HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-06-17
FIN A L
7:00 P.M.
June 17, 1992
Room 7, County Office Building
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) Public Hearing: An ordinance to be known as Chapter 16.01 of the Code
of Albemarle entitled "Naming of Roads and Numbering of Properties."
It is intended that all roads within the County which serve or are
designed to serve three or more dwelling units or business
structures, including both public and private roads, shall be named
and that all dwelling units and business structures within the County
shall be assigned property numbers. The purpose of this ordinance is
to help provide for efficient delivery of emergency and other services
and to provide for uniformity in road naming and assignment of
property numbers.
7) ZTA-91-05. Public Hearing on an amendment to Section 5.6.2 of the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, Conditions of approval for Mobile
Homes on Individual Lots by the addition thereto of a subsection "f"
reading: "No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same to be
occupied by the owner of the land on which the mobile home is locat-
ed, or by a lineal relative or bona fide agricultural employee of the
owner.
8) SP-91-39. Willie Mae Hoover. Public Hearing on a request to amend
SP-88-86 in order to permit rental of a single-wide mobile home on 5.0
ac zoned RA. Property on pvt rd on W side of R t 20 approx 2. 7 mi
S of Rt 742. TM102,P1E. Scottsville Dist (Deferred from April 15,
1992).
9) SP-91-41. Gifford & Rachel Crawford. Public Hearing on a request to
amend SP-91-15 in order to permit rental of a single-wide mobile home
on 2.0 ac zoned RA. Property on N side of Rt 776 approx 3/10 mi W
of Rt 664. TM18,P8J. White Hall Dist (Deferred from April 15,
1992).
10) SP-92-21. Keswick Acquisition Corporation. Public Hearing on a request
to amend previous special use permits in order to allow the connector
road between Rt 731 (Country Club Drive) & Rt 616 to be a private
rd rather than a public rd. Rd proposed to serve the Keswick
Country Club & Inn. Property on E side of Rt 731 at its inters with
Rt 744. TM80,P's 8,8Z,9,60A,61,62&70; TM94,P42a. Rivanna Dist.
(This property is not located in a growth area.)
11) SP-92-25. Winter Haven Limited Partnership (applicant, South Pantops II
Land Trust (owner.) Public Hearing on a request to permit a 23,420
sq ft nursing home on 1.86 acs zoned R-15. Property on S side of
South Pantops Dr approx 1/4 mi W of State Farm Blvd. TM78,P20.
Rivanna Dist. (This property is located in Neighborhood 3.)
12) Request from Jaycees for funding of Fireworks Display on Fourth of July.
13) Crozet Crossing Recapture Plan.
14) Meadow Creek Parkway Update.
15) Appropriation: Gypsy Moth 1991/92 Grant.
16) Discussion: Draft letter to Westvaco.
17) Proclamation re: Celebration of Samuel Miller's 200th Birthday.
18) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
19) Adjourn.
CON S E N T
AGE N D A
FOR APPROVAL:
5.1 Authorize County Executive to sign United Way Administrative Support
Agreement.
5.2 Berkmar Drive Extension - Option to Purchase Residue Parcel.
5.3 National Historic Landmark Designation for Shack Mountain.
FOR INFORMATION:
5.4 Virginia Cooperative Extension Service - Reassignment of Personnel.
5.5 Minutes of the Planning Commission for May 12, 1992.
5.6 Letter dated June 2, 1992, from Ray D. Pethtel, Commissioner, Virginia
Department of Transportation, stating that certain abandonments and
additions had been approved for Route 660 effective May 26, 1992.
5.7 Notice from the State Department of Taxation dated June 5, 1992, re:
Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation v. State Corporation Commission.
Edward H. Bai , Jr.
Samuel Mille
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. Marlin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
MEMORANDUM
TO'
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
and Community Development
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CM~
June 18, 1992
Board Actions of June 17, 1992
At the Board of Supervisors' meeting on June 17, 1992, the following
were taken:
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
LIe. There were none.
Agenda Item No. 5.1. Authorize County Executive to sign United Way Admini-
ative Support Agreement. AUTHORIZED County Executive to sign the agreement.
Agenda Item No. 5.2. Berkmar Drive Extension - Option to Purchase Residue
Pa eel. AUTHORIZED County Attorney to exercise an Option Agreement to purchase
20 675.99 square feet of land designated as "Residue A" on the attached plat
us"ng funds designated in the CIP.
Agenda Item No. 5.3. National Historic Landmark Designation for Shack
Mo ntain. AUTHORIZED Chairman to send letter of support for the nomination of
Sh ck Mountain as a National Historic Landmark.
Agenda Item No.6. Public Hearing: An ordinance to be known as Chapter
16 01 of the Code of Albemarle entitled "Naming of Roads and Numbering of Pro-
pe ties." It is intended that all roads within the County which serve or are
de igned to serve three or more dwelling units or business structures, including
bo h public and private roads, shall be named and that all dwelling units and
~
/
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
June 18, 1992
iness structures within the County shall be assigned property numbers. The
pose of this ordinance is to help provide for efficient delivery of emergency
other services and to provide for uniformity in road naming and assignment
property numbers.
DEFERRED to July 1 to receive the following information from staff: 1)
ther smaller road signs are allowed; 2) verify VDoT's standards for road
n size; 3) provide a recommendation on how many dwelling units would be
eptable on a private road before requiring that a road sign be installed; and
4) whether numbering is allowed on existing signs identifying properties.
The Board also CONTINUED the public hearing to July 8.
Agenda Item No.7. ZTA-91-05. Public Hearing on an amendment to Section
.2 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, Conditions of approval for
ile Homes on Individual Lots by the addition thereto of a subsection "f"
ding: "No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same to be occupied by
owner of the land on which the mobile home is located, or by a lineal rela-
e or bona fide agricultural employee of the owner. DENIED (6/0 vote).
Agenda Item No.8. SP-91-39. Willie Mae Hoover. Advertised as a public
ring on a request to amend SP-88-86 in order to permit rental of a single-
e mobile home on 5.0 ac zoned RA. Property on pvt rd on W side of Rt 20
rox 2.7 mi S of Rt 742. TM102,P1E. scottsville Dist (Deferred from April
1992). APPROVED (6/0 vote) an amendment to SP-88-86 by the deletion of the
lowing conditions:
6. Mobile home permit is issued for use by the applicant or applicant's imme-
diate family only;
8. Mobile home shall not be rented.
Agenda Item No.9. SP-91-41. Gifford & Rachel Crawford. Advertised as a
lie hearing on a request to amend SP-91-15 in order to permit rental of a
gle-wide mobile home on 2.0 ac zoned RA. Property on N side of Rt 776 approx
o mi W of Rt 664. TM18,P8J. White Hall Dist (Deferred from April 15, 1992).
ROVED (6/0 vote) an amendment to SP-91-15 by the deletion of the following
dition:
6. Mobile home permit shall only be occupied by Gifford & Rachel Crawford or
their family.
Agenda Item No. 10. SP-92-21. Keswick Acquisition Corporation. Adver-
ed as a public hearing on a request to amend previous special use permits in
er to allow the connector road between Rt 731 (Country Club Drive) & Rt 616
be a private rd rather than a public rd. Rd proposed to serve the Keswick
ntry Club & Inn. Property on E side of Rt 731 at its inters with Rt 744.
O,p's 8,8Z,9,60A, 61,62&70; TM94,P42a. Rivanna Dist.
Memo To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
June 18, 1992
Da e:
pal1e 3
APPROVED (6/0 vote) subject to the following four conditions recommended by
th~ Planning Commission:
1. Department of Engineering approval of a private road design for Club Drive
from Route 731 to Route 616 (Amendment to Condition #5 of SP-85-53);
2. Staff and County Attorney approval of private road maintenance agreement
for Club Drive;
3. Security gates shall be located in the locations shown on Attachment C.
The gates shall be installed prior to County acceptance of the private road
(Club Drive). The security gates shall be continuously controlled at all
times;
4. In accordance with Condition #2 of SP-86-02, the bonding and/or construc-
tion of the connector road is required prior to issuance of a Certificate
of Occupancy for the inn. As per the approval of this petition, the
bonding of the entire length of Club Drive, between Route 731 and Route
616, shall be for a period of two years from the Board of Supervisors'
approval date with the option to renew the bond administratively for a
period not to exceed one year.
Agenda Item No. 11. SP-92-25. Winter Haven Limited Partnership (appli-
cant, South Pantops II Land Trust (owner.) Advertised as a public hearing on a
reVuest to permit a 23,420 sq ft nursing home on 1.86 acs zoned R-15. Property
on S side of South Pantops Dr approx 1/4 mi W of State Farm Blvd. TM78,P20.
Rivanna Dist.
APPROVED (6/0 vote) SP-92-25 subject to the two following conditions
re~ommended by the Planning Commission and a third condition:
1. Use is limited to 80 beds in the facility;
2. Site shall be developed in general accord with plan prepared by Raymond E.
Gaines, Architect, dated March 23, 1992, and revised April 29, 1992;
3. The exteriors of the buildings will be primarily of brick with earth tones
used for roofing and trim.
Agenda Item No. 12. Request from Jaycees for funding of Fireworks Display
on Fourth of July. Took no action on the request.
Agenda Item No. 13. Crozet Crossing Recapture Plan. The Board agreed with
th~ concept.
The Board requested that an Executive Summary from the County Executive's
of ice be provided on all agenda items in the future.
I
D~te:
P~ge 4
I
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
June 18, 1992
Memo To:
: Using the same concept as the Crozet Crossing project, it was requested
I
t~at the staff investigate the potential for
s~ip in a mobile home park in the urban area
c~n purchase a lot in the mobile home park.
I
I
I
I
I
I Agenda Item No. 14. Meadow Creek Parkway Update. Received. There will
I
b~ a Citizens Information Meeting on the Meadow Creek Parkway study, on June 24,
1~92, 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at Woodbrook Elementary School.
I
I
I
I
J_ Agenda Item No. 15. Appropriation: Gypsy Moth 1991/92 Grant. APPROVED.
A~ropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
a County, public/private partner-
where people who own a mobile home
I
I
.1 Agenda Item No. 16. Discussion: Draft letter to Westvaco.
Chfirman to sign the letter.
I
I
I
I
: Agenda Item No. 17. Proclamation re:
Bifrthday. AUTHORIZED the Chairman to sign
thr Headmaster at The Miller School.
AUTHORIZED the
Celebration of Samuel Miller's 200th
the Proclamation and forward it to
Agenda Item No. 18. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
ADOPTED the attached resolution authorizing the County Attorney to initiate
a quick take" condemnation proceeding on Tax Map 45, Parcel 100A, and Tax Map
45~ Parcel 100B, if an agreement has not been reached with the property owners
byl June 19, 1992.
I
I
I
I DIRECTED staff to work with the Albemarle County Fair Board and investigate
th~ location of, and purchase of, property for a permanent site for a County
fa "rground. Staff to take into consideration that a permanent facility would be
us~d by all County citizens and could also possibly be used for a farmer's
ma keto The location should be accessible to transportation and have utilities.
Th~ staff is to evaluate all potential sites, including Walnut Creek Park.
I
I
I Agenda Item No. 19. Adjourn. 10:10 p.m.
I
I
LEiI(:ec
I
I
Attachments
I
I
cc: Robert B. Brandenburger
Richard E. Huff, II
Roxanne White
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
Bruce Woodzell
George R. st. John
File
<~ I
w~ ~~
~~~i2~~
uJ
~a:a:a:a:a:
oel:
;1;~IOIO~""""~
I:>-alal m
~1-(7)(7) ~
z
~aai~aiai~
FOLiDDDD
w
(f)
=>
o
:J
m
=>
0...
g~
f2~~_ffi~
~ <t:
~o~lJ.J~
1l:J~ww
Om(f)(')O
~l{o~~
;v~~~o
'L LL <( 0 F-
o
W
Il:
~
U
<t:
W
m
~
?:
z
u
:>
~
12 w~~
~ ~C5~
~ o~l5 ~
~ F= <i.~(Jl
m ~~~~rrf
>-(f)lri15~>~
ffi(,)oll:~ -=>
0...~1:tl~ ~~
~:lo~WZ:J
Q j:! ~ ffi j =>8-
LLtnom&; 0
oo'wz: wQ
Z @ 0 ~ -! :"
QZOol-ll:-
l-f2o o<t:..
~~~~~C5~
<t:[~~iJ~(f)
o
oz
z:::>
~~
D~
0::0-
~ II
LLLL
_CL
iLlJ.:lJ.:lJ.:lJ.: lJ.:
vi ui uiui ui ui
to~Sl~ffi m
.t r<i~=lri a>
ro~lD<t,... 12
rD o<ir-: ~
- (\j~ V'
.-: ~ ~
~:;: ~ lJ
-~ - - 4
~ W:<(ro:o 0.:
\5 \;fw-w-w ~
~ ~663 (9
~~i{ji{jf{j cr
0:00::0::0:: 0
,
"
-=
~'
o
^
Cl>
>
:;
(/) 08
""g~~
o ~N if)
-' llE 8
c:~ J:
8,8 g' 83
<:E>
::Jc.![
mE~
-o~
~ii'i.2
o~ 0
.=~d
C\l
LL
o
I-
w
w
:c
(f)
~
o
w
S
)-~
~~
UL
w8
~~
WZ
rn~
-,::J
<.(0-
U)
0:
)-0
~~
:::>[5
00..
u:::>
wlll
-'lL
~o
LO
wo::
m<(
</2
Ul
~.\
I
U
<l:
t=
<C
, I,
o
1IJ
(f)
o
c..
o
a:
c..
o
z
~
"
Z
t-
(f)
X
UJ
....,
i!
I.
I:
"
I' I
II. I i I
1;- pil 'I
.~~ Hilll1nl
Jl: "ilhl5il
I' :!lll!l!
I ! ! 'j ~ ~! I;
~l' : f l\
d ~ llt..!l!
>1
~~
~y
~
~>
J~
~ifj
~6r.Jl
r,0j
cF-=< '
.
.
.
.
.
.
\:' O\t ~ ,
't q" t ,
~ ~ ~ ~ 1
~q~l'
~ ~ ~ ~ ;
~.~~i ;~
II ,_ 'I
~\ ~ ~ i
\' ~~ I
.,~ ~, !
ll.'\-..:.
\!~~!
UJ
>
a:
o
ell
::l
..J
(,)
H i
Hu
o \II
~ :
~ ~
~ ~
~ 1
t 1
~ j
/1,/
/ /~'~~ '\
'::.' \
"J~~
-, ~~ \
. '" ~',~,I :!\
rA,'-,-c'~~~\t' Ji:
.. I, "'.,;'! :~~' {yf \ { \ - .
~ \:~t7' .,
,,~\;
/.
.;#/
/
,]).,,,_.. .
"~~~ ....,',
u ..,,~~ .... j ~
,u.. .._
"'-''3OM .
-'T.>N~
"-"~_n'_'-:2-::~
\\
)
I I
\ I
I I I
I / I , i
I f
/
;
, / ,
/' , /
/
~-Vi"'fr"'Cv.i\T:i'
'"';r_t^1";lI
_._.~
\illNE~:
~~, ~~ ~ ~J
- -'--
-- - - -----
- ~ ~ _h.
-- - -,.--,
::.
-=-~-
~
- ~
,/"
c:_
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
C unty, Virginia, that the County Attorney is hereby authorized to
i itiate a "quick take" condemnation proceeding on the following
d scribed properties if the appropriate deeds have not been
a quired by June 19, 1992:
A. TMP 45-100A
Owner: John T. Green
B. TMP 45-100B
Owner: Sally Green
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w iting is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
Bard of Supervisors of Albemarle Count , Virginia, at a regular
meting held on June 17, 1992. ._~
of C nty Super
r ,.
D1STRl8UH':'D TO BOA2LllM",'Anr:R'.>
(;.: .- /.'.:) ~ ,;;~-
0("", , ~__"."..
County of Albemarle
I
<I '
I
)\i::)
"
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA T TLE:
United W y Administrative support Agreement
AGENDA DATE:
June 17, 1992
IT!:M NtiMBl!iu
'/'.,.;; c' 6-: / / ~, . . / )
SUBJECT ROPOSAL RE UEST:
Approval of an administrative support
agreemen between the County of Albemarle,
City of Charlottesville, State Department
of Socia Services and the Jefferson Area
United W y to utilize Federal matching fee
child-ca e funds for local child-care
scholars ips.
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:~
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
/?If
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGRO
As you m during the FY 92-93 budget worksessions, there were discussions underway
between nited Way and the Albemarle County Department of Social Services to determine if the
United W y Child-Care Scholarship Program could qualify as a conduit for matching federal
child ca e monies in order to provide additional child-care subsidies for Albemarle County
families Since that time, Albemarle County has worked, not only with the State Department
of Socia Services and United Way, but also with the City of Charlottesville to develop an
administ ative support agreement that leverages 100% matching dollars with County, City and
United W y funds.
The
points of the administrative agreement are as follows:
.
The County's allocation to United Way for FY-93 is ($23,450), the
City's allocation ($65,105) and United Way's own funds ($41,412) are
pooled together to create a total fund of $129,967. This will be
matched by $129,967 in Federal dollars (already approved by the
State Department of Social services) for a total of $259,934 for
fee-based child-care.
.
For administrative expenses, United Way is allowed up to 13%
($33,791) to cover additional staff and computerization: Albemarle
County Department of Social Services is allocated a 2% ($5,199)
administrative fee.
.
The United Way Child-Care Scholarship Program will administer the
program and distribute the funds to County and City families. Local
matching funds allocated for scholarships by the City and County
will be used for their respective families prior to using United Way
funds. The United Way funds will be allocated to City and County
residents based on need, with the goal of maintaining United Way's
historical allocation of 50%-50%.
.
As fiscal agent, Albemarle County agrees to appropriate the total
required Federal match of $129,907 in order to reimburse United Way
for expenses. If approved, an appropriation request will come
before the Board in July.
.
United Way will submit written reports and invoices monthly to the
Albemarle County Department of Social Services, based on a standard
computerized format agreed to by all parties.
Albemarl,e county Board of Supervisors
United Way Administrative Support Agreement
June 17, 1992
Page 2 OIf 2
. Child day-care services will be provided to income eligible families
at 60% of median income on a sliding fee scale basis. Families must
be employed at least 30 hours per week and must contribute toward
the cost of day-care.
I
.: Oversight and evaluation will be performed monthly by the United Way
Child Care Scholarship Committee Board and yearly by the County's
Program Review Committee and the City's Social Development
Commission.
I
The actulal agreement, which is quite lengthy, has been developed and agreed upon by County
staff frpm the Department of Social Services, County Executive's Office, and the Department
of Finanpe, as well as the City Manager's Office and the City Department of Social Services.
It is atailable for your review in its entirety in the County Executive's office, if so
desired.:
I
I
Please f~el free to call me if you have any questions prior to the meeting.
I
ACTION NjEEDED:
Authoriz~ the County Executive to sign the Administrative support Agreement.
I
I
I
92.084 :
I
I
!
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT is entered into by and between County of Albemarle
and City of Charlottesville, and Albemarle Dept. of Social Services
hereinafter referred to as the "Buyer", and The United Way-Thomas
Jefferson Area located at 413 East Market Street, Charlottesville;
Virginia. ,
hereinafter referred to as the "Vendor" which has established
itself as a qualified provider of services and meets all applicable
State and federal standards relative to the services herein.
WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social Services
is responsible for providing social services by authority of Title
63.1 of the Code of Virginia, both Buyer and Vendor do hereby agree
that this Agreement is conditional upon approval of the
Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social Services as indicated
by the signature of its Authorized Representative on this
Agreement. Subj ect to said approval and the other provisions
contained, herein, the terms of this Agreement shall commence on
the 1st day of July 1992, and terminate on the 30th day of
June, 1993.
In consideration of the total amount not to exceed two hundred
fifty nine thousand, nine hundred thirty four ($259,934)
the Vendor agrees to provide child care scholarships and
administration of same
as fully described hereinafter.
ARTICLE I - Standard provisions
A. This Agreement is subj ect to the provisions of relevant federal
and State laws and regulations.
B. The rights and obligations of the parties of this contract
shall be subject to and governed by the provisions herein-
after set forth. To the extent of any inconsistency between
this contract and any plan, specification, or other provisions
of collateral contractual agreements which are made part of
this contract by reference or otherwise, the provisions of
this contract shall control.
Page 2
C. The failure of Buyer to enforce at any time of the
provisions of this Agreement, or to exercise any option
which is herein provided, or to require at any time performance
by the Vendor of any of the provisions hereof, shall in no
way affect the validity of this Agreement or any part thereof,
or the right of the Buyer to thereafter enforce each and every
provision. All remedies offered in this Agreement shall be
and construed as cumulative, that is, in addition to every
other remedy provided herein or by law. If any part, term, or
provision of this Agreement is held by a court to be illegal
or in conflict with any law of the United States or the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the validity of the remaining
portions or provisions shall be construed and enforced as if
the Agreement did not contain the particular part, term, or
provision held to be invalid.
D. Any documents referred to in this Agreement, but not attached
hereto, are incorporated by reference as part of this
Agreement. No other understandings, oral or written, are
deemed to exist or to bind any of the parties hereto. Any
alteration, variation, modification, or waiver of any provision
of this Agreement shall only be valid when it has been reduced
to writing, duly signed by the Authorized Representative of the
Buyer and Authorized Representative of the Vendor, approved and
signed by the Authorized Representative of the Commonwealth of
Virginia Department of Social Services and attached to this
Agreement.
E. The Vendor shall not enter into subcontracts or assignments for
any of the services approved under this Agreement without
obtaining prior written approval from the Buyer and the
Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social Services which
shall be indicated by and attached to this Agreement. Such
subcontract or assignments shall be subject to the
requirements, conditions, and provisions as the Buyer may
deem necessary. The Vendor is responsible for the performance
of.. its subcontractors. However, prior written approval shall
not be required for the purchase by the Vendor of articles,
supplies, and equipment which are incidental but necessary for
the performance of the work required under this Agreement.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as authority for
either party to make commitments which will bind the other
party beyond the description of services (Article II)
contained herein.
F. The Vendor further guarantees that any costs incurred pursuant
to this Agreement shall not be included or allocated as a cost
of any other federal, State, or locally financed program in
either the current or prior period.
Page 3
G. The Vendor and any subcontractor shall maintain an accounting
system and supporting records adequate to assure that claims
for funds are in accordance with applicable State and federal
requirements. Such supporting records shall reflect all
direct and indirect costs of any nature expended in the
performance of this Agreement and all income from any source.
H. The Vendor agrees to retain all books, records, and 'other
documents relative to this Agreement for five (5) years after
final payment, unless necessary for an unresolved federal or
state audit. The Buyer, its authorized agents, and/or federal
auditors shall have full access to and the right to examine any
of said materials during said period. In the event of an audit
exception due to the Vendor's fault, the Vendor shall provide
full restitution of any funds improperly expended.
I. The Vendor shall permit representatives authorized by the Buyer
to conduct reviews of its operations including, but not limited
to examinations of facilities and records and meetings with any
staff directly or indirectly involved in the operations
relevant to this Agreement. Such reviews may occur as often as
deemed necessary by the Buyer and may be unannounced.
J. Any information obtained by the Vendor concerning applicants
and clients pursuant to this Agreement shall be treated as
confidential. Use and/or disclosure of such information by
the Vendor shall be limited to purposes directly connected
with the Vendor's responsibility under this Agreement.
It is further agreed by both parties that this information
shall be safeguarded in accordance with the provisions of
Title 63.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, and
any other relevant provisions of State and federal law.
K. No fees shall be imposed by the Vendor other than those
set by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social
Services as described in the Commonwealth of Virginia
Comprehensive Annual Plan for Social Services.
L. Neither the Vendor nor any subcontractor shall discriminate
against employees or applicants for employment, or deny any
individual any service or other benefit provided under this
Agreement because of age, race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin. Additionally, the Vendor and all
subcontractors shall comply with all requirements of the
National Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, and with
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and any
amendments, thereto.
, ,
Page 4
M. The Vendor does hereby agree to indemify and hold harmless
the Buyer from any and all claims for damages, either in law
or in equity, directly or indirectly arising out of or by
virtue of the actions and inactions of the Vendor or its
agents, servants, or employees in connection with this
Agreement. Neither the Vendor, its/his/her employees,
assignees or subcontractors shall be deemed employees
of the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social
Services or of the Buyer while performing under this
Agreement. In addition, United Way will maintain
comprehensive General Liability Insurance of at least
$1,000,000 throughout the contract year.
N. Neither party hereto shall be held responsible for
delay or failure to perform hereunder when such delay
or failure is due to acts of God, flood, severe weather,
fire, epidemic, strikes, the pUblic enemy, legal acts of
the public authorities, or delays or defaults of public
carriers, which cannot be reasonably forecast or provided
against.
o. If a dispute arises concerning the prov~s~on of services
under the terms of the Agreement which is not settled by
negotiations, the Vendor shall receive a written decision
from the Authorized Representative of the Buyer. The
decision of the Authorized Representative of the Buyer shall
be final unless within thirty (30) calendar days of receiving
the decision, the Vendor appeals to the Commonwealth of
Virginia Department of Social Services for review of the
Buyer's findings. This provision shall not preclude the
Vendor from exercising any rights under law for failure
of the Buyer to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
P. The Buyer may terminate-this Agreement upon 30 days written
notice to the other party. Upon this termination for
convenience, the Vendor shall be paid only for "those
additional fees and expenses incurred between notification
of termination and the effective date of termination that
are necessary for curtailment of its/his/her work under this
Agreement. In the event of breach by the Vendor of this
Agreement, the Buyer shall have the right, immediately, to
rescind, revoke or terminate the Agreement. In the
alternative the Buyer may given written notice to the
Vendor specifying the manner in which the Agreement has
been breached. If a notice of breach is given and the
Vendor has not substantially corrected the breach within
15 days of receipt of the written notice, the Buyer shall
have the right to terminate this Agreement. In the event
recision, revocation or termination, all documents and
other materials related to the performance of this
Page S
Agreement 3hall become the property of the Buyer.
Upon written notice of default to the Vendor, the
the Buyer may revise the whole or any part of the
Agreement and recollect from the Vendor any funds
paid by the Buyer which are related to the Vendor's
failure to comply.
Q. Any reports, studies, photographs, negatives, or other
documents prepared by the Vendor in the performance of its
obligations under this contract shall be the exclusive
property of the Buyer' and all such materials shall be
remitted to the Buyer by the Vendor upon completion,
termination or cancellation of this contract. The Vendor
shall not use, willingly allow or cause to have such materials
used for any purpose other than performance of the Vendor's
obligations under this contract without the prior written
consent of the Buyer.
R. Equipment purchased under the terms of this Agreement shall be
limited to equipment indicated in the attached budget.
No depreciation or use charges on equipment purchased
under this contract shall be claimed on this or any future
contract with the Commonwealth of Virginia or any of its
agents.
All required equipment will be purchased and retained by
United Way within the 15% administrative allocation.
S. In the event the Buyer becomes unable to honor this Agreement
for causes beyond the Buyerls reasonable control, including
but not limited to failure to receive promised revenue from
federal, state or local governmental sources or donor default
in providing matching funds, the Buyer may terminate or modify
this Agreement as necessary to avoid delivery of service for
which the Buyer cannot make payment. The Buyer shall~ upon
cognizance of any donor default, notify the Vendor immediately.
ARTICLE II - Description of Services
The Vendor shall provide the services in a time frame, manner and
at locations described in detail below:
See Attachment A
Page 6
ARTICLE III - Reports
A. The Vendor shall produce the following reports of activities
which shall progress in the performance of services:
See Attachment B for Performance Reports
Fiscal and Statistical Reports
The formats of all reports shall adhere to the standard format
in the software package designed for reporting and shall include
warrant registers with client name, address, number of children,
type of care received, and amount of payment.
B. The Vendor shall immediately submit a written report to
the Buyer indicating significant deviations from
anticipated and/or problems associated with the
delivery of services as agreed to by the Buyer and
Vendor. Such report shall identify the deviations
and/or problems, whether anticipated or actual,
the effects of such on the performance under this
Agreement, and a proposed plan for resolution.
C. The Vendor agrees to provide any additional reports
that the Buyer may request by written notice to the
Vendor.
ARTICLE IV
COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. Cost reimbursable agreement
All invoices and purchase orders used shall be approved by the
Virginia Department of Social Services and used for each client.
All expenditures shall be documented and invoiced pursuant to the
approved line item budget. (Attachment D)
Line item budget is attached. Deviations of more than 10% of
the approved line item must be reported immediately to Albemarle
Department of Social Services.
If any of the Buyer's funds remain unexpended or unencumbered
at the end of the contract year, the funds must be returned to
Buyer unless specifically approve4 for carry.over.
Page 7
B. All revenue from the sale of products derived through
activities performed pursuant to this Agreement shall
be reported to the Buyer and shall be applied as an
adjustment to defray costs for the Buyer.
C. The invoice period shall be monthly. The Vendor shall
invoice the Buyer each invoice period on forms supplied
by the Buyer, and shall submit an invoice showing no services
delivered if that is the case in any invoice period. The
Buyer shall not be obligated to pay for services when the
Vendor fails to submit an invoice for such services within
forty-five (45) calendar days after the close of the invoice
period. in which services were delivered. Invoices which are
correct and are received by the Buyer within 30 calendar days
after the close of the invoice period shall be processed and
paid no later than ~ calendar days 'after the close of the
invoice period. Those invoices received later shall be
processed and paid with the next invoices.
D. If the Vendor fails to correctly provide any services and/or
reports as specified in this Agreement, and in the time period
specified herein, the Buyer may withhold payment of invoices
until said services and/or reports are provided. All services
provided by the Vendor pursuant to this contract shall be
performed to the satisfaction of the Buyer, and in accord with
applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules
and regulations. The Vendor shall not receive payment for
work found by the Buyer, in consultation with the Vendor, to be
unsatisfactory, or performed in violation of federal, state or
local laws, ordinances, rule or regulation.
E. If the Vendor is a donor which exercises the option to submit
donations with invoices and subsequently fails to submit the
correct donation with any invoice, it shall not have that
invoice paid until the next invoice period following the
submission of the correct donation.
F. Invoices are to be submitted to the Buyer at the following
address:
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA
22902
ATTACHMENT A
ARTICLE II
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES
Children to be served
Child day care services shall be provided to income eligible
families at 60% of the median income with children who need day
care and who are under age 13, or children up to 18 years of age if
they are physically or mentally incapable of caring for themselves
or subject to court supervision. Day care shall not be purchased
for children who are eligible to attend kindergarten or for older
children during that portion of a day when appropriate public
education is available unless there are reasons the children must
be out of school.
Eligibility Criteria
Child day care subsidy for income eligible parents shall be
made available on a sliding fee scale basis. Only income, not
resources, is to be counted. Income must be verified and the
client is expected to assist. The payment schedule and income
guidelines are attached. (Attachment A1)
There shall be no allowances made for sex, race, religion or
national origin in the selection or serving process of any
provider, nor of the Scholarship Program itself.
Applicant children shall meet eligibility requirements set
forth by the Program, including residency, age and related
guidelines.
Definition of services
The Child Day Care Scholarship Program shall provide child
care subsidies to income eligible clients who are employed full
time, i.e., 30 hours or more per week and who would otherwise be at
risk of becoming eligible for AFDC. The subsidy shall be made
available on a sliding fee scale basis.' Policy and procedures for
the determination of .family composition and gross monthly income
are attached. All participating parents will contribute toward the
cost of care.
Regulation of Providers
Clients may choose among the three major types of child day
care: child day care centers, family day care homes, and in-home
child day care providers. Providers must be regulated except
individuals providing care solely to members of the individual's
family. Providers shall afford parents unlimited access to their
children during normal hours of provider operation and whenever
children are in the care of the provider.
Attachment A
Page 2
Case management process
The family need for child day care shall be assessed at the
time of application to Vendor. Eligibility will be determined and
verified and appropriate referrals made to community agencies if
necessary to assist the client with appropriate child care
arrangements. To assist in selecting a provider, the worker should
encourage the parent to consider the individual developmental needs
of the child, ability of the provider to meet the needs of the
family, proximity of the provider to the child's residence or
school, proximity of the provider to parent's residence or
employment site, travel time of the parent/child to the provider's
location, and cost of care.
The worker shall review at least annually, and whenever
changes are reported, the household composition and monthly gross
income to ensure on-going eligibility or to make adjustments to a
parent's fee. Acceptable verification may be a copy of the
earnings check, check stubs or a written statement from the
parent's employer(s) or the source of the parent's income.
Additionally, at least an annual review of the client's
circumstances must be done.
Waiting List
The waiting list shall be maintained by date of request for
service and shall be first come first served.
Evaluatiop
Oversight and evaluation will be performed monthly by the
United Way Child Care Scholarship Committee and once yearly through
the City of Charlottesville Social Development Commission and the
County of Albemarle Program Review Committee. The efficient and
effective distribution of funds is the standard of evaluation.
Staff involved in service delivery
See attachment C & Cl.
Equipment and Resources
Purchase of one mircrocomputer and related softw~re for
financial reports and invoice control.
Purchase of office furniture and, related equipment.
Attachment A
Page 3
3pecial provisions
a. The fOllowing entities will allocate $129,967" which will
constitute the required local match for the federal fee system
child care funds of $129,967, thus allowing for a total of $259,934
for the Child Care SCholarship Program:
County of Albemarle
City of Charlottesville
United Way
- $23,450
- $65,105
- $41,412
Out of this total amount of $259,934, up to 15% of the
allocation or $38,990 will be used for the administration of the
program by the United Way Scholarship Program (13% or $33,791) and
Albemarle Department of Social.Services (2% or $5,199).
b. Local and matching funds allocated for sCholarships by the
City of Charlottesville and the County of Albemarle shall be used
solely for their respective families and shall be used prior to the
use of United Way funds. The United Way allocation will constitute
a pool of funds for Charlottesville and Albemarle residents to be
drawn upon based on need, with the goal of maintaining historical
allocation of 50%-50%.
c. Paragraph 5 not withstanding, should federal funds not be
available to cover encumbered funds for the month of June 1993, and
the United Way pool is already expended, the, City of
Charlottesville, County of Albemarle and United Way each agree to
assume the match the liability for the families currently being
served with their respective shares or contributions.
d. As fiscal agent, the County of Albemarle agrees to
appropriate the total required federal match of $129,967 in order
to reimburse United Way for expenses.
e. The City and County agree to advance the first two
quarterly payments at the start of the fiscal year.
It IN
FAMILY
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ATTACHMENT Al
UNITED WAY CHILD CARE SCHOLARSHIPS
APPROVED PAYMENT SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE 7/1/91
GROSS ANNUAL FULL-TIME WEEKLY BEFORE/AFTER SCHOOL
INCOME SCHOLARSHIP AMT. SCHOLARSHIP AMOUNTS
$ 0-11,580 $41.00 $ 19.00
11,581-14,484 32.00 18.00
14,485-18,396 25.00 17.00
0-14,304 41. 00 19.00
14,105-17,892 32.00 18.00
17,393-22,728 25.00 17.00
0-17,040 41.00 19.00
17,041-21,288 32.00 18.00
21,289-27,060 25.00 17.00
0-19,764 . 41. 00 19.00
19,765-24,696 32.00 18.00
24,697-31,380 25.00 17.00
0-22,488 41.00 19.00
22,489-28,104 32.00 18.00
28,105-35,712 25.00 17.00
0-22,992 41.00 19.00
22,993-28,752 32.00 18.00
28,753-36,528 25.00 17.00
0-23,508 41. 00 19.00
23,509-29,388 32 . 00 18.00
29,389-37,332 25.00 17.00
Infant Stipend: For children under the age of two, add $20 per week to any scholarship
amount for which the child is e1i~ib1e.
Scho1alship amounts represent maximum amounts which may be paid in each category, and
are incexed to prevailing rates in approved provider's settings. Scholarships can
cover tp to 70% of applicable child care costs in a given child care setting.
ATTACHMENT B
~1ARCH 1992
UtITED WAY CHILD CARE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM STATISTICAL REPORT
APPL
RECID
SCHOLARSHIPS DE~IED ACTIVE TERMIN WAIT
AWARDED APPLIC CHILDR LIST
PRO' IDER
MO YTD
---------------------------------------------------------------
MO YTD
NEW YTD
MO YTD
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bar ett
1
1
5
1
- . -
---------------------------------------------------------------
1
Gre ne
2
---------------------------------------------------------------
11
1
Trinity
2
2
Wes minster
1 .
---------------------------------------------------------------
2
2
5
--- ---------------------------------------------------------------
YMC~
3
Other Centers
---------------_._-------~--------------------------------------
3
13
Hom~s
11
--- ---------------------------------------------------------------
o
7
1 1
34
--- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Albern. Teens
1
4
5
1
Other
--- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Sum~er Only
--- ---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
TOT I\L : 8 25 0 5 1 3 78 8 74
---~---------------------------------------------------------------
72 awards carried over from 1991
Wai~ing List By Locale:
this mo.
21
42
4
4
1
1
1
Alb!=marle
Cha....lottesville
LoulLsa
Fluv-anna
Gre!=ne
Nel~on
Buckingham
(prior mo.)
(17)
(38)
4
4
1
1
1
Previous month active:
This month awarded:
This month terminated:
78
o
o
THIS MONTH ACTIVE
78
Dur~ng the month of March there were 29 requests for information,
froln which 15 applications were distributed. 8 applica tions were
rec~ived:
5 eligible and on the waiting list
2 waiting for more information
1 denied (over--
income)
ATTACHMENT B
UNITED WAY CHILD CARE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
MONTHLY FISCAL REPORT
March 1992
UN TED WAY (Fiscal year January 1 - December 31, 1992)
Allocation
Designations (estimated)
Scholarships, spent
Scholarships, encumbered
* Admin., spent, encumbered
Total spent, encumbered
Unencumbered balance
Mollie Michie Fund balance
$82,824.00
$15,809.00
49,101.00
8,282.00
$73,192.00
$ 9,632.00
CI Y OF CHARLOTTESVILLE (July 1, 1991 - June 30, 1992)
1,535.43
Allocation
Scholarships, spent
Scholarships, encumbered
* Admin., spent, encumbered
Total spent, encumbered
Unencumbered balance
$62,578.00
$41,630.00
13,026.00
6,257.00
$60,913.00
$ 1,665.00
AL EMARLE COUNTY (July 1, 1991 - June 30, 1992)
Allocation
Scholarships, spent
Scholarships, encumbered
Admin., spent, encumbered
Total spent, encumbered
Unencumbered balance
Allocation, Teens
Scholarships, spent
Teens, encumbered
* Admin., spent, encumbered
Total spent, encumbered
Unencumbered balance
* dministrative expenses breakdown
Administrative Allocation
United Way
Charlottesville
Albemarle
Spent to date
$20,250.00
$15,459.00
2,151.00
2,025.00
$19,635.00
$
615.00
$10,000.00
$ 4,45].00
3,305.00
1,000.00
$ 8,763.00
$ 1,238.00
$ 8,282.00
6,257.00
3,025.00
$14,004.00
.
EDUCA ION:
RESUME
Jewel E. King
763-F Mountainwood
Qlarlottesville, VA
(804) 296-9892
ATTACHMENT C
Rd.
22901
Florida International University, Miami, FL - MSW Degree, 1988
Graduate Internship - NW Dade Community Mental Health Center
Eastern Mennonite College, Harrisonburg, VA - BSW Degree, 1980
Graduated Cum Laude
Spanish (fluent)
HISTORY
I
Barr- ot~ Productions
CharI ttesville, VA
July 990 - September 1991
1986 - January 1987
ital
- July 1986
Etc.
- Sept. 1983
Chris Services
Miami and Homes tead, F1..
Decem r 1981 - Aug. 1982
Octo r 1980 - Aug. 1981
ia (Residential)
City, MD
s of 1980, 1979
EMC
Office Manager -
Wrote and typed (PWP) promotional materials
Public relations, review of AV materials
Physician Services Coordinator -
Wrote and typed physicians psychiatric reports
Assisted as needed with admissions, staffings, etc.
Intake Counselor/Mental Health Counselor -
Counseling, intake, assessment, data entry
Group Therapy Coordinator -
Documented group therapy sessions -written reports
Editing, proofreading, typing
Interpreted family therapy sessions (Eng./Span.)
Physicians' liaison, verified insurance coverage
Admissions Coordinator -
Assessment, counseling, coordinating intake process
Determined patient financial status, data entry
Independent Contractor -
Public relations, sales, inventory, bookkeeping
Produced advertising and fund-raising materials
Social Worker and Caseworker -
Acculturation services, counseling, referral
Job development, linnigration services, ESL referral
Community food/clothing services, record keeping
Program Director -
Supervised eight staff persons, and volunteers
Coordinated counseling, hotline service, activities
Involved in outreach and compiling resource book
Managing Assistant -
Assisted with typing, filing, bookkeeping
Operated AV equipment, reviewed AV materials
for various community and church organizations
Piano tuning and guitar instruction
-l
.
I
I
I
DATf:
JOBI TITLE:
I
REP~RT TO:
OBJfCTIVE:
I
I
I
Fl~FTION:
ATTACHMENT C
September. 1991
Program Coordinator
Child Care Scholarship Program
(
I
Administer the Child Care Scholarship program under the
policies as established by the Child Care Committee.
Chief Professional Officer
The incumbent is the chief operations person for the
the program. Specific duties include but not limited to:
Receive and process applications including distribution,
evaluation and approval or denial of scholarships.
authorize payments to approved providers. maintain a waiting
list of eligible children for the program, prepare reports,
financial and statistical, for the committee, serve as
secretary to the committee. Do all tasks. related to the
administration of the program and such other duties that
will be consistent with the reporting and administration of
the program and the staffing of the committee as assigned
by the CPO.
SP~CIFICATIONS: A Bachelors Degree. experience preferably in a social
service, educational or non-profit environment involving
children.
LINE ITEM BUDGET
ATTACHMENT DO
~
~
United Way
Thomas Jefferson Area
413 E. Market Street
P.o. Box 139
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(804) 972-1701
.
Administrative Expenditures
Salaries
Director
Clerical Assistant
Payroll Taxes
$17,500
11,250
2,150
Computer
2,891
Total
$33,791
.
.
~N WITl ESS WFEEEOF, the pa ::tJ..es hereto have e;-::ecuted ;-l.l1d sc.>al€:l -:::~l ~::;
Agr>:,eme )t. .
By
Sl~~ gf3~~
purchasing Agent
Co nty of en
," '.
By
--
~~
.rr
OF FUNDS:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
"'-~/f~ .
Char~tesvill~ty Attorney
CERTIFIED AS TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS:
~
Attorney
~ f.~tY
City of Charlottesville
Department of Finance
This A reement is effective only with approval of an Authorized
Represe tative of the Commonwealth of V~rginia Department of Social Services
as in4i bY~~he Bignature below:
.r
Authorized Representative of
Commonwealth of Virginia
Department of Social Services
. . ')
.,
~f II :
t .
Date
Title
,.
....vrf"'1 '....q.'r Arr~.,"'\C!
1.
THIS DEED, taxed pursuant to virginia Code section 58.1-
811.A.3, made this 13th day of July, 1992, by and between PRESTON
o. TALLINGS, unremarried widower, Grantor, and the COUNTY OF
ALB VIRGINIA, Grantee, and O'NEILL REALTY AND MORTGAGE
COR ORATION, Noteholder, and ORBIN F. CARTER, TRUSTEE, additional
Gra
WIT N E SSE T H :
For and in consideration of FIFTEEN THOUSAND AND NO/100
DOL S ($15,000.00) cash in hand paid, the receipt of which is
her by acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL
and CONVEY, with GENERAL WARRANTY AND ENGLISH COVENANTS OF TITLE,
unt the Grantee, County of Albemarle, Virginia, in fee simple, the
fol owing described real property, to-wit:
All that certain lot or parcel of land containing 20,675.99
squ re feet, and shown as Residue "A" on plat of Thomas B. Lincoln,
Lan Surveyor, Inc., dated January 3, 1992, revised February 22,
199 entitled "Plat showing Right-of-Way Hereby Dedicated For
Pub ic Use Also showing A Drainage Easement Hereby Dedicated To
Pub ic Use A Portion of the Property Belonging to Preston o.
Sta lings As Recorded In Deed Book 710 Page 182 Located on Berkmar
Dri e Extended", a copy of which is attached hereto. Reference is
mad to this plat for a more particular description of the land
con eyed herein.
This parcel of land is a portion of the property conveyed to
the Grantor by deed of Greenfield Mobile Homes Park, Inc., a
Vir inia corporation, dated February 3, 1981 and recorded in the
Cle k's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia,
.
~ 0
.. o.r.
oVl
;;:
o
~
~
o
w
o
>-
CD
w
E5
I W
(J)
~ =>
3= u
Ll.. :J
o CD
I ::>
~ ~
0: [2
~
W ~
(J) i3
=> Z
U 0
:J cd
~ CD
a.. >-
~ffi~
8@::J
ti a.. r:!
uu.Vl
000,
W Z
o 0
>- - ~
fE ~ ~
ffi lr 0::
I <t a..
<t~
e>a5
Z(J)
3~
o
V5~
o -
~ ~
<t 0
~
~
Z
o
:>
w
Z
:J
~
w l2 ~~
=> = ~Z
o ~ -'_
~;f M5
-ffi
,.,; @ 8 -~
N 8 I"-
o + to
tb:B
co
~
w~~
~if)~
t; 0 ('J~
o G) -J cng
F= <t ~ ~a::
R ~ ~ ~ ~~
(rl ~ !!] ~ ~8({)
oo::~ ~::>_
ttJ ~ :E ~ ~~
o ::.:: W Z -"a::
zO::-J~
; ~ ~ ts -0
wzVl 0
@o~~L-;
oab~-
~~~~~
~9u<!(J)
to
(Jl
(Jl
gj
o
oz
z:::>
3~
u.
~~
Ii II
LLLL
-00.;
co
Q
I
\ '{j I
-~ '~I"- \ ~ i
I :~ -~~--~
~"' ~~ L"" ~~ ~ \\
<t (J) _~~,
~ ~ 8 I '~ Y
<t!Q 8 ~ 1 ~ /
D::(o;j 8' + J. ~
o gSS ~S3 ~ b /
-0 \ + ~ ~ So ~ I ,/
N ~ r-
~ ': ~~-:: Ii I'
:J + ~ I toe
to r-I!) a
co ~ ~ u.; .:::5
~!]~~u- 0,'
.:is e6~ ()
<'.1'7 1-1 S
to W
g ~
rbl
~/
u.;
~w
~:~
tiN
z~
8z
\
"
~
o
LLLLLLlJ.:lJ.: u:
Clivivivivi vi
ro~g::BlR m
.tr<'i~=:B ai
ro2tO~1"- ~
ai c:5 <i r: .;;
- N~ ~
z
>-0
l:;!2
d~
u~
w8
~~
wZ
~S
<to.;
~ ~ m
~~ =- \,:!
.....(J). - - 4
~ W:<(m:u a:
15~LUw-w-W .:::J
I :::>:::>:::> Z
r- 000 Ci
~ ~f3f3iil ii:
a::oa::a::a:: 0
u
c:
5"
>-
Gl
>
:;
<1)08
~"'eg,
O~N iO
~~~ 8
o c~ (Jl
uC:: - co
C:E>
::; c.!E."
....... -=
a:l.E~
McE
oE.r.:Q
on -
0"": .,g
~~u
If')
u.
o
I-
W
W
I
(J)
1.Ll
S
(f)
a::
)-0
~~
z>
5[5
u~
w(f)
~15
::;:0
wa::
mg
<1rn
. .
~~~~~B~~~~~2~~~~~~~~
~Q@Q~~~~~~~~~~~8~~S~
~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ,w ~ ~ ~ _~ w _w w _~ ,~ ~ w _~ _~ ~
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~f~~~~~~
~~w~~~~~~~~N~~~~~bN~~
6 ~~~~~$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o ~~~z~~~zzzzz~z~zzzzz
~N~~ ro a-N~~~0~~~2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-g
~z~
f--
me5~O-
o~~
,~03S
~wwg
O-z~
:::!;IdJm
f-~OO
o
w
t!
u
o
w
o
~
w
a::
w
I W
~~~
~3=u
~~~
~~~
<!~
~
(.!)W
ZC/l
~L5
~ ~
o ~
~ri
<! 0
~~
0-'
-t:;
~N
ffio.;
2z
,f-N
~Il::a
~1't=
0- . .
;:;;<...lm
f-oo
~
W (.!)
C/l Z
::J 13
u z 0
9 r::
:::i W
~~ ~
~li::~o
o~ZfH
W ~ :3 0
5a.~~
o~ 0
Wz(j~
00 a::
~~~@
l1! ~ [2 a::
~<!g:~
gj ~
NO- z(
~~ i~
Wo.; 0.;0.;
~~N ~~
~crg tn<f
~<.:iai aiai
FOO c:iei
~
w~~
~a1~
c 15 C\J >-
G:l mil::
<i g ~:3
W - ~ a::'
> a:: (.!) rrit:3
gs ~ Q; )-LL
(.!) > ~6J
a:: <! ~::J ~
~ ~ )- ~>
~ W !z -,ll:!
a::-.J::J
W-.JO-
1D5UO
ZC/l 0
wW
o ~ -l ="
~b~-::-
8~a5~
gu~C/l
~~ ~
0-. 5!1~
*2 i7)~
a::
~~o.; 0.;0.;
.a::N ~<t
~1'tg t:<F
~cjai aim
f-OO eiei
~
(]l
(]l
W
0,
20
ViSa::
f::a::0-
zO ~
woa::
20W
GJ<(Z
~z6
[3';0
ozw
z<{z
<(f-~
?i z~
:s:~w
.zo
~aZ
.0::>
f-
IWW .
o WIffJ ""-
ira::f-w
LLLLf-
wwo~
~Iw::>
LLf-Q;g:
o~~a
w_wz
o~o<(
~~~1Q
CJ'zf-o
>~II"-
ZOf-!!:!
aI-a::
o~3:O-
~-
~~
0-'
-I"-
~@
~ffio-
~i'=N
~~g
0- . a:l
~gei
-~ -lB
.0
~ ~
~_ u=
-o'fR '<j.3
1":-92 ~ t3
~9,., N!L
,,~ II (1)
}-" }- II
-<J _ -<J
-tn - ~ w
fR:~ i1l:~
;:! ,,~ "-
g <{.~ <{!l3
~ -8~ -8~
~ ~~ ~~
o Q:~ Q:~
....:. N
o 0
v
c:
~
0'
"'-
CD
>
:;
en -
-o'c~8
c: _ N
o ON 8-
-'~.Q
c: -s .E
sJl.?'/B
C:E>
~ c..51'
. ~-==
cc It) ~
.... -;:; CD
o~:g
E ,..., -::
0" 0
~.....,...:::.
....-u
~~
0-'
It:;
~N
a::
~~o.;
'jN
~ 0
~ =
~0a:i
f-OO
120-
6J~
OLL
~a
>-tr
ffi<t
a:: 0-
W
I<t
~~
_ W
:<t~
WO
::>~ .
~ 90'8;
o ffJzJ,
z a::<t~
12
00-
~~
~~
>-f-
CD a::
w<{
ffiO-
I<{
~~
_ W
~o~
wW .
BCD!!!
enOl
~~~
~
w
a::
0:
t;5
z
o
en
U)
~
:::!;
o
u
>-
;:;;
r<1
LL
o
C\J
G:i
W
I
C/l
,.
V
<:
~
0'
>..
.,
>
~
II) 0 8
-g'1'~
C ON ~
-' ~..Q -
c-S.E
(5 O!!' 0>
~~> 00
~t~
. '--=
~~~
Ciii"(5
g~5
-.=~t5
5'
~ -~12
~~t5~
~~2<r
uO::(/)~
~~~~
F .tI;~
~~offi
W~~I
~o~~
;;i (/)8~0
~ ~~~~ '
~ g~~~~
-ffi' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~~f!=~1t
~
~~
~
-1 -1
<.:> i':! <.:> ~ 5' ~ ~
2 ~ 2 ~ ~ -~g
I- 5; W82 0 ,
~ :;: :;: ~6~~ ~
X W X W ~
W 2 W 2 ~~ts~
LL LL LL LL LL LL
(/j(/) (/) (/) (/j (/) ~ ~~ r<'l
~ffi ~ r;:~ ~ lL
-' l!i "" OOtO ~ F .!Ii ~ 0
(() "" r0 ~~~ ~ r<'l
(() (() r0 g: ~ 00.
csio r---"' --=-"" ~ W~ :r: ~I (/) t--
r0N lO ~~~~ ,~ ~ W W
N" N II II II 0:: W
II: " c-rU N 0:: :r
;j; _<t <t l()..: ':!2 ! (/)2 0 II) i:S (f)
- 0> ~~ ~ ~
'W I , I ~I
~W lO 2
lO:J lO 5<t ~82~~ .~~ 0
<to <t ~ <n
o..<n a.. 0..- a..
~!fJ ~ ~~~~~ r LL\5 (/)
~~ ~ ~
1-0:: (/) i7l~~~u ~ !I 0>- ~
+ + -ffi WI- g
(/) S:Ja:l 1-2
~ ~~f!=~1t ~ i':!15 >-
0 r,j)U ~
C\J
~ r0
ot> 0>
f:2 w ~ 0:: 0>
W0 ~ztn ~
o ~ ~ a: ~ 0 C\J>-
~ :s ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~!
u CD W ~ W a:: ~ -00
~ ir CD 8 ~ ~ ~ r<'l~
o 0 ~ (f) CD 0 !l2 ;; ~o
~ t-- f-O- ffi ~~ 0 ~ ~ -::>~
W zoo..- ::E::E:>-~>
ffi <t ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ _J ~
0:r~0~UlL(f)0~-U8
~ !~>:: ::> ~ <t 0 0 >
~ w W . W Z ~ W -
~ ~o ozOO~OO~-l=_"
~baS:J:t5 g~ a::
(f)~it(f)~:>-~~u~ <t
5~a::~~~~~~5~~~
0..a::f2<to:r<tlt<t9u<t(f)
~I i ~
iI \5
>-1 ~ >-
0:: wI-
~ ~~
o r'0
2 r,j)U
N
lO
~
~
'"
(/)
W
0::
0::
i:S
2
o
<n
r,j)
~
~
o
U
>-
:E
Edward H. Bai . Jr
Samuel Mille
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
Scottsvtlle
Davld P Bowe man
Charlottes viii
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y H mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
June 18, 1992
Mr. George R. St. John
Co nty Attorney
416 Park Street
C arlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Mr. St. John:
At its meeting on June 17th, the Board authorized you to
ercise an Option Agreement to purchase 20,675.99 square feet of
designated as "Residue A" on the attached plat.
The Board also adopted the attached resolution authorizing
to initiate a "quick take" condemnation proceeding on Tax Map
Parcel 100A, and Tax Map 45, Parcel 100B, if an agreement is
reached with the owners by June 19, 1992.
~.?~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
L :ec
Attachments (2)
cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Robert B. Brandenburger
Jo Higgins
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
c~unty, Virginia, that the County Attorney is hereby authorized to
i~itiate a "quick take" condemnation proceeding on the following
d scribed properties if the appropriate deeds have not been
a quired by June 19, 1992:
i
I
i
A.
TMP 45~100A
Owner: John T. Green
B. TMP 45-100B
Owner: Sally Green
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w~iting is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
Bqard of Supervisors of Albemarle Count , Virginia, at a regular
m~eting held on June 17, 1992. ..~
, of C nty Super
~
~
z
o
:>
-=
~.
o
>-.
CD
>-
:i
V) 0 8
-g:?~
o IZN i{)
~~~ 8
8.8 g> &3
CE>
::;E.!!'
..~-=
a;)~~
"0"
~iii]
D~ 5
;::~6
C\.I
1.1...
o
w
w
:r:
(/)
~
\
"
~
o
w
~
o
W
Ii:
~
(,)
<t:
W
m
w
(/)
:J
(,)
:J
m
:J
a...
g ~
<t: 2J 0
~t!> l=!
=:l ~ (/) <!
(,)3=L;)~
:Jo w
~~~o
a...O~w
~~~m
l.1...<t:012
~ w~~
~ ~aJ~
~ O~15 ~
d fC </.~0
m ~~~~r0
~(/) ~5~~
~~~~~~~
~::1o~WZJ
a...c<l:ZIi:-.J:J
1.1...~-~d8-
oo8z&; 8
z ~o~~L-;;-
Qzool-li:-
Er: f2 (,) ~ 0 <t: ,.
~~~~~~~
u.; u.; u:u.; u.; u.;
If) If) If)lf) If) If)
ro~8l~~ m
.; r<i.o....:~ <Ii
ooJ\HD_~_t-_ 12_
ro o<tt-
- C\J<t C1l If)
Z n::
.., >-Q ~~
0 f-' g u:J ~~
oz =>~
z=> 00-
31:2 ~~.=: ~ u:::'" u=>
.u.. :d~}: <lro\> a.: w8 w(/)
3~ ' w' - = ~~ ..JlL
~~www ~ ~o
Q;O- ' =>=>3
" " I- _00 t9 WZ :::=0
~~illf{jiG cr 55 wo:
LLlL OJ (5
__ (L o:oo:o:n: 0 <1m
qQ
I 12
~~
~r
<In 0
~~
I
~-
1'\(""-'_ "_. ~j
'-' .") '\.....- . .
vL (j117/C?/o,
, ,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
-lWe.-
Department of Engineering
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5861
EXECUTIVE SESSION - 17 JUNE 1992
TO IC: BERKMAR DRIVE EXTENSION CIP PROJECT
PROPERTY ACQUISITION
1. The Board previously certified the contract - OPTION TO PURCHASE RESIDUE "A".
This option is due to terminate on 28 June 1992. Attached is the CIP budget based
upon bids opened 6 June 1992. The Board indicated that the decision to purchase or not
to purchase was to be considered after staff determined if funds were available within
this budget to exercise the option. This is to request. the Board authorize the purchase of
Residue "A" using funds designated wi thin this budget.
2. At present, the following easements/right-of-way deeds have not been executed by
the property owners. This is to request the Board authorize the County Attorney
to instigate "take" proceedings IF by 19 June 1992 the appropriate deeds have not
been acquired.
A.
TMP 45-l00A - ROW, Sewer, Temporary Grading
Owner: John T. Green
Total value less than $10,000
I
f
J9"
<~
B.
TMP 45-l00B - ROW, Sewer, Temporary Grading
* Owner: Sally Green
Total value less than $10,000
i
I
I
/
* - Expect to resolve by 19 June 1992
Reg rdless of this authorization, staff will continue to negotiate with these property owners to
fina ize these documents. IT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO THIS PROJECT TO
AU HORIZE THIS ACTION IN ORDER TO GO FORWARD WITH THE
CO STRUCTION CONTRACT AWARD.
Jim Bowling, Assistant County Attorney
Bill Brent, ACSA
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Robert B. Brandenburger, Assistant County Executive
FAX (804) 972-4060
"
(>>J
1-1 I l~ I tj .2-
~. H....__ -~. ---
County of Albemarle
I
'j
;(C,')
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGEND~ TITLE: Berkmar Drive Extension-
Option: to Purchase Residue
AGENDA DATE:
June 17, 1992
ITmI NUMBER: )
tJ~ .t)(;?17(S,a.
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJEC~/PROPOSAL/REOUEST: Request Board
authorlization to exercise the option to
purchaise real property residue.
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CONTACTCS):
Messrsl. Tucker, Brandenburger &
Ms. Hi gins
REVIEWED BY:
-
BACKG~UND: On May 6, 1992 you ratified an Option Agreement signed by the County Engineer
for 2,675.99 square feet of land designated as "Residue A" on the attached plat. The
decisibn to exercise the option was deferred pending the bid opening and identification of
funding. The option must be exercised by June 28, 1992.
,
DISCUSSION: The Berkmar Road extension bids were opened on June 6, 1992.
purcha:se price can be funded within the original CIP budget.
The $15,000
RECO~NDATION: Authorize the County Attorney to exercise the Option Agreement to purchase
Residue A using funds designated within this budget.
jbt
92.086i
~
12 w~~
~ ~ai~
~ oBo Sl
~ F= <i~~
en ~~~~Iff
>-(f)lri~~~~
5:19ooc19 ~
~~lli~~~~
~ :J a ~w Z J
Q... :<t Z 0:: -l ::>
LL~-l:8d8-
oo8z&; 8
z ~o~~L-;
~~~~;~~
<r[~9D~~
~.
&/
w
(f)
::>
u
:J
en
::>
Q...
~12
<![5o
12~19 ~
~ ::> ~ (f) <!
:;:u3:~~
~:=iO w
o~~~o
t:Q...o~w
!3o-:~~en
0::2<1012
o
W
0::
3
u
<!
W
en
-=
~
~
z
o
:>
...~
o
>..
lD.
>
...
::>
In 0 8
-g~~
C ~N iO
~~~. 8
0'&]183
~E>
:::;c~
.~'::
=~~
-o~
~ Vi.:2
!2~l
;=~u
-ffi
ii5 @ 8 -~
NO' 8 r-:
+ t'1
Jd8
<Xl
CD
Q
\ ~ I
.-~;~ \ ~ i
t ~Z ~~--~
_N "'-/_ '"
~fi~ 0...2,., "
. ~,
~ ~ z ~ "f-~ 9 "~
~~ 8 I "-
~ ~ 8 ~ J I ~ ~~,
-2~s~ro~"oo ~ :_~ /
_ I'- o...~ LO " I
:J ~ ~ ~:J4u; ~
SI, u.; _ - :::5 /
~u 0,
=<! ~~ II~I ~~r):~~~ /!JS~!
~~. ~ ~ !J/ ~ ~ to ~ ~ !:Q
"~~~ ~ 2 f;--f-~ g @
00&1,)i0/ ~ :-- ----j t:1:i,'
/ ~~ I'- (!j
(/) ~ ~ f-~ g
~ ~ t---.-...
3S>l- /
<!~:: I
~o
.~o""
~~;:;:f6
~o::aiai
I=o...c:ic:i
I-
W
W
:r:
(f)
N
LL
o
"
'-
~
o
w
S
u.; u.; u.:u.; u.; u.;
(/) (f)(j) Ul Ul Ul
ro~8llB~ m
.; r<ilti....:~ a:i
00_ ~ to_ ~_I'-_ 12_
ro o<:tl'- Ul
- N<:t Ol
0::
2 rO
""T rQ ~3!
0 f- ~ uJ ~~
02 ::)[5
2::) Oel..
~[? ~~ c ~ u~ u::)
U).-- w8
~ W:<(cr(u a.. w(/)
t)~ W - - ~~ -!LL
\:;~www ~ ~O
Q'el.. ~ ~iSiS3 i9 LO
~ II w2
LLLL 0~illRjiG a: :55 wet:
-0- mg
et:orrrro:: 0 <.(iL den
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
~~
\ Ii
JUl-HISi ~
BOARD OF SUPEfMSORS
MEMORANDUM
0:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Ella Carey, B~~~ of Supervisors Clerk
Jo Higgins, ~ctor of Engineering
6 July 1993
Berkmar Drive Extension ClP
tachment A is the Deed that was executed by David Bowerman on
August 1992. The purpose of this deed was to take title to
sidue A as approved by the Board. This deed has been marked
id and will not be recorded. Subsequent to his signature, a
vision to the plat was necessary to finalize the right of way
dication. Since the same plat was used for both the right of
y dedication and property conveyance, a revised deed was
cessary.
e final deed (Attachment B) was revised to include the revision
te as stated on the plat.
ease have Mr. Bowerman execute the final deed and return to me
soon as possible so we can proceed with the recordation and
ad acceptance procedure.
you or Mr. Bowerman have any questions, please advise.
. ,
\j D"I- D
~
THIS DEED, taxed pursuant to Virginia Code Section 58.1-
p11.A.3, made this 13th day of July, 1992, by and between PRESTON
~. STALLINGS, unremarried widower, Grantor, and the COUNTY OF
LBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, Grantee, and O'NEIL REALTY AND MORTGAGE
ORPORATION, Noteholder and ORBIN F. CARTER, TRUSTEE, additional
rantors;
WIT N E SSE T H :
I For and in consideration of FIFTEEN THOUSAND AND NO/100
I
pOLLARS ($15,000.00) cash in hand paid, the receipt of which is
terebY acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL
nd CONVEY, with GENERAL WARRANTY AND ENGLISH COVENANTS OF TITLE,
nto the Grantee, County of Albemarle, Virginia, in fee simple, the
ollowing described real property, to-wit:
I
I
I
rquare feet, and shown as Residue "A" on plat of Thomas B. Lincoln,
and Surveyor, Inc., dated January 3, 1992 entitled "Plat Showing
All that certain lot or parcel of land containing 20,675.99
ight-Of-Way To Be Acquired For Public Use Also Showing A Drainage
asement To Be Dedicated To Public Use A Portion of the Property
elonging to Preston O. Stallings As Recorded In Deed Book 710 Page
t82 Located on Berkmar Drive Extended", a copy of which is attached
*ereto. Reference is made to this plat for a more particular
~escription of the land conveyed herein.
This parcel of land is a portion of the property conveyed to
he Grantor by deed of Greenfield Mobile Homes Park, Inc., a
irginia corporation, dated February 3, 1981 and recorded in the
~lerk's
I
I
I
I
I
Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia,
1
A
in Deed Book 710, Page 182. Juanita P. Stallings died November 6,
1987, and title to said property then transfered to Preston O.
Stallings by operation of law.
This property is conveyed SUBJECT TO any and all applicable
~asements, conditions, restrictions and reservations contained in
,
tluly-recorded deeds, plats and other instruments constituting
,
ponstructive notice in the chain of title to the property herein
~onveyed which have not expired by a limitation of time contained
,
therein or have not otherwise become ineffective.
The property hereby conveyed is subject to the lien of a
certain deed of trust from the Grantor to Harry N. Lewis and Orbin
,
F. Carter, Trustees, (any of whom may act), dated June 16, 1992,
~nd recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1232,
I
,
:page 167,
securing of record O'Neill Realty and Mortgage
,
I
~orporation in the original principal amount of $150,000.00.
,
I
Orbin F. Carter, Trustee, with the consent of O'Neil Realty
I
~nd Mortgage Corporation, as evidenced by its execution hereof,
teleases unto the Grantee all of the right, title and interest of
the Trustee in and to the real property herein described only. It
ts expressly understood by the Grantors, O'Neil Realty and Mortgage
~orporation and Orbin F. Carter, Trustee, that the obligations of
Grantors pursuant to the twenty-six bonds dated June 16, 1992,
fPecured by said deed of trust, shall remain in full force and
~ffect, and that Orbin F. Carter, Trustee, and O'Neil Realty and
Mortgage Corporation intended to release only the real property
4escribed herein and no other real property is released.
2
.
The Property is hereby accepted by the Grantee, pursuant to
~ resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
Founty on ';(\1~~_ \ ~, 1992, authorizing it's chairman to act
bn behalf of Albemarle County, Virginia.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals.
~~ ~~eall
RESTON O. STALLINGS
O'NEIL REALTY AND MORTGAGE
CORPORATION
BY: IDD-t-u-\ J ,~Sfl~ (Seal)
TITLE: V ie.e pr-t's t\:J ~^"'t
~FL~ T~(Seal)
ORBIN F. CARTER, T~USTEE
(Seal)
. Bowerman, Chairman,
Supervisors of Albemarle
5'"- "3/-'1L-
,
~TATE OF VIRGINIA
~OUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, to-wit;
I
I
I
~f
~ foregoing Deed
Uj-VSL
was acknowledged before me this ~" yJ'? day
, 1992, by :RESTON O. STAL~NGS. ,
dIu h ;n, (! t7-t. h~~~
Nota Public /
~y Commission Expires:
: b/dl/9i
3
.
STATE OF z;:;:;~ ~ ~ -<- ~ .
CITY / COUNTY (ifF C?lLd.< /oULJ-t-I.l //~ , to-wit;
Deed was acknowledged before me this c:??'~ day
, 1992, by ,,6l0A:-<l'Ld-' JJ" h:5'<'-~9~J ,
of O'NEIL REALTY ,ND tY MORTGAGE
~-t./;.y-- C/ ~nyJ~+-)
Nota~ Public '
~y Commission Expires: S-dl-9~
,/ILL
I
STATE OF VIRGINIA "
~ITY / COUNTY OF {!At2A .ItOi..J~ <;.l.J/ Ih.-l , to-wit;
T~e foregoing Deed was acknowledged before me thisc~~~~' day
pf C~;t~S~ , 1992, b~ ORBIN F7 C~ER, TRUSTEE.
: ~L-<h~, ~ ~np~
: No~ry Public /
tty Commission Expires: g?-.3 / - ~~
,
~TATE OF VIRGINIA &Z
~~Y / COUNTY OF , /D€/J'I(l;.fL
I
, to-wit;
the Grantee's
I
I
~ounty of Albemarle, Virginia
~/o Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
401 McIntire Road
~harlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Expires:
./lllay
address is:
was acknowledged before me this
, 1992, by DAVID P. BOWERMAN,
Albemarle~ounty. ~
t,- !u C~U
Notary Publi
3/'>t d
. ay
CHAIRMAN,
" ~,he foregoing Deed
cD f /t 9!-iAj
~oard of Supervisors of
I
I
I
I
friy
Commission
21, /1?-5
4
~
~
z
o
:>
-fB
~ @ 8 -~
C\I g r-..:
0... r<l
.b~
00
~
~ w~t
C> ~CJg:
~~ ~8~ ~
~~ ~~~~~
~~cn~~~~~
Ii: C> 0 rr <t ~::>
~~~~~~~~~
W<t2fJ~-' rr
c>wl-~~~w;;j;<-o
~z(/)<t..... aro>~
>L;)uOO.wzUl 0
u;: a a ~~
~a~~~Ui~~
[2<taf2<t8:~9u~(/)
, a
'~
a
u
<t
w
CD
~;
~~
~~
CD
Q
\ oJ, 1
-C\1 ~ 'Wi 1
C\I ~f'- f--
~ -~~I --~
~ ~ l~ o-~ r<l
~::i ~ _~~,~~9 \>
U 8 ~ ~ r ~:~ , /
-0 \ ~ + lO~ ~ a. ~ ~ /
N r1)!B.::J 2.:J I /
~(l) f-- I
--~
f'- O-ftl 10 /
(l) <t.:J IJ..' .:::5
~~u- 81/
_4. u;~. . I,-.,! }f'KJIS3& ,':8 ~
- en Lli I--1S
~ ffi O-Gi LiJ
o 10 --11 2 "I to
~,6l ~~ (j) [D ~f--~ f-- Ci:
Va..;: V W 0 g Z
'~~~ri:. 0:: C\I 1B I
......0-" u.._
~~- -~f I
~ ~ J ~ ~~ ~ E5(
<t~~: I
~d
'~Of'-
~ff{~
~[f~~
\
"
u.; U; lJ.:U; U; U;
en en en en en en
ro~m~lR m
.t r<i .0"": ~ <ri
roJl to. ~.f'-_ ~.
(l) o<tr-- -
C\I~ ~ Z
>-0
..... l::f2
0 I-' ~ cd d:E
oz
Z:::l ~~?- ~ U2
~& 3f w:<(oo:u a.: w8
~~ ~~w-w-w ~ ~~
, :::l:::la
II II f-- 00 i3 wZ
l,LlJ.: ~~mffiii'i ii: ~S
-,0- 0:::00:::0:::0::: 0 qO-
(
v
<::
c;
>-
'"
>
:;
"'og
-g~~
.5 r~ lDg
<::"'5 :f:
-OJ; ~ ~
~E>
~ E lE-
.--=
a:l,!l~
"'oE
0.:;, "'6
5~5
~~d
C\J
lL
o
I-
W
LLJ
I
(/)
w
o
w
~
..
~ .
~~~~~B~~~~~8~~2~$~~~
~Q@Q~~~~~~~~~~~8~~g*
~I ~w~~~~~!!!~~~!!~w!!!
~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~o~I~~~~~r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ ~~~~~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UI (f) (f) (f) z (f) (f) (f) Z Z Z Z Z (f) Z (f) Z Z Z Z Z
,~~~~w.~ro~Q=~~~~~~~~@
~~~~~~:..J-.J-.J-.J-.J-.J::::i::::i-.J-.J::::i-.J-.J-.J
1:>
~z~
ro~~O-
6~(f)
i~o~
~wwQ
O-z~
~IC5(l)
I-~Oei
o
,w
, 0::
:3
'u
:<t
I
,w
ICD
i~
~:~
~'3=
l?1Ll..
(/)9
~~
0.0::
w
(/)
::>
u
:J
CD
::>
a.
g~
w<tasf3
~~(/)~
u~L5~
a3~~~
l(o~w
o::~~CD
f2<tol2
~~
,
!bt:;
~(\J
ffia.:
~Z
1h;(\J
~~g
0- . .
:::E~1Il
1-00
Q5 ~
(\JO- It
~~ i~
Wa.: a:a.:
~~(\J ~~
~1fg [J)ij'
~<...iai aiai
f'=00 oei
~
~ w~~
~ ~~~
~ aSCi ~
g F= <i.g,~
w ~g:CE~ri
~ ~~~~b:
!i:(/) o::<!> <t
w~8.....~ -::>
o.:JW::E""'>-~
~-,o~w~J
o.~zO::-'::>
LLtn-~d8-o
a .G]zl;}wQ
z a ~ a ~ -' _"
~~8fi3b~--::-
~[l~~~~w
<t8:~go~~
~~ ~
!b' (l)~
~2 ~~
0::
fiolwa: a:a:
-~
,~(\J ~~
~O-g r::~
~<.>ai aiai
f'=oo eici
w
u,
CilSff
f::'0::0-
zO -
wUO::
::s:uw
GJ<tz
(f)Z6
L5;;0
ozw
z<tz
<tl-~
>-Z(f)
3~ffi
, ZO
~OZ
,u:::J
I-
IWW,
t:>WIfJ
ii:O::l-w
u..lLl-
WWO(f)
~ IW=>
u..1-0::g:
oEiITo
~~o~
ZU1W~
~;~o
>~IF-
ZOI-\!,!
8Bi~&:
~~
0-'
-~
Bi@
~ffiO-
~z
'I-(\J
~o::o
~1f=
0- . a:l
~go
-~ -ffi
Ii)
:B ~
~_ u=
-o~fR -i-'$
~~ t(l~
II ~ II (j)
I- II I- II
_ -<J _ - <J
[J)-~w
. ~ cri-
~= ~-~
~ II ~ "_
g <t-W <t ~
-8~ -8~
~ ~~ t(lca
a ~~ ~~
U
N
U
u
c
~
....'
o
>..
'"
>
:;
IF) 0
"'0,,(>- 8
C -""
o ~N iD
~-S~~ 8
oJll'~
~E>
~c~
. --~
cc~~
.., c ~
0--
EV}~
o~ ;1
;::~D
Q5
(\JO-
0-'
-I"-
IO
(f)(\J
0::
:1;~0-
ii(\J
~ 0
~ =
0- . .
~U(l)
1-00
120-
@~
Ou..
~o
~h;
W<t
0::0-
W
I<t
~(f)
_ W
:<t~
WU
:::J~ .
~ 90(1;
o fJzoh
Z o::<t~
f2
00-
~~
~~
>-1-
ffio::
ffict
I<t
~(f)
W
~u6
wfrl(\J
i3(l)~
u=;oi
l1!~~
(f)
W
0::
a::
~
Z
o
(f)
!e2
~
~
o
U
>-
::2:
N
LL
o
N
t;J
W
I
(/)
t'
... . ~
t \;""1:; H j
I'l'l~'"
~ ..J I .~I ,I,
'i~__...... .l
Edward H. Bailn. Jr
Samuel Mille~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
David P. Bow~rman
Charlottesvillr
Charlotte Y. Hlumphris
Jack Jouett :
June 22, 1992
M~. Edwin C. Bearss
Cliief Historian
N~tional Park Service
H~story Division (418)
pd Box 37127
W~shington, DC 20013-7127
I
I
Delar Mr. Bearss:
I
I
I On behalf of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors I
w~nt to convey our enthusiastic support for the nomination of
S~ack Mountain as a Natural Historic Landmark. Albemarle
C~unty has a longstanding goal and conunitment to conserving
tHe Countyls historical and cultural resources.
I
, The designation of Shack Mountain as a National Historic
L~ndmark will stand alongside Monticello, The Rotunda and the
Unliversity of Virginia Historic District as examples of our
hi~toric heritage.
,~fiGerely ,
(/ >'~4/C/01~
L/~avid P. Bowerman
Chairman
DPJ3:ec
I
I
eel: Members, Board of Supervisors
I
r"
(t \ \{ /
i _' \' /
1 f
\ J
t..di
Forrest R Marshall. Jr
Scottsville
Charles 5 Martin
Rivanna
Walter F Perkins
White Hall
I.):c:', ,.,:,' '.: C.
. ~., /.;4.. 7..."
014,___.......-. .... ..
<.
County of Albemarle
~)
r I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA ITLE:
National Historic Landmark Designation for
Shack M untain
AGENDA DATE:
June 17, 1992
ITEM NUMBER:
.., ,.
i ,/- -<
'J
-.
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:~ INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
-
STAFF C
Messrs.
Cilimberg
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGRO
The Nat onal Park Service (NPS) is considering the nomination of Shack Mountain as a Natural
Histori Landmark and is soliciting comments by July 7th. The attached staff report supports
the nom nation and recommends your endorsement of the nomination. The detailed Park Service
report's available for review in the Clerk's Office.
I
I
ATION:
e the Chairman to send a letter of support for the nomination of Shack Mountain as
al Historic Landmark.
92.081
COUNTY OF AlBE.tvlARlf.
~~"t~ /_'v<~, ;~.:~1; ~: jl l' .1; t" :1~-.
" ...-l.~"'_"__"__,_"__"""",,,,__ . ~ ";.
f'P~' -. .~ .~.,
;:'c.:.'.;.'f. JUN n 1992 iU'.'{'~
";',\ n " "
~,~ ~
~ t("'-,,,,,,.........,,,...."'. .,'r~"..-~"'I. j
I ~T1r ~~__;i{~i ::.(:\ ;:: -;r"';; ~~'Ji ,<-" ,J
r.XECUTiVF OFFlr.~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45%
(804) 2%-5823
I
MEMORANDUM
I
I
to:
Bob Brandenburger, Assistant County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community
Development
thJu
FROM:
I
IDATE:
I
I
I
~E:
June 8, 1992
I
I
I
I
~he National Park Service (NPS) is considering the designation of
Shack Mountain as a National Historic Landmark. There are
qurrently only three National Historic Landmarks in Albemarle
qounty: The Rotunda, the University of Virginia Historic
District, and Monticello. The purpose of the National Historic
~andmarks Program is to focus attention on properties of
~xceptional value to the nation as a whole rather than to a
particular state or locality. All National Historic Landmarks
~re also listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The
~ational Register includes, in addition to National Historic
llandmarks, properties significant to the Nation, State, or
qommunity which have been nominated by the States, Federal
~gencies and others; and all historic areas in the National Park
System. Albemarle County has currently fifty-three properties
~isted on the National Register.
Shack Mountain NHL Nomination Comments
Shack Mountain was listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register on
~une 15, 1976, and on the National Register of Historic Places on
Sleptember 1, 1976. The national significance of the house is
that it was designed by and for Fiske Kimball (1881-1955) whose
c!ontributions to American art and architecture are outlined in
I .
t~e nomlnation report.
,
S~ack Mountain is a residence located on Tax Map 44, Parcel 35A
j~st west of the Ivy Creek National Area, and on the south side
of the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir (Ivy Creek). Another
N~tional and Virginia Register property, the Woodlands, is
lpcated adjacent to the north. Shack Mountain is included in the
Iwy Creek Agricultural/Forestal District, a seven year district
ob Brandenburger
age 2
une 9, 1992
stablished on November 2, 1988. Access to Shack Mountain is
rom State Route 657, Lamb's Road. The proposed Route 29 Bypass
lternative 10 is located approximately 3,600 feet south of the
ouse.
effects of a National Historic Landmark designation include
effects for a listing on the National Register:
Consideration in the planning for Federal or federally
assisted projects;
Eligibility for Federal tax benefits;
Consideration in the decision to issue a surface coal mining
permit;
Qualification for Federal assistance for historic
preservation, when funds are available.
In addition, the property is given recognition for its
xceptional value to the nation as a whole. The Secretary of the
Interior must prepare an annual report to Congress which
identifies threatened National Historic Landmarks. National
istoric Landmarks may be studied by NPS for inclusion in the
ational Park System.
garding the specific effects of the National Historic Landmark
signation on Alternative 10, there are two separate provisions
the National Historic Preservation Act for 1966, as amended,
ich require comment by the Advisory Council on Historic
eservation. Section 106 requires that federal agencies
dertaking a project having an effect on a listed or eligible
tional Re ister property must provide the Advisory Council a
asonable opportunity to comment. Section 110(f) requires that
fore approval of any Federal undertaking which may directly and
versely affect any National Historic Landmark, the head of the
sponsible Federal agency shall, to the maximum extent possible,
u dertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to
m'nimize harm to such landmark, and shall afford the Advisory
C uncil a reasonable opportunity to comment.
e Phase I Historic Architecture Survey prepared by John Milner
sociates for the Rt. 29 Corridor Study does not address Shack
untain. According to a representative of the firm, Shack
untain was later addressed in an appendix to the study.
cause Shack Mountain is located more than one-fourth mile from
e centerline of the Alternative, and because a ridge line
ob Brandenburger
age 3
une 9, 1992
property from the Alternative 10 route, it was not
be impacted by the highway. The representative
aid that the same one-fourth mile distance would be used in a
eview of a National Historic Landmark property. Therefore, the
roposed designation would not appear to have any effect on
lternative 10 alignment.
he Comprehensive Plan states as a goal: "Protect the County's
atural, scenic and historic resources in the Rural and Growth
reas." The historic objective states: "Conserve the County's
istorical and cultural resources, including historic sites,
tructures and landscape features; archaeological sites; and
ther unique man-made features."
ecommendation: The Board of Supervisors should endorse the
omination of Shack Mountain as a National Historic Landmark.
CjMJSjj cw
PROPERTY STUDIED FOR
NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION
SHACK MOUNTAIN
CHARWTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
I commenting on the possible designation of the property identified above, you may find
uidance in Section 65.5(d)(4) of the enclosed regulations.
he History Areas Committee of the Secretary of the Interior's National Park System
dvisory Board will evaluate this property at a meeting to be held on Tuesday, July 7, 1992,
a 9:00 a.m. in the Director's Conference Room (#3119) in the Main Interior Building at
1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC. The History Areas Committee evaluates the studies
historic properties being nominated for National Historic Landmark designation in order to
a vise the full National Park System Advisory Board at their meeting on Monday, August
1 , 1992, at approximately 9:00 a.m. in the Many Glaciers Hotel at Glacier NatIonal Park,
est Glacier, Montana, and will recommend to the full Board those properties that the
ommittee finds meet the criteria of the National Historic Landmarks Program.
S ould you wish to obtain information about these meetings, or about the National Historic
dmarks Program, please contact Senior Historian Benjamin Levy at the National Park
S rvice, History Division (418), P.O. Box 37127, Washington, DC 20013-7127; or by
t lephone at (202) 343-8164; FTS 343-8164.
I you have questions concerning the study, which was prepared by Architectural Historian
arolyn Pitts of the National Park Service, you may contact Ms. Pitts at the History Division
a dress given above, or by telephone at (202) 343-8166; FTS 343-8166.
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
P.O. Box 37127
Washington, D.C. 20013-7127
@- .
- .
United States Department of the Interior
MAY 8 1992
r. David P. Bowerman, Chairman
lbemarle County Board of Supervisors
4 1 McIntire Road
harlottesville, Virginia 22902
i, ' \,
,'1 ',-
e are pleased to inform you that the National Park Service has completed the study of the
p operty identified on the enclosed sheet for the purpose of nominating it for possible
d slgnation as a National Historic Landmark. We enclose a coPY of the study report. The
ational Park System Advisory Board will consider the nomination during its next meeting,
a the time and place indicated on the enclosure. The Board will make its recommendation
t the Secretary of the Interior based upon the criteria of the National Historic Landmarks
P ogram.
ou have 60 days to submit your views in writing, if you so desire. After the 6O-day
riod, we will submit the nomination and your comments to the National Park System
dvisory Board's History Areas Committee, which will then inform the full Advisory Board
o the Committee's recommendations at the Board's meeting. The Secretary of the Interior
ill then be informed of the Board's recommendations for his final action.
T assist you in considering this matter, we have enclosed a copy of the re~ulations
g verning the National Historic Landmarks Program. They describe the cnteria for
d signation (Sec. 65.4), the effects of designation (Sec. 65.2), and specify how you may
c mment on a proposed designation (Sec. 65.5(d)(4-5)). Should you wish to comment,
p ease send your comments to me, at the National Park Service, History Division (418),
PO. Box 37127, Washington, DC 20013-7127.
S ncerely,
win C. Bearss
C ief Historian
~
..
PART 65-NATIONAL HISTORIC
LANDMARKS PROGRAM
Sec.
65.1 Purpose and authority.
65.2 Effects of desilI1ation.
65.3 Definitions.
65.4 National Historic Landmark Criteria.
65.5 DesilI1atton of National Historic
Landmarks.
65.6 RecolI1ition of National Historic
Landmarlu.
65.7 Monitorin8 National' Historic Land.
marlu.
65.8 Alteration of National Historic Land.
mark Boundaries.
65.9 Withdrawal of National Historic Land.
mark DesllIl&tion.
65.10 Appeala for desllIl&tion.
AtmlOKITY: 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.: 16 U.S.C.
470 et seq.
SOt7Rcr. 48 FR 4655. Feb. 2. 1983. unless
otherwise noted.
f 65.1 PurpoM and authority.
The purpose of the National Historic
Landmarks Procram is to identify and
designate National Historic Land-
marks. and encouralre the lona ranlre
preservation of nationallY silDificant
properties that illustrate or commemo-
rate the history and prehistory of the
United States. These relfUlations set
forth the criteria for establlshinlr na-
tional silDiflcance and the procedures
used by the Department of the Interi-
or for coDductina the National Histor-
ic Lanc1marU ProI!'&lD-
(a) In the Bl8toric Sites Act of 1935
(45 Stat. eM, 18 UB.C. 481 et &eq.) the
Conaresa declared that it Is a national
policy to preserve for public use his.
toric sites. bulldlnp and objects of na.
tional silDiflcance for the inspiration
and benefit of the people of the
United States and
<b) To implement the policy, the Act
authorizes the Secretary of the Interi.
or to perform the followtna duties and
functioM. amona others:
( 1) To make a survey of historic and
archeololrical sites. bulldinp and ob-
Jects for the purpoae of detel'D1in1nlr
~ 65.2
which possess exceptional value as
commemorating or illustrating the his.
tory of the United States;
(2) To make necessary lnvestigations
and researches in the United States re-
lating to particular sites. buildings or
objects to obtain true and accurate
historical and archeological facts and
information concerning the same; and
(3) To erect and maintain tablets to
mark or commemorate historic or pre.
historic places and events of national
historical or archeological significance.
(c) The National Park Service <NPS>
administers the National Historic
Landmarks Program on behalf of the
Secretary.
f 65.2 Effec:tI of desirnation.
(a) The purpose of the National His.
toric Landmarks Prorram is to focus
attention on properties of exceptional
value to the nation as a whole rather
than to a particular State or locality.
The prorram recolI1izes and promotes
the preservation efforts of Federal.
State and local aaencies. as well as of
private orl&niz&tions and individuals
and encourages the owners of land.
mark properties to observe preserva-
tion precepts.
(b) Properties desilI1ated as National
Historic Landmarks are listed in the
National Rell'ister of Historic Places
upon desilI1ation as National Historic
Landmarks. Llstina of private proper.
ty on the National Rell'ister does not
prohbit under Federal law or rellUla.
tions any actions which may otherwise
be taken by the property owner with
respect to the property.
(c) SpecifiC effects of desilI1ation
are:
<l) The National Reatster was de-
silI1ed to be and Is administered as a
pla.nnina tool. Federal alrencies under-
takina a project havinlr an effect on a
listed or el1lrible property must provide
the Advisory Councll on Historic Pres.
ervation a reasonable opportunity to
comment pursuant to section 106 of
the National Hlatorie Preservation Act
of 1968. aa amended. The Advisory
COUDell haa adopted procedures con.
cerninlr. inteT CIliCl, their commenting
responsibility in 38 CFR Part 800.
(2) Section llO(f) of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966. as
289
f 65.3
amended. requires that before approv.
al of any Federal undertaking which
may directly and adversely affect any
National Historic Landmark. the head
of the responsible Federal agency
shall. to the maximum extent possible.
undertake such ~lanning and actions
as may be necessary to minimize harm
to such landmark. and shall afford the
Advisory Council a reasonable oppor.
tunity to comment on the undertak.
ing.
(3) Listing in the National Register
makes property owners eligible to be
considered for Federal grants-in.aid
and loan guarantees (when imple.
mented) for historic preservation.
(4) If a property is listed in the Na-
tional Register. certain special Federal
income tax provisiOns may apply to
the owners of the property pursuant
to section 2124 of the Tax Reform Act
of 1976, the Economic Recovery Tax
Act of 1981 and the Tax Treatment
Extension Act of 1980.
(5) If a property contains surface
coal resources and is listed in the Na.
tional Reiister. certain provisions of
the Surface Mining and Control Act of
1977 require consideration of a proper.
ty's historic values in determininl is-
suance of a surface coal mining
permit.
(6) Section 8 of the National Park
System General Authorities Act of
1970, as amended <90 Stat. 1940. 18
U.S.C. 1-5). directs the Secretary to
prepare an annual report to COnll'es8
which identifies all National Historic
Landmarks that exhibit known or an-
ticipated damace or threats to the in-
tegrity of their resources. In addition.
National Historic Landmarumay be
studied by NP8 for poasible recom.
mendation to COncresl for inclusion in
the National Park System.
(7) Section 9 of the M1ninI in the
National Parks Act of 1978 <90 Stat.
1342, 18 U.S.C. 1980) d1recta the Secre-
tary of the Interior to submit to the
Advisory COUDCU a report on any sur.
face mininl activity which the Secre.
tary haa determined may destroy a
National Historic Landmark in whole
or in part. and to request the advisory
COUDCU'S advice on alternative meaa-
ures to mitip.te or abate such activity.
36 CFI th. I (7-1-11 Edition)
f 65.3 Definition..
As used in this rule:
(a) "Advisory Council" means the
Advisory Council on Historic Preserva.
. tion. established by the National His.
toric Preservation Act of 1966. as
amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). Ad-
dress: Executive Director, Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation. 1522
K Street NW. Washington. DC 20005.
(b) "Chief elected local official"
means the mayor. county judge or oth-
erwise titled chief elected administra.
tive official who is the elected head of
the local political jurisdiction in which'
the property is located.
(c) "Advisory Board" means the Na.
tional Park System Advisory Board
which is a body of authorities in sever.
al fields of knOWledge appointed by
the Secretary under authority of the
Historic Sites Act of 1935, as amended.
Cd) "Director" means Director. Na.
tional Park Service.
Ce) "District" means a geolr&phical.
ly definable area, urban or rural. that
possesses a silDificant concentration.
linkage or continuity of sites. build.
ings. structures or objects united by
past events or aesthetically by plan or
physical development. A district may
also comprise individual elements sep-
arated geographically but linked by as.
sociation or history.
(n "Endangered property" means a
historic property which is or is about
to be subjected to a major impact that
will destroy or seriously damage the
resources which make it el1gtble for
National Historic Landmark desilDa.
tiOD.
(g) "Federal Preservation Officer"
means the official designated by the
head of each Federal agency responsi-
ble for coordinating that acency's ac.
tivities under the National HLstoric
Preservation Act of 1988. u amended.
including nominating properties under
that agency's ownership or control to
the National Regtster.
(h) "Keeper" means the Keeper of
the National Regtster of' Historic
Places.
(1) "Landmark" means National His-
toric Landmark and is a district. site,
bu1lding. structure or object. in public
or private ownership. Judaed by the
Secretary to possess national sign1fi-
290
1
.........1 ,.rIe Service, Interior
cance in American hiatory, archealoD.
architecture, enPeertna and culture.
and so deatpated by htm.
(J> "National Repter" means the
National Repter of Historic Places.
which is a relister of districts. sites.
buildinP, structures and objects si,-
nificant in American history, architec-
ture. archeology, enlineerin, and cul-
ture. maintained by the Secretary.
(Section 2( b) of the Historic Sites Act
of 1935 (49 Stat. 666, 16 U.S.C. 461>
and Section 101<a)(1) of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (80
Stat. 915; 16 U.S.C. 470>, as amended.)
(Address: Chief, Interaaency Resource
Mana,ement Division, 440 G Street
NW. Washinl'ton. DC 20243.>
(k) "National Historic Landmarks
Pro8T&m" means the pro8T&m which
identifies. desilI1&tes. recolIlizes. lists.
and monitors National Historic Land-
marks conducted by the Secretary
throu,h the National Park Service.
(Address: Chief, History Division, Na.
tional Park Service. Washinlton. DC
20240: addresses of other participatin,
divisions found throu,hout these re,.
ulations. )
(1) "Object" means a material thin,
of functional. aesthetic, cultural. his.
torical or scientific value that may be,
by nature or desilIl, movable yet relat.
ed to a specific settin, or environment.
(m) "Owner" or "owners" means
those individuals, partnerships, corpo.
rations or publ1c acencies holdinl fee
simple title to property. "Owner" or
"owners" does not include individuals.
partnerships, corporations or publ1c
agencies holdinl euements or less
than fee interesta (1Dcludina lease-
holds) of any nature.
(n) "Property" meana a site. build.
in" object. Itructure or a collection of
the above wb1eh form a dl8tr1et.
(0) "Secretary" me&DI the Secretary
of the Interior.
(p) "Site" me&DI the location of a
sill11flcant event, & prehiatoric or his-
toric occupation or activity, or a build.
tna or structure, whether standinl,
ruined or vaniahed, where the location
itself maintain8 hiatorica1 or archeo-
101ica1 value rep.rdleu of the value of
any exiattna structure.
(q) "State offlc1&l" me&DI the person
who baa been des1lD&ted in each State
:
'I'
t 65.4
to adminiater the Sta,te Historic Pl'~s.
ervation Proaram.
(r) "Structure" means a work made
by human beinp and composed of .
interdependent and interrelated parts
in a definite pattern of or,anization.
f 65..& Sation.. Hiltoric Landmark Crite-
riL
The criteria applied to evaluate
properties for pOSSible designation as
National Historic LandmarKs or possi.
ble detennination of eligibility for Na.
tional Historic Landmark designation
are listed below. These criteria shall
be used by NPS in the preparation.
review and evaluation of National His.
toric Landmark studies. They shall be
used by the Advisory Board in review-
in, National Historic Landmark stud-
ies and preparin, recommendations to
the Secretary. Properties shall be des.
ignated National Historic Landmarks
only if they are nationally silDiflcant.
Althou,h uaessments of national sig.
nificance should reflect both publiC
perceptiOns and professional jud,.
menta, the evaluations of properties
be in, considered for landmark desig.
nation are undertaken by profession-
als. includinl historians. architectural
historiana, archeololists and anthro-
poloPta familiar with the broad
ran,e of the nation's resources and
historical themes. The criteria applied
by these specialists to potential land.
marks do not define sianificance nor
set a rilid standard for quality.
Rather, the criteria establish the qual.
itative framework in which a eompara.
tive professional analysis of national
sianiflcance can occur. The final deci.
sion on whether a property possesses
national sill11ficance is made by the
Secretary on the basts of documenta.
tion includina the comm~tt"" and. rec.
ommendatlons of the public who par.
ticipate in the desilDation process.
(a) SpecifiC Criteria of National SII.
nificance: The quality of national si,-
n1flcance 18 ucribed to cl1stricts, sites,
builcl1np, structures and objects that
pQUeIII exceptional value or quality in
illustrattna or interprettna the herit-
aae of the United States in history, ar.
chitecture, archeololY, eDliDeerinl
and culture and that possess a hl,h
desree of intelrtty of location, design.
291
f 65.5
setting. mat~rtals. workmanship. feel.
ine and UIOCtation. and:
( 1) That are usociated with events
that have made a silDificant contribu.
tion to. and are identified with. or that
outstandinely represent. the broad na.
tional patterns of United States histo.
ry and from which an understanding
and appreciation of those patterns
may be gained: or
(2) That are associated importantly
with the lives of persons nationally
significant in the history of the United
States: or
(3) That represent some great idea
or ideal of the American people: or
( 4) That embodY the distinguishing
characteristics of an architectural
type specimen exceptionally valuable
for a study of a period. style or
method of construction. or that repre.
sent a sianificant. distinctive and ex.
ceptional entity whose components
may lack incl1vidual distinction: or
(5) That are composed of intelT&l
parts of the environment not suffi.
ciently sianificant by reuon of histori.
cal association or artistic merit to war.
rant incl1vidual recolDition but collec.
tively compose an entity of exception.
al historical or artistic sianiftcance. or
outstandinrly commemorate or lUus.
trate a way of Ufe or culture: or
(6) That have yielded or may be
likely to yield information of major
scientific importance by revealing new
cultures. or by shedcl1ng Ught upon pe.
riods of occupation over larre areu of
the United States. Such sites are those
which have yielded. or which may rea-
sonably be expected to yield. data at.
fectinr theories. concept8 and ideu to
a major decree.
(b) OrcUn&rtly. cemeteries. birth-
places. if&VeI of historical ftaures.
properties owned by re11l1oua iDstttu.
tions or U8Id tor rel1l1oua purposes.
structures that have been moved from
their orictnal locations. reconstructed
historic buUcUnp and properttes that
have achieved ItlDificance within the
put 50 years are not e11llble for desle-
nation. Such properties. however. will
qualify if they fall witb1D the follow-
1ni categories:
C 1) A re11ll0Ul properw derivtDa ita
primary nationalliIDWcance from ar-
chitectural or artistic diattDctlon or
historical importance; or
36 CPI th. I (7-1.... EelIM...)
(2) A bulldtrlf or structure removed
from its original location but which is
nationally sianificant primarily for its
architectural merit. or for association
with persons or events of transcendent
importance in the nation's history and
the association consequential: or
(3) A site of a buildinr or structure
no longer standing but the person or
event associated With it is of tran-
scendent importance in the nation's
history and the association conseQuen.
tial: or
(4) A birthplace. grave or burial if it
is of a historical figure of transcend-
ent national significance and no other
appropriate site. building or structure
directly associated with the productive
life of that person exists: or
(5) A cemetery that derives its pri.
mary national significance from graves
of persona of transcendent impor-
tance. or from an exceptionally dis.
tinctive design or from an exceptional.
ly significant eVi!nt: or
(6) A reconstructed butldinr or en.
semble of buildings of extraordinary
national significance when accurately
executed in a suitable environment
and presented in a cl1pUfied manner as
part of a restoration muter plan. and
when no other builcl1np or structures
with the same association have sur.
vived: or
(7) A property primarily commemo-
rative in intent if desian. are. tracl1.
tion. or symboUc value hu invested it
with ita own national historical silDifi.
cance:or ,.
(8) A property achieving national
sipUficance within the put 50 years if
it fa of extraorcl1nary national impor.
tance.
I 65.5 OHlpatlon of Satlona! Hutorie
LandmarkL
Potential National Historic Land.
marks are identified prtmarUy by
means of theme studies and in some
instances by special studies. Nomina-
tions and recommendations made by
the appropriate State offlctals. Feder-
al Preservation Officers and other in.
terested parties wW be conatdered in
schedulm. and conduct1nl studies.
(a) TMme ,tutu NPS defines and
systematicalb' conducta orpniZed
theme studies which encompua the
292
National 'ark Service, Interior
major aspects of American history.
The theme studies provide a contextu.
al framework to evaluate the relative
significance of historic properties and
detennine which properties meet Na.
tional Historic Landmark criteria.
Theme studies will be announced in
advance through direct notice to ap.
propriate State officials. Federal Pres-
ervation Officers and other interested
parties and by notice in the FEDERAL
REGISTER. Within the established the.
matic framework. NPS will schedule
and conduct National Historic Land-
mark theme studies according to the
following priorities. Themes which
meet more of these priorities ordinari.
ly will be studied before those which
meet fewer of the priorities:
( 1) Theme studies not yet begun as
identified in "History and Prehistory
in the National Park System." 1982.
(2) Theme studies in serious need of
revision.
(3) Theme studies which relate to a
silDiflcant number of properties listed
in the National Register bearing opin.
ions of State Historic Preservation Of.
ficers and Federal Preservation Offi.
cers that such properties are of poten.
tial national sillliflcance. (Only those
recommendations which NPS deter.
mines are likely to meet the land.
marks criteria will be enumerated in
determinin, whether a silDificant
number exists in a theme study.)
(4) Themes which refiect the broad
plannin, needs of NPS and other Fed.
eral acencies and for which the funds
to conduct the study are made avail.
able from sources other than the rel\1'
larly procrammed funda of the Na.
tional HJatoric Landmarks Procram.
(b) SpeeiGl Studia. NPS will conduct
special atudles for historic properties
outside of active theme studies accord-
in, to the followinl priorities:
(1) Studies authorized by Concress
or mandated by Executive Order will
receive the hlIhest priority.
(2) Properties which NPS deter.
mines are endanlered and potentiallY
meet the National HJatoric Landmarks
criteria. whether or not the theme in
which they are silDtficant baa been
studied.
(3) Properties Uated in the National
Register beartDI State or Federal.
&&ency recommendatioD8 of potential
~ 65.5
national sicnificance' where NFS con-
curs in the evaluation and the proper.
ty is significant in a theme already
studied.
(c)( 1> When a property is selected
for study to determine its potential for
designation as a National Historic
Landmark. NPS will notify in writing,
except as provided below. (i) the
owner(s), (ii) the chief elected local of.
ficial. (iii> the appropriate State offi-
cial. <iv) the Members of Congress who
represent the district and State in
which the property is located. and. (V)
if the property is on an Indian reserva.
tion. the chief executive officer of the
Indian tribe. that it will be studied to
determine its potential for designation
as a N atior.al Historic Landmark. This
notice will provide information on the
National Historic Landmarks Pro.
gram. the desisnation process and the
effects of desilI1&tion.
(2) When the property has more
than 50 owners. NPS will notify in
wrttin, (1) the chief elected local offi.
cial. <11) the appropriate State official.
(iii) the Members of Congress who rep-
resent the district and State in which
the property is located. and. (iv) if the
property is on an Indian reservation.
the chief executive officer of the
Indian tribe. and (v) provide general
notice to the property owners. This
general notice will be pUblished in one
or more local newspapers of general
circulation in the area in which the
potential National Historic Landmark
is located and will provide information
on the National Historic Landmarks
Procram. the desilI1&tion process and
the effects of desilnation. The re-
searcher will visit each property se-
lected for study unless it is determined
that an onsite investication is not nec.
essary. In the case of districts with
more than 50 owners NPS may con.
duct a publiC information meetin, if
widespread public interest so warrants
or on request by the chief elected local
official.
(3) Properties for which a study was
conducted before the effective date of
these- relUlations are not subject to
the requirements of Paracr&pha (c) (1)
and (2) of thJa section.
(4) The resulta of each study will be
incorporated into a report which will
contain at least
293
f 65.5
(0 A precise description of the prop.
erty studied; and
(11) An analysis of the significance of
the property and its relationship to
the National Historic Landmark crite-
ria.
(d)( 1> Properties appearing to qual.
ify for designation as National Historic
Landmarks will be presented to the
Advisory Board for evaluation except
as specified in paragraph (h) of this
section.
(2) Before the Advisory Board's
review of a property. NPS will provide
written notice of this review. except as
provided below. and a copy of the
study report to <1> the owner(s) of
record; (ii> the appropriate State offi-
cial; (Hi> the chief elected local offi-
cial; (iv) the Members of Congress who
represent the district and State in
which the property is located; and. (v)
if the property is located on an Indian
reservation. the chief executive officer
of the Indian tribe. The list of owners
shall be obtained from official land or
tax record. whichever is most appro.
priate. within 90 days prior to the no-
tification of intent to submit to the
Advisory Board. If in any State the
land or tax record is not the appropri-
ate list an. alternative source of owners
may be used. NPS is responsible for
notifying only those owners whose
names appear on the list. Where there
is more than one owner on the list
each separate owner shall be notified.
(3) In the caae of a property with
more than 50 owners. NPS will notify,
in writing. (0 the appropriate State of.
ficial: (11) the chief elec\.ed local offi-
cial: <HO the Members of Congress
who represent the district and State in
which the property 11 located; (tV) if
the pro pert)" Is located on an Indian
reservation. the chief executive officer
of the IncU&n tribe: and. (v) will pro.
vide general notice to the property
owners. The general notice will be
published in one or more local newspa.
pers of general circulation in the area
in which the property 11 located. A
copy of the study report wtll be made
ava1l&ble on request. Notice of Adviso.
ry Board review wtll also be published
in the FEDaw. Rl:GIS'l'D. ~
(4) Notice of Advisory Board review
will be given at leut 60 days in ad.
vance of the Advisory Board meettna.
36 eft Ch. I (7 .1-11 Edlti~n)
The notice will state dl,te. time 8.f'&ci 10.
cation of the meeting: solicit written
comments and recommendations on
the study report: provide information
on the National Historic Landmarks
Program. the designation process and
the effects of designation and prOvide
the owners of private property not
more than 60 days in which to concur
in or object in v..riting to the designa-
tion. Notice of Advisory Board meet.
ings and the agenda will also be pub-
lished in the FEDERAL REGISTER. Inter.
ested parties are encouraged to SUbmIt
written comments and recommenda-
tions which will be presented to the
Advisory Board. Interested parties
may also attend the Advisory Board
meeting and upon request will be
given an cpportunity to address the
Board concerning a property's signifi-
cance. integrity and proposed bound-
aries.
(5) Upon notification. any owner of
private property who wishes to object
shall submit to the Chief, History Di-
vision. a notarized statement that the
party is the sole or partial owner of
record of the property, as appropriate,
and objects to the designations. Such
notice shall be submitted during the
60.day commenting period. Upon re-
ceipt of notarized objections respect.
ing a district or an individual property
with multiple ownership it is the reo
sponsibility of NPS to ascertain
whether a majority of owners have so
objected. If an owner whose name did
not appear on the list certifies in a
written notarized statement that the
party is the sole or partial owner of a
nominated private property such
owner shall be counted by NPS in de.
termining whether a majority of
owners haa objected. Each owner of
private property in a district has one
vote regardless of how many proper.
tIes or what part of one property that
party owns and regardless of whether
the property contributes to the signifi.
cance of the district.
(6) The commenttna period follow.
ing notification can be waived only
when all property owners and the
chief elected local official have &81"eed
in writin, to the waiver.
(e)( 1) The Advisory Board evalutes
'such factors u a property's stgnifl.
cance, intell'it)". proposed boundaries
294
\
.........1 '.rk ~"Ictt, Int.ri.,
and the professional adequancy of the.
studY. U the Board finds that these
conditiona are met, it Il1&Y recommend
to the Secretary that a property be
designated or declared eliaible for des.
ignation as a National Historic Land.
mark. If one or more of the conditions
are not met, the Board may recom.
mend that the property not be desig-
nated a landmark or that consider.
ation of it be deferred for further
study, as appropriate. In making its.
recommendation, the Board shall
state, it possible, whether or not it
finds that the criteria of the land.
marks program have been met. A
simple majority is required to make a
recommendation of designation. The
Board's recommendations are adviso.
ry.
(2) Studies submitted to the Adviso-
ry Board (or the Consulting Commit.
tee previously under the Heritaae
Conservation and Recreation Service)
before the effective elate of these rei'll'
lations need not be resubmitted to the
Advisory Board. In such instances. if a
property appears to qualify for desig.
nation, NPS w1ll provide notice and a
copy of the study report to the parties
as specified in P&ral'l'&pha (d)( 2) and
(3) of this section and w1ll provide at
least 30 days in which to submit writ.
ten comments and to provide an op-
portunity for owners to concur in or
object to the desilD&tion.
(3) The Director reviews the study
report and the Advtaory Board recom.
mendationa. certifies that the proce-
dural requJrementa set forth in this
section have been met and transmits
the study report8. the recommenda.
tions of the Advtaory Board. his rec.
ommeDdationa and any other recom-
mendatlona and commentl received
pert--''',", to the properties to the
SecretarJ.
(f) The Secretary revte.. the nomi.
nations. recommendations and any
commenta and, bued on the criteria
set forth herein. makn a dec1aion on
National B1.Itorlc Landmark des1lD&-
tioD. Properties that are datenateet
National BJatortc Landmaru are en-
tMed in the NatioDal RePter of RIa-
~c Ptacea. if not already 10 l1ated.
(1) U the prtnte owner or, with re-
spect to dIatrtetI or 1ncIlvidual proper-
tin with multiple ownership. the IDa-
f 65.5
jority of such owners have objected to
'the desil11&tion by notarized state.
ments, the Secretary snall not make a
National Historic Landmark. designa-
tion but shall review the nomination
and make a_determination of its eligi.
bility for National Historic Landmark
designation.
(2) The Secretary may thereafter
deSignate such properties as National
Historic Landmarks only upon receipt
of notarized statements from the pri-
vate owner <or majority of private
owners in the event of a district or a
single property with multiple owner-
ship) that they do not object to the
designation.
(3) The Keeper may list in the Na-
tional Register properties considered
for National Historic Landmark desig.
nation which do not meet the National
Historic Landmark criteria but which
do meet the National Register criteria
for evaluation in 36 CPR Part 60 or
determine such properties eligible for
the National Register if the private
owners or majority of such owners in
the cue of districts object to designa.
tion. A property detennined eligible
for National Historic Landmark desig.
nation is detennined eligible for the
National Regtster.
(g) Notice of National Historic Land.
mark dea~tion. National Relister
listina. or a determination of elil1bility
will be sent in the same manner as
specified in Par&l!'&pha <d)(2) and (3)
of this section. For properties which
are determined eligible the Advisory
Councll will also be notified. Notice
wUl be publlshed in the FEDaw. REG-
ISTa.
(h)(l) The Secretary may designate
a National RJatoric Landmark without
Adviaory Board review throulh accel.
erated procedures described in this
section when necessary to uaist in the
preservation of a nationally siplificant
property endaDaerecl by a threat of
imminent ~AIft..e or destruction.
(2) NP8 will conduct the study and
prepare a study report u described in
paracraph (c)(4) of thtl section.
(3) If a property appears to qualify
for datcnation. the National Park
Service wUl provide notice and a copy
of the study report to the parties spec.
ified in paraarapha (d)(2) and (3) and
will allow at leut 30 day. for the sub-
295
f 65.6
mlttal of written comments and to
provide owners of private property an
opportunity to concur in or object to
designation as .provided in paragraph
(d)(5) of this section except that the
commenting period may be less than
60 days.
( 4 ) The Director will review the
stud.y report and any comments. will
certlfy that procedural requirements
have been met. and will transmit the
study report. his and any other recom-
mendations and comments pertaining.
to the property to the Secretary.
(5) The Secretary will review the
nomination and recommendations and
any comments and. based on the crite-
ria set forth herein. make a decision
on National Historic Landmark desig.
nation or a determination of eligibility
for designation if the private owners
or a majority of such pwners of histor.
ic districts object.
(6) Notice of National Historic Land.
mark designation or a determination
of eligibility will be sent to the same
parties specified in paracraphs <d)(2)
and < 3) of this section.
f 65.6 Recornition of National Hi.toric:
Landmark..
(a) Followina deSignation of a prop.
erty by the Secretary as a National
Historic Landmark. the owner<s) Will
receive a certificate of deSignation. In
the case of a district. the certificate
will be delivered to the chief elected
local official or other local official. or
to the chief officer of a private oraani-
zation involved With the preservation
of the district. or the chief officer of
an oraanization representina the
owners of the district. u appropriate.
<b) NPS wt11 invite the owner of each
desianated National Historic Land.
mark to accept. free of charae. a land-
mark plaque. In the cue of a district.
the chief elected local official or other
local official. or the chief officer of an
oraanization involved In the preserva.
tion of the cUstrict. or chief officer of
an orpnlzation representin, the
owners of the dlatrict. u appropriate.
may accept the plaque on behalf of
the owners. A plaque wUl be presented
to properties where the appropriate
recipient<a) (from thoee 1latecl above)
acreea to cUsplay it publlc1y and appro-
priately.
36 al ~~ I (7.1-18 Edition)
<e) The a,pproprial.e recipient(s) may
acc~Pt t~e plaque at any time after
deSIgnation of the National Historic
Landmark. In so doing owners give up
none ot the rights and privileges of
ownership or use of the landmark
property nor does the Department of
the Interior aCQUire any interest in
property so designated.
(d) NPS will prOVide one standard
certificate ~nd plaque for each desig-
nated National Historic Landmark.
The certificate and plaque remain the
property of NPS. Should the National
~istoric ~dmark designation at any
tIme be WIthdrawn. in accorda.nce With
the procedures specified in ~ 65.9 of
these rules. or should the certificate
and plaque not be publiCly or appro.
priately displayed. the certificate and
the plaque. if issued. will be reclaimed
by NPS.
<e) Upon request. and if feasible.
~S will help arrange and participate
10 a presentation ceremony.
165.7 Monitorin, National Hi.toric: Land.
mark..
<a) NPS maintains a continUing rela.
tionship with the owners of National
Historic Landmarks. Periodic visi ts.
contacts With State Historic Preserva-
tion Officers. and other appropriate
means will be used to determine
whether landmarks retain their integ-
rity. to advise owners concerning ac-
cepted preservation standards and
techniques and to update administra-
tive recorda on the properties.
<b) Reports of monitorinc activities
form the buis for the annual report
submitted to Co~ by the Secre-
tary of the Interior. as mandated by
section 8. National Park System Gen-
eral Authorities Act of 19'70. as amend.
ed (90 Stat. 1940. 16 U.S.C. la-5). The
Secretary's annual report w1llidentify
thoae National Historic Landmarks
which exhibit known or anticipated
tt..",tI.P or threats to their intecrtty.
In evuuatlnl National' Historic Land-
mara for llatinl in the report. the se.
rioUsness and 1mm1nence of the
d~-..e or threat are coDlidered. as
well as the Intelrity of the landmark
at the time of destcnation ta.Itinc into
account the criteria in 185.4.
296
\
N"longl 'ark Mrvlc., l.,.ttP~..
:'~..?~~; ~"2l'X ~~_..;:~,~ .... ~.
(c) M mandated in section 9. Mininr
. ::.':":: ~inthe~Nat1onal Parks Act of 1976 (90
. .... ':~'-5tat. .1342. 16' U.S.C. 1980). whenever
. : :~. .the _ Secretary of' the Interior finds
_. :.. that a National Historic Landmark
may be irreparably lost or destroyed in
whole or in part by any surface mining
activity. including exploration for. re-
. moval or production of minerals or
materials. the Secretary shall ( 1 )
notify the person conducting such ac-
tivity of that finding;
(2) submit a report thereon. includ.
ing the basis for his finding that such
activity may cause irreparable loss or
destruction of a National Historic
Landmark. to the Advisory Council:
and
(3) Request from the Council advice
as to alternative measures that may be
taken by the United States to mitigate
or abate such activity.
(d) Monitoring activities described in
this section. includinr the preparation
of the mandated reports to Congress
and the Advisory Council are carried
out by NPS recional offices under the
direction of the Preservation Assist-
ance Division. NPS [Address: Chief.
Resource Assistance Division. National
Park. Service. 440 G Street NW. Wash.
init,on. DC 20243] in consultation with
the History Division. NPS.
I 65.8 Alteration of National Historic
Landmark boundaries.
(a) Two jultilf,catiofU uilt for en.
larging the bountl47'11 of a National
Hiltoric Landmark: Documentation of
previously unrecolDiZed silDificance
or professional error in the oril1nal
desilD&tion. EnlarCement of a bounda.
ry wW be approved only when the
area propoeed for addition to the Na.
tional BJatoric Landmark possesses or
contributes cUrectly to the characteris-
tics for which the landmark was desil'
nated.
(b) TIDo jult1/ICfItiOfU ui.tt for re-
ducing ~ bouMc&7'1I oJ a National
Hiltoric L4nctmark: Lola of intelrtty
or profeaiona! error in the o~
dea1lDatiop. Reduction of .. boundarY
will be app-'Oved only when the area to
be deleted from the National Historic
Landmark does not poll" or haa lost
the charaCteristics for which the land-
mark waa desisn&ted.
~u.~
(c) A prol'u:;1J for enlugf:mcnt or re-
duction of &, Na.tional Hu;toric l..I.fid-
ma.rk bound~fY m&y bE- submitte<i. to
or can originate with the History Divi.
sion. NPS. NPS may restudy the Na..
tional Historic Landm&rk a.nd subse-
Quently make ~ proposal. if appropri-
ate. in the same manner as specified in
i 65.5 (c) through (h>. In the case of
boundary enlargements only those
owners in the newly nomina.ted but as
yet undesignated area will be notified
and will be counted in determining
whether a majcrity of private owners
object to listini.
( d)( 1) When z. boundary is proposed
for a National Historic Landmark for
which no specific boundary was identi.
fied at the time of designation. NPS
shall provide notice. in writing. of the
proposed boundary to (i) the owner( S l:
(ii) the appropriate State official: nii)
the chief elected local official: (iv) the
Members of Congress who represent
the district and State in which the
landmark. is located. and (v) if the
property is located on an Indian reser.
vation. the chief executive officer of
the Indian tribe. and shall allow not
less than 30 nor more than 60 days for
submittinr written comments on the
proposal. In the case of a landmark
with more than 50 owners. the general
notice specified in I 65.5(d)(3) will be
used. In the case of National Historic
Landmark. districts for which no
boundaries have been established. pro.
posed boundaries shall be published in
the FEDDAL REGISTER fo'r comment
and be submitted to the Committee on
EnerlY and Natural Resources of the
United States Se::late and to the Com.
mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs
of the United States House of Repre.
sentatives and not less than 30 nor
more than 80 days shall be provided
for the submittal of written comments
on the propoeed boundaries.
(2) The propoaed boundarY and any
commenta received thereon shall be
submitted to the Aa80Clatecl Director
for National Repter ProIf'&lD8. NPS.
who may approve the boundarY with.
out reference to the Advtaory Board or
the SecretarY.
(3) NPS will provide written notice
of the approved boundarY to the same
parties apecified in paracraph <d>( 1> of
297
f 65.9
this section and by publ1cJP,tion in the
FmDAL RmISnJl.
(4) M&na8ement of the a.ctivities de.
scribed in parqraphs (d)(1), (2), and
( 3 > of this section is handled by the
National Relister of Historic Places.
NPS. (Address: National Register of
Historic Places, National Park Service.
Department of the Interior. Washing.
ton, DC 20240].
(e) A technical correction to a
boundary may be approved by the
Chief, History Division, without Advi-
sory Board review or Secretarial ap.
proval. NPS will provide notice, in
writing. of any technical correction in
a boundary to the same parties speci.
fied in (d>( 1>.
. 65.9 Withdrawal of National Historic
Landmark deti,..ation.
(a) National Historic Landmarks will
be considered for withdrawal of desil'
nation only at the request of the
owner or upon the initiative of the
Secretary.
(b) Four justifications exist for the
withdrawal of National Historic Land-
mark designation:
( 1) The property has ceased to meet
the criteria for desicnation because
the qualities which caused it to be
oric1nallY desicnated have been lost or
destroyed. or such qualities were lost
subsequent to nomination, but before
designation:
(2) Additional information shows
conclusively that the property does
not possess sufficient slcnificance to
meet the National Hlatoric Landmark
criteria;
(3) Profellional error in the deslcn&-
tion:and
(4) Prejudicial procedural error in
the dll!ldpation process.
(c) Properties desilnated .. National
HIstoric x.Ddmaru before December
13. 1910. caD be dedes1cnated only on
the craun"- established in parqraph
(a)(1) of thilleCt1on.
(d) The owner may appeal to have a
property dedesipated by submlttinl a
request for dedes1lD&tion and stattna
the craun"- for the appeal u estab-
Uahed in au'-ecttOD <a) to the Chief.
HiltorY Dtvtaion. National Park Serv-
Ice. Department of the Interior. Wuh-
m.tcm. DC 20240. AD appellant will re-
ceive a respoDle wltb1n 80 da18 &I to
36 CF~ th. I (7 -1-1& &1~iiion)
whethu" NPS conside~ the docwnen-
tll!,tior. sufficient to initi~te 2, restudy
of the lmdm&rk.
(e> The Secretary mas initiate a re-
study of a National Historic Landmark
and SUbsequently & proposal for with-
drawal of the landrruui; uesignation as
appropriate in the same manner as a
new designation as specified m t 65.5
(c) through (h). Proposals will not be
submitted to the Advisory Board if the
grounds for removal are procedural.
although the Board will be informed
of such proposals.
(f)( 1> The. property will remain
listed in the National Register if the
Keeper detennines that it meets the
National Register criteria for evalu.
tion in 36 CFR 60.4. except if the
property is redesil11ated on procedural
grounds.
(2) Any property from which desig-
nation is withdrawn because of a pro.
cedural error in the designation proc.
ess shall automatically be considered
el1cible for inclusion in the National
Repter as a National Historic Land.
mark without further action and will
be published as such in the FEDERAL
RZOISTZIl.
(1)<1) The National Park Service will
prOvide written notice of the with.
drawal of a National Historic Land-
mark desicnation and the status of the
National Repter listinl, and a copy
of the report on which those actions
are based to (1) the owner<s): <il) the
appropriate State official: (iii) the
chief elected local off1cial~ (iv) the
Members of Concress who represent
the dJatrtct and State in which the
landmark Is located: and (y) if the
landmark Is located on an Incl1an res.
enation. the chief executive officer of
the Indian tribe. In the cue of a land-
mark with more than 50 owners. the
leneral notice specified in I 65.5(d)(3)
will be used.
(2) Notice of withdrawal of desi~a.
tion and related National Repter list-
inI and determinations of ellc1b1l1ty
will. be published periodically in the
FDaAL RmU'l'D. "
<b) Upon withdrawal of a National
HIatoric '..a.n"""ark desilDation. NPS
will reclalm "the certificate and plaque,
if any. laaued for that lau""'ark.
(i) An owner sh&ll not be considered
.. havm. exhauated adminiatratlve
298
,
Hi~€CilO~ fJ€rrf:' ~ft~kOr IfitQri~"
reMroie~ mth respect to :dedesignation
of a Na.ttofi~ Historic L&ndmal'k. until
after submitting an appeal Md receiv-
ing a response from NPS in accord
with these procedures.
~ 65.10 Appeals for designation.
(al Any applicant seeking to have a
property designated a National Histor-
ic Landmark may appeal. stating the
grounds for appeal. directly to the Di-
rector. National Park Service. Depart-
ment of the Interior. Washington. DC
20240. under the following circum-
stances:
Where the applicant-
(1) Disagrees with the initial deci-
sion of NPS that the property is not
likely to meet the criteria of the Na-
tional Historic LandJharks Program
and will not be submitted to the Advi-
sory Board: or
(2) Disagrees with the decision of
the Secretary that the property does
not meet the criteria of the National
Historic Landmarks Program.
(b) The Director will respond to the
appellant within 60 days. After review.
ing the appeal the Director may: (1)
deny the appeal:
(2) Direct. that a National Historic
Landmark nomination be prepared
and processed accordinl' to the regula.
tions if this has not yet occurred: or
(3) Resubmit the nomination to the
Secretary for reconsideration and final
decision.
< c) Any person or organization
which supports or oppoaes the consid.
eration of a property for National His-
toric Landmark desianation may
submit an appeal to the Director,
NPS. durina the desilnation process
either supportinl' or OPpoainl the des.
ignation. Such appeala received by the
Director before the study of the prop-
erty or before ita submisaion to the
National Park System Advisory Board
will be considered by the Director, the
Advisory Board and the Secretary, as
appropriate. in the desianation proc.
ess.
<d) No person S~t~COnaidered to
have exhausted ,trative reme-
dies with respect to failure to desil'-
nate a property a National Histonc
Landmark until he or she has com-
plied with the procedures set forth in
this section.
299
NPS For~ 1 900
'S!lAClC MOUNTAIN
UDitcd Slaltl Dcpu1mcnt of 1be IDtcrior. NaIiooa1 Put Service
NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDHAlUtS NOMINATION
USDIINPS NRHP Rqialratioa Form (Rev. 1-16)
OMB No. 1024-0018
paqe 1
Natioaal RecUlcr of HUtoric PJacea Rqiatratioa Form
1. IiAKE OF PROPERTY
Histol-ic Name:
SHACK MOUNTAIN
Other Name/Site Number:
2. LOCATION
street/I:
2 miles NNW of Charlottesville;
3 miles E of Ivy Creek;
4 miles N of State Route 657;
1 mile NNW of intersection of State Routes 657 and 743
Not for publication:
Vicinity:==::
city/lI'own:
Charlottesville
State: VA
County: Albemarle
Code: 51
Zip Code: 22901
3. CLASSIFICATION
Owner$hip of Property
Private:-1L
Ppblic-local:
Ppblic-State:
Pub~ic-Federal:===
Cateqory of Property
Buildinq(s):-1L
District:
site:
Structure:
Object:===
Numbe~ of Resources within Property
contributing
1
1
Noncontributing
buildings
1 sites
2 structures
objects
3 Total
Numbe~ of Contributing Resources Previously Listed in the National
Regis~er: 1
Name of related multiple property listing:
NPS Porm 1()'900 USDlINPS NRHP Rqwalioa Porm (Rev. &-86)
SHACK MOUNTAIN
Uaitccl Slalea Dcpanmcat of 1be lDterior. NaIiooa1 Part Service
OMll No. l02.~..f(l1 b
. ,age 2
NaIioaal Rcci.a of Hiatoric: PIacca Rcciatralioa Fbrm
4. STATE/FEDERAL AGENCY CERTIFICATION
As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of
1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this nomination request
for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for
registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and
meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part
60. In my opinion, the property ____ meets ____ does not meet the National
Register criteria.
Signature of certifying Official
Date
State or Federal Agency and Bureau
In my opinion, the property ____ meets ____ does not meet the National
Register criteria.
signature of Commenting or Other Official
Date
State or Federal Agency and Bureau
5. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE CERTIFICATION
I, hereby certify that this property is:
-X-- Entered in the National Register
Determined eligible for the
National Register
Determined not eligible for the
National Register
Removed from the National Register
Other (explain):
Date of Action
Signature of Keeper
Jl\PSF_l goo USDJINPS N1UIP RqialntioG Fum (Rev. B-I6) OMB No. 1024-0018
SHACK MOUN'l'AIN Page 3
t UDMd St8Ica ~ of 1be 1ntcrior. Natiooal Pm Service Natiooal Rqiller of Historic PIacea RCCistralioo Form
6. toUNCTION OR USE
Histo ic: Domestic Sub: single dwelling
CUrre tlt: Domestic Sub: Single dwelling
7. bESCRIPTION
Archi ~ectural Classification: Materials:
!:lassical Revival Foundation: Brick
(Jeffersonian Classicism) Walls: Brick
: Roof: Copper, standing seam
Other:
NPS Form 1~900 USDIINPS NRHP RcIiIlnlica Form (ltcv. 1-16)
SHACK KOUNTAXH
Uaited Statea Depar1mcat C1l1bc 1DIerior. NaIioaal Put Service
OMB No, 1024-00J8
. :fage ..
NaIioaal Ilqilter C1l HiIIoric PIacea Ilqiatnlioo FOrm
Describe Present and Historic Physical Appearance.
Located four miles northwest of the University of Virginia with
panoramic views of the Blue Ridge Mountains to the west and north
and the Southwest Mountains to the east, Shack Mountain, named
for the Shackelford family who owned the land, was to be the
retirement retreat of Fiske and Marie Kimball. Begun in 1935,
the house is Kimball's own design in Jeffersonian Classicism
scaled to accommodate the couple.
The following description is quoted verbatim from the National
Register nomination written by the Virginia Historic Landmarks
Commission Staff.
The small house Fiske Kimball designed and built to be his
retirement home at Shack Mountain is a pure example of
Jeffersonian Classicism, so carefully detailed that it might
easily be mistaken as a work by Jefferson himself. Inspired
primarily by Jefferson's design for Farmington, the house is
a one-story, T-shaped dwelling with the front section in the
form of an elongated octagon. Dominating the composition is
a pedimented Tuscan portico with paired stuccoed columns.
The portico'S entablature is carried around the octagonal
section, but only a cornice caps the rear wing. The walls
are brick laid in Flemish bond, and the front section is
covered by a shallow hipped roof sheathed in standing-seam
sheet metal. The windows in the front section have triple-
hung sash framed with dark green shutters, features
characteristic of Jeffersonian work. The windows in the
rear wing are double-hung. A kitchen entrance on the south
side of rear wing has a Chinese lattice railing.
The main entrance to the house, located under the portico,
is a paneled door topped by a traceried transom and framed
by louvred blinds. The door opens into an unexpected
quarter-round alcove through which one enters directly into
the parlor which occupies the northern end of the octagon.
A corresponding quarter-round alcove, leading into the rear-
wing center passage, is in the southeast corner of the
parlor. The parlor thus had convex-curved corners on its
south wall, curves that frame the doorway into the dining
room occupying the southern end of the octagon. Both the
parlor and the dining room have full Tuscan entablatures
corresponding in size with the exterior entablature. These
entablatures provide the rooms with a very monumental aspect
in spite of their relatively small size. The only fireplace
in the house is on the east wall of the parlor. Its mantel
is based on Jefferson designs at the University of Virginia.
The rear wing contains the kitchen, two bedrooms, and a
small study, none of which has any outstanding architectural
decoration. Service areas are located in the basement
beneath the rear wing.
N}'S F<<m 1 900 USDVNPS NlUIP ~ F_ (llev.1-I6)
snqIt KOUNTAZlf
. Uaitcd SlaIeI Dc:par1meDt of !be lnlerior. NatiaoaI Park Service
OMB No. 1024-0018
paqe 5
NatiaoaIllCCiat.u of Historic PIacca llccillralion Fonn
Kimball took special pains with the siting of the house. He
located it at the end of a long, narrow ridge, and had the
approach road follow up the ridge through the woods from the
south. The house was positioned so that the facade faces
west towards a wooded downslope. A circular drive was
placed on the incline in front. Contrasting with the
forest on the south side of the house is a broad open field
on the north. Slots are cut through the trees framing the
field in order to open up views of the countryside and
distant mountains. While the field is fairly level, the
land to the east of the house drops off sharply so that
panoramic views are obtained of the nearer fields and wooded
hills, as well as sections of the Rivanna River. Much of
the rear slope has been terraced by the present owners; the
terraces are planted with flowers, fruits, and vegetables.
A platform for the house itself is provided by the paved
terraces at either end of the octagon. Immediately in the
front of the house is a level grassy area fronted by a low
retaining wall broken in the center by brick steps. Except
for addition of the terraced gardens, a small swimming pool,
and a garden house, which are non-contributing Shack
Mountain and its adjacent lands have changed little since
Kimball's death. 1
1 Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission. National Register
nomination. September 1976.
NPS Fonalo.900 USDIINPS NlUIP..iIlnIica Fona (Rev. 1-16)
SHACK KOUN'l'A:IN
UDitat SIIIla Dcpar1maIt of !be Iatcrior. NaIioaal Park Service
OMS No. 1024-0018
. Page 6
NaIioaal Rqiller of HPtoric: PIacea Rql.tntioo P1ml
8. STATEMENT OF S:IGN:IFICANCE
certifying official has considered the significance of this property in
relation to other properties: Nationally:-X- statewide: Locally:___
Applicable National
Register criteria: A B-X- c-x- 0
Criteria Considerations
(Exceptions): A B C 0 E F G-X-
NHL criteria: 2, 4
NHL criteria Exceptions: 8
NHL Theme{s): XVI. Architecture
M. Period Revivals
5. Neo Classical
XXVII. Education
G. Adjunct Educational Institution
1 . Museums
XXXIII. Historic Preservation
F. Monticello
XXIV. Painting & Sculpture
K. supporting Institutions
Areas of Significance: Architecture Art
Period{s) of Significance: 1935 - 1955
Significant Dates: 1935
significant Person{s): Fiske Kimball
Cultural Affiliation: N/A
Architect/Builder: Fiske Kimball
USDIINPS NJUIp RcciItnIiaD FClIIII (hv.1-I6)
OMB No. 1024-0018
paqe 7
NaIiooaJ llcciater of Hiltoric: Pl8cca Regdtration Form
siqnificance of Property, and Justify criteria, criteria
erations, and Areas and Periods of siqnificance Noted Above.
iske Kimball (1881-1955) was one of the greatest and most
omplex figures in the history of art in the united states.
owering over many of his fellow scholars, he was directly
esponsible for restoring Thomas Jefferson's reputation as an
rchitect in his brilliant book, Thomas Jefferson, Architect
(1916). Kimball's jewel-like home at Shack Mountain, outside of
harlottesville, is the one surviving building which best
xpresses his ideas and taste.
he house he wished to call Tusculum but is better known today as
hack Mountain, was conceived in the same way Jefferson designed
onticello, by choosing a commanding site on a mountain near
harlottesville with wonderful views of Albemarle County. As his
client he built a house in complete harmony with its site.
In his choice of a purely Jeffersonian format for Shack
Mountain, Kimball wanted not only to indulge his fascination
with the style but to demonstrate that regional
architectural traditions could remain viable. Although he
was sympathetic with modern artistic expression, he was
convinced that a local idiom should be maintained for the
sake of an area's identity. Shack Mountain is, therefore,
an amalgam of features he admired in Jefferson's oeuvre,
interpreted in an amazingly convincing manner. The most
obvious source for the plan and elevation is Farmington, an
elongated octagon fronted by a Tuscan portico. The shape of
the parlor, with its curved corners, is a somewhat free
adaptation of the classroom of Pavilion IX at the University
of Virginia. The order within and without is based on the
Tuscan that Jefferson employed for the colonnades at the
University. All of the detailing, the mantel, the moldings,
windows, etc., can be traced to Jefferson sources as well.2
he house is at once a clear, strong statement of the Classic
tyle with exquisite detailing applied with such skill that it
akes a few moments to realize the house is a miniature, a
istillation of the Farmington plan (Plate 142 in Thomas
efferson, Architect). The interior of the house is full of
ight admitted by triple hung windows. The furniture was
esigned for the house and scaled down so that the subtlety of
he scale and refinement of details contributed to the gracious
'nterior. Although the Kimballs intended to retire to Shack
ountain, while they were living they were only able to visit in
he late spring and at Christmas when they entertained old
riends and faculty from his University of Virginia days.
imball was the founder and the first Dean of the School of
rchitecture at the University in 1919. While there he designed
he Memorial Gymnasium, a faculty housing facility, and the
cIntire Amphitheater. For two years (1923-1925) he headed the
chool of Fine Arts at New York University and then became the
2 Ibid.
NPS P_l0.900 USDIINPS N1UIP ~ P- (Ilev.1-I6)
SBACK MOUNTAIN
Uaited SUlci I)qlarImaIl of 1bc IDlCrior. Natioaal PutI: Service
OND No. 1024-0018
, paqe 8
Natioaal Ileciater of Hiatoric PIacea Reshtratiao Farm
Director of the Philadelphia Museum of Art in 1925. He was
appointed to the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Commission as
architectural advisor for the restoration in 1935 and it was at
this time that Kimball determined to build a "very severe little
house" to occupy during his visits to Charlottesville. He also
eventually determined to retire there in the Virginia mountains.
The 110 acres were sold for $4,000. The small brick temple cost
$20,000. From his own design, all the rooms were on one floor
due to Mrs. Kimball's heart condition and there are two servants
rooms on grade at the rear of the house where the grounds slopes
away. The glory of the house is the elongated octagon drawing
room with high ceilings and large curved doors. The enormous
sash windows admit light on the dullest days creating a serene
interior that changes with the change of seasons. sadly, this
lovely house did not receive the Kimballs as they died within
five months of each other in 1955. Shack Mountain was willed to
the Philadelphia Museum whose trustees sold it the same year to
Henderson Heyward, a Charlottesville architect, who re-sold it
the next year to Mr. and Mrs. W. Bedford Moore, the current
owners.
An additional comment is in order on Fiske Kimball and his place
in the history of American architecture and historic
preservation. It is particularly appropriate to note that he was
a member of the Secretary of the Interior's Advisory Board on
Historic sites, Buildings, and Monuments, from January 30, 1936
to June 30, 1951. Among his honors are the following:
Kimball participated in the activities of many learned
societies and served each well when called upon. He was on
the editorial Bulletin, the Gazette des Beaux Arts, and the
New England Quarterly. For five successive years he was in
charge of the American Section of the A1legemeines Kunstler
Lexicon. For periods he served as Chairman of the virginia
Art commission and the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Commission,
and on the advisory Boards for Rockefeller Center, Colonial
Williamsburg, the National Park Service, and the Jefferson-
Bi-Centennial Commission. He was a fellow of the American
Institute of Architects, an honorary corresponding member of
the Royal Institute of British Architects, and a member of
the American Philosophical Society (elected in 1943;
Curator, 1952-1955).
In the midst of making a museum out of a mole hill, his busy
pen found time to turn out several books and a host of
effective articles on the various topics that came within
the large scope of his interest. Of the books, Kimball's
Creation of the Rococo will long stand as the authoritative
work on the subject.
NJ'S P- 1 ,900 USDIINPS NRHP Iqiltnliml p- (Rev. 1-86)
SHAC~ MOtJN'1'AXN
'lJDited DcpaJ1meGt of lbc Interior, NatiooaJ Put Service
OND No. 1024-0018
paqe 9
NatiooaJ RCCilter of Hiatoric PIacea Rq:illralion Form
In 1951 Fiske Kimball was presented with the Philadelphia
Award. The city to which he contributed so much honored
itself in giving him this accolade. Few have been chosen
who deserved it more.3
a distinguished list of ten books, over two hundred
rticles in professional journals, reviews, chapters,
'ntroductions and letters too numerous to cite. He wrote with
reat style, insight and elegance. Most important of all these
chievements is the fact that while he lived he was the Dean of
erican museum directors. His masterwork is the Philadelphia
useum of Art on which he labored for thirty years. He became
irector in 1925 when the building was an empty shell and the
ity collections were meagre and uninspiring {the Pennsylvania
useum was a remnant of the 1876 Centennial housed in Memorial
all (NHL, 1976, in West Fairmount Park.) Kimball's skill as an
rchitect served him well in creating an organized and coherent
et of galleries, which came to be known as Period Rooms, laid
ut in more or less chronological order which was ideal for
eaching art history. This form became common practice in
useums here and abroad. While pursuing potential donors,
irecting building construction and numerous other activities, he
estored and furnished the wonderful group of historic houses in
airmount Park; Mount Pleasant, Cedar Grove, and Sweetbrier. His
xpertise was sought outside of Philadelphia at Monticello,
tratford Hall, Gunston Hall and Colonial Williamsburg, and he
as art advisor to President Truman. with all of these
bligations he still made time for his museum staff, especially
he younger members. With the many difficulties he encountered,
from critics, his board of directors, politicians and rivals he
as free of one problem that afflicts museum directors: no
intramural intrigues were directed at Fiske Kimball, for he had
he loyalty of his staff to an extent that was incomprehensible
o any who had not worked with him. He was not an easy going
an; he could be gruff, and short tempered, but always loyal and
strong. Over the years he acquired great collection after great
collection for the museum, he suffered his share of losses, most
notably the Joseph Widener collection to the Mellons and the then
new National Gallery of Art in washington, D.C. (1939-1941). In
an ironic twist of fate, David Finley, the first director of the
National Gallery who had convinced Widener his pictures should be
in the "nation's gallery" was the uncle of the present owners of
Shack Mountain. The two directors, although competitors, were
respectful, friendly rivals. In addition to his crowning
achievement of the creation of the Philadelphia Museum, Kimball's
greatest contribution was to establish the study and preservation
of American art and architecture as a professional discipline of
the first order.
3 American Philosophical Society Yearbook, 1955.
Philadelphia. p. 469.
NPS Jl<<m 10-900 USDVNPS NUIl'.........1'Ga (llev.1-86)
SBACK MOUN'J.'AXN
thWd Slata I>epartmcm of tbe 1DIuior, Natiooal Put Service
OMB No. 1024-0011
'page'10
Natiooal Rcciatcr of HiIloric PIacea RCC~ Form
9. MAJOR BXBLXOGRAPHXCAL REFERENCES
American Philosophical society Yearbook, 1955 Philadelphia.
Biographical Memoirs. Fiske Kimball (1888-1955) pp. 466-469
Brownlee, David Bruce. Building the city Beautiful: The Benjamin
Franklin Parkway and the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Exhibition
and catalogue. 1989 Philadelphia Museum of Art.
Kane, Mary and Frederick Doveton Nichols. 1959. University of
Virginia Press, Charlottesville, Va. A Bibliography of the Works
of Fiske Kimball.
Kimball, Fiske. Thomas Jefferson, Architect. Boston (Printed
for private distribution) 1916.
Kimball, Fiske. A History of Architecture, New York, Harpers &
Bros., 1918. (In collaboration with G.H. Edgell). Second
revised edition 1926.
Kimball, Fiske. Domestic Architecture of the American Colonies
and of The Early Republic. New York, Scribners, 1922.
Illustrated.
Kimball, Fiske. Jefferson' Grounds and Gardens at Monticello.
New York, Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, 1927. (Collected
reprint of articles from Landscape Architecture).
Kimball, Fiske. American Architecture. Indianapolis and New
York, Bobby-Merrill Co., 1928.
Kimball, Fiske. Mr. Samuel McIntire, Carver, The Architect of
Salem. Portland, Southworth-Anthoensen Press, 1940.
Kimball, Fiske. The Creation of the Rococo. Philadelphia,
Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1943.
Kimball, Fiske. Great Painting in America, New York, Coward-
McCann, 1948. (In collaboration with L. Venturi).
Kimball, Fiske. Le Style Louis XV: origine Et Evolution. Paris,
A & J. picard & Cie., 1949. (Translation of The Creation of the
Rococo.
0' Neal, William B. Architectural Drawing in Virginia 1819-1969.
Charlottesville, Va.: 1969 university of virginia.
Roberts, George and Mary Roberts. Triumph on Fairmont. 1959 New
York: J.B. Lippincott Co.
Stevens, William T., Ed. 1962 virginia House or Tour.
Charlottesville, Va.: Stevenpost publication.
NfS P_l .900 USDJJNPS NRHP ~ P- (ltev.1-I6)
SHACIt KOUHTAZN
'Uaitcd Slalea Dcpar1mcDt of lbc Interior. Natiooa1 Parle Service
OMB No. 1024-0018
page 11
Natiooa1 Rqister of HUtorie PIaca RqPtralioo Form
Previj~us documentation on file (NPS):
breliminary Determination of Individual Listing (36 CFR 67) has
peen requested.
-A- Previously Listed in the National Register.
previously Determined Eligible by the National Register.
Designated a National Historic Landmark.
Recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey: #
Recorded by Historic American Engineering Record: #
Prima~y Location of Additional Data:
~tate Historic Preservation Office
Other State Agency
Federal Agency
~ocal Government
-A- tJniversity
-A- Other (Specify): Harvard University
University of virginia
Philadelphia Museum of Art
tIPS PGm 10-900 USDJINPS NltHP......... PGm (lleY. 1-16)
SHACK MOUNTAIN
Unital StaIa DepanmaIl of the IDterior. Naticaal Park Service
OMS No. IC1lA-OOI8
'paq. '12
NatiooaI RCCUlcr of Hi.coric PIKca Rciillnlioa FllI1II
10. GEOGRAPHICAL DATA
Acreage of Property:
100.9 acres
UTM References:
Zone Northing Easting
Zone Northing Easting
A 17 719210
C 17 718630
4219450
4218270
B 17 719240
D 17 718600
4218280
4219450
Verbal Boundary Description:
The acres comprising the Shack Mountain property are bounded by a
line beginning on the north side of State Route 657, 2,200 feet
due W of Ivy Creek; thence extending 900 feet northeastward
paralleling the approach road; thence extending 300 feet east;
thence extending approximately 1,500 feet northeast and then
north, basically following the 580-foot contour line; thence
extending 200 feet northwest; thence descending the hill 1,000
feet north then 700 feet northwest (the latter following the
pipeline); thence extending approximately 5,000 feet southwest
along the 400-foot contour, basically paralleling the east bank
of Ivy Creek then curving south then southeast along west side of
treeline to north side of Route 657, across the approach road and
to point of origin. The boundaries delineate the 100.9 acre
tract on which Shack Mountain is set and encompasses a sloping
wooded property that rightly complements the landmark.
Boundary Justification:
The property described above is the acreage acquired by Fiske and
Marie Kimball in 1935 for $4,000.
~ p_ 1~900 USDJINPS NRHP ~ P_ (Rev. 1-86)
SHAC)t MOUNTA:Ilf
. United SIaIea Deparlmeot of !be 1Dtcri<<, N.tiooal Park Service
OMB No. 102.4-00111
paqe 13
Natioaa111egistcr of HiIlDric PIaceI Registration Form
11. rORM PREPARED BY
Name/ritle:
Carolyn pitts
Org. :
History Division, National Park Service
Date:
April 24, 1992
stree~/#:
City/r.own:
1100 L Street, NW
Washington
state
DC
ZIP:
20006
Telep~one:
(202)343-8166
NPS/WASO/History Division: Kay 1, 1992
~".') ~"r.WJd ,;i~.' ~-I\~~ ~~.:'~.I(a.r ~ ~;..'.~~~'~~~.,--~,.,~;~,\''T.'.Ii!~.\.~\ -- 000
~~~='7'~'~--:~ ~)jM~\~ ~ ~rt.,): , f\L~ ~~<>~'~~~~>~?[,~J~:\-~~~T
~', '. ~~' ~ \\' ()\QJ. ) A\))5~;;Jt~ ~J) 1.",\ \~ ~ r,C//! ~ ''".
'~<'<nHt~i,j. \ ] 111. ~~~..l ~(~s.-r~w.~~ '.;~..:(~..\s.' &~;.,~'~;.'~rff"
~. ^<:,,': '}~..-0>i'~ .~f~~i~...\.i.. .~/..~;~;;::.. ,:/ ~I.\ \I\~
" : '::y" .'~ c .;0' H ~lf~~~." J: .~~ I,. .j!; ,.' ,,/~/Jj ~tl\
" o' - ~ II ~ V ) ~-! --~ 0 ~' 7~ ~\-
) ~ -= =- . ,\ \'\ I / '0'" ~ :; ft:/ 1,----- '%:l
i" .'\: ..' I, ' . ~"" "\~R\Wl.' .~~7'. . '.,,:.~.. ~~(;f~~<,~:1
\'. . <>_) \ .'~ r\ ~ / .1 ),
II -~== ~ ~ ...~~. ~:;::::::"'_\' 0 / /;/ ri '51.('/
) . / y--.' \ -- )\ ....... ~\~ \\. : ~J< IIC
" . /./ /' ".... \':::...... \ .)--- I~(<I~\ "-" v ~ -:///u:.~ ,::::--V,/ ~/\\ ~c
Ii O/.. ". ".. '-'" ~ n f"\... "~,\::;(I f. 5 ,~'1 --' -- -~
~ /, 600 ::-':::,' .51' . h 1(.' 4220
I; . . \. / ;---J\0/~( 0 '- fl'r'J . \,
9~ . \\. .,' >:/ "e;,)'}/,/'r' ~ ~ '?J ) --0(~~)
i: 0, ',.. . / ~. ~- ~o S60 II .<:-....
II .,/ "_ ./" '"V' V I~_" ,n \\ ~ )r::.1 I
) i: ' '. 60 : ""~" '\ 0 ~ ",,-. Ii -=~ ==IL~~, J;l..... \':'-~) {('\.\-o.
", < "-.. ~~'- ,. , ,,"" .. ~.~
~....~ ,~ / '.. I ''':-I ~~"'/""" : ~~'; f.1 I ~J
)\\~? ~, c'" ~\\\\\\ '-" = .' "-'.. ~) :;.-, 4219
.. (~}~?\J ,v ,~~~,.. .~. r?'n;:::S:~. ::
~ IJj '(.1 O~'. _.1' !~~5 ,,1b~~~f0~~\I'.~ ~ .
';.\\I~ .11 ~, (I ~~~l,(1I)-0' ~',(\~ Y'fd- "~~~ . .~'"
7'1} i (~k '\'c~~"'... ~\I~~!J~HA~!dutr~~- . \\~'f~ ~n?'-'" ~.
L/fl':; i 0 ~ ~ !~~ Albemarle County, Virginia -
~r 10 C ~" " \..,.' IIII/.' ,\'-.~~~,. UTM Coordinates 4218
/1!IQ ',,>,-:1- I.yrr/....:-...~ ..
'i!'. "'~~ - .-/ -~ . ,,,,,,,,,,% fi.~u ~ .~ Zone 17 5'
.. ",/ ~".../" i' ..~l;~ A 719 210 4219 450 8 719 240 4218 280
~' n~"" ,'" V ~~:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ) t '!f~ ~ ~ ...-'.."
~~ ~'\c&~K(f~~~ ~\\~~~'~~ ~ v h:.\~" ~j}~\R\ 4217
if 0 \\~CU ~(fJ ~/1 ~I,S (,,\ Ii. \\ (~' ~J
\\ :\. . '( ~ \:: ::0 J(:.~ ('<< ~) ~\' ,"~I
1\ ~ II I, 'pr;,...~ ~ ~, \(
~' 5 .~\ " ~ ~ ::--\ '.. /.
~~s; 'l '!?:iff)" r~ \ Go ~~.~~ ~~ \-,'-,~
1=~: ~ ~~ '(o)f!; 111~ ,'{> ." / r"'-< . J:t'" ~ I ~(b
./;:!J ~<< ~ ~ ". ,).'";;.rJJJ) (O:l' /k'r@ . ~ ~ . ,,","!l II ~ 'X'\'o~ V)
M,_i~ u ~~.~. l"rC~ ~ ~ ~'~<k~ -;;.Jr )~v ~ ~~.",.... ~~
J~ ~~ I)~/~"J?((~ 'r;h(.$~ o~. . ......:J~"j~"'.v.J - ~~
.J /1 ~ -. 0'" l ~fr'"Yi~r 2 ' ~ 0 .-> ~ ~ : /, - 'vir r:~. '.I~'!.. 11 ~>- ~~
Y?~ ~/ .~. tlu~~00~1@ 0~~' '". II ",-~? .~f'7(7( ~ ~ ~~
~'X\\\\\0~~-~.il.l7\\~ '::::: I~' "(~ ->~_ './l,;" '/ f"--. ~\, C1 i::'if, t~
\
~
,
~.
,.
.
t.
I
r
I
\
i
[
I
I.
I
I
I
1
I
f
I
I
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
I
II
FIRST flOOR
flOOR PLANS
O'
5'
-fl,--
.....
" .
- .
. .
, '.
10'
20'
SITE PLAN
0' IS' JO'
60'
S~ACK MOUNTAIN
FURNACE
....17.4
BASEMENT
· ~-......~ 0
"O~ .0 ~
tJ · 0'0
on ?"" ~ I) ~ p.
o~Do --;: 0 000"
o I' 11 n" D .
DP 009~ 0
· 0 POu'
. ~.. ..A~:. It.
.. . ~...I';j ..
. .. t~ ":)C~'$j
.~ '. . .... ~~:,..J'.:
.. ..... :":..
:. ',' . -. .:. ',... . '. ,I ~{~l)"
~.. f,1~-
r .. .~.
'. :(~:".:'
I ~~. D.
() ~.~:.
'~ .
\~~k".:.
) ..'L~ l\":;' "
.Zt-i> l}~".
~g;;o ..
'---
~~i
.' '
,. . '..
"~ :~?
~- '~ .:7:'!
:.~ I ~.~ ~
~. ~ . it
- ~~j'
BEDROOM
11-10x12-2
-
'>l r-
""~
-
BEDKOOM
11-10x12-2
~
-Q
--
..rt:. ~~ ~ ()
:,ji.. ;Y.w ·
.::-wf' J(
. 10 ~
..~It,v-- .0
oA~-1.jf ()
~~1r.~~(
1'0' b . ~ 1
. ~ ,,- ~
O. .o~
--
0:
...,
r
I
~
H;, ,J-
11- "\
~o
Q~
=1=
Y1
I
HArl
,-d
l->
~
.... :t'.",p
::: ~ 1'{1Jfv.';,'o
K1fJC-HtN . .:..~\y.~\ .~~.
Y7-6 x 13:'6: f~'~,;~,
Q I.'~~~.~~'~~~:
o . :7.;;1,~ ^-. I.
: :v~{op. .
./
LIBRARY /\
11-9x12-8 . ,.
I
RJ
. ,
- .
po
-...
SITTING ROOM
23-8x 17-9
DINING
18-5x17-9
r--.... _
I ~
I
~
..
~
...
:.-A:'
5j
. .
.. ffl~ It:.~
· ..~ \v';1''': .
_ ~~ .V{).~ . /-~"e'
, . [IJ [IJ
. "II
. .
"[8] ~
I I .'
lIT. '. . . "
. .
.
.
. . . .
.
-
. .
. "
. I
" . ,.'U
OFFICE
l2-9x12-0
'OFFICE
12- 9 xl 2-0
u
u
STORAGE
1 2- 0 xl 0 - 6
STORAGE
12 - 0 x 20-4
FURNACE
9-4x17-4
BASEMENT
,
./
" .~
.I<yto.-:.
..,;-1>
;:~ i ':'~~. '. -.
.. ,,. ~ . ":'I'...i, ....
~ - '. .:~f.
;~J:.(' :,~~~.:-~ "-
~~~
:s:;
. '.
"'-.' ':'.. - ~ .
....~.. ..
~~~ ~~~::
~';.,.:
~ ..
....
" 1
,.,-,--
'"<. ;
~J
!.
. :~
0
CJ'\
.......
..-
..-
W
Ul
:J C
0 0
..c .0-1
Ul
'+- Ul
0 -0-1
E
..c E
+' 0
H U
0
C Ul
rn ..:.t.
.0-1 0 H
C +' rn
.0-1 E
01"0 "0
H...-l C
.0-1 W rn
::> .0-1 ...J
'+-
rn
>>"0 -0-1
+' C C
C rn .0-1
:J 01
0 W H
U "0 .0-1
rn ::>
w u
...-l rn >>
H '+- .0
rn
E ..c 0
w +' +'
.0 H 0
...-l 0 ..c
c:::( z a...
. .'
":0(, .
.l.. ;~ .
~..., ,
~,,~-t,rt.. ~"..."
.A' ,.~~
'."" .~.
",.~ .
", ~. ~~..
~~ ... v~..
. -.;; . '
. .. i ~
.~~.
o
CJ\
'"
.--
.--
c
o
.,-i
U)
U)
.,-i
E
E
o
t.J
U)
ro ~
.,-i I-<
C ro
.,-i E
OJ 1:l
I-< C
.,-i ro
:::>W-1
1:l
~roro
>> u .,-i
+>roc
z C ~.,-i
H:J OJ
c::I:O.......1-<
f- t.J +> .,-i
Z C:::>
:=lWO
O...-ll-<>>
~I-<~D
ro '-'
::.:: E
t.J W
c::I:D
I ...-l
rn c::I:
o
+>+>
U) 0
W.c
3a.
OUNTAIN
1e County, Virginia
of entrance
y Virginia Landmarks
Cl
CJ'\
'-.
.-
.-
10
.rl
C
.rl
en
r-.
.rl
::>
c
o
.rl
(Jl
(Jl
.rl
E
E
o
U
(Jl
~
r-.
10
E
1]
C
C 10
QJ....J
.
t
CJ
0'1
'-
.-
.-
C
o
..-1
UJ
E UJ
0..-1
o E
I-l E
o
CJlU
C
..-1 UJ
CO C ~
..-1..-1 I-l
C1:1CO
..-1 E
CJlUJ1:1
I-l 1:1 C
..-1 I-l CO
:::>CO..J
3
~ 0 CO
>>+' ..-1
+' C
C CJl..-I
H:JCCJl
c:I: 0..-1 I-l
I- U ~..-I
Z 0::::>
:::J QJ 0
CJ .-I .-I >>
~ I-l ..0
CO I-l
E 0 0
UQJ.-I+'
c:I: ..0 I-l 0
I.-ICO.c
lfl c:I: c.. c..
SHACK MOUNTAIN
Albemarle County, Virginia
Parlor looking towards front door
Photo by Virginia Landmarks Commission,
"
!I
II
II
;
}
i
~t.
i
I
~'>..~' .~, ....'1
. ~"
'" .,-....,:
; ~
;i
j!
I
I
I
I
i
;
,
I
I
I
,!
I
!/
r'~'Y ~
----
,
~
f
!
r
!
i
l
f
I
Jl
, .
SHACK
Albern
Oinin
Photo
MOUNTAIN
rle County,
room
by Virginia
Virginia
Landmarks Commission, 11/90
......Ol_~.~-:..-"'.
1
AGENDA
Virgini
Reassig
,.
ITLE:
Cooperative Extension
ent of Personnel
SUBJECT PROPOSAL RE UEST:
Notific tion of loss of
Agricul ural Extension Agent
STAFF C
Messrs.
BACKGRO
As part
Agent i
Due to
1/3 to
92.080
Huff
OH t . (,,2", '7.J.-. :: \,3:::~':>
-..,,-......-'--.---______~......w~~...,_.
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
~ I j
r ....
7"
Service -
AGENDA DATE:
June 17, 1992
ITEM NUMBER:
I
/< /' (' (.' /~/>_)- c/ )
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
1/2
time
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:--X--
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
Extension Service's reorganization plan, the Albemarle County Agricultural
being split into a 50% position for Albemarle County and 50% for Fluvanna County.
reassignment, our share of the costs associated with his position will drop from
information.
N DIST EXT SER TEL No.7037432009
Jun 5,92 12:57 No.002 P.02
..
I e
'1IR(;INIA COOPERA~rIVE EXTENSION SEIlVI(:E
I
ViRGiN' ^
'fEe"
Northern District Ext~nsion Offic~
23 West Main Street, Suite B
I~ray, Virginia 22835
(703) 143-2009
VIRGINIA
STA l'E
---.,. .,---
June 4, 1992
Mr. CharI ef; W. Burgess, .1r.
Count;y Adm.i nlstrat.or
P. o. Box '-99
Palmyra, VA 22963
Dear Mr. Burgess:
Thank you for your letter indicating local support for filling
the F.xtension Agent, Agriculture position recently vacated by Chet
Maxey. I thought it would be appropriate to bring you up to date
on our staffing situation statewide as well as locally.
During the past three years of budget reductions, the humber
of Extension agents in Vir.ginia has been reduced from 416 to 287.
As a result, we are in the process of reallocating positions and
relocating many agents throughout the ~tate.
After looking at a number of cri teria, we unfortunately
detnrmined that the staff in Fluvanna would have to be reduced {rom
three agents to two agents.
We also realized that we are lacking in agricultural expertise
for Fluvanna because Tucker Swanson has worked in the 4-H program
for a number of years and therefore has not been able to maintain
his expertise In the agricultural arena. To cover this Situation,
I would be willing to assign Mark Reynolds, Extension 1\gent,
Agriculture in Albemarle County to work fifty percent of his time
in Pluvanna County. In so doing it would be necessary for Fluvanna
and 1\1 bemarl.e to each pay one-sixth of Mark's salary and the
approprjat~ share of his fringe benefits based on each county's
portion of the salary funding.
As you may be aware, the agents in your planning district have
taken a te~m approach to programming and problem solving in the
ast and plan to continue. This team offort Should also help in
ur efforts to providing agricultural expertise for Fluvanna
ount:y.
I regret that our funding has been reduced to the point that
e are having to make these changes. Hopefully, we can get some
estoration in the future.
\'''-,llli,l C ....'r""1 jll I\!' ''''f'I,'\,'m ~I"h It 'I'" i"',1111 E"L11 ~drU1;1t ';N..11,. uf thf' \ jtll:ll,i~ I'olft('~ hill' IUHlrUI.. ;"'c, \I;ur ftul\'I'"fh :md \'it,,'h... c;t:,tr tftlh N..U"
\'U~III1,,... . .:.r~d I ,I~nl h~~llllltlm,\. """i1h tj!of U",'.Htr11f'nt 01 AlII'.1 uhllll' ~"', r ,t1lt..1 f ;11\'1'1 fllrti'IU. ('UI)IIoI""linS rll)~"'HI". ,( .h'id,,~, AHI' l,,,,,"tt,,nlf'nr
"'.I'IU 11Ifdl';",~ jU" ,ih'AiI.,l1t.. In In pf"tl~..1i' 1~'K:lrl'If"" nr rat". to.''', I.."~irtn. \~~. /trol', n;,' jl,ul"rl ',IIr.ill. Ililmlit ,'p, I II r'llriHt ill i\tftlUllnll
An P'll'," n~I'''\lllIl1h\ :'''11;11.1111\'.. .'tllillll "111"ln,..,
N nrST EXT SER TEL No.7037432009
Jun 5,92 12:57 No.002 P.03
*! 1 anxiously await your response to the proposal. If you have
a questions, please feel free to oontact either Margaret Hackler
o lne.
I
I
I
I
I
J Iwsa
co: Dr. Judith Jones
Mrs. Margaret Hackler
Mr. Mark Reynolds
Mr. Robert Tucker
SinoerelYb
Ck-<~ ..1{
r3~~se N. udy
Distriot Director
to
(j . /;(:??
i'<>;;>l!::- . (,.j
...'. _. "'":"--' -,~~..t--'~-::
!'"l';' P"'T' ;
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D. PE HTEl
COMMISSI NER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND,23219
June 2, 1992
Secondary System
Additions and Abandonments
Albemarle County
Project 0660-002-187, CS01, CS02
Bard of Supervisors
C unty of Albemarle
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, VA 22901
M MBERS OF THE BOARD:
As requested in your resolution dated May 6, 1992, the following additions
t and abandonments from the Secondary System of Albemarle County are hereby
a proved, effective May 26, 1992.
A DITIONS
R ute 660 - Sections 3 and 4 of new location Route 660,
P oject 0660-002-187, CS01, CS02
LENGTH
0.21 Mi
A ANDONMENTS
R ute 660 - Sections 1 and 2 of old location Route 660,
P oject 0660-002-187, CS01, CS02
0.23 Mi
4;t~
Ray D. Pethtel
Commissioner
i
.I
I
I
I
. "
{.
jI ..-'
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
w
/.' .<;.;..
....~--."'-.,..b....'_..,_'''''''..
._~:~~ / (;:" t-'. / . ~/ .s".. :.) ..J
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Taxation
Richmond, Virginia 23282
...
June 5, 1992
TO: Councils of Incorporated Cities and Towns
Board of Supervisors of Counties
Commissioners of the Revenue and Supervisors of Assessments
Columbia Gas Transmission corporation
Whereas, in Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation v. State Corporation
Commission, No. 911456 (February 28, 1992), the Supreme Court of Virginia
reversed and annulled the Commission's order and entered final judgment
dismissing the Commission's Rule to Show Cause, and
Whereas, the Commission has vacated the order assessing the real and
tangible personal property of said company,
This is to certify that the document "Statement of Assessed Values for
Local Tax Purposes for Railroads and Interstate Pipeline Transmission
Companies" made by the Department of Taxation for the tax year 1991 is hereby
amended to include the real and tangible personal property of Columbia Gas
Transmission Corporation.
WEU
David E. r;~n
Acting Di or
Property T Division
APPROVED:
/1Wd "" ~-~
W.'H. Forst ~---------
Tax Commissioner
~ ClI .....
<I: ..... :I
.... cn ~
ocnc
.... L&.I ::>-
cn
cn
c
ClI a: >-
:z L&.I ....
<s: - a:
a: L&.I
ClI a: Q..
:z <s: ClI
<S: r...> a:
~ :z Q..
o
:z
~ ClI ClI
<S: ..... :z
.... en <<
oen~
.... L&.I
en
en ~
<S: r...>
-
L&.I
- ~ 0
0-<<-
0- r...> ....
-0<<
-' a:
~ CD ClI
c:zZ
.... _ CI:
o ClI ~
.... :I
~
r...>
-
......
z
o
-
....
r...>
:I
a:
....
en
z
o
r...>
z
2~:::
~:;:~
- E-'
z:
cn ClI
Z Z
<S: C
a:
....
~
<S:
a:
.....
z
.....
CD
- ...
~
<< cn
- ......
a: _
..... -'
.... Q..
<< Q..
E :I
cn
.... a:
z: L&.I
C::Z:
~....
Q.. 0
en ClI en
o z :w:
.... << r...>
:I :I
<S: a:
....
>- ClI
a: z
......e
z.
:c
u
<<
z:
>-
:z
c
Q..
z:
o
r...>
z
o
-
en
cn
-
z:
en
z
<<
a:
....
en
c
CD
<<
-
c:a
z:
:I
-'
o
u
en
CD ....
z z
-.....
.... z:
<< .....
a: ::>-
...... 0
Q.. a:
o Q..
E
-
>-
....
-
r...>
...
....
z
U!
z:
Q..
-
:I
at
......
o
-a
o
In
<::>
<::>
-a
o
....
-a
.
In
CD
-
-
0-
....
o
o
o
o
-
-
0-
....
o
.c
....
en
-
::>-
c
z
.....
:I
-
.. - In
.... CllII In
.... CllII....
....-....
.... 0- -a
.... -..
-a -a
00<::>
000
~~......-
.... CllII ..
.... .... ....
CD all
.. -....
.... CD ....
CD -a ....
- - -
CD .... ....
_....0
..--a
..... ....
.. 0- ....
.... ........
<:>CDCD
a:,.,iN
0..0....
CD -....
..... ....
....
CD
o
....
....
0....
-
CD
o
....
....
In .... ..
0-....
-.... -a
0_
.... ........
..... -a
0- 0- CD
.... 0- ....
CD.... _
.... 0
- ....
_ 0_
0- 0-
.... -a
..... ..0_
-In....
1t"lI.... .....
.ncO~
.. CD ....
o _
- -
.... ....
CD on ....
.... -a 0-
0.... ....
0....
.... ....
CllII CD
-
.... ....
.....
:w:
<S:
.....
~
en
.....
::z:
r...>
.I:: .I::
.... ....
::::I ::::I
a a.....
~ ~ w
00<<
_ c:a ""
....c:~
..aen
.. .... ""
~ ....:
r...> c: r...>
.-
lCL.I:: ~
....c
.. ......
ClI =- CI
....
CD , 0
.... Q
.... ....
In
..
-
....
-
....
o
.....
..
-
-
....
-
....
CD
....
CD
....
..
....
<::>
o
....
-a
....
....
....
o
<::>
CD
!!!
o
....
o
cii
....
!
.....
%
~
~
z
CI
~
Q
r...>
..
2:
....
o
o
o
....
..
0-
-
....
o
o
o
..
0-
....
<::>
o
o
....
<::>
0-
0-
In
-a
o
....
z
CI
....
Il
;:
CI
U
..
.....
....
....
-
<::>
..
.....
....
....
-
....
ai
C"'!
-a
<::>
o
....
o
....
o
-
o
....
o
o
o
o
cD
fi
en
~
~
a:
~
~
....
CD
.....
..
....
.....
o
o
CD
....
.....
CD
In
-a
CD
0-
o
-
0-
.....
-
-
CD
o
-
o
CD
CD
....
....
-a
o
o
o
o
<:>
-
..
....
....
....
....
-'
~
W
.....
Q..
~
-
o
....
o
o
....
o <:>
. ,
- ....
CD 0-
-a
-0
CD
o
o
o
<:>
....
-a
"'"
<:>
z
ClI
....
=
-
-
""
-'
1
-a
CD
....
In
....
o
o
.....
....
-a
CD
-
CllII
....
CD
CllII
....
....
....
-
o 0
0- -a
.... ..
- ....
CllII ....
o t -0
-
o 0
o 0
-
~
CD
.....
.....
.....
0-
-a
cii
=-
~
....
!i
it
""
:z
....
....
....
....
....
o
o
....
....
....
.... 0
....
o
..
CD
- ,
....
o
0-
....
..
0-
....
o
....
-a
~
-a
....
.....
-
-a
....
..
CD
a:
::)
c:a
en
a:
......
....
.....
Q..
o
-0
....
..
....
....
o
-0
....
..
....
....
-
CD
CD
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
:i:
....
:I
ClI
E
en
....
a:
CI
Q..
o
-a
....
o
....
....
.....
....
0-
.....
CD
....
CD
-
....
....
..
0-
o
.....
....
....
....
....
o
0-
-a
-
....
0-
....
....
o
CD
CD
....
o
....
....
......
....
-
o
...
:z
i!
:
u
;:
0-
..
-a
..
o
0-
-
-0
..
-
0-
-
<D
....
CD
CD
....
-
o
o
....
CD
CD
....
-
o
o
o
:C
.....
-'
c
en
-
-
....
....
-
0-.... -
........ ....
-........
0- .... ....
CD 0 0-
CllII....O
-
o
o
....
000
000
In.... ....
CD_O
- -....
- I
....
..
-
o
o
-
........-
........ ....
....In_
o In -a
_ 0- I"')
CD - <::>
-0
.0
c:c
..
-a
....
.... CD
.. In 0
0....1"')
-....
.... - tn
0-.... _
=
o
....0....
- -
0- 0-
.... ....
o
-<::>-
CllII - 0-
.... 0- -a
........0
-a.... _
....- ....
....
....
....
_ 0_
0- 0-
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
o
000
- -
....
....
F>
-oCD_
.... CllII -a
..0 a" ~
CD -0 ....
- .... ..
.... ....
-
-
o
....0....
_ -a 0
........ ....
........-
....-....
:z
ClI
....
Z
:I
C
....
en
.c:
.I:: ....
.... ::::I
::::I a
a ..
~ a
a"",
"'"
..
~a
::::1%
....
""' ..
~~
CI u
.... ::::I
..... .I::
::) U
en
""'
~
ClI
U.
....
:I
_en
lCL
.. ~
.. c
-....
en CI
....
<::>
o
0-
-0
....
-
CD
....
....
....
<::>
CD
In
....
0-
o
o
-
-
In
....
CD
....
-0
N
-0
....
<:>
-
....
....
CD
-
In
....
-
CD
....
In
=
....
CD
CD
N
-
CD
....
-
....
-
....
0-
....
....
....
CD
....
CD
0-
-
....
In
....
<:>
0-
..
....
....
....
....
-
0-
-0
0-
<::>
....
....
0-
-
....
....
In
0-
-
....
<:>
..
....
....
CD
....
....
In
....
""
..
....
-
0-
-0
....
<::>
....
..
..
CD
-
....
<:>
....
....
....
a
a:
o
CD
en
......
:z
>-
<S:
=-
en
.....
-
....
r...>
~
<S:
....
Q
....
.... "'" 1.1I
4:1.1I=
_ cn.....
acn4:
-1.1I:>
U)
U)
4:
"'" a:: >-
:ZLU_
cz: _ ac
ac 1.1I
"'" a:: ....
:Z4:a
4:uac
..... :z ....
a
:z
..... "'" "'"
c .... :z
_ U) c
aU)....
_ 1.1I
U)
U) .....
cu
-
1.1I
-....a
0- c-
0- u_
QC
.... a::
..... CD "'"
c:z:z
_ c
c::JQ.....
-=
....
U
-
1.1I
:z
a
-
-
u
=
ac
-
U)
:z
Q
u
:z
c::J U) U)
;;;~~
U) c-
-:Ie .....
:Ie
U) "'"
:z :z
4: c
ac
-
--
.....
~~
ac
1.1I ....
- ....
4: a..
:Ie =
U)
..... - ac
4: . 1.1I
ac 4: ::I:
1.1I..... _
. .... c::J
1.1I
CD _
~ie
~ ~
-
Q-
. Z
4: 1.1I
:Ie
....
-
=
CII
1.1I
>-
Z
4:
a..
:Ie
a
u
z
c::J
-
en
en
-
:Ie
en
:z
4:
ac
-
en
cI:
CD
<<
-
lID
:Ie
=
.....
c::J
U
en
CD _
z :z
-....
_ :Ie
C 1.1I
a:: :>
1.1I c::J
.... ac
a....
:Ie
-
>-
-
!i
c::J
u
lID
.....
0-
o
lID
or
0-
-
lID
r-
0-
o
....
....
....
or
-
....
....
or
0-
It'>
or
CD
CD
....
....
o
or
....
-4
-4
....
or
....
.....
C>
CD
....
o
.....
....
-4
....
....
~
~
.....
a::
~
....
lID
.....
cI:
-4
or
....
or
....
....
o
C>
o
....
-4
or
....
-
....
....
-
....
CD
It'>
,...
C>
CD
....
....
....
-4
or
....
....
r-
-
or
or
....
....
CD
....
or
or
C>
M
lID
c..-
o
or
11'I
....
o
..
.;:.
z
c
::c
CD
1.1I
.....
::2
-4
CD
.....
CD
.....
0-
o
00
....
-4
CD
r-
-4
.....
0-
0-
....
-
-4
-4
....
....
CD ....
0- ....
..... ....
....
or
00 ....
M ....
0- I 0-
.... ....
.... 0-
o CD
....
....
o
....
or
....
-
....
....
....
....
-0
at
....
-
.c
-
en
=
I
0-
o
....
....
....
-
.....
00
.....
....
....
or
o
....
....
or
or
....
o
....
....
CD
....
.....
....
o
00
.....
lID
....
-4
o
or
-a
....
lID
-a
0-
CD
...
-
-0
0-
.::.
a::
=
o
-
w
-
o
at
-a
....
....
....
-a
..... r- 0-
_ _ CD
~ ... r-_
.... - CD
..... .... ....
CD CD
..... .....
o
000
o 00
.... ....
-a -4
.... ....
-a
....
,.,
....
-4
.... .... 0-
_ _ CD
~....._~
0_....
.... - CD
.... ....
.... ....
0-
-a
r-
.....
-a
....
....
CD
-a _ 0
r-OCD
.... CD ....
0- .... .....
....--
00 _
.... M
00
_0_
CD CD
o 0
.... r-
.... ....
.....
-a
....
CD
-a
r-o--o
_ 0- or
~W!.~
........-
r- CD
.... ....
.... ....
o
....0....
or _
0- 0-
.... ....
or _
o
000 ..
r-
I ....
-
....
or
-
o
....
-
CD..... M
.... 0 or
....... N ...
_.... 0-
or or
or or
M
CD
...
....0....
-a -a
o 0
at CD
,... ,...
- -
~
~
=
!i
IS
>-
-
z
a
_u
Oz
c:: c:
I~
-0
-=
--
-co
c:: .....
::::I c:
~ -
CD a
-
i
~
::c
u
ii
...
0-
CD
r-
CD
0:..
.....
...
all
....
o
00
...
....
0-
r-
all
....
....
...
r-;.
....
o
.
...
....
....
....
-
~
....
-4
.... 0
....
or
o
....
-4
- I
....
o CD
-a ....
all -4
.... ....
all CD
0- M
....
....
....
...
....
....
....
-4
<::>
-a
....
-
....
.... I 0
....
-
o
-a
..
"'"
.....
~
14
a::
1.1I
-
en
....
::I:
U
-
.....
-a
....
....
,.,
o
...
.....
-a
r-
....
,..,
....
....
all
all
....
....
....
CD
.....
o
o
o
..
....
:.0:
=
.....
c..J
2
~
-a
....
....
CD
o
00
all
....
....
....
-
all
....
....
all
or
.
....
-a
....
-
-
....
....
-a
.....
o
-
....
....
.....
-a
-a
.....
o
o
....
....
;0,;
-a
....
...
o
or
-
....
ci:
1.1I
....
....
....
.....
=
c..J
~
....
....
-a
.....
0__
.... or -
CD .... CD
- - -
.... -4_
or .... -a
.... ....
..... .....
o
0- .... or
.... .... 0-
.... ..... 0-
- - t
or 0- .....
-a ....
..... ....
all
-
0-
....
-a
.....
- -a ....
.... -a ....
.... .... all
- - -
.........0
all 0-
.... ....
N N
-a
.....
....
o
o
....
M....O
CD .... -a
.... .... ....
CD CD ,...
or ....
-a -0
..... ....
...
all
.....
o
all 0 all
.... ....
-a -a
o 0
- ....
.....
-
-
~o~
.... .....
.... .....
all CD
....
.....
.....
0-
0-
....
.... .... .....
- In""
.... .... 0-
0- 0-
or or
o
000
0-
....
....
-
all
...
0- IN....
~-~
IN CD 0
.... -0 CD
.... ....
-4 -a
o
.... -a CD
000
........M
-
.... .... -a
or or
- -
::ii
c::J
U)
Z
....
~
"'"
>-
-
_!i
o 0
u
'"
a _
oc
_ 14
a::
--
c: C
014
-co
c:: .....
~~
% 0
-
..
-
c
....
a::
-
c
14
,..,....00
all or M
~alIM
.... or
.... ....
... ...
-
.... ....
000
00 0
..... ....
=: =:
......... 0
CD ... ....
-:.ClJO
M or
-4 -4
or ...
.... ....
....
-a
CD
.... 0.... I
o all all
....0....
-a _....
-a -4
all all
~o!::
.... ....
-
....
::.0=
- ...
-a -4
CD all
.... ....
-0-
.... all -
0-
000
all 0 all
.... ....
.... ....
0- 0-
-a -a
CD 00 CD
-a -a
0- 0-
CD
a::
~
=
CII
=
cI:
14
>-
-
_z
0::=
c::J
10: U
a
o a::
-....
-
-=
:is!!
....c
c: Y..
..
... .....
~ c
.. -
31 a
-
.... .... 0-
.... .... 0-
~~~
.... .... all
o <:> 0
..... -a ....
..... .... 0-
........0
- - -
- -a all
-
ai
....
.....
....
all
.... ... 0-
o -a -a
........0
.... ..... 0-
000
000
....0....
o 0
..... .....
000
o all all
or ...
0- 0-
- -
.... ....
0-4....
--
~..r:..
CD
>-
--
a z
=
c: c::J
au
a
_ en
1.1I
-.....
...-
a CD
a
en ... .....
.... ~ c
==S
CD _
4iI
...... "" L.I.I
c: L.I.I :=I
_ en......
=enc:
- L.I.I :>
en
en
oS:
IC:II co: ,...
z: L.I.I_
oS: co:
cr: L.I.I
"" a: IlL
z:c:=
oS: u a:
...... z 0..
=
Z
...... "" IC:II
oS: L.I.I z:
_ene:
= en......
_L.I.I
en
en ......
e: u
-
L.I.I
O=ci!~
0- u_
- = e:
...... co:
...... CD IC:II
e: z: z:
_ - c:
=IC:II......
_ :=I
......
U
-
L.I.I
- ...
en
L.I.I
-
......
IlL
~
en
en en
~w
c-
:Ie......
IC:II
Z
e:
_ co:
z: L.I.I
e: ::c
......-
0.. =
...
"" en
z: :w
e: u
:=I
a:
-
""-
~~
:Ie
~
:=I
QI
L.I.I
,...
z:
e:
IlL
:Ie
=
U
z:
:=
en
en
-
:Ie
en
z:
c
a:
-
en
c:
CD
c
;;
:Ie
:=I
......
=
u
CD
z:
-
-
c
co:
L.I.I
0..
=
>-
-
!i
=
u
z:
=
-
-
U
:=I
cr:
-
en
z:
=
u
en
-
-
L.I.I
:II:
..,
:>
=
g:
!;
....
1ft
0-
...
-
....
N
.... CD
N_
~-
C>
1ft
...
0-
C>
C>
C>
C> C> C>
C> C>
C> c::..
.. ..
.. -
- I
...
-G
-
,.,
1ft
0-
C>
It')
-
,., CD -
N_'"
.... - ...
-a -a
C> C>
... ...
0- 0-
N
C>
0-
...
1ft
N
...
N
N
...
N
... CD ....
.... CD N
,., .. CD
,., ....
... ...
.... ....
=: =:
C>
-a
-
CD
1ft
.... C> ....
C> C>
CD CD
- -
.. ..
0- 0-
...
1ft
N
1ft
0-
0-
-G C> -G
.... ....
C> C>
.... 1ft
.... ....
,., ,.,
...
N
N
N
. ~"'CD
_ ....-a
-_1ft
.... ....
C>
C> C> C>
-
C>
0-
...
-G
..
-
-
... -a ,.,
C> -a ...
L'" 1ft
0- 0-
I CD CD
0- 0-
_ -a
C>
CD
CD
,.;
0-
-
...,
..
-
.;
~
C> ...,
..
CD
o
C>
,.,
""
:I
:i!
u
=
51
...
o
c
.
0""
--
z:
-:=I
.. =
_u
-
';: W
US L.I.I
.... ..,
~ cr:
.. CD
'a
C ......
.. C
....-
en =
-
!S!
L.I.I
..,
3i
-
...
...
C>
1ft
...
0-
- I
CD
-
0-
- I
-a
In
-
In
-a
..
N
C>
o
N
C>
,.,
-a
In
0-
..
,.,
..
N
CD
CD
1ft
....
CD
....
-a
....
N
C>
0-
....
0-
00
-a
iN
...
-
0-
00
....
....
0-
00
....
...,
iN
In
0-
o
,.,
-
..,
......
......
-
:>
II
L.I.I
..,
cr:
CD
0-
CD
-a
iN
....
00
0-
CD
-a
iN
....
-
N
....
CD
....
,.,
....
..
00
CD
....
,.,
1ft
..
C>
00
o
o
Q;
L.I.I
:>
ir
~
-
-
0-
CD
0-
iN
on
....
CD
-
....
-a
CD
00
....
-a
iN
,.,
....
CD
00
..
0-
on
00
,.,
0-
...
,.,
00
....
....
,.,
on
N
00
00
In
..
....
,.,
..
-a
..
CD
-a
Ci
~
!IE
~
N
1ft
....
N
-G
CD
00
00
C>
..
-
N
1ft
....
CD
..
CD
-
,.,
....
0-
0-
N
0-
0-
,.,
0-
-
-a
...
N
-
..
CD
....
....
1ft
CD
-
C>
00
-
iN
1ft
CD
....
,.,
-a
CD
N
-
ii
-
:a
~
=
L.I.I
......
en
-
-a
N
1ft
iN
-
N
on - -a
... ... -
_ on C>
on .... 0-
-N....
.... ....
.... ...
00
00
....
.... C> CD
on 1ft
CD CD
.... ....
.... ....
on ....
-a
iN
00
N
-
N
... - CD
-.... CD
-a 1t'J-
0- .... ....
,., N -a
-a -a
-a -a
In
....
0-
-a
-a
....
-a
iN
N
_ 00"
-.... ..
,., .... 00
- ... 0-
-iN....
CD CD
... ...
00
CD 00 CD
0- 0-
00 00
CD CD
,., ....
... ...
-
-a
,.,
N
..
-
- ... CD
.... 00 ...
0- -a ....
00 It'J
... iN
,.,
- -
00
- 00-
CD CD
- -
-
00
00 00 00
....
~
-
-
CD
N ,., 1ft
l"lI N 1ft
-_N
"N-a
- -
-a -a
-
-
...
..
N
....
NOON
l"lI l"lI
0- 0-
-a -a
CD CD
~
-
-
u
en
!1M
c
-
>-
-
";!i
=
c U
.
o z
-a
-IC:II
_:=I
~ =
::I ......
-
.. ......
.. c
.. -
......=
-
..
:=I
=
""
:=I
=
......
3
00
....
....
on
I C>
..
-
N
-a
- I
l"lI
-a
0-
,., I
N
..
....
l"lI
0-
....
l"lI
00
00
....
0-
..
N
..
CD
l"lI
..
iN
....
....
0-
CD
0-
..
,.,
-
..
iN
CD
..
-a
N
...
-a
N
-
-
N
-
-
1ft
....
CD
N
N
00
....
0-
on
-a
-a
I ."
-
-
1ft
00
iN
CD
....
....
~
-
:=I
=
......
...
-
~
N
-a
-a
00
00
<:>
-
...
..
CD
- I
-a
-a
-a
iN
-a
..
-a
N
....
....
00
<:>
-
..
-a
..
0-
0-
-
....
00
-a
CD
-
CD
..
z
=
en
-
""
C
:II:
0-
CD
0-
-
....
C>
0-
CD
0-
-
-
....
-a
- , ....
-a ...
00
....
0-
-
....
00
l"lI
00
CD
2:
00
00
N
....
..
-
....
1ft
00
....
00
-
a;;
!i
ca
Z
L.I.I
......
~
!1M
....
...
CD
0-
..
-
00
0-
....
....
..
N
C>
00
....
...
CD
0-
..
-
C>
0-
,.,
....
..
N
,.,
...
-a
00
...
....
0-
0-
00
....
-a
-
-
-a
....
00
00
00
...
....
0-
0-
-
00
....
-a
-
-
~
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
..
L.I.I
CD
-
c
l!5
~
CD
C
IlL
"
"-'c:aL&.l
II e: L&.I ~
GS~4!
II .... LLI :>
" en
" en
" e:
"
"
"
"
.. Q ac: :a-
N ZLIJ......
.. <I: _ a::
II a:: LU
.. c:a a:: a..
II Z CI: Cl
"e:UQ:
II -' z: Q..
" Q
" :z
-' Q ClI
e: ... :z
.... en e:
Qen-,
-L&.I
en
en -'
e U
-
...
;;a!2
0- U....
-Qe
-' Q:
"
"
II -' CD Q
11<1:22
. ....... - <<
Q c:a -'
_ ::0
-'
U
-
.....
:z
-.ao Q
-' -
e en ....
-"'U
Q: - ::0
L&.I -' Q:
Q.. -
e: Q.. en
:a::: ::0 :z
en Q
" U
"
.. UJ en
" z: ...
II -::II:
II e-
II JC --I
"
n ClI
II :z
" e
II
..
"
" -""
I z: L&.I
e: :c
-' ....
Q.. Q
.ao
lCI en
z: :..:
e U
::0
Q:
....
lCI ....
z: z:
e: .....
:a:::
Q..
-
::0
QI
.....
>-
z:
e:
Q..
:a:::
Q
U
z:
Q
-
en
en
-
:a:::
en
z:
e
""
....
en
e:
CD
e:
-
all
:a:::
::0
-'
o
u
en
CD _
~~
.... :a:::
e L&.I
Q: :>
L&.IO
Q.. GI:
o Q..
:a:::
-
>-
-
!i
o
u
..
0-
1ft
..
.....
o
.. , ....
0- CD
It'll .....
.. -0
N 2
..
0-
o
CD
o
o
..
o
,..,
o
o
o
..
o
I"'>
o
o
o
o
..
Do
..
M
o
-
Z
e:
-
e:
~
o
Q..
.....
CD
GI:
o
.....
CD
L&.I
~
GI:
Q..
....
CD
on
0-
It'll
-
.. 0- I"'>
.. It'll 0
-0,,_
- -
I"'> CD .....
0-..... N
"--0
..
g
I"'>
I"'>
It'll
....0....
.... It'll
.... It'll
.... -0
-
.... 0- -0
CD It'll ..
0.. It'll
.... CD on
....NO
"--0
0-
I"'>
CD
I"'>
-0
N
..
0-
CD
..
CD "" 0
0" It'll
.... "" 0-
0- .... -0
01"'>..
....-....
-0
o
....
It'll
I"'>
0-
-00-0
I"'> I"'>
-0 -0
.... It'll
"" .....
o
0-
I"'>
0-
..
....
""
N-oCD
1"'>01"'>
0- -0 It'll
- -
I"'> 1ft
It'll I"'> CD
..-on
o
""
..
-0
N
000
I"'>
0-
....
000
o
-0
..
.....
....
o
N-oCD
0- I"'> N
...~-
01"'>_
I"'> I"'>
CDOCD
.. ..
-0 _
Q
:C
e:
~
-'
-
a
-
..
is
..
...
.-
u.
..
-
-
.-
>
..
..
II:
.-
..
CD
-
-
..
-
..
II:
o
-
en
u.~
II: _
0-'
1ft -'
t:;
..
.,
~
-
:;;:
Q..
-0
I"'>
0-
~
z
:;;:
Q..
~
-
o
-
on
,..,
0-
In
..
~
N
o
o
~
.....
.....
In
I"'>
0-
I"'>
N
o
-
""
I"'>
.
-
0-
....
0-
....
~
""
""
....
..
..
""
-
0-
-
o
0-
-
-
o
....
N
....
-0
o
o
..0
,..,
o
o
.....
....
-
CD
on
-
L&.I
e
as
:..:
u
o
GI:
-0
It'll
-0
o
0-
.....
-,..,....
CD .... ....
0- -0 ....
CD -0 It'll
"--0
o 0
.... ....
..-
It'll
It'll
000
o 0
-0 -0
0- 0-
.... ,..,
.... ....
N
o
-
-I"'>....
CD It'll ,..,
.... -0 0
- - -
0- -0 -0
0-.....
.... ....
-0 -0
0-
CD
N
CD
...
0-
-0
-
N.... 0-
0- CD ....
-0.... 0
00-0
--....
CD CD
.... ....
o
....
....
o
.... - CD
.... CD_
1t'lI_0
....1"'>-
.. It'll
.... ....
o
N
....
0-
....
,..,
C> 0 0
.... ,..,
It'll on
0-
....
....
-0
o
.... CD 1ft
..... _ 0-
-.... ..
0- 0-
0- 0-
N N
C>
0- 0- CD
""--
CD.... _
.... -
,..,
-
-
OCDCD
,.., on CD
0- .... ..0
o
It'll
-
""
..0
,..,
,..,
0-
0- - 0
,.., -0 C>
...._N
0- __
_ --0
N N
i
ii
-
:;;;:
~
GI:
>-
-
z:
::::I
-0
OU
c: :c
-e:
~g
-~
....Z
... L&.I
::I :z:
.A en
..
.. -'
... e:
--
en 0
-
i
o
lCI
~
Z
.....
:c
en
0-
It'll
CD
0-
It'll
....
- ,
-0
;:;
-
4
....
....
CD
CD
I"'>
....
o
....
I"'>
CD
CD
,..,
....
o
0-
.2)
-
It'll
-
o
I"'>
CD
o
-
In
-
C>
....
CD
o
o
o
o
z
o
-
I:
~
-
::::I
o
en
N
..
-
....
CD
o
o
....
""
..-
0-
-0
CD
..0
..0
-0
I"'>
-
It'll
o
....
-
o
....
..
It'll
o
....
-
o
o
o
o
c
Z
e:
:>
-'
>-
en
-
o
a..
en
..0
CD
N
.....
..-
""
o
-0 I"'>
CD ....
N I"'>
-
N 0-
.. 0-
"" ..
- ,
-
o
0-
-0
CD
....
CD
....
,..,
o
0-
0-
N
-
-0
,..,
o
o 0
_ In
In .....
o ....
- ,
- ....
-
....
,..,
-
>-
=
::::I
en
....
....
....
-
o
It'll
o
o
o
""
I"'>
....
CD
0-
,..,
-
0-
0-
In
o
.....
....
In
-
0-
It'll
o
.....
-
-
..
-
L&.I
en
en
::::I
en
-
....
~
0-
..
o
..
....
-0
0-
..
-0
....
....
It'll
0-
CD
o
....
o
It'll
..-
....
o
""
o
o
o
It'll
....
o
I"'>
o
..
-'
-'
!lit
L&.I
...
e:
-
-0
""
-0
I"'>
o
o
It'll
....
....
CD
....
....
0-
....
0-
0-
0-
..
....
CD
0-
""
,..,
0-
In
....
o
....
o
....
o
-
In
N
o
....
o
o
CD
In
0-
0-
,..,
....
-0
....
o
z
.....
GI:
~
a
-
CD
-
o
o
""
..
....
o
CD
..0
In
....
o
....
It'll
0-
o
o
....
CD
o
....
0-
""
-
- II
....
0-
CD
o
..0
o
0-
CD
-0
o
....
""
-
o
..
....
....
""
-0
....
....
It'll
....
0-
....
In
....
o
""
It'll
It'll
CD
CD
..
It'll
o
..
0-
o
0-
N
It'll
In
....
..
-
0-
-
-0
-
....
o
-
0-
CD
....
CD
""
..
....
-
In
....
..
..
....
.....
....
-
-0
....
....
..-
....
o
0-
-
..
""
0-
..-
""
....
.....
....
In
0-
..
....
-0
-0
-
""
I"'>
....
....
-0
.... "
0-
-
-
In
In
o
In
....
0-
0-
CD
o
CD
....
-
en
~
-
!i
CI
u
-'
e:
-
CI
-
-'
e
-
CI
-
...
-
e
CD
L&.I
gs
CD
e:
DATE ?//'-/2--
AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ~5t:7tk ~/?
;(:4 r/ /Y~ ~~ ~~ ...,
AGENDA ITEM NAME W~
DEFERRED UNTIL /-/-~ 2---
Form. 3
7/25/86
, ..~..
L' ~'t1~?, 9~
Af,endJ i:c'ffl '\:.. 9/'/;;:;'; , </ ~
~,._._--.._...- -~- .,...-.,.;.--,...
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45%
(804) 2%-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning ~
June 10, 1992
DATE:
RE:
ZTA-91-05 Mobile Homes
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
June 9, 1992, by a vote of 6-1, recommended denial of the
above-noted zoning text amendment. Attached please find a
staff report which outlines this amendment.
This item is scheduled for review by the Board of
Supervisors on June 17. 1992.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
RSKjjcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
AFF PERSON:
ING COMMISSION:
ARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RONALD S. KEELER
JUNE 9, 1992
JUNE 17, 1992
DENDOH REPORT: ZTA-91-0S MOBILE HOMES
Z A-91-05: RESOLUTION OF INTENT BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO
STRICT OCCUPANCY OF ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED MOBILE HOMES TO
ER OF PROPERTY OR LINEAL RELATIVE OR BONA FIDE AGRICULTURAL
PLOYEE IN THE RA, RURAL AREAS ZONE AND VR, VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL
NE.
CKGROUND
July 17, 1991, the Board of Supervisors referred this matter to
e Planning Commission (Attachment H). The issue was subsequently
bled awaiting recommendation of the Board-appointed Housing
visory Committee. Recently, the Housing Advisory Committee
esented its report to the Board of Supervisors who, in turn,
activated ZTA-91-05 together with direction that pertinent
using Advisory Committee recommendations related to mobile homes
analyzed by the Planning Commission. This report discusses
using Advisory Committee recommendations related to ZTA-91-05.
her mobile home strategies/objectives should be discussed as part
consideration of the report by the Planning Commission/Board of
pervisors.
USING ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
e Housing Committee has made the following recommendation
garding mobile home rental:
(MH2) Mobile homes, including single wide mobile homes, should
be subject to rental like any other type of housing (G1, G2).
(page 71.)
DSCUSSION
tachments A through L discuss issues related to the proposed "no
ntal" clause to be applied to all individually-sited mobile
mes. Of these documents, staff would recommend particular
nsideration be given to Attachment A prepared by the County
torney together with Attachment I prepared by the Zoning
ministrator. The original Planning staff report on ZTA-91-05 is
tachment F. .
1
T e following is a review of the disposition of individual mobile
h me petitions from 1981 through 1991:
. Between January, 1981 and August, 1991, the county received
390 mobile home petitions.
. Of that total, 82 petitions were reviewed by the Board of
Supervisors.
I
T erefore, only 3.3% of these petitions during this 10 year period :
w re disapproved. The following is an analysis of each petition
d nied:
.
Of these 82 petitions, 69 were approved.
1. SP-81-39 - Denied due to public objection and the number of
mobile homes in the area.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
SP-81-51 - Mobile home was proposed for weekend use.
SP-83-03 - Denied due to proximity to a sawmill.
SP-83-47 - Mobile home was proposed for storage use.
SP-84-50 - Mobile home would have been the fourth one on the
property.
SP-85-23 - Mobile home was a proposed rental unit.
SP-85-24 - Mobile home was a proposed rental unit.
8. SP-85-70 - Mobile home was to be attached to an existing
cabin.
9. SP-87-99 - Denied due to proximity to the state road and
public objection.
SP-88-09 Proposed to convert interim mobile home to
permanent mobile home.
SP-89-92 - Mobile home was proposed for storage use.
SP-90-51 - Mobile home was a proposed rental unit.
SP-91-09 - Mobile home was proposed for weekend and vacation
use.
aff opinion is that the inclusion of a "no rental" provision
gether with the Board's demonstrated favor towards "needed
using" has provided a balanced appro~ch toward individual mobile
me location.
2
A to the issue of rental, staff offers the following comments:
1. As a condition of a special use permit, the "no rental"
restriction can be deleted by the Board in a particular case.
Some compelling reason should justify such action to avoid
abuse;
2. The special use permit is the only mechanism available to the
Board to address the special nature of mobile homes on
individual lots in the Rural Areas, short of repealer.
3. The Board tends to elevate consideration of the applicant
above the land use considerations for issuance of a permit as
contained in section 31.2.4.1. That is to say, review of
mobile home petitions is more personalized than other reviews
and conditions according to such review would seem to
rationally follow (personalized review of mobile homes has
been consistent for decades. Note that staff refrains from
making recommendations regarding mobile homes) .
Should the Board choose to abandon personalized review of
mobile homes and focus purely on the content of Section
31.2.4.1 (Basis for Issuance of Special Use Permit by the
Board of Supervisors) the County Real Estate Department should
probably comment in each case on the effect to land values in
the immediate area. Also, the Planning staff in each case
would emphasize as a major land use consideration that the
Rural Areas is not intended as a residential zone and,
therefore, rental housing would be contrary to the intent of
the Rural Areas zoning district.
4. The Zoning Administrator has outlined difficulties involved in
the "no rental" clause. A parallel exists in the subdivision
ordinance in the form of "family division," which is also
subj ect to abuse. The Attorney General has stated that
reasonable provisions and procedures may be undertaken to
avoid subterfuge regarding family divisions.
COMMENDATION AS TO ZTA-91-05:
ile a "no rental" provision is an exception to the general role
of a special use permit (i. e. - attached to the land, not the
a plicant), such restriction results from a demonstrated effort by
t e Board of Supervisors over decades to accommodate this type of
d elling in the case of need. The facts are that individual mobile
h me permits are availed to about 90% of the land area of the
C unty and only about 3% of the petitions filed in the last decade
h ve been disapproved. Given this background, the County does not
a pear discriminatory or exclusionary towards, but accommodating
t , mobile homes as "needed housing" for property owners. Of the
eight counties surveyed by the County Attorney's office, six
3
ounties have prohibition or restrictions on individual mobile
omes in their agricultural/rural districts (Attachment A). Staff
pinion is that inclusion of a "no rental" provision together with
he Board's demonstrated favor towards "needed housing" provides
balanced approach toward individual mobile home location in the
Rural Areas and VR Vi~lage Residential zones. Should the Board
eem that the "no rental" provision is not enforceable or is not a
legal restriction, one alternative is to restrict mobile homes to
obile home parks and mobile home subdivisions which is clearly
allowable under the Code of Virginia.
e Board has adopted a resolution of intent to amend Section 5.6.2
addition of:
f. No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same to be
occupied by the owner of the land on which it is located
or by his lineal relative or bona fide agricultural
employee.
Staff recommends the following change if this approach is to be
sed:
f. No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same to be
ocoupiea BY the Drimarv residence of the owner of the
land on which it is located or By of his lineal relative
or bona fide agricultural employee; and shall not be used
for any other DUrDOSe other than a dwellinq.
ould the Board choose not to adopt the revised language
commended for 5.6.2(f), staff would recommend general repealer of
e "no rental" provision from all special use permits upon which
e same has been imposed. Prior to such action it may be
propriate to renotify all adjoining property owners and hold
ditional pUblic hearings if warranted (It is staff's opinion that
me adjoining owners may have been satisfied with the "no rental"
ndition, but would object if the units were available to rent,
ekend, vacation, or storage uses).
4
ADDITIONAL STAFF COMMENT
Tbe intent of the Board has been to avoid unnecessary proliferation
of mobile homes randomly throughout the Rural Areas, on the one
h~nd, and to allow mobile homes as a legitimate means of housing on
tbe other. Another approach to this issue, which would be simple
tb enforce and potentially more legally sound than "no rental"
p~ovisions, would be to require that the mobile home be the only
d~ellingon the property:
f. Such mobile home shall be the only dwelling on the property
and shall not be used for any purpose other than a primary
place of residence.
A~vantages of this approach in staff opinion are:
1. It would allow for a property owner who may not be able to
afford or desire conventional housing to live on his property.
2. It would be a deterrent to rental housing, yet would allow
opportunity for the property owner to recover his/her
investment once the mobile home is placed.
3. It would largely preclude weekend or vacation units.
4. It would be simpler to enforce and may be legally more sound.
5
T
I ATTACHMENT AI
MEMORANDUM
fiECEJVED
MAR 2 7 1992
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Director of Planning
~"i .^, :'.1" ~ iI" 'Q
ri...r.l"i",i'~ DEPT.
George R. st. John
County Attorney
Legal Parameters of Treatment of Mobile Homes Under
Zoning and Report on Nearby Counties Treatment of
Same
March 25, 1992
In our opinion, Albemarle County's treatment of individual
bile homes is within what is permitted by law, with the
ception that the conditions under administrative approval
ould be the same as those which go to special use permit.
ere follows an analysis, in support of this conclusion:
First, the statutory framework: Virginia Code section 15.1-
466.1 permits counties to designate areas where mobile homes or
parks may be located. This section expressly applies whether or
n t the locality has a zoning ordinance.
Code Section 15.1-486.4 tempers the effect of the above, by
providing that in municipalities having zoning ordinances,
manufactured homes 19 feet or more in width ("double wides")
must be permitted in agricultural districts subject only to
st ndards equivalent to those applied to conventional site built
d llings. This statute contains a provision that local
go ernment regulations enacted under it, shall not relieve lots
or parcels from the terms of private restrictive covenants. .
The Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Act, Code
Se tion 36-70 through 36-85.1, establishes construction and
safety standards but expressly leaves the local zoning power
in act.
The Virginia Fair Hous.ing Act, section 36-96.1 et seq.,
lies to mobile homes and mobile home parks, but is silent as
zoning.
From the above statutory framework, it is clear that the
ginia legislature thusfar has intended to leave counties free
enact restrictions on mobile homes, with the exception of
ble wides in agricultural districts, which are not applied to
ventional housing.
In our opinion, this latitude extends from across-the-board
right inclusion in all districts on the one hand, to total
egation to mobile home parks, on the other. In between these
I ATTACHMENT AI
I Page 21
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Page 2
March 24, 1992
extremes is the system of individual mobile homes by special
permit with conditions, which is what we have in Albemarle.
Turning from statutes to case law, there has been very little
the Virginia courts recently. A good article on the national
nd toward equal treatment of manufactured housing including
ile homes, is contained in Rathkopf, Zoning and Planning,
pter 19, in our office. But in Virginia, very few legal
llenges have been brought, possibly because attorneys feel
t in order to win a challenge they would have to convince the
rts to declare the statutory framework cited above, as
lative of the Federal or state Constitution.
Several years ago, the Circuit Court of Fluvanna County
eld Fluvanna's ordinance, which will be discussed below.
d Payne defended Fluvanna, and its ordinance is similar to
ou s. What is required to defend a case of this kind, is expert
ev'dence to the effect that the regulations are based on
re sonably valid economic, health or welfare considerations and
no on pure aesthetics or prejudice. In the Fluvanna County
ca e, Fred had testimony that mobile homes devalue nearby land,
an thus a rational basis for the ordinance was established.
Again, a review of the cases to date along with the statutes
icate that a system of special use permits, so long as the
ditions are reasonable and the system is administered
artially on a rational basis, will be sustained.
Next is a summary of how nearby counties treat individual
ile homes:
Buckinqham County interestingly has no zoning ordinance and
y regulates mobile homes in parks under its general county
e. Individual mobile homes are by-right in all residential
tricts subject to a "placement permit" from the County
inistrator, which is mainly for tax purposes.
Nelson Countv's ordinance is similar to ours and may have
us d ours as a model. They issue permits administratively if no
ob'ectioni if objection, by special use permit. But they do not
pu on a condition against rent or alienation out of the family.
Greene County uses what is called a conditional use permit
er which a certain set of facts triggers by-right use. Must
owner occupied and owner or family must show either a medical
financial hardshipi permit has four-year time limit for
iew and either termination or renewal dependent on whether
dship still exists. This is all administered by their BZA.
I ATTACHMENT AI
IPage 31
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Page 3
March 24, 1992
Louisa County only allows mobile homes in mobile home parks.
only county we contacted, which totally excludes individual
ile homes. They did this in 1988 because of what they saw as
roblem of over-proliferation of individual mobile homes.
Fluvanna County has provision for farm tenant and "temporary
while house being built", by administrative permit, and hardship
to owner by special use permit with flexible conditions. A copy
of Fluvanna' s application form, with the categories and rules
sp lIed out, is attached. This is the practice which was upheld
in litigation; I forgot to mention above that the plaintiffs in
that case appealed to the Supreme Court of Virginia but their
ap eal was rejected.
Auqusta County has individual mobile homes by-right in all
al districts subject to a placement permit. Equivalent to
ventional housing.
Rockingham County allows mobile homes by-right in one of its
rural districts, and by special use permit in the other.
dship must be shown in the latter, but once shown there is no
or restraint against future rent or non-family
Rockbridge County uses special use permits, liberally issued
wi hout hardship or family limitation but always with three year
re ewals, to assure mobile homes and site are reasonably
maintained to guard against nuisance potential and devalue of
ne rby property.
So you see from the above, there are many variations. The
orneys in these counties believe that their particular
iations are permitted under Virginia law, and vIe concur in
ir belief. What is necessary in case of any challenge, is
irical evidence to justify any particular restrictions and
ditions imposed in the particular county.
Looking at conditions: As most people are aware, the basic
damental rule is that zoning, and permits issued thereunder,
uld run with the land not the person. That is to say, they
ach to the land itself, not to the particular applicant.
er this rule, such limitations as "family only", "owner-
upancy only", and time limits, do not pass muster. However,
trend is for these conditions to be upheld if rationally
portable, and the basic rule is now honored more in speech
n in practice. Therefore, I think such conditions as we
e, including owner-occupancy, screening, time limitation, and
forth, are within what Virginia law permits.
'\ATTACHMENT AI
Ipage 41
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Page 4
March 24, 1992
I have always looked for the law to evolve either through
islation or judicial decisions, to the point where mobile
es would be treated exactly like any other type of housing,
that has not occurred. The one thing we are doing which
cerns me, is that our administrative permits do not restrict
upancy to the owner or the owners family, whereas our special
permits invariably do. This is because the Supervisors
an doing this in every case, without putting a requirement
this condition in the ordinance. Of ccurse, the
inistrator, not having any specific authority to impose this
dition, did not and still does not do so.
We suggest that the conditions for both types of issuance, be
lIed out in the ordinance. We further suggest, that if the
rd is of a mind to review its treatment of mobile homes, then
should take testimony by qualified people, and make findings
fact, as to the effect of mobile homes on surrounding land,
need for them as low cost housing, the market, and so forth,
underpinning for any regulations and conditions they put into
ordinance. I am told that space in mobile home parks is
y hard to come by, for example, and the Board may want to
1 with this as part of its review both of mobile homes and
housing situation in general.
And the Commission and Board should be aware of the study
itled "A study of Mobile Homes" undertaken by the TJPDC in
19 7. This document has valuable information on the number of
ex' sting mobile homes in the various localities and their
tr atment by locality; it also contains recommendations one of
wh ch is that the District Commission be brought into the
pr cess as a clearing house for changes in mobile home zoning
re ulations among the localities in the District. I believe
th s document would be a good starting point for any proposed
re ision in our practice.
I !':rTAC,HMENT A I
. I
IPage 51
propelr~y Owner
FLUVANNA COUNTY, VIRGINtA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Phone
Jl.ddress
Location of Proposed New Use
Total Acreage _____ No. of Present STructures
Tax Map
Describe Proposed New Use
CERTIFICATION OF OWNER
Individual mobile homes are parmitted by the Fluvanna County zoning
Ordinance in A-l Agriculture, R-l Residential, R-2 Residential General
after receiving a Conditional Use Permit from the Fluvanna County Board
of Supervisors under one of the following conditions: (Check one.)
a. Bonafide farm tenant permit is valid for two (2) year intervals.
Revalidation after that period by the Fluvanna County Board of
Supervisors.
*b. While constructing a single family dwelling (mobile home must be
located on the same property as proposed construction). Subject to
renewal each year for a period not exceeding five (5) continuous years
after receiving Conditional Use Permit from Fluvanna County Board of
Supervisors.
c. Hardship cases defined as natural disaster destruction, emergency
medical, or moral responsibility. Permit is valid for two (2) year
intervals. Revalidation after that period by the Fluvanna County Board
of Supervisors.
An inspection fee of $60 is required before mobile home set-up can be
~pp:oved by ~he Building Inspector.
*A copy of your building permit, obtained from the Building Inspector,
must be attached to this application in order for it to be considered by
the Board of Supervisors
I have read the applicable sections of the Fluvanna County Zoning Ordinance
governing the above-stated use(s) and certify that this property will be
used for the above-specified use.
Date
Signature of Property Owner
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ____ day of
19_.
Notary Public
My Commission expires
CERTIFICATION:
!:late
Zoning Admini.stra'\;or
Renewals
1_1'..'l:~(',HMENT Ai i~d~': s:
- propl y Owner
FLUVANNA COUNTY, VIRGINIA
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Phone
}..ddres
Locati n of Proposed New Use
Total creage
No. of Present STructures
Tax Map
Descri e Proposed New Use
CERTIFICATION OF OWNER
Indivi
Ordina
after
of' Sup
ual mobile homes are permitted by the Fluvanna County Zoning
ce in A-l Agriculture, R-l Residential, R-2 Residential General
eceiving a Conditional Use Permit from the Fluvanna County Board
rvisors under one of the following conditions: (Check one.)
a. Bo afide farm tenant permit is valid for two (2) year intervals.
Re after that period by the Fluvanna County Board of
Su
*b. Wh'le constructing a single family dwelling (mobile home must be
lo ated on the same property as proposed construction). Subject to
re ewal each year for a period not exceeding five (5) continuous years
af er receiving Conditional Use Permit from Fluvanna County Board of
Su ervisors.
c. Ha dship cases defined as natural disaster destruction, emergency
me ical, or moral responsibility. Permit is valid for two (2) year
in ervals. Revalidation after that period by the Fluvanna County Board
of Supervisors.
An ins ection fee of $60 is required before mobile home set-up can be
a?p~cved by the Building Inspactcr.
*A copy of your building permit, obtained from the Building Inspector,
must be attached to this application in order for it to be considered by
the Board of Supervisors
I have ead the applicable sections of the Fluvanna County Zoning Ordinance
governi g the above-stated use(s) and certify that this property will be
used fo the above-specified use.
Date
Signature of Property Owner
Subscri ed and sworn to before me this ____ day of
, 19
Notary Public
I
I
CERTIFI ATION:
My Commission expires
Date
--r-.-- """'--'--:--:""~~._'
----
Zoning Admini.stra-cor
Renewal
ZTA-91-05 To ame- ~ the Albemarle County Zon5 ,. ordinancdATTACHMENT I
in Section 5.6.2, . Conditions of Approval f01 Aobile Hom<::;;:, VAl
Individual Lots by the addition thereto of a subsection 'If"
reading: "No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same
to be occupied by the owner of the land on which the mobile
home is located, or by a lineal relative or bona fide
agricultural employee of the owner."
Mr. Cilimberg briefly introduced the item.
5Y
The Chairman invited public comment.
Mr. Kevin Cox addressed the Commission. He felt the County
would benefit by a requirement that all single wides m~et
the HUD Code's Federal Building Standards for Manufact~red
Housing. Regarding the ZTA, he felt the issue was "Is:the
Zoning Ordinance intended to enable a local governing body
to regulate the socio-economic make-up of its populace?" He
felt prohibiting the rental of single-wide trailers would
effect the socio-economic make-up of the County. He quoted
the following case law (City of Manassas vs. Rosson): "A
Zoning Ordinance must not discriminate arbitrarily either in
terms or application;" and "When a landuse permitted to one
owner is restricted to another similarly situated, the
restriction is discriminatory and if not SUbstantially
related to the public health, safety or welfare, denies
equal protection of the laws." He felt owners of double
wide units are "similarly situated" to owners of single wide
units and therefore should be allowed to rent their units
just as double wide owners are allowed to do.
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed
before the Commission.
Mr. Johnson read a prepared statement, a'copy of which is
made a part of this record as Attachment A. He presented a
copy of a North Carolina study on manufactured homes to Mr.
Cilimberg.
9-23-91
I ATTACHMEN~ I Page 21
Mr. Rittenhouse noted that the Board has recently deferred
(to January) two applications to amend special permits to
allow rental of single wides in order to allow time for the
Housing Committee to complete its study and submit a report.
He described two possible actions by the Commission: (1)
Approval of the ZTA as stated would "ensure some consistency
between administrative approvals and the Board's previous
actions," thus it would remove an inconsistency, but it
would not increase the availability of affordable housing by
making these units available as rental units; fr (2) Denial
of the ZTA which would be consistent with the Eoard's action
of deferral because it would allow time for t~e Housing
Committee to complete its study. He pointed out that the
negative aspect of a denial is that the consistency sought
by the proposed amendment would not occur because there
would be no change in the present situation, at least for a
while. He stated he was in favor of the latter action
(denial) because he felt it was premature to "try to
determine how affordable housing is effected by the
allowance of single-wide mobile homes for rental units." He
want~d to wait for the report of the Housing Committee.
J
Ms. Huckle stated she supported the amendment for the
following reasons: (1) Allowing rentals will "slow the
impetus for the County to provide real affordable housing";
and (2) Because there is no inspection of rental property,
landlords could rent substandard, unsafe units. She did not
feel rental mobile homes were more affordable than
traditional rental units. Ms. Huckle indicated she had done
some research and discovered there are currently 1,536
trailers in the County which are appraised at a total of
$5,615,825 (average of $3,356/unit for an average of $26 per
unit in real estate taxes). She felt this was a low price
to pay for educating the children which these units will
house.
Mr. Grimm asked how the County could enforce a "no rental"
policy. Ms. Patterson addressed this question ~nd stated
that it was "extremely difficult" to enforce given the fact
that surveillance is required and the County does not have
the means to perform this type of function. She also noted
that she did not have access to documents which would verify
occupants' relationship to owners of the units.
Mr. Wilkerson expressed agreement with Mr. Rittenhouse's
position. However, he felt either a denial or approval
would be "sending a message." He suggested a deferral until
after the Housing Committee's report has been submitted.
Mr. Grimm agreed.
Mr. Rittenhouse stated he had no opposition to a deferral.
"
Ipage 3\
9";23-91
I~TTACHMENT B I
Mr. Wilkerson moved that ZTA-91-05 be indefinitely deferred
to allow time for the Housing Committee to complete its
study and submit a report. Ms. Andersen seconded the
motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Johnson stated he would support the deferral, but he
asked that the Commission request that the Housing Committee
consider the North Carolina study in ~n attempt to "see what
can be done to these manufactured homes to make them
acceptable and make them serve as lQ\o~'-cost housing." He
stated: "I would not be in favor of.a review of the
situation just based on mobile homes as the seven of us view
them today but I think there are some changes in the Code
that could, as I have indicated in my statement (Attachment
A), make these very acceptable in the locations where they
are most apt to be placed and acceptable to the
neighbors...and also acceptable as low-cost housing."
The motion for deferral passed unanimously.
Mr. Johnson left the meeting at this point (7:40) because of
a previous committment.
,~rATTACHMENT 81
IPage 41
September 1991
A-91-05 Add occupancy restrictions to P 5.6 Mobile Homes
Ir.dividual LClts
are considering a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to eliminate
a I inconsistency in the application of restrictions to the
s~bJect Mobile Homes. Without question, this situation
s ould be corrected. The proposed amendment does remove
t is inconsistency, however, in this process, it creates
.othet~.
Mr. Bowlir.g reported, the State Ccode says that "ar,y urJit
er 19 feet in width, if it meets the appropriate codes,
Mist be treated as any stick-built house." The proposed
a endment thus applies only to units 19 feet or less in
w"dth. It is my lmderstar.diy.g that the r.ext smaller
i crement has a width of approximately 14 feet. Since the
c ~t of the unit is proportional to the size, we are thus
d"rec~ly discriminating on the basis of economic
c pab{lity. Only those not able to financially afford the
a ditional 5 feet will be faced by this restriction
r quiring occupation by the owner of the land etc. Such a
ovision is neither morally or perhaps legally suportable.
ections to mobile homes are primarily based on the
rception that they will have an adverse effect on adJacent
operty values. This they may have, but it will not
cessarily be more than that of a stick-built house of
Imperable vallie. Iy, bc,th situatic.r,s, we are addressiYlg lc,w-
st housing, either as being c.wned or rented.
. lieu of the proposed amendment, I recommend that those
ctions applying to mobile homes in the Zoning Ordinance be
anended along the following lines:
(1) Use the currently accepted terminology of
" arllifactured HClmes."
(2) Permit maY"JL\factured hcomes "By Right" ir. the Rur.al
ea Districts.
(3) Within Section 5, Supplementary Regulations,
entify special conditions applicable to manufactured
~es. These may include (a) Meets or exceeds the
nufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards of the
fice of Housing and Urban Development, (b) Moving hitch,
fATTACHMENTB I
eels and axles, arid tl"~anspc'rting lights remc1ved, (c)
terior siding consists predominantly of vinyl or aluminum
.rizontal lap siding (whose reflectivity does not exceed
at of gloss white paint), wood, or hardboard, comparable
i composition, appearance and durability to the exterior
siding commonly used in standard residential construction,
a.d (d) Set up on a continuous, permanent masonry foundation
masonry curtain wall.
Ie unit to a lot, the value of lots in Albemarle County and
IY anticipated rental return, can be expected to be a
,sitive and significant control over the number of rental
its. The suggested conditions, being more than those
plicable to stick-built houses, will improve the
a ceptance c.f these urlits. Allc1wirlg marlufactl..lred hc,rfles "by
ri ght II wi 11 esserlt i all y el irni rlat e the admi rd strat i ve
p obi ems of the past.
ese manufactured homes are indeed low cost housing. With
,nditions, they can be made acceptable to the locations on
ich they are most apt to be located. We must not forget
at in 1988, 34~ of the population of Albemarle County had
I annual AdJusted Gross Income of less than $15,000.
year ago we made an exception and authorized Montdomaine
C lIars to continue another 3 years using a Temporary
Nc,rlresiderlt i al Mobile HClme because i rl was faci rIg 'II fi narrcial
difficulties" arId was a "busirless activity which is related
to agriculture." Surely we have as much empathy fc,r IClw
cc.st hC11..\sirlg.
opies of zoning information from North Carolina on
anufactured homes are being supplied to Mr. Cilimberg.
. F. Jc,hrlsc,rl
Ipage 51
1 ATTACHMENT C I
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
WORK SESSION - September 10,1991
Hi~hlights:
Greatest objection to mobile homes is the perception by the
puplic that they negatively impact surrounding property
va ues. It has not been determined if this is a real
thl-oeat,
'"
.~
Mr Dennis Rooker, a businessman in the manufactured housing
in,ftustry, answered several questions and offered the
fo lowing comments:
--Single-wide mobile homes sometimes replace sub-
st~ndard conventional housing.
--A single-wide mobile home is much preferable as a
re~tal unit than a substandard stick-built house,
--Cost: Single wide - $13,000 to $30,000
Double wide - $20,000 to $50,000
--Average financing: Single wide - 10% down,
$l~ljmonth for 15 years. Double wide - 10% down, $247jmonth
fo" 15 years,
--The value of a unit after 15 years depends on whether
it is to be sold with the land it sits on, or moved.
--A single-wide, on a 2-acre lot, would have some
va ue.
--Even in mobile home parks where mobile homes are
ow~er-occupied, but the space on which the home sits is
re~ted; the level of upkeep is much higher than in renter-
oc~upied units.
--Only 5-10% of mobile homes are ever moved from their
or ginal sites.
--An older person who must leave his mobile home to
moire to a nursing home could use the rental income which his
mobile home could then produce.
--Owner-occupied units are better maintained,
--HUD guidelines which took effect in 1976 required
th~t manufactured homes pass inspection for safety
st~ndards. These guidelines deal with the quality of
construction,
'ATTACHMENT C I
I Page 21
-2-
--Many communities now accept HUD homes "by-right."
Ot~er communities accept other types of manufactured housing
prl vided they meet the same minimum standards as any other
tYI e housing,
--After the 1976 HUD laws went into effect the number
of fires in mobile homes was no greater than in conventional
dw llings.
--It is often difficult to obtain financing on older
mol ile homes,
Mr. Rooker was asked to provide whatever information he
COt ld to the Housing Committee regarding the policies of
ot er communities,
..
Mr Kevin Cox pointed out that there have been no
apl lications from persons who wish to buy mobile homes
so ely for the purpose of immediate rental, Rather,
in( ividuals want the option of being able to rent the units
af er the family no longer needs the home, Persons often
li~e in the units until they have built a coventional
dWE lling, often at the back of the same property, So if the
mot ile home was then rented, the owner-landlord would be
cll se by to see that it is kept up, No one is going to buy
pr me real estate in Albemarle County with the intent of
pl. cing mobile homes on it for rental purposes, Mr, Cox
SUI gested that a way to control the rental of mobile homes
WOl ld be to state that no one person could own more than one
reI tal mobile home. .
Ec(nom}cs of land values make mobile home parks unattractive
fo in\estors and developers.
Tu nover in small mobile home parks is less than in larger
pa1ks.
Hu(kle; Felt the existing process has worked well and will
be made more effective by restriction against rental of
mol ile homes which receive administrative approval, She
noted that an applicant can seek relief from the Board from
an~ condition placed on a special permit. She also feared
thct a supply of mobile homes as rental units might reduce
thE impetus for finding more acceptable solutions,
Mr, Johnson noted that the present issue is related to
di~crimination, i.e. persons who apply for a single wide and
re(eive no objections, do not have the same restriction
agl inst rental with an administratively approved permit as
th(se who must come before the Commission for approval,
I ATTACHMENT CI
-3-
Mr, Johnson also suggested that the industry might consider
ma ing modifications to double wides which would decrease
th cost (e,g, allowing some of the interior work to be
co pleted by the purchaser) thereby making double wides
af ordable to more people, (Mr, Rooker noted that financing
mi ht be difficult to obtain.)
Qu stions to be answered:
--Is there a public purpose to be served by
di tinguishing single wides from double wides?
--What is going to be accomplished if enforcement is
al ost impossible?
--Are property values really effected and, if so, how?
IPage 31
.~
SE 10 '91 07:
~TACHMENT 0 I
REPUBUC CAPITAL CORPORA nON
P.O. Box 7885
Charlottesville, Va. 22906
(804) 979.5388
FAX (gQ4) 979-0575
September 10, 1991
Mr. V. Wayne CiHmberg
Director of PJ~nning &:
Community Deve}~pment
Albemarle COunty Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Wayne:
I understand that the County is considering changing the ordinance that
effects the availability of mobile homes within the County. -I would like to ~xpress
my concern about the changes in the ordinance that would make it more diffiCult for
people to occupy this type of affordable housing.
As the statistics for housing clearly show, inexpensive rental housing is a
scarce commodity. Although manufactured housing has had an unfortunate sti~
it nevertheless remains a necessary alternative for some people seeldng shelter. I
would advocate that prior to any change recommended oy your staff or placed
before the Planning Commi~sion or the Board of Supervisors, a careful analysis is
done on the effect such an ordinance change would have on the availability Of rental
manufactured housing in the County.
Yours,
~~
~t me.~
BJake Hurt
President
jmen
. . I )-\. .A(';H..vu:a~ I t:
ZTA-91-05- To amend the Albemarle County Zonl.nq Ordl.nal1lr.p
in Section 5.6.2. Conditions of ApDroval for Mobile Homes in
~ndividual Lots by the addition thereto of a subsection 'If"
reading: "No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same
to be occupied by the owner of the land on which the mobile
home is located, or by a lineal relative or bona fide
agricultural employee of the owner."
Mr. Keeler presented the staff report. The report stated the
purpose of the amendment was "to ensure that mobile homes
approved administratively are subject to conditions of
approval as may be imposed by the Board of Supervisors."
Mr. Johnson asked staff to comment on the discussion which
had taken place at the State level which resulted in the
state Code allowing rental of double-wide mobile homes, but
not single wides, i. e. "what is the logic?" Mr. Cilimberg
did not think there had been any discussion of the rental
vs. owner-occupancy issue at the state level "in the case of
those which would become by-right in rural or agricultural
districts." He explained further: "As to the difference,
9-3-91
1 ATTACHMENT E I IPage 2\
where one can be considered one way and one another, is the
essence of land use decision making and what localities are
empowered with and not empowered with. What this locality,
in its rural area district, is empowered to do, is allow
mobile homes not allowed by right under state law by special
use permit, and attach all appropriate conditions...related
to health, safety and welfare." He summarized that the
issue of whether rental or owner occupancy is considered to
be in the public interest is a land use decision.
Mr. Bowling added that the state Code says that "any unit
over 19 feet in width, if it meets the appropriate codes,
must be treated as any stick-built house."
Mr. Johnson asked if compliance with Section 5.6.2 should
also be required of special permits for mobile homes which
are administratively approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Mr. Keeler explained that all the conditions of 5.6.2 are
required and the Zoning Administrator decides whether or not
to grant administrative approval based on 5.6.2(e) which is
related to screening and landscaping, i.e. if there is no
public opposition to a special permit request, then the
Zoning Administrator is satisfied.
The following members of the public addressed the
Commission.
Mr. Kevin Cox - He felt the amendment was unnecessary. He
pointed out that the County's subdivision rules and land use
policy, along with the demand for lots, have contributed to
a dramatic increase in the cost of property, making land
unaf'fordable for many people who must look to single-wides
for housing. He felt the restriction against rental would
be very difficult to enforce. He felt the solution was:
"To allow single wides by-right--change the wording of the
current zoning text amendment so that it reads 'No rental to
be made of the mobile home during the first year following
the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. During this
period the mobile home is to be occupied by the owner of the
land on which it is located or by his lineal relative or
bona fide agricultural employee.'" He also felt an
additional condition should required that a single-wide be
placed on a permanent foundation.
Mr. Cox's comments had included references to staff's memo
dated September 3, 1991, which addressed general issues
related to mobile homes. Mr. Rittenhouse pointed out that
the Commission had not yet discussed the memo. Staff was
suggesting that a work session be held to discuss these
9-3-91
I ATTACHMENT EI
Ipage 31
matt~rs. Mr. Johnson suggested the Commission should not
act on the ZTA until after the work session had taken place.
There followed a debate on whether or not to continue with
the ZTA or to defer it until after the work session.
Public comment continued.
Mr. Greg Davis - He felt the amendment was an "effort to
legislate away poverty." He noted that few people would
choose to live in a mobile home if they had a choice. He
stated: "Just because housing is considered by some to be
undesirable is not, in itself, a reason to legislate it
away."
Mr. Ed Wayland - He was opposed to the amendment. He
stressed that housing is a serious problem in the community
because there are many persons who cannot afford traditional
housing and to take a step eliminating a certain type of
housing which could accommodate these persons is "a step in
the wrong direction." He felt this was sending the message
to a segment of the population that "We're sorry but there
is no place here for you to live and was a serious misuse of
the power of landuse planning." He stated that proper
landuse planning requires planning for all segments of the
population. He felt this step should not be taken unless
there is an alternative provided. He also pointed out that
the special permit process is "humiliating."
There being no further public comment, the matter was placed
before the Commission.
Ms. Huckle pointed out that the amendment would not prevent
persons from buying and occupying mobile homes; rather it
would prevent the rental of mobile homes. She indicated she
was in favor of continuing the policy of the Board of
Supervisors, and noted that the restriction against rental
of mobile homes had been in the original Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Johnson felt a "salient feature of the whole subject"
was its relation to low cost housing.
Mr. R~ttenhouse noted that there has historically-been a
policy of restricting mobile homes from rental and felt the
amendment was a clarification of an existing policy. He also
stated that he was not ready to acknowledge that the rental
of mobile homes was a solution to the issue of affordable
housing. He stated that the fact that mobile homes still
require the issuance of a special permit implies that the
public views this type of housing differently. He concluded
he was willing to support the proposed amendment and he did
not think the amendment was "an attempt to deny affordable
housing by manipulating rental or owner occupancy of mobile
homes."
IPage 4\
9-3-91
I ATTACHMENT EI
Ms. Andersen was in favor of deferral of the ZTA until after
a work session has been held to discuss all mobile
home-related issues.
Ms. Andersen moved that ZTA-91-05 related to the rental of
mobile homes be deferred to September 17, 1991 and that a
work session be scheduled for Septembert 10, 1991.
Mr. Jenkins seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
Mr. Johnson asked staff to consider the question of "is
there any way to satisfy both problems, i.e. acceptability
~nd availability?"
IATTACHMENT Fl.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning~
September 3, 1991
MOBILE HOMES: INDIVIDUAL SITES IN RURAL AREAS
As its meeting of July 17, 1991 when the Board of
Supervisors referred ZTA-91-05 to the Planning Commission,
request was made that the Commission also discuss the more
general issues related to mobile homes. You will have an
otherwise full agenda to consider on September 3, 1991 and
it is suggested that you hold a separate worksession on this
matter at a later date.
Comprehensive reviews related to mobile mobile home sites
were undertaken in 1976 and 1984. Much of this information
may be useful today, however, it appears a comprehensive
land use survey may also be in order (significant
discrepancies exist in past County and Thomas Jefferson
Planning District Commission surveys; only single-wide
mobile homes would be currently surveyed due to change in
state law which allows double-wides by right). Such a
survey would take months to complete.
However, the Commission may wish to discuss the issue solely
on the basis of policy and identified needs. For example in
the early 1980's, staff identified the need for about 250
replacement spaces in mobile home parks due to actual or
likely discontinuance of existing parks. It is likely that
many of these units would be relocated to individual sites.
IATTACHMENT FI
Ipage 21
Board of Supervisors
September 3, 1991
Page 2
Staff offers five alternatives to provoke discussion on this
matter:
1. Prohibit single-wide mobile homes on individual lots:
This would restrict single-wides to mobile home parks.
Double-wides by state law would be allowed by right in
the Rural Areas. Staff opinion is that many people who
could afford a single-wide mobile home may be unable to
afford a double-wide.
2. Review all mobile home special use permits: This
approach would add significantly to Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors reviews. Since 1981, the
County has processed 390 mobile home petitions of which
82 (i.e. - lout of 5) have been reviewed by the Board.
What "impresses staff in this regard is that most mobile
homes do not receive complaint or concerns are
satisfactorily resolved prior to public hearing. While
staff has not analyzed this factor, you may recall that
many complaints are received from out-of-state property
owners.
3. Continue current procedures: The current "review if
appealed" procedure has saved much agenda time to
devote to other issues. Generally, the only additional
regulations which have been applied are in regard to
rental and screening. The Zoning Administrator does
not require screening measures if no objection is
received (screening measures have been agreed to
between the applicant and complainer to avoid public
hearing). A matter of concern outlined by the Board
regarding the current review process is consistent
application of regulation. This simply may not be
practical when some mobile homes are approved
administratively and others are approved (or
disapproved) in the public hearing process.
4. Give the Board of Zoning Appeals authority to approve
mobile homes: Under the Code of Virginia, the Board
may delegate approval of (selected) special use permits
to the Board of Zoning Appeals. As stated earlier, the
County has basically been receptive to need or hardship
on the part of the applicant and the Board of Zoning
Appeals is versed in hardship review. Board of Zoning
Appeals review could be in accord with procedures of
either 2 or 3 above.
IATTACHMENT FI IPage 31
Board of Supervisors
September 3, 1991
Page 2
5. Allow single-wide mobile homes by right: These mobile
homes would be required to comply with the provisions
of S 5.6.2 of the supplementary regulations. Failure
to comply would constitute violation of the Zoning
Ordinance, however, the mobile home would not be subject to
repeal by the County. Since these regulatory
provisions are in the supplementary regulations, relief
or modification would be granted by the Board of
Supervisors as opposed to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
RSK/mem
I ATTACHMENT G I
Kevin Cox
Route 2, Box 226E
Gordonsville, Va 22942
July 16, 1991
f'" " ~ .. .....
~". .
L 1? 1991
, ,
..~<~. ;;'" ~
"':~'~.~:,: ~J
Ti~,;,~
lbemarle county
oard of Supervisors
01 McIntire Road
arlottesville, VA 22901
1-
,.,,'~ \\
l 1.1.
, " -
...~ (. i ,~'.. .';'tC~:: t t'
ince the adoption of the current zoninq ordinance in December of
980 neither a prohibition aqainst rental nor a requirement of
pplicant occupancy have been conditions of approval for mobile
omes as stated in section 5.6.2. Because this condition was
ropped from the zoninq ordinance, all mobile homes which were
dministratively approved since 1980 can be legally rented or
old on the site if the special use permit holder so desires.
ome, but not all, of the BOS approved mobile home permits have
he "no rental" condition placed on them. As recently as 1989
any mobile home permits were approved by the BOS without
pplicant occupancy as a condition. The vast majority of mobile
omes certified for occupancy since 1980 do not have applicant
ccupancy as a condition of approval. Yet there has not been a
roliferation of "de facto" rural trailer parks in Albemarle
ounty. Nor are there larqe numbers of poorly maintained rented
obile homes on rural lots. There are, however, a few very nice
ffordable mobile homes available to rent on rural lots. These
ffordable rentals frequently provide the opportunity for future
ome owners to reduce their expenses and save towards a down
ayment.
t has been suqgested that the lanquaqe of the condition be
hanqed from "applicant" to "owner". The rationale beinq that
e applicant could then sell the home on the site and not lose
heir investment in site work. Unfortunately, many older mobile
omes cannot be sold irreqardless of their physical condition.
en though many of these homes have been considerably improved
nd are on well maintained lots, they remain "trailers" in the
yes of the lenders. Financing the purchase of an older sinqle
ide is very difficult.
ecause sellinq is a limited option, many sinqle wides become
ental properties when the oriqinal buyer is able to afford a
inqle family home or there is a chanqe in circumstances. There
re sinqle wides with the "no rental" condition which are beinq
ented at this time. In one instance an elderly parent livinq in
sinqle wide passed away. After tryinq unsuccessfully to sell
he home, the permit holder rented to a low income elderly
ouple. How would this "no rental" condition be enforced in this
ase? FOrtunately that is not a problem because, the, condition is
I ATTACHMENT G I
I ~age 21
unenforceable. Like much of the zoning ordinance, this
regulation will have to be enforced through citizen complaints.
I will not register a complaint because of the possibility of
eviction and the potential increase in public assistance costs to
meet the housing needs of the evicted tenant.
~ -
I ask that you not amend the zoning ordinance with the ,"no
rental" condition for the following reasons:
1) Unenforceable. This condition will adversely effect honest
people while encouraging scofflaws.
2) Unnecessary. The two acre lot size and five subdivision rule
eliminate the possibility of "de facto" trailer parks in rural
areas. There also has been a decline in single wide permit
applications since the "legalization" of double wides last year.
3) Limits housing opportunities and reduces affordable options.
Families live in a mobile home while paying for the land. When
the land is paid for, it can then be used as collateral for a
construction loan to build on the site with the mobile home rent
providing increased income for the owner, affordable rental
housing and on site management of the mobile home.
Albemarle County has one of the most liberal policies regarding
mobile homes in central Virginia. I commend you and encourage
you to retain it as such.
Sincerely,
Kevin Cox
IATTACHMENT HI
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Albemarle County Board. of Supervisors
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
Community Development
and {1v 0
TO:
DATE:
July 12, 1991
RE:
Conditions of Approval
Mobile Homes Authorized Administratively
~ The Board of Supervisors has requested ordinance language to
restrict occupancy of administratively approved mobile
homes. Such language was included in the prior zoning
ordinance and could be reintroduced in current regulation as
Section 5.6.2(f):
f. No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same
to be occupied by the owner of the land on which
it is located or by his lineal relative or bona
fide agricultural employee.
Currently, special use permits issued by the Board typically
have the condition "Mobile home shall only be occupied by
(property owner) or their family."
If the Board wishes to amend the ordinance to include the
above language, it should pass a resolution of intent to do
so. If the Board feels it should address the mobile home
policy more broadly, staff would like to discuss the issue
with the Board as to the direction to take.
VWC/jcw
cc: Amelia Patterson
IATTACHMENT II
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM,
0: ~ber-\. W. TL\~e,}-:JK,) . c..oun'-'t E.~e.c.u.+\''-fe.. ~
ROM: .Af-J.e-\l5 t--\. Pa+-tef60nJ ~ntnC\ Adml(J\S.-tr-a+o\
ATE: ju \'1 \'1 \ \C"1'1 \ .
E: Lc(~d-'\O()5 Which '~e.s\f"\C~ llie of ~ob;\e.
\-\~0 S?eua \ ?,,~m'l'-t6
Io'-.J e. 6e\[ era \ Co('(\ <<Iee'd.'") ren. --\-\ \[ e.. .-\0 ~ he. e.(\\Drc..e -
, -t and ,(\ter~("e+a-"hor) o~ Sp=c\a' -pe\fY)'\-t5 \NY: \en
~\c...+ aLU(\e<onl~p ancllo\ oc.c..u'p3'tO../ 0.(: mo'b\\e
ome5. T\--e ?nrYUrl1 Cofy:er'(\ i~ {~ 'm'p('oc..+\caL .hl
f e~r\D('cerl\ef)+ o.~ 6uch res-k-IL+\Gno.
ere I~ p~l~ no mech8nl'sm -+0 1()'~o(,N\'-l-hi~
t:epr.\-(Y)e.(\+ 0\ requ-\~e. aWrO\fO-\ -\Or cren~e O~
ttLu~~ 0, (\-\,\-.\e\ ou.:>ner6h1p 0+ mob,le hC:(Y1eo.
10 Ino+l+u+e.. 6uch a mec.honI0(Y) \NOLlld re dt~wl~
and V\l6Ll\d Q.c(\6urre rnuc:Jr\ 6ta-H-~-Hrne... A+ ~+h to
'4-\irY'e. I --thcre ,\ ~ ()cl 5u q: \ c.\U\l 6fa# -to pro"f '\de.
r\eJd I NOPOC+-10t15 and rec.o~ c-h-ecJ\~ r\ec.e.66arY-to
Oc+\\!e.'\i e(lto~e.. 6uch C1:Yld\:+'on~ I f'nforl~el-Ylenf 0+
6\\"'1\\ \0...(' CD()d,+',ons on ()O(\ - le6ldc=n-\- I a \ 6peoet 1
~\'+ U'be~ Such ~ da~~<L Cen-\e('~ a~
p('\\Ja..~ .cc.hoo \-s ,r::, o-H-en l.-\nw\ eJc\ 1\1 ) de.'5-p1 ~c:
,",e. bUD\ ~~ \ \ ~ense 30C1 zon I \~ ~\ea("(J nc.e. 05
mec\rv3n \ \jr{)~ .-\0 ch c.cJ< Ccxn p \ \ tl nee- ,
IATTACHMENT II \page 21
:s ~ \ 'i i I )1 q ~ \
't!v.hs- t vJ. TJ cY,~;z
~~ t
As s secondac-L\ IOSL\e) -L ro"ie. CDnC.ecrl2J a'oou+
'--\-\\e \{\terp-reAfJ,+ion I 30d e(0),t.ernen+ cJ;.. \N ho
5\\3\ \ te. 'pef""(Y\\-t\-cl.. \ C I' F?("'r", I, \l d c.~ l~tJe. dW hco(\+
d\t \C\cJ1..,uJed. 'TYI16 c.ou\d 0\60 \n'46\\/e~eJd
'{\6~C+\CC-c") and recc\(\ Cy-:eck"j ~~(" c.Cq'"1\tj'i \?4~.
J ce.cc,('n(~ne(~ "JIr')6-+ so(Y)e. de-h'(-;',-tiC")n 0+ i\fO(Y\I)~'1
Le- IC1CJIJ(1e-.d \ 1) 311'1 -k,\\rc\ Te.l -\- A\~\e.\d(cerd-
~c()?c6Ld .
~~; -L
I '('-\-;---. i II
I. \-> \.... "
: )
. \ -
(' (})'I ref,,:>J i C\~ ch-) 1~ (~ e-C p CC>3 \L~
'l)\-e.a-:~ \ {"'>-torrY, (Y-le.
?1c\d,+\Gna \
At'i\ r /6p
I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of County Attorney
416 Park Street
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901
Telephone 296-7138
JAMES M. B WLING, IV
DEPUTY COUN Y ATTORNEY
GEORGE R, ST,JOHN
COUNTY ATTORNEY
May 2, 1990
. Wayne Cilimberg, Director
lbemarle County Planning Department
01 McIntire Road
harlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Re: Special Use Permit -- Limitation to Curent Owner
Wayne:
At the Planning Commission's meeting on May 1, 1990, the
ommission asked me to give an opinion as to whether the Planning
ommission can restrict a special use permit to a single owner or
pera tor.
The general rule is that special use permits run with the
and and are not personal to the user. The Planning Commission
nd Board of Supervisors may not impose a condition which is
nrelated to the use of the land. Thus, a special use permit may
ot be conditioned to terminate when the title to land is
onveyed to one other than the applicant. Further, where a
ersonal condition is improperly imposed rt can be removed, even
'f the appl ican t has agreed in wr it ing to ab ide by it. See
erican Law of Zonin , 3rd ed., Section 21.32.
Will you please see that each member of the Commission gets
copy of this letter in an appropriate agenda packet. If you or
ny members of the Commission have any questions, please feel
ree to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
().
! ---
JamiM.
Bowling, IV
B/bm
IATTACHMENT KI
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 229014596
(804) 296-5823
January 22, 1988
Mr. George St. John
County Attorney
416 Park Street
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: Mobile Homes
Dear George:
In recent years, staff has proposed changes in the review
process for current development to provide more time for the
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to devote to
long-range planning and community development issues. The
Planning staff is discussing a recommendation for
substantial change to the approval process for individual
mobile homes subject to Sections 10.2.1.10, 12.2.2.10, and
5.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. Prior to any discussion of
this issue with the Planning Commission, staff seeks your
advice as to the legal aspects and feasibility of this
proposal.
Currently, special use p~rmit review of a mobile home is
required from the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors if the petition receives objection by any person
notified pursuant to Section 5.6.1.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance. The change to this process would be that review
would be made by the Board of Zoning Appeals as opposed to
the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.
Section 15.1-430 of the Code of virginia (1950, as amended)
defines "special exception" as a special use, that is not
permitted in a particular district except by a special use
perm~t granted under the provisions of this chapter and any
.
IATTACHMENT Kt IPage 21
George St. John
Page 2
January 22, 1988
zoning ordinances adopted herewith." Section 15.1.49l(c) of
the Code states in part that "the governing body...may
reserve unto itself the right to issue such special
exception or use permit." Section 15.1-495 of the Code
establishes the powers and duties of board of zoning
appeals. Among powers and duties of a board of zoning
appeals is "to hear and gecide applications for such special
exceptions as may be authorized in the ordinance."
1. The governing body may reserve the right to issue
special use permit or by ordinance designate the Board
of Zoning Appeals to hear and decide such petition.
Does the governing body have authority to designate the
Board of Zoning Appeals to hear and decide selected
special use permits and reserve right to issue other
special use permits?
2. If the answer to Question 1 is "yes," are there any
legal cautions to "fragmenting" the special use permit
review process? That is to say, could permits issued
by the Board of Zoning Appeals be viewed as being of
lesser importance due to delegation of authority by the
governing body?
3. Section 15.1-497 of the Code provides that any person
aggrieved by Board of Zoning Appeals decision may
present petition to the circuit court of the locality.
Should the governing body authorize the Board of Zoning
Appeals to hear and decide special use permits, would
an intermediate appeal of Board of Zoning Appeals
decision to the governing body be permissible or would
such appeal be precluded by Section l5.1-497 of the
Code?
Please do not confine your response to these questions. Any
observations you have regarding this proposal will be
greatly appreciated.
erelY~ T?~
& Community Development
JTPH/jcw
, .
IATTACHMENT K\ Ipage 31
W f~ '~I1~~r\~ID1m~
v j', ,....... ~"'-'~ \_:i I ~- 1 1'1 ,
l\ ~,.~ .^~..,. '"J ! 4.:. -~':~, "
IoJ.:::''W'.K .
. I ~ "I '.'.. - ~ ~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of County Attorney
416 Park Street
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901
Telephone 296-7138
PU'.,I'l i'~, ;,~u D\ \.';::)iGN
JAMES M, B WLlNG. IV
DEPUTY COUN Y M'TOHNEY
January 26, 1988
GEORGE R, ST,JOHN
COUNTY ATTOHNEY
Mr John T. P. Horne
Di ector of Planning
40 McIntire Road
Ch rlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Re: Special Permits - Mobile Homes
(Our File #ACPZ 76-301)
De r John:
In response to your letter of January 22, 1988, concerning
th idea of having the Board of Zoning Appeals issue special
pe mits for mobile homes, your questions are answered as follows:
1. I do believe it is possible for the governing body to
de egate issuance of special use permits for mobile homes, while
res e r v i n g to its elf the rig h t t 0 i s sue allot her s pe cia 1 use
pe mi ts.
2. I don I t think there are any legal problems with
fr gmenting the special use permit process as envisioned above.
3. I do not believe you can appeal the action of the Board
Zoning Appeals on any matter, to the Board of Supervis~rs.
must follow the route prescribed in Code Section 15.1-497,
go'ng directly to the Circuit Court. I am aware that we have
h an intermediate appeal when the Planning Commission approves
disapproves site plans and subdivision plats, but that is a
ferent thing since the Commission is by statute the agent of
governing body for this purpose. Under those circumstances
is impliedly authorized for the governing body to review the
ions of its own agent. However, the BZA has nothing to do
h the County government but is, rather, a separate body
ointed by the Circuit Court and not the agent of the governing
y at all.
..
.
IATTACHMENT KI
Ipage 4\
Mr. John T. P. Horne
Page 2
January 26, 1988
I have some other thoughts on this concept: First, is the
tion of whether the zoning staff or the planning staff should
the staff report to the BZA. The BZA was not set up and
fed for that purpose. And while this is not crucial, it may
omething to consider.
Second, under Code Section 15.1-496 the application must be
sen to the Planning Commission which "may send a recommendation
to the Board or appear as a party at the hearing". If this
sho Id become customary, you are not saving any time for yourself
or he Commission.
Third, if this process should result in more appeals being
n to the courts, because the Supervisors are bypassed, then
whole process is going to be more time consuming than ever.
Tha is because the preparation for, and tr ial of, a case in
court is the most time consuming of any kind of proceeding.
How ver, you will not know if the number of court cases would
increase, until the process is put into effect. I believe it
cou d be put into effect, and if it does not work, then the Board
of Supervisors can take back the responsibility to the Planning
Corn ission and itself.
Sincerely yours,
v~--
George R. St. John
County Attorney
GRS J/tlh
"
..
IATTACHMENT LI
;:~':~' ~";' ,...~. ~~~i .,;. ~ ;"
. I ~ ',' ,"l"f....., ','
. !'. -\ :~~,j-'" :.,..
f.t'......'
I' , ~.~
.\.....' :,t
:~:r~,~
.' ~ .~ ~9
.7
0(;1
..
~ .' ~)
"''!'','. ~~..I.JI
-:1 \:
.:.. .;
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of County Attorney
416 Park Street
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Telephone 296-7138
iF"JLi\I,.jNii";,G DiV.iSION
JAMES M. BOW lNG, IV
DEPUTY COUNlY A O{lNEY
October 20, 1988
GEORGE R. ST.JOHN
COUNTY ATIORNEY
Mr.
Dire
Carom
Coun
401
Char
ohn T. P. Horne
tor of Planning and
nity Development
y Office Building
clntire Road
ottesvi11e, Virginia
22901-4596
Re: Special Use Permits with condition "Non-Transferablell
(Our File #ACPZ 88-66)
Dear John:
We have noticed that the Planning Commission and Board of
isors have been conditioning SUP's as non-transferable with
asing frequency, and expanding the categories of uses to
they apply this condition.
It is a basic rule of law that a SUP is not and cannot be
nal to the applicant but is an attribute of the subject land
uns with the land. Therefore, this condition is always
, lega1ly~ and in some of the recent instances it is in my
ent clearly void.
The condition was first applied in Albemarle to mobile
homes. That was stretching the rule; but because mobile home
permits after all are usually granted based (in part at least) on
the pplicant's individual need for housing, and the mixed
feeli gs most people have on mobile homes, this seemed reasonable
and became customary.
This
most
the
when
ext the condition began being applied to Home Occupations.
seemed reasonable because of the highly personal nature of
of these occupations and the fact that there is little in
ay of capital outlay to be lost if the permit terminates
the holder moves away from the premises.
Ao
ow recently, the condition was applied to a country store
or c aft shop near Ear1ysville, to several day care centers, and
last eek to a nursing home. The rationale I have heard for this
is th t the Commission wants a look at the qualifications of any
.
IATTACHMENT LI , I Page 2l
.
Mr. John T. P. Horne
Page 2
October 20, 1988
future owner before renewing the permit, and wants to see how
we~l the facility is comporting with the other conditions and the
su~rounding neighborhood.
This philosophy is totally different from the reasoning
behind the non-transferability of mobile homes; and while the
la~ter practice is a stretching of the law, the present expanded
application of this condition is clearly unlawful, and
un~nforceable both under the general rule and under the standards
fo~ SUP's in our ordinance.
I strongly advise that this condition be applied only in
ca~es of mobile homes and those home occupations not involving
anv permanent capital outlay to the premises, and any other rare
situation where a use is of a uniquely personal nature to the
applicant.
Sincerely yours,
~~ A( JL---
George R. St. J:hn J
County Attorney
GRStJ/tlh
n ....1 el/
)' -'''.( ... I
~I), f{Jt/~,1f,^
.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Bob Brandenburger, Assistant
County Executive
of Planning anci~cOc/
FROM:
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director
Community Development
DATE:
September 26, 1991
RE:
ZTA-91-05 Mobile Homes
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
September 24, 1991, indefinitely deferred the above-noted
zoning text amendment. This was deferred in order to await
the report of the Housing Committee.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
VWC/jcw
,OJ,!'' ,~ I.
.
"7 j i . J
(1'/, ~ ,.J~
. f . (,~ ,t I _._
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING ~OMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RONALD S. KEELER
SEPTEMBER 3, 1991
OCTOBER 2, 1991
ZTA-91-05 Add occupancy restrictions to S 5.6 MOBILE HOMES
ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS
ORIGIN: Board of Supervisors
PUBLIC PURPOSE TO BE SERVED: To ensure that mobile homes
approved administratively are subject to conditions of
approval as may be imposed by the Board of Supervisors.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT: At its meeting of July 17, 1991 the
Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution of intent to add
to S 5.6.2
f. No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same
to be occupied by the owner of the land on which
it is located or by his lineal relative or bona
fide agricultural employee.
STAFF COMMENT:
Historically, the County has looked favorably upon mobile
home petitions where the property owner is in need of
housing. At the same time, the County has not favored
rental units, hunting lodges, vacation units and the like
(See Attachment A). As a consequence, the Board since 1989
has been uniform in restricting occupancy of mobile homes
(From 1981 to 1989, the Board imposed the "no rental"
restriction in about half of the cases reviewed).
1
~,
.
J-\ I I A\JHIVII::NfA
-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
T
F
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning
William D. Fritz, Senior Planner
August 27, 1991
Mobile Homes
Since 1981 the Board of Supervisors has reviewed 82 mobile
home requests. Of this number 13 were denied. Six of those
approved were approved as temporary mobile homes. Those
requests and brief summary of the reason for denial are
listed below:
1. SP-81-39 - Denied due to public objection and the
number of mobile homes in the area.
2. SP-8l-51 - Mobile home was proposed for weekend use.
3. SP-83-03 - Denied due to proximity to a sawmill.
4. SP-83-47 - Mobile home was proposed for storage use.
5. SP-84-50 - Mobile home would have been the 4th one on
the property.
6. SP-85-23 - Mobile home was a proposed rental unit.
7. SP-85-24 - Mobile home was a proposed rental unit.
8. SP-85-70 - Mobile home was to be attached to an
existing cabin.
9. SP-87-99 - Denied due to proximity to the state road
and public objection.
10. SP-88-09 - Proposed to convert interim mobile home to
permanent mobile home.
11. SP-89-92 - Mobile home was proposed for storage use.
12. SP-90-51 - Mobile home was a proposed rental unit.
13. SP-91-09 - Mobile home was proposed for weekend and
vacation use.
WDF/mem
,. t
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Developm
101 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296,5823
April 16, 1992
Willie Mae Perkins
607 Kelly Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SP-91-39 Willie Mae Hoover
Dear Ms. Perkins:
t;; ,/~ i 9.:2.-,
S?,r./2Zf y2 3
.t P'~ 1. G; ~992
; ;
II
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
April 15, 1992, deferred the above-noted request to its
meeting on June 17, 1992. Please note that this request has
been deferred due to the Board's desire to receive a report
from the Housing Committee on affordable housing.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
\~~
Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
RSK/jcw
~c: Lettie E. Neher
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginicl 22901-4596
(804) 2965823
January 13, 1992
willie Mae Perkins
607 Kelly Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SP-91-39 Willie Mae Hoover
Dear Ms. Perkins:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
January 8, 1992, deferred at the request of staff, the
above-noted request to amend SP-88-86 to permit rental of a
single-wide mobile home on 5.0 acres. This request is
scheduled for review by the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors at their meeting on April 15, 1992.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Of) ~~
v. ~~~:limberg
Director of Planni
Community Development
VWC/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher~
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
" ,. 8' doJI/
, I.,,"'...,~v ,', ,......1-. ,.w ,,, ,.,.-
; '.,',', :,,"" r; Kl..LaJ..J. ~ eft;;
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
0:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
William D. Fritz, Senior Planner W~
August 20, 1991
SP-9l-39 Willie Mae Hoover
E:
On December 21, 1988, the Board of Supervisors approved
SP-88-86, a request for a single wide mobile home on 5.0
acres (Attachment A). Staff has included the original staff
report for this mobile home as Attachment B. The applicant
is now requesting relief of Conditions 6 and 8 which limits
the use of the mobile home to family members only and states
that the mobile home cannot be rented. As a justification
for this request the applicant has stated:
"Since there was a compliant on my special use permit,
I had to go before the Board of Supervisors. The
condition was placed that only a relative could occupy
the mobile home. On the special use permits that are
approved administratively, the condition is not placed.
I have spent more than $15,000 on site work. If my
daughter would vacate the home, it would be a hardship
to have to vacate the property. I feel this condition
is discriminatory. I feel this is discriminatory
against me since the other special use permits that
were approved administratively did not have this
condition at the time of my approval."
Staff has researched past Board actions on mobile homes and
can offer the following comments. Since 1981, the County
has accepted 390 mobile home requests of which 82 (2l%) have
been acted on by the Board of Supervisors and 69 of those
reviewed have been approved. Since 1989, all mobile homes
approved by the Board (17) except for one (a double-wide
Memo: Board of Supervisors
August 20, 1991
Page 2
mobile home on a permanent foundation with a peaked roof)
have had a condition restricting rental of the mobile home.
Prior to 1989, the Board restricted the rental of the mobile
homes in 16 cases and approved 30 with no conditions
limiting rental. The Board also approved six (6) mobile
homes on a temporary basis and acted to deny 13 mobile home
requests. Double-wide mobile homes are no longer subject to
special use permit due to changes in the state code.
WDF/mem
ATTACHMENTS
IATTACHMENT A, Page 11
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
ecember 28, 1988
illie Mae Hoover
nspections Department
01 McIntire Road .
harlottesville, VA 22901
SP-88-86 Willie Mae Hoover
Tax Map 102, Parcel lE
Mrs. Hoover:
he Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
ecember 21, 1988, unanimously approved the above-noted request
o locate a single wide mobile home on five acres, accessed off
f private easement, zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, located on
he west side of Rt. 20, approximately 2.7 miles south of
'ntersection with Rt. 742. scottsville Magisterial District.
lease note that this approval is subject to the following
onditions:
Albemarle County Building Official approval;
Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable
requirements for district in which it is located;
Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of the
mobile home to be completed within thirty days of the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
IATTACHMENT A, Page 21
illie Mae Hoover
age 2
ecember 28, 1988
provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to
the reasonable satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and
approval of the Virginia Department of Health, if applicable
under current regulations; ,
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;
Mobile home permit is issued for use by the applicant or
applicant's immediate family only;
Mobile home to be located as shown on the plat recorded in
Deed Book 560, page 635;
Mobile home shall not be rented.
lease note that according to Section 35.0 of the Zoning
rdinance, the applicant is responsible for paying any expenses
'ncurred by the County during the processing of the application.
herefore, you are required to reimburse the County for $34.00.
ake your check payable to the County of Albemarle and submit
ayment to the Zoning Department. The attached invoices shows a
ist of expenses.
f you should have any questions or comments regarding the above
oted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
--r4~
hn T. P. Horne
irector of Planning & Community Development
Maurice J. Thomas, Jr
Kathy Dodson
IATTACHMENT 8, Page 1\
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
William D. Fritz
November 29, 1988
December 21, 1988
SP-88-86 - MAURICE J. THOMAS, JR.
Petition - Willie Mae Hoover (new owner of parcel) petitions
the Board of Supervisors in accordance with Section 5.6 of
the Zoning Ordinance for the issuance of a special use
permit for a permanent single wide mobile home on 5.0 acres.
Location - Property described as Tax Map 102, Parcel 1E is
located on a private road on the west side of Route 20
approximately 2.7 miles south of Route 742. Zoned RA, Rural
Area. Scottsville Magisterial District.
Character of Area
This property is located on a private road approximately
2/10 miles west of Route 20. Properties along the private
road are primarily residential. The property itself is
primarily cleared with existing young growth to the west and
south of the parcel. A small stand of existing evergreens
in the front of the property provides some screening from
the private road. One mobile home is currently located
within a one mile radius.
Staff Comment
One letter of objection has been received regarding this
petition. The letter states opposition to the permit
because "granting of it would be contrary to the purpose and
intent of the Zoning Ordinance and detrimental to public
health and welfare."
rrwo dwellings, including that of the objecting landowner are
visible from this site. The applicant has stated that the
mobile home is to be the residence of her daughter.
The mobile home is to be located as shown on the attached
plat from Deed Book 560 Page '35.
Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
choose to approve this petition, staff recommends the
following conditions:
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.
1
IATTACHMENT B, Page 21
3). Skirting around mobile home from ground level to
base of the mobile home to be completed within
thirty (30) days of the 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 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). Mobile home permit is issued for use by the
applicant or applicants family only.
2
. '.: ..... .' . 10.', -"~
.......~;)
",
..
BOOK 560 r'\~l635
"-
'. .... ~30' FOR f:r,
S J9 J-' ..J~/Jt STINe, RI",
'0,1 ~t':--lo.5.~.{!l [-.....:..:. SfE PL.1 rs I" 0
---.{ --..:. --- f rO R..... .8
........... --.:: -;-.!:3!...rt 2
- ..,.:.~ 8 ---... ..... . . ~9
....!!Jtj __.., __
---.: llltt: ~8'~1
~. -. r'lOl4 rlo ----
.-.:!; I!OJD
1I:c
-"a...
\ ;'\
'.
-. .... ;,.",...
,
,
,
,
\
i
\
~
5,OO'Ac.
1<71
<0,
~"to
r:: .J'
-\ \,
~
",
~
vJ
0\
00\..
~>
xl
....'
:,1, ^S -t-
~'.~
.en,
.c..>
.....ic-a
I:;;
,
\
",i
.ro,
.....:
8\
\
\
\
i
\
,
\
1"011 se
'\' ,,"-
v"
'I."~ 108.88
N 59 07 12 W 365.26
256.~
T~4 ~~p J. P~~CEL 102
IATTACHMENT 8, Page 31
" ,
.'
~.. ,- ,..:..,.I(.).,:;~.."" ,;,."..:
<"'!j~':)Io-t.~....'i"'~"'.,_, ._," _........ _ .
~_...._r_. . . 7.........-
.:_' " ;,,~ -..2~;::~.!S~1_~!};;;;~~~:<~~
.... ....,'....~..:.'...~\~
' :. '~' '. :.' :..,~~':~ .: ~..tt;.:.'r..~.;..,~;." ~\~ ~.~.-.
'" -..':......
"(tn' r02 -, J i:
. 5117 P,
160. o. s.
~79 P, ~7,
0.8 ~
, . ..',.~fjO_~. _~~5
TO for.
t c. 20 .
\
,\
U'
~....
. c:,)
[As:
$'0
/
,/
/,
,/
'"
/
,
//
,,{~ 'fn~. . ,..:"~~'~~.}yf~.;::.~:.;,;.L:-...;.~.{.::.:.:f.,,.
- ------.- . ,
-
IATTACHMENT B, Page 4\
LAW OFFICES OF
FRED G. WOOD, JR.
SUITE B
100 COURT SQUARE ANNEX
P.O. Box 97
CHARLOlTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902
(804) 977-3143
. ADMITIED IN VIR INIA AND WEST VIROINIA
October 28, 1988
Ch rles W. Burgess, Jr.
Zo ing Administrator
Al emarle County Department
of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Ch rlottesville, VA 22901
RE: Gary W. Sarkozi-Zoning Opposition
Mr. Burgess:
m responding on behalf
ter of 14 October 1988
mit for a mobile home.
losed.
of my client Gary W. Sarkozi to your
regarding a request for a Special Use
A photocopy of your letter is
client herewith states his opposition to the request because
granting of it would be contrary to the purpose and intent of
Zoning Ordinance and detrimental to public health and
fare.
regards, I remain
Very truly yours,
I- '~
Fred G. Wood, Jr.
FG /db
. ,
~ . .:, '~.
'" .,'1.'
\'~ :...;
losure
r,In\! R
.,-
;; ".:; L> r ~ ~:) i"I.J
SA
" '
" .'/
\:7
0-\
.
IATTACHMENT B, Page 51 \
60
~~~" /
-v I! ! _0 Pr.pose./ m",h;/.. If",,..<-
) / 10 ,I - * firis;','n!jt rntt:16dt!. J I
l lOG I7Dn'lt:...!:
\.. '
'f ) /~" II Db ' /
. \, ....- Jecft'n<J'- lafldCJtJ
, 10E. 10~ 1Je. rs
\ \ \\";(\
/ '
-'"
..""
""
""
" ,
'--.1
. -......... ""-........
""--.\
'"1
~--j
l
~/
/
/
./~.
:~. \
"
"
36
)y-/" "'"
--./. \ '"
20 ,'- . \
. /\),---1 \. "\
"- " '--4 \
~""'--...." )-.__" 18'\.
-............ . -- - \.
16 '~I --.. -.......! .
-=:::::::- X'" ": ' .",-, '\
'_ / ITA \ \. '\
--.. J"
/' ".
" ,/ ) "'-.
"" .,./ \ I
. ) <on,
Edward H, Bai , Jr.
Samuel Mille
David P Bow rman
Charlottesvill
F, R (Rick) B wie
Rivanna
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979-1281
August 19, 1991
Charlotte Y Humphns
Jack Jouett
Walter F Perkms
White Hall
Peter T, Way
Scotlsville
TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ADDRESSED:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will conduct a
pu lic hearing on September 4, 1991, at 7:00 p.m. in Meeting Room
#7 County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville,
Vi ginia, on the following request:
SP-91-39. Willie Mae Hoover. To amend SP-88-86 in order
to permit rental of a single-wide mobile home on 5.0
acres, zoned RA. Property located on private road on the
west side of Route 20, approx. 2.7 miles south of Route
742. Tax map 102, Parcel 1E. Scottsville District.
Since you are an adjoining property owner, you are invited to
end the Board meeting and express your views. If additional
ormation is needed, please contact the Clerk of the Board of
ervisors, Fourth Floor, County Office Building, between the
rs or 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
S~'.~
~ E. Nener, Clerk, CMC
LE :ec
cc: Willie Mae Hoover
Maynard A., Jr. and Evelyn Mae Wood
Ola Louise McDaniel
Gary W. and Leigh D. Sarkozi
Richard S. and Ann M. Hunter
Anne B. Palmer
v. Wayne Cilimberg
(.~'lJTH[RN Horel. 0REfNSBURO rJ4',0');
~
OW':' "1 ArrnOVII~
THE ueDIVISION OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN
IS WI II THE FREE CONSENT AND,., ACCORDANCE
WITH THE DESIRE OF THE UNDERSIGPlEll OWNER,
· PROP 'HOIlS, AI<<lTRU5TEES. ANY REFERENCE TO
FUT E POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS TO BE
DE AS THEORETICAL ONLY. ALL STATEMENTS
AFFIX TO THS PLA T ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO
THE EST Of' ItIY KNOWLEDGE.
'/" 5~",
APPROVED FOR RECORDATION
~~~~
Director of Planning IooIl ~
IP-B),/
Dote
~
~
OW ER: WILLIE MAE HOOVER
401 MC INTIRE RD.
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22901
LE AL REF: T.M.102 PARCELIE
0, B, 1022 P. 126
o 8 560 P. 635 PLAT
ZO ING: R A
NO
E: THIS IS A FAMILY DIVISION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SEC. IS-56
OF THE AL8EMARLE COUNTY SUB-
DIVISION ORDINANCE, SUCH PARCELS
SHALL NOT 8E TRANSFERED FOR A
PERIOD OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE
OF RECORDATION EXCEPT IN ACCORD-
ANCE WITH THIS SECTION OF THE
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE,
2.50 ACRE RESIDUE AND
PARCEL H EACH CONTAIN MORE
THAN 30,000 CONTIGUOUS
SF WITH SLOPES LESS
THAN 25%,
TM 102- IJ
0, e 640 PI 93 plot
Richard Hunter
~~
~. -....:. .......,JrIS-,.
".......~-~J'OI ,/
\~~, 19~...~./fy ,/
se.1 '<?Qs$'o).".......1o/ let?,
I 'f. 5<? .......'\. 6 s .3;>50 ~
... '" -........... ........~s,<lsl~c/;:s
'~I ) ............. .........e~.......
$ ........ ....... S "15"""0-
- -. lift'....... li
'"0 t -""<Q..8, .36"~ ~s,.
o . . ~2 -...:.. If,. .,
rri"" .' '- --. ... -.....;~o-....
l() I/') .......... _~~.. ........
\D If) 2 50 AC RESiDuE I~ ~
~ . PARCEL , E TAX MAP 102 .s'~ S 45055"
\') \""'- 30' ACCESS ESMT r) 'lI~\..\.. 150;)-/15
~'-Tp SERVE PARCEL H /,.,1
\"'\ .~ ,~,'
,t ...,\ ~~ <?- '" t,. ':~'
(. '~ca,\'~ \1:. "-
\' .., ~ ,
~l'l se.1 \-z. \ \""\
\1'- 8 0 0 [.>.:, ~
I . 559007';'2"/:
{' 37.2,29'
.w (...... wet weather stream ~ ", -..................
" ~--..........
in
k ~
<t C\J
C\J If)
C\J
THE PRIVATE ACCESS ESMT. TO
SERVE PARCEL H SHALL PROVIDE
REASONA BLE ACCESS BY MOTOR
VEHICLE AS REQUIRED BY SEC.
18- 36 CF TH E AL8EMARLE COU NTY
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
T. M. 102- IF
D. B.564P248plo
IRON s~.,. Gary or Lei
Surkozi
.0
o i-""
. <t
<t r...:
C\J en
z C\J
l
(
-!-
PARCEL H
2.50 ACRES
<t
<t
o
10 C\J
; ~
C\J Vl
O~ se. 1
\1'-
256.4/'
N59007'/2"W
SUBDIVISIO N PLAT
PARCEL H
2,50 ACRE PORTION OF PARCEL IE TAX MAP 102
LOCATED OFF STA TF ROUTE ? ()
TM.I02_~
o c;
,8,574 P.380
o 8 IO? ., .,._
'- , Co fiplOl
Anne e p
, a/mer
1<1
~J
<S:~ /08S8'
365,29'
\I'-O~
-.._-
",,:tdlin~."':~~"~ ',..,,:,:.,.....
h\,)",L ( !: () ~>t.
.!;;<"-,r. , r~;>,
" ? , //;'
& '7 ,.-,..,
~ - j' . _f-:, tt--
:/,- I L- j
d /, ,k,7,v':.1, q ~/2 ,/
7(_'0/'/ .L~' 7
r. ..
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE \
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 i
(804) 2965823
April 16, 1992
Gifford & Rachel Crawford
P. o. Box 256
Earlysville, VA 22936
RE: SP-91-41 Gifford & Rachel Crawford
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Crawford:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
April 15, 1992, deferred the above-noted request to its
meeting on June 17, 1992. Please note that this request has
been deferred due to the Board's desire to receive a report
from the Housing Committee on affordable housing.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
RSK/jc7
cc: -J(ettie E. Neher
r ~ (..
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & CommunIty Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(S04) 296,5823
January 13, 1992
Gifford & Rachel Crawford
P. o. Box 256
Earlysville, VA 22936
RE: SP-91-41 Gifford & Rachel Crawford
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Crawford:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
January 8, 1992, deferred at the request of staff, the
above-noted request to amend SP-91-15 to permit rental of a
single-wide mobile home on 2.0 acres. This request is
scheduled for +eview by the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors at their meeting on April 15, 1992.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
~~erg
Director of Planning &
VWC/jcw
Lettie E. Neher'/
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
cc:
IATTACHMENT A, Page 11
, '
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
July 15, 1991
Gifford & Rachel S. Crawford
P. o. Box 256
Earlysville, VA 22936
RE: SP-91-iSGifford & Rachel Crawford
Tax Map 18, Parcel 8J
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Crawford:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
July 3, 1991, approved the above-noted request for a single
wide mobile home on 2.0 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas.
Property located on the north side of Rt. 776 approximately
3/10 mile west of Rts 664/776. 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 the issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
4) provision of potable water supply and sewerage
facilities to the satisfaction of the Zoning
Administrator and approval by the local office of the
Virginia Department of Health, if applicable under
current regulations;
5) Landscaping and/or screening to be provided to the
'satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator. Required
screening shall be maintained in good condition and
replaced if it should die;
,10
Gl
Cl,
~-'
af
~ .
z
w
:a:
:t:
()
~
I-
<t
,;..--
\
c'
,.
"
-~---.....
~
'"
...
s
~
~
~
:::l
c
...
--'"
( - g
...
"
r
;.;
...
<
"'::t:
~~~
....000
>
r:lS~
0< ::t: "
"'0< "
~g~ ..
::> ....
~~~
u::t:
~<Il~
o.<IlH
Z...
"'O<ll
::t:HH
"'<IlK
I z'" I
~!ij",
....=
'" ~ H ~I ~
E-l ~ r:t:i E-i[
Si5~~
I
. ..
~
...
...
CIS
c:l
~
...
...
.,
<Q
"l
8
..
..
~
.. "
: \~
-=
~~
kDr
Qoq; ~ -\)0
....""l . -;:r-
8 ~ti '*__
~ ::~ --
~ "
II-S
\ ...\
\J
/
~
I
--!~
I
/
/
00)
....
Co
:-
..
~..
~:.,:,
- .
~ ..
---
"
"
::
'"
"'"
....\5
~~ ~
B
t\j -; ~
. ..
~l
...t]
~~
.,Jt:l ,\;
"
'"
..
," "
? :
::: "
~ ..
\
<:>
~
I':
..
~
-0
o
\0 v,
.~) ct)~
~~,?t
<::::: C) c .
....11) ." ~
8 ~"
! ~ ~;;
.
-------
..----:---
"
"
.
..
'"
...
0;
u
... ..
.... c
" "
-' c
"
.."
'f~
.
~~
0;,
~~~
~-..,
~'" '
..."ll
t,,/li
~~c:i
Ill"
"'~
~'"
'>ci
';\
~\ ~
'" '" ~ t
~, y.",~
\J~\ ~
, ';..
~I
~.,
~
.
~
"
~
~ i
~ .. 10
, ~
a ~ ~
~ i :
'Il ~ Q
~ ~
" ~
~ ~
"
R ...
" ....
n
~ ~,
h
>. ~
'~ ~
....
If ~
" '"
.... i..,
-If'
\0
~
~~. \
..:
" ,
,~
h.
.'
) J
~~:~\
'" "
\
~ "
;l~,.\'I'; ~\1
8~ "c
-_:~~~
~'o ;'! I
"""".c- J
"'~
;.
j
~
~~
O)-~
Cl~~
<:~:::::
""'.A
(l)::o:>;
~~G-
l...1O ~
<::l1C)'~G
I-.....~'::J
"'" ct
-.J~<::)~
Q..c>~~
.;j""'...
~~~
).~"':J.
-sf\..::;::
""1..:::-
!EQ:
~I..:
Cl.:II)
~
~
or
~ t
~Y-
~
.:. ~
.;,
..:;
....
a
~
"
'~ ~
"
-
,;; "
-'
::l ~
'"
,
00)
"
00)
-
~ ,
~~
" ....'
~
~~
""
,,~
...:~
'~i'~~ . ~~'W'l
;;-:;:;-.
~~~~ . "'-......
:::::~~
\llo- ft~ ,...lIl:;....
.... G G
....
....
"
... ~-'Cl.ti~ ....!~~ ~1il:t.,'Cl
" :'..;~o\ ..............
~~~~ .'0'0
0; :::~~~ ;;C'A..
:::. ......PI... -,,~
U ........
'IIIl....lIi::... "'lo"lII::... ..\..~...
G
<'0
f;
~
~ ~
"""
~... ::it
- ."
". "
~~ ~
"~ ~
~~~
". "
'. ...
~~;a
".."
o~~
It\ ~...~
-.l ~~~
"t 1.1)......
~ Cl::",::"
C ~~~
ct ~~ ~
Q..
Q..
"'"
~~ ~ :<
..... c
-,
~.... 0;
.... '"
~~ " ~
....~
", '~
,"
>:~ c
,,~ "
~~ '"
;:'h '"
~~ :t
........ '"
'l:~ ..
...~ 0:
"e
~~ '-
....
".... '"
ct" ::,
:::." "
",.. u
. ...
.
IATTACHMENT 8, Page 71
4 ~ "
\ ~ttUL-t \DR.-l . ,
-~ t \J.:SL-b; ~ ~ ~ \..~ e..\t\-OY lL r
WL (:,bj~Lt -+D f~
G- I'f\- Cl ~ t l Q...- \u~ '(f\.. L ctXj OJ
~ \,L5- ~ \{~y YfLwJL
s-t:1 . W <L- --\-~\ ~ i 1i- w t II
'r \L\'iL --\-~ \J O-...lU.5~- D ~- D_ui::.
lCL~
. ~ ~6\L~
..~ ._-rt'lWlA-~,\.1..o.-~~ ~ f{l(L'I'~
l(~"',t"~.\~\t \"J'" ',"',;'.',im," "~,",; N
I ~y\ \ t:,~, ~' . ~ \ ~~ \ d~ \ ~4 \ J ~ ~
\'-',I&'}I~~ \~~~ i.lor~ ,~:r~J1\ ~W Y'1\.~
\\ .'C.:~,
~ ~.
'.,.." ' Are -80 ,mg1
,(.5'
'""\ \
..,','" 9I~
' -;. ';r. 1'\)\ \ \~
~\, 'a, i=.l'..:t.a..t'....,_..... -.. .",,"' "frJ
t-.l-t:;;I'-"... .......:..'/';. 'n:-o ,~, _.~.:,.
~t>i\N"U \VT] ,..,' ,.., ..
lU\.,h ,...
I
~, '0(\ ~
;?i.. li\. I ~
.-t
. ,.
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) 979-1281
August 19, 1991
Charlotte Y Humphr!s
Jack Jouett
David P Bow rman
Charlottesvill
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
F, R, (Rick) B wie
Rivanna
Peter T, Way
Scottsvil1e
TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS ADDRESSED:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will conduct a
pu lic hearing on September 4, 1991, at 7:00 p.m. in Meeting Room
#7, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville,
vi ginia, on the following request:
SP-91-4. Gifford & Rachel Crawford. To amend SP-91-15
in order to permit rental of a single-wide mobile home on
2.0 acres, zoned RA. Property located on north side of
Route 776, approx. three-tenths mile west of Route 664.
Tax map 18, Parcel 8J. White Hall District.
Since you are an adjoining property owner, you are invited to
end the Board meeting and express your views. If additional
ormation is needed, please contact the Clerk of the Board of
ervisors, Fourth Floor, County Office Building, between the
rs or 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
s~~
~ E. Neh r, Clerk,
CMC
:ec
Gifford and Rachel S. Crawford
George W. Shumaker
Gordon W. and Pamela S. Sullivan
v. Wayne Cilimberg
..... .,
.
~;:;J~_::,(lJ.~:~::'t,,_,U..L:Ltq),~,(),.....?~:..__,r:.i;:.'(;;;..LI..~~1.,J........C.i::'..<:'\ ~\I f 0 'I" d ..... F to':. tit i 0 I", tOE;. In c": '('I cI
SP-91-15 in order to permit rental of a single wide mobile
home on 2.0 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property,
described as Tax Map 18, Parcel BJ is located on the north
side of Rt. 776 approximately 3/10 miles west of Rt. 664 in
the White Hall Magisterial District. This site IS not
located within a designated growth area CRA 1).
~;:H::,~:'(,7.'J,.:::::}~l,___blj:..JJ..,Lq__JJ!.::~~':...J::I,i;;:E~,::(f1.,i:::, ,.... F'to' t: it: i 0,', t: 0 i::' rn ':::1 'I", c:l ~3 P ,.... b D ,..., D 6 i ',",
Dreier to permit rental of a single wide mobile home on 5.0
acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map
102, Parcel IE is located on a private road on the west side
of Rt. 20 approximately 2.7 miles south of Rt. 742 in the
Scottsville Magisterial District. This site is not located
within a designated growth area
..
l' "
ej('f"'\l'!~ "j I .... ,/ .
~.' !f"H\!w re; ~"J'P" !', /_- //7 _ c;, ')
... '. ....IUI!.i U7 /~ /u.<..._
'-..........,~"~_..,~
,Y.2 ~~~/ ?Y<J"'->
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Develnpment
401 Mclntiw Road
C harlottl'sville. Virginia 22901AS96
(H04) 2%5.>-\23
'~
-';'.)
May 21, 1992
Keswick Acquisition Corporation
ATTN: Pete Bradshaw
P. o. Box 68
Keswick, VA 22947
RE: SP-92-21 Keswick Acquisition Corporation
Tax Map 80, Parcels 8, 8Z, 9, 60A, 61, 62, 70
Tax Map 94, Parcel 42A
Dear Mr. Bradshaw:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 19, 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. Department of Engineering approval of a private road
design for Club Drive from Route 731 to Route 616.
(Amendment to Condition #5 of SP-85-53.)
2. Staff and County Attorney approval of private road maintenance
agreement for Club Drive.
3. Security gates shall be located in the locations shown
on Attachment C. The gates shall be installed prior to
County acceptance of the private road (Club Drive).
The security gates shall be continuously controlled at
all times.
4. In accordance with Condition #2 of SP-86-02, the
bonding and/or construction of the connector road is
required prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the inn. As per the approval of this
petition, the bonding of the entire length of Club
Drive, between Rt. 731 and Rt. 616, shall be for a
period of two years from the Board of Supervisors
approval date with the option to renew the bond
administratively for a period not to exceed one year.
Keswick Acquisition Corporation
Page 2
May 21, 1992
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 17. 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,
/< J[]",L
,
-~
----..,
Richard E. Tarbell
Senior Planner
RET/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
Angela Tucker
.. t, ,
I,
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RICHARD E. TARBELL
MAY 19, 1992
JUNE 17, 1992
(SP-92-2l) - KESWICK ACQUISITION CORPORATION
Petition: Keswick Acquisition Corporation petitions the Board of
Supervisors to amend a previous special use permit (SP-85-53) in order
to allow the connector between road (Club Drive) between Rt. 731 and Rt,
616 to be a private road rather than a public road. This road has been
proposed to serve the Keswick Country Club and Inn, existing parcels and
proposed lots reviewed in SP-85-53, Property, described as Tax Map 80,
Parcels 8, 82, 9, 60A, 61, 62, and 70 and Tax Map 94, Parcel 42A, is
located on the east side of Rt, 731 at its intersection with Rt. 744 in
the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is not located within a
designated growth area,
Character of the Area:
Club Drive currently exists as a private road constructed from Route 731
to Wood Lane in the Keswick development (Reference Point A to Point B
shown on Attachment C). The Keswick Country Club facilities and Ashley
Inn are currently under construction at the eastern end of the property.
The sewage treatment plant and the golf maintenance facility are under
construction on the west side of Carroll Creek, just north of 1-64. The
golf course is nearly complete. There are 49 parcels which utilize the
private road system within the development, 30 of which are owned by the
Keswick Acquisition Corporation. One single-family residence is under
construction by the Keswick Acquisition Corporation,
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing to amend previous special use permit
conditions of approval to allow Club Drive to be a private rather than
public road.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff supports the request for private roads based on the applicant's
demonstration of alleviating the danger of significant degradation of
the environment in accordance with Section 18,36(b) of the Subdivision
Ordinance. In accordance with Section 18-36(d)(4), the Planning
Commission must make a positive finding that there is a public purpose
served by the connection of the proposed private road to two state
roads, Staff opinion is this connection does provide public benefit by
allowing convenient access to the development and reducing traffic on
the intolerable roads that would otherwise be utilized for access,
Therefore, staff recommends approval of SP-92-21,
1
..
PlANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
The history of this property is extensive. The following is a summary
of the reviews most applicable to this request.
· SP-85-53 Tom J, Curtis - Special use permit to allow the
subdivision of 37 single-family residential lots on 284 acres
located south and east of the golf course, Condition #5 stated,
"Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval and
acceptance of proposed public roads with specific requirement that
Club Drive from Route 731 to Route 616 be built to State standards
and accepted by the Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation." The lots were never platted, however, the special
use permit is still valid, Road plans have been approved for the
entire length of Club Drive as a public road. The action letter is
included as Attachment D,
· SP-85-54 Tom J. Curtis - Special use permit to allow six guest
rooms in two existing cottages and 36 guest suites in the proposed
inn. Condition #4 required: "Bonding and/or construction of the
connector road from Route 731 to Route 616 and the central well
system shall be required prior to issuance of building permit for
the new guest rooms/suites; provided that the six (6) existing
suites in the clubhouse may be renovated without compliance with
this condition."
· SP-86-02 Keswick Country Club Land Trust - Request to amend
conditions #1 and #4 of SP-85-54, This approval requires the
bonding and/or construction of the connector road prior to issuance
of a certificate of occupancy for the inn rather than prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This site is not located in a designated growth
area. This site is located in Rural Area II.
STAFF COMMENT:
The analysis of this request will be presented in three sections:
I, Private Road vs, Public Road
II, Connection between Route 731 and Route 616
III, Private Road Maintenance
2
~
I, Private Road vs Public Road
The main purpose of this request is to amend Condition #5 of SP-85-53 to
allow utilization of a private road design for Club Drive. The
applicant has submitted a private road request in accordance with
Section 18-36(b) of the Subdivision Ordinance (see Attachment E), The
request cites the following reasons (summarized by staff) as
justification for a private road,
· Enhancement of the Physical Environment - Reduction in the amount
of tree removal and reduction in the grading requirements,
· Security - There is a public purpose to be served by the location
of security gates at both ends of the residential development (see
Attachment C).
· Safety - Low speeds and restrictions on access will contribute
significantly to enhance the safety of residents and the guest of
the inn and golf course.
In addition, the applicant has prepared a technical comparison between
the approved public road alignment and the proposed private road
alignment (see Attachment F), This analysis indicates the public road
construction would occasion 67% increase in cut and a 55% increase in
fill compared to the private road proposed, The Engineering Department
has reviewed the applicant's justification and stated their support of
the private road request (see Attachment G),
II. Connection between Route 731 and Route 616
Section l8-36(b)(4) of the Subdivision Ordinance states:
"Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public
purpose, such private road sh~ll not be designed to serve through
traffic nor to intersect the state highway system in more than one
location;"
These private road prOV1S1ons require the Planning Commission to make a
positive finding that there is a public benefit to be served by
permitting the private road (i,e,-Club Drive) to intersect two public
roads (Route 731 to Route 616), Access to the property is currently
from Route 731 and 744, both of which are non-tolerable roads, Staff
opinion is that establishment of the connector road would reduce traffic
to Routes 731 and 744 by providing a second access point for the entire
development convenient to 1-64, (It should be noted that residents, inn
guests, and golf club members will be provided access through the
security gates,)
Condition #4 of SP-85-54 requires the bonding and/or construction of the
entire length of the connector road from Route 731 and Route 616. The
subsequent approval of SP-86-02 simply allowed the bonding to be done
with the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy rather than with the
issuance of the building permit, Without the connector road, any guest
3
or member of the facility travelling on Interstate 64 from the east
would be forced to travel north on Route 616 past the Keswick property
to Route 22 and then south on Route 731, an intolerable road. In
addition, emergency vehicles would not be provided the most convenient
access to the development without the connection, For these reasons,
staff opinion is a public purpose is served by the connection of the
private road Routes 731 and Route 616.
III, Private Road Maintenance
In the past, staff has expressed concern about mixing residential and
commercial uses on private roads due to potential inequities in
maintenance costs and responsibilities, This proposal could involve
three parties in the maintenance agreement: 1.) the existing individual
lot owners; 2.) the Keswick Acquisition Corporation as lot owners; and,
3,) the Keswick Acquisition Corporation for the traffic generated by the
inn and golf facilities. Staff has not received a proposed maintenance
agreement for review, however, the applicant has provided a petition
from 12 of the 14 existing lot owners in the development stating their
support of Club Drive as a private road (Attachment H), The petition
also states, "This petition in no way obligates the undersigned to any
homeowners association road maintenance agreement".
Staff has received no objection regarding road maintenance
responsibilities resulting from this proposal. Staff opinion is this
concern may be addressed with a condition requiring staff and County
Attorney approval of road maintenance agreements, however, the details
of those agreements will not be available before the Board of
Supervisors action on this request. It should be noted Keswick
Acquisition Corporation could be responsible for the entire maintenance
costs for Club Drive as they are the party requesting the change from
public to private road, Subsequently, the 14 existing lot owners may
choose to enter the maintenance agreement for Club Drive for enforcement
purposes only.
Summary and Recommendation:
Staff opinion is the applicant's request for private roads is acceptable
with the justification provided based on the amount of environmental
degradation a public road would occasion compared to a private road
design. The applicant has. agreed to build or bond the entire length of
Club Drive with the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the inn
and golf facilities consistent with the approval of SP-86-02,
Therefore, staff recommends approval of the SP-92-21 Keswick Acquisition
Corporation petition subject to the following conditions of approval:
1, Department of Engineering approval of a private road design for
Club Drive from Route 731 to Route 616. (Amendment to Condition #5
of SP-85-53,)
2, Staff and County Attorney approval of private road maintenance
agreement for Club Drive,
4
t.
3. Security gates shall be located in the locations shown on
Attachment C. The gates shall be installed prior to County
acceptance of the private road (Club Drive).
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Tax Map
B Location Map
C Schematic Road Plan
D SP-85-53 Action Letter
E Private Road Request
F Private vs Public Road Grading Analysis
G Engineering Department Comments
H Peti tion
I Virginia Department of Transportation Comments
5
79
81
..
11
\
\\ I
/\ /
~ \ ~,/SlE
. '" ....IIN
. '".
/
><'
\
'"
SA
SP-92-2l
Keswick Aquisition Corp.
12C
"
-"/,':--- .---,
'}
"",,-,-'"
~~C'
~q..tt" Ou
OV' ...",.
~ r
...
--/
roo
~
SP-92-2l
Acquisition Corp.
Keswick
-
"
o
"
TO ZIO~OSSFt()...os
"Q:-
01 <{-
"/ c,?'
~
,
~
\
\
-...\
~'"'.:,
....,
~
~
o
c.
"
", /'~
~"
, ..'~,
.,;:~
,\. \."
. ~ \\~:I
f '~'~\.~.
, ~ J~,::-,,~:-. ,~~~, i
; (~,\,:-':. <, ,I ,.
" \' '~'<\\ I
"
',,-
'-
"--.
"- \\..
101
I-
-~
.td
UJ
1~
0.-.
:r:
o
<1:
~:
<t
; \
,...,
[)
UJ
(1)
o
a..
o
a:
a..
Cl
z
<(
(9"
Z
l-
,(1)
X
UJ
......,
i'j'
I;'
I:'
,I'
I"
II' . t
~j ~l!,in
Ib -1\IIJtj
~; H~tliilh
f{ "}\}JS~{
, IlL,
9 - , t I II
! \' J!
\ ~ !11.~h;
0',1 r ~Ilt\tl
2! ; !Hdhf
" ).,
\. "rt",
'I ~ K I' ,
~ '" ~' ,
:.; ~ ~ ~ I
\) "11
~ l) " { ~
<( {VI t '
'l q ...") ...
~ f . ~'I'
\,L "'\., 1
~ "'I ", t~ H
,hl\ '1
~ l{ '" \
"~,,I\. l
~ ., ~ ~ I
"" ~ 'I. ,
l\, ~ ~ 'll '
~ ~ ~ :, ~
n<:l0 !
UJ
>
a:
o
CO
::)
...J
(.)
.
.
.
.
.
.
/
/f
/:-:7-
,~:;~/
./
-')'
.-
~.
~ :~....
v
~
~~
~y
or=i
~::?
.J~
~ifj
~~!,
i1\~~
liJ -.,,/ I
C ,
~
"
\
\
~
11) i\
~ ~
~ ~
~ -:t.
~ ~
':>
U. 0
~ ~
o VI
~ ~
~ ~
~ L'l
:D f
i :i
1. ..
'~ )
11
$!
'"',
\
.\
"0\
\
!\
"
\ ",
.\ '
..
t-\--(~
0'0
c;
., .
DEPARTMENT of PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901-4596
804 296-5823
September 9, 1985
Mr. Tom J. Curtis, Trustee
Keswick Country Club Land Trust
P. O. Box 71
Keswick, VA 22947
RE: SP-85-53 Tom J. Curtis
Dear Mr. Curtis:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
September 4, 1985 unanimously approved the above petition to
allow the subdivision of 37 single family residential lots.
Total acreage of site is 284.ll acres zoned RA. Property
located on south side of Rt. 616 at I-64 interchange and adjacent
to existing golf course. Tax Map 80, part of parcels 6l, 8, 60A,
62, 70, 3l, 8Z and Tax Map 94, parcel 42. Rivanna District.
This application is subject to the following conditions:
l. Prior to any subdivision plat review by the Planning
Commission the applicant shall obtain the following:
a. Virginia Department of Health approval of two septic
drainfield locations on each proposed lot;
b. County Engineer review of pump tests for two wells in
southeastern portion of the property in accordance with
the requirements of the Code of Albemarle County;
2. Prior to subdivision plat review by the Planning Comrn~ssion
for lots southeast of Carroll Creek the applicant sha~l obtain
the following:
t
a. County Engineer approval of construction activity in the
floodplain of Carroll Creek in accordance with 30.3
Flood Hazard Overlay District of the Zoning Ordinance;
b. County Engineer approval of public and private road plans
to provide connector road from Club Drive to Rt. 6l6;
" .
I ATTACHMENT 01
I Page 21
SP-85-53
Page 2
3. All lots northwest of Carroll Creek shall be served by a central
water system supplied by the two wells located in the southeast
portion of the property or such alternative well locations as
may be approved by the Board of Supervisors; the usage of
existing wells at clubhouse will not exceed present usagG;
4. Development shall be in general accord with the preliminary
plan submitted as a part of this petition and marked "Board
of Supervisors; September 4, 1985" and initialled "RSK";
5. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval and
acceptance of proposed public roads with specific requirement
that Club Drive from Rt. 73l to Rt. 616 be built to State
standards and accepted by Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation.
If you have any further questions, please advise.
Sincerely,
Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
RSK:mkf
cc: Ms. Lettie E. Neher
I ATTACHMENT EI
Page I
March 23, 1992
Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director
Albemarle County Department of
Planning and Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Mr. Cilimberg:
Keswick Acquisition Corporation is hereby requesting
amendments to SP-8S-S3, SP-86-02 and SP-86-04. The purpose
of these amendments is to allow for the following:
(1) Improvement of Club Drive to private road
standards along its existing alignment through the Old
Keswick Subdivision;
(2) Extension of Club Drive along the proposed new
alignment to SR 616 to private road standards; and
(3) Bonding and/or construction requirements mentioned
as conditions in the afore-referenced speciai permits be
described as "to private road standards" and limited to Club
Drive from SR 731 to the Sewage Treatment Plant.
Section 18-26 of the Albemarle County Subdivision
Ordinance provides the basis for this discretion when
certain criteria are met. The following criteria are
relevant to this request:
(a) Specifically, Section 18-36(b) provides that
"approval of such roads will alleviate a clearly
demonstrable danger of significant degradation to the
environment of the site or adjacent properties which would
be occasioned by the construction of public roads in the
same alignments. For the purposes of this provision, in
addition to such other factors as the commission may
consider, "significant degradation" shall mean an increase
of thirty percent in the total volum~ of grading for
construction of a public road as com~ared to a private road.
As secondary considerations, among other things, the
commission may consider actual volum~ differential as well
as surface area differential and removal of vegetative
cover;"
(b) "No alternative public road alignment available to
the subdivider on the adoption date of this section would
alleviate significant degradation of the environment; and"
(c) "No more lots are proposed on such private road
than could be realized on a public road due to the right-of-
way dedication."
ASHLEY INNS INC.
'ATTACHMENT E \
\ Page 2\
-2-
The County Subdivision Ordinance further states in 18-
36(h) that "a subdivider seeking approval pursuant to 18-
36(c) ... of this chapter shall file with the agent a
written request which shall state reasons and justifications
for such request together with such alternatives as may be
proposed by the subdivider. ... No such request shall be
considered by the commission until the commission has
considered the recommendation of the agent. ..
It is our hope that the following justification, in
conjunction with the enclosed technical comparison between
the approved public road alignment and the proposed private
road alignment provided by Roudabush and Gale, will allow
you to make a favorable recommendation to the Commission.
Our justification is grouped into the following
categories: Enhancement of the Physical Environment;
Security; and Safety.
Enhancement of the Physical Environment
As you are probably well aware, the Old Keswick Country
Club was originally developed in the late 1940's and from
that time to the present the residential lots therein have
been served by private roads. Over the past four and one-
half decades the entire community has matured aesthetically
with huge trees, many of specimen quality, bordering the
existing private roads. This is especially true along Club
Drive in the vicinity of the Inn and Golf Pavilion. The
construction of public roads along the approved alignment
will necessitate the removal of approximately 50 trees in
the Inn/Pavilion area, many of which are estimated to be
well over 100 years old. By construction and/or improvement
of the existing private road alignment it may be possible to
avoid the removal of any trees. At a point on Club Drive,
in the vicinity of the Inn, to the intersection with Wood
Lane, the approved public road alignment, with its
associated utility easement, will require the destruction of
a strip of trees approximately 20 feet wide and 3,400 feet
in length. The approval of private roads along this section,
will allow for the preservation of ALL ornamental trees and
woodland areas. In additio~, private roads, using existing
alignments, will decrease grlading requirements by
approximately 907. from SR 7~1 to the intersection of Club
Drive with Wood Lane. From/Wood Lane to Carroll Creek the
proposed private road alignment will be similar to the
approved public road alignment. The primary benefit to
private road use along this section will be an approximate
207. reduction in the surface area which will be required to
be cleared of trees for road construction. From Carroll
..
I ATTACHMENT EI
IPage 31
-3-
Creek to SR 616 we proposed a new alignment to
specifications consistent with VDOT mountainous terrain
standards. This will allow for tighter vertical and
horizontal curves which will reduce grading requirements
substantially. Obviously, with private roads there will be
afforded much more flexibility concerning landscaping and
tree removal within the road right-of-way corridor.
Security
Over the past few months the Keswick Estate has
experienced a significant security problem. I know,
personally, of four incidents of burglary of our offices and
construction site which resulted in substantial losses to
Keswick Acquisition Corporation. This problem has resulted
in further additional expense to the owner by necessitating
the retention of a security service during night-time hours
and weekends.
Private roads will enable us to restrict access to the
residential subdivision and to enhance the physical security
and safety of the development and its residents by means of
security gates on Club Drive at two locations--at the
entrance to the residential community in the vicinity of the
Inn and at the entrance from SR 616. Clearly this enhanced
security will decrease the necessity for involvement of
local law enforcement officials and enhance the peace of
mind of the homeowners, both at no additional expense to the
County. This, indeed, is in the public interest.
Safety
The approval of private roads will allow for the
establishment of a speed limit along Club Drive not to
exceed 25 mph. Low speeds and restrictions on access will
contribute significantly to enhance the safety of residents
and the guests of the Inn and Golf Course.
We realize that Albemarle County views private roads as
a departure from the general rule as is considered to be
appropriate when certain circumstances are present. The
Keswick Estate is an example which represents a particularly
unique situation. As mentioned previously, the road system
at Keswick has alwJys been private. To change this now
would not only be fnvironmentallY insensitive, but also
would change the aesthetic sense of maturity found at
Keswick in a very hegative way.
We fully understand that private road systems must be
maintained through private revenue sources. We can assure
I ATTACHMENT E\
Ipage 41
-4-
you that the by-laws of the Keswick Estate will require that
all roads within the development be maintained to very high
standards. McGuire, Woods, Battle and Boothe is preparing
the by-laws which will provide for a portion of annual dues
to be escrowed for road maintenance.
It would be difficult to overemphasize the importance
of private roads in achieving the sensitive, informal
country feeling envisioned by the owner.
For the reasons set forth above, I believe that the
Keswick Estate represents an excellent example of a
development which should be granted the use of private
roads. I respectfully ask that you make a favorable
recommendation to the Planning Commission.
Sincerely,
~=~
Development Manager
r-
.~
IATTACHMENT FI
I Page I I
PHONE (B041 293,4251
(B041 977-0205
FAX (804) 296.5220
.-
LAND SU"VEYORS
ENGINfERS
LAND PL,o.NNERS
I
J, THOMAk GALE. L.S,
MARILYNN R, GALE. LS,
WILLIAM ~, ROUDABUSH. LS,
I
I
I
I
I
I
ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC.
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
914 MONTICELLO ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902
DAVID L, COLLINS. LS,
DIANA p, DALE. P.E.
.pril 6, 1992
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ieswick Acquisition Corporation
, 0, Box 68
eswick, VA 22947
I
i
tTTN:
~entlemen:
I
I
I This letter is in reference to our discussions concerning the
*tilization and design of private roads at Keswick, We are well
~ware of your strong preference for private roads as you have
previously outlined in your letter dated March 23, 1992, addressed
to the Director of Planning and Community Development of Albemarle
~ounty.
I
I
I I am aw~re that your primary interest is to construct safe and
idequate roads, protect the environment throughout the corridors
here these roads will be located as well as in the entire project,
nd reduce the tendency toward higher speeds in this residential
evelopment. I am also aware that you intend to adhere strictly to
irginia Department of Transportation design criteria so far as it
~ffects the pavement structure design, and the requirements of the
tlbemarle County Engineers for storm water drainage design,
! I have reviewed many publications concerning design criteria
i'nd recommendations for subdivision streets and private roads.
his literature clearly indicates that design speed and operating
peed are a function of the geometric design elements of a road,
he design speed chosen should be consistent with the speed a
~river is likely to expect and when a more difficult condition is
pbvio~s, drivers are more likely to accept the lower speed
fPer~tion than when there is no apparent reason for it,
I !The existing roads within Keswick, as presently used and
~onstructed, have always existed as "private" roads and will meet
the ~eometric design standards for Mountainous Terrain as to grade,
purvature, and design speed.
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
RECE~VED
APR 9 1992
PLANNING DEPT.
Pete Bradshaw, Development Coordinator
Reswick Acquisition Corporation
April 6, 1992
Page 2
Plans have been previously approved by the Virginia Department
~f Transportation and the County Engineers Office to construct Club
qrive and an extension thereto to connect with Route 6l6, Your
~taff has suggested that this extension, between Route 616 and
~tation 51+20 be redesigned as a private road using Mountainous
lerrain design criteria. Your realignment reflects the use of
~mall radius curves for the horizontal alignment which are
~ompatible to the lower design speed. We have prepared a profile
tor the vertical alignment and grading for this proposal,
i
i
i
'Our estimate of grading quantities comparing the construction
~f the approved state road to the proposed private road are as
follows:
i
I
trivate Road Cut 11,353 cy Fill 3,800 cy
$tate Road Cut 18,919 cy Fill 5,910 cy
tncrease Cut 7,566 cy Fill 2,110 cy
~ Increase Cut 67% Fill 55%
i
i
The above quantities apply to construction between Route 616
fnd Station 51+20 located just east of Carroll Creek, Your
tevision indicates that generally there would be no design change
trom existing conditions between Station 51+20 and Route 731.
I
I
I
: Please advise if you need additional information,
I
I
Sincerely,
I
W~J
~illiam
I
I
~SR/jmc
I
A~_
S, Roudabush, L,S,
. ,~
IATTACHMENT G I
.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
Rich Tarbell - Planning Department
Jack M. Kelsey - Engineering Departmen
TE: April 16, 1992
SP-92-21 Keswick Acquisition Corporation; Private Roads
"", ~.~ ''''1 ~ J .
T e plan, profile and earthwork volume comparison have been reviewed for demonstration
o alleviating the danger of significant degradation as required under Section 18.36.b.l.a,
o the Subdivsion Ordinance,
T e maximum slope on the proposed road is 9%, which is less than the 10% maximum
sl pe for an equal class public road, The pavement width is reduced 2 feet (22' to 20') by
u ing a private road and will reduce the disturbed area, The private road vertical and
h rizontal curve design criteria allow the road to more closely follow the existing
to graphy, This further decreases the disturbed area, The engineer determined an
hwork volume increase, to construct a public road, in excess of the 30% minimum,
F r these reason the Engineering Department can support the reclassification to a private
r ad. Should the commission approve the request, new road plans, profiles and drainage
c mputations shall be submitted to Engineering for review. These plans shall be based
u n VDOT mountainous terrain criteria and the applicable traffic generation,
c : Jo Higgins - Director of Engineering
4 'k ..
'" .
(ATTACHMENT HI
I Page I I
PETITION
We the undersigned by our signatures on this petition acknowledge that we are in
upport of the following described Special Use Permit amendments currently pending with
he County of Albemarle:
Amendment of SP.85-53, SP. 86-02, and
SP. 86-04. The purpose of these amendments
is to allow for the following:
1). Improvement of Club Drive to Private
Road Standards along its existing
alignment through the Old Keswick
Subdivision.
2). Extension of Club Drive to private
road standards along the proposed new
alignment to SR 616.
3). Bonding and/o~ construction requirements
in the afore-referenced special permits be
described as "to private road standards"
and limited to Club Drive from SR 731 to the
Sewage Treatment Plant.
his petition in no way obligates the undersigned to any homeowners association road
maintenance -agreement.
ADDRESS
~x -::33 - #~0/t l, ~L"J.?9C;7
(
II /, ;',... /,...
,~J
-
2 ff'1 f ?~1~~' 2ZY'l7
/.
I,
~.2/,~~ 7; ~~~~P9'>
/I
"
If
, J
Rf,~( r~ /)<>~ I /{ "-<J I{/~ cLr i/ /I ;L~ 9Vi
\1c:1- 'l \/>-;-~, l{'~s tiNe Ie f; q ~ 'J- '7 t.;7
,
RI c;z. v~w /.2-. )ce5 tv'/ c-Jc: k; ;2 ~ 91'7
Ir
I I
IATTACHMENT HI
I Page 2\
'j!.t /Z},;) / fdt-r- 13 J<t9L-Jick; f~ 2Z!f.'
((
( ,~...
.. .
1.
2.
5.
6r-~ htJ. ~. ~
7.e,.~~ I?.~-~L'i
8.sP!#.~~
'ivt E/' I) i..Ii ('") /n} ()
. .// ~~r // <-~t:-ero-Yl
O. t2 C~L- tv1 fG~
1. (r. ~_ " ~ .~ ~ ""'\.--<..r '~.L
2. ~ /JJ c9..wt~
3. . - _ ] e ~'h"",
\...
4.
5.
V2 7 ,;< ~ x- // , /2:?<~/'dC-L.. ,1//'1 7.1 ~ <-I I'
1ft- :0 1":Jt./~ / J(;y;;/ /~ 41t1 ;t z f f/7
~r ;) ~X /'? r-:?'~/~7_~ t/ /f 2 <<' ~ y/-
, / ,/ I
%'_ ~ ~ L U\, ~e A')U-^- I \) \)0- .J '),0 ~ 9
R-~> ?--) 13-d f4 l~ ~.dl> V4 :l ~4 1-)
/Zk 2 f;'c//t /8 ~7((~/I(,kVa 2:ulr/;
K+ 2 ~,~- Iff I\~ 54).( k,ti, ;L~flf'7
T .J
f~l ~--t!J{7 /[/; k.P/klJ~~ G~<.. ;A ~/l Y--1
,-
o v ~~~~
'\~' ~ ~r4- \ <..'. "'\~~ '(\ ('- '
. \
1?,19... ~evf- I~~ V~ &:;2 9 '17
~ ~ ~ Is ~~.,;I./I yf) ~.;zf<t'}
oj
..
~
IATTACHMENT II
.
VDOT COMMENTS
Page 2
April 20, 1992
Ronald S, Keeler
Special Use Permits & Rezonings
3. SP-92-20 Crozet Church of God, Route 824 - This section of Route 824 is
currently tolerable, Under the current RA zoning, this 5 acres could generate up to
20 VPD. This request is for a 250 seat church and a day care center for 60
children. The traffic generation from this would be at least several hundred VPD.
A minimum of 450 feet of sight distance is required for the entrance on Route 824.
To obtain this to the northeast, major grading of a bank will have to be done, From
a previous plan that was reviewed, it was indicated that a sight easement is not
. needed but a grading easement would be needed on the adjacent property for the
entrance location proposed.
+
4. SP-92-21 Keswick Acquisition Corporation, Route 731 - This request is to amend
previous SP's to allow Country Club Drive to be a private road rather than a public
road, The Department does not support the use of private roads, Road plans for
Cou~try Club Drive, as well as two side streets, have been reviewed and one phase
has been approved by the Department, Not having a public road connecting Route 731
and 616 could have an effect on the traffic patterns and circulation in this area.
Tra1fic coming or going out of this development would have to take alternate routes
exi~ting public routes for access if they were not able to enter the gates. The
Courty Ordinance requires a road connecting two public roads to be a public road
unlEss approval is given. The entrance improvements shown for both Routes 731 and
616 on the road plans are the same whether or not this connector road is public or
pri\ate.
5. SP-92-22 Dale Yilberger, Route 250 E. - The traffic generation from this request
wou d not be in the high range of uses allowed in the HC zoning. As part of the
con~ truction on Route 250, the existing two entrances to this property will be
redlced to one at the location of the existing eastern entrance.
6. SP-92-24 Richard & Donna Harry, Route 618 - This section of Route 618 is
cur ently tolerable. This request is for two additional development right~ which
wou d result in an increase of traffic of 20 VPD. Should 3 or more lots ~ccess an
ent ance, then it would need to be to commercial standards with adequate ~ight
dis ance. There is an existing private gravel road that runs to the north of this
prolerty, This private road is currently on the priority list for possible rural
add tions by the County,
,. J
~" '.. ':, {"".' /-/2 - .9.2/
!.!l:;t'\(llJl8u [v Q~iiJt'). f?_..__.",- ---.
~ ., .., ,_ !,'" 9.2, t1 d:t /7, </02 t"
Ag~nl.la ~,.el,l f.'), ....._~______.__~--~,-~--,..,'~.--
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dep!. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
C harlottcsvilll', Virgllllil 229() 1-4596
(H04) 2% SHn
.>r. ,..
"".r'
,-, r ' 1:.
May 13, 1992
Winter Haven Limited Partnership
c/o Mr. Keith W. Gibb
7601 Dominion Drive
Sandy Springs, MD 20860
RE: SP-92-25 Winter Haven Limited Partnership
Tax Map 78, Parcel 20 (part)
Dear Mr. Gibb:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 12,
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. Use is limited to 80 beds in the facility;
2. Site shall be developed in general accord with plan prepared by
Raymond E. Gaines, Architect dated March 23, 1992 and revised April
29, 1992.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on June
17. 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,
~,O[~
Richard E. Tarbell
Senior Planner
RET/jcw
cc: ~ettie E, Neher
Jo Higgins
Raymond E. Gaines
Amelia Patterson
South Pantops Land Trust
" .
. .
"---
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RICHARD E. TARBELL
MAY 12, 1992
JUNE 17, 1992
(SP-92-25) - WINTER HAVEN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (APPLICANT)
SOUTH PANTOPS II LAND TRUST (OWNER)
Petition: winter Haven Limited Partnership petitions the
Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a
23,420 square foot nursing home [Section 18.2.2(9)] on a
1.86 acre site zoned R-15, Residential. Property, described
as Tax Map 78, Parcel 20 (part), is located on the west side
of South Pantops Drive, approximately 1/4 mile north of
State Farm Blvd. in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This
site is located in a designated growth area (Neighborhood 3)
and is recommended for High Density Residential development.
Character of the Area:
The site is predominately clear near the road with wooded
areas on steeper slopes leading to the Rivanna River to the
west and a large drainage swale to the south. The Overlook
Apartment Complex and State Farm Insurance Offices are
located approximately 1200 feet to the south.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing to provide a 40 bedroom (80 bed)
facility consisting of two buildings. It is estimated that
25% of the resident population will be non-ambUlatory and
fire protection measures will be designed accordingly. The
facility will require a total of 17 employees with 10 people
working during the day shift. The applicant has provided a
detailed description of this request included as Attachment
C. A site plan has been submitted which is being reviewed
in conjunction with this special use permit (see Attachment
D) .
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff opinion is this request
is consistent with the criteria of Section 31.2.4.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan and recommends
approval subject to conditions.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: Several applications have been
reviewed for Tax Map 78, Parcel 20, however, none affect
this site directly. The existing R-15 Residential zoning is
the original 1980 designation on the property.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This site is located in Neighborhood 3
and is recommended for high density residential development.
1
.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
In addition to the requirements of Section 31.2.4.1, the two
issues to be addressed in the review of this special use
permit are:
1. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan
2. Compliance with Supplementary Regulations (Section
5.1.13)
1. ComDliance with the ComDrehensive Plan
This site is recommended for high density residential use
with a density of 11 to 34 dwelling units per acre. Based
on the proposed 1.86 acre site for this facility, the
project is within the recommended density of the
Comprehensive Plan (21.5 dwelling units per acre).
2. ComDliance with Supplementary Requlations r5.1.131
This section of the Zoning Ordinance regulates resthomes,
nursing homes, convalescent homes and orphanages.
a. Such uses shall be Drovided in locations where the
physical surroundinqs are compatible to the Darticular
area;
Adjacent land uses consist of the Overlook Apartments
complex and the State Farm office building to the
south. To the west the site slopes down to the Rivanna
River and properties to the east and north are zoned
R-15 Residential and presently undeveloped. Adjacent
land uses both proposed and existing are compatible
with this request.
b. No such use shall be established in any area either
by-right or bY special use permit until the Albemarle
County Fire Official has determined that adequate fire
protection is available to such use;
Required fire flow is 500 gpm at 20 psi since all
buildings are proposed to be sprinklered. A fire
hydrant exists approximately 200 feet distant and
available fire flow is 2500 gpm at 20 psi.
c. Generally, such uses should be located in Droximitv to
or in short reSDonse time to emerqency medical and fire
Drotection facilities. Uses for the elderlY and
handicaDDed should be convenient to shoDDinq, social,
education and cultural uses;
2
.
Fire response will be provided by stony Point Fire
Company, East Rivanna Fire Company and Charlottesville
Fire Department. Emergency medical response would be
provided by the Charlottesville-Albemarle Rescue Squad.
The service from these sites meets the recommended
response time stated in the Community Facilities Plan.
The site is located in close proximity to the Riverbend
Shopping Center. In addition, the Senior Center,
Piedmont Virginia Community College, and the University
of Virginia would all be within approximately 15
minutes travel time from this facility.
d. No such use shall be oDe rated without aDProval and
where aDDroDriate. licensinq bY such aqencies as the
Virqinia DeDartment of Welfare. the Virqinia DeDartment
of Health. and other such appropriate local. state and
federal aqencies as may have authority in a Darticular
case.
This facility will be licensed by the Virginia
Department of Social Services. A Certificate of Need
is not required for this particular use as it will be
licensed as a home for adults and no federal funds are
involved with the project.
Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors find, in
accordance with Section 31.2.4.1, the proposed use: (1) will
not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties; and,
(2) will not change the character of the district, and,
therefore, the use will be in harmony with the purpose and
intent of the Zoning Ordinance, the by-right uses within the
district, the Supplementary Regulations, and with the public
health, safety, and general welfare. Staff opinion is this
special use permit is consistent with Sections 5.1.13 and
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
Therefore, staff recommends approval subject to the
following conditions:
Recommended Conditions of ApDroval:
1. Use is limited to 80 beds in the facility;
2. Site shall be developed in general accord with plan
prepared by Raymond E. Gaines, Architect dated March
28, 1992 and revised April 29, 1992.
----------------
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Tax Map
B - Location Map
C - Project Description
o - Preliminary Site Plan
E - Preliminary Landscape Plan
3
I ATTACHMENT AI
I
I
79
i.__
- '""-
'"
'''--_oj
22
...
---
SeAL[ IN n:[T
..,
..&0
,
92
SCOTTSVILLE AND
RIVANNA DISTRICTS
SECTION 78
""
~
~
t'~~..r"l.,/I
,/
-~
<Y
i r64iJ
11
I
I)
\ " ~
~\~~~
lS)\)!
r'~
.............
" <.,
"')"~B
~ '0,\
~~ I
,~ I
" IB4 I,
I "
..
@
~
,,~
;:,~
~O
)$
"~
->~
!' 't
"
-,
, ,
...
...
;,
~'~
\
i
\
@;J
0'0
..
I6iOI
...., ,~ -~-:..--\
\.... .,
,-
.
""...~
~ "
"
....
~
I
....
d'
c.;
',"',
/'
/
~
iollesvilJe
,
~-;r-'::-
'"
'L ~ - ..
("S_....~~
,/
/
,'". . ",._..:~:\)<
A'~:' ~(, I
C '
,~r
I. ...
~
"
,f7.@
.;:)
o
"
,.
\
,
\
:\
o ,
'"'
I
I
"\~"
&'....Ol"
'b ~ "0}
i'....rj.. '- '-,
l ~Il "'-'l~ ...."
,
"',
)
,
J'
/..,,- . t;'
Ii? ~~/~,~ "
" ,~O,<,,/
.....,,1, /
,
"
"-
,,~'
/
/
I
\ -~
IillJ )~
."" -~,
--..
<f
~"\'"
\
'1'
/
..\,
~',
.'
v'
I "
.,J I ~
\
l
[!lir
"
, "
I l
,
I
;"
,
,
, '!"
~
I
..
,
I
J
;'-- .;~
'" '
.. ..
,
["",""'"
~'do" \
- ,
i
~
\
.
I \~-,
. "
/
.....
~
--.)
o
c,
1C...ne
K,'1',
'", ','.
-,
. \e. ,
[@},' r
'", ~ ll? ~
?-
'"
'"
~
.
IATTACHMENT cl
Prepared by Ray Gaines and Keith Gibb
(applicant) April 21, 1992
-R. Tarbell
Sr. Planner
RECE1veo
APR 2 2 1992
PLANNING DEPT.
PROJECT SUMMARY
WINTER HAVEN HOME FOR ADULTS
PANTOPS MOUNTAIN
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
The Winter Haven Limited Partnership consists of six
individual partners, three of whom have made careers of long
term health care. The partnership is committed to providing
residential care to the elderly, They currently operate
three licensed homes for adults in the Commonwealth of
Virginia, a fourteen bed facility in Warren County, and
twenty and thirty-one bed facilities in the City of
Charlottesville, .AIl three facilities generally stay fully
occupied, ~nd are licensed in good standing by the
Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Social Services.
The Proposed Winter Haven Home for Adults to be located on a
portion of Tax Map 78, Parcel 20 on Pantops Mountain in
Albemarle County, Virginia is an eighty bed, forty bedroom
facility of two buildings housing up to thirty-two and
forty-eight residents respectively. It is the partnership's
experience that a substantial number of the bedrooms will be
occupied as private rooms, such that rarely will there be
more than sixty residents onsite at any given time.
Experience shows that approximately twenty-five percent of
the resident population will be non-ambulatory.
This facility will provide employment for seventeen
individuals broken down as follows:
Day Shift
Second Shift
Third Shift
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
1 Administrator
2 Food Service
2 Housekeeping
5 Primary
Caregivers
4 Primary
Caregivers
3 Primary
Caregivers
The residents are housed in a residential atmosphere in
private or semi-private rooms with individual baths, Meals
are prepared onsite and served in a communal dining room.
Amenities available to the residents include multiple living
and day room spaces along with exterior deck or patio space,
The buildings are one story in height in order to maintain a
residential scale, The exteriors will be primarily of brick
with earth tones used for roofin0 and trim.
jATTACHMENT cj
'/Page 2/
Section 5.1.13 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance
deals specifically with rest homes, nursing homes,
convalescent homes, and orphanages. It is reasonable to
consider a licensed home for adults to be covered under this
section as it is a similar use to those listed in the
ordinance.
The site is currently zoned R-15, and is particularly well
suited for this use. With R-15 zoning, the adjacent parcels
(remainder of this parcel after division of the site) will
probably develop as multi-family apartments or townhouses.
Since the proposed use of this site is of a residential
nature, the impact of the facility on the adjacent
properties will be minimal. A plus for the residents of this
facility are the good views of the Woolen Mills area,
Monticello'and Brown's Mountain from the site.
Life safety concerns are easily addressed at this site. For
fire protection, There is a 10" water main in South Pantops
Drive serving the site. The Albemarle County Service
Authority advises that fireflow to the site is 1,500 GPM at
20 PSI residual. The buildings are to be fully sprinklered
in compliance with NFPA-13. Additionally, the site is
approximately five to eight minutes from the fire station on
Ridge Street. Emergency medical facilities are available at
Martha Jefferson Hospital, approximately five minutes away.
Additionally, the site is convenient to the Charlottesville
Albemarle Rescue Squad.
Because the site lies in the urban area of the county,
access to any cultural, educational, or social use is
convenient, as travel time to such locations as the Senior
Center, PVCC, the University of Virginia, Downtown, etc. is
within fifteen minutes at most hours, The site is
approximately three thousand feet from Pantops Shopping
Center,
This facility is to be licensed by the Commonwealth of
Virginia Department of Social Services. Department of Social
Services Standards and Requlations for Licensed Homes for
Adults do not require a Certificate of Need for this
particular use, The department regularly inspects licensed
homes for adults to assure the weJ.I being of the residents,
As the area population ages, the need for residential care
is increasing dramatically. A licensed home for adults
provides an alternative to nursing home care for those not
requiring the services of a nursing home. This facility will
be a definite asset to the community,
..
u
~'"'I
, ,". 'J~, ~..
r, 1 ';'. ~ UI:
--"
,
\
'\
" '\ '\
------
_,J.- I
/' {
). ,,'
-' -'
,,\ r'
,-
I'
" '-......
,~ .r ~
\h ~~ ~
~~ 'J~
![ ~~
t,~ ,\,
f;~ ~
~d ~
G~
'0
Q~
~~
~U
~~
&r
~~
r~
"
,
,\
"
>
[
u
f
! b ~ !
:\. It!
H;
, I\~
~ I:::
\~ :1'
Ir :G
!t-
,r
I"
is
I~
t:i.4t 'ij, r._' 'I'.
ffi~ l ~.~. M
~ ~ ~ ~
n .l:"'.J ..J, 1 -:i ..J, 1
r Ij " , · " ,
Ri~H ""-
" ,,1,1 n 0 j ~ ~
Ii J ,M ~ ~
" :', ~ ,;: - ~
''.I' t ~ ~ C
II _'~ g ~I [t'>
, "ll_
~ . 'i ~r ~
~ } i ~ ~
) "f d
~ ~ i& 0
d
_~ R ~;" ~-~:. ~- ~.. ~-'~~
I -"'~Ilt_!:f
~ ~ -F. ~- { ~ ~ ~,;~~
; f.'=~'PI~
~ 2 ~ iP ~ ~~G
!j It \II \l' 1) \1' .., ~~
'n .... 'II " U _I ~
~~~i*;(iH~
l' :Jo \fI IJ ,. 1.1' tr IF< If' 'Il/l:
"1 .", '1t :n :It " JI"')J"U
in
pq
i n ~ i
IP
"d
~ -(
, "
, ,
"
":1
\: ;~ .
:~if:,
~1I1
:I~
, ,
l.:~;
'I'
'"
Ir
i i ~
i!, /
t, '\
\ . c
'--\ I,
.- "-.......-
.,; '- .
I
G\
G\ c<,
(t\ L,d
ip--:, G~\
I~\'~~~~
,1-J;-5/"c=- ~
RAYMOND E, GAINES
1\~nllF'~(;T
~D"'~It..JG~
--
.~ ,"", ~ CQU,,",T"l' VI~"'"
.~.=(~~~ ",,~6
~
~
n
J:
J:
m
'...' Z
-4
m
I'IY"'ld :LJ.19
----- ,\'.noo ""V~'J,'
'tIN l:j\~.] '..d.'\lH't'd lHll~"
:Lil, _ ----..-~^YH-\I.d)ol"
~ic;I" ; -lJl.J.--'dl.ldlJ Ii~ _._
-..,
, 01
-
T
'\ \ '
, I
I
\ \
) I
l
I \
- - vn01";;i\I";i
"A_ j ^ r.a
t?lf\, '
~~)
~ """"-......
,--- r-
_'-. " _..,~-,--_~::-:.::-~)-;0C:::":";':" ~::-:::-)'.' :";;C'",,::.J
KS-~(. \ ( " (~+ \ ,/
~~ ,..-~:: -~+ ..1 ' ,'1 ) '" + ~~ ,\ (l
"" -;- _~ /'>> ./ .._~ (~~, It.",
r- + :: /1 t'- ) / ....-- \::.J" \\ I \
\ ~.. L 8C;(-1 ~ ", ( ~ ~ ~)':\\', \\,\ :~V ^/ \.-.
, 1'(. ' · ,\ \! .. )') ,
, , ) ~..,,<- __ \, " \, t' , ..~,
. '> 0)~,)\ \\A~\ \ '\ 1 )
----/ '\~\ /\ H \ "
~~~,\~ctl ~;f\ \
lr'~~--',)') --.~.., ____".. \'~'\)~ \\1\:....,-,,",,:\>"; \ \
\. (:) > I h ': +~ " ,
~' ~.'+ f;..... \\..~' ( \
~<j,t> ( r' ". ,> ------,~.. \ \,
5 ~ \ . w1--;;'~ \~ \
/ ------- ~I-+ - \, ~~~~)\ '~
/ '\ " \:;,\~ (~ \~
/ \' I \)~ i~ ~
/' ,-" - ~ ~'t- )I ,I 't'Z,,,'I'J. II: ~- \~ ';\
/ ~'~v-.- \ ~'10r" ~. \: "",' ,-
;' __ (..o.::.!;;J. ~ iI to) \,
,__~ ,~,~~:r "611 N \ 9Y i~ ~~
.. ..~~~ "~.,,,h .... Ill/ ( I
_ ~ , ~\ \ \ \ ,_70" '\ \+ II \
-~-s~, )_ ,," V'J~ "~~ '!~~V'i.-'-\" \ \\ \ \ \ \ - .. \~t \\ \
/'\()~+,t: \\ \ \ \ \\ ,0-" '\\/ ~'~\\
\,\ " ) , ' (~~~., 'II +1.1 )" \
-f "I \ \ ' ....' .. ~ :'
----..- ' .. "':'~-'tj, , ' \ ' " \ \ '\ ,\ \ \.:, ,', \ .<;'Q" !\j ~\ \
'-Jr--y\-'..- _~.. :', '" \ ,n II \ \ \ ~..-\~~t ",~.'I<'O>~ c;.' "\ ~\ '\
\ ' ,_..-:.::,.,~, ..,.~ 1",,\ \-1 I,' \_l-':.:.-,'/ <:/:(l"tI.,:(~\.."C'."",~\, ',I\~"~\,
\ . ~. \., " \ ~,.,.____ .. ~ .",<'J C , \....J'.. " . >J' \
.._,(.,",',p' ,," ,,~,';:>,_~~~....-----:-:::r.&.j;-!d...-J "\ \\'~,'+ \",', '~;,-~~;\ \
,^,' / f~ ,~~ ,-....-:; ) '...--J /\~ Il \ '(' \
\;('~,;!:\ J"'<':":'~",\, , I ~f~'\t '\ \-, ;~\ \
j .. <. I (1)' \.. ~'\~' ,I 1.J
\ ,"~ '.... \ \ '
~\ "'-;;"~ \ ' ,[) -H' 'I'~ I ~ ~ f-
~\ ,.., ,) X)/, ~ '1 \
'i \,\) ,~, i ':1
~ /~, . ,II
'-~''-- \ ;!
',---l...." , ,/. ,'::
'-\.-l \ U'
"----- '~./-/ - ,
~ \
\':'
\ .)
---
w
t- :.'~..,.
Z
W
I:
:I
U
~
~
I
""""1"\ t=;)Nln~~:p[:~"
___-1 ~~ ~'pLJ..la.:.,-::y t _ "1
fV'\"3V'-3-3 ~Nn'a:;--';:~~L_~__
-..
".o:i!- .,.
('rl
~)0
.. ,_.... ..,.._i_,_
] ' ),],....---'---1
I' ~,J " 11
, .01'" 11)'
: tfI ~ rI j., II
'" "
, ~'~I_~ .._..___..\~:
.L831.1H8tiV
S3NIV8 '3 ONOv-.J}..\11:J
~. j ! .~ ~ N ,;) "
,.' . .1, :,.J 1I~~: ';'.1 ,I
.>.;:IIILjl/ .I,,": :J...(fji k ..i' Ii U"'i....
~ '!)NldY.,><,=ClN-V1
, ,
:.--"
"
----.-.. ,_'
..
,I
"-'\.~
\
\
..)
/f ,(?
" (
) I
,..1 ,)
) /
1 ;._____
!
,,'_'il)
----..
.;.-----
(
.: ,'~:J"'" "
/
/
---- """-.,
'I~
"1..-~ )
u
--.., /-r-'
, 'J
o'.{l u: u: u: Ii u: u.",
-~ III Il\ .si iii 11 Ill.si
~~! IJ * ~ ~ >J ~ R
~~ ~< N III ~ ~,~
~ ill U, U u. b.. \l
~~, jj .n 'Ii >Ii >Ii 4) (l
\}~i a ~ !l; ~ ~ ~ ~
AI IJ
~ ~I
(jllll ~ <r w = 't ~
~(~ ~ ~ :r _~ ",t i
~~i-t -~ -~ ';~ -! "~ ~
]
of
1
~
-\
. - ,(, I~
\...il)jd~'" ; (~+
(.~') \E;,' \:~;:
I' - ..... I,,'" ..(I:rI,"
, . ",: I-;'l"", + l
I ."/l?\\......... \ '\ ~
-------- ',~ ) //
... f -~,v,,,~ ,_ (' '-", - - -----,.. /~-J
\ )--. ~__.~--~_< ~ ""}'I...
,~}~:J \~,_
'.. --\
i:-''-.
</1'\~ I.
"', '1
I
1
\
l,t,
I' ')
,1"
~I' ~
4 <J
,) ,
d)~
I ',1.,
]1 I
,1/ :\
..I!e)
....., ,:"..
-, ',; .....~<..~
!
'I.
I..
'- 1..,
'\
" "
>II ,1
l!\ n
'J) S
.') (\
0 ill )- J
J .{
<\ Id
\J, \-
;D
~
r
;1
tJ c;
~ w
~ 8
S \~
Q :-J ~
~~ 8~S
J g ~ ~ ,
~ ~ G ~I ': ~
J 3a~~w~~~
~~~llJl~[c~3'-!~
() Cl [I ~~ !if
0~2 5Al~~r!(J
~~ ~~)W~~~
~ 9 ) l
<l - N ~ 'i 1!\ .9 i' I, ;1
r ~ ~ ~ \' ~ ~ ~I ;~ Ij
...
(
C
t
,
.... \ '- :
"'2" ',~ \
'(.\\ "
;"-
Q
~ It
~ lJi
5 ~~
1~
9 P3
<l If'
B l,~
] ~~
~ tl~
~ ~~
III DII--
III '~
~ 3:1
~Q
\,~ ~
d- Jr
~ D. ~
~di ~;
~ J>l1 I:H
..: w
i ~ ~ It" f-
-ro "\\) "" "1
lu- - ;1 (\)
..1 : _\ \ ,I ..
:1\ .."!.~ -Il! ~
vi
lil'
....:
(\!
\\.
1\1 )- T
~II ~ ~ 4
t.l lU I
\1 ~: ~ ~ ~ ~
",;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
III .1 ~ ~ III 2
rJ ~
J !I,<:l11
lii J: "' oj) >II ,j\
III
III
lI.
J
:J
'1
a
III
~
~
r'
---~-- --,----
Edward H Bal , Jr
Samuei Mille
David P Bowe man
Charlott€svill
'ii"".,,'
~'''''''"
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
While Hall
Charlotte y, H mphris
Jack Jouett
June 18, 1992
Ms. Mary Loose
President
Charlottesville/Albemarle Jaycees
PO Box 96l
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Ms. Loose:
At its meeting on June 17, 1992, the Board of Supervisors
took no action on your request for $l250 to help fund the annual
J ly 4th fireworks celebration.
V~O?~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
LE :ec
cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Richard E. Huff, II
\-,
~~L~;:"-"... _ _ '
')N , j,'-~ /...< - ~7~
'~..,..,''"'"''"'-........~.~...~_.-_. ,~...
"
County of Albemarle
, I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Request
AGENDA DATE:
June 17, 1992
ITEM -NUMBER:
;:/02. tJ~/ tl, '1oL;l
ACTION:~
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Charlott
requeste
County
celebrat
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Huff.
ATTACHMENTS: No
/Jr;-
REVIEWED BY: A;:t<Jf
BACKGRO
At the
Charlott
help fun
from the
une 10, 1992 Board of Supervisors meeting, Ms. Mary Loose, President of the
sville/Albemarle Jaycees made a presentation requesting $1,250 from the County to
the annual July 4th fireworks celebration. She intends to make a similar request
City of Charlottesville.
DISCUSSI
Ms. Loos
fund the
of commu
funding
indicates that in prior years, the business community has always been able to fully
fireworks display but with the current economic conditions, budgets for these kinds
ity projects have been cut drastically. The Jaycees do not anticipate that public
ould be a regular component of future year's displays.
RECOMME ATION:
Staff re ommends that if the Board supports this request, funds should be committed from the
Board co tingency account contingent upon the City providing a matching amount.
92.083
l"
, &,-/.2 -;1.;L
9:z, ~'~;1.~:;.2 F
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
;1
:TO:
:FROM:
iDATE:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
1)ei?
David B. Benish, Chief of Community Development
June 12, 1992
,
iRE:
,
Crozet Crossing Proposed Recapture Plan
Background:
Attached is the Charlottesville Housing Foundation's
proposed recapture plan for the Crozet Crossing housing
project. County approval of the recapture program is
required by Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA)
and Virginia Housing Partnership prior to the release of
funds committed to the Crozet Crossing project.
The first page of this Plan is a summary of the contents of
the report. Sections I through IV provide the purpose,
intent and overall guidelines which define the recapture
plan. Staff would recommend you focus on the concept of the
plan outlined in these sections. The remaining sections
provide more detail and justification for the components of
the plan.
Discussion:
The following are key points of the proposed plan that you
should be aware of:
o The purpose of the recapture plan is to establish the
terms under which the buyers in Crozet Crossing will
repay the money invested in Crozet Crossing by the
County (CDBG and County matching funds) and the
Charlottesville Housing Foundation (CHF) totalling up
to $813,000.
o The funds recaptured by CHF and the County are
recommended to go into a proposed Housing Trust Fund.
This money will be reused in future programs to assist
County citizens in obtaining decent and affordable
housing. Specific programs to be funded from this
Trust Fund have not been determined or developed but
possibilities include a program to assist in down
payments and/or closing costs for homes on the market,
a homeownership education/training program, or future
construction of affordable housing.
-
e
e
(
John Shepherd.
Francis Fife,
j ~[C/-';eJ.IJB~,__J~J=-/-';N. LIJ~_J;:JiQ~t:..I__l;:.~J.).t!~I!\IG
JUNE 9. 1992
Pr-epared by:
Housing Specialist. AHIP
Vice President and former Executlye Director.
Charlottesville Housing Foundation
Forrest Kerns, Executive Director,
Foundation
Charlottesville Houslng
e
e
e
(
SLJI"H"JPiBY..QE._ ~9NT EN TS
The purpose of the Recapture Plan is to recoup the moneys
inyested in Crozet Crossinq by the Charlottesville Houslng
Foundation, Albemarle County, and the Department of Houslng and
Communlty Development to reuse for other houslng projects. This
111 be done without comprOmlSlnq the ability to bUlld affordable
ousing at Crozet CrOSSlnq. fhe plan contalns three basic
lements. 1) tlnancing that enables low and moderate lncome
eople to own a well bUllt, energy efficient home that would
therwlse be way beyond thelr reach. 2) The method by wn1ch
the money that the County, DHCD and CHF have invested in the
rOJect will be repaid. 31 Thls recaptured money will De placed
In a Housinq Trust Fund that will support affordable houslng
rOJects In the future in Albemarle County.
I. INTRODUCTION: fhe $813.000+ lnvested in Crozet Crossing wlII
be repald by the purChasers and recycled through a Houslng Trust
Fund to support future affordable houslnq projects In the County.
II. SOURCE OF FUNDS TO BE RECAPTURED: Th1S shows amounts lnvested
bv DHCD. the County and CHF.
III. OBJECTIVES: These include affordabilitv and repayment.
IV. GENERAL GUIDELINES AND ASSUMPTIONS: These are a prellminary
design based on discussions with VHDA. DHCD. the Enterprlse
Foundatlon. and a reVlew of the recapture plans of CHF. Nelson
County s Montreal Village. and Fairfax County.
V. COMPONENTS OF VALUE IN THE PROPERTY SUBJECT TO RECAPTURE:
Crozet Crossing relies on a varlety of financing mechanisms that
are more easily understood when related to different elements of
Lhe homes.
I. FINANCING PACKAGE: lhis outlines how the houses wlII De
financed and what portions of that flnancing will be subject to
recapture bv the Housina Trust Fund. The use of shared
dPpreciation rather than fixed rate interest is dlscussed.
VII. CASH AT CLOSING CREDITED TO THE FUND: A substantial portlon
of the funds invested ln Crozet Crossinq may be recaptured In
c sh at the time of the initial sale.
VIII. CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH DEFERRED LOANS ARE REDUCED.
F RGIVEN OR BECOME DUE: Deferred loans are forqiven at the end
of 30 Years. Otherwise. the deferred loans are designed to
f nctlon as much like fixed lnterest rate loans as possible.
HOUSING TRUST FUND: This is a general description of
using Trust Fund that will serve to admlnister the funds
recaptured under this plan for future projects.
the
that
X. RECAPTURE PLAN EXAMPLES: These show how the financinq ~f an
l ltlal sale and dlfferent resales would be recaptured.
e
e
e
..
PRO'=Q_~E[Lm~:~BrTJ181::,_.,.E'=B~LF_QJI_J;:J3DZ~T_J~RQ~~J_NG
REV I S~p ~_.JJJN..~__Y.!._1992c
I . I NTRODUCT-I ON !..
The County of Albemarle and the Charlottesville Houslng
Foundation have. together. invested $813.000+ in the acquisition
nd development of the Crozet Crossing property. This Recapture
Ian. (henceforth referred to as the Plan) describes the terms
under which this money will be repaid by the Durchasers.
This Plan calls for the recaptured funds to be placed ln d
ous1ng Tr-ust Fund. (henceforth referred to as the Fund) that
ill be used for the benefit of future programs that SUPDort
affordable housing ln Albemarle Countv.
It lS understood that further work will be requlred to
lmplement this plan. It will be necessary to draft real estate
sale and loan documents that are consistent wlth the plan. It
wlll also be necessary to draft the agreements and documents
that will establish the Trust Fund.
II. SOURCE OF FUNDS TO BE RECAPTURED:
$300.000
DHCD Block Grant
$331.500
Albemarle County
$181~00+
Charlottesville Housing Foundation
$813.000+
Total funds invested
recapture plan.
that
subject
to
this
are
I addltlon to this figure.
prlce. determlned by the
that wlII also be subject to
there wlll be value above the sale
County s valuation for tax purposes.
thlS recapture plan.
III. OBJECTI~!;.~;
1. Make the houses in Crozet Crosslng more affordable by
deferring payment on a portion of the total cost of land.
site development. and house construction.
~,
L.
Recycle
Courlty.
and the
houslnq
the money that has been lnvested by Albemarle
the Department of Housing and Communlty Development.
Charlottesville Housinq Foundation to meet long term
needs.
.1
e
e
e
:: .
IV.
GENERAL _GU I Qt;;.L I ~ES L_ASgUMYT :tm~S:
1. The purchasers should ultimately pay all the hard costs
of thelr homes with a comblnatlon of down payments.
conventional mortqages. and deferred loans. These deferred
loans should not carry a flxed rate of lnterest that accrues
untll the house lS resold. Rather. the purchasers should pay
a portlon of the appreciatlon that can be attrlbuted to the
deferred loan. Thls avoids the possibility that accumulated
interest might exceed the appreciation in the property at the
time of resale. In this Plan. the cost of borrowinq the
deferred money equals the interest that would be charged if
the rate equaled the rate of appreciatlon.
The purchasers in Crozet Crossinq do receive assistance
In the form of low interest loans. the opportunity to corrow
down pavment and closing costs. the opportunity to obtain
loans with deferred payments. and the low cost of land.
Also. there are donated servlces in this development that
add to the value of these homes that the purchasers do not
pav fOt-.
The Housing Fund.
a return on the
created by CHF and the County should
money lnvested In Crozet Crossing.
earn
The plan should not
to make improvements on
create disincentives
the house.
to remairl in or
4.
The plan should
purchasers selllng
large profit.
contaln protections against initial
their house soon after purchase for a
5.
The plan
plan must
lTlean no
payments.
future.
must be acceptable to VHDA. To this end.
not decrease future pavment ability. ThlS
balloons. plans that call for increased
or plans that call for payments to commence
the
would
future
ln trle
6. The plan should avold placlng conditions on future sales
that have the potential to create title insurance problems.
I.
The plan should be
possible. the plan
purcrlasers.
extent
by the
consistent
should be
and falr.
accepted
To the
as such
v. COMPONENTS OF VALUE IN lHE PRO~~RTY SUBJECT TO RECAPTURE.~
from
The total value of
different sources;
the hnuses ln Crozet Crosslng wlII come
some subject to recapture. oLhers not.
,-
L
e
e
e
1. THE LAND AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS:
Crozet Crosslnq wlJI be affordable In larqe part because
the land. road. water. and sewer are being pald for initlally by
the Block Grant. Albemarle County. and the Charlottesvllle
Houslng Foundation. Thls t1nanclng arrangement lS the baSlS Of
the recapture plan because It allows purchasers to defer some or
all of the cost of the lot.
All funds committed to lot costs are subject to recapture;
ither under the provisions of the deferred loans or as
"cash to the Housing Trust Fund at closing".
2. THE CONSTRUCTED HOUSE:
The houses will be built by CHF wlth
financlng. The construction financing will
proceedS of VHDA. VHPF. or FmHA permanent
by the initial purchdsers.
VHDA construction
be repaid with the
mortgages obtalned
No portion of the cost of construction of the houses lS
subject to this recapture plan.
3. ADDED VALUE:
Added value is the dltference between the purchase prlce
market value. Thls value is determined by a tax
at the tlme of the lnitial purchase. This added value
above hard costs lS created by the contrlbutlons of the Kessler
Bill Edqerton. Harry Porter. the Charlottesville
H using Foundation. and others. The work of staff at TJPD. AHIP.
Albemarle County and CHF contrlbutes to this added value as well.
It also comes from the fact that there lS no developer profit
b lit lnto Crozet Crossinq.
Added value is subject to recapture under this plan.
V I . F:~I Nf:!~C I NG.__pA~KBQ~
The total value of a house and lot will be palj for
th cash and a variety of financing mechanisms. Note that some
these components are in the form of cash and third party loans
at are not subject to recapture. Other components of the
nanclng are in the form of secured. deferred loans that are
bJect to recapture.
1. DOWN PAYMENT:
i om
This wlIl be pald by purchaser
the VIrginia Housinq Partnership
sown
Fund.
funds.
or borrowed
o wn payment funds are not subject to recapture.
,-",.
e
e
e
2. PERMANENT MORTGAGE:
The amount of this mortqaqe will be based on the purchaser s
repayment abillty. This will range from the total cost of the
nouse and land mlnus the down pavment down to the cost of the
house constructlon onlv.
These mortgages wlII be secured bv 1st deeds of trust.
payable to the Vlrginla Housing Development Authorlty. the
Vlrginla Housing PartnershlP Fund. or. posslbly. the Farmer's
Home Admlnlstratlon.
fhese mortgages are not subject to recapture.
3. DEFERRED LOANS:
Most of the houses in Crozet Crossinq will be financed ln
part by deferred loans. The principal amount of these loans will
reflect the balance owed to the Fund for the cost of the lot.
The princlpal plus a return will be secured bv a second deed of
trust. payable to the Fund.
Added
lpan. This
Value wlll also be secured in the
lS addressed in the next section.
deferred
second
Deferred loans are subject to recapture.
M~thod of Recapture of Deferred Loans:
The amount due at the time of resale or any other
triggering event will be the principal amount of the deferred
lpan plus a percentage of the appreciation of the value of the
property. It is thls percentaqe of appreclation that provides the
F~nd the return on the lnvestment in the land and slte
d~veloDment.
The percentage of the appreciatlon due under the provisions
of the second deed of trust is determined at the time of the
lhitlal purchase. It is calculated bv dividinq the prlncipal
amount secured by the 2nd deed of trust by the assessed valJe of
the house and lot. This lS referred to as the in~es!.~ent factor.
At the time of resale. the total amount of appreciatlon
l~ calculated by subtractinq the original tax assessed value from
tle valid resale value. The value of improvements made by the
ol"mer. determined bv the ta:< assessment. is then subtract2d to
a....rive at the adJusted appreciation. ThlS adjusted appreclation
i~ multlPlied by the investment factor to arrive at the r2turn
diJe under the terms of the second deed of trust.
4
e
e
e
In the event that the property is conveyed
lnheritance. the value at time of conveyance will be
by the County assessment. adjusted by the State's
assessed value to market value.
bv qlft or
determined
ratio of
Rationale for this approach to deferred loans:
a. ThlS approach avoids the accrual of unpaid interest. It
protects the purchasers from the posslbility that the property
would not appreciate enough to pay the accumulated interest
at the tlme of resale.
b. It provldes a
appreciatlon.
return to
the
Fund in
form
the
of
shared
c. I t lS fair to the home owners because those who recelve
large subsidies will net less at the tlme they resell.
Those who have been making larger mortgaqe payments will
net more at the time of resale.
d. Removlng the value of subsequent lmprovements from the
tax assessed value at the time of resale allows the property
owners to realize the full benefit of improvements they
make to their homes. ThlS provldes an lncentive to the
owners to maintain the property ln good repair and to
make improvements.
4. ADDITIONAL VALUE ABOVE THE INITIAL PURCHASE PRICE:
The amount of added value to be secured lS calculated by
s~btracting the initial purchase price from the falr market
v~lue. The falr market value is determlned by a tax assessment.
This lien will be lncorporated lnto the second deed of trust.
ih favor of the Fund.
This value above
u~der this plan.
the sale prlce ~s subject to
recapture
M~thod of recapture of added value:
The amount to be secured will be determined by a tax
a~sessment at the time of the lnitial purchase. At the e~d of
fpur years 25% of the principal will be forgiven. At the
ehd of flve years an additional 25% of the orlginal prin=ipal
a(nount will be forglven. At ttle end of six years an additional
2p% of the orlginal prinCipal will be forglven. And. at the
ehd of seven years this obllgation will be fully satisfled.
rile payoff amount wlII be prorated.
This will ca,rv no lnterest or return.
5
e
e
e
I
Rationale for recognizing and securing added value:
The purpose of this provision lS to ,emove the posslbil1ty
that inltial buvers 1n Crozet Crosslng would sell thelr house
spon afte, purchase and reallze a sizable proflt. This would
1ntroduce an undeslrable element of instabilltv to the commun1tv.
Thls lien will extinguish over time to reflect
the initial added value decreases as a percentage
of the value as the property appreciates.
the f dC t t ha t
of the total
Once this obligation 1S satisfied. the owner reaps the full
benefit of the appreciat10n of the property value. based on the
owner s equltv.
VII. CASH AT CLOSING THAT IS CREDITED TO THE FUND
If all money avallable for recapture was equallv distributed
among the thirty purchasers. each house could be financed In
part with a $25.000 deferred loan. However. manv of the
prospective purchasers are able to qualifv for larger first
positlon mortgages and will not need such large deferred loans.
It 1S not anticipated that any of the deferred loans will exceed
$25.000.
fherefor-e.
actual deferred
to the Fund.
at each closlnq.
loan amount. If any.
the difference
and $25.000 will
between the
be credlted
The County and CHF have each paid $31.500
Housing Specialist staff positlon for Crozet
amount will be recaptured and repaid directlv to
become available from the sale of houses.
to support the
Crossing. This
each as as funds
Cash at closing is subject to recapture.
VIII. CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER __~~~~tl DEFERRED LOANS ARE REDUCED~
FbRGIVEN OR BECOME DUE:
a.
Deferred
forg1ven
are to be
loans. secured by a second deed of
at the end of 30 years.
trust.
b.
Accelerating the payments on the first mortgage does
decrease the term or amount of the second mortgage.
not
c. Prlnc1Pal only payments can be made to reduce the balance of
of the deferred loans. These payments will be llmited to a
minlmum of $1.000.
d.
In the event that the 2nd Oeed of Trust mortgagor has made
intermittent payments to reduce the princlpal. the following
steps will be taken to dete,mine the final payoff amount:
6
e
Accor-ding to the procedures outlined under "Method of
Recapture of Deferred Loans". beginning on page 5. adjusted
appreciation 1S multiplied bv the investment factor to arrive
at the amount due under the terms of the 2nd deed of trust.
When thls amount is known. an equation with this amount of
return. the amount of principal. and the term of the loan
can be solved to determine the rate of return. This rate
will be inserted into the same amortization formulas that are
used to determlne pay-off amounts for fixed rate. 30 year
mortgages.
e.
Anv event that triggers a due on demand clause In
deed of trust. will also trlgger a due on demand
the second deed of trust.
the first
clause In
IX. HOUSING TRUST FU~p
The County of Albemarle and the Charlottesv1lle Houslng
Foundation will draft an agreement that will serve as the basis
for the establlshment of the Housing Trust Fund. The agreement
will include the following points. subject to dlSCUSS10n and
r-ev1sion.
e
The two partles will create the Housinq Trust Fund from
recaptured money from Crozet Crossing and create a committee
of trustees to administer the Fund. There will be five trustees:
two designated by the County. two designated by CHF. and one
deslgnated by the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program ((~HIP).
The Purpose of the committee will be to use money
a d accumulated interest) from the Fund for affordable
proJects within Albemarle County. CHF and the AHIP
grants or loans from the Fund for affordable housing
whlch either now operate or initiate in the future.
(capital
housing
wi 11 use
programs
The committee w1II designate who will manage
of the Fund. whether it is the Albemarle County
Finance. another department wlthin the County,
or outside firm. The committee will decide
k ep liquld and what amounts to invest at
appropriate investment return.
the 1nvestment
Department of
another person
what amounts to
a timely and
The commlttee will dec1de how much of the Fund will be
d signated for grants and how much will be designated for- loans.
The loans will be repaid to the Fund to provlde a revolving
flow of monev.
e
The adminlstration of the fund will lnvolve both the method
of investing the Fund balance when it is not being used for a
signated housing actlvity and approving the use of the fund to
pport specific housing programs. The administrative procedures
II be provided by Albemarle County and CHF on an agreed basis.
r example, the County might provide staff for one vear and then
tate to CHF for the next vear. Or. the duties could be split
-,
/
e
e
e
between the two.
deslgnated term.
The committee will select its chairperson for a
The commlttee should be allowed and able to operate
a cumbersome or overly politlcized structure. The funds
be made available to diverse and innovative projects 1n a
and accountable way. The funds should not be prevented from
used for as vet unknown housing strategies in the future.
The following is a list of potential uses for the fund:
1. Downpayment and
existlng homes.
closing
assistance
cost
for
~. Scattered site housing.
3. Self-help housing.
without
should
fair
being
new
or
4. Housing activities to benefit elderly or disabled people
similar to the Scottsville School Apartments and the
Meadows.
5. Matching funds for a subd1vision.
6. Home ownership education.
7. Rehabilitation programs.
8
ex. l~tE~BeT!JR~ HE'=BN .F;>5AI'1PLES
e
e
1. INITIAL PURCHASE:
Purchase Price:
Added Value:
Fa1r Market Value:
65.000
~.'!OQQ
70.000
(determined by assesment)
HOW FINANCED:
Down Payment:
1 s t D.O. T. ( VHDA )
2nd D.O.T.:
1.000
54.000
(deferred loan)
(added value)
2nd D.O.T. total
10.000
5.0..Q_Q
15.000
~~_QO
70.000
Total
INVESTMENT FACTOR:
(percentage of developer s equity in property at time of
initial sale)
15,000 (amt. secured by 2nd).
70,000 (Fair Market Value )
21 ~~
r\lote:
The second deed of trust secures both the deferred loan
and the added value.
DISBURSAL OF FUNDS AND DEFERRED LOAN AT CLOSING:
House building contractor
40.000
Cash to the Housing Trust Fund
15.000
Deferred loan owed to the Fund
1:~ , 000.
Total
70.000
I '
e
e
e
"
.
2. EXAMPLE OF RESALE AFTER TWO YEARS:
Suppose. that at the end of 2 years the house lS
$72.828. This would reflect a 2% annual rate of
Assume that no improvements were made.
resold for
appreciation.
PAY OFF AMOUNTS:
1st D.O. T. (estimate)
2nd D.O.T.
53.500
Added Value:
Deferred loan:
Appreciatlon: 72.828
::20.00Q
2.828
in ves t. f ac. t\________ 21./.
return: 593
Payoff 2nd D.O.T.:
Total Pay-off:
5.000
10.000
:~L9_;l
15.593
15 5'7<:,
---~_._,
69.093
~eller Net:
sale price:
secured debt:
net to seller:
in1tial down pavment:
galn from sale:
72.828
--99 . 09~
3.735
- 1..!QQ2_
2.735
Note: A 6% real estate commission (4.369) plus closlng
costs would result in a loss to the seller.
This demonstrates how securlng the added value
discourages quick resales.
ous1ng Trust Fund Net:
Net amount to Hous1ng Trust Fund: 15.593
Minus origlnal deferred loan amount: 1Q~00Q
Gain from appreciation and added value: 5.593
. to..
e :.3. EXAMPLE OF SALE AFTER SI X YEARS
Suppose. that at the end of 6 years the house lS resold for
$78.831. This would reflect a 2% annual ~ate of appreciatlon.
Assume that the owner bUllt a deck with an assessed value of
$1.800.
e
e
PAY- OFF AMOUNTS:
1st D.O.T. (estimate)
2nd D.o.T.
Added Value: 5.000
--,-_._--.?_~~
1.250
51.COO
1.250
Principal:
10.000
10.000
Return:
Resale price:
oriq. FMV:
Improvements:
Ad j. Appr.:
Invest. Fac.: X
Return:
2nd DOT payoff:
78.831
-70,000
~_L~_8 OQ
7.031
:?Li'~
1.476.51
l-L.4Z{:>
!1..726
Total Pay Off for 1st and 2nd:
63,,726
SELLER NET FROM SALE:
78.831 - 6:3.726
Down Payment:
Paid Principal:
Seller's Gain:
15.105
- 1.000
:-__~LOQ.Q
11.105
HOUSING TRUST FUND NET:
Total amount paid to Fund :
Original Deferred loan Prin.:
Gain from apprec1ation and added value:
12.726
- 1 0 . O.og
2.726
/2t U /f't;v( ~f!/Y~
f t,0~/'
Albemarle County, Virgin;.
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY STUDY
ottp..f1
CITIZENS
INFORMATION MEETING
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY STUDY
JUNE 24, 1992
WOODBROOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
i'
AllHNnarIB County, Virginill
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY STUDY
Purpose of this Meeting
The purpose of this meeting is twofold: to inform you about the proposed
Meadowcreek Parkway, and for you to tell us what factors you think are
most important in the planning ofthe Meadowcreek Parkway. Your input
is important - so please write your comments on the attached sheet and
talk with a member of the Study Team or County representative.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine whic.h Meadowcreek Parkway
alternative will best serve the needs of Albemarle County, and which will
minimize negative impacts. The study will c'onsider the currently planned
CATS Alignment, the "No Build" alternative and several other possible
alignments developed by the Study Team. Using objective criteria and
your input the Study Team, in conjunction with County Officials, will
determine a single best alignment for further study.
A preliminary design will be made of this best alignment, and an
environmental study will be conducted of the alignment on the basis of
the preliminary design.
As a result of the study county officials will know in the impacts and
benefits of the Meadowcreek Parkway. The facility will have been
placed using input from the citizens who'will use and be impacted by the
facility. The study will also result in a preliminary design and greater
understanding of the engineering challenges and costs.
The Mesdowcreek Parkway
The Meadowcreek Parkway will be a four lane, residential collector road
connecting U.S. Route 29 and State Route 631 (Rio Road). The primary
purpose of the Meadowcreek Parkway will be to serve local
neighborhoods and local traffic to and from Rio Road and Route 29. The
parkway will also serve commuter and through traffic. Although it may
have a few interchanges and access will be limited, it is not a high
{speed, interstate type facility. Furthermore, even though the largest
- 1 -
AJlNItrMrle County, Virgin;'
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY STUDY
single benefit will be reduced traffic on Route 29 North, the parkway is
not being developed as a Route 29 Bypass.
To aid the parkway's ability to serve local neighborhoods a connector to
the Hollymead and Forest lakes neighborhoods is being considered as
part of the facility. This connector, referred to as the Timberwood
Connector, would allow residents of Hollymead and Forest lakes a route
to Rio Road and Charlottesville without accessing Route 29 North.
A separate project, referred to as the Mcintyre Road Extended, will
connect to the Meadowcreek Parkway at its southern termini to serve
traffic heading to Charlottesville.
Meadowcreek Parkway Alternatives
The Study team has divided the Meadowcreek Parkway into three
segments and has developed preliminary alternatives to best traverse
each segment. Figure 1 in thi,s handout shows the general location of
each alternative. The display maps show in more detail the proposed
location for each alternative.
Alternative locations are always subject to adjustments. These
preliminary alternatives have been developed and located using aerial
photography at the scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet. A single alternative
will be selected and developed using topographic mapping at a scale of
1 inch equals 200 feet. At each stage of development more detailed
mapping is used, and as a consequence, alignment shifts are inevitable.
Impact Matrices
The alternatives have been evaluated using measurable, objective criteria.
The criteria show the impacts of each alternative in the following general
areas: natural environment, historic and archeological resources, and
socio-economic. A comparative summary of the impacts is shown in
Figure 2. Please let us know which criteria you consider most importantl
P
l
.2.
. ....
":1
l
N
I
f
j '"
. ,
',/ -.(
. I
.J
~~
xa
f;
II
_t'
f<,.~.-:-/:('/
~~//
/1
Ii'
-,
..
.......~....
\~,
"\
"
'il
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY STUDY
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
~
ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES
'Ia
I
'12
SCNh N!{)(}O'
OR/GINN.. SIZE IN INCHES
>-
~
U)
.!!~
i.~
~~
~~
~ltl
85
-!~
J~
~~
'E'"
CllXl
E
C
.21
;(
~
C
:J
~
~
~
>-
g
...
U)
IU
~
~
~
o
o
Gi
E
Cl
2::
~
~
Cl
>
.5
j!
0.......00
~
0.......00
;::.
0"'000
~
0...000
>=
o~...oo
....
o
0(9"'-0_
&
0('1)...00
(;
00...00
~
Nan_a.....
NIO('I)O...
UCiUCiM!UCiUCi
o
c(
C
Cl
oX
{!.
:
I ~
~0
0:i'
CII'ii.o
'E.2"Q
..,. l? 'i
]c~goCII
Cl~~:D'E
-~;t::e:!!....
Or-~c(CI_
:11.2E!';;
1i~-;;oOj~
:( 'ii OJ ~ l5 .~
-u.2.2C1111"
Ii l?l?ctz11
----to
.22g.!!oo
ls..'E-c"::
.1i1i~~~
- ... ... 0 -- __
:Z:c(c(Il.:I::I:
~
::l
j
..........C\l0
...
...
0"'0:8
0...02
OOO~
00010
O...oeo
...
0-_(")
...
0001lO
--o~
...OO~
UCiUCiUCiUCi
'01
~ Cl
1; ~
J:>J:> .!!
~lic~
E~~~;€
-QClS~
:i..GiI"
_ c: C (.) ~
CCI"iCC
-3cc~~
."ic-.:
CII.);!.!!:i
a:WIl.a:a:
o NO('l)...O
0...0000
0000"'0
000000
000000
000000
000000
000000
0..........0......0
0--0.....0
UCiUCiUCiUCiL:.iM!
o
c(
.!!
.e
~
...
t! C
CD ;€
E CII ~
~ 'E =.1 ~
'P" = E _.CII_ _
~ ~'S E:D
.Ii -as~ oX
cc-...~s
-3 Cl :c l5 .5 ... >-
.-'!i~"'.ccl:
EJ!l~.;t:::c8.
C""!!~;t::o
CI-!.!~"~~
:ECl:D..~"
~.li.2e88
.cEE:i5:l.c.c
o~~.r<3~~
""'OOOO~...
C'). .-0
OOst...
o 'OOOONO
...
.......0000..-0
N' ...000...0
-'-"-OO~O
....Noomo
...
N' "'000,,"0
N~......OO~O
""
Ng('l)
000..,.
N
UCi~M!M!M!UCiM!M!
000 00
c(c(c( c(c(
~
~
a:
.
C
.
~
a:
~
'E ~
~ CI C
cl.5'ii
o ~Q.
~ ~8
WO'OiL"g
'ii~.c'O.
_:i!QCSE
- c CD ....
~~~<~
" .!!
11 .0
" "
-ai ~
i ~-a]
!o~j.5
G Ii "2 !
~~~~
~~~~.
N N
...
~~O
,.:
~.
N
~O
G
00'
~~
vi
00'
~~
..,-
00'
~~~~~
"" N
~~~~~
ui N
~~~~~
.0 N
~
::l
~
~O~~.
N ui
...
~8~~'
Ntrl N
~~~~~
C Cl
o CI
I '6'0
Cl12~
'0 tII 111 '0
-c-uc.
lXI "C: .Q 0
~lXIO..!:::
.5~i!!l8.~
IC0...J~O
.5iit~t
CO~~Cl~
W.......J...J0...J
o
~
~
<3
~
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
F Jrrest R MarshalL Jr
Scottsville
David P. Bower an
Charlottesville
Charlotte Y. Hukphris
Jack Jouett I
I
I
Charles S Martm
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
M E M 0 RAN DUM
Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CM~
June 18, 1992
TO
Board Actions of June 17, 1992
At the Board of Supervisors meeting on June 17, 1992, the
rd approved the appropriation of $129,831.15 for the Gypsy
h 1991/92 Program. Attached is the signed appropriation form.
:ec
achment
Roxanne White
Steven G. Meeks
......
..
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FIS 91/92
NUMBER 910056
TYP OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW X
ADV RTISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
X
EXPENDITURE
CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
********************************************************************
112 034010110000 SALARIES-REGULAR $58,754.15
112 034010130000 PART-TIME SALARIES 31,800.00
112 034010160900 SALARY RESERVE-BONUS 2,788.00
112 034010210000 FICA 6,913.00
112 034010221000 VRS 4,925.00
112 034010231000 HEALTH INS 2,052.00
112 034010232000 DENTAL INS 120.00
112 034010241000 VRS-LIFE INS 427.00
112 034010270000 WORKER'S COMPo I~S 1,507.00
112 034010332100 MAINT. CONTRACT-EQUIPMENT 50.00
112 034010390000 OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 50.00
112 034010520100 POSTAL SERVICES 1,370.00
1123034010520300 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 500.00
1123034010550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE 4,000.00
1123034010550110 TRAVEL-POOL CAR 1,020.00
1123034010550400 TRAVEL-EDUCATION 960.00
1123034010580100 DUES & MEMBERSHIPS 170.00
1123034010600100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 700.00
1123034010601400 OTHER OPERATING SUPPLIES 10,150.00
1123034010601700 COPY SUPPLIES 400.00
1123034010800710 ADP SOFTWARE 775.00
1123034010360000 ADVERTISING 400.00
GYPSY MOTH
OSE OF APPROPRIATION:
OPRIATION OF GYPSY MOTH FY 91/92 BUDGET.
TOTAL
$129,831.15
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
2123033000330001 GRANT REVENUE-FEDERAL $117,152.00
2123051000512004 TRANSFER FROM GEN'L FUND 9,695.00
2123051000510100 APPROPRIATION FROM FUND BALANCE 2,984.15
TOTAL
$129,831.15
*******************************************************************
STING COST CENTER:
FINANCE
VALS:
SIGNATURE DATE
TOR OF FINANCE
~.~~ //?-/~
OF SUPERVISORS
;~.~ i"; i ~ ;:~, i
/ /~ cQ..,
&- - /,~ - ;'-..L--
762 ' Ow / 7. r.:J--cJ
;"l! ~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Finance
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Telephone (804) 296-5855
;;
MEMORANDUM
,
T~:
I
I
F,OM:
I
I
D~TE:
I
I
R,:
I
I
Attached is an appropriation request for the Gypsy Moth 1991/92
ptogram.
I
Tte Grant is from Federal sources. The grant period runs from
o tober 1, 1991 through September 30, 1992. The Contract was
s gned in February, 1992.
I
I
T~is appropriation request was postponed until the new Gypsy Moth
C~ordinator became familiar with the accounting and record
keeping requirements. The Contract and Grant is in the process
ot being revised to reimburse termination benefits for the former
C~ordinator. The revision is expected to be completed after June
3Q,1992.
I
I
I
C~py: Steven G. Meeks
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Robert J. Walters, Jr., Deputy Director
of Finance,~
I'
June 5, 1992
Appropriation of Gypsy Moth 1991/92 Grant
. ," f
I. J, .,
" ; ; :,.' I' , l,'
, .. ! :
t\,j'JiU)I_," \1'
'--/ "'-" l f LJ
Edward H. Bai . 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
June 19, 1992
Forrest R. Marshall. Jr
Scoltsville
David P. Bowe man
Charlottesville
Charles 5 Martin
Rlvanna
Charlotte Y H mphris
Jack Jouell
Walter F Perkllls
White Hall
r. H. E. Matics
estvaco corporation
ood Department Manager
ovington VA 24426
ear Mr. Matics:
It has come to the attention of the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors that there is some consideration being given to moving
he Westvaco Ivy Wood Yard to the Louisa-Fluvanna area. Obviously,
he loss of jobs and related issues give us great concern.
rom a statistical standpoint, we are advised that the Ivy Wood
ard contributes upwards of $750,000 per year to our local economy.
It employs a number of local residents and the yard alone
ontributes $2,300 per year in local taxes to help support the
perations of county government. These are factual components
hich are easily measured as to Westvaco's impact in this
ommunity.
lthough more difficult to measure, the intangibles play an equal
r greater role in your contribution to this county than the
tatistics. The service which your organization offers in
roviding an outlet for pulpwood is critical. In a developing
ounty, this opportunity plays an important role in serving as an
lternative to landfill disposal or open burning for site clearing
ctivities. Additionally, small logging operations cannot be
ustained without a market in close proximity to their activity.
he cost of hauling any significant distance would be devastating
o these small businessmen.
In terms of future markets, it is important to note that there are
pproximately 293,436 acres of forest land in Albemarle County as
ell as 65,319 acres in Agricultural/Forestal Districts. As you
now, the Agricultural/Forestal District concept provides a degree
f protection against development pressures, thus assuring the
reservation of this resource. Additionally, Department of
orestry records indicate that there were 123,000 cords of pulpwood
emoved in Albemarle County last year and almost twice that number
eplaced. The future for pulpwood in this area appears to be quite
ositive.
~ f
, '. r'7:
;
.; /
/
I '
U
~" ~;,")'. , .' ; ,,'"
: ,/ j I i
",-" Lf
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
June 19, 1992
Forrest R Marshall. Jr
Scotlsville
David P. Bower an
CharloUesville
Charles S Martin
Riv~nna
Charlotte Y Humphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
While Hall
M . William R. Small
W stvaco Corporation
M II Manager
C vington VA 24426
D ar Mr. Small:
has come to the attention of the Albemarle County Board of
pervisors that there is some consideration being given to moving
e Westvaco Ivy Wood Yard to the Louisa-Fluvanna area. Obviously,
e loss of jobs and related issues give us great concern.
om a statistical standpoint, we are advised that the Ivy Wood
rd contributes upwards of $750,000 per year to our local economy.
employs a number of local residents and the yard alone
ntributes $2,300 per year in local taxes to help support the
erations of county government. These are factual components
ich are easily measured as to Westvaco's impact in this
mmunity.
A though more difficult to measure, the intangibles play an equal
o greater role in your contribution to this county than the
s atistics. The service which your organization offers in
p oviding an outlet for pulpwood is critical. In a developing
c unty, this opportunity plays an important role in serving as an
a ternative to landfill disposal or open burning for site clearing
a tivities. Additionally, small logging operations cannot be
s stained without a market in close proximity to their activity.
T e cost of hauling any significant distance would be devastating
t these small businessmen.
I terms of future markets, it is important to note that there are
a proximately 293,436 acres of forest land in Albemarle County as
w II as 65,319 acres in Agricultural/Forestal Districts. As you
k ow, the Agricultural/Forestal District concept provides a degree
o protection against development pressures, thus assuring the
p eservation of this resource. Additionally, Department of
F restry records indicate that there were 123,000 cords of pulpwood
r moved in Albemarle County last year and almost twice that number
r placed. The future for pulpwood in this area appears to be quite
p sitive.
..
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors ~r-- ~
FROM: Robert w. Tucker, Jr. , County Executive I
DATE: June 12, 1992
RE: Westvaco Letter
As you recall, the Board asked staff to develop a letter to be sent
o t under the Chairman's signature expressing concern over any
potential relocation plans being considered by Westvaco, located in
I
At ached, please find a draft which will be added to the June 17, 1992
co sent agenda for the Board's approval. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
/)sl k l1tJCLiC{ &//7/92-
S~~,~md /
DRAFT
__,,,,,,___~-,,,,,,-,,--
Edward H. Bain, Jr.
Samuel Millet
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
June 16, 1992~
Forrest R. MarshalL Jr.
Scottsville
David P. Bowojrman
I
Charlottesvi]l~
Charles S. Marlin
Rivanna
,
Charlotte Y. Hpmphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
M~. H. E. Matics
W~stvaco Corporation
Wpod Department Manager
Cbvington VA 24426
D~ar Mr. Matics:
,
It has come to the attention of the Albemarle County Board of
s~pervisors that there is some consideration being given to moving
the Westvaco Ivy Wood Yard to the Louisa-Fluvanna area. Obviously,
t~e loss of both the jobs and related issues, as well as the loss
o~ the service which is provided to local logging operations, gives
u~ great concern.
From a statistical standpoint, we are advised that the Ivy Wood
Y~rd contributes upwards of $750,000 per year to our local economy.
It employs a number of local residents and the yard alone
cpntributes $2,300 per year in local taxes to help support the
operations of county government. These are factual components
which are easily measured as to Westvaco's impact in this
cbmmunity.
I
,
A~though more difficult to measure, the intangibles play an equal
oe greater role in your contribution to this county than the
s atistics. The service which your organization offers in
p oviding an outlet for pulpwood is critical. In a developing
cpunty, this opportunity plays an important role in serving as an
a~ternative to landfill disposal or open burning for site clearing
abti vi ties. Addi tionally, small logging operations cannot be
sustained without a market in close proximity to their activity.
T~e cost of hauling any significant distance would be devastating
to these small businessmen.
,
,
Ip terms of future markets, it is important to note that there are
approximately 293,436 acres of forest land in Albemarle County as
well as 65,319 acres in Agricultural/Forestal Districts. As you
kpow, the Agricultural/Forestal District concept provides a degree
of protection against development pressures, thus assuring the
preservation of this resource. Additionally, Department of
Fprestry records indicate that there were 123,000 cords of pulpwood
removed in Albemarle County last year and almost twice that number
r~placed. The future for pulpwood in this area appears to be quite
p~sitive.
Mr. H. E. Matics
J~ne 16, 1992
P~ge 2 of 2
I
I
Ip short, Westvaco is an outstanding corporate citizen in Albemarle
Cpunty which in many ways helps to contribute to our fine quality
o life. Any decision to move from our area would be a tremendous
I ss which the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors would like to
e reconsidered. If the Board or any of our staff can be of any
sistance in identifying and addressing those issues which might
ke it possible to keep your company in our county, please do not
sitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DpB/bat
9~-1
I
I
cF Board of Supervisors
I
-
,
-.
Edward H. B~in. Jr
Samuel Milltr
I
David P. Bowfrrnan
Charlottesville
I
Charlotte Y I-jumphris
Jack Jouett I
,
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
Rivannd
Walter F Perkins
White Hall
June 18, 1992
M~. Donaldson P. Tillar
H~admaster
T~e Miller School
Cqarlottesville, VA 22901-9328
I
I
Deiar Mr. Tillar:
I
,
,
: At its meeting on June 17, 1992, the Board of Supervisors,
authorized the Chairman to sign the attached proclamation commemo-
ra~ing the 200th birthday of Samuel Miller.
~Yours.
Lettie E. Ne
LEN:ec
I
I
Attachment
cc Bruce B. Barclay
I
PROCLAMATION
SAMUEL MILLER DAY
WHEREAS, Samuel Miller was born on June 30, 1792, in a small
cabin high in the Ragged Mountains near Batesville; and
WHEREAS, although born of humble means, Mr. Miller obtained
an education and obtained considerable wealth; and
WHEREAS, he sought to break out of his limited environment and
improve the lot of the poor children in Albemarle County; and
WHEREAS, upon his death, Mr. Miller left part of his estate to
be used for "the founding, establishment and perpetual support of a
School on the Manual Labor Principle' to be superintended by a compe-
tent teacher or teachers, wherein, at all times, there shall be fed,
clothed and instructed in all the branches of a good, plain, sound
English education, wholly free of expense to the pupils, as many poor
or-phan children and other children whose parents shall be unable to
educate them"; and
WHEREAS, this generous and benevolent bequest effectuated the
educational experience which expanded and embraced thousands of
students from all walks of life and which continues even unto this
day;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of County
Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that June 30, 1992, is
proclaimed to be SAMUEL MILLER DAY in celebration of the ~OOth
Anniversary of his birth.
tL2~~~
CHAIRMAN
I) , ;, 7) .Ii~>) (; (L-t. J
',.' ,s.:
uj'<P(i2-
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Samuel Miller was born on June 30, 1792, in a small
cabin high in the Ragged Mountains near Batesville; and
WHEREAS, although born of humble means, Mr. Miller obtained
an education and obtained considerable wealth; and
WHEREAS, he sought to break out of his limited environment and
improve the lot of the poor children in Albemarle County; and
WHEREAS, upon his death, Mr. Miller left part of his estate to
be used for "the founding, establishment and perpetual support of a
School on the Manual Labor Principle to be superintended by a compe-
tent teacher or teachers, wherein, at all times, there shall be fed,
clothed and instructed in all the branches of a good, plain, sound
English education, wholly free of expense to the pupils, as many poor
orphan children and other children whose parents shall be unable to
educate them"; and
WHEREAS, this generous and benevolent bequest effectuated the
educational experience which expanded and embraced thousands of
students from all walks of life and which continues even into this
day;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of County
Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that June 30, 1992, is
declared to be SAMUEL MILLER DAY in celebration of the 200th
Anniversary of his birth.
CHAIRMAN