HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-05-20
FIN A L
May 20, 1992
3:00 P.M., Room 11, County Office Build:ing
1) Call to Order.
2) Executive Session: Personnel.
3) Adjourn.
7:00 P.M., Room 7, County Office Buildin~
1) Call to Order.
2) Pledge of Allegiance.
3) Moment of Silence.
4) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
5) *Consent Agenda (on next sheet).
6) SP-92-14. Geater & Emma J. Allen. Public Hearing on a request for a
single wide mobile home on 3.6 acs zoned RA. Property in E side of
Rt 627 approx 1.4 mi S of Rt 6. TM128,P37. Scottsville Dist. (This
property does not lie in a designated growth area.)
7) ZMA-92-02. Virginia Land Trust & South 29 Land Trust. Public Hearing
on a request to amend the existing Hollymead PUD to permit 37 single
family lots and 76 townhouse units on 19 acs. Property located near
Rt 29 with access to North & South Hollymead Dr. TM46B2,Sec 1,
P'sl,3&4. Rivanna Dist. (This site in located in the Community of
Hollymead is recommended for community service in the Comprehensive
Plan. )
8) Approval of Minutes: June 12 and September 18, 1991.
9) Appointments ~
10) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
11) Adjourn.
CON S E N T
AGE N D A
FOR INFORMATION:
5.1 Copy of the Planning Commission's Millutes for April 28 and May 5, 1992.
5.2 Copy of the Minutes of the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of
Directors for March 25, 1992.
5.3 Copy of Application dated May 4, 1992, filed with the State Corporation
Commission by Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc., for a general increase in
natural gas rates.
. _C'- _:; _l~
, . 7
_._ .' I". . _, ......~-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901-4596
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Members of the Board of
FROM:
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk,
Supervisors
J .-7 /~} /
CMC . / ////t/~1
/). 0- v L
DATE:
May 12, 1992
Appointments to Various Boards/Commissions/Committees
ARCH TECTURAL REVIEW BOARD:
e on November 14, 1992.
One member to replace James Caswell. Term will
Interviews are scheduled for May 20, 1992.
REN AND YOUTH COMMISSION: Two members. One vacancy to fill position
ed by Ann Webb last November 14. Interviews scheduled for May 20, 1992.
Term will be for three years from November 14, 1991. Also, Eve Haverson, the
nt representative is no longer a member. An appointee for this position is
needed.
PIED ONT COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: The terms of Grace Carpenter,
d Dixon and J. T. Henley, III, all expire on June 30, 1992. Letters have
to all three asking if they wish to be reappointed.
ITY SERVICES BOARD (REGION 10): The term of Dr. W. D. Buxton expires on
30, 1992. He is not eligible for reappointment. This vacancy will be
tised.
FIRE PREVENTION CODE BOARD OF APPEALS: The term of William C. Thacker expires
Nove ber 21, 1991. He is eligible for reappointment.
The term of Mary V. Mikalson expires on June 30, 1992. She is
reappointed.
SCHO L BOARD: The term of Michael J. Marshall as the at-large member expires on
June 30, 1992. By State law, this vacancy must be advertised, and a public
hear ng held. If the Board wants this vacancy advertised, it should be done
imme iately in order to complete the process by June 17. Notice of the public
hear be given on May 30; public hearing on June 10; appointment on
June
s
J' ,.
Edward H. Bair, Jr.
Samuel Millet
I
David P. Bowerman
Charlottesvill~
I
Charlotte Y. H~mphris
Jack Jouett
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
MEMORANDUM
TOf Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
I
I
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
and Community Development
I
FROM:
I
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC $-?L--'
-'
DAtE:
I
I
SU~JECT:
May 21, 1992
Board Actions of May 20, 1992
At the Board of Supervisors' meeting on May 20, 1992, the following actions
wete taken:
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
A tepresentative of the Baha'i Faith invited Board members to a service on
Thfrsday, May 28th, 8:00 p.m., Old Cabell Hall, commemorating the passing of the
Pr~phet-Founder of the Baha'i Faith.
I
I Agenda Item No.6. SP-92-14. Geater & Emma J. Allen. Public Hearing on a
re~uest for a single wide mobile home on 3.6 acs zoned RA. Property in E side
oflRt 627 approx 1.4 mi S of Rt 6. TMI28,P37. Scottsvi1le Dist. APPROVED
SPr92-14 subject to the following six conditions recommended by the Planning
Corission:
I
1. Albemarle County building official approval;
2. Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable requirements
for district in which it is located;
3. Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of the
mobile home to be completed within thirty (30) days of issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy;
4. Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and approval
of the local office of the Virginia Department of Health, if
applicable under current regulations;
~
. ,
Memo To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
May 21, 1992
Da4e:
Page 2
5.
Maintenance of existing vegetation, landscaping and/or screening
to be provided to the reasonable satisfaction of the Zoning
Administrator. Required screening shall be maintained in good
condition and replaced if it should die;
6.
The mobile home shall be occupied only by Geater and Emma Jean
Allen or other family members.
(5/0 vote)
Agenda Item No.7. ZMA-92-02. Virginia Land Trust & South 29 Land Trust.
Pu lic Hearing on a request to amend the existing Hollymead PUD to permit 37
si gle family lots and 76 townhouse units on 19 acs. Property located near Rt
29 with access to North & South Hollymead Dr. TM46B2,Sec 1, P'sl,3&4. Rivanna
Di t. APPROVED ZMA-92-02 subject to the following six agreements recommended by
th Planning Commission and added the following seventh agreement:
1. Development shall be in general accord with plan titled "Proposed
Division of Parcels A, C-2 and D, Tax Map 46," dated February 24,
1992 (copy attached).
2. Thirty (30) feet on the north sides of North Hollymead Drive and
Hollymead Drive shall be provided as open space and shall contain
an impervious pathway and landscaping.
3. Landscaping in the open space adjacent to North Hollymead Drive
and Hollymead Drive shall consist of not less than a double
staggered row of screening trees planted 15 feet on center.
4. Improvements to North and South Ho1lymead Drive shall be in
accordance with recommendations as stated in the Virginia Depart-
ment of Transportation letter of March 23, 1992 (copy attached).
5. Yards shall be provided as follows: front yard (measured from
road right-of-way or edge of access easement) - 30 feet in depth;
rear yard - 20 feet in depth; side yard - 10 feet in depth.
6. Access to adjacent property to the south of the townhouse develop-
ment may be required at the time of site plan review if determined
practicable.
7. This development shall become a part of the Hollymead PUD.
(5/0 vote)
Agenda Item No.9. Appointments. Directed staff to contact principals at
tht three high schools for recommendations for the student representative on the
Chtldren & Youth Commission. The Board expressed a desire that the student be a
so~homore and able to serve a two-year term.
,"
-,
Me:mo To:
I
I
I
D~te:
P~ge 3
I
I
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
May 21, 1992
Requested Mr. Tucker to provide information for the June 3 meeting on the
cons of appointing a staff member vs. a citizen member to the Library
Agenda Item No. 10. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
T ere were none.
Agenda Item No. 11. Adjourn. 7:40 p.m.
L
A tachments
c Robert B. Brandenburger
Richard E. Huff, II
Roxanne White
Jo Higgins
Amelia Patterson
Bruce Woodzell
George R. St. John
File
~ .
IATTACHMENT cl
. ,., '0'
......o.-__~.,.
7i1x ;I/AP4f..
,LE~{'t//II"Y 24, '9,)2.
37 g.o~r<"_ t L~~~LWAlj
7(.,'1 -1..
O<.o)o~,.v ,
Scale. 1"' 100
/
P!?(,':-"" 'E:I -
u~..:::. .:':l.J::>iV ';, {"" I;'
~ L jr~-'
Th"" 'A" "
-..E.lS. C' " "
IU&: .' vD
/If".eLE (i'''L ,,-,
e, 'VI r. V #.
0/
--
-
/~.'
..,,".'
,,-/
~,I..,1L.1.
J)
.....-----.
" eel0f->
..' $'!'
p,..f'-t~
1"'" A..e-'/.
ST"'T~ tAf/.NI. 1Jl~,
3, s I\CP~S
~''Ut 3-1
\
pt:,6
'l.~'b B''/.
~c~r..e.'!.
-(f'\
f
I
/
\ / L
\' ,
\' /. \-
)\/ /~~j\~
/_". CT...~..'2.., ~\C\
~~~~~VV~' ,.~.~./S r-:-\..
/ '" / __ _, 1=\
~+ ~c-: ,. l---' \ 8
<;9 /" - ". .-J
/ ~. ...--
/ ..-. ...-_. ----.
~-~~
/'
"'~"
g'1i':tr,'i{:,~
tr' 11,'1',,' "t:?~
;:. \',1, i~,"',,': 'I','t.
, , ~. "
I~" ;I'{ ',)
, ~,'I~ ;>J.~-=,;;1
, ~~~~, ~~.l.W
'(',,-.--:,....-- '~"'Yr
-~~
(ATTACHMENT 0]
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D PETHTEL
COM ISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P, 0, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22902
D. S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
March 23, 1992
Special Use Permits
& Rezonings
April 1992
Ronald S. Keeler
ef of Planning
nty Office Building
McIntire Road
rlottesville, VA. 22902
r Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
ZMA-92-01 Ednam House Limited Partnership, Route 250 Y. - This request is to
mit three dwelling units which would result in a traffic generation of 30 VPD.
access to this development is to a signalized intersection that is currently
quate on Route 250.
ZMA-92-02 Virginia Land Trust & South 29 Land Trust, Route 1520 - This request
to amend the PUD to permit residential usage on property that was designated as
mmercial. The number of units indicated in your letter would result in a traffic
neration of approximately 900 VPD. Commercial deve19pment on the 19 acres could
rtainly result in a higher traffic generation. The Department recommends a right
rn and taper lane on South Hollymead Drive and a left turn and taper lane on North
llymead Drive for the two proposed entrances. Construction of the left turn and
per lane on North Hollymead Drive will require rebuilding a section of the
isting road because there is up to a 2 foot difference in elevation in the median
tween the travel lanes on this road. Adequate sight distance will be necessary
r these proposed entrances. Additional right of way may be needed for the turn
nes.
ZMA-92-03 University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation, Route 29 B. - This
quest is to change the zoning from the current PD-SC and R-10 to CO. The
partment questions the status of Route 782 from Fontaine Avenue to the railroad
o erpass in conjunction with this request. Previous proffers on this property have
i cluded reconstructing Fontaine Avenue to current standards with a four-lane
d vided roadway. The Department supports this previous proffer. This site plan
sows closing the existing Forestry entrance and having all access to both
operties through a single entrance. Consolidation of the accesses on the south
de of Fontaine Avenue is supported by the Department. There is adequate sight
stance at the location of the proposed entrance shown on the plan. Comments
ncerning the submitted traffic analysis and recommended roadway improvements will
addressed in a separate letter.
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
C MMONWEALTH
Ga Services
-
c .
',; 'J'JJI0:
c, ,.l--
'p , ,_:C.~ ~_::"",_, ~; ,'"' . ,,(,: 2> ,)
. '\.~ iH~rn i'.;\~. ., '- . .~\ _ -'"
.';:"/""~"""-.,,,:._-,.~-
.t/ ',: V'
'.J
I'
May 4, 1992
RE: Application of Commonwealth Gas services, Inc. por A
General Increase in Natural Gas Rates
D ar Sir or Madam,
Pursuant to the Rat.e Case Rules of the State Corporation
C mmission, I have enclosed for your information a copy of the
A plication of Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc. For A General
I crease in Natural Gas Rates. A copy of the complete Application,
i eluding all of the supporting testimony and exhibits, may be
o tained at no cost by making a request therefor orally or in
w iting to:
Stephen B. Seiple, Senior Attorney
Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 117
Columbus, OH 43216-0117
Telephone: (614) 460-4648
Very truly yours
#~.~c
Stephen B. Seiple
Senior Attorney
Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc., 200 Civic Center Drive, P.O. Box 117, Columbus, Ohio 43216-0117
(
.
COMMONWEALTH OJ' VIRGIHIA
BBPORB '1'D
STATB CORPORATIOIt COXKISSIOIt
AP LICATION OJ' )
)
CO ONWEALTB GAS SBRVICBS, INC. ) Cas8 110. 92POBOO -
)
1'0 a qeneral increase in natural )
qa rates )
APPLlCATIOIt OJ'
COMMOIt1fBALTH GAS SBRVICBS, IltC.
TO RBVISB ITS TARIJ'J'S AND
SUPPORTIIIG PREPARED TBSTIKOItY
AND BXHIBITS
Pursuant to S56-237 of the Code of Virginia and to the
Co ission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, Commonwealth Gas
. Se ices, Inc. ("Commonwealth" or "Company"), hereby makes this
Ap lication for a general increase in its rates for natural gas
se ice. The tariff revisions proposed herein are designed to
.
de elop annual jurisdictional operating revenues of $143.7 million.
is submitted in accordance with the Commission's
utility Rate Increase Applications and Annual
In ormational Filings (the "Rate Case Rules") adopted by the
Co ission by Final Order issued August 21, 1985 in Case No.
PUE850022, as they apply to general rate cases.
In support of its Application, Commonwealth respectfully
states the following:
1. Commonwealth, a public service corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, is a
nat ral gas distribution company providing natural gas service at
.
.
.
re ail to approximately 139,600 customers in Central and Souths ide
vi ginia, the Piedmont and most of the Shenandoah Valley, as well
as portions of Northern and Southwest Virginia.
2. The gas distribution service and operations of Common-
1th and the rates it charges for gas service are regulated by
commission.
3. In April, 1991, Commonwealth filed an expedited rate
ceeding, Case No. PUE910029, reflecting an increase in total
$3.3 million. Interim rates were placed in effect in
, 1991, to produce that level of increase. At the September 4,
hearing in that case, a stipulation between the Commission's
and Commonwealth was presented recommending that the
ission approve new rates for Commonwealth designed to produce
itiona1 annual operating revenues of $2,145,904. The Hearing
E aminer recommended in his Report issued January 9, 1992, that the
mmission approve these "settlement rates" and the level of annual
r venues they are designed to produce. However, on February 20,
1 92, the Commission issued an order remanding the case to the
aring Examiner for the limited purpose of taking additional
stimony on the balancing and banking tracking mechanism issue.
aring in the remanded proceeding is set for May 4, 1992, with a
f na1 order expected sometime after that.
4. Commonwealth's currently effective rates, as well as the
in effect at the end of the test period, are the proposed
currently being collected subj ect to refund in Case No.
E910029. However, the new permanent rates that are ultimately
2
.
.
.
app oved in that case will be lower than the proposed rates and
cou d reasonably be expected to be the settlement rates recommended
by he Hearing Examiner. Accordingly, for the purposes of this
where the Rate Case Rules require use of Commonwealth's
ting rates or the rates in effect at, the end of the test
Commonwealth has used the proposed rates in Case No.
10029, but has also presented parallel data showing the same
rmation calculated based on the settlement rates in that
case.
5. As in any rate case, Commonwealth is seeking in this case
of new rates designed to produce a desired level of
egate annual jurisdictional revenues. However, because it has
customary to describe rate cases in terms of the additional
revenue needed to address a revenue deficiency, Commonwealth
has made those calculations using the settlement rates, as
as the proposed rates in Case No. PUE910029, because using
the proposed rates for that purpose would not present an
picture of the Company's actual revenue deficiency.
6. Commonweal th' s testimony filed herewith supports a return
on common equity of capital of 13.25%, which, when applied to the
capital structure used for purposes of this case, will result in an
overall return on rate base of 10.54%. To achieve this fair rate of
re Commonwealth must earn annual revenues of $143.7 million.
lysis of Commonwealth's operations during the test period of
lve months ended December 31, 1991 indicates that Commonwealth
3
.
is not earning sufficient annual revenues to cover its cost of
se ice, including a fair return on investment.
(a) unadjusted operating results for the test period indicate
that Commonwealth's per books return on rate base was
6.48% and return on equity capital was 3.36%, producing
an indicated revenue deficiency of $8.3 million when
compared to the proposed rates in Case No. PUE910029.
(b) Application of the normalization, annualization and other
rate-making adjustments authorized in Commonwealth's most
recent general rate cases, including the adjustment for
the post-test period CWIP, would produce a return on rate
base of 8.53% and a 7.70% return on equity, with an
indicated revenue deficiency of $5.1 million using the
same 13.25% proposed return on equity when compared to
the proposed rates in Case No. PUE910029, and $6.9
million when compared to the settlement rates in the same
case.
(c) Application of these same adjustments, but using Common-
wealth's proposed adjustment for the "full pro-forma"
year capi tal expendi tures and O&M expenses, through
December 31, 1992, would produce returns on rate base and
equity of 6.43% and 4.22%, respectively, and the indicat-
ed revenue deficiency using a 13.25% proposed return on
equity is $8.9 million when compared to the proposed
rates in Case No. PUE910029, and $10 million when
compared to the settlement rates in the same case.
.
.
4
.
.
.
The revenue increase applied for herein is that which will develop
rates based upon the need for annual jurisdictional revenues of
$143.7 million and a cost of service based upon use of Common-
lth's proposed adjustment for the "full pro-forma" year capital
e enditures and O&M expenses, through December 31, 1992.
7. In accordance with the Rate Case Rules for general rate
es, Commonwealth respectfully makes application to the Commis-
n for approval of the proposed revised tariff sheets contained
in Schedule 32 to be sponsored by Commonwealth witness Robert E.
Ho ner. The rates contained in these proposed revised tariff sheets
designed to develop additional annual revenues of $8.9 million
n compared to the proposed rates in Case No. PUE910029, and $10
lion when compared to the settlement rates in the same case.
se rates will enable Commonwealth to more accurately reflect the
ocated costs of providing service to its customers. The proposed
iff revisions make miscellaneous changes to improve Company
rations and the administration of the tariff.
8. The proposed increase in revenue is required to offset
eral increases in rate base, costs of labor and materials, and
er administrative and general expenses associated with the
ration of the gas distribution system of Commonwealth so as to
vide continued quality service to its customers. However, there
several overriding concerns, described below, that have
n cessitated the filing of the Application at this time.
9. Commonwealth has seen its earnings plummet over the last
years. In 1989, Commonwealth was authorized to earn 13.25%
5
.
.
.
I
on equity capital. In 1990 and 1991, it was authorized to earn
12.75% on equity capital. Yet, in those years it earned only 5.57%,
2.23% and 3.36% on equity. This earnings erosion is due to several
factors:
(a) Commonwealth is expending substantial sums for the
remediation of parts of its system, primarily in the
Lynchburg area. As a result of the October 23, 1991,
Settlement Order in Case No. PUE910061, Commonwealth
plans to spend $2.1 million on the improvement of its
Lynchburg system in 1992, and $2.4 million in 1993. In
addition, Commonwealth is undertaking other significant
safety-related expenditures, all of which impact Common-
wealth's earnings deficiency. None of these costs are yet
reflected in Commonwealth's rates. Clearly, the acceler-
ated program for upgrading these facilities, as set forth
in the Settlement Order, is in the public interest.
Commonwealth was willing to enter into the ambitious
program of remediation and facilities upgrades contained
in that settlement, in recognition of the immediate need
for those system upgrades. The safe operation of its
distribution system is of paramount concern, both for the
Company and the Commission. Because of the significant
financial burden imposed on Commonwealth by the acceler-
ated schedule of these capital improvements which
undeniably benefit its ratepayers and the general public
at large, it is imperative that the Commission fully
6
.
.
.
I
7
.
.
.
ch the redesign of Commonwealth's rate blocks and the
horization of an accounting adjustment for Post In-Service
pr
Ca
Co onwealth's supporting testimony and exhibits.
Charges. These matters are all fully described in
11. The increase in rates requested by Commonwealth would
revenues not in excess of the aggregate total costs
in urred by Commonwealth in serving its customers within the
ju isdiction of the Commission, subject to normalization for
no recurring costs and adjustments for known future increases in
co
fair return on the Company's rate base used to serve
th se customers, all as such costs, normalization, adjustments and
re urn are calculated, allowed and prescribed in the Rate Case
Ru
th
in
general rate cases.
12. Evidence in support of this Application will be provided
testimony and supporting exhibits of the following
William J. Gresham, Manager
Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc.
Demand Forecasting,
Robert E. Horner, Director Rates and Regulatory
Affairs, Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc.
Penny L. Koehl, Manager - Regulatory Services, Common-
wealth Gas Services, Inc.
Robert G. Kriner, Manager - Corporate Taxes, Commonwealth
Gas Services, Inc.
William J. Lavelle, Controller
Services, Inc.
Commonwealth Gas
John F. Litzinger, Assistant Controller - Columbia Gas
System service Corporation
Donald L. Meister, Manager - Budgets and Cost Control,
Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc.
8
.
.
.
Robert V. Mooney, proj ect Engineer, Commonwealth Gas
Services, Inc.
Paul R. Moul, Senior Vice President, AUS Consultants -
utility Service Group
Richard A. Newbold, Vice President - Operations, Common-
wealth Gas Services, Inc.
william L. Payne, Director - Regulatory support Services,
Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc.
John M. Quinn, Chief Regulatory Analyst, Commonwealth Gas
Services, Inc.
James F. Racher, Senior Regulatory Analyst, Commonwealth
Gas Services, Inc.
Richard G. Stalnaker, Director - Regulatory Services,
Commonwealth Gas services, Inc.
Robert B. Wemyss, Jr., Vice President - Administration,
Commonwealth Gas services, Inc.
In accordance with the Rate Case Rules, the prepared direct
te timony of these individuals and supporting exhibits is attached
to and included as part of this Application.
13. Commonwealth further requests that the proposed revised
iff sheets be made effective June 4, 1992, thirty days after the
e this Application is filed. The earnings performance referenced
paragraph number 9 above is woefully inadequate to ensure the
g-term financial viability of Commonwealth. If Commonwealth were
a stand-alone company it certainly could not obtain adequate
ancing under reasonable terms and conditions with this earnings
tory. If Commonwealth is to continue to serve the new customers
its service territory, and do its part to help Virginia's
nomy grow, then the factors that are causing this earnings
sion must be addressed by the Commission. Failure to do so
9
.
.
.
1-
cl arly threatens Commonwealth's financial viability, and is not in
best interests of the Company, its rate-payers or the Common-
lth. without adequate rate levels, Commonwealth will not be in
a osition to fund the investments and programs required to meet
the needs of its customers.
Permitting Commonwealth to place its rates into effect,
sub'ect to refund, on June 4, 1992 (thirty days after the filing of
application), will enable the Company to mitigate the
imental impact of the earnings erosion being caused by the
ors referenced above. Early implementation of the proposed
s in this case is particularly important given that Common-
this 1992 earnings have again been seriously diminished by the
ificantly warmer than normal weather this winter. - the period
Commonwealth normally earns much of its annual revenues.
14. In accordance with the Rate Case Rules, Commonwealth has
se ed a true copy of this Application, without the accompanying
imony and exhibits (together with a statement that a copy of
complete Application may be obtained at no cost by making a
re est therefore orally or in writing to a specified Company
cial or location), by placing same in the United states first
s Certified Mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the
cus omary place of business or residence of the following:
(a) The Commonwealth's Attorney and Chairman of the Board of
Supervisors of each county (or equivalent officials in
the counties having alternate forms of government) in
this state affected by the proposed increase; and,
10
.
.
.
,II
(b) The Mayor or Manager and the Attorney of every city or
town (or an equivalent official in towns and cities
having alternate forms of government) in this state
affected by the proposed increase.,
In further satisfaction of the notification requirement,
cOfmonwealth has served by means of personal delivery, three true
I
cories of the complete Application upon the Division of Consumer
cotnsel of the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia.
I 15. The name, post office address and telephone number of
cofmonwealth and its counsel are as follows:
Cpmmonwealth Gas Services, Inc,
Post Office Box 117
Columbus, Ohio 432116-0117
Counsel: Andrew J. Sonderman, General Counsel
Kenneth W. Christman, Counsel
Allan E. Roth, Senior Attorney
Stephen B. Seiple, Senior Attorney (trial counsel)
Telephone: (614) 460-4648
Stephen H. Watts, II (trial counsel)
Jacquelyn E. Stone
McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe
One James Center
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Telephone: (804) 644-4131
11
.
.
.
WHEREFORE, Commonwealth prays that the Commission enter an
or er forthwith accepting this Application for filing, suspending
th proposed changes in rates and tariff sheets described in the
Ap lication and accompanying materials, and making them effective
on June 4, 1992, subject to refund, and setting the earliest
pr cticable dates for investigation and hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
:~O~i1~
.
Alan P. Bowman
Vice President Regulatory
Services
Ma 4, 1992
12
.
I.
.
.1 i
VERII'ICATIOJf
E OF OHIO
CO TY OF FRANKLIN to-wit:
Alan P. Bowman, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that
he is vice President - Regulatory Services of Commonwealth Gas
Se ices, Inc., that he has read the foregoing document and knows
contents thereof, that the same are true as stated, except as
to hose matters and things, if any, stated on information and
bel'ef, and that, as to those matters and things, he believes them
to be true, and that he has executed the same on behalf of
Co
onwealth Gas Services, Inc., with full power and authority to
do
o.
A~!l~
Vice President - Regulatory Services
Commonwealth Gas Services, Inc.
off
Subscribed in my presence, and sworn to before me,
{Sf
cer above named, this _ day of ~j;~
Notary Public
by the
My Commission expires:
aIM t ROTH, AltDmet At l.n
-- MUC.riAit i-OliO
_.b.- ~ ..........
."AU U.
13
.
.
.
CBRTIPICATB OP SBRVICB
I hereby certify that I have this day served a true copy of
th s Application, without accompanying testimony and exhibits,
ether with a statement that a copy of the complete Application
ma be obtained at no cost by making a request therefor orally or
writing to a specified company official or location, by placing
sa e in the united states first class Certified Mail, return
re eipt requested, addressed to the customary place of business or
re idence of those persons required to receive such service under
commission's Rules Governing utility Rate Increase Applications
an Annual Informational Filings, and that a true copy of the
co plete Application was served, by means of personal delivery,
up n the Division of Consumer Counsel of the Office of the Attorney
Ge eral of Virginia.
Dated at Columbus, Ohio, this q~~ day of May, 1992.
~~ ';j~~
;te~~n B. Seiple
Attorney for Commonwealth Gas
Services, Inc.
14
--;--~-''i''''''~,:, -2
J
',' :,,!,! ~
\!f'
" -
" ~
Dept.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
of Planning & Community Developmerln,
401 McIntire Road " ",
C harlottcsvill", Virginia 22901-4596
(H04) 296 5H2:)
(' ,','
~~ '
May 7, 1992
Geater or Emma J. Allen
Rt. 1, Box 86A
scottsville, VA 24590
RE: SP-92-14 Geater and Emma Jean Allen
Tax Map 128, Parcel 37
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Allen:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 5, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. Albemarle County building official approval;
2. Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable
requirements for district in which it is located;
3. Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base
of the mobile home to be completed within thirty (30)
days of issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
4. Provision of potable water supply and sewerage
facilities to the reasonable satisfaction of the zoning
administrator and approval of the local office of the
Virginia Department of Health, if applicable under
current regulations;
5. Maintenance of existing vegetation, landscaping and/or
screening to be provided to the reasonable satisfaction
of the zoning administrator. Required screening shall
be maintained in good condition and replaced if it
should die.
I'
1
Geater or Emma J. Allen
Page 2
May 7, 1992
6. The mobile home shall be occupied only by Geater and
Emma Jean Allen or other family members.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on Mav 20. 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
c~~~,,~:
Yolanda Hipski \
Planner
YH/jcw
cc: ~e E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
-.,&
..
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YOLANDA A. HIPSKI
MAY 5, 1992
MAY 20, 1992
(SP-9 2 -14) - GEATER AND EMMA JEAN ALLEN:
Petition: Geater and Emma Jean Allen petition the Board of
Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a single wide
mobile home (10.2.2.10) on 3.593 acres, zoned RA, Rural
Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 128, Parcel 37, is
located on the eastern side of Route 627 approximately 1.0
mile south of its intersection with Route 6 (see Attachment
A). This site is located in the Scottsville Magisterial
District near Esmont in Rural Area 4.
Character of the Area: Other than a few shrubs and several
scattered trees mostly along the property edge, this site
has been cleared of significant vegetation. The property
slopes down from the road by approximately 3% slope. There
are three dwellings visible from the proposed mobile home
site. This property is adjacent to and visible from an
agricultural forestal district. Staff opinion is that this
use will not negatively affect the district since mobile
homes are allowed within an agricultural forestal district
as permitted by the underlying zoning district.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing to locate a single wide mobile
home on 3.593 acres (see Attachment B).
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: N/A.
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff has received one letter of objection (see attachment
C). There are five existing mobile homes within one mile of
this site (see Attachment D). Should the Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors approve SP-92-14, staff
recommends the following conditions of approval:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Albemarle County building official approval;
2. Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable
requirements for district in which it is located;
3. Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base
of the mobile home to be completed within thirty (30)
days of issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
1
- "'-
4. Provision of potable water supply and sewerage
facilities to the reasonable satisfaction of the zoning
administrator and approval of the local office of the
Virginia Department of Health, if applicable under
current regulations;
5. Maintenance of existing vegetation, landscaping and/or
screening to be provided to the reasonable satisfaction
of the zoning administrator. Required screening shall
be maintained in good condition and replaced if it
should die.
6. The mobile home shall be occupied only by Geater and
Emma Jean Allen or other family members.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Mobile Home Location
C - Letter of Objection
D - Mobile Home in Area Map
2
"
"
IATTACHMENT Allpage ~I
'"'.
\~\"
....
.....
i'
<l
.:-
~
o
CJ
~
.:-
.:-
~
.:.
?7'f)
..:>
"
<<
~
GEATER
SP-92-14
or EMMA JEAN
ALLEN
c
tot
G
\-\
po.
tv\
~
u
c
1<
I'
....
ALBEMABLE
COUNTY
IATTACHMENT A
I ~age 21
, I
I,
"
II I
'/ i
:' i
~h.1
:: I
,~I I
._' I
,~.,~- ~ I
,,' .. I
SP-92-14
GEATER or EMMA JEAN ALLEN
....
SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT
SECTION 128
.. '
---.----
LESTER BROWN
0.8.615-169
48' '1'. r
2'1>2,44
N
'. ...
TAX HfP 129 PIREl. '17
.-.,...-:-
.
BOOK
H. H. HARRIS GOINS
08,131-194
I
/
I
I
S 890,
lit. 32 ..
344,81
E
N 020 5" 25 "E
89. 10'
""IV".' .
3.593 ACRES
0.B.393-199
JEAN OeLUTZ
0.8. 569 - 130
.
.
/
'Sa:rrTSVIl1.[ ~15TR1 <:T
RLIrr.HAiU: a:unY. VIRliINIR
SCALE I'" = I mil ~RTE \If'NJlRY 2. 1979
RCBE:RT L. UJ1
LRND PUtIN J NS - SLIM:Y
PALl1YRR. VIRSIHIA
,"lljllll'II,II,/,IIIIIII'IIIIIII' Jl I , I '
:' .~".'... 1 II I (tf'I;I'JlI'JlI'Jlf'I~I'JlI'JlI'lII'l~I'III'I'II"III~IIJ'I'''I'JlI''~
~'/' ./' ell 'I' II' 0 I .
-- ""I"" ""I"" 11II/""""'"""",,,II,,,,I,,"III,,,~IIII/II~I,,,,/I~IIIII/I~1 I.' I e/ 1'/ '1-"
""'11I11"11"""'"111"/11"1111/11"
I..,
\,
"
'.
-,
Apt'i15,1992
I ATTACHMENT C I
Amelia M. Patterson
County of Albemarle
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Chat'lottesville, Va 22901
Dear Ms. Patterson,
We have given a lot of thought to the request of Mr. and Mrs.
Allen to locate a single-wide mobile home on the property
adjacent to ours. We have several concerns that we would like
considered before you reach your decision.
As residents of Albemarle County for 30 years, respectively,
we chose to make our home in the southern area. A concern at
the time we located what is now our home were the amount of
taxes we would pay, the resale value if we choose to relocate
to another area of the county, the general upkeep and
appet'ance of the "neighbot'hood", and the school (s) OUt'
child(ren) would attend. The taxes are much too high however,
we choose to live in Albemarle, mainly because of the
wonderful school system. We were very pleased with what was
going on at Yancey school. Thanks to special project
opet'ations, such as A.H. I.P. and concet'ned local citizens,
the al-'ea of Esmont was being "cleaned-up" and today thel"e at'e
many who can take pride in our community.
In addition to our reasons above we would like to recommend
that you also consider that traditionally, land value of
propery located in the vicinity of mobile home's go dawn. It
is undesirable to land/home owners to have a non-permanent
"stt'ucture" located "neat'-by". In OUt' case, we do not y.Jish to
watch the sunt'ise ovet' a "tt'ailot'''. Genet'ally these homes at'e
not thought of as permanent and therefore do not receive the
attention and upkeep of permenately situated homes. This is
usually q'.lite obviol.ls ft'om lawn to extet'iot'. We, of cout'se,
have never met the Allen's and their intentions may not fall
in tl,is genet'al categot'y, but it is not a gamble we wish to
take. Please consider our future carefully.
Thank you for your time. We hope you
Albemarle ahead...
wi 11
continl.le to
move
I
f
I
;
I
i
j
;
smAa.tZ ~MC;~
Robert and Elizabeth Villwock
Rt 1 Box 313
Esmont, Va 22937
C E H.ff P""
RE ~ ~J ;:.~,.
(, t ,.'
APR 1 5 1992-
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
ZONING DEPARTMENT
I ATTACHMENT 0 I. ,~~~
-~-
'.
K(;. Y -!:
)j
l!I(
,
\
01-~
.[!]
I
}
/
.
....., ~
COUNTY
113
OE3J~C.TING
LANDoLON~R
P~Opo6G.D
MOBILe ~
EX16TING
MOBfL~ ~C;cS
7
.
.
.
J':
-~ :
- .
- .
~ .
-.. .6
~..'
/~ \
---+-- /' t-",-
" "',
Y-
-~~..
'll=+::'~
.
.'
iI,
.,
il '/
.. -
-1L -:" ---.-.-.,
. ~,;...
.....-- .......
.-/' .
8A
/'
--""'- ~
"---..~..~
1/ ~~~
..
.
134
DISTRICT
SCALE IN ,[E T
SECTION 128~ _' ... .... ,...
.. .cR.cUI..TU....L . '0"1''''.... DIU "leTS
--
....
,
SCOTO
t~~':;h:.!--_l I... ..... , _
...........-- ........ ".",;.;;':'
r"B,,:~n;j~\ ;,~ J f} {'J
> ,'... J \
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virg\l1i<1 22901 ,I!:)l)b
(H04) 2%~)~Q:)
~'lIll-
May 6, 1992
Virginia Land Trust
Attn: Steve Melton
195 Riverbend Dr
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: ZMA-92-02 Virginia Land Trust
Tax Map 46B2, section I, Parcels I, 3 and 4
Dear Mr. Melton:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 5, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted petition to the Board of supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
proposed agreements between the applicant and the County:
1. Development shall be in general accord with plan titled
"Proposed Division of Parcels A, C-2, and D, Tax Map
46" dated February 24, 1992.
2. Thirty (30) feet on the north sides of North Hollymead
Drive and Hollymead Drive shall be provided as open
space and shall contain an impervious pathway and
landscaping.
3. Landscaping in the open space adjacent to North
Hollymead Drive and Hollymead Drive shall consist of
not less than a double staggered row of screening trees
planted IS feet on center.
4. Improvements to North and South Hollymead Drive shall
be in accordance with recommendations as stated in the
Virginia Department of Transportation letter of March
23,1992.
Virginia Land Trust
Page 2
May 6, 1992
5. Yards shall be provided as follows: front yard
(measured from road right-of-way or edge of access
easement) - 30 feet in depth; rear yard - 20 feet in
depth; side yard - 10 feet in depth.
6. Access to adjacent property to the south of the
townhouse development may be required at the time of
site plan review if determined practicable.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on May 20, 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
v;dL/~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
MAY 5, 1992
MAY 20, 1992
ZMA-92-02 VIRGINIA LAND TRUST
Petition: Virginia Land Trust petitions the Board of
Supervisors to amend the existing Hollymead PUD, Planned
Unit Development to permit 37 single family lots and 76
townhouse units on 19 acres. Property, described as Tax Map
46B2, Section 1, Parcels 1, 3 and 4 is located near Route 29
with access to North and South Hollymead Drive in the
Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is located in the
Community of Hollymead and is recommended for Community
Service.
Character of the Area: The area of the proposed townhouse
development is located south of South Hollymead Drive. The
site is open and moderately rolling and is bordered by
Hollymead Open Space, Silver Thatch Inn and the Hollymead
Recreation Areas to the east. Several single family homes
border the site to the south, Rt. 29 is to the west and the
remaining Hollymead commercial land is to the north of the
site. The area of the proposed single family development is
located on the north side of North Hollymead Drive and is
scrub and moderately rolling. The site is bordered to the
east by single family dwellings, to the south and west by
commercial land. The Silver Thatch Inn is located to the
south. The land to the north is vacant and is open space
for Hollymead.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant has submitted a plan
showing the location of the development and the means of
access (Attachment C). All dwellings will be provided
access to new internalized roads and no dwelling will have
direct access to any existing public roads. This request
will increase the total number of dwelling units in
Hollymead to 625. (The Hollymead development is approved
for 650 dwelling units).
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with the comprehensive plan and the
original Hollymead rezoning and recommends approval of
ZMA-92-02 subject to the provided agreements.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
May 8, 1972 - The Board of Supervisors approved SP-156
authorizing 740 dwelling units in the Hollymead Development
and establishing commercial uses adjacent to Route 29.
I
December 14, 1977 - The Board of Supervisors approved
SP-77-70 reducing the previous number of dwellings to 650
units with no change to commercial acreage.
April 15, 1989 - The Board of Supervisors approved SP-89-08
permitting a tennis facility.
Numerous other approvals have been granted in Hollymead.
Staff has listed only those directly related to the area
under review.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan recommends this
area for Community Service uses. The recommendation for
this area in the Land Use Plan for Hollymead is as follows:
Establish a community service area centered around the
entrance to the Hollymead Subdivision. This recognizes
the approved commercial area in the Hollymead PUD.
While too large to be a neighborhood service area, the
scale of commercial development is to be in keeping
with the residential nature of the Hollymead
subdivision and oriented to the subdivision rather than
highway uses. The area is intended to meet local
convenience shopping and professional service needs and
is to be screened and buffered from adjacent
residential areas. Access to high density residential
areas to the north and south is to be reserved.
The Comprehensive Plan essentially acknowledged previous
zoning decisions made as part of the approval of the
Hollymead PUD. Based on recent concerns by residents of the
Hollymead subdivision concerning commercial development
adjacent to residential areas and the Comprehensive Plan's
recommendation encouraging commercial development more in
keeping with neighborhood service scale, this proposed
rezoning to residential use would be considered consistent
with the intent of the Plan for this area. With this
rezoning, the remaining commercial area is of a scale in
keeping with the Neighborhood Service designation.
An agreement to permit access to the south has been
provided. It is the opinion of staff that access to the
adjacent property to the north is not feasible due to
topographic constraints. (A large swale and a stream are
located between the proposed single family development and
adjacent property).
STAFF COMMENT:
The zoning of the area proposed for residential development
currently permits a wide range of commercial activity. In
the review of this request staff has given consideration to
the permitted uses on this site. The proposed single family
2
lots represent an extension of the existing single family
lots on the north side of North Hollymead Drive. The
proposed single family development is buffered from the
adjacent land recommended in the Comprehensive Plan for high
density residential use by existing open space. The
applicant and staff have prepared a list of agreements to
regulate development of this site:
1. Development shall be in general accord with plan titled
"Proposed Division of Parcels A, C-2, and D, Tax Map
46" dated February 24, 1992.
2. Thirty (30) feet on the north sides of North Hollymead
Drive and Hollymead Drive shall be provided as open
space and shall contain an impervious pathway and
landscaping.
3. Landscaping in the open space adjacent to North
Hollymead Drive and Hollymead Drive shall consist of
not less than a double staggered row of screening trees
planted 15 feet on center.
4. Improvements to North and South Hollymead Drive shall
be in accordance with recommendations as stated in the
Virginia Department of Transportation letter of March
23, 1992;
5. Yards shall be provided as follows: front yard
(measured from road right-of-way or edge of access
easement) - 30 feet in depth; rear yard - 20 feet in
depth; side yard - 10 feet in depth;
6. Access to adjacent property to the south of the
townhouse development may be required at the time of
site plan review if determined practicable.
Staff opinion is that these agreements address the primary
concerns of staff which are:
1. Reduction in the total number of entrances to the
existing state road and provision of adequate entrances
to the sites;
2. Treatment of double frontage lots;
3. Maintenance of pedestrian walkway;
4. provision of access to adjacent property.
Staff has no method of calculating total traffic volumes
created by 19 acres of commercial development. However, in
general commercial development generates more traffic per
acre than would be generated by residential development.
3
r
(The proposed development should result in approximately 900
vehicle trips per day.) The Virginia Department of
Transportation has commented that improvements to North and
South Hollymead Drive are needed to accommodate traffic
generated from the proposed use (Attachment D). An
agreement is proposed that addresses this concern. Approval
of residential units will generate an estimated 48 students
to Hollymead Elementary, 23 students to Jouett Middle School
and 25 students to Albemarle High School.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has identified the following factors which are
favorable to this request:
1. The proposed use results in fewer vehicle trips than
could be generated in "by-right" development;
2. Agreements are proposed to address access and double
frontage issues;
3. While reducing the amount of commercial land in the
Community of Hollymead, the remaining commercial area
is of a scale in keeping with the intent of the
Comprehensive Plan;
4. The number of units in the Hollymead P.U.D. is not
being exceeded.
Staff has identified the following factors which are
unfavorable to this request:
I. Approval of this request will remove approximately 19
acres of commercial land from the Community of
Hollymead.
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the
Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant
and staff have prepared agreements which are intended to
address the potential negative impacts of the rezoning.
During the review of subdivision plats and site plans for
this development staff will insure that all applicable
provisions of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances are met.
Staff opinion is that the favorable factors outweigh the
negative factors and therefore staff recommends approval of
ZMA-92-02 subject to the proposed agreements which are in
addition to the conditions currently in place under
SP-77-70:
4
Proposed Agreements
1. Development shall be in general accord with plan titled
"Proposed Division of Parcels A, C-2, and D, Tax Map
46" dated February 24, 1992;
2. Thirty (30) feet on the north sides of North Hollymead
Drive and Hollymead Drive shall be provided as open
space and shall contain an impervious pathway and
landscaping;
3. Landscaping in the open space adjacent to North
Hollymead Drive and Hollymead Drive shall consist of
not less than a double staggered row of screening trees
planted 15 feet on center;
4. Improvements to North and South Hollymead Drive shall
be in accordance with recommendations as stated in the
Virginia Department of Transportation letter of March
23, 1992;
5. Yards shall be provided as follows: front yard
(measured from road right-of-way or edge of access
easement) - 30 feet in depth; rear yard - 20 feet in
depth; side yard - 10 feet in depth;
6. Access to adjacent property to the south of the
townhouse development may be required at the time of
site plan review if determined practicable.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Development Plan
D - VDOT comment
5
~I
, .
e
9
c
IATTACHMENT A:
ITN,
-
u
GIBSON
\
l
i -,
..~
" "'-...L
"\... / -/
\ -:'
rAIN
)
l".
l
~I
G'l'a
'\<"
o~
;ill, --,-
~',"
.'>
..
~
c,;
~
...
".
"'~ \
,/
I'
ALBEMARLE
COUNTY
IATTACHMENT BI
..
Us
ROUTE
29
4Ul31
,
1---
1-
,
Ia
~
.
.
..
Zl'ofA-92-02
VIRGINIA LAND TRUST
.
.
.
SCALI.N 'EET
-
RIVANNA
DISTRICT
SE OTION
468(2)
..
-iV/a0j,,:{/ jq 9;L
])mu ~l' 1~~1J)
~GJ {~~L ~{)-L' ",-J O1b;yrewL
~ApUb ik..t~t:0 ~tJu'-:P..u~
~oV fYjedz-ig' u~ UJoUf!d-; ~ *
--Ofruz.w &~V pUaM-t-UV w~L2LL/e.L~
ct.iuj,~;x-v HliW 'l5au6' i~ /nUL~ ~}
6Uu CUud&-fY~? I'-<j-> tJtrw -, .
, ,,-.flt, ,if; t)trc---cV tz; ~ ~ pu~'
t~Lltb~ pu c-~v ~c c;J truu~_
1dc~;r l;;i~0 /~n.a!,-~;u~~ ,!~x.i-~a.) ~
VI ) 1 /7 / . , '
CUU:u w L-C-L 6'~a.o L~0 & V ~ #rx.A-U2V
L~' '.
~~) U/V {j~Jv L;rtr;v ~
-b}1.u ~ /2J /LVjt'/t..V -t::iiu /Y~~
w-rLf}'J IJA;2hbJc -v;et/~ ~J ,?~aJ
tvYLcJ0 ~ I ,~QU ~ ~
~ -tJtu~~~
th<.:t, f::Iu, !ll- ~ ~ ~~
~~);W wD~U~7d
~uu2J '-riA /fVv rl-ft .~ ~
Jvv OZ~~;; :biu ~ ~
to -f::/I..L ~, tJ.v /vv~ ?U~'
...; . .
~~ ~ ~CUZJ ~ iA) ~
, ~OJ~pi2 ~~
{;1J /lnuMi1~nJ/}. ~'
" ~,~ 9,~)t, ~
"" ,. ~
J70SGol~-h~~ VLc~
I
~'->- ."-":;- - ~-;.~;
..,...., "'.l ~... J_~~s.--
Edward H, Bain, Jr.
Samuel Miller
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R. Marshall. Jr.
Scottsville
David P, Bowerman
Charlottesville
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y, Humphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
DATE: May 15, 1992
SUBJECT: Reading List for May 20, 1992
June 12, 1991 - pages 68 - end - Mr. Bain
September 18, 1991 - pages 1 - 21 (#8) - Mr. Bain
LEN:ec
Edward H, Bin, Jr.
Samuel Mill r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R, Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
David P, Bow rman
Charlottes vii e
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y, umphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
While Hall
May 22, 1992
M s. Deborah Cooper
P incipal
M rray High School
1 00 Forrest Street
C arlottesville, VA 22901
Mrs. Cooper:
D
As you may know, when the Children and Youth Commission was
f rmed in 1990 it was recommended that one of the members be a
s udent representative. The term of the current student member
h s expired and the Board is currently sOliciting recommendations
fr m the principals of the three high schools for a replacement
ca didate. It is requested that the student be able to serve at
Ie st a two year term. Please submit a recommendation for the
Bo rd's consideration to this office by June 29. If you have any
qu stions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
~?~~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
LE :ec
Edward H, Ba n, Jr.
Samuel Mill r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R, Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
David P, Bow rman
Charlottesvil
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y, umphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
May 22, 1992
Dr. Anne Coughlin
Principal
We tern Albemarle High School
Ro te 1, Box 425
Cr zet, VA 22932
r Dr. Coughlin:
As you may know, when the Children and Youth Commission was
med in 1990 it was recommended that one of the members be a
dent representative. The term of the current student member
expired and the Board is currently SOliCiting recommendations
m the principals of the three high schools for a replacement
didate. It is requested that the student be able to serve at
st a two year term. Please submit a recommendation for the
rd's consideration to this office by June 29. If you have any
stions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
/~-, ---c W /
r~ G //~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
LE :ec
Edward H, Bin, Jr,
Samuel Mill r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R, Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
David P, Bo rman
Chadottesvi Ie
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y, umphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
May 22, 1992
M . William Raines
P incipal
A bemarle High School
2775 Hydraulic Road
C arlottesville, VA 22901
Mr. Raines:
As you may know, when the Children and Youth Commission was
med in 1990 it was recommended that one of the members be a
dent representative. The term of the current student member
expired and the Board is currently SOliciting recommendations
m the principals of the three high schools for a replacement
didate. It is requested that the student be able to serve at
st a two year term. Please submit a recommendation for the
rd's consideration to this office by June 29. If you have any
stions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
~~~~CMC
LE :ec