HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-12-16
FIN A L
7:00 P.M.
December 16, 1992
Room 7, County Office Building
Call to Order.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
Consent Agenda (on next sheet).
!lMA -92-86-& -SP-92-33,:,-- Bonnie-and -€atherine- Blinn -fdeferred -from
Novemeer-H,-~992,,:, (To be deferred to January 13, 1993.)
SP-92-56. Schuyler Enterprises (applicant), Teresa Harris & Brenda
Roberts (owners). Public Hearing on request to amend condition on
SP-82-21 in order to increase the number of vehicles which may be
stored on -site (currently no more than 4 tractor trailers can be
parked in the outside area at anyone time) & to clarify condition
limiting the hours of operation. Property znd RA on S side of Schuy-
ler Rd (Rt 800) & Howardsville Turnpike (Rt 602). TM126,P31F.
Scottsville District. (Property does not lie within a designated growth
area. )
Public Hearing to take comments on the Americans with Disabilities Act
Transition Plan.
Public Hearing to receive comments on the County's 1993/94-1997/98 Capital
Improvements Program.
1) P11hlie- Hearift.g-on -reetliest-to-inemde-f'rOflerty-of- Bavid - Booth -and - 6oeo,
rne,:" -in -serviee-area - eOlindaries -of-the- A}{,emarle- 8olinty- Sel"viee
Ali thority; -water-serviee-only-to-l'M~9, Pl:9 - ~oned - 8 - ~; -water-serviee
only-to-exittting-stl"lietlires -to-l'M~9, Pl:8- ~oned - RA ':' - - Pl"of'el"ties -loeated
at-intel"s -of- R t-22 -& - R t-2S8E,:, - - Ri'iranna - Bitttl"iet,:, (Applicant requests
deferral to February 3, 1993.)
1) ZMA-92-10. Virginia Department of Forestry. Public Hearing on Resolu-
tion of Intent to rezone 33.2 acs from R-1 to CO. Property on S side
of Fontaine Ave., E of US Rt 29 Bypass. TM76,P17A. Samuel Miller
District. (Property located in designated growth area and designated
office service.)
1) Public Hearing on an Ordinance to amend and reenact the Code of Albe-
marle in Article IX, Industrial Development Authority, Section 2-49 to
add a subsection (h) reading: facilities for use by an organization
(other than an organization organized and operated exclusively for
religious purposes) whose purposes are exclusively both charitable
and educational as described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended ("IRC"), which is exempt from
federal income taxation pursuant to Section 501(a) of the IRC; and to
amend Section 2-52 to increase the number of outstanding bond issu-
ances for the Authority from fourteen to fifteen.
1) Resolution: IDA Bond Issue for the Darden School Foundation.
1) Public Hearing on an Ordinance to amend and reenact the Code of Albe-
marle in Article IX, Industrial Development Authority, Section 2-49 to
add a subsection (i) reading: facilities receiving loans through the
Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development from its
Virginia Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund; and to amend
Section 2-52 to increase the number of outstanding bond issuances for
the Authority from fifteen to sixteen.
Resolution: Approve Funding for Acme Design Technology, Inc.
Discussion: Funding for Teen Center.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
1 ) Executive Session: Personnel and Legal Matters.
1 b) Certify Executive Session.
1) Adjourn.
1)
2
3
4
5
~
u
7
8
9
CONSENT AGENDA
FDR INFORMATION:
5 1 Memorandum dated December 9, 1992, from Melvin A. Breeden, Director of
Finance, to Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, re: Virginia Public
School Authority Bond Sale.
5 2 Notice dated December 8, 1992, from the Virginia Department of Taxation,
re: issuance of order temporarily restraining the collection of Virginia
localities taxes arising from the assessment of real estate and tangible
personal property of CSX Transportation, Inc., and Richmond, Fredericks-
burg and Potomac Railway Company.
5.3 Letter dated December 7, 1992, from H. Allen Glover, Jr., Woods, Rogers
and Hazlegrove forwarding notice of an application with the State Corpora-
tion Commission filed by Appalachian Power Company for an increase in
rates.
5.4 Letter dated December 9, 1992, from Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administra-
tor, addressed to Mildred Southard and Eddie P. Southard, re: Official
Determination of Number of Parcels - Section 10.3.1, Tax Map 32, Parcel
50.
5.5 Memorandum dated December 15, 1992, from Tex Weaver, Information Resource
Planner, re: Enhanced 911 Implementation Plan Update.
Edward H. B in, Jr.
Samuel Mill r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R. Marshall. Jr.
Scottsville
David P. Bow rman
Charlottesvil e
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
While Hall
M E MaR AND U M
TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Planning & Community
Development
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC~
December 17, 1992
Board Actions of December 16, 1992
At the Board of Supervisors' meeting on December 16, 1992, the following
ac ions were taken:
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
LIe. There were none.
Agenda Item No.6. ZMA-92-06 & SP-92-33. Donnie and Catherine Dunn
ferred from November 11, 1992). At the request of the applicant, deferred to
uary 13, 1993.
Agenda Item No.7. SP-92-56. Schuyler Enterprises (applicant), Teresa
Ha ris & Brenda Roberts (owners). Public Hearing on request to amend condition
SP-82-21 in order to increase the number of vehicles which may be stored
site (currently no more than 4 tractor trailers can be parked in the outside
a at anyone time) & to clarify condition limiting the hours of operation.
perty znd RA on S side of Schuyler Rd (Rt 800) & Howardsville Turnpike (Rt
). TMI26,P31F. Scottsville District. DENIED SP-92-56 by a vote of 3:3.
PTED the attached Resolution of Intent.
Agenda Item No.8. Public Hearing to take comments on the Americans with
Di abilities Act Transition Plan. ADOPTED the Americans with Disabilities Act
Tr nsition Plan as presented.
(i)
Printed on recycled paper
M
Robert W. Tucker, Jr
V. Wayne Cilimberg
December 17, 1992
D
P
Agenda Item No.9. Public Hearing to receive comments on the County's
1 93/94-1997/98 Capital Improvements Program.
The Board requested staff to report back in January on the feasibility of
ving up the schedule for repairing the Albemarle High School track and, if
cessary, making alternative arrangements for the students to use a track
cility at another school.
Staff to report on funding the request from the Peach Tree Baseball League.
Final action to be taken on the CIP in January after the Board receives new
i formation on revenue projections.
Staff will check to see if a contract has been let for study of Avon
Street/Route 20 connector road.
Staff to talk to Forrest Marshall about the space and data processing
st dies.
Agenda Item No. 10. Public Hearing on request to include property of David
Booth and Goco, Inc., in service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service
A hority; water service only to TM79,P19 zoned C-1; water service only to
existing structures to TM79,P18 zoned RA. Properties located at inters of Rt 22
& t 250E. Rivanna District. At the request of the applicant, deferred to
Fe ruary 3, 1993.
Agenda Item No. 11. ZMA-92-10. Virginia Department of Forestry. Public
ring on Resolution of Intent to rezone 33.2 acs from R-1 to co. Property on
S ide of Fontaine Ave., E of US Rt 29 Bypass. TM76,P17A. Samuel Miller Dis-
trict. REZONED 33.2 acres from R-1 to CO, located on the south side of Fontaine
Av nue east of US Route 29 Bypass, known as Tax Map 76, Prcel 17a.
Agenda Item No. 12. Public Hearing on an Ordinance to amend and reenact
Code of Albemarle in Article IX, Industrial Development Authority, Section
9 to add a subsection (h) reading: facilities for use by an organization
her than an organization organized and operated exclusively for religious
poses) whose purposes are exclusively both charitable and educational as
cribed in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended
RC"), which is exempt from federal income taxation pursuant to Section 501(a)
the IRC; and to amend Section 2-52 to increase the number of outstanding bond
uances for the Authority from fourteen to fifteen. ADOPTED the attached
inance.
Agenda Item No. 13. Resolution: IDA Bond Issue for the Darden School
ndation. ADOPTED the attached resolution.
MEmo To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr
V. Wayne Cilimberg
December 17, 1992
Dcte:
Pc ge 3.
Agenda Item No. 14. Public Hearing on an Ordinance to amend and reenact
tle Code of Albemarle in Article IX. Industrial Development Authority, Section
2 49 to add a subsection (i) reading: facilities receiving loans through the
V'rginia Department of Housing and Community Development from its Virginia
Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund; and to amend Section 2-52 to increase
tle number of outstanding bond issuances for the Authority from fifteen to
sixteen. ADOPTED the attached ordinance.
Agenda Item No. 15. Resolution: Approve Funding for Acme Design Techno-
lcgy, Inc. ADOPTED the attached resolution.
Requested the County Executive to coordinate with Jim Murray, Jr.. a joint
meeting of the Board of Supervisors and the Industrial Development Authority to
re~iew the limitations imposed by the Code of Albemarle relative to the
Authority.
Mr. Bain and Mr. St. John to discuss with the County Executive the idea of
fupding such facilities as the Darden School. including tax exemption, and
re~ort back to the Board.
Agenda Item No. 15a. Discussion: Funding for Teen Center. APPROVED a
reRuest to appropriate $5930 to employ an Executive Director for the Teen Center
wi~h the directive that the staff meet with the CACY Commission and City
representatives to resolve the supervision and office location issues. The
Bo~rd also expressed the opinion that food and beverages should be self-
supporting and not funded. Appropriation form requested from Melvin Breeden.
Agenda Item No. 16. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Staff to prepare a report on monopole towers and the reason no special use
pe~mit is required for Board discussion on January 6. 1993.
Board to review at some time proposal from Bill Nitchman on development of
an Albemarle County Economic Development Organization (copy attached).
LEN':ec
At achments
cc Richard E. Huff, II
Robert B. Brandenburger
Roxanne White
Amelia McCulley
Jo Higgins
Bruce Woodzell
George R. St. John
File
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
o F
I N TEN T
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
nty, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to consider amending
Comprehensive Plan to establish Schuyler as a growth area and
current rezoning of same area;
FURTHER requests the Albemarle County Planning Commission to
hold a public hearing on said intent to amend the Comprehensive
Plan and rezoning, and does request that the Planning Commission
se d its recommendation to this Board at the earliest possible
da e, but no later than March, 1993.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing, is a true correct copy of a resolution of intent unani-
mo sly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Vi ginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
~:~
~lerk, Board of unty Supervisors
. '
o R DIN A N C E
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE IN
ARTICLE IX, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
Arti le IX of the Code of Albemarle, known as the Industrial Development Authority
ordi~ance be amended and reenacted in Sections 2-49 and 2-52 as follows:
Sec. 2-49. Powers and duties generally.
The public and corporate powers of the industrial development authority of the
coun yare solely and exclusively limited to the power to finance: (a) industrial
poll tion control facilities for industries presently located in the county; (b)
indu trial plant expansion for industries pre~ently located in the county, requiring
minilnum local public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of
whic shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (c) new
indu trial facilities in the county, which new industrial facilities shall be
excll sively limited to light manufacturing industries and research oriented
indu tries requiring minimum local public utilities and providing new jobs, the
subs antial majority of which shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the
coun y; (d) medical facilities and facilities for the residence or care of the aged
and handicapped in the county; (e) multistate, regional or national headquarters
offi( es or operations centers for research-oriented businesses, requiring minimum
loca public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of which
shal be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (f) shopping or
serv'ce facilities which the industrial development authority of the county finds are
for the convenience of any of the aforementioned facilities or the employees thereof
and I....he current residents and domiciles of the surrounding area, provided such
shoPling or service facilities are compatible with the current comprehensive plan of
the county; (g) airports and office and support facilities relating to airports; and
(h) j acilities for use by an organization (other than an organization organized and
open ted exclusively for religious purposes) whose purposes are exclusively both
char.table and educational as described in Section 50l(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended ("IRC"), which is exempt from federal income taxation
purstant to Section 501(a) of the IRC.
*~'t***
Sec. 2-52. Limitation on number of bond issues.
~here shall be no more than fifteen bond issuances of the industrial development
authority of the county in existence at anyone time.
* '* * * *
II, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
corre~t copy of an ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
~~~
Cl~~~ o~~~rsbrs
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
V.rginia ("Authority") has considered the application of The
Uriversity of virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
rEquesting the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
aIlount not to exceed $45,500,000 ("Bonds") to be applied by the
Fcundation for one or more of the following purposes
(collectively, "Project"): (i) to finance the construction and
ecuipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
ccnsisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
Glounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
Rcad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
Allington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
V.rginia for use by the University's School of Business as an
academic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
flnd certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
cErtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
ifsuance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
Plblic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
section 147(f) of the Internal Rev~nue Code of 1986, as
alended (the "Code"), provides that the governmental unit having
jlrisdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
tle area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
pl ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
tle bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
A bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
A bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
Slpervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
e ected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
ifsuance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
o the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
Althority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
S atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OJ~ THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
Althority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
SEction 147(f) of the Code and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of
V rginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code") to permit the
Althority to assist in the financing of the Project.
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
constitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
of the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
Income Tax Regulations Section 5f.103-2(f)(1), this resolution
will remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
its adoption.
4. This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
adoption.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle, Virginia, this~7~~ day of December, 1992.
~.~
Clerk,
County
the
[SEAL]
o R DIN A N C E
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE IN
ARTICLE IX, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
Article IX of the Code of Albemarle, known as the Industrial Development Authority
ordin~nce be amended and reenacted in Sections 2-49 and 2-52 as follows:
Sec. 2-49. Powers and duties generally.
~he public and corporate powers of the industrial development authority of the
county are solely and exclusively limited to the power to finance: (a) industrial
polluiL.ion control facilities for industries presently located in the county; (b)
induslL.rial plant expansion for industries presently located in the county, requiring
minim~ local public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of
which shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (c) new
indus1L.rial facilities in the county, which new industrial facilities shall be
exclu~ively limited to light manufacturing industries and research oriented
indusr-ries requiring minimum local public utilities and providing new jobs, the
subst~ntial majority of which shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the
county; (d) medical facilities and facilities for the residence or care of the aged
and I andicapped in the county; (e) multistate, regional or national headquarters
offic~s or operations. centers for research-oriented businesses, requiring minimum
local public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of which
shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; ({) shopping or
servi~e facilities which the industrial development authority'of the county finds are
for tre convenience of any of the aforementioned facilities or the employees thereof
and he current residents and domiciles of the surrounding area, provided such
shopp.ng or service facilities are compatible with the current comprehensive plan of
the cpunty; (g) airports and office and support facilities relating to airports; (h)
facil ties for use by an organization (other than an organization organized and
opera ed exclusively for religious purposes) whose purposes are exclusively both
chari able and educational as described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended ("IRC") , which is exempt from federal income taxation
pursu~t to Section 501(a) of the IRC; and (i) facilities receiving loans through the
Virgi~ia Department of Housing and Community Development from its Virginia Economic
Develppment Revolving Loan Fund.
* * * * *
Sec. 2-52. Limitation on number of bond issues.
Phere shall be no more than sixteen bond issuances of the industrial development
au tho ity of the county in existence at anyone time.
***,'c*
, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
corre t copy of an ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors
of Al emarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
~-~~
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Community Develop-
ent, an agency of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 501 North 2nd
treet, Richmond, Virginia, 23219, (the "Department) is the
esignated agency to administer loan funds allocated by the
eneral Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle
ounty, Virginia, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia,
2902-4596, (the "Authority") is a political subdivision of the
ommonwealth, established by ordinance of Albemarle County,
irginia, under the Industrial Development and Revenue Code Bond
ct, Chapter 33, Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as
ended; and
WHEREAS, Acme Design Technology, Inc. (the "Company")
ishes to own and operate a plant that will produce filing and
tor age systems which will require one hundred and ten full-time
jobs; and
WHEREAS, in order to promote the economic growth and
evelopment of the Albemarle County community and to promote the
elfare of its citizens, the Authority~ for the benefit of the
ompany, has applied to the Department for a loan in the princi-
al sum of Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) to be used
the Company in its business;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the loan by the Authority for the
nefit of the Company, as required by Section 15.1-1378(12) of
e Virginia Code, and Section 2-50 of the Code of Albemarle, to
rmit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
i ting is a true, correct copy of a resolution unanimously
a opted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
V.rginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
-~/ ~~-------
Cl~~~rd of County Supervisors
tJ
'/1_ I _-C/)
; .'/\,
-;;i~-l. :--rc;,'! 1
"', )1
..._c_.Lo,. )
f<~':',~y~ l'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Finance
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Telephone (804) 296-5855
MEMORANDUM
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance ~~
December 9, 1992
Virginia Public School Authority Bond Sale
This is to confirm that the VPSA Bonds were sold on December
1 1992 at a net increase cost of 5.7477%.
Based on the standard agreement with VPSA, the County I s
terest rate on the $2,885,000 will be 5.8477%, one-tenth of one
rcent greater than the sale amount.
Closing on all documents is scheduled for December 17, 1993 at
ich time the funds will be available.
Bibs
Richard E. Huff, II
Robert Paske I
\- .:
C';: t, L ~.. ,.-.
. r-
..;,,_C
Ute j 0 1992
...
," .-,'r'"
j........i,..
December 8, 1992
92-12
Collection of Property Taxes Restrained
for the 1992 Tax Year
On December 2, 1992, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Vi ginia, the Honorable Robert R. Merhige, Jr. presiding, issued an order temporarily
res raining the collection by Virginia localities of taxes arising from the assessment of real
est te and tangible personal property of CSX Transportation, Inc. and Richmond,
Fr dericksburg and Potomac Railway Company. The referenced assessment is set forth in
the 1992 Statement of Assessed Values for Local Tax Purposes for Railroads and Interstate
Pi eline Transmission Com anies issued by the Department of Taxation on September 1,
19 2. This temporary restraining order shall remain in effect until 5 :00 p.m., December
12, 1992.
This order is conditioned upon the plaintiffs' payment by December 5, 1992 to all
ap ropriate interested Virginia taxing authorities taxes for 1992 based on the original 1989
ass ssments made by the Department of Taxation but using 1992 tax rates.
The Court's order indicates that in the event the defendant prevails on the merits of
thi action, the plaintiff railroads shall be liable for any tax payments found to be properly
ow ng, plus interest and penalties on those amounts.
Questions regarding this tax bulletin should be directed to Keith Ma~/yer at:
(8 4) 367-8020.
WOODS, RoGERS &. HAzlEGROVE
Roanoke Office
'.
i
Dominion Tow r' Suite 1400
10 South Jeffer n Street. P.O. Box 14125
Roanoke, Virgi ia 24038-4125
Telephone 703 983-7600
Facsimile 703- 83-7711
(703) 983-7636
U>"'L'. iNT'V OF' Alettlb~ P.O. Box S60
, -'. . .. . 24543-0560
fD f-d~ n ne~91_1350
I','. .'>>-'. ,". F~~simi 8. - 9-3527
f'lFt (. l";lioj2
n\'. /A" "
UU\ I -'\.bU 0
80lk.RD OF SUPER\ilSO(:'C:
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL TELEPHONE
December 7, 1992
In re:
Appalachian Power Company
Application for an Increase in Rates
Madam or Sir:
On behalf of Appalachian Power Company, and pursuant to
Ie VI of the Virginia State Corporation Commission's Rules
verning Utility Rate Increase Applications and Annual
formational Filings, we serve you with a copy of the Company's
sic application for an increase in rates filed on December 4,
92.
You may obtain a copy of the complete application at no cost
making a request orally or in writing to:
Terry R. Eads
Director of Rates, Tariffs and Contracts
Appalachian Power Company
P.O. Box 2021
Roanoke, VA 24022
(703) 985-2337
Sincerely,
WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE
ff~~f'
H. Allen Glover, Jr.
H Gjr:mbh
e c.
M 132141
COIIKOnBALTJI 01' VIRGIBIA
STATB CORPORATIOB COIIKISSIOB
~pplication of
,-PPALACBIAN POWER COKPABY
'or an Increase in Rates
CASB BO. PUB
~.
Introduction.
Appalachian Power Company ("Appalachian" or "Company"), a
~irginia public service corporation having a post office address
pf P. o. Box 2021, Roanoke, Virginia 24022, applies, pursuant to
~itle 56 of the Code of Virginia and the Commission's Rules
;overning utility Rate Increase Applications and Annual
nformational Filings (the "Rate Case Rules"), for a permanent
ncrease in its Virginia retail jurisdictional base rates of
S31,377,417 on an annual basis over rates presently in effect.
The proposed increase is based on an adjusted test year
ending June 30, 1992 and an end of test period capital structure
~nd cost of capital of the Company. It represents the additional
evenues required to give Appalachian the opportunity to earn an
pverall rate of return on its Virginia jurisdictional rate base
pf 10.259%, which includes a return on common equity of 12.75%.
'~he additional revenues sought will result in an average annual
ncrease of 5.5% over present Virginia rates.
In support of its request for general rate relief, the
l~ompany is herewith filing the testimony of witnesses Vipperman,
~odes, Carson, Moul, Sever, Stephens, Mitchell, McCoy, Anderson,
~aine, Henderson, Thomas, Jahn and Moore. Through the testimony
pf Ms. Moore, Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Anderson, Appalachian is also
~iling Schedules 1-36 as required by the Rate Case Rules.
Schedule 32 consists of new tariff sheets, with an effective
4~ate of January 3, 1993, intended to produce increases in the
~ompany's Virginia jurisdictional revenues amounting to
~pproximately $31.4 million annually over present Virginia rates.
r~he increases reflected in the tariff schedules will be applied
.0 as to move individual class rates of return closer to the
~equested overall jurisdictional rate of return, in accordance
1iith principles of equity and gradualism endorsed by the
c~ommission. In connection with its request for a permanent rate
ncrease, the Company is also asking that the Commission approve
c~ertain changes in its rate design and in its terms and
c~onditions of service as set forth in Schedule 32.
In accordance with Rule IV.1 of the Rate Case Rules,
J~ppalachian is not submitting at this time its fuel factor
]Drojections, cogeneration rates and supporting testimony. The
c~ompany will file these materials at the time directed by the
(~ommission. In that filing, the Company may request a change in
ts fuel factor to take effect concurrently with the increase in
1 ase rates.
:1. AD~alachian's 7ncreasina Level of ExDenses Dictates that the
ComDanv be Granted Rate Relief.
Rate relief is required in order to recognize the increasing
evel of expenses which the Company has incurred since its last
late case (Case No. PUE900026) and the resulting erosion in
- 2 -
which the Company will continue to experience through
he end of the rate year absent the rate relief requested in this
roceeding.
For example, the amount of capacity equalization charges
hich Appalachian is having to pay to the American Electric Power
Inc. ("AEP") system pool has increased substantially
1991 and test year levels. This increase has been due
rimarily to the level of Appalachian's Member Load Ratio, a
alue which can fluctuate in a volatile manner from year to year.
n connection with this rate request, Appalachian is asking the
establish a tracking mechanism which would
uthorize deferred accounting for these capacity charges and
llow them to be reviewed in the context of the Company's annual
factor proceeding.
Coupled with the increase in capacity equalization charges
significant decline in Appalachian's share of net
ealizations from AEP system sales experienced since the last
The realizations from these system sales, which in
have helped offset the Company's expenses in providing
are now a fraction of their former amount and there is
o reason to expect that a substantial improvement will occur in
e immediate future.
Another major element of the Company's filing is the annual
pact of the accounting change mandated by the Financial
counting standards Board ("FASB") to accrue the cost of
stretirement benefits other than pensions during the working
- 3 -
of employees. These postretirement benefit expenses, which
onsist primarily of medical expenses, currently are recorded on
pay-as-you-go basis. However, the FASB, which establishes the
accounting and reporting requirements of companies,
Appalachian, has issued statement of Financial
ccounting Standards No. 106 which changes the accounting to be
ollowed for such postretirement benefits. The change becomes
Company no later than January 1, 1993, and will
.ncrease the recorded cost of postretirement benefits to several
the pay-as-you-go amount. While Appalachian has taken
to mitigate the financial effect of this change, there will
significant increase in expense for this item.
Also contributing to the requested increase are items
new depreciation rates, West Virginia B & 0 taxes and
e implementation of demand side management programs.
Furthermore, the Company's overall cost of providing service
its customers has continued to increase as a result of cost
reflecting inflationary influences over which
has no control. During the period from December,
89, the end of the test year used in Appalachian's last rate
to June, 1992, the last month of the test period in this
oceeding, the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers) has
creased by 11.2%. This factor alone makes it difficult for the
mpany to sustain an acceptable earnings level.
Despite a decline in system sales realizations and
c ntinually rising costs, Appalachian's electric rates in
- 4 -
Virginia for all classes of customers remain among the lowest in
.ts region. As illustrated in Mr. Vipperman's direct testimony,
~ comparison of rates as of July, 1992 demonstrates that
~ppalachian's residential, industrial and commercial rates rank
~mong the lowest in its region.
These low rates are attributable in large part to
~ppalachian's continuing record of-superior operating
performance. A prime example of Appalachian's impressive level
pf operating efficiency is the low heat rate experienced at its
~enerating plants which translates into substantial savings in
Fuel costs. In 1991, the median heat rate for the largest 100
nvestor owned electric utilities in the United states was 10,523
3TU/kwh. In contrast, the Company's heat rate was an impressive
~,515 BTU/kwh, significantly lower than the national median.
II. Conclusion.
This application and the testimony and exhibits filed
~erewith demonstrate that the rate increase sought is just and
reasonable, that the additional revenues sought are based on the
~ost of serving the Company's jurisdictional customers who have
peen classified in accordance with Virginia law and prior
l~omrnission decisions, and that the increase sought is required on
. timely basis.
WHEREFORE, Appalachian respectfully requests that its
cpplication for rate relief be filed and docketed; that the
(~omrnission's staff undertake an investigation of the Company's
cpplication and report its findings to the Commission; that the
- 5 -
J
ommission order evidentiary hearings on the Company's request
a permanent increase in rates at the earliest possible date;
that the Commission issue an order approving the Company's
ew Tariff No. 15 as filed herewith.
APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY
".
. Allen Glover, Jr.
ichael J. Quinan
oods, Rogers , Bazlegrove
. O. Box 14125
oanoke, VA 24038-4125
Bacha
erican Elec~ric Power Service Corpora~ion
Riverside Plaza
olumbus, Ohio 43215
Counsel for Appalachian Power coapany
- 6 -
~-~
.-
'1"1 i .... .'1
Di~,j.nbut:d to QDzrri: ,~'_~l~~...J
J" 'L -, , \
. cr>. f'~ '-~:...., )1... "~, l' .,-"'. , ,J. --t )
A,,~71J< !.'!.Il) ,".' _.._,,--._._:...:J...:.. ____"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
ecember 9, 1992
ildred Southard
oute 1" Box 98
tandardsville, VA 22973
ddie P. Southard
31 Hanison Street
,ohnson City, NY 13790
E: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PARCELS - Section 10.3.1
Tax Map 32, Parcel 50
ear Ms. Southard and Mr. Southard:
he County Attorney and I have reviewed the chain of title you have
ubmitted for the above-noted property. It is the County
'ttorney's advisory opinion and my official determination, that
'his property consists of two (2) separate parcels:
1) That portion lying entirely on the west side of Powell Creek,
and consisting of two (2) acres;
2) The remainder consisting of ten (10) acres.
ach of these lawfully separate parcels is entitled to associated
evelopment rights. This determination results in one (1) parcel
han is shown with a parcel number on the County tax maps.
,his determination considered the descriptive clauses of the deed,
:hich delineate and enumerate the property as composed of two (2)
djoining tracts. This consideration is based on the findings of
,he Va. Supreme Court in the case, Faison v. Union Camp 224 VA 54.
,he most recent deed of record as of the date of adoption of the
oning Ordinance is found in Deed Book 539, Page 522. It is dated
eptember 18, 1973 from Early Sanford and Virginia Southard to
rnest Dewey and Mamie Southard. This deed describes the following
arcels:
~ .I
ecember 9, 1992
ildred Southard/Eddie Southard
age 2
1) First, 2 acres near Proffit, together with the right of way to
the Earlysville Road. It was previously conveyed to Gilbert
and Jennie Tyree. (One (1) development right; no division
right).
2) Second, a ten (10) acre parcel. It was also conveyed to
Gilbert Tyree. (Five (5) potential development rights).
I
I
nyone aggrieved by this decision may file a written appeal within
irty (30) days of the date of this letter. If you have any
estions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
lincerely,
· -G. a1:J:~~~~~;'
Administrator~'P(
Jan Sprinkle
Gay Carver
Lettie Neher, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors
Reading File
(1) additional parcel
(1) by Tax Map, Two (2) by determination
\
j)/sl J.Z//0/~
C:/c'?, IcZ/t (~-;S)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Distributi~ List
Tex Weaver, Information Resource Planner
FROM:
DA'rE :
December 15, 1992
RE:
Enhanced 911 Implementation Plan Update
GTEGIS, Inc., our Enhanced 911 Building Locator System
consultant, has notified the County that they will be unable
to meet the necessary deadlines to proceed with the current
Building Locator and Enhanced 911 implementation schedule
(revised 9/16/92). This notification came as a result of a
contractual dispute between GTEGIS, Inc. and ETG, their
mapping subcontractor.
GTEGIS, Inc. has recently replaced ETG as their mapping
subcontractor with Network Design Engineers, Inc. (NDE) to
complete our project. At this time, information pertaining
to a revised implementation schedule is not available.
I will be getting in contact with you early in January to
coordinate a worksession to discuss plans for an alternative
implementation schedule. Should you have any questions or
concerns, please let me know.
Distribution List
December 15, 1992
RE: Enhanced 911 Implementation Plan Update
cc: Robert W. Tucker, County Executive
Distribution List:
Robert B. Brandenburger, Assistant County Executive
Richard E. Huff, II, Deputy County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning & Community Development
Wayne Campagna, Director of Emergency Operations Center
Jo Higgins, Director of Engineering
Robert Walters, Deputy Director of Finance
Jim Heilman, County Registrar
Mike Schlemmer, Fire/Rescue Coordinator
Maynard sipe, Planning Technician
Dave Shaw, Commander of Administrative Services (Police Dept.)
Louie Chapman, Assistant City Manager
Charlie Tyree, GTEGIS, Inc.
Rick Colley, U.s. Postal Service
Ken Bartels, Centel
Ed Hammond, Centel
David Major, C&P
Phil Sparks, Virginia Power
DATE D e c- / L, I I ~ ~\ ~
AGENDA ITEM NO.
q.2.//I/.7:27
AGENDA ITEM NAME 7 fYtA ~ CJ z - ~ ex-. sf) C7 2:; -3 f) J ,!ll-U i)u kit- -'
DEFERRED UNTIL
-.- Ja - 1'\
/~ I /99.~
Form.3
7/25/86
I
I
I r'" .' I,"
D;stfib!l~€j z~ ::.':: ,. ld-~j._'-:~,6
,/!
1;.<. - :'~r\ /)/1" I
Agend(l i'-::'~' l~'_, ....1.:-_
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
N vember 18, 1992
S huyler Enterprises
A tn: Jim Clark
1 30 Oakhill Drive
C arlottesville, VA 22901
R
SP-92-56 Schuyler Enterprises (applicant), Teresa Harris and
Brenda Roberts (owner)
Tax Map 126, Parcel 31F
Clark:
e Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
vember 17, 1992, by a vote of 4-3, recommended approval of the
ove-noted request to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
ease note that this approval is subject to the following
nditions:
commence until final oite plan
haD been obtainedl
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Saturday; operation shall be defined as
maintenance work. except in case of emerqency ;
3. No outside storage of parts including junk parts. Refuse
awaiting disposal shall be stored in appropriate containers;
4. No freight shall be handled or stored on-site;
5. All work shall be conducted within the garage;
6. Repair work and storage shall be limited to equipment owned
or operated by Schuyler Enterprises; and
Schuyler Enterprise
P~ge 2
Npvember 18, 1992
7 No more than ten tractor trailers can be parked in the
outside area at anyone time;
8 4-5 foot white pines shall be ~lanted 15 feet on center
across the frontaqe of the developed portion of this site no
later than Mav 31, 1993.
P ease be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
w'll review this petition and receive public comment at their
m~eting on December 16, 1992. Any new or additional information
r~garding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the
Bpard of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled
h~aring date.
IF you should have any questions or comments regarding the above-
npted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
S ncerely,
:tv~jl9
W lliam D. Fritz
S~nior Planner
W)F/jcw
cp: Lettie E. Neher
Theresa C. Harris & Brenda C. Roberts
Amelia McCUlley
Jo Higgins
titian: The applicant petitions the Board of Supervisors to
end a condition of SP-92-21 [10.2.2(37)] in order to increase
e number of vehicles which may be stored on-site (currently no
re than four tractor trailers can be parked in the outside area
anyone time) and to clarify a condition limiting the hours of
eration. Property, described as Tax Map 126, Parcel 31F is
cated on the south side of Schuyler Road (Rt. 800) and
H wardsville Turnpike (Rt. 602) in the Scottsville Magisterial
D"strict. This site is zoned RA, Rural Areas and is not located
within a designated growth area (Rural Area IV).
AFF PERSON:
ANNING COMMISSION:
ARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
NOVEMBER 17, 1992
DECEMBER 16, 1992
-92-56 - SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES (APPLICANT) TERESA HARRIS AND
A ROBERTS (OWNER) -
aracter of the Area: This site is developed with a garage and
graveled storage/parking area. The areas surrounding the site
e wooded and no dwellings are visible from the site. The
rage is visible from the state road.
A licant's Pro osal: This request is to delete condition #7 of
SP-91-21, thus removing the restriction on the number of tractor
trailers which may be parked on-site, and to clarify condition #2
Ii iting the hours of operation. The applicant currently uses
th site to store and repair equipment used by Schuyler Trucking
only. The applicant currently has similar facilities in Schuyler
(N Ison County). Maintenance includes, but is not limited to,
re airing or replacing tires, brakes, lights, and routine truck
maintenance. Hours of operation are limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Mo day through Saturday. No freight is handled or stored
on-site. A justification for the current request has been
pr vided by the applicant (Attachment C).
Y AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this request for
with Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance and recommends
ING AND ZONING HISTORY:
- Board of Supervisors approved SP-90-11 allowing
lots on Parcel 31A.
e 21, 1990 - Staff approved the subdivision plat creating the
currently under review.
tember 18, 1991 - Board of Supervisors approved SP-91-21
mitting a public garage. (The site plan was later approved
inistratively) .
1
gust 12, 1992 - Board of Supervisors approved SP-92-46
rmitting an additional dwelling on this site. (The special use
rmit allows a total of two dwellings).
S AFF COMMENT:
e history for the special use permit includes a zoning text
endment (ZTA-91-04) which accompanied SP-92-21. That zoning
xt amendment proposed to amend the definition of public garage
include the temporary storage of motor driven vehicles.
ring the Board's review of the special use permit and zoning
xt amendment, the Board determined that the public garage
finition did not need to be changed. The special use permit
port for the public garage was prepared under the assumption
at ZTA-91-04 had been approved and the issue of storage
dressed and, therefore, contained no condition limiting the
mber of vehicles stored on-site. The Board added a condition
SP-91-21 limiting the number of tractor trailers on-site to
ur (4).
aff has reviewed all requests for public garages in the Rural
eas since 1980. A total of eleven (11) applications have been
ocessed. One was dismissed after it was determined it was an
ricultural service occupation which is permitted by-right, two
) requests were withdrawn prior to Board action, three (3)
quests were denied and five (5) requests were approved
ncluding the public garage on this site). Four approved
quests limited the number of vehicles awaiting repair to four
) and one approved request limited the number of vehicles
aiting repair to two (2). As can be seen all approved requests
ve limited the number of vehicles stored on site.
November, 1989 the Board of Supervisors approved ZTA-89-14
ich amended the definition of public garage as follows:
lIGarage, Public: A building or portion thereof, other than a
private garage, designed or used for servicing or repairing
equipping, renting, Delling, or Dtoring motor driven
vehicles".
T e change to the ordinance in 1989 was because of the
i consistency of equipping, renting, selling and storing of
v hicles with the purpose and intent of the Rural Areas.
e Board of Supervisors did not approve ZTA-91-04 which would
ve broadened the definition and would have allowed temporary
orage of motor driven vehicles. Staff's analysis of past Board
tions regarding public garages indicates a clear and deliberate
fort to minimize the number of vehicles stored or parked on-
te.
2
T plan for this use was approved administratively after
a of SP-92-2l which permitted the public garage. The
p oposed increased use of the site does not anticipate any
a ditional clearing, grading or other site development. The
e isting gravel parking areas would be used for vehicle storage.
A ditional plantings adjacent to the public road are proposed.
T e additional plantings would consist of a row of white pines
panted 15 feet on center. The plan submitted to accompany this
r quest shows 18 additional spaces (22 total). The applicant
c rrently has approximately 40 tractors and 80 trailers. Storage
o -site would be short term.
e County Attorney and Zoning Administrator have provided
mments regarding the categorized definition of the proposed use
ttachment D & E). The Zoning Administrator does not consider
is use to constitute a "public garage" as it provides no
rvice to the general public. The County Attorney supports this
sition, states he believes this is a truck terminal, and
lieves an elimination of the restriction on trucks further
d parts from the public garage and moves this use even more
d"rectly into that of a truck terminal. During the 1991 review
o this request, it was noted that a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
t review the appropriateness of this area for this type of use
w uld be most appropriate. The County Attorney's opinion
s pports this as the appropriate process. As a truck terminal
t e use would be permitted in LI, Light Industry district by
S ecial Use permit. The Plan would, thus, need to be amended to
s ow this area for Industrial Service and the property rezoned
w'th a special use permit. The Board should address this issue
p ior to amending the previous permit conditions.
applicant has been cited for violations of the Building Code.
Building Code violations have been abated.
identified the following factors in favor of this
1. No additional site development is proposed.
2. Approval of the request would provide for a centralized
storage center thereby alleviating storage of vehicles in
scattered sites in the County.
S aff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable
t this request:
1. The Board has consistently limited the number of vehicles
permitted to be stored in conjunction with public garages in
the Rural Areas.
3
2. The definition of public garage was amended to delete
storage of vehicles.
3 Approval of this request moves the use further from the
definition of a public garage and towards a truck terminal
which is permitted only in the Light Industry District and
only by special use permit. The Comprehensive Plan
designates this as Rural Area, not as a Growth Area
designated for industrial uses.
aff opinion is that approval of this request would be
consistent with past actions of the County in regards to
orage of vehicles. Approval of this request may make denial of
milar request for storage difficult to deny. For the above
ated reasons, staff recommends denial of SP-92-56. Should the
ard of Supervisor choose to approve this request staff offers
e following conditions which are identical to the conditions of
-92-21 except as noted.
commonco until fin~l oitc pl~n ~pprov~l h~o been obt~inod;
2 Hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Saturday; operation shall be defined as
maintenance work;
3 No outside storage of parts including junk parts. Refuse
awaiting disposal shall be stored in appropriate containers;
4 No freight shall be handled or stored on-site;
5 All work shall be conducted within the garage;
6 Repair work and storage shall be limited to equipment owned
or operated by Schuyler Enterprises; and
outoido ~re~ ~t ~ny one timo;
8. 4-5 foot white pines shall be planted 15 feet on center
across the frontage of the developed portion of this site no
later than May 31, 1993.
A TACHMENTS
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Applicant's Justification
D - Zoning Administrator
E - County Attorney's Letter
F - Board of Supervisors Minutes
4
(..
I.', ..
.'>>
, JibJ'/., Y/4<__
I '-----T . - -/- - - - - .t.
- - - - - - I. 1)1 I .
r.
I \
r.~
.;'J
<,7 :.~ ......'" .
\
\
A'ITACHr-1ENT A
"'"
.t'
A
('
BOAl
MOUNTAIN
o
\
c;.
\
\
~.
TO \
..>.
,/lOVINGSTON
6]2
\
,
I ,.
I
\.
J
l!.ill{ "
\
}
.f
".....
.r
i
(
.>
0.'
'."
[ijj"
.I-
...
...
...
...
.... J
''''
\ "
.... '"
@2]......
...
....
, -r,.~~
(IT
Esr"onl
Rf 1,~;i -.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;;1
~
)
4
110NT & PORTER
10ull IlMtSoMA.PSIA.l!
c
(
N
G
H
A
t-/l
I.'>
\)
c
K
SP-92-56
Schuyler Enterprizes
~
I:
~ 0
(f-;
~
ALBEMARLE COUNT.
125
ATI'ACH1''lEt'J':1:' B
It)
(\J
z
o
t-
O
w
CJ)
\
"'--""
\
\ Z9
.:~
~.
\
(
I
REVISED It. JU~Y 196~ - .1t~6
SCALE IN FEET
.00 1100 1..0 .400'
SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT,
SECTION 126 a 12!
r
ATJ'lMENT C
SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED
Attachment:
1. The purpose of this request is to expand the parking requirement limit
stated in Item 7, SP-91-21; "...no more than four tractors and trailers
can be parked in the outside area at anyone time."
2. Justification:
a. Schuyler Enterprises, Incorporated attempts to allow most drivers to be
home for weekends and holidays. The drivers generally use the Schuyler
Enterprises, Incorporated parking area, thus eliminating unnecessary
driving and/or parking of tractors and trailers throughout Albemarle
County.
b. Preventative driving/parking throughout Albemarle County results in the
following:
1.
Safety for Albemarle County citizens by drivers
tractors and/or trailers throughout the Albemarle
system.
not driving
County road
2. Less wear and tear on the Albemarle County roads.
3. Fewer complaints from citizens in reference to tractors and/or
trailers being driven and/or parked on Albemarle County roads or
subdivisions.
4. Consolidation of tractors and trailers in one area deters vandalism
and theft.
c. Centralized location of tractors and trailers results in lower costs
for cargo and liability insurance.
R E. C E~J ,,. EJ)
AUG ~5 \992
~. ..' (Ii I: rr'(
"L~r::"M,t'l \.~ l" "".' I
Z"\~l'~/ ir~"D EP AFn.~ j,:.~~T
u." II'U .
I',
I)
K; ~HHENT D
RECEiveD
NOV 0 l 1992
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
MEMORANDUM
TO:
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community
Development
Bill Fritz, Senior Planner
George st. John, County Attorney
~~
Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrato~
FROM:
DATE:
November 3, 1992
RE:
Schuyler Enterprises (TM 126, Parcel 31A part)
The purpose of this memorandum is to address two issues: the
zoning category for this land use, and the current status of the
ci ted violations of the special permit. In summary, it is my
opinion that the conduct of this activity does not constitute a
"public garage." In terms of the second item, at the time of the
last inspection of the site, it was in compliance.
ZONING CATEGORY OF USE
On April 2, 1991, I wrote an official determination of category of
use, which was not appealed (attached). It was and is my
determination that this use is not currently permitted under the
Rural Areas district. I have not and do not consider this use to
constitute a "public garage."
Webster's Dictionary includes a def ini tion for "public" which
states: "accessible to or shared by all members of the community."
The ordinance defines it as "a building or portion thereof, other
than a private garage, designed or used for servicing or repairing
motor driven vehicles." This use was deliberately narrowed in
activity by a 1989 zoning text amendment. ZTA 89-14 removed the
permitted activities of equipping, renting, selling and storing
vehicles in a public garage. By this and the original action in
1981 to amend the ordinance to include this use, the legislative
intent appears to be to provide for rural vehicular service to the
general public. There is no evidence wi thin the ordinance
language, its intent or generally accepted definitions for "public"
that the operation of an individual commercial trucking business'
maintenance and storage facility, is a public garage.
November 3, 1992
Schuyler Enterprises
Page 2
STATUS OF VIOLATIONS
At the time of our most recent inspection #of the site, this
business was in compliance with the special permit approval. Since
that inspection, the building violations were corrected and a
certificate of occupancy has recently been issued. Therefore, the
site is now also in compliance with the ordinance.
Based on evidence obtained from the public, and regular
surveillance by Zoning Inspectors, we ascertained that several
conditions of the special permit were violated on a regular basis.
They were cited by an official determination of violation notice
dated October 7, 1992. The specific conditions which were violated
are as follows:
1. Hours of operation (condition #2). There was evidence of
work occurring on weekends, nights, etc.
2. Outside storage of junk parts (condition #3). There were junk
parts of trucks, and a wrecked truck stored on the property.
3. More than four tractor trailers parked outside (condition #7) .
There were often more than four on the property.
We conducted surveillance of the site by Zoning Inspectors,
a week at odd hours, and found compliance to be sporadic.
receipt of the violation notice, our inspections have
compliance.
twice
Since
found
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
AGM/
N' ':HMENT E
s:...
L-.
GEORGE . ST.JOHN
COUNTY TTORNEY
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of County Attorney
416 Park Street
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Telephone 296-7138
September 22, 1992
JAMES M. BOWLING, IV
DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY
. Wayne Cilimberg
irector of Planning
401 McIntire Road
arlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Re: Schuyler Enterprises
You have asked my opinion on the legal ramifications of
iminating from the special use permit issued to Schuyler
terprises, the limitation on the number of trucks permitted on
e site. This special use permit was for a "public garage" in
e RA District.
It has always been my opinion, from the beginning, that this
o eration is not a public garage at all, and in fact it was a
rversion of the English language to approve it under that
signation in the first place. The intent of a "public garage"
the RA District, is to provide a support service for
ricultural and timber operation, and for rural residents, to
ve their vehicles and equipment repaired without having to
me to the big commercial dealerships and garages in
arlottesville. The Schuyler Enterprises operation does not
ovide any such service, and in fact is not open to the public
all. It has always been my opinion that it is a truck
rminal, not a public garage, and the process for its approval
ould have been to amend the Comprehensive Plan to show
dustry in that area, and then rezone it as such.
This proposed amendment of the special use permit, to
e iminate the restriction on number of tractors and trailers,
s'mply constitutes a further departure from the idea of a public
g rage, and a further vindication of the proposition that the
o eration is a truck terminal.
therefore, feel that the proper way to handle this
is to do what should have been done in the
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Page 2
September 22, 1992
beginning; that. is to say, rather than eliminating the
cpndition, to look at a change in the Comprehensive Plan and
r~designate this area as industrial.
In no way am I advocating whether or not such a redesignation
should be approved or denied; rather, I am saying that this is
the proper procedure to deal with the matter.
Sincerely yours,
1/ ~~
de~hn
County Attorney
GRStJjtlh
cP: Amelia G. McCulley
RECEIVED
NOV 0 4 1992
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5~75
Planning
ept.
MEMORANDUM
0: V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community
Development
Bill Fritz, Senior Planner
George st. John, County Attorney
Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrato~
November 3, 1992
Schuyler Enterprises (TM 126, Parcel 31A part)
he purpose of this memorandum is to address two issues: the
oning category for this land use, and the current status of the
ited violations of the special permit. In summary, it is my
pinion that the conduct of this activity does not constitute a
'public garage." In terms of the second item, at the time of the
ast inspection of the site, it was in compliance.
ONING CATEGORY OF USE
n April 2, 1991, I wrote an official determination of category of
se, which was not appealed (attached). It was and is my
etermination that this use is not currently permitted under the
ural Areas district. I have not and do not consider this use to
onstitute a "public garage."
ebster's Dictionary includes a definition for "public" which
tates: "accessible to or shared by all members of the community."
he ordinance defines it as "a building or portion thereof, other
han a private garage, designed or used for servicing or repairing
otor driven vehicles." This use was deliberately narrowed in
ctivity by a 1989 zoning text amendment. ZTA 89-14 removed the
ermitted activities of equipping, renting, selling and storing
ehicles in a public garage. By this and the original action in
981 to amend the ordinance to include this use, the legislative
ntent appears to be to provide for rural vehicular service to the
eneral public. There is no evidence wi thin the ordinance
anguage, its intent or generally accepted definitions for "public"
hat the operation of an individual commercial trucking business'
aintenance and storage facility, is a public garage.
~ovember 3, 1992
Bchuyler Enterprises
Page 2
iaTATUS OF VIOLATIONS
I\t the time of our most recent inspection of the site, this
pusiness was in compliance with the special permit approval. since
hat inspection, the building violations were corrected and a
c~ertificate of occupancy has recently been issued. Therefore, the
$ite is now also in compliance with the ordinance.
Based on evidence obtained from the public, and regular
~urveillance by Zoning Inspectors, we ascertained that several
c~onditions of the special permit were violated on a regular basis.
rhhey were cited by an official determination of violation notice
caated October 7, 1992. The specific conditions which were violated
are as follows:
. Hours of operation (condition #2). There was evidence of
work occurring on weekends, nights, etc.
· . Outside storage of junk parts (condition #3). There were junk
parts of trucks, and a wrecked truck stored on the property.
. More than four tractor trailers parked outside (condition #7) .
There were often more than four on the property.
l~e conducted surveillance of the site by Zoning Inspectors,
c week at odd hours, and found compliance to be sporadic.
eceipt of the violation notice, our inspections have
c~ompliance .
twice
Since
found
f you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to
c~ontact me.
~GM/
F
1
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 4)
\CHHENT F
based on circumstances beyond the control of the applicant. Approved
final plans will not be granted extensions. As with final plats,
expired final plans can be reactivated by resubmitting on a submittal
date with an appropriate application, fee, and number of copies. The
plan will go through the normal site review process and be placed on
the Commission's agenda for action.
L
Item 5.3. Memorandum dated September 4, 1991, from V. Wayne Cilimberg,
Director of Planning and Community Development, entitled "Fire Hydrants along
Existing Water Lines outside of Jurisdictional (Services) Areas."
Mr. Bowie asked for this matter to be brought back to the Board at the
day meeting in October with information pertaining to who will be responsible
for paying for these fire hydrants, how it should be done and what has to be
done to get the job accomplished.
Item 5.4. Memorandum dated September 9, 1991, from Robert W. Tucker,
Jr., County Executive, entitled "Proposed Adult Day Care Center", was received
as follows:
"County staff has been approached by representatives of the Jefferson
Area Board for Aging regarding the potential of using a county-owned
parcel of land on Berkmar Drive adjacent to the rescue squad building
as a new adult day oare center. Apparently plans to use a site owned
by the Catholic Diocese of Richmond at Branchlands has run into
difficulties and alternatives are being explored.
Mr. Gordon Walker, Executive Director of JABA, has requested to meet
with the appropriate county representatives and staff recommends that
the Board's Building Committee be instructed to meet with Mr. Walker
and bring a recommendation back to the Board for its consideration."
Mr. Bowie said that this is not a firm proposal, and he sees no value in
sending it to the Building Committee. He noted, though, that everyone sees a
need for an adult day care center. He told Board members that there is a ten
page report available if anyone would like to refresh his or her memory. He
mentioned that a similar arrangement has been worked out in Scottsville. He
asked for the staff's recommendations to be brought back to the October day
meeting.
Item 5.5. Copy of a certified copy of United States Internal Revenue
Service Form 8038 filed by the Albemarle County Industrial Development Author-
ity for the $12,595,000 Residential Facility First Mortgage Revenue Bonds (Our
Lady of Peace Project) series 1991, was received for information.
Item 5.6. Copy of letter dated September 6, 1991, from James Christian
Hill, National Register Assistant, State Historic Preservation Office, stating
their interest in having Solitude placed on the Virginia Landmarks Register,
was received for information.
Item 5.7. Copy of Bond Program Report and Monthly Report for Arbor Crest
Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.) for the Month of August, 1991, was received
for information.
Item 5.8. Copies of Minutes of the Planning Commission for August 27,
September 3 and September 10, 1991, were received for information.
The following two items were heard concurrently.
Agenda Item No.6. ZTA-91-04. Schuyler Enterprises. Public Hearing on
an amendment to Section 3.0 of the Zoning Ordinance to change the definition
of public garage. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on September 3 and
September 10, 1991.)
Septembe~ 18, 1~91 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 5)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the the following staff report:
"Origin: Request by Schuyler Enterprises.
Public Purpose to be Served: The proposed amendment would provide
clarification of the activities permitted as part of a public garage.
L
History of ZTA-91-04: The applicant originally submitted a request to
add contractor's office and equipment storage yard in the Rural Areas
and to amend the definitions and add supplementary regulations for the
use. Staff was unable to recommend approval of that request and on
July 16 the Planning Commission deferred action on ZTA-91-04 until
August 6. Staff prepared a revised ZTA after discussions with the
applicant and the County Attorney. The revised report was prepared on
the addition of truck terminal to the Rural Areas District and to
provide for supplemental regulations. Staff was unable to recommend
approval of that proposal. The applicant then requested deferral of
ZTA-91-04 on August 6. Subsequent to that request the applicant has
now changed the requested ZTA-91-04 to amend public garage and has
submitted a revised definition.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to amend Section
3.0, Definitions, as follows:
Public Garage: A building or portion thereof, other than a
private garage, which together with the adiacent land area is
designed or used for servicing or repairing and temporary stor-
age (not to exceed 48 hours) of motor driven vehicles.
Staff Comment:
History of Public Garages: The following is a brief history of the
County's approach to the issue of public garages:
In a special use permit review in 1978, staff stated that (SP-78-55,
Walter Johnson): 'the definition of public garage has been problem-
atic in the past. This use appears only in the A-I zone, and staff
opinion is that "renting, selling, or storing motor vehicles" are uses
inappropriate to that zone. Therefore, staff recommends repealer of
said wording thus restricting such use to the "repairing, servicing,
and equipping" of motor vehicles.'
In a November, 1986 Comprehensive Plan work session report, staff
stated that: 'Some uses included in the RA district bear little or no
relationship to the statement of intent and need not be permitted
(based on other zoning provisions) in the RA district. These are
basically uses permitted by special use permit, such as motels,
restaurants, and public garages.'
In 1989 the Board of Supervisors amended the definition of public
garage to delete the 'equipping, renting, selling or storing of motor
vehicles. '
Staff has identified nine applications for a public garage since the
adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. Of these nine, one was dismissed,
four were denied, three were approved, and one was withdrawn. No
applications for a public garage have been approved since the amend-
ment of the definition of public garage in 1989. All public garages
approved by the Board and all recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission (an additional two requests), had conditions limiting to
four the number of vehicles awaiting repair, or a condition stating no
storage of vehicles.
It is clear from past approval of public garages that the intent of
the Board was to limit the amount of activity and the visual impact
that garages have on the Rural Areas. In 1989, reference to storage
of vehicles was deleted from the definition of public garage. Under
the prior definition, storage could occur independent of any repair
activities. Under the current proposed language, storage can occur
only as an accessory use to the repair activities.
September 18, 1~9l (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 6)
L
Purpose and Intent of the Rural Areas ZoninR District: In general,
the purpose and intent of the Rural Areas zoning district reflects the
Comprehensive Plan and is to encourage and preserve agricultural and
forestal activities and to discourage development not related to bona
fide agricultural and forestal uses. This intent is reflected by the
uses permitted in the district. The provisions for commercial,
non-residential, non-agricultural/forestal uses are primarily for uses
supportive of agriculture/forestry (Farm Winery, Sawmill) or support-
ive of a rural population (Country Store, Public Garage).
Public Garage would remain supportive of a rural population under the
applicant's proposal. Staff has discussed this amendment with the
Zoning Administrator who has stated that temporary storage of vehicles
is currently permitted as accessory to a public garage. This inter-
pretation is based in part on the possible need to store a vehicle for
a limited time while awaiting parts necessary to complete the repair.
Therefore, staff does not object to the addition of 'temporary stor-
age' to the definition of public garage. Staff is concerned about
setting a time limit to define temporary storage. This would remove
any discretion on the part of the Zoning Administrator. In the past,
storage of vehicles at public garages has been addressed by limiting
to four the number of vehicles awaiting repair or restricting storage.
This allows for a reasonable storage time and grants the Zoning
Administrator and garage operator flexibility.
Summary: The applicant's proposal would clarify the uses permitted at
a public garage. Defining a time period for temporary storage may
create an enforcement problem for the Zoning Administrator and does
not provide for any discretion to allow for unforeseen delays in
repair of vehicles which may result in storage for over 48 hours.
Staff recommends that the following language be added to the end of
the applicant's definition 'whether or not for compensation'. This
additional language further clarifies a public garage in the event
that a facility is operated as not for profit by a club or individual
or is used by only a single user.
Staff recommends approval of ZTA-9l-04 with the following language:
Public GaraRe: A building or portion thereof, other than a
private garage, which tORether with the ad;acent land area is
designed or used for servicing or repairing and temporary stor-
aRe of motor driven vehicles, whether or not for compensation.
Mr. Cilimberg said, the Planning Commission, at its meeting on Septem-
ber 10, 1991, unanimously recommended denial of ZTA-9l-04, because they felt
it was neither necessary nor desired.
Agenda Item No.7. SP-9l-2l. Schuyler Enterprises. Public Hearing on a
request to locate a public garage on 25.0 ac zoned RA (use proposed under
ZTA-91-04 above). Property on S side at inters of Rts 800/602. TM126,P3lA
(part). Scottsville Dist. (This property does not lie in a designated growth
area.) (Advertised in the Daily Progress on September 3 and September 10,
1991.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report as follows:
"Character of the Area: This site is developed with
structed garage and a graveled storage/parking area.
surrounding the site are wooded and no dwellings are
site. The garage is visible from the state road.
a recently con-
The areas
visible from the
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to use the existing
site to store and repair equipment used by Schuyler Trucking only.
The applicant currently has similar facilities in Schuyler (Nelson
County). Maintenance would include, but is not limited to, repairing
or replacing tires, brakes, lights and routine truck maintenance.
Hours of operation would be 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Saturday.
No freight will be handled or stored on site. A description of this
request as well as a justification has been provided by the applicant.
.
September 18, 1~91 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
(Staff notes that the previous use of this site has been in violation
of the Zoning Ordinance and as of the preparation of this report the
Zoning Administrator is pursuing action pursuant to the violations.)
L
Summary and Recommendations: Staff has reviewed this request for
compliance with Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance and recommends
denial. This report will be based on the assumption that ZTA-91-04
has been approved and that the general policy issue of permitting
storage in conjunction with a public garage has been addressed.
Therefore, the remainder of this report will be site and use specific.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan states on Page 203: 'All
decisions concerning Rural Areas shall be made in the interest of the
four major elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The four major ele-
ments are: 1) preservation of agriculture and forestal activities; 2)
water supply protection; 3) limited service delivery to the Rural
Area; and 4) conservation of natural, scenic, and historic resources.'
Based on information provided by the applicant, this use will have at
best only an indirect relationship with local agricultural/forestal
activities as the products trucked will typically have origin and
destination outside of the County. (This relationship would be a
direct one if the applicant's primary service was the trucking of
agricultural commodities produced by or used in Albemarle County
agricultural activities.)
This site is not located within a water supply watershed. This site
is extremely remote to the developed portions of the County and the
provisions of services, primarily police and fire protection, may be
limited due to the distances involved. Other issues listed by the
Comprehensive Plan will be discussed later in this report.
It is the opinion of staff that this request is inconsistent with the
intent of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Rural Area and that
this use would be more appropriate in a designated growth area.
Staff Comment: In the past, staff has recommended that public garage
uses are more appropriate to designated growth areas of the Compre-
hensive Plan than to random location in the Rural Areas. In past
reports for public garages, staff has stated that commercial use of
the property should be evaluated in terms of appropriateness to the
Rural Areas. That is to say, a determination should be made as to
whether or not this garage would provide service to the area otherwise
not conveniently available.
It is clear that this use will not provide the limited support ser-
vices for the Rural Areas that a typical public garage would provide.
This is due to the applicant's proposal which would limit use of the
garage to the repair and maintenance of Schuyler Enterprise equipment
only. If the proposal were for a public garage open to the general
public it is the opinion of staff that the use would then duplicate
garage services which are available 1.8 miles from the site at the
intersection of Route 6 and Route 630 (Dennis Brown, a non-conforming
garage).
The remainder of this report addresses the following issues:
1. Safety of Routes 800 and 602 in Albemarle and Nelson County.
2. Suitability of the site for development.
3. Consistency with items contained in Section 31.2.4.1 of
the Ordinance.
Safety of Route 800 and 602 in Albemarle and Nelson County: The
applicant notes that this location will remove traffic hazards on
Route 800 in both Albemarle and Nelson counties. The applicant
currently performs the activities proposed on this site in Nelson
County, but requires additional area to support the business. The
applicant states that by moving this operation to Albemarle County it
will reduce truck traffic coming from Route 6 on the section of Route
800 between this site and Nelson County. Staff has obtained accident
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
L
information from the Virginia Department of Transportation for Routes
800 and 602. This information indicates that in the past three years
there has been one fatal accident and that this occurred on Route 800.
This accident occurred between the site currently under review and
Nelson County. Based on the applicant's information, staff agrees
that this request may reduce the number of trucks using Route 800
between this site and Nelson County. However, this site will not
remove the risk of accidents as some trucks may still go to the
Schuyler operation. This site will also involve the use of a portion
of Route 602 previously unused for daily truck traffic. Staff does
not support uses which will increase truck traffic on secondary roads
in the Rural Areas which are not designed for such regular use. Staff
also notes other traffic associated with the operation may increase on
Route 800 due to the geographic separation of the applicant's two
locations.
Suitability of the Site for Development: Staff notes that a portion
of this site is currently developed and that no site plan has been
approved. A variety of soils are located on this site, most of which
are not suited to agriculture. However, the potential of tree produc-
tion on-site is moderate to high except where restricted by slope.
Therefore, this use will not substantially restrict future use of the
site for agriculture, due to the presence of unsuitable agricultural
soils. The potential use of a portion of the site for forestal
activities will be lost due to this development. It should be noted
that available soils' information is general in nature. Large deposits
of soapstone are located in this area and they may reduce tree produc-
tivity. For construction purposes, the soils on the developed portion
of the site do not have severe limits. Other soils on site have
severe to moderate limits and seasonally high water tables.
Provisions of Section 31.2.4.1:
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to
issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use
permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a
finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to ad;acent property,
All property adjacent to this site is wooded and parcel 31A is re-
stricted by the conditions of SP-90-11 which allows division into lots
of 21 acres or greater only. This use will result in an industrial
use which may result in the storage of unsightly material and noise
from the repair operation as well as increased traffic volumes on
Route 602. This may result in a detriment to adjacent property.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby,
The establishment of this Public Garage which is unrelated to local
agriculture and/or forestry is inconsistent with the character of the
district due to the scale and characteristics of the activity.
Approval of this permit may encourage additional requests for com-
mercial activities in this area.
and, that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of
this ordinance,
This use will result in traffic volumes higher than what would be
normally expected from a single-family dwelling. Staff is unable to
determine what the average traffic count to the site will be, but
based on the applicant's information it would be a minimum of 24
vehicle trips per day with a majority being truck traffic. This
increase may be considered inconsistent with the intent of the ordi-
nance as stated by Section 1.4.2 'To reduce or prevent congestion in
the public streets.' This use would not appear to be consistent with
the intent of the Ordinance as stated by Section 1.6 as this area is
recommended as Rural Areas in the Comprehensive Plan.
.
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
with the uses permitted by right in the district,
As stated in the intent of the Rural Areas District section: 'It is
intended that permitted development be restricted to land which is of
marginal utility for agricultural/forestal purposes, provided that
such development be carried out in a manner which is compatible with
other purposes of this district.'
l- .
.-
As has been stated earlier, this land is of marginal utility for
agriculture. The by-right uses of the Rural Areas District are
limited. It does not appear that this use would directly interfere
with existing agricultural/forestal operations in the area. However,
due to the scale of this use and its industrial character, this use is
not in harmony with the intended by-right uses of the district.
with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this Ordinance,
Section 5.0 contains no regulations governing public garages.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
pue to the existing development on site, it is unknown if storage
areas can be adequately screened. The Planning Commission and Board
of Supervisors should be aware that the site was developed without
site plan approval and staff is unable to verify that all provisions
of the Zoning Ordinance have been met. This site is served by private
septic system and has obtained Health Department approval. Water
service to the site is by the Nelson County public water system.
Safety issues regarding public roads have been previously addressed.
Waste materials such as parts will be placed in dumpsters and removed
from the site. Waste oil will be collected and used to heat the
structure. Other waste fluids will be stored in barrels and then
removed from the site. During Site Review, staff will take measures
to ensure adequate containment and disposal methods for all waste.
Additional Information and Recommendations:
Staff notes that a number of letters have been received both in
support of and opposing this request.
In general, this use represents the introduction of a use which is
inconsistent with the general character of the area and is not sup-
portive of local agriculture/forestry or the existing rural popu-
lation.
Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this
request:
1. The land is of marginal utility for agriculture.
2. Use may reduce truck traffic on a portion of Route 800 which is
narrow and winding.
Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to
this request:
1. Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan due to incompatibility
with the Rural Areas.
2. Lack of support of the Rural Area population or relationship with
local agriculture/forestry.
3. Possibility for an increase in total traffic volumes of Route 800
due to the geographical separation of the operations for Schuyler
Enterprises.
4. A use of this nature (industrial characteristics) is a potential
detriment to adjacent properties.
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 10)
5. A use of this nature (industrial characteristics) will change the
existing rural character of the area.
6. Use appears to be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the
ordinance due to increased traffic and inconsistency with the
Comprehensive Plan.
L
7. Due to existing site conditions, ensuring compliance with the
Zoning Ordinance may be difficult.
It is the opinion of staff that there are significant negative factors
that make this use inappropriate in this location. Therefore, staff
recommends denial of SP-91-12.
Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve this request, staff
recommends the following conditions of approval:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. Planning Commission approval of site plan. Use shall not commence
until final site plan approval has been obtained;
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Saturday;
3. No outside storage of parts including junk parts. Refuse awaiting
disposal shall be stored in appropriate containers;
4. No freight shall be handled or stored on-site;
5. All work shall be conducted within the garage;
6. Repair work and storage shall be limited to equipment owned or
operated by Schuyler Enterprises."
Mr. Cilimberg said the Commission had wondered if the Zoning Text Amend-
ment was necessary. The County Attorney's Office felt there was not a public
need for the amendment, and that the definition was adequate as it currently
existed and also expressed a concern that even the amended definition would
not fit the activities of Schuyler Enterprises. It was the Planning Commis-
sion's decision not to recommend the Zoning Text Amendment to this Board for
approval, and on September 10, 1991, the Commission denied the request unani-
mously. He said that the basis for the Commission's decision was that the ZTA
was neither necessary nor desirable.
Mr. Cilimberg stated that with this background, the Planning Commission
still considered the request for a special use permit for a public garage,
assuming that the zoning text amendment would be approved or that the public
garage definition would be considered as adequate for this request.
Mr. Cilimberg then discussed the staff report. He noted that there will
be no freight handled or stored on site. He said that the applicant stipulat-
ed before the Commission that currently repairs occur off site. He pointed
out that a number of letters have been received in support of the request as
well as in opposition, and they are included in the Board members' packets.
He then circulated among the Board members an additional letter in support of
the request which had just been received. He went over the favorable and
unfavorable factors relative to the request.
Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that in the discussion of the item, the Plan-
ning Commission devoted some time to a concern that the Comprehensive Plan was
not in accord with this project, and the Commission expressed concerns about
the precedent and effect of this approval on the Comprehensive Plan goals
objectives and strategies. He noted that the Planning Commission recommended
denial of the SP-91-21, with a majority of the Commission members stating that
their view was that a request such as this should be reviewed in the context
September 18, 1991 '(Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 11)
of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, first, before it would be consid-
ered for a rezoning application. He said that the County Attorney's office
had also voiced the same opinion.
L
Mr. Bowerman commented that the staff recommended that the ZTA be ap-
proved. He wondered if it was the staff's understanding that with the approv-
al of the ZTA by the Planning Commission, the definition would meet the
requirements of this particular applicant and the use that is on that site.
Mr. Cilimberg replied that this was the staff's opinion after consultation
with the Zoning Administrator.
Mr. Bowerman said he understands that Mr. Bowling had disagreed with that
interpretation when the matter was before the Planning Commission, and the
Planning Commission accepted Mr. Bowling's opinion that even if the ZTA was
approved, this use would not be covered on this particular site. Mr.
Cilimberg agreed that Mr. Bowerman's comments were correct.
Mr. Bowerman asked Mr. St. John if he concurs with Mr. Bowling's opinion.
Mr. St. John answered, "yes." He went on to say, however, that there will be
a rational argument from the applicant that this Board should consider.
Mr. Bowerman asked if there was a reasonable difference of opinion
between the staff and County Attorney over the interpretation of what this
Zoning Text Amendment would allow. Mr. St. John agreed that this is true. He
said that the problem lies in the term, "public garage." He noted that the
garage in question is strictly for the use of the applicant and is not public,
and this is the total basis for the disagreement. Mr. Cilimberg stated that
one Commission member expressed concern that the particular definition of
public garage might not be appropriate.
Mr. Bowie said if there were no further questions for Mr. Cilimberg, he
would open the public hearing. Barring objections from the other Board
members, the public input on this hearing would be limited to one hour, with
30 minutes of the time being allowed for the people to speak in favor of this
request, and 30 minutes allowed for the people to speak against the request.
He asked that the speakers address their comments to the Board and not to each
other. He reminded the group that the issue before the Board is land use.
The Board accepts the applicant's integrity, and it is fine for the speakers
to address the applicant's integrity, but the Board does not want to hear it
repeatedly. He suggested that when the speakers are making their comments,
they ask the people in the audience who are in agreement with their statements
to hold up their hands, and this would save a lot of people from saying the
same thing. The public hearing was opened at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Bowie noted that
the first 30 minutes of the hearing would be devoted to the people who are in
favor of the project, and he asked the applicant to speak first.
Mr. Fred Landess spoke on behalf of the applicant, Schuyler Enterprises.
He said that he would make a brief comment about the ZTA, and then Mr. Jim
Clark would speak regarding the special use permit. In regard to the ZTA, the
applicant is in complete agreement with the language propose~pythe staff.
The applicant further feels that this language supports Schuyler Enterprises'
position, and the applicant will endorse the language. He asked if he could
speak after those speaking against the request if their whole 30 minutes is
not used. Mr. Bowie replied that he never promises anything in advance.
Mr. Jim Clark, Schuyler Enterprises, commented that it has been a long
process trying to get permits, etc., and he believes that his understanding of
the Zoning Ordinance was incorrect. He noted that at no time was he trying to
mislead or deceive the County in any way. He said that Schuyler Enterprises
bought this land approximately a year ago, and there were some junk cars and
trash on the area where the barn-like building now stands. He said that this
area was cleaned, and someone from the County's Engineering Department came by
and told him that an erosion permit would have to be acquired. He added that
_ a surveyor was then contacted and survey information was presented to the
County. He went on to say that Schuyler Enterprises posted the bond, and the
drainage, etc., was accepted by Bobby Shaw of the County.
Mr. Clark remarked that the next step was to get an entrance approved by
the Highway Department, and the Assistant Engineer suggested that Schuyler
Enterprises apply for a commercial entrance. He said that he had not previ-
ously applied for a commercial entrance because he did not think that one was
September 1S, 1991 '(Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 12)
needed. The Highway Department's Assistant Engineer stated, however, that it
was no more of a problem to get a commercial entrance than a private entrance.
He noted that there was a bond requirement of $2500, and Schuyler Enterprises
posted it and proceeded to follow the procedure of grading the road and
putting in proper drain pipes, etc. The entrance was accepted and the $2500
was refunded.
1._
Next, Mr. Clark said that his brother acquired the permit to build the
barn, but the brother was faced with signing a lot of paperwork. Mr. Clark
said his brother paid the fee and signed the papers because he felt as though
the County employees knew what they needed. He said that the barn was built
in the middle of the summer of 1990, and Mr. Clark thought that everything was
all right. He then recalled that in February of 1991, Schuyler Enterprises
received a certified letter from Mr. Hurt of the County Inspections Depart-
ment, stating that Schuyler Enterprises was in violation of the State ordi-
nance on electrical and plumbing, etc., and permits had to be acquired within
ten days. He then went to see David Cooke because Mr. Cooke was the only
County employee he knew. Mr. Clark said Mr. Cooke informed him that he would
have to go to the Inspections Department and get permits. He applied for the
building, electrical and plumbing permits, but he was informed that he had to
go to the Health Department for the sewage permits, and he did so. In a
couple of days, according to Mr. Clark, an inspector came by the site, checked
the junction box, and verified that the work was acceptable.
After Mr. Clark had waited close to a month and nothing happened with the
other permits, he said that..he contacted Mr. Cooke again. He went on to say
that Mr. Cooke spoke to Mrs. Patterson, the Zoning Administrator, and she
spoke with Mr. Bill Fritz. Mr. Clark was informed that Mrs. Patterson and Mr.
Fritz wanted to have a meeting with him. Mr. Clark informed Mr. Fritz and
Mrs. Patterson that all Schuyler Enterprises wanted to do in the building was
to work on equipment. He reminded them that no business would be conducted on
the lot, and he said that freight would not be handled there. He said that he
does not like the "truck terminal" reference to the building because this
sounds to him as though freight will be brought in and distributed from the
building. He went on to say that Mr. Fritz and Mrs. Patterson suggested that
he apply for a Zoning Text Amendment and call the building a "contractor's
office and storage area," because they thought that this was how Mr. Clark's
building would be used. Mr. Clark noted that his company is a contracted
carrier, and nothing is done on a listed rate. He said that contracts are
negotiated on all of the hauling. Mr. Clark said that he agreed to Mrs.
Patterson's and Mr. Fritz's suggestion because he had no knowledge relating to
this type of situation.
Mr. Clark then noted that when his request was presented to the Planning
Commission, Mr. St. John did not think that Schuyler Enterprises was the type
of contractor to which the ZTA referred, so it was decided that Schuyler
Enterprises should apply for a permit for a truck terminal. Mr. Clark said
that, at this point, he decided to hire Mr. Landess, a lawyer, because he was
not sure what was happening. He added that neither he nor Mr. Landess believe
that his building is being used as a truck terminal, because a truck terminal
usually has freight going in and out of it.
Mr. Clark went on to say that he asked for an extension of time, and then
applied for the public garage permit. He pointed out that Mr. Landess is
knowledgeable in this area, and Mr. Landess thought that Mr. Clark's operation
matched the public garage definition. Mr. Clark added that he thought things
were progressing fine, until Mr. Rittenhouse spoke against the request at the
Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Clark said that a couple of mistakes were
made, and he thinks that one mistake was made by Mr. St. John's assistant, who
didn't understand exactly what Schuyler Enterprises was doing. He pointed out
that Mr. Bowling had indicated that there would be 36 tractors and approxi-
mately 60 trailers in the building, which is not true. He stated that there
would probably only be two to six trailers in the building at one time, and
never more than eight. He noted that the trailers are only brought in when
repairs are needed. He said that ordinarily freight is hauled between ven-
dors, and the trailers and tractors never come into the area. He indicated
that it would be too expensive for his company to allow 36 tractors and 60
trailers just to set in anyone area.
September 18, 1991 XRegular Night Meeting)
(Page 13)
l_
Mr. Clark said he was not sure if any of the Supervisors have gone to
look at the location. He explained that there are 25 acres of land, and he
wants to use approximately one and one-half acres of it. He stated that the
building that is located on this property is a metal building which has six by
- six pressure-treated posts, and 27 guage steel on the outside of it. He added
that it is a nice looking building, shrubbery has been planted around it and a
rail fence has been installed. He said that the building is completely
surrounded by timber, and it is approximately a mile from any other building.
He noted that representatives of Schuyler Enterprises have personally gone to
see all of the neighbors, and they have been in favor of the building being
located there. He pointed out that the land is no good for anything else
because there is soapstone under the soil, and as far as agriculture is
concerned, nothing could be raised on it. He said, too, that three wells have
been drilled, approximately 500 feet deep, and there is no water on the
property. He added that scrub-type timber grows on it, but nothing grows very
well on top of the soapstone. He remarked that it is actually a heavy indus-
try area, because there are soapstone quarries all the way around the proper-
ty. He said that there are three soapstone quarries on the back side of the
property, two on the right side and one on the left side. He pointed out that
the land only has three sides because it lays between Routes 602 and 800.
Mr. Clark said he feels a lot of mistakes have been made throughout this
process, and he probably should have contacted a lawyer at the beginning. He
said he didn't because he was listening to the people in the County Zoning and
Planning Departments, and he believes that these people were really trying to
help him.
Mr. Bowie told Mr. Clark that the Board would be delighted to listen to
him for the full thirty minutes, but he had already used up about half of that
time. Mr. Bowie suggested that, perhaps, someone else would like to speak on
Mr. Clark's behalf.
At this time, Mr. Clark thanked the Board for listening to him. He
reiterated that he was not trying to deceive the County in any way. He
thought truly that it would be possible to work on farm equipment as well as
the trucks in that building. He informed the Board that there were posthole
diggers and different pieces of farm equipment, as well as fertilizer, in the
building when Mr. Hurt inspected the property. He pointed out that the
building is environmentally clean, and there is an EPA approved furnace
located there. Motor oil will be burned in the furnace, which will be the oil
out of the vehicles when the oil is changed. He said that Schuyler Enterpris-
es also permits people in the community to bring their oil and put it in the
tank for the purpose of burning it in the furnace. He stated out that most
people in that community change their own oil.
Next, Mr. Landess spoke about the technical points involved with the
request. He noted that he was not contacted until after the Planning Commis-
sion had deferred the hearing in regard to the contractor's office and storage
yard. He said that after Mr. Clark met with the staff, the term "tTuck termi-
nal" was suggested. However, Mr. Clark is not comfortable with that term.
Mr. Landess believes that "public garage", as it is defined in the Ordinance,
fits the situation. He added that it is the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance
that is being discussed and not a dictionary, and he pointed out that the
Ordinance has definitions in it. He said that the Ordinance defines a private
garage as an "accessory building for the storage of all vehicles owned and
used by the occupants of the building to which it is accessory." He added
that this definition fits a normal household type garage. He said the Ordi-
nance also defines a public garage as, "A building or portion thereof, other
than a private garage, designed or used for servicing or repairing motor
driven vehicles." He went on to say that the public garage definition fits
Schuyler Enterprises because this is exactly what is happening in that build-
ing. He added that the garage is not an accessory use to a residence, and he
reiterated that motor driven vehicles are being stored, serviced and repaired
there. He pointed out that under the definition used in the County's Ordi-
nance, the use for Schuyler Enterprises is already covered.
Mr. Landess then noted that some of the members of the Planning Commis-
sion had difficulty with the application for this use and how it relates to
the Comprehensive Plan. He said that under the enabling legislation in the
State Code for Comprehensive Plans, it provides that the Plan shall be general
ll:.J-
September 18~ 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 14)
in nature. There is a section that deals with the legal status of the plan,
but it deals with public facilities such as streets, parks and utilities. He
quoted from the section on the land use plan and the introduction to it in the
Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan. He said that there is a provision that
says, "The Land Use Plan is cognizant of the County's existence in a regional
setting and attempts to integrate the County's physical development with that
of neighboring jurisdictions." He noted that under Development Standards, it
provides that, "Development standards are intended to provide a guide to
accommodating land uses in a manner harmonious with natural and the manmade
environment." He said the applicant's proposed use and the land for which it
is proposed is located in Albemarle County. In every way, other than geogra-
phy, it is a part of the Schuyler community, and it always has been. The
Schuyler community is basically an industrial community, and its only reason
for being is because of the soapstone. Mining, preparation, cutting and
shipping of soapstone is what created the community of Schuyler, and it is
what the community has always been about. He said this land is surrounded by
potential quarry property owned by Alberene Stone. He noted that when
Alberene Stone sold this property to Schuyler Enterprises, surface rights were
sold, but Alberene Stone still retains the mineral rights. He also pointed
out that agriculture is not a viable use in this area because the soapstone is
too prevalent, and the soils are too thin. Trees cannot be grown commercially
for the same reason, and only scrub growth is possible. The applicant's
proposed use for this property is far more in keeping with both the natural
and manmade environment than any agricultural or forestal or residential use
that might be suggested. Residential uses would not be good because of the
difficulty in finding water. and putting in a septic system. He pointed out
that this property is really a part of the Schuyler community and since the
applicant could not find water on the property, the property is connected to
the Nelson County public water system coming from Schuyler.
Mr. Landess stated that these reasons demonstrate that the granting of a
special use permit would be in accord with both the letter and spirit of the
Zoning Ordinance. He said the Zoning Ordinance provides for special uses
within the rural areas. He believes that the special use that is already in
the Ordinance fits this request. He further believes that this use is in
accord with the Comprehensive Plan, and it is the right thing to do for the
benefit of the residents of this area. He explained that many of them are at
this meeting, and can verify this. He added that the applicant has no objec-
tion to the proposed conditions, and he and Mr. Clark will be happy to answer
questions.
Mr. Bowie announced that nine minutes were left for favorable comments.
He asked the people who wished to speak to come forward and form a line.
Mr. Kevin Cox spoke first. He said he supports the Zoning Text Amendment
because he feels there is a need for it. He said that he also supports the
Clarks, as well, in the special use permit request. He noted that there are
currently facilities in the County which match the definition as set forth in
the proposed ZTA. He said that garages can be called public or private, or
the word, "public" could be struck altogether, but they would still meet that
definition. He went on to say that the Mundy Brothers had to let an employee
go in order to meet the Home Occupation guidelines, and if this use were
allowed, they would at least have had a chance of retaining their employee by
applying for a special use permit under this definition. He said that some
rural economic development has advantages, such as jobs and reduced commutes,
in particular. He added that stopping all rural economic development to
preserve the rural character is not in the best interest of all of the rural
people, especially low and moderate income people who would like to live and
work near where they live. He quoted from the draft of the Comprehensive Plan
Annual Report, "There is a continuing decline in the percentage of households
earning less than $15,000. This may indicate that individuals and families
with lower incomes are leaving because they can no longer afford the cost of
living in the County." He noted that Mr. Clark has had to layoff some people
_ because he can't use this building. Mr. Cox thinks that some jobs might help
some poor people stay in the County and also increase their income. He also
noted that a practical decision in this matter would require some flexibility
in this Board's interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan. He hopes tonight
that this Board can demonstrate that the Comprehensive Plan is not written in
stone and does not put rural preservation ahead of the best interests of rural
people.
September 1~, 1991'(Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 15)
L
Mr. Courtenay Powell spoke next. He said that he lives in Faber which is
in Nelson County, and he owns and operates Powell Machinery, Inc. He also
owns considerable land in Albemarle County, which has been in the family since
the early 1700's. He added that for this reason, he is concerned about the
workings in Albemarle County as well as Nelson County. He mentioned that for
some time he was on the Nelson County Industrial Commission, and at that time,
the Commission helped Mr. Vance Wilkins purchase Alberene Stone and the
adjacent property with the hopes that Schuyler could be rebuilt to what it had
been in the past. He assumes that everyone is aware that Schuyler used to be
the largest soapstone producer in the world, and at one time 2500 people were
employed there. He noted that the Industrial Commission was very concerned
and interested in seeing Schuyler built up to the way it was 100 years ago.
He said that Mr. Wilkins was unable to do this, so Alberene Stone was sold to
some people from Finland, and they are trying to build up the business. He
pointed out that to do so requires transportation, and it must be dependable,
local and available. In his own business, he sells machinery allover the
eastern seaboard, Canada and through the middle west, and he also exports
machinery. He said that his company is solely dependent on its operation as
far as how the products can be moved. He added that his machinery is large
and there have to be tractor trailers to haul it, and they have to be avail-
able. He pointed out that common carriers such as Wilson and Smith's cannot
provide that service. He noted that Mr. Clark has been in business not quite
as long as Mr. Powell, but Mr. Powell was one of Mr. Clark's first customers.
He said that Mr. Clark has done a good job for Mr. Powell's company ever
since. He noted that Mr. Clark is a good Christian man who has affected many
lives in the Schuyler area as is indicated by the number of people at to-
night's meeting. He added that the County needs people who are interested in
the County and have love and concern for one another. He urged the Board to
grant whatever is needed so that Mr. Clark can continue his business, because
Mr. Clark is needed in that area of the County.
Mr. Powell pointed out that he has a farm in Nelson County, and he knows
that Schuyler is not farming country. He went on to say that Mr. Clark hauls
a lot of products which deal with agriculture, such as fruits and vegetables,
throughout the whole country. He noted that one of Mr. Clark's trucks took a
load of machinery to New York, and the driver told Mr. Powell that he was also
picking up a load of apples to haul to Texas. Mr. Powell said that this is
indicative that Mr. Clark is distributing food for people. He stated that Mr.
Clark's business is earnestly needed, and Mr. Clark, himself, and his family
are also needed in the County.
Mr. Bowie remarked that he would allow two more people to speak in favor
of the Schuyler Enterprises' request, but then time would have to be given to
anyone who might want to speak against the request.
Sheriff Bill Harris from Nelson County spoke on behalf of Schuyler Enter-
prises. He said that he wanted to comment about the law enforcement and
safety aspect of the roads. He thinks that everyone is familiar with the
condition of the roads going into Schuyler. He noted that the soapstone plant
has a lot of "eighteen wheelers" going in and out hauling their product. He
added that because of where the Schuyler Enterprises' building is located, it
will reduce half of the traffic going directly to Schuyler. He pointed out
that this will reduce the possibility of wrecks, injuries, etc. He thinks
that moving some of the trucking to the outskirts of Schuyler is one of the
best things that could happen there. He supports Schuyler Enterprises 100
percent, because the location of its building has helped his patrolmen in many
ways.
Mr. Dwight Mays, Pastor of Schuyler Baptist Church, stated that he has
known Mr. Clark for the two and one-half years that Mr. Mays has been a
resident of the Village of Schuyler. Mr. Mays explained that for 17 years he
has been a consultant and chaplain to industry on environmental and conserva-
tion issues, and he also is the coordinator of the group of volunteers who
have adopted both sections of Routes 800 and 602 which are shown on the plan
for the adopted highway cleanup program. He said that part of what is needed
in the community of Schuyler is the diversity of the land, natural resources
and the people. He added that a rich bayou and ecological system depend on
this kind of diversity and the same can be applied to the Schuyler community.
September 1~, 1991'(Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 16)
L
He said that Mr. Clark probably provides the dominant role now in terms of
jobs and livelihood for the people of the Schuyler community. He pointed out
that Schuyler has undergone changes in recent years. Schuyler lost its school
this year, and the soapstone plant does not employ nearly the level of people
that it once did. He added that the Schuyler community's livelihood depends
in part on maintaining this balance between land and people and its enterpris-
es. He said, as far as the road cleanup campaign is concerned, some of the
people have walked the ditches, and they know what has been pulled out and
removed from the roadside. He added that the roadside leading into Schuyler
on Route 800 has been more difficult than the portion of Route 602. He indi-
cated that Mr. Clark has personally helped in this regard in maintaining his
area. He said that Mr. Clark's section of road is well maintained, and it is
his feeling that it will continue to be. He stated that Mr. Clark and his
business enterprise are needed as well as the connections that the business
makes in the lives of the Schuyler people. He hopes that the Board will take
this into consideration in its deliberations tonight.
At this time, Mr. Bowie recognized the number of people who were at the
meeting in support of the application by asking for a show of hands. He next
opened the hearing for those people opposed to the application.
Ms. Pam Lancaster, a concerned citizen and member of the League of Women
Voters, spoke next. She said that she does not live in the area, but she was
traveling in that area one day, and two semi-trailer trucks pulled out in
front of her. She added that the trucks proceeded to go to Route 29 where
they pulled onto Route 29 South. She pointed out that to do this, the trucks
had to go across a four-lane section without a traffic light. She thinks that
this is a dangerous situation, and she feels that those roads are not built to
accommodate semi-trailer trucks. She understands that there has already been
one accident in the area.
Next, Mr. John Hermsmeier spoke on behalf of Citizens for Albemarle, as
its Secretary. He noted that the County staff report examines the criteria by
which a special use permit might be justified, and concludes that this request
should be denied. He said that Citizens for Albemarle agree. He read a
prepared statement which was included with the Board members' information.
Ms. Page Massie stated that she grew up in Southern Albemarle County, and
her family has been there for five generations. She cannot understand why an
exception could not be made when there are so many people in favor of the
application. She pointed out that there is only 1S percent of the County
zoned for commercial and business use, and 8S percent of the County is in
rural use. She said that if the business was close to a residential area, and
the people in that residential area opposed it, she could understand why the
Board might deny the request. She thinks that Schuyler Enterprises is great,
and she reminded the Board members that they are supposed to be looking out
for the welfare of the people as well as their safety and health. She be-
lieves that this business is very important to the welfare of that area's
citizens.
Next, Mr. Bowie asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak.
Since no one else came forward, Mr. Bowie closed the public hearing.
Mr. Way stated that during his years as a Board member, the last time he
remembers this many people coming to a Board meeting it was in reference to a
garage in Scottsville, and the request was denied. He thinks the problem is
the fact that it is hard to describe what is really going on, because there
are no definitions that fit it. It appears to have taken approximately five
months to go through the process to this point. At the present time, the
Planning Commission's final conclusion was that the property should be rezoned
rather than tring to find a definition that fits the request. He feels it
would take another year to rezone the property.
Mr. Way said he believes in the Comprehensive Plan, he voted for the
Comprehensive Plan, and he served as Chairman of this Board during all of the
work sessions on the last revisions. In terms of the traffic conditions on
Route 29 South, he agrees that it is a very serious problem, but he does not
think this application would in any way affect this situation since whether
this application is approved or not, trucks will still be going and comin out
of Schuyler. He pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan is not the Bible; it
is not written in stone. He feels the whole purpose of a special use permit
is to allow the Board members to look at each application individually and
determine whether or not that particular application, in the requested loca-
tion, is something that is reasonable. It seems to him that this request is
reasonable.
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 17)
l_
Mr. Way said the property in question is zoned agricultural because he
does think anyone ever bothered, when the Comprehensive Plan first came into
existence, to decide what was going on there. He added that the agricultural
use there was grandfathered. He pointed out that the surrounding area is all
industrial, and industry is on three sides of the property, which is shaped in
a triangular fashion. When these maps were originally drawn, he believes this
area should have been colored purple because a quarry is considered an indus-
try. He added that if the quarry were anywhere else in the County, it would
show on the map as an industrial section, and that is exactly what it would
be. From that point of view, Mr. Way thinks that it is already industrial
property, and just because it is not colored that way on the map, does not
keep it from being an industrial property.
Mr. Way then pointed out the safety aspects of this application. He said
that the portion of the road that is shown in yellow on the map is relatively
straight, and the portion of the road colored in red is dangerous. He does
not think there is any question that from a safety point of view, there will
be fewer' trucks going into Schuyler than there were before. He agrees with
the Sheriff's analysis of the situation. He said that it is obvious that none
of the adjoining landowners object to this application, and he thinks it is
important to provide jobs for County citizens. He understands this is not
something to be considered in a land use situation, but he thinks it has to be
remembered that the Comprehensive Plan is not 100 percent correct. In his
opinion, the errors that sometimes come up are particularly obvious in the
most outlying areas where some things are appropriate and some things are not
appropriate. He added that..the request clearly has the community's support.
As he looks at the pros and cons of the situation, he sees it heavily balanced
that many people are going to benefit from Schuyler Enterprises being located
in the area, and very few people will be disturbed by it. He went on to say
that he believes there will probably be something better located there than
what was there in the first place. He said that a lot of it is a question of
semantics and whether the building is going to be called a public garage. Mr.
Way said he does not believe that the other Supervisors would want this
operation moving into a major subdivision or somewhere else in their dis-
tricts. He added that there has to be something about this application that
makes it different. He believes that it is different because he cannot think
of any other piece of property in all of Albemarle County that is surrounded
on three sides by a quarry. He thinks that this makes the property very
unique, and he does not believe that there is any danger of setting a prece-
dent. He is in favor of the application.
Mr. Bain stated that he would like to handle the amendment relating to
the public garage definition first.
Mr. Bowie replied that the items would be voted on separately.
Mr. Bain remarked that he thinks that the public garage definition does
not need to be changed. He said that the staff and the County Attorney's
office have both said that the definition is all right.
Mr. Bowie stated that he did not care when the motion was made on this
petition. He said that he personally accepts Mr. Landess' definition of a
public garage. He pointed out that Mr. Landess read the Board the County's
own definition, and Mr. Bowie is unsure where the problem lies.
Mr. Bain explained that this is a situation that is different from the
definition. Mr. Bowie agreed. Mr. St. John commented that when the defini-
tion is discussed, the Board must remember that this is a question, in the
final analysis, for the Zoning Administrator. He added that the Zoning
Administrator has not been asked yet to make a ruling, but the Zoning Adminis-
trator has already said that she agrees with Mr. Landess' position. He
pointed out that the Zoning Administrator is the authority on this matter. It
is Mr. St. John's opinion, however, that the definition carries no weight
- whatsoever, at this point, as far as this issue is concerned.
Mr. Bowerman asked why the matter is before the Board, if there is no
problem with the definition. Mr. Cilimberg remarked that the Zoning Adminis-
trator agreed that the clarifications which were included in Mr. Landess'
submittal, and the staff's suggested alterations were a better description in
clarifying the public garage definition. He said that this was the Zoning
.
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 18)
Administrator's op~n~on when the staff discussed the matter, so she was
supporting the Zoning Ordinance's public garage definition.
Mr. Bain asked the problem. Mr. Cilimberg answered that he just wanted
the Board to know the Zoning Administrator's position during staff discus-
sions.
L
Mr. Bain commented that he sees this situation as one that takes the
public garage definition which has been used and tries to tie it into some-
thing that is specific. He added that it does not make sense to do this. He
thinks that it will make it worse if the definition is changed. It seems to
him that, with the staff's recommendation, the County Attorney's position, and
Mr. Landess' comments, the current definition will work for this situation,
also. He added that the Board or the applicant can put conditions on a
special use permit, but he reiterated that the definition should be left as it
stands.
At this time, Mr. Bain moved that ZTA-91-04, which is an amendment to
change the definition of public garage, be denied on the basis that this
specific situation is covered by the existing definition of a public garage.
Mrs. Humphris seconded the motion.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
None.
Mr. Bowie clarified the Board's motion and vote by explaining that the
Board turned down ZTA-91-04. He said that this has nothing to do with the
garage, and the garage will be discussed next. He went on to say that it has
been established that the Zoning Ordinance description as it is now written is
good enough, and it will not be changed.
Mr. Way stated that, under the conditions for the special use permit for
the garage, he thinks that it would be appropriate to put a limit on the
number of vehicles that could be stored there. He suggested that storage of
vehicles be limited to six or eight vehicles.
Mr. Bowerman remarked that the County Attorney believes the current
definition in the Ordinance for "public garage" cover this situation. He went
on to say that the Zoning Administrator has said that this particular applica-
tion is covered by that definition, so he has no problem dealing with the
special permit. He did wonder why there has to be a special permit. Mr. St.
John asked Mr. Bowerman to clarify his question. Mr. Bowerman replied that he
understands the current definition covers this request, and the Zoning Admini-
strator thinks the application fits the definition, so why does there have to
be a special permit. Mr. St. John answered that a public garage can be in
this district only by a special use permit.
Mr. Perkins commented that what is being done now probably should have
been done 12 to 18 months ago. He thinks that Mr. Clark should have come to
this Board for a special use permit at the beginning of the process. He said
this Board has to face the fact that there are a lot of County citizens who
don't know about all of the special use permits that are necessary and all of
the special conditions that have to be met. He said that it is as though a
person has to be educated allover again when learning all of the County's
rules and regulations. He does not know everything that is in the County's
zoning laws, and he has read the Comprehensive Plan several times, and he does
not know everything that is in that. He would like to thank the County staff
for being very vigilant in finding violations. He said that this is the
staff's job, and he is glad to see that it is being done. He thinks that a
decision has to be made as to whether or not the applicant can continue his
- operation. He will support the application.
Mr. Bain remarked that the Planning staff and the Planning Commission
have spent a lot of time on the ZTA and the special use permit, and he thinks
that one revolves around the other. He agreed with Mr. Way that the Compre-
hensive Plan is general in nature, and it is to be a guide as to what is being
done in the Zoning Ordinance. He added that the Zoning Ordinance relates to
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 19)
the particulars and how each individual piece of property is handled. He
understands Mr. Landess' comments relating to the Comprehensive Plan and
making changes to allow for the reality of the nature of this property. He
said that he has been to the site, but he has not walked all of the adjoining
properties. He added that although the property is in Albemarle County, the
community is mostly in Nelson County. He said he does not know how Nelson
County's Zoning Ordinance operates in terms of the Community of Schuyler.
L
Mr. Bain thinks this may be an inter-jurisdictional matter. The matter
was mentioned when the Comprehensive Plan was being studied, relative to
working with different counties with areas in close proximity where there may
be development and business going on. He said that he would like to know what
the zoning is for the business that is just across the Nelson County line from
this property. He pointed out that the Board has not been told this informa-
tion from the staff or the applicant. He mentioned that the business may have
pre-existed the Nelson County Zoning Ordinance, but he would like to have more
of this type of information before he votes. He said that if he had to vote
on the matter tonight, without having this information and without knowing
whether there was support among the Board members for a change in the Compre-
hensive Plan for the whole area and not just for this property, then he would
be voting in ignorance, and he would not want to support the change.
Mrs. Humphris stated that this is a tremendously difficult situation, and
she could not help but wonder what the Board would be discussing right now if
the building was not already in existence; if the special use permit was
coming to this Board before"' the fact instead of after the fact. She said she
is still uncertain as to how this situation happened, but she would be very
uncomfortable doing what has been called "legitimizing" a zoning violation
after the fact. She said that most particularly she thinks it is critical
that attention be paid to the Comprehensive Plan even though she agrees it is
not written in stone. She feels that considerations should be made relative
to the Comprehensive Plan before considerations dealing with changing the use
of this piece of property. She agreed with Mr. Bain that this situation
should be dealt with regionally instead of just county-wide. She also agrees
that it would be very difficult to make a decision based on the situation as
it exists now without further information. She would feel uncomfortable
making a decision now, but she recognizes the feeling of the people in the
area. Yet, she stated that she is uncomfortable departing a great deal from
the procedures that are the glue that holds the County together in terms of
planning.
Mr. Way stated that if this building was not there, and the Board had
been involved from the beginning, he still thinks the same argument would
hold.
Mr. St. John asked Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Bain if they were suggesting
that someone on staff contact Nelson County. He said that this could be done.
Mr. Bowie replied that at this point, that does not need to be discussed
at this hearing.
Mr. Way moved that SP-91-21, which is a request from Schuyler Enterprises
for a public garage, be approved with the conditions that are recommended by
staff, with an additional condition that no more than four tractor-trailer
trucks be parked in the outside area at one time. Mr. Way would also like for
the applicant to plant a few pine trees between the building and the road.
Mr. Bain told Mr. Way that the suggestion concerning landscaping would be
discussed during site plan review. Mr. Bowie felt as though Mr. Way could
include in his motion that screening be done on the site. Mr. Bain agreed
that if Mr. Way had specific thoughts in mind, maybe he should specify them in
his motion.
Mr. Way said he would be satisfied if the staff would consider the
landscaping issue during site plan review. Mr. Bowie repeated Mr. Way's
condition as to the number of trucks that could be parked outside of the
building, and he also mentioned landscaping as a condition.
(
Mr. Way said he did not know whether to include the landscaping in his
motion, but he would be happy if the staff would consider having the applicant
plant pine trees for screening. Mr. Cilimberg stated that the screening did
not have to be another condition as part of the motion.
,
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 20)
Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.
1.-
Mr. Bowie said he would support the motion. He believes that Mr. Clark
tried to do everything that was required, and Mr. Bowie pointed out that no
one from the County found the building for ten months. He believes that Mr.
Clark got every permit that he needed to get. He thinks this area is diffe-
rent from other areas in the County because it is completely surrounded by a
quarry. He also believes that Mr. Way is right, and the property probably
should have been zoned for industrial use originally. He agrees with the
County's own reports and the Nelson County Sheriff's statement that this
situation will improve public safety on that section of the road. He would
like for the Planning District Commission to work with all surrounding terri-
tories on jurisdictional zoning, but he does not think this is an issue here.
He will say that with all of the information that has been provided, if the
building was not already on the property, and if the Board was reviewing the
request .at the beginning of the process, for the reasons that makes this
particular piece of land different from other areas in the County as described
on the map, he would vote for approval of the application.
Roll was then called, and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Bowerman, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
Mr. Bain and Mrs. Humphris.
(The conditions of app~oval are set out below:)
1. Planning Commission approval of site plan. Use shall not commence
until final site plan approval has been obtained;
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Saturday;
3. No outside storage of parts including junk parts. Refuse awaiting
disposal shall be stored in appropriate containers;
4. No freight shall be handled or stored on-site;
5. All work shall be conducted within the garage;
6. Repair work and storage shall be limited to equipment owned or
operated by Schuyler Enterprises; and
7. No more than four tractor trailers can be parked in the outside
area at anyone time.
The Board recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m.
Mr. Bowerman stated that Mr. Bain had talked to him after the last vote
about not making his thoughts known. He believes that Mr. Bain is right. Mr.
Bowerman said that regarding the last vote, he would like to say that he
served on the Planning Commission for ten years and has been a member of this
Board for almost two years. During that time, he does not think anyone has
upheld the Comprehensive Plan or looked at it more critically. He said that
this is especially true in light of setting precedents and where an interpre-
tation today could mean something detrimental tomorrow, especially as it
affects the watersheds and detention basins. He thinks that in this case he
was convinced by what he read in the staff report and the Planning Commission
minutes that the nature of what is going on outside of Schuyler is not going
to change by the approval of this application. He said the existence of the
quarry is not going to change, and it is a fact that the land is not going to
be used for agricultural purposes. He does disagree with Mr. Bowie. If this
application had been presented to the Board as a new application, and nothing
had been done on the property, it would be much more difficult for him to put
this use in place in that location. He added that this use developed over a
period of time. It started out as a trucking operation for a grocery store
with one truck and one trailer, and it grew over time to the current opera-
tion. He said that this operation will remain there whether it is in this
location or in Nelson County. He went on to say that it seemed to him that a
l~
L.
I
I
l_
September 18, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 21)
common sense application of this use in that place is that it is not going to
set any bad precedent for the Comprehensive Plan, and common sense tells him
it was the proper thing to do in this particular situation. He said that thi
is basically the reason he supported the special permit. He added that he
also agreed with the other positive comments, but he understands, too, Mr.
Bain's and Mrs. Humphris' statements.
Agenda Item No.8. CPA-91-02. Public Hearing on an amendment to the
Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan to include the recommendations of the Blu
Ridge Neighborhood-Area B Study: Change land use designation of the Blue
Ridge Hospital tract N of Rt 53 from RA to Public/Semi-Public; Change approx
30 ac in N portion of Hillcrest tract from low density residential to
Public/Semi-Public to accommodate the possible location of Forestry
Department; Replace residential holding capacity lost as a result of pub-
lic/semipublic designation by changing approx 10 ac of low density residentia
to medium density residential on Hillcrest tract W of unnamed tributary strem
to Moores Creek. (Advertised in the Daily Progress September 3 and September
10, 1991.)
Mr. Cilimberg gave the following staff report:
"Proposal to amend the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan to include
the recommendations of the Blue Ridge Neighborhood 'Area B' Study as
stipulated in the Three Party Agreement between the County, City of
Charlottesville and" the University of Virginia. Proposed amendments
include both text and table changes and a change to a land use desig-
nation on the Land Use Map.
Text Chanl1;es:
The expansion of the Growth Area to include that portion of the Blue
Ridge Hospital tract south of Interstate 64 and north of Route 53 is
based on the condition that the area be designated for public/semi-
public use and development in this area be consistent with the Master
Land Utilization Plan for the Blue Ridge Hospital tract dated May of
1991 (see Blue Ridge Neighborhood 'Area B' Study). The Albemarle
County Service Authority service area shall remain on this tract.
Expanded water and sewer services will only be provided for develop-
ment of this tract consistent with the Master Land Utilization Plan.
If the Forestry Department undertakes its proposed office development
on approximately 30 acres in the northeast portion of the Hillcrest
tract adjacent to Piedmont Virginia Community College, change the
Comprehensive Plan land use designation of that area from low density
residential to public/semi-public. Concurrently, increase the medium
density land use designation by approximately 10 acres on the same
tract in an area west of an unnamed tributary stream of Moores Creek
to replace the residential holding capacity lost due to the construc-
tion of the Forestry Department. This Land Use Map amendment would
not be effective until the Forestry Department undertakes its expan-
sion in this location.
Evaluation of the feaSibility of reconfiguring the Interstate 64 and
Route 20 Interchange to improve traffic circulation in the area and
determine the impact such a reconfiguration would have on a future
Interstate 64, Avon Street Interchange.
The Neighborhood presently contains Piedmont Virginia Community
College, a private school, two churches, the Regional Joint Security
Complex, the National Guard Armory, the Thomas Jefferson Visitors'
Center and the Blue Ridge Hospital.
-
Consider recommendations of the City/County/University Planning and
Coordination Council's Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" Study as a
guide for future development of that portion of Neighborhood Four
within the study area.
or. ..
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
im Clark
ransportation Director
chuyler Enterprises, Inc.
. o. Box 149
chuyler, VA 22969
OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF CATEGORY OF USE -
Complaint 91-37, Property known as Tax Map 126, Parcel 31A
Mr. Clark:
his is in fOllow-up to our March 12th meeting with David Cooke,
oning Inspector and Bill Fritz, Senior Planner. Staff has sp~t
onsiderable time discussing the issue and researching other
'nformation sources and other localities' regulations. A portion
f this information researched by Mr. Cooke is attached for your
se. After review of this information, the use of the site as
escribed by you, and an onsite inspection, it is my determination
hat this use is not currently permitted under the current RA,
ural Areas zoning. A copy of the Rural Areas district
egulations is attached for your review. You may chose to seek a
oning text amendment, a rezoning of the property, or an appeal of
his determination.
here is no category of use currently in the Zoning Ordinance
~hich closely describes your use. One of the closest categories
's II truck terminal'l found in the industrial district. This use
ypically involves the transfer of goods - onloading and
ff-loading - which your use does not entail. There is no
efinition currently in the Zoning Ordinance for this term.
text amendment option could include providing for your
se with a modification of the category of "truck terminal." In
ther words, it could be amended to state "truck storage yard or
ruck terminal." Or an entirely new use could be created which is
ess specific to trucks. For example, "vehicular storage and
aintenance facility" or "private business garage."
pril 02, 1991
im Clark
age 2
he determination of the most appropriate text is reviewed and
ecommended by the staff of the Department of Planning and
ommunity Development, with comment by this Department. You
hould contact Bill Fritz of the Planning Department for further
iscussion. Zoning Text Amendments are only accepted twice a year,
nless sponsored by staff, the Planning Commission or the Board of
upervisors. I have attached a filing schedule.
he current use of the property is in violation of the Zoning
rdinance. We appreciate your efforts to resolve this. At this
oint, you can 1) use the property as a farm building or some
ther by-right use under the Rural Areas district; 2) seek a
pecial Permit for use in the Rural Areas (reference Zoning
rdinance Section 10.2.2); 3) seek a Zoning Text Amendment to
rovide for this use in this zoning district; 4) seek a Zoning Map
mendment to rezone the property to industrial. Please make some
ritten reply as to your intentions and a schedule for compliance,
n or before May 1, 1991. If you have any questions, please
ontact me at your convenience.
incerely,
~.~ f}'\IEf~.
melia M. Patterson
oning Administrator
MP/sp
c: Rev. Way
Bill Fritz
David Cooke
Reading File IITRUCKII
nclosures
OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF ZONING VIOLATION
NO. V-92-103/AGM
DATE: Ocotber 7, 1992
Amelia G. McCulley
(Zoning Administrator)
0: SchuYler Enterprises, ATTN: Albert Clark
(Violator)
You are hereby informed that after investigation the Zoning
dministrator has determined that the following use or activity
onstitutes a violation of the Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle
ounty:
Property:
126
(Tax Map No.)
31F
(Parcel No.)
Owner:
Teresa C. Harris and Brenda C. Roberts
Violator:
SchuYler Enterprises
NATURE OF VIOLATION: Violation of conditions of Special
Permit 91-21, relatinq to number of tractor-trailers;
storaqe of iunk parts; and hours of operation.
You are hereby ordered to cease and desist from the above
iolation no later than IMMEDIATELY. If you need additional
ime for termination of this violation you may come to the office
f the Zoning Administrator at 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville;
irginia and extension to a later date will be considered.
ctober 7, 1992
-92-103/AGM - Schuyler Enterprises
age 2
Under Virginia Code Section 15.1.496.1, if you disagree with
his determination of violation you may appeal fhis decision within
hirty days of the date of this letter by filing with this office
written notice of appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals. If you
o not file such written appeal within thirty days, this decision
ill become final and unappealable.
DELIVERED:
(} 2' /;) j) ) L
/, (/'/}.;.2/ ~~-- DATE: /0 /~ 0/
._( .-/' // / t
. r\ 0
b1"eJL ~'1 1-
'..0't.Lj
~~...,~-
,
P r .~ 1-)'-1 II)
0- r ,-, -'. ~
.-f ,-\ +-
J vir/. Ct\.lc.'\_
,
1 'j "
C"...,---\/~, o.--,,,-!-\,~
v'"
,_i
'-'f? v'" t) ,-{;> "
/ v~. t-:,'-i:.CI\ \
d .
\.. Li:J;~ \\
'J
~~'"
I " -,. 1.-0' e rr1 .
c',/X I~ ~,-j .' .
iO/i'3!'1;0o
\) \L (I. ,1:'0 nO....... c' _ -"7 'i_.
O~ Wtw~u0', V 'i{.~~'
OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF ZONING VIOLATION
NO. V-92-103/AGM
DATE: Ocotber 7. 1992
ROM:
Amelia G. McCulley
(Zoning Administrator)
0:
SchuYler Enterprises. ATTN: James E. Clark. Jr.
(Violator)
You are hereby informed that after investigation the Zoning
dministrator has determined that the following use or activity
onstitutes a violation of the Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle
ounty:
Property:
126
(Tax Map No.)
31F
(Parcel No.)
Owner:
Teresa C. Harris and Brenda C. Roberts
Violator:
SchuYler Enterprises
NATURE OF VIOLATION: Violation of conditions of Special
Permit 91-21. relatinq to number of tractor-trailers;
storaqe of ;unk parts; and hours of operation.
You are hereby ordered to cease and desist from the above
iolation no later than IMMEDIATELY. If you need additional
ime for termination of this violation you may come to the office
f the Zoning Administrator at 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville~
irginia and extension to a later date will be considered.
October 7, 1992
V-92-103/AGM - Schuyler Enterprises
Page 2
Under Virginia Code Section 15.1.496.1, if you disagree with
~
this determination of violation you may appeal this decision within
thirty days of the date of this letter by filing with this office
a written notice of appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals. If you
will become final and unappealable.
do not file such written appeal within thirty days, this decision
Zoning Administ ator
Albemarle County, Virginia
AGM/sp
HAND DELIVERED:
()JJj)- 0
~)..---- .-",
/ /- ~
.- p:;;z:.-y.---1.
l1y.J
r
),fl\. t)U(_. (:Y~J:U..u~_.-C:.
"t~
':
0,-
o,v-..~t
c, ]),.~ V ~ ':) (Q \) \" C
% ,-/ -~
r:-Y;'7 (.. '-1.,lo--"
V/I,-, _ '-"
(',
f,.v
,v j
. ,~ l ' ~r)
7f~ t, Cl,lti:j\j L' IJJ'z/ C
,-._/
~ O:f...
I ,') -? '4 .' () ,/)
(1:.t- ~ J, --u I I I r t ,
!o/f::'~!1~ I?
.' ,c) .
Uv.~-~ Ot~~-
J"<:l.
- 0
DATE: / (J / l.? ,)f:1,;
I / l '
~
~,
~~
~~
~~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
0: Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator
Thomas Eaton, Senior Inspector
November 3, 1992
Schuyler Enterprises
T e Schuyler Enterprises site was checked/monitored for compliance
n.ne (9) times during the month of September, 1992. And three (3)
t.mes during the month of October.*
"spot checks" were performed at least one time on each "dav"
o the week, with the exception of Wednesday. The times of
v'sitation were randomly rotated from as early as 7:00 a.m. to as
1 te as 5:30 p.m.
every site visit, the Clarks were found to be in a state of
, om liance' in regard to the number of tractors and trailers at
e site and hours of operation.
ere was junk (wrecked trailers) at the site until the insurance
mpany was able to access the loss. "0n-si te junk" was in
mpliance on or before September 19, 1992.
e site was. last visited and found in "compliance" on Tuesday,
tober 27, 1992.
Dates:
ptember 05,
ptember 13,
ptember 14,
ptember 18,
ptember 19,
ptember 21,
ptember 24,
1992 - AGM
1992 - TNE
1992 - CDC
1992 - TNE
1992 - TNE
1992 - CDC
1992 - CDC
September 27, 1992
September 29, 1992
October 05, 1992
October 13, 1992
October 27, 1992
- AGM
- CDC
- CDC
- TNE
- TNE
=- ..
lJCl
II>
>
.....
l,;l
c..
:D
CD
(f)
.....
o
...
(l)
.....
g' ~
mO
::t:;-
00
~::J
I:D
(l) <D
< 3
CD 0
~a.
CD!.
..... -.
::J
to
~
o
::J
::.
o
o
ar
:x:
o
.3 :!1
. CD ~,
':7
o
o
'J
p:.... --::r
8 ~(1)
~ 0 g'a:'i
C"l''''MO
::r(1)(1)~
(1) ~I(.t)~
~. "'li;t31>>
:':;' ~ II> t:l g'
'< t:l .... 0 I'l
C"l' C"l' g- ~ C"l'
0='<:::;:
~ 8..S ~
n 0..
~g.~~
~ ~ 0.. ~.
QI'
. 1
I' --
'. '..-' ~ ..-.- ......:
!
I
I
. I ~
.,.,..:".:..\. .
I
'1
. I
I
I
i
...~..;..;..;.
I
I
I
I
k;
c2. C L--t'--e'.-. cL
.-.....
/ c2---/G'--7~
g ~ [ 5' 5' ~ 0' ~ UJ II> =
g::~ ;.I>>UJ....C"l'~S'e: ng-g.g-t::t
!ll e:; (1) g II> 't:l S' I>> g, C"l' n ~...: o. ~ ~ t:l g
~ '" g ~ n g. n ~ C"l' ll' '< !!l .- g-<< oq &r C"l'
<: tn 0,<1>>"1 ",--1:1 (1) :
II>!!: I>> S ~ I!. '< e...c e. tr g. &r r:; ;' ll'
::T B '" g !3 ~ '" t::t::11 E. p.. ~ 0 - e..;' e: e-
IlO '" 't:l (1) 8 _. 0 0 n ~ - t:r' ::11 II> C"l' 0
;g.~ ~ _ : 8. g IlO S I - : ~ 0' (1) n t:r' ~
_ II> C"l' C"l" ::l"'II>~"'on(1)C"l'
:g t:l O' '" IlO '< C"l' S' : ;. l:j 2: <-!r e. t:I ::T (]'Q ::;:
II> 0 ~ S g.:, g'n IlO I!.'t:l (!) 0..t:1 e:...., '"
III IlO 1lO1lO(!)C"l'P;' '""' ;-.....~. ~!!:g't:l
~ ~ e: . ~ .... ;' ~ a ",- S; ~!!l ~ ~ 't:l -,
UJ.lil(1) ~::t!l:;. ~~e:t:l(1) 0"1~~
II> _. ~ ~ 5' '" (!) . t:r' a (1) CI> ~ ~ . '"
II> ll't:I.. 1lO~ 00..- 0....
C"l'.... ...oqa-'~ ....;-~O~ ~-1lO0
0= o' i:! g S ~;: C"l" C"l' ~ g. 0 C"l' n "1
t:l <D oq _. <p '" g- '"'3 t:r' 1lO. ~::T..c C"l'
!:;ll ~ ..... 0....... ,<!r !!J O!:!.. <D II> 1=. =-
;;;.,: .::-;; t::. ~ ..' 't:l H G ,.
trj;::! 0.. '" C <D ;-'< (1) 't:l C"l' ~ S II> 't:l
. ...,:0.. (1)ll'C"l'0 ;+>o..trOO m:flS'"
"'::Tg t:!.o - C"l'g ~ ~~ nF~.g
~ ~ g ~ i ~ i? g- ~ ~ g' IlO E. ~ ~ ~
> ~ '<: 0 e-~ ~. ~ (!) t:l tr 0.. 0.. ~ ':<
'- ...., r- ~ S ~ ~ ~ -..+ o~g- ~ 0..
_. tr ~ _ c::-'g:.~ ~ ..- ,.
",
....
~g.~ OC;'t:l:a't:l
ol}l~ OOa(1)O'~ S-;'~oe:
= '" 0 ~ S .P 't:l .... 0 : ~ ll' t:l ~
t:I(1)... !3 (!)oC"l't:I :JC"l'PC"l'-
~"'a 8:a~~::x:C;~~C"l'(1)t:r'~~
'1lO ~ 8. e:'< ~ 0 g (!) ::: g- ~ (1) S 0
t:I S I}l C"l' n IlO C"l' ~ j;" g' ... '< ~.] (!) ~
0.. I>> IlO '< t:r' 0.. C"l' e: I < ~ ~ 0.. tr C"l' ....
t:l = C"l' o' 0 0.. (1). IlO (1) ~ t:r' g
!r !!!. ~..8 g- 5' - : '" ::;: t:I : t:l ~ p' ~ j;"
C"l' 0 t:l ~ '" :0;, - 0 C"l' '" IlO -
o t:I g. G' Cl .... e 8 '" 0 l S ~ to. III
~, t::. (1) a t:r' t:r' p; (!) ;.:g. C"l' t:r' I ~ t:l
e.c", (!)ll' 11>0.' 0 0....
S ;: 5' ~ ~ ~ &. r:; ~if 8 ~ ..g ~
ql III ~ > Z .... 0 tr ~ 0' IlO ~ to. ::T
<b C"l'~' So ~",t:1 -t:loq 0
t:I a t:r'~ -< (1) Q t::.:'t:l C"l' lil C"l' 5' ~ ~
~p~",;;"'!::>'90..~0 a;.....~C"l'
C"l'~'t:lf""IlO;;;.,..,IlO<DC"l' _CI>oo~
S 8 _ tn g tIl n ~ g- ~ 0 S'~
~ 8 ~ ~O'.~~O 0..... &~:goq t:r'
C"l' S (') (1)(!) sOo 0
: &. ~ ~ ~~ E ~'~ ~.g a gJ
t:I t:r' a ~ 'E..:a <D C"l' ;. 5' &. g .g 5'
C"l' 0.... IlO ~ t:r'C"l' 0 0 C"l' ......(1).....
t:r'-t:r' tnC"l'ot:r'(1)t:1 o.......,~.....
<D0..<D Illl>>tIlllOMO ,(1)OEl"o
. CI> ..... ,_ 1>>' ~ 8 oq ~
S ;'O't::tto
=~(')t:I00
(1) 8, &r ~ El ;l UJ
C""f"" rt" = C"1"
Ii- ':< g-~.;;? S ~
o ... e.~-
~ ~m.....p;1lO
n 0 _. 0 CD ~
~ ~g-~~~
~ O'.~:a:at:l
C"l' g tIl 0 t:r'!!l
! ~~~~i
_...., '<n~oqT
g g-g!,,~g:
't:l < n tIl<< t:l
(1)<D", CD
o 0 i:l .-. g.. 0"
_ t:l~0..1ll0
C"l' ::x:t:le:
~g.~io..
ape: g,
lllC"l'o..e:tIl
t:::C"l'tIl"'P
. n g-~t:I"g
~ ~ *' ~ ~ ~,
~
o.
()
,
o
:E
en
en
.-..
D>
o
'<
=t:fD>20"
03<Do,<D .
,<.-..D>O-':;
, - D> ....
:-0=c:<D
~-roenO
_!:fen<D"'2.
~~-<:f<D
<D -'<D <D D>
00. '< '
~I;!:E~
__<DD>C:
o ~'< ::J -
D> -
cg "";. 0. D> ffi
eno.o'
;- :E ::J_ c: <D
:E ~.-.. CD'
(l) D> :E .-
,<-D>
::J
.-..
t:I
o
C"l'
g"
5'
oq
.'.
, ~
~
-J
g,tIl I
t~
4'~ 0
,8 CD
" 0
II> c:
!:l 2. 3
mil>
5l''O
::;Z
0 CD
...,
...,
00'
JJ
CD
en
...-+
0
~
OJ
r-+
-.
0
::J
~
OJ
-
-
CD
C
-
o
c
-,
-
u:
,....
-
-.oIIll
0:
-c
fai"
1 .
.
* Home
.
Continued From Page Al
gions or philosophies," said Des-
mond Child, Akwenasa'a director
of public relations. The nine men
and three women who live at Mon-
ticola are trying to preserve a land-
mark, not create 8 cult or commune
of any sort, he said.
"We are a non-profit educational
1 organization. Any time you have a
group of unrelated people living to-
gether, people will make all kinds
of assumptions based on their own
problems. We have no plans of tak-
ing over Howardsville. We want to
help preserve it, not change it."
Akwenasa's goal is to turn the
mansion into a small-scale museum
hosting open house-type events
roughly twice a year, Child said.
In response - and contrast - to
Akwenasa's upbeat "Howardsville
Gazette" newsletter, Stacy's
"Howardsville Guardian" now of-
fers a strongly worded, differing
description of the organization's
activities.
The Guardian states that the
Akwenasa-sponsored project to
clean up the Howardsville boat
landing was undertaken to secure
more parking space for tourists
and that efforts to clean up town
cemeteries have been made "to ex-
pand the list of tourist attractions
and thereby increase their money-
making opportunities."
The boat landing was cleaned in
preparation for the James River
Bateau Festival, said Child.
Child said Akwenasa never
planned to clean up the cemeteries.
adding that those are projects con-
sidered by a different group orga-
nized to beautify the town.
"-
"He's created ;"sit..uation where
he's misrepresenting the commu.
nity," Child said of Stacy. "The
community was outraged. He's
made up everything without
asking any facts. He hasn't visited
Monticola or been up here to talk
to us. "
The opposition group, which
Stacy said has 15 members, has
said Akwenasa's programs, includ-
ing historical re-enactments,
classes, craft demonstrations, and
open-air tours and events violate
county zoning ordinances.
Child said Akwenasa secured
permission for each of its events.
Special use permits for similar
events in the future. such as those
obtained by private schools in Al-
bemarle County, may be appropri-
ate. said county zoning
administrator Charles Burgess. No
violations have been discovered at
this time, he said.
Burgess said special-use permits
would ensure sufficient parking for
events and suitable entry and exit
capacity connecting the property
to Route 626.
"If they're going to have any
type of festival-type events or
showings of the property, then
they'd want a special use permit,
which would meet concerns such as
parking, ingress and egress," Bur-
gess said.
The organization must describe
its needs before the county can se-
lect appropriate permits. he said.
adding that further discussions
have been planned. "I think their
intention. from what I've seen. is
to become a small-scale Monticel.
10," Burgess said. "With zoning.
we'd try to balance the wishes of
both parties."
it,
)'.- !~--,-~
"
I
"
bisf- -to J~O(J.-L~ 12/' ~/C;:;L/
15 December 1992
Mr. David Bowerman, Chairman
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Charlottesville, Virginia
Dear Mr. Bowerman:
I was present at last year's meeting of the Supervisors when Jim
Clark was authorized by special permit to occupy and use the tractor-
trailer maintenance facility that he had already built in southern Albe-
marle. At the time, I was sympathetic (as I believe you were) to Mr.
Clark's dilemma, because of the confusion out of which it arose. I
concluded that individuals employed in several administrative positions of
the County had failed their responsibilities in the processing of the
original application for zoning approval and resorted even to absurdly
creative semantics to resolve a problem that never should have been
allowed to develop.
Now, a year or so later, it must be clear that Mr. Clark's ingenuity
and the County's mistakes have created a burden to be borne by the area
residents for years to come. That burden, in all its many manifestations,
should not be compounded by allowing an inappropriate facility to be
enlarged so that its incongruous operations may become even more
intrusive.
The area surrounding the existing facility is entirely rural. The ac-
cesses to it from every direction are country roads. Route 6, the Virginia
By-Way that connects the facility to Route 29, is becoming a speed-way for
Mr. Clark's eighteen-wheeler customers. These giant vehicles roaring
through this residential country-side, tooling along at hazardously high
speeds along Route 6, as it rises and descends around sharp curves
skirting Butler, Shiloh, and other low mountains east of Route 29, conflict
not only with the neighborhood character but the personal safety and
tranquility that we residents are entitled to expect and enjoy.
Moreover, in consistently ignoring the conditions upon which the
special permit was granted, Mr. Clark has exacerbated the incongruity of
the site development itself. More often than not, the number of rigs
parked at the facility far exceeds the four authorized by permit, accentu-
ating the incompatibility of this industrial usage of a rural site and
offering visual confirmation of the heightened noise levels and roadway
usage by vehicles moving to and from the facility.
The creation of the facility has prompted Mr. Clark to establish (in-
formally, I suppose) an off-site storage area for more of these rigs at the
Briar Fork country store (nine of them today), one of which, for many
days now, has remained parked on or along the Route 6 right-of-way, no
more than about six feet from the pavement edge, obscuring sight lines
needed by persons arriving at or leaving the store from the east.
~
~ ,
I
"
- 2 -
Mr. Clark's televised statement last night that an expansion of the
facility is needed to accommodate increases in his business operations, if
true, is the strongest argument possible for refusing such a permit.
No doubt, more space for his terminal operations are needed; no
doubt, either, that this is the wrong space.
Sincerely,
14~ (~~
Roger Leclere
Esmont, Virginia
c: Mr. Bain
Ms. Humphries
Mr. Marshall
Mr. Martin
Mr. Perkins
Mr. Tucker
....
.1 .
/4.'~~ (~/L/ c-{" "'C
,,~ 'J '/d-
/.:.' / v
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
MEMORANDUM
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and
Community Development
Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administratora't~
December 15, 1992
S.P. 92-56 Schuyler Enterprises (Tax Map 126, Parcel 31F) _
Comment on Enforcement of Proposed Condition #2 Relating to
Operation in Case of Emergency
is in response to your request for comment regarding the
forcement of this condition. I understand that there was some
estion at the Planning Commission meeting. The condition as
a ended by the Commission, reads "Hours of operation shall be
l'mited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday; operation
s all be defined as maintenance work exce t in case of emer enc ."
is my opinion that without further clarification, enforcement of
is condition would be difficult due to extensive discussion as to
s intent. There may be differing interpretations of "emergency"
ses by different staff, or between staff and the applicant.
rthermore, in the case of repeated noncompliance with this
ndition, it may prove hard to document.
espectfully request that should the Board adopt this condition,
e intent of "emergency" be clarified by additional language to
e condition. The applicant should be consulted as to what
c nstitutes emergencies in this business. If I can be of further
assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
RECEIVED
ucG I .' 1992
Planning Dept.
,
.
// ,f
r... c!k-~ 4:,
~ c!<-c,~ tfL
/cy~oL
/3(!S
T : Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
D TE: December 16, 1992
F OM: Tom Olivier, representing Citizens for Albemarle
R : Schuyler Enterprises petition to amend SP-92-21
My name is Tom Olivier.
i the Schuyler postal area.
d"rectors of Citizens for
o ganization this evening.
I live in southern Albemarle County
I~m a member of the board of
Albemarle and am speaking for that
Our group urges that the current request from Schuyler
E terprises be denied. With this new request, it is difficult to
e cape the conclusion that the owners seek to use this site as a
tuck depot or terminal. The site is located on a narrow,
w"nding secondary road poorly suited to a high volume of heavy
tuck traffic. The site is not isolated from residences, as some
h ve claimed. The site is near houses, including two new houses
u der construction, one of which is about 200 yards from the
S huyler Enterprises truck facility.
We wish to make clear that Citizens for Albemarle is not
c tegorically opposed to the location of a truck depot or
t rminal in southern Albemarle County. Rather, we believe that a
f cility of the type that Schuyler Enterprises seeks to operate
s ould be located on land suitable and zoned for industrial use.
In addition, at the Planning Commission meeting, under
q estioning for Commission members, Mr. Clark indicated that he
w uld like to be permitted to keep more than 10 trucks at this
s"te. He also said that the size of his business had tripled in
r cent years. It seems unlikely that granting the request
b fore you will put an end to the story of changing land use at
t is site. We believe that granting the current request will
o ly lead to larger future problems at this site.
Citizens for Albemarle also is concerned with what appears
t be a breakdown in reasonable and equitable application of land
u e planning in handling of the Schuyler Enterprises site and the
d structive precedent that the handlings of requests from this
s te are setting.
The truck facility at this site was constructed by right
i itially as an agricultural building then used for truck fleet
m intenance. After being found in violation of the Zoning
o dinance, the owners sought and obtained from this Board a
s ecial permit to operate this site as a public garage. This
r quest was granted despite widespread opposition from in the
C unty administration. For example, Mr. St. John, the County
a torney stated in a letter of 22 September to Mr. Cilimberg that
h regarded the designation of this facility as a public garage
a a "perversion of the English language".
Since the granting of this request, Schuyler Enterprises has
v'olated the conditions of its special permit, particularly with
r spect to the number of trucks parked on this site at one time.
S huyler Enterprises now seeks relaxation of the requirements of
t at permit.
It is beginning to appear
A bemarlt:! County, if you want to
a lowed, you can get permission
b eaking the rules, getting the
r les, getting the rules changed...
that at least in parts of
put land to a use that isn't
for that use by repeatedly
rules changed, breaking the
and so on.
We hope that this is incorrect. You can make clear that
t is is incorrect and that due processes are in place to protect
t e interests of residents of all parts of this County by denying
t e request from Schuyler Enterprises.
Thank you for allowing us to express our views this evening.
.'
~
.
THE
J
(~; /i' ,J ,. ....,p, ~
k' '---""-.--'\..,.- V " c
.
.
12//yI7~3
HOWARDSVILLE
GUARDIAN
1
.....-
I(/I\IG I q ee
ISSUE#
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
lh~ HOWARDSVILLE GUARDIAN is a new voice in our community. lhe
viewppint e>:pressed in the GU~lRDIAN reflects the opinions of a
recen ly-formed coaliti?n of Howardsville residents who strongly
oppos~ the CON game being played on us by the AI<WEN{~SA/NONTICULA
CULT. It is our intention to use this newsletter to keep the Howards-
ville community informed of the various CON games that are being
perpe'rated upon us by this CULT. We feel s"tt~ongly that the true
feeli 19S of the majority of Howardsville residents need to be aired
to co Interact the biased~ self-serving reporting in tIle CULT'S news-
lette . It is our opinion that the Howarsdville Gazette is nothing
more han a slick~ public relations gimmick~ designed to give the
impre3sion that it is a community newsletter. In truth~ the Gazette
is nu hing more than a pr'opaganda tool and is Just a part of their
larger scheme to brainwash local residents.
It is the unanimous feeling of our coalition that we want Howards-
ville to remain the residential community as it has been. We intend
to st ongly oppose the commercial exploitation of Howardsville by the
Af::WEN ~SA CULT. Nor do we ~>Jallt to see Howardsvi 11 e become a commune
for h pmose>:ual refugees from Ne~~ Yor-k. Uther CULT groups such as
{iKWEN ~SA have taken over- small ~ rur-al communi ti es in other parts of
the cpuntry. LoJe are all familiar with .the tragic and destructive
conse~uences of such takeovers when local residents were duped by the
decep ive manipulations of such CULTS. Be assured that it can happen
to Ho~ar-dsville if we Just sit back and let them have ther-e way. The
ear-Iy warning signals are alr-eady upon us.
----- ---------------------------------------------------------------
WHO OR WHAT IS THE AKWENASA CULl'?
If you ask this question of the CULT~ don.t be surprised if you
don't get a str-aight anSNer-. FIt last week's Town Meeting, these and
simil ar- questions wer-e asked of several of the CULT members who
wer-e Jr-esent. They were also asked about their long r-ange plans for
devel :Jpment of t'lont i co1 a.
It is inter-esting that when asked, the var-ious CULT member-s told
sever-~l of us that we ha~ to dir-ect our- questions to Desmond Child as
they fvere unable or- not permitted to ans~~er LIS directly. We found it
ver-y ~isturbing that answers to our questions had to be fir-st
scree[1ed by t'1r. Child. Appar-ently~ individual CULT members ar-e not
allow~d to communicate directly with the Howar-dsville community about
their real plans for- the development of Monticola. It seems clear to
us th~t the CULT intends to censor and carefully contr-ol any and all
infor-Ination about their- futur-e development plans for I'10nticola. The
Howar~sville Gazette is a pr-ime example of this type of manipulation
of pU:Jlic opinion. But~ we ar-e wise to this tactic.
So
Ghent
migr-a
In order- to get some answer-s~ we contacted sever-al people in
New Yor-k, the tO~Hl l-'~her-e the m<liJEN{-'tSA CULT was located before
Ing to Howardsville.
(see ne):t page)
PAGE 2
"he people in Ghent had several interesting comments to make about
the AKWENASA CULT. First of all, they were both surprised and amused
to earn that the CULT had fallen in love with the Old South and the
Con ederacy. To their knowledge, none of the various cult members had
eve shown any interest whatsoever in the South, much less the
Con ederacy, the War of Northern Aggression or southern plantation
lif styles.
hey told us that the CULT had lived in ~hent for about five years
bef re leaving. They said that the local Ghent community had been put
of f by the CULT because of thei r pushy, e;q:1l oi "tati ve behavi or such as
\~e ave recently witnessed in Howardsville. Apparently, the CULT had
wor out their welcome in Ghent, so they decided to move elsewhere to
ach eve their goals.
0, now that we know a little of their background, we are in a
pos tion to speculate about the CULT'S real plans. Our speculations
are as follow:
It is clear that the CULf'S posture of being champions of the
Old South and the Confederacy is nothing more than a bald-faced ploy
des gned to give the impression that they are solid southerners and
tha we should welcome them with open arms. Just pay attention to how
int ntly thay try to CONvince you of their sincerity. The true sons
and daughters of the Confederacy certainly do not feel the need to be
I
penly demonstrative of tlleir heritage. True southerners carry
selves with quiet dignity. True southerners do not come across
as nake oil hucksters or florthern carpetbaggers.
It has also become clear that the CULT intends to exploit the
ric" cultural heritage of the South, Albemarle County and Howards-
viI e. They apparently do not care that their moneymaking schemes
and exploitative attitudes will destroy the unique character of
How rdsville. It is clear from their slick and aggressive advertising
aign that they intend to make Howardsville a tourist attraction.
ywhere you go in Charlottesville you will see the hundreds of
NASA/MONTICOLA posters inviting the public to Howardsville. Not
ention their sizable mailing lists.
Because of their bad reception in Ghent New York, the CULT now
Imo Ula t they have to get the support of the local communi t y in
ord r to be successful. Be advised that they have learned from their
pas mistakes. And it is here that the CON games begin.
l.JH(H ARE THE FUHNS OF THE "BIG CON"?
1. rhe first CON began with their initiative to clean up Robert
-aber's property on the river. "riley invited the community to help
ith the cleanup and/or contribute money to the effort. Their
eason was to provide a nice recreational by the river for the
ene"f i t of the local communi ty. But guess what happened? As soon
s Baber's property was largely cleaned up, the now clear land
'ust happened to coincide with the CULT'S need for a large, open
rea for - you guessed it - a tourist parking lot for visitors to
10nticola! Need we say more?
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
o F
I N TEN T
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
C unty, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to consider amending
t e Comprehensive Plan to establish Schuyler as a growth area and
c ncurrent rezoning of same area;
FURTHER requests the Albemarle County Planning Commission to
h ld a public hearing on said intent to amend the Comprehensive
P an and rezoning, and does request that the Planning Commission
s nd its recommendation to this Board at the earliest possible
d te, but no later than March, 1993.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w iting, is a true correct copy of a resolution of intent unani-
m usly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
V'rginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
~.~~sors
. '
. ,
(..;;~'\
./)
.p\
Disabilities Act (ADA)
for Albemarle County
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA DATE:
December 16, 1991
ITEM NUMB R:
0.'/ .~- I(:J,
-;', . . ~,; , , o){
. I .
l('(1.
ACTION:
INFORMATION:~
SUBJECT
Public
Transit
the Cou
regulat
PROPOSAL RE UEST:
hearing on the County's ADA
on plan, which outlines the steps
ty will take in complying with ADA
ons by January, 1995,
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
BACKGRO
The Arne
Novembe
from th
Plan, w
steps t
require
service
togethe
who wer
.0 comp
have be
1995.
reflect
Parks &
White
REVIEWED BY:
icans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan, which you received at your
4 meeting, is schedule for a public hearing on Wednesday evening to receive comments
community, particularly those citizens in the community with a disability. The
ich was developed by an ADA Advisory Committee over the past six months, outlines the
e County intends to follow in order to be in compliance with the ADA structural
ents by January, 1995. Although three representatives from the disabled community
on the County's Advisory Committee and were instrumental in putting the plan
, this hearing provides an additional opportunity for those in the disabled community
either not able to serve on the committee or are not aware of the ADA regulations.
Y with the ADA regulations, all non-structural changes outlined in the plan were to
un January, 1992. All necessary structural changes must be in place by January,
11 the structural modifications, which are outlined at the end of the document, are
d in the CIP project request for FY 93/94 and FY 94/95 for the County Office Building
Recreation, the School Division and the Regional Jail.
Althoug completion of a transition plan is required by the Act, a public hearing on the
transit'on plan is not required nor is the Board required by the Act to formally adopt the
plan. H wever, since the plan will serve as the County's documentation of its intentions to
comply ith the regulations, staff recommends that the Board give its approval to the plan
as pres nted. Approval of the plan will provide a framework for action and guidance for
County taff in addressing the ADA requirements.
al copies of the plan are available in our office, if needed.
s prior to the public hearing, please feel free to call me.
If you have any
92.182
-
. "
DISTRIBUTED
ON 10
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA ITLE :
America s With Disabilities Act
Transit"on Plan
(ADA)
AGENDA DATE:
November 4, 1992
ITEM NUMBER:
qZ..11C''1- . (J11
ACTION:---1L-
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Request
County'
Albemarle
Plan.
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY: ;WI
BACKGRO
The new
that at
opportu
Section
public
to all
to all
y enacted Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) is a comprehensive federal statute
empts to change stereotypes and assumptions about disabilities and to ensure equal
ity and economic self-sufficiency for disabled people. The Act extends the 1973
504 regulations, which applied only to agencies receiving federal funds, to all
ntities. All state and local governments are now required to provide equal access
ograms, services, agencies, and facilities as well as equal employment opportunities
isabled persons.
To comp
program
be in p
service
require
Y with the regulations, all non-structural changes needed to provide access to
and services were to have begun January, 1992; all required structural changes must
ace by January, 1995. To document current accessibility to County programs and
to the disabled and to identify those areas that need to be changed, the County is
to prepare a transition plan.
op this plan, a County Advisory Committee was established in April, 1992 to evaluate
rograms and facilities for ADA accessibility and to make recommendations for ADA
ceo The Advisory Committee consisted of staff from County departments that provide
to the public, as well as those that have an interest in the regulations of the ADA.
The att ched draft Transition Plan is the result of the Committee's work over the past six
months nd is submitted to you at this time for your approval. Following your approval, the
Transit"on Plan will be presented at a public hearing in December in order to solicit input
from th community, particularly those members of the community with a disability. The plan
has bee reviewed and approved by the Deputy County Attorney and recommended structural
changes have been incorporated into the FY 93/94-97/98 ClP for completion by 1995.
ATION:
commends that the Board approve the ADA Transition Plan and set a date for a public
for community input.
92.156
'. I
'.
ATTACHMENTS
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
TRANSITION PLAN
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Department/Agency/School Division H~d~~
Roxanne W. White, Executive Assista~~
June 8, 1992
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Self-Evaluation
Forms
(ADA)
stere
oppor
exten
recei
gover
servi
oppor
s you may know, the newly enacted Americans with Disabilities Act
is a comprehensive Federal statute that attempts to change.
types and assumptions about disabilities and to insure equal
unity and economic self-sufficiency for disabled people. The Act
s the 1973 Section 504 regulations, which applied only to agencies
ing Federal funds, to all public entities. All 'state and local
ments are now required to provide equal access to all programs,
es, activities, and facilities, as well as equal employment
unities to all disabled persons.
o comply with the regulations, all non-structural changes needed
vide access to programs and services were to have begun January
1992; all required structural changes must be in place by January 1995.
To do ument current accessibility to County programs and services to the
disab ed and to identify those areas that need to be changed, the County
is re ired to prepare a transition pla~ by the end of July, 1992.
he attached forms, a Self-Evaluation Plan and an Architectural
Barri r's Checklist are to be used to help complete the County's
trans'tion plan. The first form, the ~elf-Evaluation Plan, identifies
both rogram and facility accessibility and must be completed by each
depar ment, school or any program/agency that receives County funds.
Part 2 of the Plan, or the Self-Evaluation Analysis, simply provides
furth r clarification for questions 1-11 of Part 1.
n answering the questions, it is important to remember that the
need or program accessibility is not limited to persons with physical
disab 'Ii ties , but must also be provided to the visually or hearing
impai ed. I have included a brief summary of the Title II regulations,
which will hopefully give you a better understanding of the basic
requi ements, as well as the intent, of the ADA legislation. Realizing
the p tentially broad application of these regulations, ~lease feel free
to ca I me if you have accessibility questions for a specific program or
activity.
Tne second form, the Architectural Barriers Checklist, is being
used to assess the physical barriers for the transition plan.
Departments or programs located in the County Office Building, Court
Square buildings or school owned facilities do not need to complete
either ,the checklist or the Transition Plan (Attachment 2). Al Waugaman
and Al Reaser will be responsible for identifying and costing the needed
structural changes in these buildings and will be in contact with many
of you as they complete their structural assessment. All other
programs/agencies should complete both of these forms.
Thank you for your assistance in collecting this information and
feel free to call me if you have questions on either the forms or the
ADA compliance regulations. Please return all completed forms to me by
Friday, June 26.
The followinq forms are included:
o Self-Evaluation Plan
Attachment 1, Part 1
Attachment 3, Non-Structural
- Must be completed by every
department, agency and school
- Clarification for Part 1 - does
not need to be returned.
- Departments/programs in the
County Office Bldg, ct. Square, or
any school facility do not need to
complete this form. All other
agencies must complete and return.
- Must be completed by any
department, agency or school that
has identified needed program
changes.
- Must be completed and returned by
any agency/program outside of COB,
ct. Square or school facility.
- Information only.
Attachment 1, Part 2
Attachment 2, Transition Plan
o Architectural Barriers List
o Title II Hiqhliqhts
ADA structure Subcommittee
ADA Proqram subcommittee
.. ,
Roxanne White
David Shaw
Pat Mullaney
Al Waugaman
Robert Walters
Lois Brown
Andy Stamp
Roxanne White
Pat Mullaney
Al Reaser
Al Waugaman
Herman Key
Paul Hostetler
.-;
Attachments
c: Rick Huff
John Baker
ATTACH EHT 1 - PART 1
SELF-EVALUATION PLAN
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Ans er these questions for each program, service, or activity that your local government
provid s. Then, do the "analysis" section following the questions.
As all local government may want to complete .this questionnaire for each department (such
as police or sheriff, administration, city recorder or court clerk), while a larger local government
might a swer a questionnaire for each division within departments (such as patrol, investigation,
and rec rds within the police or sheriff's department). .
1. Is th public aware of the service, program, or activity?
Yes
No
2. Met ods used to make the public aware of the service:
a. Telephone book
b. Brochures
c. CommunIty relations program
d. Radio or TV spots
e. Sc.hool programs
f. Public relations training .
g. Organization communications and participation in civic clubs, disabled groups, etc.
h. Other methods
3. Is t e department responsible or potentially responsible for this program, service, or activity
aware of its participants who may be disabled?
Y s
N
"t. Wh t does the departmen~ or the local government do to ensure the respective departments are
awar of the different categories of disabled citizens in the community?
a. Surveys
b. Bureau of Census data analysis
c. Contact with organizations for the disabled
d. School programs
e. Other efforts?
5. Ar the public buildings, offices, and recreational or other facilities accessible to the disabled?
Are I cal governmental programs and services fully accessible? For example, are there barriers
enco ntered in the voting process or in the process of paying taxes or utility bills?
Yes
o
-3-
AlTACHMENT 1 - PART 1
6. What methods are employed t:J provide accessibility?
a. Ramps
b. Elevators
c. Restrooms
d. Parking
e. Counters
f. Stairs
g. Doors
h. Windows
1. Entrances
r 'Handrails
K. Grab Bars
I Signs
m. Other
7. What specIai programs or services do you have in place for the disabled? For example, during
new construction of sidewalks and streets, are ramps constructed in compliance with state law?
Do yo~ have a sidewalk maintenance program? Are provisions made for universal signals at
Walk/Don't Walk crosswalks (seeAttachmentS)? .
3 ~J ve disabied citizens used the department's services in the past?
'::'es
~o
9. Have there been obvious problems or complaints from disabled citizens about a particular.
?rogr2IT'., serVin:, or activity? Ii yes, list complaints or problems.
Yes
~o
~ C. What response have you made to deal with specific complaints or problems listed in question
9?
~ 1. What businesses or persons contracting with or associated with the local government are
?rovlding or have inaccessible services, programs, or facilities?
-4-
ATTACH~E1iT 1 - PART 2
Self-Evaluation Analysis
Wl' at follows is an outline for analyzing questions 1 through 11 in the preceding self-
evalua ion. As you analyze each question, consider how to eliminate barriers to full participation
in you\- services" programs, or activities.
Quest ons 1 and 2. If you answered question 1 with a "yes," document how you're making the
public including the disabled, aware of your services. If you answered "no," develop methods of
ensun~g the public is aware of your services. Question 2 suggests several methods for making the
public aware. If it's necessary to increase the public's awareness, you should list these or other
methods in Attachment 3 (non-structural changes), and have them in place by January 26, 1992.
Notes
,
Ques ions 3 and 4. If th~ aI}swer to question 3 is "yes," again be sure that appropriate government
perso~nel are taking steps, such as those listed in Question 4, to become' aware of the disabled
publi they serve. If the answer is "no," methods must be developed to ensure that personnel are
propE rly educated about the disabled public they serve. The methods adopted should be listed in
this a tachment and put in place by January 26, 1992.
Note':
Question s. The response to this question is the "heart" of the self-evaluation and will be the basis
for a ~y required transition plan. All "non-structural" changes necessary to make all activities,
prog ams, and services accessible must be made r.~' T'", ary26, 1992. Structural changes necessary
to comply with the ADA must be identified in a transition pian (Attachment 2) if the local
government has 50 or more employees.
Tlhe ADA provides the local government with a choice of two architectural standards: the
ADP AG or the UFAS. - _
All structural changes must be completed by January 26~ 1995.
Atta hment ., is the suggested transition plan format and provides for the scheduling of structural
changes over the three-year period.
NotE s:
-5-
ATTACHMENT 1 - PART 2
Questions 6.8. The ideal proof that your services, activities, functions, and facilities are accessible
to the disabled is that these persons have, in fact, used the service or facility or participated in the
program. Begin to document such use or participation by the disableq, as well as those character-
lStiCS of the service, program, or facility that provide accessibility. Document positive efforts
you've made toward compliance with the ADA.
Notes:
Questions 9 and 10. Similarly, complaints by the disabled regarding inaccessible services or
facilities are a good indication of problems that must be corrected. Document any previo~s
resoiutions of complaints of inaccessibility, both structural and non-structural.
Notes:
Question 11. Agencies associated with or persons under contract with a local government, such
as libraries or consultants, should be investigated to determine whether barriers exist regarding
the programs or services they offer or the facilities they operate. The local government should help
identify barriers and methods of providing accessibility.
Also, there should be some method of monitoring these persons or entities for continued
compliance.
~otes:
-6-
ATTAC MEHT 2
Transition Plan
Name f person completing this plan:
Name nd address of facility:
For th's facility, list structural changes necessary to achieve accessibility by disabled citizens,
includ ng, but not limited to: wheelchair ramps; enlarged doorways and entrances; rails, full-
length mirrors, raised toilet seats, increased space, and accessibility of items such as soap
dispe sers in restrooms; designated parking; vehicle hand controls; curb cuts in sidewalks and
entran es; repositioned shelves; accessible vending machines and storage racks; lowered water
fountains; Brailled documents; TODs; readers or interpreters; and auxiliary aids and services.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
List the completion date for each change (no later than January 26, 1995).
1.
..,
..,
J.
4.
5.
List t e cost of accomplishing eac~ change.
1.
..,
3.
4.
J.
-7-
ArrACHMENT 2
List the persons or organizations for the disabled contacted.
Name
Address
Date Consulted
1
..
2.
,).
\
"t.
5.
This list must be kept on file and available for public in$pection for three years.
-8-
I
.
ATTAC~ MENT 3
. Non-Structural Changes Inventory
(No later than January 26, 1992)
.
Date to be
S ervicel Activity IFunction Change Completed
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
.
.
9.
10.
ll.
12.
13.
0
14.
.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
-9-
RCHITECTURAL
ARRIERS CHECKLIST
This checklist is designed to give local governments a very quick
appraisal of potential problem areas for achieving accessibility and
when making structural changes.
Building Access
Yes No
1. Are 96" wide parking spaces designated
with a 60" access aisle?
o 0
2. Are accessible parking spaces near the main
building entrance? 0 0
3. Is there a "drop off" zone at building entrance? 0 0
4. Is the gradient from parking to building
entrance 1 : 1 2 or less? 0 0
5. Is the entrance doorway at least 32" wide? 0 0
6. Is door haAdle easy to grasp? 0 0
7. Is door easy to open (less than 8 Ibs. pressure)? 0 0
8. Are other than_ revolving doors available? 0 0
Building Corridors Yes No
1. Is path of travel free of obstruction and
wide enough for a wheelchair? 0 0
2. Is floor surface hard and not slippery? 0 0
1-1
Local Officials Guide
To ADA Compliance
3. Do obstacles (phones, fountains)
protrude no more than 4"? 0 D
4. Are elevator controls low enough (48"
to be reached from a wheelchair? 0 0
s. Are elevator markings in Braille for the blind? 0 D
6. Does elevator provide audible signals
for the blind? 0 0
7. Does elevator interior provide a turning
area of 51" for wheelchair? 0' 0
Restrooms Yes No
1. Are restrooms near building entrance
and/or personnel office? 0 0
2. Do doors have lever handles? 0 0
3. Are doors at least 32" wide? D 0
4. Is restroom large enough for wheelchair
turnaround (51" minimum)? D 0
S. Are stall doors at least 32" wide? 0 D
6. Are grab bars provided in toilet stalls? 0 0
7. Are sinks at least 30" high with room for a
wheelchair to roll under? 0 0
8. Are sink handles easily reached and used? 0 0
9. Are soap dispensers, towels, etc. no more
than 48" from floor? 0 0
1-2
I
..
Appendix 1
Architedural Barriers Checklist
10.Are exposed hot water pipes located under
sinks wrapped in insulation to avoid injury
to those individuals using a wheelchair?
o
o
(
;
City Departments that Serve the General Public
Yes No
1. Are doors at least 32" wide? 0 0
2. Is the door easy to open? 0 0
3. Is the threshold no more than 1/2" high? 0 0
4. Is the path of travel between desk, tables, etc.
wide enough for wheelchairs? 0 0
5. Do you have a counter that is too high
to serve individuals in wheelchairs? 0 0
1-3
II
u.s. Department of Justice
Civil Rig~ts Division
Office on the Americans with Disabilities Act
@
'.
Title II Highlights
1. Who is covered by title TI of the ADA
TI. Overview of Requirements
III. "Qualified Individual with a Disability"
IV. Program Access
V. Integrated Programs
VI. Communications
VII. New Construction and Alterations
VITI. Enforcement
IX. Complaints
X. Designated Agencies
XI. Technical Assistance
L Who is Covered by Title n of the ADA
~ The title II regulation covers "public entities."
~ "Public entities" include any State or local government and any of its departments, agencies,
or other instrumentalities.
~ All activities, services, and programs of public entities are covered, including activities of
State legislatures and courts, town meetings, police and fire departments, motor vehicle
licensing, and employment.
· Unlike section S04 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which only covers programs
receiving' Federal financial assistance, title II extends to all the activities of State and
local governments whether or not they receive Federal funds.
~ Private entities that operate public accommodations, such as hotels, restaurants, theaters,
retail stores, dry cleaners, doctors' offices, amusement parks, and bowling alleys, are not
covered by title II but are covered by title m of the ADA and the Department's regulation
implementing title ID.
~ Public transportation services operated by State and local governments are covered by
regulations of the Department of Transportation.
· DOT's regulations establish specific requirements for transportation vehicles and
facilities, including a requirement that all new busses must be equipped to provide
seIVices to people who use wheelchairs.
D. Overview of Requirements
~ State and local governments -
· May not refuse to allow a person with a disability to participate in a seIVice. program,
or activity simply because the person has a disability.
· For example, a city may not refuse to allow a person with epilepsy to use parks
and recreational facilities.
. Must provide programs and services in an integraJed setting, unless separate or
different measures are necessary to ensure equal opportunity.
. Must eliminate unnecessary eligibility standards or rules that deny individuals with
disabilities an equal opportunity to enjoy their services, programs or activities unless
"necessary" for the provisions of the service, program or activity.
· Requirements that tend to screen out individuals with disabilities, such as
requiring a driver's license as the only acceptable means of identification, are also
prohibited.
2
I
· Safety requirement~ that are necessary for the safe operation of the program in
question, such as requirements for eligibility for drivers' licenses, may be
imposed if they are based on actual risks and not on mere speculation,
stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities.
.
Are required to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures
that deny equal access to individuals with disabilitie~ unless a fundamental alteration
in the profI'aIll would result
· For example, a city office building would be required to make an exception to a
role prohibiting animals in public areas in order to admit guide dogs and other
service animals assisting individuals with disabilities. . .
· Must fmnish auxiliary aids and services when necessary to ensure effective
communication, unless an undue burden or fundamental alteration would result
· May provide special benefits, beyond those required by the regulation, to individuals
with disabilities~
· May not place special charges on individuals with disabilities to cover the costs of
measmes necessary to ensure nondiscriminatory treatment, such as making
modifications required to provide program accessibility or providing qualified
interpreters.
· Shall operate their programs so that, when viewed in their entirety, they are readily
accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
llI. .. [lualified Individuals with Disabilities"
) Title n of the Americans with Disabilities Act provides comprehensive civil rights protec-
tions for "qualified individuals with disabilities."
) An .'individual with a disability" is a person ,"",.
· Has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a "major life activity,"
or
· Has a reCord of such an impairment, or
· Is regarded as having such an impairment
,
Examples of physical or mental impairments include, but are not limited to. such contagious
and noncontagious diseases and conditions as orthopedic, visual, speech. and hearing impair-
ments; cerebral palsy. epilepsy. muscular dystrophy. multiple sclerosis, cancer. heart disease,
diabetes. mental retardation, emotional illness, specific learning disabilities. HIV disease
(whether symptomatic or asymptomatic), tuberculosis, drug addiction, and alcoholism.
Homosexuality and bisexuality are not physical or mental impairments under the ADA.
3
~ "Major life activities" include functions such as caring for oneself, performing manual tasks,
walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working.
~ Individuals who currently engage in the illegal use of drugs are not protected by the ADA
when an action is taken on the basis of their current illegal use of drugs.
~ "'Qualified" individuals.
· A "qualified" individual with a disability is one who meets the essential eligibility
requirements for the program or activity-offered by a public entity.
.' .'~.. .
.
The "essential eligibility requirements" will depend on the type of service or activity
involved.
-:....: . '~ - ~ .~ ..
,"
· For some activities, such as State licensing programs, the ability to meet specific
skill and performance requirements may be "essential."
· For other activities. such as where the public entity provides information to
anyone who ~uests it, the "essential eligibility requirements" would be minimal.
IV. Program Access
~ State and local govemments--
. Must ensure that individuals with disabilities are not excluded from services.
programs. and activities because buildings are inaccessible.
. Need nonemove physical barriers. such as stairs. in all existing buildings. as long as
they make their programs accessible to individuals who are unable to use an
inaccessible existing facility.
. Can provide the services. programs, and activities off~ h the facility to individuals
with di:>>abilities through alternative methods, if phys~cal barriers are not removed.
such as -
. Relocating a service to an accessible facility. e.g.. moving a public information
office from the third,floor to the first floor ofa building.
. Providing an aide or personal assistant to enable an individual with a disability to
obtain the service.
. Providing benefits or services at an individual's home. or at an alternative
accessible site.
. May not carry an individual with a disability as a method of providing program
access, except in "manifestly exceptional" circumstances.
4
.
Are not required to take any action that would result in a fundamental alteration in
the nature of the service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative
burdens. However, public entitit's must take any other action, if available, that would
not result in a fundamental alteration or undue burdens but would ensure that
individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services.
V. tegrated Prograrm
Integration of individuals with disabilities into the mainstream of society is fundamental to
tht pwposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Public entities may not provide services or benefits to individuals with disabilities through
programs that are separate or different, unless the separate programs are necessary to ensure
that the benefits and services are equally effective.
Even when separate programs are pennined, an individual with a disability still has the ~ght
to choose to participate in the regular program.
. For example, it would not be a violation for a city to offer recreational programs
specially designed for children with mobility impairments, but it would be a violation
if the city refused to allow children with disabilities to participate in its other
recreational programs.
State and local governments may not require an individual with a disability to accept a
special accommodation or benefit if the individual chooses not to accept it.
VI. 'Communications
> State and local governments must ensure effective communication with individuals with
disabilities.
~ Where necessary to ensure that communications with individuals with hearing, vision, or
speech impairments are as effective as communications with others, th~ public entity must
provide appropriate auxiliary aids.
. "Auxiliary aids" include such services or devices as qualified interpreters, assistive
listening headsets, television captioning and decoders, telecommunications devices
for deaf persons {TOO's), videotext displays, readers, taped texts, BraiDed materials,
and large print materials.
. A public entity may not charge an individual with a disability for the use of an
auxiliary aid.
> Telephone emergency services, including 911 services, must provide direct access to indi-
viduals with speech or hearing impairments.
5
~ Public entities are not required to provide auxiliary aids that would result in a fundamental
alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and adminis-
trative burdens. However, public entities must still fUJTIhh another auxiliary aid. if available,
that does not result in a fundamental alteration or undue burdens.
VII. New Construction and Alterations
~ Public entities must ensure that newly constructed buildings and facilities are free of archi-
tectural and communication barriers that restrict access or use by individuals with disabili-
ties.
~ When a public entity undertakes alterations to an existing building, it must also ensure that
the altered portions are accessible.
~ The ADA does not require retrofitting of existing buildings to eliminate barriers, but does
establish a high standard of accessibility for new: buildings.
. Public entities may choose between two technical standards for accessible design:
The Uniform Federal Accessibility Standard (UFAS), established under the
Architectural Barriers Act, or the Americans with Disability Act Accessibility
Guidelines, adopted by the Departtnent of Justice fot places of public accommodation
and commercial facilities covered by title ill of the ADA.
. The elevator exemption for small buildings under ADA Accessibility Guidelines
would not apply to public entities covered by title II.
VIII. Enforcement
~ Private panics may bring lawsuits to enforce their rights under title II of the ADA. The
remedies available are the same as those provided under section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973. A reasonable attorney's fee may be awarded to the prevailing party.
~ Individuals may also file complaints with appropriate administrative agencies.
. The regulation designates eight Federal agencies to handle complaints flled under
title II.
. Complaints may also be filed with any Federal agency that provides financial
assistance to the program in question, or with the Department of Justice, which will
refer the complaint to the appropriate agency.
IX. Complaints
~ Any individual who believes that he or she is a victim of discrimination prohibited by the
regulation may file a complaint. Complaints on behalf of classes of individuals are also
permitted.
6
DISTRIBUTION LIST
ADA SELF-EVALUATION FORMS
D artments Heads
C'rcuit Court (Shelby Marshall)
C mmonwealth Attorney (James L. Camblos, III)
A'rport Authority (Bryan Elliott)
C unty Attorney (George R. st. John)
G neral District Court (sterling Hudson)
E 11 (Wayne S. Campagna)
J int Security Complex (Albert A. Tumminia)
S eriff's Department (Terry W. Hawkins)
M gistrate's Office (D.D. Hudson)
J venile & Domestic Relations Court (Judge Janene Shannon)
C unty Executive (Robert W. Tucker, Jr.)
E ucation Department (Robert W. Paskel)
Bard of supervisors (LettIe E. Neher)
E gineering Department (Jo Higgins)
E tension Service (Charles Goodman)
Finance Department (Melvin A. Breeden)
Fire & Rescue Coordinator (Mike Schlemmer)
I formation Services (F~ed L. Kruger)
I spections Department (Jesse R. Hurt)
S aff Services (AI Waugaman)
P rks & Recreation Department (Patrick K. Mullaney)
Personnel Department (Carole A. Hastings)
lanning '& Community Development (V. Wayne Cilimberg)
olice Department (John F. Miller)
egistrar's Office (James M. Heilman)
ocial Services Department (Karen L. Morris)
ater Resources Department
oning Department (Amelia M. McCulley)
encies
harlottesville/Albemarle Legal Aid Society
entral VA Child Dev~lopment Association
eff'~r...r ,1 Area Board for Aging
AUNT, Inc.
efferson-Madison Regional Library
onticello Area community Action Agency
adison House
ffender Aid & Restoration
utreach Counseling Service
iedmont Council of the Arts
egion Ten
helter for Help in Emergency
homas Jefferson Emergency Medical Services
homas Jefferson Health Department
homas Jefferson Planning District Commission
nited Way Child Care Scholarship Program
irginia Discovery Museum
harlottesville/Albemarle Visitor's Bureau
exual Assault Resource Agency
- ~
bemarle Housing Improvement Program
mmunity Attention
teracy Vo~unteers of America
ds Support Group
CA, Inc.
e Senior Center
mily services, Inc.
nor-Hurt Elementary School
bemarle High School
oadus Wood Elementary School
ownsville Elementary School
rley Middle School
ozet Elementary School
eer Elementary School
nley Middle School
IIYmead Elementary School
ck Jouett Middle School
riwether Lewis Elementary School
rray Elementary School
rray High School
Ie Elementary School
d Hill Elementary School
ottsville Elementary School
one Robinson E~ementary School
ony-point Elementary School
lton Middle School
stern Albemarle High School
odbrook "Elementary School
ncey Elementary School
TEC
jdbm
92.052
..
ADA GRIEVANCE PROCED/URE
le County of Albemarle has adopted the following grievance procedure to provide for the prompt and
e uitable resolution of any complaints alleging the County's non-compliance with Title II regulations of the
A ericans with Disabilities Act. Title II states in part that "no otherwise qualified disabled individual shall
s lely, by reason of such disability, be excluded from the participation, ~e denied the benefits of, or be
s bjected to discrimination" in programs or activities sponsored by a public entity.
t is anticipated that most complaints will be resolved at the department or division level and should not
re uire a formal grievance procedure. However, if a citizen believes that they have been discriminated against
o the baSis of handicap, the following grievance procedure should be followed:
STEP 1
APPEAL TO DEPARTMENT HEAD
ithin thirty days of the occurrence or condition giving rise to the grievance, the complainant should
s bmit a grievance either in writing or verbally, identifying the nature of the grievance and the expected
edy, to the appropriate Department Head.
ithin ten days of receipt of the grievance, the Department Head will hold a meeting with the complainant
to review the grievance and attempt to mutually resolve the issue.
STEP 2
APPEAL TO ADA COORDINATOR
f a satisfactory resolution is not reached within fifteen days of the first meeting with the Department Head,
th individual may submit the grievance to the County's designated ADA Coordinator.
n investigation, ifappropriate, will be conducted by the ADA Coordinator affording all interested persons
d their representatives, if any, an opportunity to submit evidence relevant to the complaint. TIle ADA
C ordinator will, within ten days, meet \'lith the complainant to attempt to resolve the grievance.
STEP 3
APPEAL TO COUNTY EXECUTIVE / SUPERINTENDENT
f a satisfactory resolution is not reached within fifteen days of the first meeting with the ADA Coordinator,
th individual may submit a grievance to the County Executive/Superintendent. TIle County Executive/Su-
p rintendent will meet with the grievant within five working days or indicate if an extension is necessary.
S ch extension shall not exceed five additional \vorking days except with mutual consent. The County
E'ecutive/Superintendent shall render a written reply on the validity of the complaint and a description of
th resolution within five days of the meeting.
e ADA Coordinator shall maintain the files and records of all filed complaints.
e right of a person to a prompt and equitable resolution of the complaint snallnot be impaired by the
ividual's pursuit of other remedies such as filing an ADA complaint with the responsible federal
d partment or agency. Use of this grievance procedure is not a prerequisite for pursuing other remedies.
r
I
MPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE - ADD
- "Summarize special JOB-RELATED
skills and qualifications "
EFERENCES - ADD
-"--of your qualifications
(OTHER THAN A RELATIVE)"
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO TEACHER APPLICATIONS
DUCATION
-DELETE - "Dates Attended"
LOYMENT EXPERIENCE
-DELETE - "Reason for Leaving"
-ADD
- "--the renewal of a TEACHING
contract ?
ERSONAL DATA
-DELETE
-"3.Condition of Health"
-"A. Days Missed"
-"B. Hospitalized"
-"4.Convicted"
EFERENCES
-ADD _II -- if you have worked in a
school setting"(PLEASE DO NO INCLUDE
RELATIVES)"
QUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY DATA
- DELETE -"32. Disability Status"
ECOMMENDED CHANGES TO SUBSTITUTE EMPLOYEE APPLICATIONS
LEMENTARY SCHOOLS
- ADD - AGNOR-HURT
DELETE _II When was this degree
conferred?"
DUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
-DELETE - "Dates Attended"
MPLOYMENT HISTORY - DELETE - "Reason for leaving"
- ADD - "---sexual abuse or rape of a
child? YES--- NO --- IF YES,DESCRIBE IN
ULL"
EFERENCES
- ADD - "DO NOT INCLUDE RELATIVES"
OTICE TO APPLICANTS
SAME AS ABOVE
Z- o~ 5
,
i.
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS
It is the policy of Albemarle County to conduct criminal
investigations on all applicants offered employment. As a
condition of employment the applicant, at the time the offer is
made, will be required to sign a statement which authorizes
Albemarle County to have a criminal investigation performed. The
form to be completed is the : II Albemarle County Police
Department Criminal History/Motor Vehicle Violation Record
Request"
Applicants with criminal convictions may be rejected for
employment where there is a demonstrable relationship to the job
for which the applicant is applying. Albemarle County will
consider the nature, gravity and time of the offense rather than
automatically excluding applicants solely because of the fact of
the conviction. Arrest records will have no bearing on the
selection process.
If you, as the applicant, do not sign the Criminal ~ .
History/motor Vehicle Violation Record Request Form/the
investigations are unsatisfactory, the offer will be withdrawn, or
if the employee has started to work, employment will be
terminated.
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION APPLICATION
EDUCATION
- DELETE - "Dates Attended"
EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCE - DELETE - "Reason For Leaving"
- INSERT- "renewal of a TEACHING contract?
PERSONAL DATA
- DELETE - "3.
"A.
"E
"4.
Condition of health
How many day's work ----"
- ..I."e you been hospitalized "
Have you been convicted --"
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS - DELETE - (REPLACE WITH ABOVE STATEMENT)
AGREEMENT
- DELETE - "--previous employer
MEDICAL HISTORY ___"
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO CLASSIFIED APPLICATTON.
- DELETE - "Have you ever been convicted-"
- DELETE - "and type of discharge"
- ADD - "DID YOU RECEIVE AN HONORABLE
DISCHARGE? YES NO _".
DRIVER'S LICENSE
- DELETE - "LIST RESTRICTIONS"
\ .~~ 2,
.. t
QUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
ISABLED
DELETE -
~~s
..
,
".
I . TRANSPORTATION
The following section addresses the transportation services provided by the
City of Charlottesville. The section is divided into specific areas of the
code that are required under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
A. OrQanization and Structure of Charlottesville Transit Service
Charlottesville Transit Service (CTS) is owned by the City of
Charlottesville, VA and operated through a division of the City's
Department of Public Works. Bus service is provided on nine fixed
routes.
B. Area and PODu1ation Served
CTS bus routes operate within the corporate limits of the City of
Charlottesville and also serves a densely population corridor extending
into adjacent Albemarle County. The population of the service area is
59,800.
C. Days and Hours of ODeration
CTS operates fixed route service Monday through Saturday from 6:30 a.m.
to 6:30 p.m. CTS also provides wheelchair lift-equipped,
demand-response service on Saturdays.
D. Fare Structure
CTS regular fares are 60 cents, per one-way trip; elderly and
handicapped ride for 30 cents. Transfers are free.
E. Present Fleet Information and Planned CaDital ReDlacement
CTS has an active fleet consisting of thirteen, 35 passenger transit
coaches, and two trolley buses (rubber tire). One twenty one passenger
vehicle which is wheelchair lift-equipped is currently inactive. Two
of the fifteen vehicles are wheelchair life-equipped. These two buses
are in daily revenue service on fixed rout~s The decision on which
fixed routes were to receive the 1ift-equl~pe~ buses was based on data
indicating where most people with disabilities are geographically
located and consultation with _the local handicapped advocacy
organization. Following is a capital replacement chart which indicates
the number of lift-equipped vehicles, their proposed replacement dates
and specifies the percentage of buses that meet ADA vehicle
specification~ and those that are lift-equipped which may not meet the
new standards.
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Total Buses in Fleet . 16 16 16 16 16 16
# of Buses to 1 0 6 5 0 2
be purchased
% of Fleet Lift-Equipped 19 19 56 88 88 100
% of Fleet Meeting 0 0 38 69 69 88
ADA Specs.
33
F. Service and Financial Information
In calendar year 199f, CTS provided 678,000 one way trips. It is
anticipated that 705,000 trips will be provided in fiscal year 1992.
Budgets for the two year period follow:
1991
1992
ADMINISTRATIVE
$209,002
$238,500
OPERATING
$1,118,801
$1,128,500
CAPITAL
-0-
$37,876
G. Structure and OrGanization of Paratransit Services
The primary paratransit provider in the service area is JAUNT, Inc., a
public corporation (non-profit) owned by the City of Charlottesville
and the Counties of Albemarle, Nelson, Fluvanna and Louisa. JAUNT
operates thirty-nine vehicles, fifteen of which are lift-equipped, and
provides both public and coordinated human service agency
transportation. JAUNT receives both Section 9 and Section 18 funding
for its public transportation services, as well as state and local
funds, and fare revenue. The human service agency transportation is
paid for by the agencies served. JAUNT has been in existence since
1975.
CTS purchases additional paratransit service from Yellow Cab Company, a
locally owned, private, for profit corporation which was established in
1987. Yellow Cab operates a total of 50 cabs, none of which
are lift-equipped. .
H. Present EliGibility. Reauirements
Those people who, because of a mental or physical disability, find it
difficult or impossible to use public (bus) transportation may be
certified to utilize the paratransit service at a reduced rate.
I. Service Area for Paratransit
JAUNT's demand-response public service covers the City of
Chariottesvi11e and all of Albemarle County, which greatly exceeds the
service area covered by CTS's fixed route services. The urban area
service extends not just within three-quarters of all fixed route
service, but further to more than four miles from the bus lines.
Yellow Cab's purchased paratransit services are provided within the
City limits of the City of Charlottesville and within three-quarters of
a mile of the fixed routes which extend into urban Albemarle County.
J. ReSDonse Time
JAUNT has provided next day service for the past seventeen years.
There is no limit as to the number of days in advance that a passenger
can call for service. Passengers are rarely asked to adjust their
pickup times. Less than one-half of one percent of the requests for
urban area trips are turned down, if they call the day before. There
is currently no provision for passengers to call in on Sunday to
schedule trips. .
" , t
".
Under CTS's agreement with .Ye110w Cab, the company is required to
provide service within four hours of the time that it is requested. An
exception to the four hour limit is wheel chair lift service, which
must be requested at least twenty-four hours in advance of the trip.
K. Fares
JAUNT has two fares in the urban area: The fare for passengers riding
within Charlottesville City limits is Sl.00, while the fare for
passengers into and from the urban area of Albemarle County is S2.00.
Under the City's agreement with Yellow Cab Company, the cost per trip
is 75 cents inside the City limits and within three quarters of a mile
of CTS bus routes in Albemarle County.
L. TriD PurDose
Neither paratransit provider has any trip purpose restrictions
whatsoever.
M. Hours and Days of Service
JAUNT operates 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, which
exactly matches the weekday fixed route service hours of CTS. In
addition, JAUNT matches CTS's holiday schedule for urban area trips.
For general public self-pay service, Yellow Cab Company is available
twenty-four hours a day, seven days week. Under contract to CTS,
Yellow Cab Company provides door to door paratransit service on
Saturdays from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. which are the same as CTS fixed
route hours. Since Yellow Cab does not own wheelchair lift-equipped
vehicles, CTS provides the lift-equipped service on Saturday, using
school buses which are owned by the City and operated by CTS employees.
N. CaDacity Constraints
Neither Yellow Cab Company nor JAUNT limit the amount of paratranist
service that is available. While JAUNT occasionally received requests
for service that cannot be accommodated, these rare the results of
unexpected demand, and as noted above, represent less than one half of
one percent of the trips provided.
o. ComDliance CharGe
In order to be in complete compliance with ADA regulations"for
paratransit service, the following must occur:
1) Fares in Urban Albemarle County must be no more than twice" the
amount of regular route fares. Regular route fares are currently
60 cents per trip on weekdays in urban Albemarle while JAUNT's
demand response trips are $2.00.
2) JAUNT does not provide Sunday reservation service for Monday trips.
35
P. Timetable for ChanQes
1)
Fares: August - November 1992 - JAUNT'S FY'94 budget will be
prepared and submitted to the local governments. This budget will
include the cost of the additional urban Albemarle Trips, lowering
the fare from $2.00 to $1.50.
July 1, 1993 - CTS fare will increase to 75 cents.
October 1,.1993 - JAUNT's urban Albemarle fare will decrease to
$1.50.
2) Sunday Reservations: January 27, 1993, JAUNT will begin accepting
reservations for Monday service on Sundays.
36
. .
COr'v to:
4 .. I'
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
P.O. BOX 6Q
RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23216-2060
roUNf1 QF ALBDN.I~U
~ ~l~~ln
. c"1:: I \,T\~;IUJ
iIiIL II ~9H
SUPl'S MEMO NO. 13
Hay 13, 1992
Dr. English
'.Dr. Has t ings
Mr. Reaser
REGULATORY
," .
F
Division Superintendents
" .
, \.. ;--' ~
T
Joseph A. Spagnolo, Jr.,
Superintendent of Public Instruction
r\~
I :J 19?!
"".
:';,'.\
! .f
r~.~ '.'"tT
C'; '-_ i} L.
vincent C. Cibbarelli, Deputy Superintendent
for Administrative Services
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II:
Impact on Virginia Public School Facilities
On January 26, 1992, the Americans with Disabilities Act went
to effect. Since ADA is a civil rights law, it will be enforced
the courts as are current civil rights laws. Subsequent to the
ssage of this law, the Commonwealth of Virginia Board of Housing
d Community Development adopted, on February 1, 1992, the
erican with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADA-AG)
to the Virqinia Uniform Statewide Buildinq Code. These technical
andards are enclosed for your use along with the Title II law
om the Federal Reaister dated 7/26/91, 28 CPR part 35. We have
a so enclosed a one page summary of the law for your use.
Specifically, public schools in Virginia fall under Title II:
lic Services and Transportation; Subtitle A which prohibits
s ate and local governments from discriminating against persons
w'th disabilities. State and local governments must ensure that
i dividuals with disabilities are not excluded from services,
p ograms, and activities because buildings are inaccessible. The
A A defines an "individual with a disability" as a person who has
a physical or mental impairment that substa,tially limits one or
m re major life activities, has a reco~~ ~f such an impairment or
i regarded as having such an impairment. The law consistently
u es and encourages use of the term "disability" as the new term of
c oice rather than "handicapped".
This federal law requires at a minimum the following general
ints:
1. All existing school programs must be operated so that
they are, when viewed in their entirety, readily
accessible to and usable by individuals with 4isabilities
(~35.130 and ~35.150).
2. All new school construction, additions, renovations and
alterations to both buildings and sites must be "readily
accessible" to individuals with disabilities. State law
currently requir~s all architects and engineers to use
ADA-AG, wheD designing school construction projects
(935.151) .
3. Schools shall develop by 7-26-92, and make available for
public inspection, a "Transition Plan" where structural
changes to a school are undertaken to achieve program
accessibility (935.150(d)). The requirements further
state that as a minimum. the "Transition Plan" cover the
following:
a. Identify physical obstacles on site, and in the
school facilities that limit the accessibility of
programs or activities to individuals with
disabilities.
b. Describe in detail the methods that will be used to
make the facilities accessible.
c. specify a schedule for taking steps necessary to
achieve compliance with this section and, if the
time period of the transition is longer than one
year, identify steps that will be taken during each
year of the transition period.
d. Indicate the local school official responsible for
implementation of the plan.
4. Schools shall complete by 1/26/93 a "Self Evaluation
Plan" of each program and service to ensure access to the
disabled. This plan is not required if the policies and
practices were previously evaluated (and on file) for
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (~35.105).
Schools are not required to make modifications to existing
facilities if all programs and activities are readily accessible.
However, if new construction or alterations are undertaken that
effect the usability of the facility, the new construction or
alterations must, to the "maximum extent feasible", meet the
requirements of ADA-AG. The determination of which alterations to
make lie soley with the public schools and their boards. It is not
the responsibility of any architect or engineer to make this
determination.
The Department of Education recommends that each school
division begin the process of developing a "Transition Plan" and a
"Self-Evaluation Plan" as quickly as possible. Both plans can be
developed by in-house staff if they have training in this area and
are given assistance by your legal counsel. Several workbooks are
on the market to assist you in conducting a survey for compliance
to identify areas to be included in the transition plan. A number
of professional consultants are also available if you wish to
procure their services.
Please contact Hunter Barnes, Architectural Consultant,
Facilities Services, at (804) 225-2035 if you have any questions or
comments.
JAS/VCC/lc
Enclosure
Transition la
mericans wi h
is abilities
ct
rs
"ALBEMARLE COUNTY DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON
THE BASIS OF RACE, CREED, SEX, NATIONAL ORIGIN.
AGE, MILITARY SERVICE OR DISABILITY. REASONABLE
ACCOMMODATIONS Will BE PROVIDED TO PER-
SONS WITH DISABILITIES, IF REQUESTED."
<~.~~'ii{;';<"" ", ' ",., ,t <z,'l") I ,1.:lWl~WliLEiiI;JJ<~..,,,
._j;f;<-","-_"..-"-",,.L'ili*.ct:.itl__","""'^~,_1lJEIili.l:Jl~c!_'"
('0' '\- C.': I f.!V!I\H L"C
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES A.~T' ,.
t. I, :,\,' \ .iL v
TRANSITION PLAN
'%,-
-.. ,. '..",.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIAlh) lJ C
December, 1992
The County of Albemarle would like to express its sincere appreciation' to the
following members of the ADA Advisory Committee who provided
greatly needed insight and assistance in the preparation of this plan.
l.:I I IZHNS
Gary Carter
Herman Key
Lynne JoImson
STAFF
John Baker-Pel"SODllel/ADA CooJdiDamr
David Benish-pll1nniqg
Paul Hosteder-lDspectioas
Fred Kluger-Information Services
Karen Morris-Social Services
Pat Mullaney-Parks & ReaaDClIl
AI Reaser-Building Services
David Shaw-Police Department
Ellen Steele-Pel'SClllDel
Robert Wa11ers-Fmanc::e
'.
AI WlInprmm-Staff Services
RoxaDDe Wbi1e-County Executive's Office
By1be
AdvisoIy Committee
1992
ADA TmaIiDoaPIBD
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
I.IN1'R.ODUC1l0N.. .. .. .. .. ., .. ...... .. .. ...... .... .... .... .. ...... .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. . 1
II.ME1HODOLOGYOFEVALUATIONANDCOMPLIANCE.................................. 2
A. Policies and Practices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
B. General Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
C B .ld' 17 T' fo Physi_1 ... .bility. 3
. "I IT or rlCl mes r ~ ^CCCSII . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D. ParticipantsaadCommunication....................................................... 4
E. Eligibility aad A.dmi....ion Criteria aad Practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4
F. Employment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
G Complaint Pro . Procedma. 5 4
_ Alft
. ces g .....................................................
H SidewalksandStn:etImpIOVeDlen1S.................................................... 5
I. Public Tmnsportasion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5
J. PaIks and R.ecleation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. 6
K. Education. . . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
m. NECESSARY SlEPS FOR COMPLIANCE Wl1HADA ....................................7
A. PrograIns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7
B. COIIUIlunication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8
C. Employmeat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8
D. Education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
E. Appeals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
F. Physical and Access Modification. . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . 9
G. Structural Changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 9
IV. ATIACHMENTS (Atmdtments n -VI are locacted in sepandD document)
A.ttachment I
Attachment n
Attachment m
Attachment IV
Attachment V
Attachment VI
County of Albemarle ADA Gricvaucc Proc:cclwe
List ofDcpar1ment and Agencies Surveyed
PcrsoDDeJ/Human Resources Revisions
Self-Evaluation FOIDl
City of Charlotmsville ADA Traasportation Compliance Plan
Regulatory Memorandum from Supcri1ttendcnt ofIostrudion
De=Dbcr. 1992
ii
ADA Tmasi1ion Plan
TRANSITION PLAN
AMERICANS WITH DISABILmES ACT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
I.
erieans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which is built upoIl a body of cxistiDg legislatioa, particularly the Rehabili-
tation Act 1973 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, states that its purpose is to "provide ac1ear and comprebeDsive nfIrinnAI
m"Me fo the eliminSltioa of discrimination agaiDst ind1viduaJ8 with titsobilities". AdditioDally, the ADA Jeg;slaaOll saata
that it to "dispel stemJtypes aDd assumptioaa about disabilities, aad to assme equality of opportllnity, full participa-
tion, living and economic self-sufficiency for disabled people." To achicw these objectives, litle n of the
ADA 1 . on prohibits public entities fiom exchul1ng people fiom employmeat, services, progmms, adivities or beaefits
based OD ... Under the law, penalties are provided for discrimiDatiClll with specific timelines defined for jurisdictiODal
requin:ment outlined in TItle n of the ADA is that allgovemmental entities must evaluate their dcpadmen1s,
ics, and contractors to assme compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act A&r identifying in-
and facilities, each jurisdidiClll must pn:pll'C a traDsitiOll plan that outlines needed st:ruawa1 modifica-
pleted by 1995. The fo1IowiDg trIDIition plan, which is a result of an eva1wdion of CouDty departments and
agencies, p poses a course of action to enswe that the CouDty will be in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities
Act by 199 .
A" . may be defined in several ways. 'I'be Americaas with DiSIbiIities Act defines a disability relabng to an in- . .
. dividual as
"c:aJ or 1IIMItll impairment that substantially limits ODe or more of the major life activities of an indi-
The fo
i.e. the use
not auto
inforces a
. tpnmrion plan, msmdated by ADA, will uti1ize the definiti()l1' aad interpretations set forth in the ADA,
fthe word "disabled" aad the term "with a disability" are not ~"8"'.able. A person "with a disability" can-
y be considered "disabled". This premise underlies the assmnptions in this plan and fiutber sets forth and re-
. Iy held view within the commUDity of persons with disabilities.
To dev op this plan, a County advisory committee was eslablished in April 1992 to eva1uab: County progmms and fil-
cilities for A acceutbility and to make recommendations for ADA compliance. The advisory committee cona!lted of
-' staff from unty departments that provide services to the public, as well as those that have an inrmest in the reg'lll~ of
the ADA. I should be no1M that both the City of Cbarlottcsville and the IndepcmdaIce Rcso1m:e Cemcr (IRC), an ageacy
. that rep the interests of person with disabilities, were very helptUl and involved in the development oftbis plan. The
knowledge expertise of the IRC staffin the areas of accessibility were ememely useful in detennining the necessary
changes an modifications.
letiClll by the advisory committee, the tIaDSition plan was submiUIed to tho Board of Suporvisors for their re-
ber 4, 1992. Following a public hearing to receive citizen views and ~lIINVIlItion, , tho Albemarle
of Supervisors officially adopted this ttansitiClll plan on December 16, 1992. 'I'be ADA Advisory Committee
words an defined on pap iii and iY
1992
1
ADA 1'raaIition Plan
sory or review capacity as the Iecommendations of the transition plan are implemented. As this plan is ptepated, the County
of Albemarle will continue to identify any aIeaS of its programs or services that may prove a hindrance to persons with dis-
abilities and act accordingly. It is recammcmded that the steps for compliaDce outlined in this plan be reviewed annually by
the ADA Advisory Committee.
In 1984, the County of Albemarle conducted a self~va1uation of its programs and services in older to comply with the
office of General Revenue Sharing's (ORS) handicapped discrimination regulations as published in the October 17, 1983
Federal Register.
Although the County of Albemarle complies with Section 504 regulations, this plan further investigates County pm-
grams, agencies and services in consideration of the Americans with Disabilities Act. It is the intent of the County of Albe-
marle to meet the ADA regulations that provide for equal access and enjoyment of services and programs offeIed by the
County. These services may include direct aDd, in some cases, indirect involvement by the County of Albemarle.
Due to local efforts, such as Albemarle's, in complying with the cunent S04 regulations, a number of communitiM have
witnessed a welcome incIease in the use of municipal f8cilitif!s and prosraaDJ by perIODS with di".hilities. Coasequeady, a
segment of our society that bad been effectively ranoved from full participdiao has now become a beDeficial and coatribut-
ins compoDent of our community.
The County of Albemarle Iecogniza its Iesponsibility to adhere to the requiJanents of the ADA legislation, and fully in-
tends to provide services and programs that assure involvement by all citizeas teprdless of ability. The.County pbiJosopby
is: "Like all citi--. persons with a disability are entitled to basic human rigIds aDd opportunities. .t\fritnrlinal aDd aadli1ec-
tural barriers are principle factors in excluding persons with a disability from leading aD independent aDd produetive c0m-
munity lifi:. The disabled have more abilities tha disabilities..
II. METHODOLOGY OF EVALUATION AND COMPLIANCE
To develop the required transition plan, the County appointed aD ADA CoontiDaIor and aD ADA Advisory Committee,
which subsequently divided into the followina duee sub-committees: Persoane1; Structural Bmiers; and ProsaAau Accessi-
bility. In initiar:ing the self-evaluatiOll process, a questionnaire, a barriers ~Ii~ and TItle II HigflligJD printed by 1be
U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, weIe distributed to each County department, major school divisiao aDd
school fiIcility, as well as all regional and nOll-profit agencies that receive County funds aDd provide services to Albemarle
County residents. A full copy of the Tltle U Technical Assistance Manual published by the U.S. Department of Justice was
sent to each commiuee member. Eadl member of the st:ructwal sub-co",",~ teceived a copy oftbc UFAS Accessibility
Cbcc:klist from the United States AId1i1ectural and Transportation Bmiers CompliaDce Boanl
The intent of1be survey was twofold: 1) to be as inclusive as possible in r-r-hi11g aDd informing all publicly funded pr0-
grams and services in Albemarle County about the new ADA regulations and; 2) to provide aD opportuDity fortbele pablic
agencies to assess aDd evaluale their own programs and policies for ADA accessibility. A copy of the seIf-evaluatiao foml
aDd a list of those departments and agencies that received the evaluatiao fonD can be found as Auacbment I and U.
Each self~va1uation plan was returned to the ADA Advisory Committee for review aod approval befoIe beiDa placed in
the overall transition plan. After reviewing several drafts, the final transition plan was approved by the the full COIl1IDittce.
A. Policies ud Practices
Albemarle County has taken 1be following actions in evaluating the County's policies aDd ~ to com-
ply with ADA regulations. The County has:
1. Desigaated John Baker as it's ADA Coordinator.
December, 1992
2
ADA TI3IIIitioaPlaa
. Couducted a self~valuation of it's departments, agencies and services.
o Set a timetable to solicit comments on the County's transition plan from the public by dab:d legal n0-
tices.
o Identified steps to insure equal access to programs by providing qutlltjied interprete1'8 for the bearing
impaired, TDD's wi1bin several key departments, therapeutic aides at recreational prognuns and other
reasonable accommodattonl that may be rcquimL roD's will be placed in the Police Department.
PaIks and Rccreatica., the Sheriff's Office, the DepartmeDt ofPenonneJlHumaD Resources and the
School Division's Centml j\dmim!drative Office. roD's an: aln:ady locamd in the Department of So-
cial Services, the Emergency OperaIions Center and the Airport.
o Published and distribu1I:d c:opies of this transition plan to all County department beads and school prin-
cipals to ensure that ADA policies and requirements an: transmitted to those department beads, 1118D18-
en and pelSClllS who interact with the public.
. Solicited tYH111IIt'JIlU m.n a number of agencies or ~ includiDg the Jeffcnon AJea Board for Ag-
ing (JABA), Departmeat for the Visually Handicapped, aDd the Ouuiottesville-An~ftulrle Association
ofRebuded Citizens, all ofwhom either serve or have knowledge of the righ13 of pet'IOIIS with disabili-
ties.
B. Policies
. The County sball make Tflafonoble accommodottons for employees and applicalds with disabilities as
required by the law to facilitate access to programs aDd facilities.
. The County sball make reasonable accommodaIioas to penons with m4llPhitities on a non~
toIy basis to aU County progmms open to the public.
o The County will require an assurance of compliance with the Americaas with Disabilities Act m.n all
agencies and orpni-mtions and COIItIactors who provide a service to or receive funds from the County.
. The County will make masonable efforts to pbu:e public programs aad activities in aD accessible loca-
tion. Should any~.Oa&am or activity be offi:red to the public in an ....~ble location, efforts will be
made to relocate that program to an accessible location if a qIIJIlijied person with a disability provides
a minimum of 48 hours no1ice and if it does DOt result in a fjmdsmumt:ll al1eration in the naIIJre of the
program or activity or in any undw financial 0,. admintstl'alt11e harrbhip. The prefi:md minimum n0-
tice is one week.
. The County sba1l eoforee access sIaDdaIds for perIOIII with a disability on anon~ '-is
as required by law.
C. . diD.. or Facilities for Physical Acceaibility
. The Self-Evaluation bas indicared that most County buildings or fiIcilities an: accessible. Those m:as
still in need of correction an: addressed Iamr in Section m, G oftbe plan.
. During the annual Capi1allmpmvement Program review, the County of Albemarle sba1l give special
~ to accessibility issues in geaeralgowmment and school flIcilirin, as well as County pub ct
recreatioual areas.
o Capi1al funding for ADA compliance will begin in FY 93-94 to be complellld by January 1995.
1992
3
ADA Tw-lIlIIitioJl PIa
D. Participaats aad CODlIDuaicatiOD
1. The County of Albemarle bas adopted a policy to provide uecessary arailimy atds aad services to CD-
sum community participation. These may include, but DOt be limi1ed to: an interpmer, given reaIQD,..
able notice; Braille documenas. upon ~ or readca for public meetings.
2. roD systems have been purchased aad installed in the Dcpartments of Social Services and the Emer-
gency Operations Center for persons with a hearing impainneDt. roD's win be installed in the Police
Department, Parks & Recreation, the Sheriff's DepartmaIt, the Departmem ofPersoDDel aad Huma
Resources, and the School Divisian's administrative ofIic:c. Add~ly, the Virginia 800 ft\JIfther ..-
communication relay system will be publicized and utili-t,
3. All departments will iDclude the roD phone number in the Police DepartmaIt, wben 1q)1aciDg staDOIl-
cry.
4. Job opportuDities for Albemarle County are ftlCOlded weekly aad are available by telephone duougb
the Job OpportuDities Hodine.
Eo Eliaibility aad Ad.i...... Criteria _d Practice
1. It is the intent of the County to assure accessibility to County programs open to the public.to perIODS
with a disability, provided such lIOOO"'modPon does DOt IeSU1t in a fuDdsnntoJnml aItemtiClll in the __
ture of the pI08J3IIl or activity or cause an unduo ~ or administIative budsbip.
2. Some pI08l8IIIS, due to their IUIlUIe, may be held in .. in--.ceaibIe locaticD.. A Pi081Ml will be moved
to an accessible location if 1) a q.......ified person with a disability provides a minimum of 48 hours
prior notice iNti~g their wish to atamId the program, 2) the move does DOt IeSU1t in a ~ al-
teration of the program or activity or in any UDdue 4m~ or administrative hardship, 3) an accessi-
ble locatiClll is available. In reg;ud to advance notice, at least oae week is prefinble, but DOt ID8IIddory.
3. The County sball make n:uonable acconnnod;a;ons for employees with a disability as n=quiJed by the
law to facilitate access to programs and facilities for persons with disabilities.
4. The County of Albemarle will require an 8SSUI3IICC of C<lIIlpliaDcewith the Americans with Disabili-
ties Act from all agencies, Olpli7.Sdious aad \iUIltlidulll that either contract to provide or receive
County Services and/or fimds. The .s1*uaa&t will be in their COIdIaa with the County.
r. Employment (ladudiac Pre-EmplGylDe8t)
1. The ADA Advisory Connn~ fonned a Penonnel Sub-O-mn.- to mview ADA employment Ie-
quinmtents and make compliance recommeadatioDs to the full COlIlIIlittce.
2. The Departmem of Human Resoun:es reviewed its policies and pnlCtices aad made ftJC(ook...~
which are included in A~_ m.
3. The County's Affinnative Ac:tioD Plan will be amended 10 i~tde language that prohibits discrimina-
tion against qualified job applican1s and employees who are or bec:ome disabled.
~, 1992
4
ADA Tn-itinn PIa
G. C mplaiat Proceuial Procedures
. The COlDlty of Albemarle bas standard grievance procedures which haDdle complain1s of employment
discrimination OD the basis of a disability.
. The ColDlty of Albemarle amicipates tbaa: most complaints or concerns OD DOIl~ployment ADA is-
sues can be resolved at the department or division level. Department and division heads will be encour-
aged to resolve accessibility concerns or complaints within their own an:as of responsibility and will
be required to document and forwmi all ADA complaiDts and their resolutions to the ADA Coordina-
tor.
. Should a complaiDt not be resolved at the depaatmeat level, a person with a disability will have an 0p-
portunity to file a grievance under the provisioos of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Procedures
for filing a formal grievance will be provided upon request by the Depa1ment ofPcnonneJlHuman Re-
sources. Grievance hcarinp will be provided at the following sequcutiallevels: the Departmeat
HeadIPrincipa1; ADA Cooldinamr, County ExecutiveI SuperiDteDdeat or desig1'ee. A copy of the
County's Grievance Procedure can be found in }.~ment IV.
B. S ad Street Impnmmeats
1. Street improvements including curb ramps locamd on stare right-of-way ale the responsibility of the
Virginia State Department ofTransportion. Since VDOT, as a State agency, will also be UDder ADA
regulaDons, VOOT s Road and Bridge StaDdards, March 1992 revision, include specifications for cmb
ramps tbaa: will be in conformance with ADA rcgulatiOlll.
. County sidewalk projecrs ale submiUI:d to the ptsnnring Cnnnnln10Jl for Capi1al Improvement Pr0-
gram funding based on priority recommeudatiOllllisu:d in the County's 1985 Pedestrian 0bs1acle
Study. Sidewalk priorities were deteDDined.by seveml cri1mia, iDcl~g access, safety, neighborhood
density, and type ofpopulalion, i.e.. c:hildIal, elderly. In detmDining futun: priorities, access for per-
SODS with di~ties will be given special atIDntion.
3. The County is cummtly respoasible for seveml sidewalk projects. The sidewalks to be constructed
along Greenbrier Drive, Georgetown Road, WhilcwOOO Road and Hydraulic Road will meet the
VOOT staDdards and, therefore, will be in compliance with ADA regulations.
L
'on (see A ~hment V for complete Transportation Compliance Plan of the Charlottesville Tran-
uthority)
1. The County of Albemarle provides fixed route public tIaDsportatioo through a ~aa with the Char-
lottesville Transit Authority (crs). One route serves the deDJely populaaed area alcag Route 29 North.
crs began pwr-.hNiDg lift equipped replacement buses in 1987 and projects that l000At of the traDsit
buses will be lift equipped by 1997.
. The COlDlty provides a cmb to curb para-transtt system for any County resident who is unable to UIe
the fixed route system. The J?W&-transit system is JAUNT, Inc., a public corporatioo (noa-profit)
owned by the COUDties of Albemarle, FluV8lJD8, Nelson and Louisa aad the City of CbarlouesviJJe.
JAUNT opcmd:es 39 vehicles, fifteen of which ale lift equipped. In Albemarle County, JAUNT pr0-
vides a fixed route system, as well as a demsmd response system tbaa: provides door-tlMioor service.
, 1992
s
ADA TraasitionPIaD
3. JAUNTs urban area service extends not just within the required ~ of a mile fiom all fixed
rou service, but further to more than four miles fiom the bus lines. Since JAUNT oaly opf;&" :fiom
6:30 A.M. to 6:30 P.M., Mondayduu Friday, the Countypwcbases Satwdaypam-traDsitservices
within tIuee-quarters of a mile of the fixed routes in the urban area :fiom Yellow Cab as part of its crs
contract.
4. In order to be in compliance with ADA regulations for para-transit service, Albemarle County must re-
duce fares in the urban area to no more than twice the amount of mgular fixed routc fares. Since crs
bas proposed a fixed route increase to $.75 on July I, 1993, Albemarle will be required to reduce the
urban We from the current $2.00 to $1.50. JAUNT bas esri-SItNI that this fare reduction will cost an
additional $17,000 in County subsidy based on cumm ridership.
J. Parks aDd Recreatioa
The Department of Parks aad Recreation currently offen season passes to disabled residents to County p;uks
free of charge. The Department aim walks jointly with the City ofCbarloUr:svillc to provide special thera-
peutic rec=ation programs.
In cc:mpliance with ADA, the Department offers progI3IIl accessibility to eligible residents. Efforts are made
to comply with requests for reasonable accommodations. To discuss reasonable accommodations, prospec-
tive participants should COIdBCt the Parks and Recreation office as far in advance of tile registration ~lift1lll
for any activity as possible. Complaints about program or facility accessibility should be directed to the Di-
rector of Parks and R=n:aIicm.
It is the intrmion of tile Parks and RccIeation Department to make its dmle fbll-service pub-Cuis GteeDe,
Mint Springs, and Walnut Cleek-accessible. Other parks that are primarily willer supplies with limited rec-
reation facilities will not be DUMIe accessible iftbey are located near an -=ssible facility. For insIaDce. Bea-
ver Creek will DOt be made accessible due to its close proximity to Mint Springs. Toticr Creek will have
accessibility improvements due to its distance fiom Walnut Creek.
The County aDd City will wOJk together to provide accessibility at the two joint paIks, Ivy Cleek Natmal
AIca and Rivanna. In addition, the Department will be undcr1aking accessibility improvement at tile Mead-
o~ Greenwood, aad Scottsville Commuaity Centers, and will work with the school division in providing
. accessibility to the schools' outdoor RlCIeation fiIcilities, which serve a community and district park function
in the County. A summary oftbese improvemems is attached as part oftbis transition plan. These projects
will be submiUed for funding as part of the aanual Capi1al1mpmwmeDts Program.
K. Educatioa
1. The County of Albemarle provides educatiOll on a non-discriminatory basis to students regaadless of
ability or disability.
2. By the ADA structuJal accessibility tt-ttlift1lll ofJanuary 26, 1m, all sc:bools will be physically acces-
sible or UDder consttuctiOll to make them accessible.
3. Reasonable accommodations aDd necessary ~Iiary aids, such as qualified interprelms and baasporta-
tion are provided to students wbcn necessary.
4. A regulatory memorandum fiom the S...,...i.llallClent of Public InstIud:ion, VugiDia Ocpartmcdt ofEdu-
cation, dated May 13, 1992, bas been imp~ into this plan (see J1uac1nneut VI ).
December, 1992
6
, ADA TmasitionPlan
m. NE
Y STEPS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ADA
owing section outlines the steps the County of Albemarle, its agencies, contractors or providers of a service will
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act The actions listed in this section are a n:sult of the self-
personal observations and discussion among the ADA Advisory COIIlIIlitb:e. The self~uation qucs-
remain on file in the Department ofPersonnellHuman Resoun:es fortlu= (3) years after this plan's approval.
intention of the County of Albemarle to comply with the regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
County of Albemarle will amend intemal documents to conform with the Americans with Disabilities
Since the County holds regularly scheduled meetings, such as Board of Supervisors, School Board,
" g C()IIImi!lsion and other public meetings, it sbaIl be the responsibility of the County of Albemarle,
request, to provide a QlI"'iiicd imerpacler for the hearing impainxi (a) to the extent an auxiliary aide or
odation of this type is requiftd by the Americans with Disabilities Act (b) when reasonable advance
"ce is given (c) to the extent that oagoing requests of this type will not IaUlt in a {lllllltmv!nml alteration
IUItuIe of the pIO&&lm or activity or in undue finaDcial or administrative hardship. WIth regard to ad-
notice, at least one week is preferable, but not mtmdlltnry. At a minimmn, notice should be at least 48
prior to the meeting.
Its to obtaiD. an intekpt*cwill utilize the list ofavaiJable interpU~k;IS, including intelJuetef'i employed
the Albemarle County School Division. Furthermole, UDder the same conditinns as outlined above, the
C ty of Albemarle will provide a reader at any meeting when ~ by a visually impaired person.
lie notices and agendas published in the local newspaper sball include a notice that "~le accom-
"ODS will be provided forpenons with disabilities if requested" ,(to include interpreters, readers, BmilIe
or other necessary auxiliary aids or services). These notices are to be provided to the local radio station
a Ia(UCSt that they be ailed as a public service for the visually impaired commUDity.
County shall develop a recorded call-in service to provide meeting and public bearing dates for the
of Supervisors and P1mmi~g Commi!lSion. This will benefit, not only those persons in the community
a sight impairment, but will enable anyone in the community to call in and obtain cummt infonnation
maJor issues and meetings.
County department or agency that distributes infonnation to the public will be required to provide in-
" in an. a1temat.e format, such as Braille, audio tape or computer disc, if requested by a qualified per-
with a disability and given sufficient time for the transfi:r of data..
"qualified disabled penon" requests utility billing in an. alternate format as ,listed above, the Albemarle
ty Service Authority will provide such at no additional cost, provided the Authority is given reasonable
ceo
County employees who are considered field staff and n:gularly come in contact with County citizens. in-
. Police officers and volunteer fire and rescue pe1'SOIJDCl, sball possess identification cuds in Braille.
Indcpendence Resource Center can. provide the required 1Klmical assiSIaDCe to produce these canis.
, 1992
7
ADA TmaIidoa PIID.
B. CommuaiCaDon
To ensure equal access for all individuals, a sign will be placed near the visitelS entraDc:c of the County Of-
fice Building diJecting hearing im.pain:d persons to an available roD in the Social Services office adjaccut
to the main first floor entrance.
All employees of departments or agencies of the County of Albemarle which possess roD's sbal1 be given
appropriate tJaining on the use of these devices as deemed necessary by their supervisolS.
Emergency Service Agencies (File, Police, Emergency Operations) sbal1 make every effort to have a list of
people 011 call to communicare with persons with bearing impairments. Tbese ageacies should seek the nec-
essary training for an in1erpm:er for the bearing im.pain:d clien1s.
C. Employmeat
The County of Albemarle will eliminSltl! the word "bmKticap" from all its hiring practices and fonns. When a
training or wotkshop for County employees 1akes place, aD iDreqJleter sbal1 be provided if requested by a
hearing impaired perIOD one week in advance.
If a County employee with a hearing impainnent att&mds a County sponsored tJaining session, close cap-
tioned or sub-titled film's or video-tapes sbal1 be used when available. When tJaining tapes or films are
found to include c1osed-captioning. the County sba1l consider purr.haKing than for use in employee training.
The County of Albemarle will make "leasoaable accommodatiaas" in policies, practices and proceclun:s to
ensure full participatiOl1 of any employee who bas a disability. The County of Albcmade sball assess eadt
case individually and sball use the following checklist to detenniDe 1he method of compliance:
1. Analyze each County position description and detenniDe its purpose and ~a1 fimctions;
2. Consult with individuals with disabilities to ascertain the precise job-lelab:d 1imi1ations and how those.
limitatious might be overcome with RlIlIIOIUIble accomm~Sltion;
3. After detennining the above issues, a decision on what physical chaDges or ammgements are neces-
sary;
4. Additional equipment needed to be pun:based or rented;
5. Duties that could be shifted;
6. Adequate space available if a personal attendant is necessary;
7. Most reasonable cost method for compliance.
These and other issues will be addressed when looking to make "reasonable accommodstrioas. "
No medical exams can be required unless a conditional oim' bas been made and all other eurering employ-
ees for that position are required to take a similar exam. Confidentiality will be assured by mmntllining re-
sults 011 a separate fonns.
The County of Albemarle sbal1 include penons with disabilities in its Aftinnative Action Plan aud Career
Development Program within the next twelve months. The Penonne1 sub-commitII:e of1he ADA Advisory
Committee will CODtinue i1s revision of1he Aftitmatjve Action Plan, the final version of which will be at-
tached to the Tr.msition Plan Appendix.
~.1992
8
ADA TI8IISition Plan
policies and procedures that deal wi1h persons with disabilities sball change their refcn:nce's from
. capped" to "persons with disabilities". This sball occur as sooa as practical.
If hearing impaired employee attends an Albemarle County training session, close-captioued or sub-titled
fi or vidco-t.apes sball be used when available. The school system. sball oonsider purehNing close-cap-
ti training tapes or films for employee training.
cDons held at school facilities sball be held at accessible locations and a qualified iutGlpl~tca sball be pro-
when requested by a qualified disabled person at least 48 hours in advance, as loag as it does not re-
in a nnmmenuJ alteration in the DaIure of the prosram or activity or in a undue financial or
'YO burdens. The preferable minimum notice is one week in advance.
Human Resource Department sball provide ADA training to its employees to assure a better under-
. of and service to persons wi1h disabilities.
D.
School Division of the County of Albemarle will abide by laws and regulations governing TItle II of the
eriean Disabilities Act.
appeals that require an inbp1~bdion of the County's ADA Transition Plan will be referred to the
A Coordinator.
1. The County of Albemarle will wolk toward coopemting with the Virginia Department ofTransporta-
tion and the Independence Resource Center to identify in1crsections that require cwbcuts and/or ramps.
2. The County will coatinue its commitment to providing sidewalks in high priority areas as detennined
by the 1985 Pedestrian Obscacle Study using access to persons wi1h disabilities as a major criteria for
prioritization.
G. S dural Chanps
It the intention of the County that all new construction will confonn to the Americans with Disabilities
A Accessibility Guidelines (ADMG).
existing structuIes, the following changes are necessary for full compliance with the Americans with
. .ties Act. Each n:quired change has been identified and listed on a fonn entitled ADA TRANSmON
, which will remain on file in the Department of Personnel I Human Resources for a period of not less
three years.
steps provided within this document to pursue compliance with TIde II of ADA are considered a "good
effort" and may not be all inclusive.
, 1992
9
ADA ThmsitionPJan
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
I'replnt by the NaIionlII League
of GliB' CeaIer far EducaIDI_
bdormalion SenicIs saaff. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your'self-
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fadlity that needs strudural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
Date: 7/20/92
Name of person completing the plan: L. A. Reaser, Director, Buildinq Services
Name of the ADA coordinator: ;John Baker
Address of the facility: N/ A
List public services offereel at this location:
Public Education
List all structural ..ocIifleations to II. ..eI. anel thel. location:
Modification Location Co_plete By:
Prior to the completion of the Self- All School Board 10/1/92
evaluation, we will conduct a cOflt)rehensive Bw.ldi.nqs
survey of each building to determine what
"structural changes II need to be made
to ensure accessibility.
K-l
- by the NaIianIl Uague
CiIIIs' CIIIIW far Educadaa ..
SIniceI sial. .
DA TRANSITION PLAN
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and ma~e it available for public inspedion.
ate: 7/20/92
ame of person completing the plan: L. A. Reaser, Director, Buildinq Services
orne of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
dress of the facility: Buildinq Services, 2751 Hydraulic Road. Charlottesville. VA 2290
t public services oRered at this location:
Provide Maintenance and custoctial Services -to the Coun Schools.
1st all structUrallftodillcatio.. to b. Iftade and their location:
odillcatlon Location Complete By:
Modify Parking area and Entrance Office 1/1/95
Add an: accessible restroom arid 0
lOOdifications
1/1/95
K-l
K."
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
I'repaM br the NaIionaA I..Iague
01 CiIIII' c.- *- fducadoa and
IaluImaIiaa s.mc. stal .
Use this transition plan to dOcument those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
. now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fadlity that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
Date: 7/20/92
Name of person completing the plan: L. A. ~S-~, Director. Build;"9' ~T'V; l"'tOlC:
Name of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the facility: Broadus Wood El~n1-;JT'V. F,."Irl~ IIp. V]l ""Q~"
List public services offereel at this locatlonl
Elementary School
List all structural alodifications to ... iliad. aael their location:
Modification Location Complete By:
Install a wheel~h;Jir lift avm/~~re~PT;~ 1/1/94
Install a ramp
library/classrooms 1/1/94
K-l
DA TRANSITION PLAN
by the NaIionaIlIaguI
, CentIf far EducaIlan aad
. Stnices sIaff. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changesr is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain.'this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
te: 7/20/92
. me of person completing the plan: L. A. Reaser, Director, Buildinq Services
me of the ADA coordinator: JOhn Baker
dress of the facility: Woodbrook Elementary, 202 WoOdbrook Dr., Charlottesville, VA 2290.:
public services oHereel at this locatioll:
School
t all structuralllloeliflcatioBS to be lIIael. aael their locatioll:
odificatioll Locatioll Complete By:
tall wheelchair lift Staqe 1/1/95
Restrooms
1/1/95
K-1
K.
. ........
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
PNpartd by die Nadonal.....
of Cities' c.- far EdumIioD aad
InfannaIioa SenirIs staff. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, .1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
faolity that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection..
Date: 7/20/92
Name of person completing the plan: L. A. Reaser~' Director f Buildincr Services
Name of the AOA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the faolity: Walton Middle School, Rt: 1, 'Box 200, Charlottesville, VA 22903
List public services offereel at this location:
Middle SChool
L
List all struduralllloeliflcations to ... maele anel their locatio.:
Modification Location CODIple.. By:
Install wheelchair lift and raaps 5tage/~theater 1/1/95
K-1.
DA TRANSITION PLAN
... by lhe NaIioaal.....
Cities' Cent. for Edt__ and
. SriIs sIaif. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers cHecklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
factity that needs structural modification. If your local govemment
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
ate: 7/20/92
ame of persen completing the plan: L. A. Reaser, Director, Buildiner Services
orne of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
dress of the faotify: Albemarle High SChool, 2775 -Hvdraulic Road, Charlottesville,- VA
. t public services offereel at this location:
., High School
List all structural moellfications to b. maele anel their location:
Modification Location Complete By:
Install rani) and elevator Fine Arts Winer -. - 1/ 1/ 94
Install elevator
Foreian laner. Winer
(3 F.loors)
1/1/94
K-l
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
~ by the NaIioMI u.e
oi CiIiII' C8IIIW for EduaId!J- .-
~maIiaII SenkIs sIIif. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation cheddists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
faolity that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
Date: Julv 22, 1992
Name of person completing the plan: Al Waugaman
Name of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the faolity: County Off'ice Building, . 401 McIntire Road
Ust public services offered at t.... locatio..
A 11 Cnl1T'1ry hl1~i npq~
List all stl'actural ..ocIHlcatioas to II. ..de anel. their location.
Modification Location eomplete By:
Replace siqnaqe with ADA approved See above Jan. 26, 1995
signage $3,500
Replace doornobs with easy to
See above
Jan. 26, 1995
grasp levers $IO,OOO
K-l
DA TRANSITION PLAN
br the NatianlIi lIague
, CenIIr far EdumIIoa and
SInicIs sial. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers tnat
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changesr is July 26, 1992. After you hove completed your self.
evoJuation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you ore
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fiftY people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
a~: July 22, 1992
ame of person completing the plan:
ame of the ADA coordinator: John
dress of the facility: County Office
Al Wauaaman
Baker
Building, 401 McIntire Road
public services oHered at this locatl_=
ist all structural ..ocIificatl... t. lie .ael. _ct th.l. location:
oclification Location Co..pl.t. By:
I ce V. . SP-P- .=Ihnw~ .1.=1"1.6. 1 qqc:;
with
$13,50q
individual listening stations See above
Jan. 26, 1995
On the Auditorium. Aprox. $5,000
K-l
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
I'rIpInd br ... ...... UlIgue
of OllIs' c.-.. rduaIIi4MI_
lldo.matiaa SInicIs sial. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes~ is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fadlity that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
Dare: July 22, 1992
Nome of person completing the plan: Al Waugaman'
Nome of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the fadUty: County Office Buildinq,' 401 McIntire Road
LIst pulllle services 08...... at tills locatI_a
All County business
..-
List all structa..1 .....IRcatI... to lie ...... -.. their locationa
Modification Location Complete By:
Restrooms to be made ADA accessible See above Jan. 26. 1995
on First Floor. $5,000
K-l
A TRANSITION PLAN
by'" NaIiDMI ~
c.a.b~-
, s.mc. saal .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes~ is July 26, 1992. After you hove completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you ore
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
Julv 22. 1992
e of person completing the plan: Al Wi'lnqi'lma.n
me of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
ress of the facility: Court Square, SOl E. J ef fer son Street
public services oft.reeI cd this locatio.:
All County Court and legal transactions
t all structural ..ocIiflcatio_ t. lie ...... a." tll.ir location:
ificati.. Locati.. Compl.t. By:
lace accessible entrance door see above Jan. 26, 1995
th power operated door' $3,250
signage with ADA approved
see above
Jan. 26, 1995
doornobs with lever t e
~PA ~bovp
.ra. n 26. 199<<;
K-l
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
Pr...-I br.... NaIiaaIIlMgue
of OllIs' CIIIIIr far EdumIiaII_
Infu.__ SInirIs sial. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fadlity that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this. transition plan
for three ~IS and make it available for public inspection.
Dare: Julv 22, 1992
Name of person completing the plan: Al Wauqaman
Name of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the fadlity: Court Square., SOl E. Jefferson Street
Ust p.bllc servi_ off...... cd this locatI...
All County Court and leaal ~r~n~action~
Ust all slructaral .ociiflccdi- to lie ..de ..d their locationl ,.
Modification Location Complete By:
Inst~11 inrlividl1~1 li~~Rninq ~pp ~hnvp Jan. 26. 1992
stations in Court rooms. Approx. $10,000
Make bathrooms ADA accessible $6,000 see above
Jan. 26, 1992
K-l
A TRANSITION PLAN
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you ore
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
7/15/92
of person completing the plan:
of the ADA coordinator:
55 of the facilityPreenwood COllllRunity
Patrick K. Mullaney
.1nhn RAW,.,.
Cen ter, ROt! te 6'91 , Greenwood
ubllc services offered at this location:
playground.
path
area
List II structural modilicatio... to be made and their location:
Iflcatlon Location Complete By:
ccessible arkin makin 2 van s aces. SharinR 96" access 1/26/Q'i
pave access to ramp and redo ramp, proving proper landing
drails. Add rails to stairs. Remove threshold, change $40,000
re on 4 doors. Build upstairs unisex accessible restroom.
hallway door downstairs. Build ramp in bowling room. Finish
o basketball courts. Make path from shelter to spectator
nd playground. Add acces8ibleplayground equipment.
Pave
aisl
and
hard
Wide
pron around shelter.
ath from parking to basketball courts.
K-l
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
PrlpClted Irr the NalionaIl..eogue
of Oil..' c.nt. for Educallon and
Information SHes stall .
Use this transiHon plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modifi~ation. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain, this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection..
Date: 7/1 't/9?
Name of person completing the plan:
Name of the ADA coordinator:
Address of the facility: ScottBville
PJlt-,..,....1,'1l Mlll1.aftAY
John Baker
Community Cent~r--Page St., Scott8ville.
List public services offereel at this locatlonl
GvmnAsium I::It'Slr,:ar ,.lJ1f:llIlrnn..! mlll~ip""'pna.. ~nnftl Fnp' PH"'"'' ,...a......~"t.......-a p~o8rgAlIiI
and private rental.
Modification
Pave 1 van-accessible space and one
~1I.,.h ,.."f"" nn 1'1I~h nF a,.,.aaa aofal.a tl"to
ramp--
Build entrance ramp
New railing at steps
Change entrance door hardware to give
List all strudural modifications to be made aael their location I
Complete By:
_1/26/95
Locatloa
regular -- Parking lot.
~QtraQ~e
Parking and path
To entrance
Entrance
approp-
$32.000
riate width and proper handle Entrance
Change threshold -_. Entrance
Install accessible phone Hallway
Remove urinal and extend 1st stall to side.
Move mirror. change door hardware -- Men's restroom 1(-1
Eliminate 1st stall to give proper turning
space, make second stall accessible. Move
mirror, change door hardware. Women's restroom
Change hardware at entrance to gym to give proper width. Designate seating area in gym.
Buy lift for stage.
Build ramp and 12' of walk at rear entrance.
Repair and add total of 425' of concrete walk.
A TRANSITION PLAN
P,. eel by ,h. NallOllGlleatu.
of 011 ' C.n'lI' fal EdlXlllloa and
Inlor lion S.rvklS slall . .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers tho:
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992.- After you have completed your self-
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three y~ars and make it available for public inspection..
Oat : 7/ 15/92
No e of person completing the plan: Patrick K. Mullaney
No e of the ADA coordinator. John Baker
Ad ress of the facility: Mint Springs Valley Park--Route 684
public services offered at this location:
S
Lis all strudural modifications to be made and their location:
M dlflcatlon Location Complete By:
nil ::Inn t-T':ail
-.l tU./QC;
$48,000
rooms to be open with side entrance when beach is closed. Pave around shelter and~J+
rant. Connect bathhouse, shelter, playground and trail with accessible path. Prov/~
e pav ng or nature trail. nd lake~-Provide handicapped parking 1(-1
g with two van-accessible spaces. Clear trees along front of lake. Pave along fr~1
ke with curb and build fishing pier.
K.
ADA TRANSITIO'N PLAN
Pr...... br.... NaIionIl Ltague
of cw.' Ctnfw 'ar EducaIIaa ...
IIIIM_1an SIIYkIs staff. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transiUon plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more thon fifty people, you m.ust retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
Date: 7/1.U9? .
Name of persOn completing the pion:
Name of the ADA coordinator:
Address of the facility: Totier Creek Park. Rr~ 726
~.~~~~~ V M..l1~~9Y
John Baker
~,..n......vil'.
List public service. oHerH at this location.
Fishing
List all strudural modlflcatlo... to be made and their location.
Modification Location Complete By:
Pave and mark 1 accessible van space and 1 regular space on V26/95
either side of 96" access aisle at boat launch.
Extend accessible pathway along shore from access aisle and $10,000
build fishing platform. Install pad off of path for accessible
portajohn.
K-l
br lhe ,......... a.....,.
c.naw far &Iucadea aad
SII'IkII saaff. .
Use this transman plan to document those architectural barriers thot
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, Is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self-
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fadllty that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain. this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.- -
Dot: 7/16/92
No e of person completing the plan: Patrick K. Mullaney
No e of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Ad ess of the fadllty: Meadows Co_unity Center--Rt. 240. Cro.et
Lis public services oHered at this locatlona
Lis all structural Inodilleatlons to b. Inad. and their locatlona
Mo Iflcatlon Location COlnplete By:
ccessible arkin are~ on side. 1 1'~/q~
walkway. Change hardware on 4 doors. Need new toilet
de bars in both men's and women's bathrooms. Lower- $7.500
and paper dispenser in both. . Move partition and put
1bla urinal in men's room.
e 3 door thresholds.
round ba~~ entrance to parking lot.
K-l
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
Prlpcnd br 1M NaIioaaIlIaguI
01 ClIIes' Cent. for EducadoII_
Information s.mm saal. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition pion
for three years and make it available for public inspection..
Dote: 7/17/92
Nome of person completing the plan: Patrick K. Mullaney
Nome of the ADA coordinator: .Jnhn RJlk,ar
Address of the facility: Chris Greene Lake-Route 850
List public services offered at thb location;
Swimming beach, fishing, picnicking and nature trails, plaYRround.
List all structural modifications to b. .ad. and their location;
Modification Location .. Co.plet. By:
Beach--make 4 accessible oarkina soaces wi~h 1 vJln r.rJl~,a JI~ 1/'~/Q~
bathhouse for drainage. Run 450' of paved path on beach. Make
new entrance to bathrooms from. beach. In men's side remove trough $52,000
urinal, make accessible middle stall with grab bars and new
toilet. Put in accessible urinal and sink. Women's side--make
acceSS1b~e t01~e~ stall, new toilet and dressing stall. Build
dock at canoe rental and build ramp at concession.
BOil t' rSlmp--plI"a ? ::,,.,.AGaof 10,.1 a nftn ~F2~gll 1[-1 th qha,.." :It-PAGel A of al A
Add onto fishing dock. Shelter--pave shelter parking space and
mark van space. Put curb along dropoff around shelter and along
path to plaVRround. Modifv Dlav~rnllnd ;lnd ...dd !'If"r,,rf"''TP!'l
Bathroom--women's and men's--make door open out, replace sinks 1(-1
in bath, cut back urinal shield in men's. Add ~ mile of paved
trail.
A TRANSITION PLAN
br lhe NaIIonaI league
Ceat. far EducaIIaa ...
S...,klS staff. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barri!,rs that
need to be removed. The deadline for compleHng this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you hove completed your self-
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you ore
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facilily that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.-
7/15/92
of person compleHng the plan:
of the ADA coordinator.
of the facilily: Walnut Creek Park.
Patrick K. Mullaney
.Jnhn RAlr,....
Rt. 631. North Garden
ubllc services offer.d at this location:
s
List II structural modifications to b. IDad. and their locatio..,
Iflcatlon Location Complete By:
area--pave handicapped parking and service road to 1 /26/95
om. Run paved pathway along curb -across walk at bathhouse
oe landing. Path to water at edge of kiddie area. Pave $27,000
cnic table pads off of walkway. Continue zigzag concrete
t bathhouse to attach to paved walkway. Curbing
shower and zigzag walk. Pave 4 spaces in main lot.
accessible canoe launch.
g area--pave access e spaces an pathway to bOat ~aunch
Build bridge over water and pave up shoreline for fishing
Put 2 ads off back side of ath for icnic tables.
trees for shade. Fix end of boat dock with curb or rail. 1<-1
dock for accessible boat launch.
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
Prlpared br the 1CaIIoI.I.....
of 0111I' C..... far ~..
InlOlmaltoa SIIYkes IIaff. .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers thaI
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, Is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your seU-
evaluation cheddlsts and architedural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs strudural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain.this transition plan
for three y~ars and make it available for public inspection..
Date: 7/A/n
Name of person completing the plan: Pat"'~~k K. Mnllanfl!v
Name of the ADA coordinator: .John Saker
Address of the facility: IvY Crfl!fI!k N..,........l 1.1".. R... 7la"\
List public services offered at this location:
Nature trails and programs
Lbt all structural modifications to be made and thel. location.
Modification Location Complete By:
* Pave accesaible parkin2 area and mark J v..n-BrrPRRihl. Rp.~.. 1/'~/Q~
and 1 regular acceasible space.
Install protective curb at dropoffs along pathway. kiosk and $35.00 or $25.000,
rest;rooms.
Install railinga. cut off doora and fix ramp at barn entrance. depending on re~troo~s
WidAn rAmp And r.mnv_ hl1nAa ~n Al1nu u~p..abk ft~~Aaa ~^ ~~~~p~o-
Completely redo bathroom. or provide pad for acceaaible p~rtajohn.
'Pave 1700 ft. o~ trail.
Pravide pads for 4 benches off trail.
Fix sections of path which a~e uneven or sloped wrong.-
Pave under shade shelter.
K-l
* This park is jointly owned by the city and the county. and theae improvements will
need to be approved by the city before becoming.partof the tranaition plan.
A A TRANSITION PLAN
by lhe NadaMllIIgue
Center for EduaIdM ..
Ion SIIYkIs sIatf. .
Use this transiUan pion to document ,hose architectural barriers Ihal
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self-
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form f<?r each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
fo~ three y~rs and make it available for public i~spection.. .
7/8/92
of person completing the plan: Patrick K. Hullanev
of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
of the fadlllytlivanna Park--Route 20 and Elk Drive
public services oOered at this locallonl
ic fi
II structural modifications to b. made and th.lr locatlonl
Iflcatlon Location Complet. By:
igure accessible parking--4 s aces--l van-accessible a~ 1/26/95
e par ing. Reconfigure 2 accessible spaces each on
side of 96" aisle for 'shelter. and soccer. 4 additional $26.000
uts for access aisle in main parking area. 1 van access
ith parking spnce on either s~de at tennis courts. New
fountain and ~ccesaible path to and a~ound at tennis courts.
th from p'arking to shelter and shelter apron'. Fix threshold at restroom in picni~
Pave access to soccer field spectator area. Replace tire mulch with fiber mulc~
ground. Replace pay phone with accessible phone. Adjust door pressure to 1~1in
nsulate pipes in ..in bathrooas. Bring road around to allow 1(-1
ble parking at softball fields.
k is jointly own~d by the city and the county. and the.. improvements will need
proved by the city before becoming part of the transition plan.
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
".,... lip'" ........ u..-
of CiIIII' c....far fdIaIIeII_
I.u.'" SeniIIs sIlIIf. .
Use this transition pion to documen~ those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you hove completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fodlity that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
,Dote: July 17, 1992
Nome of person completing the pion: Roxanne W. White
Name of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the facility: Joint Security Complex, Avon' Street Extended
LIst p..UC ..I"r..... ......... at this I.ctlllona
Inmate detention and services
Visitor's area is not handicapped accessible
LIst .11 structural .ocIlfIcati... to lie ..... .... t...... locati...
Modification 1.--11- COlllple" By:
Designate van parking space Parkinq lot 1993
Ramp and appropriate 1andinqs
Visitor's area. lQQ4-qc; ~T))
Visitor's section 1994-95 CIP
Visitor's area 1994-95
Visitor's area 1994-95
K-1
Handicapped bathroom
Lower 1 hand-set & visiting booth
Lower 2 drinking fountains
A TRANSITION PLAN
by the NalianallIague
, Center for EdUCIIIiaR ...
. SenUs staff. .
Use this transition plan to documeAt.those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your trOnsition plan. Use this form for each
facility that needs structural modification. If your local govemment
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
July 17, 1992
e of person completing the plan: Roxanne W. White
e of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
ress of the faolity: Jefferson-Madison Regional Librar Scottsville
roze an en a L~ rary, Ma~n St., Charlottesville
L pallUc services oHereel at this location.
ibrary services
~
t all structural .ocIlllcatl... to be ._cle _.eI their location.
clllication Location Co.plete By:
r magazine shelves to 30" above Central Library 93-94
oor eve
aisles to provide wheelcha1r Scottsville 1995
access
aisles to provide wheelchair
access
Crozet
1995
K-1
K.
ADA TRANSITION PLAN
Preplnt br the NaIionaI Uague
of CiIIIs' C8IIw far EducaIiaa ..
~........... SIniaIs stall .
Use this transition plan to document those architectural barriers that
need to be removed. The deadline for completing this plan, not the
changes, is July 26, 1992. After you have completed your self.
evaluation checklists and architectural barriers checklist, you are
now ready to prepare your transition plan. Use this form for each
fadUty that needs structural modification. If your local government
employs more than fifty people, you must retain this transition plan
for three years and make it available for public inspection.
. Date: Ju1v 17, 1992
Name of person completing the plan: Roxanne W. White
Name of the ADA coordinator: John Baker
Address of the fadlity: Thomas Jefferson, Visi tor's Bureau
Ust public services 00...... at this .Iocatloa.
Visitors information and guides
..
List all structural modltieatl... to ... ...... .... their locatioa.
Modification Location Complete By:
Lower one section of front counter Visitor's Center 1995
Main Section
K-1
ADA GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
The County of Albemarle has adopted the following grievance procedure to provide for the prompt and
uitable resolution of any complaints alleging the County's non-compliance with Title n regulations of the
ericans with Disabilities Act. Title 1I states in part that "no othelWise qualified disabled individual shall
lely, by reason of such disability, be excluded from the participation, be denied the benefits of, or be
bjected to discrimination" in programs or activities sponsored by a public entity.
It is anticipated that most complaints will be resolved at the department or division level and should not
quire a formal grievance procedure. However, if a citizen believes that they have been discriminated against
n the basis of handicap, the following grievance procedure should be followed:
STEP 1
APPEAL TO DEPARTMENT HEAD
Within thirty days of the occurrence or condition giving rise to the grievance, the complainant should
bmit a grievance either in writing or verbally, identifying the nature of the grievance and the expected
mcdy, to the appropriate Department Head.
Within ten days of receipt of tile grievance, the Department Head will hold a meeting with the complainant
review the grievance and attempt to mutually resolve the issue.
STEP 2
APPEAL TO ADA COORDINATOR
If a satisfadory resolution is not reached within fifteen days of the first meeting with the Department Head,
e individual may submit the grievance to the County's designated ADA Coordinator.
An investigation, if appropriate, will be conducted by the ADA Coordinator affording all interested persons
d their representatives, if any, an opportunity to submit evidence relevant to the complaint. The ADA
rdinator will, within ten days, meet with the complainant to attempt to resolve the grievance.
STEP 3
APPEAL TO COUNTY EXECUTIVE I SUPERINTENDENT
Ifasatisfad:ory resolution is notreachcd witbin fifteen days of the first meeting with the ADA Coordinator,
individual may submit a grievance to the County ExecutivclSuperintendent. The County ExecutivclSu-
rintendent will meet with the grievant within five working days or indicate if an extension is necessary.
ueb extension shall not exceed five additional working days except with mutual consent. The County
. velSuperintendent shall render a written reply on the validity of the complaint and a description of
e resolution within five days of the meeting.
The right of a person to a prompt and equitable resolution of the complaint shall not be impaiR<! by the
. .vidual's pursuit of other remedies such as filing an ADA complaint with the responsible federal
epartmcnt or agency. Use of this grievance procedure is not a prerequisite for pursuing other remedies.
The ADA Coordinator shall maintain the files and records of all tiled complaints.
'( ,; '"" ,
DATE
/) (J (t./
AGENDA ITEM NO.
AGENDA ITEM NAME
DEFERRED UNTIL
Form.3
7/25/86
1(0 J !9qJJ
,
{1,:; , / I 0 c(. ~l ) J-
Cff~)
i' ~
"(fl~ (p I I '7'7~
I
- "
,
~ C) IG c"3
)ATE / /-/~7
~GENDA s/.,J, / ' / Y 7_3~ -
ITEM NO. 02 (j ,..
~GENDA ITEM NAME Boo'ih
DEFERRED UNTIL ~ h ,;) / /99'3
Form.3
7/25/86
.......
~
f',...~, I '') " ~
J,:,(, IliUteu to " ,_i~1 jJ...::13
Agend;! Item NoJ{l.1.:.!~~j6:.~.;/l.:J;/
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902,4596
(804) 296-5823
EMORANDUM
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
& communitY~~
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
Development
December 10, 1992
ZMA-92-10 Virginia Department of Forestry Property
Tax Map 76, Parcel 17A
ell
Planning Commission, at its meeting on
ecember 8, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of a
esolution of Intent which proposes to rezone 33.2 acres from R-
1, Residential to CO, Commercial Office.
lease be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
ill review this petition and receive public comment at their
eting on December 16, 1992.
have any questions or comments regarding the above-
please do not hesitate to contact me.
C/jcw
Lettie E. Neher
Jo Higgins
Amelia McCUlley
Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Forestry
1
~
~
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
V. WAYNE CILIMBERG
DECEMBER 8, 1992
DECEMBER 16, 1992
ZMA-92-10 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY PROPERTY
retition: Resolution of Intent to rezone 33.2 acres from R-1,
Residential to CO, Commercial Office. Property, described as Tax
Map 76, Parcel 17A is located on the south side of Fontaine
Avenue east of the U.s. Route 29 Bypass in the Samuel Miller
~agisterial District. This site is located in a designated
growth area (Neighborhood 6) and designated Office Service.
Character of the Area: The property is being developed for the
Virginia Department of Forestry Headquarters. Adjacent property
to the northeast is being developed for the University Real
~state Foundation's (UREF) office park.
proposal: The Resolution of Intent proposes to rezone the
property to CO, Commercial Office to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan designation and remove setback requirements
for the adjacent UREF development.
Planninq and Zoninq History: The property is owned by the state
and has been zoned R-1, Residential as a "holding" zone in case
it might ever be sold to private interests. The Board of
Supervisors, on November 4, 1992, passed a Resolution of Intent
to rezone the property to CO, Commercial Office, for the reasons
described in the following Summary and Recommendation.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
Tax Map 76, Parcel 17A is designated for Office Service use in
the Comprehensive Plan and is under development by the Virginia
Department of Forestry for its headquarters with acqess from
Fontaine Avenue. The existing R-1 zoning pos~s potential
problems for the adjacent UREF property, ~~:cel 76-17B, which is
Zoned CO with a development plan and proffers. Building setback
from R-1 for CO is 50' with a 20' undisturbed buffer. There is
no setback adjacent to commercial zoning for CO except that
building separation necessary to meet building code required fire
~atings. To remove the residential setback requirements from a
property that is not developing residentially and to make the
Forestry Department property zoning match the type of development
occurring (which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan),
~taff recommends rezoning of Parcel 76-17A from R-l to CO.
1
.11'
1,~
~
\.
1,
<:-~-"
~
w.~ ).\
""'....
,0 @ill!
>J [6311. .,e...
.J~--r-""
1~"9 9,
~
{.,~~'<-""
_\~J
.~
(
"..'
,"'.-
.l> ~ I51TI
/8 ,
(5'
r~
\
I
~.
~
's..~...II!'t.
'-
~.
F'
.~ '
~(6
\
.r
1
/
--/''-''' //
,
'I'" .'-
:fuJ /. ~-.:......
~. ~~~r"
~. N"",1I
"
./ 53J
l
+' ,I\~".
"
0'
<' I
i I
\
J,
ITliJ""
\
,
I
l
f
I
I
j
~
...
~
Iilil
~
~.'
"
J
,
c.
~~..
\.
\.
'm
".
i
\"
~
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
.~ ~___ .U:M~ f/ '~,,~~_
~ .IJVf/Y~~OfO 76C __ \ ( l f:~, 'A \~ .'~ ~ I~
ISl' ,..... \ SEllAI" ~~..,,~ t---'1 1r" r ...........'~ !~-:\: y .1 /\ \ ,/ ~
- IOOlll . _ ~'-.J, ~ !,f.IT' I ... if
~ r-. 'v "'-'1" ...:--. . ,#1 s.. "-
t%1-:/ A:// / // - { ):;- _ f....... / f~:
,~...-Y///h ~ 'OJ'o" ~ ......... II....... _ ~
-r-::::... \' '-- -'- -1 J / ~,
~ 10Ef2' ./ \ ,>__,! I I ~
~ --f '<'W// .~> _~ __ l'-..?' ." I / I . A
I' h!~'/~ '""' '{ 101121\ ., /. . 'il'./' ( J I r Jo\
rh EC110N 76H ,.. I .......
I'.~..c M' 'OC,/I lIBERTY Hill 10F I lA [.-: ~:JI, ---./ ,- \ ~ ~
'~1/ ~O: .- ~U 'n' "/1 \ /
i't"..:' \ .1- ~ I ~ i--1' \! t /1 "~.// 'I I
i ,,~'.::' ,;~.: ~:,);:) (f L " Z. ~.;,vy / ; ~
D . I'D'\; rio' 1)1111 1),1 L" .Ii~:r. ""1" .~ I .~~ ~
UCKING.:.-: ~ i / ""-" ~/ ~ ~ I
!----\-\_ SEC. 76. H.... / B 'vi' . ~ \
\ ~~l "\. t j A /SMD ~ -0;7'\. ~ -\ I
~ t. 29 Uno
~k~' ~12C 1781 ~ \
H;14 17< ~~ \
:."', '~J '7CIII','" ( ~./
... =, '78 /.. :f ~Ol!fH~.:it'
~'->('", /" - \. A. ~,.. "
I ~ ~ ...-""\ __ -- 01 CHARLOTTESVILLE
"- ~ K. ~r ~;;., ./ CITY :. F. '.
75 ~S\r' ~~~l ~CT;{!{" ~ .,. \
~ t..oo::: ~ \ 19 NO~ HIll ~ r \ \
"'" ~ \ :(//, XX"~ S~ / '- \
~~ v);S' ~ ~ y '~J '\\~ ~ \,
~~~~ ,. '.A3 " .............._-,,_
w~ ~"'" Virginia Deparboont of Porestry -~._'",-. .w
~~ ,7 \ ,.- I ~ -we-
. ~ ~ \ (l~ r ( :,~
~ ,.~ "', '~7 I "d , ~
r;:;;::;':r, ::::/) ~_~~ .~ "j "41r ~r s,
~ --- --- - .;" .6C Q ( '0"; ~.-
r/ ~~-- ~ OK:' b~'1. ~''''''. -.!:l!k..::r-o_ ~~" ~.,.. v~ ,_ '
V / ::--=:: ~'..i!.!! as /It. SHOt 5 S ( ~ A,
, ~... FlOUTt::.u. ,>c
~~ ~'6C c 6'~ F < ----::'~ -~ /r -"'" 64 ~
;c--::::::: - -- ~ -. . .. / ... ~~..:;~ _
~ ~.CTio. 76" ":::7 ~ :;; 46E · .. '" J'/ ::!,~ -;.~'S ~ l
~ "EO"ElOS_~ / ~ ,. / iffii1..~ '/,
~ I. ..A -- ~ '''//1 ^'. .r :::0. /
'-...:::" "~ r- ',~ ! ;"1 Rt. 631.... / / ~G;;~.." ~ //;;:;
~ IIS'? :"'"./"1 ~~:- ..;~ 54P :. ~i>'Y' 00 "/0
, ~ ..B.) '" ' "l ~ ~ . - rA:X. -I' I//,a
p'~ ~:;: ''?, '~ : ,;\!I>'11\l, ......... '/.
( --...... / "'.;:, '): ); I ~... --:~ ~ I/. f::'...:
\ I'~..C \ \~,. '" '1r.~jJ::d/rfff;,/ /j <<.~ ~~ ~.
~,I' -I- ; $ .-'j,l~\ $.,:'0.' · !!!)//////, SEC710N .OA ~/// ""'''--~ 0-."'" ~
'-></.-........... r-' ,-'...~lC '. ~ .",""'" .''''/~~/H~ S:S~ ~
~- / /" ~ "'~;~ '//, 0 ~W. ~~,,~~ ~~
V ~ I- /'v' \ ~. !'Yff:/; ~ '////;/1&// '////A:. ~00..""""""""""~'MILL c E! ~ ~
90
SAMUEL MILLER, SCOTTSVILLE
AND 'JACK JOUETT DISTRICTS
-
i
V
-..
.....,
'\..
"\
77
. ~06"(I~76"'~
SCALE IN FEE.T
IDO II~
SECTION 76
I
MOTION: Mr. Bain
SECOND: Mrs. Humphris
MEETING DATE: December 16, 1992
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has
convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an
affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provi~
sions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1
requires a certification by the
Supervisors that such executive
conformity with Virginia law;
of the Code of Virginia
Albemarle County Board of
meeting was conducted in
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of
each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters
lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia
law were discussed in the executive meeting to which this
certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public
business matters as were identified in the motion convening
the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by
the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
VOTE:
AYES: Mr. Perkins, Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris,
Mr. Marshall and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
[For each nay vote, the substance of the departure from the
requirements of the Act should be described.]
ABSENT DURING VOTE: None.
ABSENT DURING MEETING: None.
Clerk, arle County
of S\}PEjrvisors
, I
\.J
'.-.-
o R DIN A N C E
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE IN
ARTICLE IX, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
Arti Ie IX of the Code of Albemarle, known as the Industrial Development Authority
ordi~ance be amended and reenacted in Sections 2-49 and 2-52 as follows:
Sec. 2-49. Powers and duties ~enerally.
The public and corporate powers of the industrial development authority of the
coun yare solely and exclusively limited to the power to finance: (a) industrial
polll1tion control facilities for industries presently located in the county; (b)
industrial plant expansion for industries presently located in the county, requiring
min~~um local public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of
whic~ shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (c) new
indu trial facilities in the county, which new industrial facilities shall be
exclusively limited to light manufacturing industries and research oriented
indu tries requiring minimum local public utilities and providing new jobs, the
subs antial majority of which shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the
coun y; (d) medical facilities and facilities for the residence or care of the aged
and ~andicapped in the county; (e) multistate, regional or national headquarters
offi es or operations centers for research-oriented businesses, requiring minimum
loca public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of which
shal be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (f) shopping or
serv ce facilities which the industrial development authority of the county finds are
for he convenience of any of the aforementioned facilities or the employees thereof
and the current residents and domiciles of the surrounding area, provided such
shop ing or service facilities are compatible with the current comprehensive plan of
the ounty; (g) airports and office and support facilities relating to airports; and
(h) acilities for use by an organization (other than an organization organized and
oper ted exclusively for religious purposes) whose purposes are exclusively both
char table and educational as described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended ("IRC"), which is exempt from federal income taxation
purslant to Section 501(a) of the IRC.
* ..'( "I~ ')': ').(
Sec. 2-52. Limitation on number of bond issues.
There shall be no more than fifteen bond issuances of the industrial development
auth<rity of the county in existence at anyone time.
'1: ')'( * ,;'c "le
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
corr~ct copy of an ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors
of A bemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
.~~'
!-?/h'~#~
CI rk, Board o~~~ y Supervisb~s
.' C. I; .,
, ;..j.. ,.~~
. ),
I,I!, ",'
...' ~ ..~. ill, l
, (j'/)
,-~!:/)
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA
Amendme
Albemar
Issuanc
Bonds
ITLE:
t to Section 2-49 and 2-52 of the
e County Code and Approval of
of Educational Facilities Revenue
AGENDA DA :
December 16, 1992
ITEM HUMBER:
(i'l ,/j :', ;7~5
",.1' ,.-'"! ' I" ,"
ACTION:-X..-
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Public
Code of
allow i
50l(c)(
to $45,
Revenue
Foundat
PROPOSAL RE UEST:
earing to consider amendment to
Albemarle Section 2-49 & 2-52 to
suance of bonds by IRS designated
) organizations and to approve up
00,000 of Educational Facilities
Bonds for the Darden School
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF C
Messrs.
Huff
BACKGRO
The Dar
obtain
academi
lease t
Authori
amendme
en School Foundation plans to obtain a ground lease from the University of Virginia,
inancing in the amount of up to $45,500,000 in tax exempt revenue bonds to build
, administrative, and conference facilities for the University School of Business and
e buildings back to the University. The Albemarle County Industrial Development
y has recommended approval of th~ project which will require the attached County Code
ts as well as the adoption of the attached resolution authorizing the issuance.
ATION:
commends that Section 2-49 of the County Code be amended as presented to provide the
organization that this project will fall under. Further, it is recommended that
2-52 of the County Code be amended to increase the number of financings authorized,
ly, it is recommended to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the issuance of
s per the Industrial Development Authority's recommendation.
92.183
I
~.I ~
..
...
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
v'rginia ("Authority") has considered the application of The
U iversity of Virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
r questing the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
a ount not to exceed $45,500,000 ("Bonds") to be applied by the
F undation for one or more of the following purposes
( ollectively, "project"): (i) to finance the construction and
e uipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
c nsisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
G ounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
R ad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
A lington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
V'rginia for use by the University's School of Business as an
a ademic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
f nd certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
c rtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
i suance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
p blic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
ended (the "Code"), provides that the governmental unit having
risdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
e area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
e bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
A bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
A bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
S pervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
e ected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
i suance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
thority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
o THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
thority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
ction 147(f) of the Code and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of
rginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code") to permit the
thority to assist in the financing of the Project.
. .;
...
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
c nstitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
of the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
I come Tax Regulations Section 5f.103-2(f)(1), this resolution
will remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
i s adoption.
This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
emarle, Virginia, thisL7~~ day of December, 1992.
~~/
,/
Clerk, Board of pervisors of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia
[5 AL]
I
,
...
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
V rglnla ("Authority") has considered the application of The
Ul iversity of Virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
r~~questing the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
al~ount not to exceed $45,500,000 ("Bonds") to be applied by the
F(bundation for one or more of the following purposes
((foollecti vely, "Project"): (i) to finance the construction and
e(uipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
c(bnsisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
G ounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
Rcbad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
A lington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
V rginia for use by the University's School of Business as an
albademic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
fand certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
cl~rtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
i~suance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
pablic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
section 147(f) of the Internal Rev~nue Code of 1986, as
aj1ended (the "Code"), provides that the governmental unit having
j~risdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
tne area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
p ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
tjle bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
A bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
A bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
Sl1pervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
e ected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
i~suance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
o~ the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
A~thority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
S~atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
o bo THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
A~thority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
S~ction 147(f) of the Code and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of
V rginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code") to permit the
A~thority to assist in the financing of the Project.
I
~
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
constitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
of the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
In~ome Tax Regulations Section 5f.103-2(f)(1), this resolution
will remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
its adoption.
4. This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
adpption.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle, Virginia, this I;v~ day of December, 1992.
V/~/k ~/ /
t?f-/?{(f' C::~;:t:///l
Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia
[S~AL]
I
..
~
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
irginia ("Authority") has considered the application of The
niversity of Virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
equesting the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
ount not to exceed $45,500,000 ("Bonds") to be applied by the
oundation for one or more of the following purposes
(collectively, "Project"): (i) to finance the construction and
e uipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
consisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
G ounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
ad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
lington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
Virginia for use by the University's School of Business as an
a ademic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
f nd certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
c rtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
i suance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
p blic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
Section 147(f) of the Internal Rev~nue Code of 1986, as
ended (the "COde"), provides that the governmental unit having
risdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
e area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
e bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
pervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
ected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
i suance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
thority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
thority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
S ction 147(f) of the Code and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of
V'rginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia COde") to permit the
A thority to assist in the financing of the Project.
'-
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
c nstitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
o the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
I come Tax Regulations Section 5f.103-2(f)(1), this resolution
w'll remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
i s adoption.
4. This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
a option.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
bemarle, Virginia, this~/'~~ day of December, 1992.
';~6~
Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia
[SEAL]
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
V'rginia ("Authority") has considered the application of The
iversity of Virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
questing the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
ount not to exceed $45,500,000 ("Bonds") to be applied by the
undation for one or more of the following purposes
ollectively, "Project"): (i) to finance the construction and
uipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
nsisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
ounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
ad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
A lington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
V'rginia for use by the University'S School of Business as an
a ademic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
f nd certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
c rtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
i suance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
p blic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
Section 147(f) of the Internal Rev~nue Code of 1986, as
ended (the "Code"), provides that the governmental unit having
risdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
e area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
e bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
pervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
ected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
suance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
thority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
thority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
ction 147(f) of the Code and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of
rginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code") to permit the
thority to assist in the financing of the Project.
f, I
..
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
ccnstitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
oj the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
Ircome Tax Regulations Section 5f.103-2(f)(I), this resolution
w'll remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
its adoption.
4. This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
acoption.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
A~bemarle, Virginia, this /;'r~ day of December, 1992.
~/~;{~
Clerk, Board of SUpervisors of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia
[~EAL]
............
Vi \
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
V'rginia ("Authority") has considered the application of The
iversity of Virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
questing the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
ount not to exceed $45,500,000 (I'Bonds") to be applied by the
undation for one or more of the following purposes
ollectively, "project"): (i) to finance the construction and
uipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
nsisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
ounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
ad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
A lington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
V'rginia for use by the University's School of Business as an
a ademic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
f nd certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
c rtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
i suance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
p blic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
section 147(f) of the Internal Rev~nue Code of 1986, as
ended (the "Code"), provides that the governmental unit having
risdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
e area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
e bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
S pervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
elected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
suance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
thority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
thority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
S ction 147(f) of the Code and Section l5.l-1378.l of the Code of
irginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code") to permit the
thority to assist in the financing of the Project.
\
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
stitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
ome Tax Regulations Section 5f.I03-2(f)(1), this resolution
1 remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
adoption.
4. This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
ption.
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
emarle, Virginia, this /;7~ day of December, 1992.
the
[S ALl
RESOLUTION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
V'rginia ("Authority") has considered the application of The
iversity of Virginia Darden School Foundation ("Foundation")
questing the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an
ount not to exceed $45,500,000 ("Bonds") to be applied by the
undation for one or more of the following purposes
ollectively, "Project"): (i) to finance the construction and
uipping of an approximately 195,000 square-foot facility
nsisting of multiple buildings to be located on the North
ounds of the University of Virginia ("University") on Masssie
ad adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the Recreation Center, between
A lington Boulevard and Alderman Road in Albemarle County,
V'rginia for use by the University's School of Business as an
a ademic, administrative and conference facility; and (ii) to
f nd certain reserve funds, capitalized interest accounts and
rtain costs of issuance as may be required by the proposed
suance of bonds (collectively, the "Project"); and has held a
blic hearing on such proposed financing on November 23, 1992.
Section 147(f) of the Internal Rev~nue Code of 1986, as
ended (the "Code"), provides that the governmental unit having
risdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over
e area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of
ivate activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of
e bonds.
The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of
bemarle, Virginia ("County"); the Projects are located in
bemarle County, Virginia ("County"); and the Board of
pervisors of the County ("Board") constitutes the highest
ected governmental unit of the County.
The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the
i suance of the Bonds.
A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance
the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon; the
thority's certificate of public hearing; and a Fiscal Impact
atement have been filed with the Board.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the
thority for the benefit of the Foundation, as required by
ction 147(f) of the Code and Section 15.1-1378.l of the Code of
rginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia COde") to permit the
thority to assist in the financing of the Project.
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not
co stitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds
of the creditworthiness of the Projects or the Foundation.
3. Pursuant to the limitations contained in Temporary
ome Tax Regulations Section 5f.103-2(f)(1), this resolution
1 remain in effect for a period of one year from the date of
adoption.
This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
emarle, Virginia, this ,//~~' day of December, 1992.
[S AL]
McGuI REWOODS
BAlTLE&BooTHE
(804) 977-2500
Fax: (804) 980-2222
One James Center
90 I East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219
The Army and Navy Club Building
1627 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
Avenue des Arts 41
HWO Brussels, Belgium
Court Square Building
P.O. Box 1288
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-1288
associated office.-
P.O. Box 4930
Bahnhofstrasse 3
8022 Zurich, Switzerland
Direct Dial: 1-804-977-2588
December 2, 1992
s. Lettie Neher
lerk of the Board of Supervisors
bemarle County
bemarle County Office Building
4 1 McIntire Road
harlottesville, Virginia 22901
Industrial Development Authority Proposed Financing for The University of
Virginia Darden School Foundation
ear Ms. Neher:
Enclosed are the following documents which we are forwarding on behalf of the
dustrial Development Authority:
1. Cover letter dated November 23, 1992;
2. Certificate with Exhibits A through C;
3. Fiscal Impact Statement;
4. IDA Resolution;
5. Proposed Board of Supervisors Resolution.
s. Lettie Neher
ecember 2, 1992
age 2
The foregoing are being provided in preparation for the Supervisors' meeting on
ecember 16, 1992.
Very truly yours,
jMe/I'-/W, &~~/~,l/j;)
Steven W. Blaine
WB/itm
nc.
c : Mr. James B. Murray, Jr., Chairman Albemarle County Industrial Development
Authority
James M. Bowling, IV, Esq. (w/enc1osure)
William J. Strickland, Jr., Esq.
Mr. Mark Reisler (w/enc1osure)
s b31202.ltr
November 23, 1992
Bard of Supervisors
C unty of Albemarle, Virginia
C arlottesville, Virginia
Industrial Development Authority
of Albemarle County, Virginia
Proposed Financing for The University of Virginia
Darden School Foundation
The University of Virginia Darden School Foundation
('Foundation") has requested that the Industrial Development
A thority of Albemarle County, Virginia ("Authority") assist the
F undation in financing the issuance of up to $45,500,000 of its
r venue bonds ("Bonds") to be applied by the Foundation for one
o more of the following purposes: (i) to finance the
c nstruction and equipping of an approximately 195,000
s uare-foot facility consisting of mUltiple buildings to be
I cated on the North Grounds of the University of Virginia
('University") on Massie Road adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the
R creation Center, between Arlington Boulevard and Alderman Road
i Albemarle County, Virginia for use by the University's School
o Business as an academic, administrative and conference
f cilitYi and (ii) to fund certain reserve funds, capitalized
i terest accounts and certain costs of issuance as may be
n cessary to the proposed issuance of bonds (collectively,
" roject").
By its resolution dated November 23, 1992 ("Resolution"),
e Authority has agreed to issue its Bonds as requested. The
thority has conducted a public hearing on the proposed
nancing of the project and has recommended that you approve the
suance of the Bonds as required by Section 147(f) of the
ternal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Section 15.1-
78.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended.
Attached is (1) a certificate evidencing the conduct of the
blic hearing and the action taken by the Authority; together
th various exhibits, including (A) the Resolution, (B) the
tice of pUblic hearing, and (C) a summary of statements at the
Bard of Supervisors
N vember 23, 1992
P ge 2
p blic hearing; (2) the Fiscal Impact statement required pursuant
t Virginia Code Section 15.1-1378.2; and (3) the form of
r solution suggested by counsel to evidence your approval.
evelopment
County,
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned Secretary of the Industrial Development
of Albemarle County, Virginia ("Authority") hereby
as follows:
1. A meeting of the Authority was duly called and held on
23, 1992, pursuant to proper notice given to each
of the Authority before such meeting. The meeting was
public. The time of the meeting and the place at
ich the meeting was held provided a reasonable opportunity for
terested individuals to appear and present their views.
2. The Chairman announced the commencement of a public
on the application of The University of Virginia Darden
hool Foundation. Notice of the hearing was published once a
ek for two successive weeks in a newspaper having general
c'rculation in the County of Albemarle, Virginia ("Notice"), with
e second publication appearing not less than six days nor more
an twenty-one days prior to the hearing date. A copy of the
tice has been filed with the minutes of the Authority and is
a tached to this Certificate as Exhibit A.
3. The names of the individuals who appeared and addressed
e Authority, along with a summary of their statements, is
to this Certificate as Exhibit B.
4. Attached to this Certificate as Exhibit C is a true,
and complete copy of a resolution ("Resolution") adopted
a the meeting of the Authority by a majority of the Directors
such meeting, who constituted a quorum. The
solution constitutes all formal action taken by the Authority
a the meeting relating to matters referred to in the Resolution.
T e Resolution has not been revoked, rescinded or amended and is
i full force and effect on the date hereof.
. '?3 rd.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Author1ty, th1s ~ day
o November, 1992.
'\' .-, ,;'..,.
" ":> L~ _' y. t'-<_
~~. -;. f" - v v
Secret~y, Industr1al Development
Authority of Albemarle County,
Virginia
[ EAL]
E hibits:
A - Copy of Certified Notice
B - Summary of statements
C - Authority Resolution
-2-
. .
TIlE DAILY PROGHESS
685 \V ES'I' UIO ROAD
Ci-IARLOTTESVILl,E, VIRGINIA 2290G
,'CERTIFICATION OF PUBLICATION
~~~8L
TO:
I her by certify that the attached notice was published in "The Daily Pro-
gress"; a newspaper in Charlottesville, Virginia, and nppeared in the
issue s) dated (\oJ / C0 4 \k-,190L
,
"Given Under I\1y I-Iand This
~ ,19 O'-"I~'
~A-'1"\~w \\-' )
Crcdi t MG'lIl8.gcr ~
The Daily Progress
Publ'shing Fee $ \\,-\.\~
EXHIBIT A TO CERTIFICATE
COPY OF CERTIFIED NOTICE
\
"'N
~ .., . ON fI!R C
~: 'BONDlIN. el~.tW .
:\j>',INOUSTRIAL DE' 'E
~,.
l;,<~'~l..~ ~". '
lH~otlCi"' .".. ,t
?i lndu.trIi1o.... opmenfAuthorl-
" tyAOI A1bema, rI. COunty, Virginia'
. (" ul!1orlty''l.'''' who.." 'malUn"
Iddr...l.p,O, 80.911 Chi,.'
Iottlllvlll..; 'Vlr"lnla' 22902 'Win-'
hold I Publlf Hearing on the
Ippllcadon 0 Th. UnlYerllly 01
" Vlrglnl. Derden School Fourida-;:
I lion (.Fou~tion"l.whole.~l
dr... I. P.O. 60. 6650Chir.,
. to_vllle, Virginia 22806.r..,
que.ling the Authority 10 IPl\
prove the lIIuance of ,'IlpdQ'
. 1$45,500,000 of the Authority'.
I revenue bond. lObe .pplled bY'
the Foundation lor one or more'
01 the lollowln" purpo...: (I) 10 .
finanee lhe' OlInalructlon and
~Iggbri" .' 01 ,.~pro.lm.teIY
01 multl::~~~~~ C:,II~'I~~'I
. Cited on \he Nortli Grou 01 ':
the UnlverlllY 01 VlrQ!.n1~'U'" ",'
Iv,ralty") on MuIle ,f'tCl" II.."
cent 10 Sponaort Hill the '
Recreation" Center;..bttrleen"
ARlington Blvd. and A1C1ei'rrer'l,
Roadln Albemarl, Coul11Y ,VIr~ ".
ginia loru.e by the unJv6l'ilty'."
School 01 Bu.rne.. .. iI\I 10""
'. d~lc,..dmlni.trativ'..~Jcon;
; ,Ierenee laclllly/u' (II) 10 .lund ce~
': lain r,..ry.. no,. ,; 'capitallz.,
", .ccountl and certain co.tI 01
; lIIuanCl, ',.., 'ma. "Y be necelllry
10 the propoMd lllUance 01 th4t '.
bond~ :'~'~~: \.'7':~ ~~ ~'" '_~~~>'~)-*:,r:~t.f..~
The IlIUance '01 'r....enu. bond.
f a. requlllted by the Foundation
will not con.tltute . debt or'
pledoe 01 the faith .nd credit 01
the Commonwe.lth 01, Virginia.
.;,;,.:~A=Ttf.Cp~IWaW~~~
: ,norlhe taxing p!)wer 01 the
'. ,Commonw,alth ol',Vlrglnl. or..
, II.ny poUticallUbdlvIIlon lhereol.
. wtn.be pledged 10' i!_Or.
,:, 01 ;IUQh bo"nd.,L,~rr-...., ,:,"', '",." '.',..
hunollild. ~~\"".: , ..' ,
",.:=~7ij,'~ '~. ,.....
, ~~In~..
, ........... . I Floorn t: .
"~ Pnf of COlll'llY'~
. lId1n., 4Ml1'. InIIr ~d;IJ
'. " hII1qt!IIYUlei' ~rgln'-: . .AnY(
. perlOn ntere.ted 1n' the' ~ ..
, lUanee ,01 the \lOn~ or lh.loo..',
. tIon or nature 01 '!be Pl'oPOf8CQ
project may .p~r at the l~. "
Ing and pre..nt thelr v'8'tl~A(1
copy 01 the Foundation'. .9~-i'
Cltion I. avallabl.lor lna~n'.
at the Authority'. olllce .t theV
County Olllce Building, 401 ~
. . MC:lnti,r. ROad, Ch"r1olteavlll.r:"
,VA 221101 aurlncr ',bualne.. .
. hour.. " . '.' " ""rt
.. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT',
~., ~UTHORrrv OF ALBEMARLE.!.
.~'};""^~OlltolTV. VIRGINIA. ..'.
I ~J1.,,.~.,..J'...u._;j.:1....;.fJ)_
I
EXHIBIT B TO CERTIFICATE
Summary of Statements
william J. Strickland, Bond Counsel and Counsel to the
Iarden School Foundation, introduced the proposed project to the
Ioard of the Authority. He described the background to the
Jegislation permitting this type of financing and the proposed
~tructure for this transaction. He then introduced Mr. Mark
Feisler and Professor Neil Borden of the Darden School
Foundation.
Mr. Mark Reisler described the proposed project in some
detail. He outlined the plans for the new Darden School and the
Expanded Sponsors Hall. He exhibited to the members of the
P.uthority a site plan for the new facilities.
Mr. Strickland, Mr. Reisler and Professor Borden answered
questions from members of the Authority. No other members of the
p~blic made any statements.
s~bll124.summ
, "":;,,,,_ ;J 'jX"" ! " )
~
~ t~ if, ~~i~)
,s'~~:~~ ~.H .:.,;/i." ~~.
RESOLUTION OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF UP TO $45,500,000
REVENUE BONDS FOR THE BENEFIT OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA DARDEN SCHOOL FOUNDATION
The Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
V'rginia, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia
('Authority"), is or expects to be empowered by (a) the Albemarle
C unty Code and (b) the Industrial Development and Revenue Act,
C apter 33, Title 15.1, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended
('Act"), to finance facilities for use by organizations described
i Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
a ended ("Code") and exempt from federal income taxation pursuant
t Section 501(a) of the Code.
The Authority has received a request from The University of
rginia Darden School Foundation, a not-for-profit Virginia
nstock corporation ("Foundation"), requesting that the
thority issue its revenue bonds ("Bonds") to be applied by the
undation for one or more of the following purposes: (i) to
nance the construction and equipping of an approximately
5,000 square-foot facility consisting of multiple buildings to
b located on the North Grounds of the University of Virginia
('University") on Massie Road adjacent to Sponsors Hall and the
R creation Center, between Arlington Boulevard and Alderman Road
i Albemarle County, Virginia; and (ii) to fund certain reserve
f nds, capitalized interest accounts and certain costs of
i suance as may be necessary to the proposed issuance of bonds
( ollectively, "Project").
Such assistance will benefit the inhabitants of the County
Albemarle, Virginia, and the Commonwealth of Virginia, either
rough the increase of their commerce or through the promotion
their safety, health, welfare, convenience or prosperity.
The Foundation has represented that (a) it is an
ganization described in Section 501(c) (3) of the Code; (b) the
oject is compatible with the current Comprehensive Plan of
bemarle County, Virginia (the "County"); and (c) the estimated
st of the Project and all expenses of issue will require an
sue of revenue bonds in the aggregate principal amount not to
ceed $45,500,000.
Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
ended, requires that a public hearing be held before the
suance of the proposed Bonds.
A public hearing has been held on the Project and the
oposed Bond issue, and the Authority desires to recommend
proval of the Project and the proposed Bond issue to the Board
Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia.
.
~
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
HORITY OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. It is found and determined that (a) the Project will be
the public interest and will promote the commerce, safety,
haIth, welfare, convenience or prosperity of the Commonwealth of
V'rginia, the County, and their citizens; (b) the Foundation is
a organization described in Section 501(c) (3) of the Code which
i exempt from federal income taxation pursuant to section 501(a)
o the Code; and (c) the Project is compatible with the current
C mprehensive Plan of the County.
2. The Authority agrees to assist the Foundation in
f'nancing the Projects by undertaking the issuance of its revenue
nds in an amount not to exceed $45,500,000 upon terms and
nditions mutually agreeable to the Authority and the
undation. The bonds will be issued pursuant to documents
tisfactory to the Authority. The bonds may be issued in one or
re series at one time or from time to time.
3. It having been represented to the Authority that it is
cessary to proceed immediately with the acquisition, planning
d construction of the Project, the Authority agrees that the
undation may proceed with plans for the Project, enter into
ntracts for land, construction, materials and equipment for the
oject, and take such other steps as it may deem appropriate in
nnection with the foregoing; provided, however, that nothing in
is Resolution will be deemed to authorize the Foundation to
ligate the Authority without its consent in each instance to
e payment of any moneys or the performance of any acts in
nnection with the Project. The Authority agrees that the
undation may be reimbursed from the proceeds of the bonds for
I expenditures and costs so incurred by it, provided such
penditures and costs are properly reimbursable under the Act
d applicable federal laws.
4. At the request of the Foundation, the Authority
proves McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe, Richmond, Virginia, as
Counsel in connection with the issuance of the bonds.
5. All costs and expenses in connection with the financing
the Project, including the fees and expenses of Bond Counsel
d Authority Counsel, will be paid by the Foundation or, to the
tent permitted by applicable law, from the proceeds of the
nds. If for any reason such bonds are not issued, it is
derstood that all such expenses will be paid by the Foundation
d that the Authority will have no responsibility therefor.
6. The Authority recommends approval of the Project and
e proposed Bond issue by the Board of Supervisors of the
unty.
-2-
.
7. This resolution will take effect immediately upon its
a option and will remain in effect for one year from this date.
-3-
~
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned Secretary of the Industrial Development
thority of Albemarle County, Virginia ("Authority") hereby
rtifies that the foregoing is a true, correct and complete copy
a resolution adopted by a majority of the Directors of the
thority present and voting at a meeting duly called and held on
vember 23, 1992, in accordance with law, and that such
r solution has not been repealed, revoked, rescinded or amended
b t is in full force and effect on the date hereof.
WITNESS the following signature and seal of the Authority,
t is ~_ day of November, 1992.
( : rJ1lJ' , V~ ~ V-'~.-
Secretar of the Ind str1al
Development Authority of
Albemarle County, Virginia
[ EAL]
\ ARDN\DARDN102.TEF
4 ·
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR PROPOSED BOND FINANCING
Date: November 23, 1992
the Board of supervisors
Albemarle County, Virginia
The University of Virginia Darden School Foundation
I
Maximum amount of financing sought
$45,500,000
2
Estimated taxable value of the facility's
real property to be constructed in the
municipality
NjA
3
Estimated real property tax per year
using present tax rates
NjA
4
Estimated personal property tax per
year using present tax rates
NjA
5
Estimated merchants' capital tax per
year using present tax rates
NjA
6
Estimated dollar value per year of
goods and services that will be
purchased locally*
$ 1,150,000
7
Estimated number of regular employees
on year round basis*
27
8
Average annual salary per employee*
$
37,000
a~rman,
Authority
Virginia
* Incremental increase resulting from project.
,'-' ...
..
.:.~'. <,,,:v;'"2L- :." , " :.. O'V
ON _ J ~.' ,= J"; ~~-1:fi'-I<"
~ ~"~--
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA
Amendme
County
Develop
purchas
ITLE:
t to Sections 2-49 and 2-52 of the
ode to authorize the Industrial
ent Authority financing for
of Acme Visible Records
AGENDA DATE:
December 16, 1992
ITEM NUMBER:
09') ']/ / ....73'7
;: -'). I'~ '-f""
ACTION: ~
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT PROPOSAL RE UEST: Public Hearing
to consi er amending Sections 2-49 and 2-52
of the County Code and affirmatively
authori e the IDA to proceed with the
financi g of the project for Acme Design
Technol gy, Inc. to receive a $700,000 loan
from the Virginia Department of Housing and
Communi y Development
-
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF C
Messrs.
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY'~
BACKGRO
Acme De Technology, Inc. has applied to the State Department of Housing and Community
Develop nt for a $700,000 loan through the Virginia Economic Development Revolving Loan
Program s a part of a financing package designed to keep the company from having its assets
liquidat d through bankruptcy proceedings and provide ongoing employment for approximately
110 war rs. This Revolving Loan Program is structured such that the County's Industrial
Developm nt Authority must be the conduit through which the loan proceeds pass. The state
program oes not require Board of Supervisor's approval; however, Section 2-50 of the County
Code of lbemarle prevents the IDA from financing any projects without Board of Supervisors
approval. Although technically not a bond financing, the County Attorney's office felt that
Section -49 of the County Code needed to be amended to provide for this type of financing
and Sect on 2-52 amended to increase the number of outstanding issues. Lastly, the attached
resoluti n will provide the necessary approval for the IDA to participate in this program.
hments reflect the terms and conditions of the loan that the IDA is considering as
ssurances from the State and County Attorney's Office regarding the County's lack
ial liability in the project.
ATION:
ommends approval of the ordinance amendments and adoption of the attached resolution
ng the IDA to participate in the project.
\bt
92.184
I
.
o R DIN A NeE
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE IN
ARTICLE IX, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
Article IX of the Code of Albemarle, known as the Industrial Development Authority
ordin~nce be amended and reenacted in Sections 2-49 and 2-52 as follows:
Sec. 2-49. Powers and duties l!enerallv.
~he public and corporate powers of the industrial development authority of the
countty are solely and exclusively limited to the power to finance: (a) industrial
pollul....ion control facilities for industries presently located in the county; (b)
indus~rial plant expansion for industries presently located in the county, requiring
minimflm local public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of
which shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (c) new
indus rial facilities in the county, which new industrial facilities shall be
exclu~ively limited to light manufacturing industries and research oriented
indus ries requiring minimum local public utilities and providing new jobs, the
subst~ntial majority of which shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the
countw; (d) medical facilities and facilities for the residence or care of the aged
and 1 andicapped in the county; (e) multistate, regional or national headquarters
offic~s or operations centers for research-oriented businesses, requiring minimum
local public utilities and providing new jobs, the substantial majority of which
shall be filled by prior residents and domiciles of the county; (f) shopping or
servi~e facilities which the industrial development authority of the county finds are
for t~e convenience of any of the aforementioned facilities or the employees thereof
and t he current residents and domiciles of the surrounding area, provided such
shopp ng or service facilities are compatible with the current comprehensive plan of
the cpunty; (g) airports and office and support facilities relating to airports; (h)
facil ties for use by an organization (other than an organization organized and
opera ed exclusively for religious purposes) whose purposes are exclusively both
chari able and educational as described in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue
Code pf 1986, as amended ("IRC") , which is exempt from federal income taxation
pursu nt to Section 501(a) of the IRC; and (i) facilities receiving loans through the
Virgi ia Department of Housing and Community Development from its Virginia Economic
Devel pment Revolving Loan Fund.
* ,,;'( ...,'( ..,'( ...,'~
Sec. 2-52. Limitation on number of bond issues.
'here shall be no more than sixteen bond issuances of the industrial development
autho ity of the county in existence at anyone time.
'"1<*-1<,'<*
, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
corre< t copy of an ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors
of Allemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
~h~7?~/
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
f
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Community Develop-
nt, an agency of the Commonwealth of virginia, 501 North 2nd
reet, Richmond, Virginia, 23219, (the "Department) is the
signated agency to administer loan funds allocated by the
neral Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle
unty, Virginia, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia,
902-4596, (the "Authority") is a political subdivision of the
C mmonwealth, established by ordinance of Albemarle County,
V'rginia, under the Industrial Development and Revenue Code Bond
A t, Chapter 33, Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as
a ended; and
WHEREAS, Acme Design Technology, Inc. (the "Company")
w'shes to own and operate a plant that will produce filing and
s orage systems which will require one hundred and ten full-time
bs; and
WHEREAS, in order to promote the economic growth and
velopment of the Albemarle County community and to promote the
lfare of its citizens, the Authority, for the benefit of the
mpany, has applied to the Department for a loan in the princi-
1 sum of Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000) to be used
the Company in its business;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the loan by the Authority for the
nefit of the Company, as required by Section 15.1-1378(12) of
e Virginia Code, and Section 2-50 of the Code of Albemarle, to
rmit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w i ting is a true, correct copy of a resolution unanimously
a opted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
V'rginia, at a regular meeting held on December 16, 1992.
4~,./ /7dh~
Cl~:~~~ard of County Supervisors
r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OHICQ of County Attorn/ilY
416 ParK Street
Charlott/ilsville. Virginia 22901
Telephone 296.7138
Oecember 10, 1992
JAMES M. BOWLING. IV
DF.P\JTV COUNTY ^ TTORNEV
C,EORGF.. R. S .JOHN
cnUN rv ^ I If HN~.V
ard E. Huff, II
ty County Executive
marle County
McIntire Road
lottesvilla, virginia 22902-4596
Acme Design Technology Loan
De
This letter is in reply to your question concerning the loan
the Commonwe~lth of. Virginia, Depar~ment of Housing and
munity Development thr.ough t.ha Albemarle County Industrial
elopment Authority to Acme nP.~ign T~chnology. This loan is
horized by virgini~ code Section 15.1-1378(12). Neither the
nty of Albemarle nor the Albamarle County Industrial
De elopment Authority shall have any legal liability to repay
th'S loan. All risk of default lies with the Commonwealth ot'
vi ginia.
The county has some fiscal responsibi. 1 i t'.y bacause in the
nt of default the Industrial Development Authority is
uired to liquidate the secured iH~f.::et.s. This would involve
ff time. I envision that outside experts would be hired to
uidate the plant. Literature sent to me by Charles H.
vitt, Financial Assistance Coordinator, Commonwealth of
ignia, Department of Housing and Community Development.
icates that the Commonwealth of virginia would reimburse the
nty for expp.n~p.s of the liquidation.
If you have any questions, p--l.ease let me know.
JM /tlh
cc James Murray
Very rUlY yours,
I "
/'1............
JarneYMf Bowl ing, IV
DepUl)/county Attorney
10'd 6G:S1 c6'01 JaG
1021-96G-VOS"ON l31 JN3~~~l'9NIl~08'NHOC1S
r
11: 08
"B804 371 7093
COMM. DEV. / CORD
@ 0021002
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
ROB R. BL CKMORE
DEPUTY IRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND COMMU~ITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF COMMUNITI DEVELOPMENT
The Jackson Center
SOl North Second Street
Richmond. Virllinia 23219-1321
(804) 371-7025
TIP: (804) 371-7089
NEAL J. B RBER
DIRECTOR
December 10, 1992
Richard Huff
Charles H. Gravatt
Acme Design Technology, Co.
As we discussed over the telephone, in the event that a
mpany defaults on a loan funded from the Virg inia Economic
velopment Revolving Loan Fund and it becomes necessary to
quidate the collateral securing the loan, the Department requires
e Authority to coordinate the activities associated with such
quidation.
Upon completion of liquidation, assuming the Authority has
ted in a manner that is neither fraudulent nor intentionally
gligent, the Virginia Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund
11 be responsible for any losses and unpaid collection cost.
you have any questions, please give me a call at (804) 371-
I
r
COUNTY OF Al8EMAF\l...~
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
ROB R. BL CKMORE
DEPUTY D ECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The Jack~on Center
501 North Second Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219-1321
(804) 37] -7025
TIP: (804) 371-7089
NEAL J. BA BER
DIRECTOR
October 30, 1992
M . Richard Huff
A bemarle County
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, VA 22902-4596
D ar Mr. Huff:
The Virginia Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund provides
f nding through local Industrial Development Authorities (IDA) to
igible companies. The funds are lent by the Department of
using and Community Development to the IDA and in turn, relent to
e approved company. A loan agreement between the Department and
e IDA is prepared by the Department and a similar loan agreement
tween the IDA and the company is prepared by the IDA's attorney.
The IDA's attorney coordinates the closing, preparing all
cessary loan documents and providing a legal opinion on behalf of
e IDA and the Department. The program does prohibit passing on
y administrative and servicing fees incurred by the IDA to the
mpany, however customary cost associated with the loan closing
n be passed on to the company.
After the loan is closed, the IDA is responsible for
llecting paYments from the company on a monthly basis and
rwaroJ.ng them to the Department on a quarterly basis. The IDA is
so responsible for seeing that all reporting requirements
ecified in the loan agreements are forwarded to the Department in
timely manner.
In the event that a company defaults on its loan and a loss is
curred, the IDA's accountability does not extend beyond its
duciary responsibility. Although the IDA's liability does not
tend beyond its ability to collect the principal balance of the
an, the IDA must make every effort to use all practical means to
llect the loan balance through an orderly liquidation of
llateral.
I
.-g Bui ding Better Communities
II
r
MI. Richard Huff
page 2.
October 30, 1992
If you have any other questions regarding the Department's
lcan closing procedures or the IDA's responsibilities, please call
mE at (804) 371-7028.
(JJJjJ/vJj
Charles H. Gravatt
Economic Development Planner
CIG:rlc
.1,1 " 2' 92 10 : 12
'5'804 3i1 i093
COYM. DEV.: CORD
l4i012:01.3
VXRGINIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
e following terms were set forth by the Board of Directors of the
partment of Housing and community Development at their November
, 1992, meetinq:
Recipient:
The Industrial Development Authority of
Albemarle County, Virginia.
Beneficiary:
Acme Design Technology, Inc.
Amount:
$700,000.
terest Rate:
6.5%.
Interest only for the first six months then
amortized for 7 years with a balloon after
five years.
1st lien on machinery and equipment.
Life insurance policy in the amount of
$700,000, on Thomas Hall with the Authority as
the beneficiary.
C llateral:
Personal guarantees of Thomas Hall and spouse.
In addition, the oepartment's commitment is contingent on the
ollowing conditions:
A resolution from the Authority to participate in the loan.
A commitment from the company to retain 110 full-time jobs
within a two year period.
verification of the $500,000 contribution of private equity.
A commitment from NationsBank to provide funding in the amount
of $850,000.
A commitment from VEDCORP to provide funding in the amount of
$400,000.
A copy of the final purchase aqreeltlent approved by the
bankruptcy court.
P/25/92
10:12
'5'804 371 7093
COMM. DEV./ CORD
l4J 01"J/013 ~
Having reviewed the terms and conditions of this loan
commitment set forth by the Department of Housing and Community
Development, we accept this loan commitment and agree to the terms
and conditions specified above SUbject to the acceptance by all
parties of the final loan agreeroent.
Authority Representative
Date
Company Representative
Date
Edward H, Bai . Jr
Samuel Mille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902,4596
(804) 296,5843 FAX (804) 972,4060
Forrest R, Marshall. Jr
Scottsville
David P Bow rman
Charloltesvill
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte y, H mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
M E M 0 RAN DUM
F
Melvin Breeden, Director
Finance Department
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC~~~
December 23, 1992
TO:
D
Appropriation Request for Teen Center
At its meeting on December 16, 1992, the Board of Supervisors
nsferred $5930 from the Board's Contingency to fund the Execu-
e Director position for the Teen Center for February, 1993,
ough June, 1993. Attached is a copy of the signed appropriation
:ec
achment
cc: Richard E. Huff, II
Roxanne White
John Dawson
*
Printed on recycled paper
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR 92/93 NUMBER 920026
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL X
TRANSFER
NEW
ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES
NO X
FUND GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
FUNDING OF COUNTY SHARE OF TEEN CENTER.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
1100071017110000 SALARIES-TEEN CENTER $5,930.00
1100011010999999 BOARD OF SUPV. CONTINGENCY (5,930.00)
TOTAL
$0.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
TOTAL
$0.00
************************************************************************
REQUESTING COST CENTER:
BD OF SUPV
APPROVALS:
SIGNATURE
DATE
/,2/u~~
, ~
/;/ ?I/ f?;.-
I
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
%~
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
Edward H Ba n, Jr,
Samuel Mill r
David p, Bow rman
Charlottesvil
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jouett
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902,4596
(804) 296,5843 FAX (804) 972,4060
Forrest R, Marshall, Jr
SCOlt5viJle
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Walter F, PerkinS
White Hall
December 17, 1992
M . Jeanne Cox
C erk, City Council
C"ty Hall
P Box 911
C arlottesville, VA 22901
D
Ms. Cox:
At its meeting on December 16, 1994, the Board of Supervisors
proved a request of $5930 to employ an Executive Director for the
en Center, and to fund three events at different sites around the
unty and City, from February, 1993, through June, 1993. In
proving this request, the Board felt that food and beverages for
e Center should be self-supporting.
The Board also directed County staff to meet with the CACY
rnrnission and City representatives to resolve the supervision and
fice location of the Teen Center.
Very truly yours,
~~.~k'
CMC
L N:ec
c Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Richard E. Huff, II
Patrick K. Mullaney
John Dawson
*
Printed on recycled paper
Edward H. Ba n, Jr
Samuel Mill r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr
Scottsville
David P Bow rman
Charloltesvil e
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
M E M 0 RAN DUM
F
Melvin Breeden, Director
Finance Department
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC~
December 15, 1992
T
S
Appropriation Request for Teen Center
At its meeting on December 16, 1992, the Board of Supervisors
propriated $5930 from the Board's Contingency Fund (1-1000-11010-
9999) to fund the Executive Director position for the Teen
nter for February, 1993, through June, 1993. Attached is a copy
the paperwork provided on this item. Please provide the
cessary appropriation form to reflect this action.
tachment
c Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Richard E. Huff, II
*
Printed on recycled paper
" .
c,... ;<,._0j,,;) ~lJ}.~q~~,~..-
Vi'" _._.. .G:\-,--~.~~-
County of Albemarle
AGENDA ITLE:
Teen Ce ter
EXECUTIVE SUMMAR Y
AGENDA DATE:
December 16, 1992
ACTION:-1L-
ITEM HUMBER:
9~ .18;tZ~, . 731
I II /
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT PROPOSAL RE UEST:
Funding request for the time period of
Februar -June, 1993 is presented for Board
approva .
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
J;r
STAFF C
Messrs.
Huff
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGRO
On Dece
Teen Ce
this pr
three e
11, 1992, the staff was instructed to present a funding request to the Board for
ter activities through the end of the current fiscal year. The County's share of
posal is $5,930 and will employ an Executive Director for this time period and fund
ents at different sites around the County and City.
ON:
est unresolved question at this point in time is who this employee will be supervised
here he/she will be located. No funds are proposed at this time for operating
(phone, stationery, mileage, etc.) which indicates these costs may have to be
by the jurisdictions through donations.
RECOMME
staff r commends that the funds be approved from the Board's contingency account with a
directi e to the staff to meet with the CACY Commission and City representatives to resolve
the sup rvision and office location issues.
92.185
~
C:,_,
I.)
,,-
L, .J'''''';
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
P arks and Recreation Department
County Office Building
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Telprhnnp (~()4) 2%-5R4,,)
MEMORANDUM
Richard E. Huff, II, Deputy County Executive
Patrick K. Mullaney, Director of Parks and Recreation/1Yn7
December 14, 1992
Teen Center Request
On December 11 the CACY Commission in conjunction with the
en Center Steering Committee, teens and both City and County
rks and Recreation Departments, presented a formal proposal to
ard and Council concerning the establishment of a Teen Center.
As part of the presentation, the Commission recommended that
ch locality appropriate in equal shares a total of $11,860 for
e purpose of hiring a teen center director to continue the work
at has been completed to date. This funding will allow for the
ring of a person who will start off earning an annual salary of
proximately $20,000 for the period of February 1-June 30, 1993.
so, included in this amount are 21% for fringe benefits and funds
run three events at different sites around the City and County.
detailed budget is as follows:
Salaries ($1,666.66/mo. x 5 mos.)
Fringes ($8,333 x .21)
Professional Services
(Funds budgeted for DJ's to
provide music at events -
3 events @ $225 ea.)
Food
(chips, pretzels, popcorn,
sodas at events)
Security Services
(off-duty police officer at
events - 3 events x 5 hrs. ea.
x 3 officers/event x $20/hr.)
$ 8,335
1,750
675
200
900
$11,860
ORANDUM
GE 2
Teen Center Request
It will be the role of the teen center director during this
itial period to begin working with the teens and the steering
mmittee, to further pursue a teen center site and to begin
veloping the Teen Council and satellite activities.
Both Board and Council seemed to favor this recommendation.
ard members present directed staff to put together a request that
n be acted on at this Wednesday's Board meeting. The County
are which will need to be appropriated for the five month period
$5,930.
For the period beginning July 1, 1993, I would suggest that
e City and County Parks and Recreation Departments develop an
nual operating budget to be submitted and considered in our
spective budget processes. In that budget I envision us
questing an amount that would continue the work of the teen
nter director and a contingency amount to be appropriated if an
tual site is found and agreed upon by both governing bodies.
Finally, I would like to request your assistance in making a
termination as to which agency will take on the administrative
sponsibilities at this time for the Teen Center. Perhaps you and
uie could discuss this or the CACY Commission should be asked to
ke a recommendation. Ultimately, the site selected may be the
jor determining factor for which locality will administer this
rvice in the future.
Isms
~
..
\ ,1
I;'J j :~ 6Vv ~. V \'-n Cc VI
DATE: 12-15-92 PAGE 1
MEMO TO: ALBERMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
CC: DAVID BOWERMAN CHAIRMAN BOARD OF SUPERVISOR
FORREST R. MARSHALL SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT SUPERVISOR
ROBERT TUCKER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
JANE DITTMAR PRESIDENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
FROM: BILL NITCHMANN PLANNING COMMISSIONER SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT
SUB~ECT: INITIAL PROPOSAL AND OUTLINE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN
ALBERMARLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION
IN OUR NOVEMBER 17, 1992 MEETING I RECOMMENDED THAT WE START TO THINK
ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION I WAS ASKED TO PREPARE AND PRESENT
AN OUTLINE AND CHARTER FOR AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION. WHAT
FOLnOWS IS A FIRST DRAFT OUTLINE OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVIEW AND
DIS~USSION BY THE COMMISSION.
'.;
ALB~RMARLE COUNTY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN RECENT HISTORY HAS BEEN IMPACTED
BY ~ DOWN TURN IN THE NATIONAL ECONOMY. THE RECENT RECESSION HAS BEEN
FELt NOT ONLY IN THE INDUSTRIAL MARKET SEGMENTS BUT ALSO BY THE STATE
RUN INSTITUTIONS LOCATED IN OUR AREA. THE MAJOR RESULTANT FACTOR OF
THI$ RECESSION HAS BEEN THE LOSS OF AN ESXIMATED 3000 JOBS AND THE
INCREASE OF INDIVIDUALS BEING UNDER EMPLOYED VERSUS THEIR CAPABILITY.
RECtNT EVIDENCE OF THIS HAS BEEN THE LAYOFF OF WORKERS AT TELEDYNE.
ALBERMARLE COUNTY IS A BEAUTIFUL PLACE TO LIVE AND TO RAISE A FAMILY.
WE tREASURE THE LIFE STYLES THAT THIS BEAUTIFUL COUNTY AFFORDS US.
HOW~VER, THE LIFESTYLES OF OUR CITIZENS AND THEIR CHILDREN ARE IN
JEOPARDY FROM THE LACK OF A FOCUSED APPROACH TO IMPROVING THE ECONOMIC
STABILITY OF THE COUNTY. IT IS THE INTENT OF THIS DRAFT TO OGTLINE THE
DEV~LOPMENT OF AN ORGANIZATION TO ADDRESS THE LONG TERM ECONOMIC HEALTH
AND FUTURE OF OUR COUNTY. WE CAN APPROACH THIS THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT
OF A PLAN THAT RECOGNIZES THE STRENGTHS OF THE COUNTY SUCH AS: NATURAL
RESOURCES, JOB SKILLS OF THE CITIZENS, CURRENT BUSINESS BASE,
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES, CAPITAL RESOURCES , AND THE CURRENT
INFRASTRUCTURE. THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ASSETS OF THE COUNTY WILL BE THE
FOUNDATION TO PUTTING INTO MOTION A It STRATEGIC PLAN " TO ASSURE
ECONOMIC WELL BEING AND IMPROVE UPON THE STANDARD OF LIVING FOR THE
CIT!IZENRY OF ALBERMARLE COUNTY. "
WE MUST BE FORWARD LOOKING IF WE ARE TO MAINTAIN A STABLE QUALITY OF
LIF!E FOR THE CITIZENS OF ALBERMARLE COUNTY. THIS STABILITY MUST BE
BA~ED UPON A BALANCED APPROACH BETWEEN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE
PR~SERVATION OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE THE COUNTY OFFERS US.
A PLANNED APPROACH TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WILL IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF
LI~E BY IMPROVING UPON THE RANGE OF EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE
TO CITIZENS IN THE COMMUNITY. OUR APPROACH AND THE lMPLEMENTATION OF
OUR STRATEGIES MUST HAVE THE ENDORSEMENT OF BOTH THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
SECTORS OF THE COUNTY. OUR ECONOMIC PLAN FOR THE FUTURE MUST HAVE THE
STRONG SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. THEY MUST BE
AT~ENTIVE TO THE ECONOMIC NEEDS OF THE CITIZENS OF THE COUNTY AND THE
LEGACY WE WILL LEAVE TO FUTURE GENERATIONS.
",'.
.~
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION PROPOSAL - PAGE 2
~
EXAMPLE OF A
.
MISSION STATMENT
THE MISSION OF THE ALBERMARLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATION ( or COMMISSION) IS TO INITIATE AND OVERSEE THE
NECESSARY STEPS TO BE TAKEN IN OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
EFFORTS WITH THE GOAL OF MAINTAINING AN EXCELLENT
QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL OF THE CITIZENS OF ALBERMARLE COUNTY.
~
J
..
ECON9MIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION PROPOSAL - PAGE 3
PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT
THE fIRST STEP IN MOVING FORWARD MUST BE TO GAI~ THE FULL SUPPORT OF THE
MEMBtRS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION , THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE
PRIV~TE SECTOR UTILIZING THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AS THE THEIR
REPRESENTATIVE. I HAVE SPOKEN TO JANE DITTMAR THE PRESIDENT OF THE
CHAMaER AND SHE FULLY ENDORSES THE CONCEPT OF DEVELOPING AN ECONOMIC
DEVELoPMENT COMMISSION. IT IS UP TO US ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IF
WE SO ELECT, TO PASS ON TO THE BOARD A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT. WE MUST THEN SEEK THE BOARDS FULL
ENDOksEMENT OF OUR OBJECTIVE TO CREATE ECONOMIC STABILITY IN THE COUNTY
THATiWILL WORK IN HARMONY WITH THE LONG TERM GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN,.. .
,)
WHAT IS REQUIRED:
THER~ IS A NUMBER OF APPROACHES THAT WE CAN CONSIDER THIS IS JUST ONE.
BOARP OF DIRECTORS OR A COMMITTEE-
~
THE IBOARD SHOULD BE MADE UP OF FOUR REPRESENTATIVES APPOINTED BY THE
BOAR~ OF SUPERVISORS ONE OF WHI~H SHOULD BE FROM THE COUNTY GOVERNMENTS
MAN~GEMENT TEAM, THREE MEMBERS APPOINTED BY THE CHAMBER OF CO~MERCE,
AND lONE MEMBER BY THE INDUSTRIAL AUTHORITY CO~~ISSION. THESE EIGHT
DIRmCTORS MAY CHOSE TO APPOINT TWO AT LARGE MEMBERS BRINGING THE
CO~ITTEE TO A MAX OF TEN MEMBERS. THE TERM OF OFFICE OF THESE MEMBERS
SHOULD BE STAGGERED AND OVERLAPPING AND NOT EXCEED FOUR YEARS.
ANY ~EMBER THAT IS ABSENT FROM THREE CONSECUTIVE MEETINGS OR MISSES MORE
THA~ X% OF THE MEETINGS SHALL BE DROPPED FROM THE BOARD.
THE~E SHALL BE AN ELECTION OF OFFICERS AT THE FIRST OR SECOND BOARD
MEE~ING. ROBERTS RULES SHALL APPLY.
ONE iOF THE POSITIONS ON THE BOARD SHOULD BE AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS
POS~TION. THIS POSITION SHOULD BE FILLED BY A FULL TIME STAFF MEMBER
REPQRTING TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS OFFICE. IN THE DEVELOPMENT STAGE
OF ~HIS ORGANIZATION THE MANAGE~ENT STAFF MEMBER APPOINTED BY THE BOARD
OF ~UPERVISORS MAY FILL THIS POSITION UNTIL A FULL TIME POSITION IS
DEE~ED NECESSARY AND FUNDING IS APPROVED.
THE!RESPONSIBILITIES OF THIS OFFICE IS TO PERFORM ALL OF THE
ADM~NISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE POLICIES OF THE
BOARD, SCHEDULE ALL MEETINGS AND PREPARE ALL NECESSARY REPORTS.
THEiBOARD SHOULD MEET ON A MONTHLY BASIS UNTIL THE STRATIGIC PLAN IS
IN gLACE AND THE PROPER COMMITTEES HAVE BEEN PUT IN PLACE TO CARRY OUT
THEiSTRATEGIES OF THE PLAN. THE BOARD SHALL MEET NO FEWER THAN FOUR
TIMSS PER YEAR THEREAFTER.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION PROPOSAL - PAGE 4
THE STRATEGIC PLAN APPROACH:
THE MISSION OF THE BOARD IS TO SET FORTH THE PROPER DEVELOPMENT OF A
STRATEGIC PLAN NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE ECONOMIC
GROWTH AND DESIRED INDUSTRIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR THE COUNTY.
THE STRATEGIC PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING BUT MAY NOT NECESSARILY
BE RESTRICTED TO THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. COMMITTEES TO ADDRESS THE
FOLLOWING AREAS NEED TO BE FORMED.
- INDENTIFICATION AND RESEARCH OF COUNTY ASSETS
IDENTIFICATION, CATALOGING, AND RESEARCH OF COUNTY LABOR ASSETS-
INFRASTRUCTURE ASSETS, EDUCATIONAL ASSETS, AND CURRENT INDUSTRIAL
STRENGTHS. ~~
- INDUSTRY RETENTION
REVIEW OUR ABILITY AND DESIRE TO MAINTAIN A FAVORABLE BUSINESS
CLIMATE FOR THE INDUSTRIES ALREADY LOCATED IN OUR COUNTY. WORK WITH
THEM THROUGH REGULAR MEETINGS TO HELP THEM SUCCEED AND EXPAND.
- INDUSTRY ATTRACTIVENESS COMMITTEE
UPON COMPLETION OF ANALYZING OUR STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESS AND WHAT WE
HAVE TO OFFER POTENTIAL EMPLOYERS, WE NEED TO IDENTIFY OUR SELECTION
CRITERIA AND THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH A MARKETING PLAN TO ATTRACT
THOSE BUSINESSES, WE FIND DESIRABLE, TO OUR COUNTY
- ASSET DEVELOPMENT
DEVELOP THE NECESSARY PLANS TO PUT INTO PLACE THE INFRASTRUCTURE
IF NEEDED, AND THE IDENTIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL SITES ATTRACTIVE TO
NEW BUSINESSES INTERESTED IN OUR COMMUNITY.
f
- CERTIFICATION
SEEK CERTIFICATION FROM THE STATE AS A "CERTIFIED BUSINESS
LOCATION". THIS CERTIFICATION GIVES US A PREFERRED STATUS WITH THE
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
THESE COMMITTEES AND OTHERS THAT MAY BE DEEMED DESIRABLE CAN BE MADE UP
OF TWO OR MORE MEMBERS TO CONDUCT THE BUSINESS NECESSARY.
.,.,'
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION PROPOSAL - PAGE 5
EXAMPLES OF THE GOALS THE "IDENTIFICATION AND RESEARCH COMMITTEE" MAY
DEVE1LOP:
I
gOA~_ -IDENTIFICATION, CATALOGING, AND RESEARCH OF COUNTY LABOR ASSETS-
I
A- IIDENTIFY AND QUANTIFY THE LABOR ASSETS OF THE COUNTY:
~TRENGTHS IN PARTICULAR INDUSTRY DISCIPLINE SUCH AS MECHANICAL
~SSEMBLY , ELECTRONIC ASSEMBLY, HIGHLY TECHNICAL SKILLS, PROFESSIONAL
dKILLS SUCH AS ENGINEERING OR MEDICAL RESEARCH.
I
i
B- ~DENTIFY THE INDUSTRY STRENGTHS ALREADY PRESENT IN THE COUNTY:
EGREGATED BY SIC CODES SUCH AS FOOD INDUSTRY, ELECTRONIC
ANUFACTURING, TRANSPORTATION.
i
I
GOA4 -
ESTABLISH CRITERIA FOR TARGETED INDUSTRIES BASED ON ENVIRONMENTAL
CRITERIA, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND LABOR ASSET POOL.
I .
A- JEVELOP A CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING NEW iNDUSTRIES TO BE SURE THEY FIT
qUR ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC GUIDELINES
i
B- ~EVELOP A LIST OF INDUSTRIES WE WISH TO TARGET WITH OUR MARKETING
~FFORTS.
I
I
C- ~URCHASE AN INDUSTRY ATTRACTIVENESS AND IMPACT MODEL
I
i
GOA~ - IDENTIFY MEANS OF OPTIMIZING OUR
I
I
A- tDENTIFY STRENGTHS IN OUR GOVERNMENT
~F OUR INDUSTRIAL LAND
RESOURCES:
THAT MAY HELP THE MARKETABILITY
B- WORK WITH OTHER REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT GROUPS
C- *URSUE RECOGNITION BY THE STATE AS A PREFERRED ECONOMIC COMMUNITY
~DDITIONAL COMMENTS: WE MAY WISH TO CONSIDER THE FORMING OF A JOINT
~CONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WITH THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE.
SU1ATION: THE PURPOSE OF THIS SUBMITTAL IS TO START THE MOTIONS
NEC SSARY TO FORMULATE THE ACTION PLANS NEEDED TO ACHIEVE A SUPERIOR WAY
OF .IFE FOR THE CITIZENS OF ALBERMARLE COUNTY.
END
BItL NITCHMANN
..,- -
T
F
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
MEMORANDUM
Bill Fritz, Senior Planner
Yolanda Hipski, Planner ~
Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator
October 22, 1992
Towers for Cellular Phones
is is in response to your transmittal of October 5th, requesting
determination on the zoning regulations applicable to cellular
p one towers. This question has arisen in conjunction with two
d'fferent proposals, one by Charlottesville Cellular (SP 92-69) and
t e other by Centel Cellular.
have consulted the County Attorney, who has responded with the
tached letter dated October 19th. By this letter, he notes a
versal in his prior decision on the tower on Con Agra property,
sed on our broader ordinance definition of "public utility." He
ates that the Virginia Code does not consider a cellular
lephone system licensed by the FCC a public utility.
r zoning ordinance defines a "public utility" in Section 3.0 as
" ny plant or equipment for the conveyance of telephone messages
" This would therefore include both of these, and.all cellular
p one companies.
As a public utility, they are subject to the following:
1) Review by the Planning Commission under Virginia Code Section
15.1-456;
2) A special permit if it is a multi-legged tower. (Note:
right category of use for public utilities specifically
multi-legged towers.) If the tower is a monopole, it
permitted by-right, with -456 review and a site plan;
the by-
excludes
is
and
L'
I
Q<tober 22, 1992
T<wers for Cellular Phones
Pcge 2
3) A site plan. This development is not exempt from the site plan
requirement (see Section 32.2.1). Supplementary regulation
5.1.12 applies to this use.
P ease forward this memorandum to these two applicants. If you
hcve any additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me .
cc: reading file "Cellular Telephone"
ACM/
.."
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of County Attorney
416 Park Street
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Telephone 296-7138
GEORGE R. ST.JOHN
COUNTY A TORNEY
JAMES M. BOWLING. IV
DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY
October 19, 1992
M . Amelia McCulley
Z ning Administrator
C unty Office Building
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, Virginia 22902
Re: Towers (Antennae)
(Our File # ACPZ 91-978)
D ar Amelia:
In my opinion, under Chapter i6.2 of Title 56 of the Virginia
Code (Section 56-508.8 and following sections, being the
"Cellular Mobile Radio Communication Towers Act II , a cellular
telephone system licensed by the FCC is not considered a public
utility. That is what I based my earlier opinion on, and that
is what the attorney for the company who applied for a tower on
a lot owned by Con Agra in Croze1:, based his concurrence on.
However, I have just noticed that the words IIpublic utilityll
defined on page 18 of the ordinance as including lIany plant
equipment for the conveyance of telephone messages "
ref ore, our own def ini tion is what we must apply in this
e.
Going further, it seems to me, although I have no authority
way or the other, that the messages you receive over a
lular telephone are "telephone messages II and if you agree,
n these companies are public utilities under our own
inance.
since this is a "public facility", these towers do
to require review by the Planning Commission (with
sible appeal to the Board of Supervisors) under Virginia Code
tion 15.1-456 which we commonly call "456 reviewll.
....-' ,
A elia McCulley
Page 2
October 19, 1992
I am returning the two applications from Centel Cellular and
C arlottesville Cellular along with this letter.
Sincerely yours,
~
George R. st. John
County Attorney
G S/sw
E closure