HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-09-18
FIN A L
September 18, 1991
7:00 P.M.
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 back of sheet).
6) ZTA-91-04. Schuyler Enterprises. Public Hearing on an amendment to
Section 3.0 of the Zoning Ordinance to change the definition of public
garage.
7) SP-91-21. Schuyler Enterprises. Public Hearing on a request to locate a
public garage on 25.0 ac zoned RA (use proposed under ZTA-91-04
above). Property on S side at inters of Rts 800/602. TM126,P31A
(part). Scottsville Dist. (This property does not lie in a designated
growth area.)
8) CPA-91-02. Public Hearing on an amendment to the Albemarle County
Comprehensive Plan to include the recommendations of the Blue Ridge
Neighborhood-Area B Study. Amendments include changes to the
Land Use Map as follows:
1) Change land use designation of the Blue Ridge Hospital tract N
of Rt 53 from RA to PublicI Semi Public.
2) Change approx 30 ac in N portion of Hillcrest tract from low
density residential to PublicI Semi Public to accommodate the
possible location of Forestry Department.
3) Replace residential holding capacity lost as a result of
public/semi public designation by changing approx 10 ac of low
density residential to medium density residential on Hillcrest tract
W of unnamed tributary stream to Moores Creek.
9) ... SP-91-25. WCYK AM-FM. Public Hearing on a request to locate 2 satellite
dishes atop the Jefferson Savings Bank on 1.186 acs zoned CO. Pro-
perty located in NE corner of inters of Rt 29 & Rio Rd. TM61,P123A.
Charlottesville Dist. (This property is located in a designated growth
area. )
10) SP-91-38. General Machinery Corp. Public Hearing on a request for a
Home Occupation-Class B for a telephone business with 2 employees in
an accessory structure on 92.5 acs zoned RA. Property in NW quad-
rant of inters of Rts 636 & 691. TM84,P39. White Hall Dist. (This
property does not lie in a designated growth area.)
11) Adoption of Resolution Providing for the Issuance of $16,070,000 School
Bonds, 1991 Series B, of Albemarle County, Virginia, Heretofol'e
Authorized to be Sold to the Virginia Public School Authority, and
Setting Forth the Form and Details Thereof.
12) Solid Waste, Discussion on Voluntary Curbside Recycling Pilot Program
(continued from September 11, 1991).
13) Approval of Minutes: . April 3, 1991.
14) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
15) Adjourn.
- ,--~~
0" "' + '.' ,", ;. q -/ :3 - (/' ,
istrliJU,eO [Q :,oarc. --__;~_ ",
A~;eflrta ltt~m t-.;Q. ql. Oq1!tJl~
"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
l,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
and UoJu
FROM:
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
Community Development
DATE:
September 4, 1991
RE:
Fire Hydrants Along Existing Water Lines outside
of Jurisdictional Areas
Staff has further analyzed the question of strategically
locating hydrants along water lines outside of the
jurisdictional area to provide additional fire service
protection in those areas. In discussion with Bill Brent,
he indicted that in the late 1970's, the County committed
money to install hydrants in such locations. Although Bill
did not believe all of this money was expended, it was used
to install some number of hydrants. Therefore, some water
lines outside of the jurisdictional area now have fire
hydrants.
Further contact with representatives of the Jefferson County
Fire and Rescue Association (JCFRA) indicates merit in
providing hydrants in more remote areas near developments
(see Attachment A). Mr. John Hood of JCFRA did emphasize
the need to strategically locate the hydrants for
accessibility and to make sure all fire companies were aware
of the hydrant locations in their service areas.
The Albemarle County Service Authority has provided
information on where lines exist that have potential to
provide fire protection outside the jurisdictional area (see
Attachment B). This indicates the extent to which such
service may be made available.
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Page 2
September 4, 1991
It is staff's opinion that the location of fire hydrant's
along lines providing finished water can be beneficial.
Such hydrants should be located where they are immediately
accessible from public roads or subdivision private roads.
Location of all hydrants should be mapped and provided to
the fire companies responsible for that area. Mr. Brent
suggests that maintenance of such hydrants should be as
currently provided on existing hydrants. Considering
fiscal constraints, the County may want to indicate that
installation of such hydrants will be at the private
property owner's discretion and expense. Approval of such
hydrants would be as currently handled through the
development review process.
VWC/jcw
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Bill Brent
Mike Schlemmer
Dennis Rooker
"
FUW~
llL 1'l 1991
PLANNING DIVISION
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Inspections
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5832
IATTACHMENT AI
TO: Ken Baker, Planner
FROM: Mike Schlemmer, Fire/Rescue Coordinator ~(~
DATE: July 17, 1991
RE: Rural Hydrants
As per our conversation on ~ydrants in the rural area, it is my
opinion, rural hydrants located near developments can be very
benefical. These hydrants will provide the fire department with a
good access and a clean water source to fill their tanks. If
these hydrants are permitted, they must have enough pressure to
make their function worthwhile.
\..
I hope this is the information you need. Ifdy'ou have any
questions, please give me a call.
cc: Jay Schlothauer
MSjnd
IATTACHMENT Bj
ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE
MEMO
To:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
ccp 4 1991
PLANNING DIVISION
Wayne Cilimberg, Director
of Planning~
Engineerin~
K~
Paul A. Shoop, Director of
September 4, 1991
Water Service Available for Fire Protection Outside the
Service Authority's Jurisdictional Area
As requested we haye reviewed the routing of finished
water facilities that have the potential to provide fire
protection outside our jurisdictional area. Lines extend in
various sections of the urban area on the fringe of our
jurisdiction. A line between Rivanna Park and Ashcroft could
provide service north of the Virginia Power right-of-way. A
waterline on Rt. 29 can provide service to property east of
the highway between Proffit Road and across from the G.E.
plant. The same line can serve the Airport Industrial Park
property along the north fork of the Rivanna River currently
outside our jurisdiction. A line in Rt. 29 can serve property
on the west side of the highway between the south fork of the
Rivanna River to property across from Hollymead.
The 12" waterline between Montvue and West Leigh extends
through a number of parcels outside our jurisdictional area.
For the most part, parcels directly adjoining the line are
agricultural and not developed. .
In Crozet, the Yancey Mills area can be provided with
limited fire protection. In scottsville, fire protection can
be made available along Rt. 726 between its intersection with
Rt. 1302 and the entrance to Totier Creek Park.
Along these corridors we have reviewed the developed
parcels for availability. Property with structures can be
divided into the following categories. Specific parcels are
identified for each.
-Existing structures located outside our service
jurisdictional area in the proximity of a waterline (finished
water only):
TM 32, Parcel 19(part), Parcel22P
TM 59, Parcels 7D,7D2,20,12B,12F,15,15A,16
-Service has been made available to "existing structures
only," no fire service has been obtained, and the property is
located in the proximity of a waterline:
TM 32, Parcel 22J,22E
TM 33, Parcel 1A
TM...46, Parcel C (part), 7, 28D
TM 130, Parcels 37,38,40,40A,40B,42,43(part)
TM 136, Parcels 26,27,36
If you need additional information please let me know.
PAS:dmg
cc: J. W. Brent
."
...
"
r
t'
I
\
r7',
1 tj i
.j
I
,
"l7
\, ,I
, .t
: !
. ?
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) 979-1281
MEMORANDUM
Charlotte Y Humphns
,J(\(I-. ,JOUl!lI
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
Walter F Perkins
While Hall
F. R. (Rick) Bowie
Rivanna
Peter T Way
Scottsvdle
AMENDED
FROM:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Planning and Community Development
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CM~
DATE: September 19, 1991
TO:
SUBJECT: Board Actions of September 18, 1991
Following is a list of actions taken by the Board at its meeting on Septem-
ber 18, 1991:
Agenda Item No. 5.1. Memo dated September 12, 1991, from V. Wayne Ci1imberg,
Director of Planning and Community Development, requesting the Board's concurrence
for changes to conditions of approval for ZMA-90-09, Cathcart-Turner. APPROVED
the following substitutions for Conditions #1 and #2 of ZMA-90-09. Condition #3
through #6 remain as set out in letter of October 12, 1990, addressed to
Cathcart-Turner Development. Condition #7 which reads: "The southern road en-
trance to the future connector road to be closed off at such time as the connector
road is accepted into the State Secondary Highway System," is' deleted.
1. Development shall be in accord with plan dated June 3, 1991, and titled
"Exhibit C2 Lakeside Apartments";
2. The applicant agrees to reserve for dedication, upon demand of the
County, a 50-foot right-of-way from Route 742 to Tax Map 91, Parcel 2.
The applicant agrees to construct a 40-foot curb-to-curb cross-section
running approximately 600 feet perpendicular to Route 742 and then
approximately 200 feet parallel to Route 742. Costs incurred in having
the road accepted into the state system shall not be borne by the appli-
cant unless the need for dedication is generated by this development.
Agenda Item No. 5.3. Memorandum dated September 4, 1991, from V. Wayne
Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development, entitled "Fire Hydrants
along existing Water Lines outside of Jurisdictional (Services) Areas." The Board
asked for a firm recommendation from staff to be heard at it's October 9, 1991
meeting.
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
September 19, 1991
Page 2.
Agenda Item No. 5.4. Memorandum dated September 9, 1991, from Robert W.
Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled IIProposed Adult Day Care Center.1I The
Board asked for a firm recommendation from staff to be heard at it's October 9,
1991 meeting.
Agenda Item No.6. ZTA-91-04. Schuyler Enterprises. Public Hearing on an
amendment to Section 3.0 of the Zoning Ordinance to change the definition of
public garage. DENIED. The Board felt that this specific case is covered by the
existing definition in the Zoning Ordinance.
Agenda Item No.7. SP-91-21. Schuyler Enterprises. Public Hea~ing on a
request to locate a public garage on 25.0 ac zoned RA (use proposed under
ZTA-91-04 above). Property on S side at inters of Rts 800/602. TM126,P31A
(part). Scottsville Dist. (This property does not lie in a designated growth
area.) APPROVED with the following recommended conditions as outlined in Staff
Report from William D. Fritz, Senior Planner:
1. Planning Commission approval of site plan. Use shall not commence until
final sit plan approval has been obtained;
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Saturday;
3. No outside storage of parts including junk parts. Refuse awaiting dis-
posal shall be stored in appropriate containers;
4. No freight shall be handled or stored on-site;
5. All work shall be conducted within the garage;
6. Repair work and storage shall be limited to equipment owned or operated
by Schuyler Enterprises; and
7. No more than four tractor trailers can be parked in the outside area at
anyone time.
*Staff is to be mindful of the Board's concern that screening be required
during site plan review.
Agenda Item No.8. CPA-91-02. Public Hearing on an amendment to the
Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan to include the recommendations of the Blue
Ridge Neighborhood-Area B Study.
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
September 19, 1991
Page 3.
Adopted with the following additions/deletions to the Comprehensive Plan:
1. Add: page 170 under EXISTING LAND USE, last paragraph, add "... and the
Blue Ridge Hospital;"
2. Add: page 170 under Recommendations before last bullet "Evaluation of
the feasibility of reconfiguring the Interstate 64 and Route 20 Inter-
change to improve traffic circulation in the area and determine the
impact such a reconfiguration would have on a future Interstate 64 and
Avon Street Interchange.
3. Page 171 after "Industrial service and neighborhood service designation
on Avon Street across from Lake Reynovia limited to existing' zoned land
only, add:
The expansion of the Growth Area to include that portion of the Blue
Ridge Hospital tract south of Interstate 64 and north of Route 53 is
based on the condition that the area be designated for publici
semi-public use and development in this area be consistent with the
Master Land Utilization Plan for the Blue Ridge Hospital tract dated May
of 1991 (See Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" Study.) The Albemarle
County Service Authority jurisdictional area shall remain, but only
provide additional water and sewer services for development consistent
with the Master Land Utilization Plan.
If the Virginia Forestry Department undertakes its proposed office
development on approximately thirty acres in the northeast portion of
the Hillcrest Tract adjacent to Piedmont Virginia Community College,
change the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of that area from low
density residential to public/semi-public. Concurrently, increase
medium density land use designation by approximately ten acres on the
same tract in an area west of an unnamed tributary stream of Moores
Creek to replace the residential holding capacity lost due to the con-
struction of the Forestry Department. This Land Use Map amendment would
not be effective until the Forestry Department undertakes its relocation
in this location.
Consider recommendations of the City/County/University Planning and
Coordination Council's Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" Study as a guide
for future development of that portion of Neighborhood Four within the
study area except for reference to commercial service in this area.
Delete next paragraph which reads: Consider recommendations of the
City/County/University Planning and Coordination Council for the Blue
Ridge Route 20 South Study Area. Incorporate adopted recommendations
into the Comprehensive Plan for the County.
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
September 19, 1991
Page 4.
In Table 50 under Developable Acreage-Public the number should be 164;
non-residential subtotal should be 319; and Undeveloped Land Total
should be 1255.
On May 20, Urban Area Land Use, Neighborhoods 1 through 7, make change
attachment B (copy attached).
Agenda Item No.9. SP-91-25. WCYK AM-FM. Public Hearing on a request to
locate 2 satellite dishes atop the Jefferson Savings Bank on 1.186 acs zoned CO.
Property located in NE corner of inters of Rt 29 & Rio Rd. TM61,P123A. '
Charlottesville Dist. (This property is located in a designated growth area.)
APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Approval is limited to two, eight-foot or less diameter dishes;
2. Dishes shall be painted same color as building;
3. Dishes to be located as shown on Attachment (copy attached to this
letter) dated August 21, 1991, initialed W.D.F.
Agenda Item No. 10. SP-91-38. General Machinery Corp. Public Hearing on a
request for a Home Occupation-Class B for a telephone business with 2 employees in
an accessory structure on 92.5 acs zoned RA. Property in NW quadrant of inters of
Rts 636 & 691. TM84,P39. White Hall Dist. (This property does not lie in a
designated growth area.) APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Use shall be limited to three persons, whether or not same are employ-
ees;
2. No entrance to the state road or parking area shall be allowed to serve
this use;
3. Except as otherwise provided herein, compliance wit~ Section 5.2.2 of
the Zoning Ordinance;
4. Permit is limited to applicants, Richard E. Rike and Gary Epsenhart.
Agenda Item No. 11. Adoption of Resolution Providing for the Issuance of
$16,070,000 School Bonds, 1991 Series B, of Albemarle County, Virginia, Heretofore
Authorized to be Sold to the Virginia Public School Authority, and Setting Forth
the Form and Details Thereof. ADOPTED resolution sent out with agenda materials.
All original resolutions have been returned to Melvin Breeden.
Agenda Item No. 12. Solid Waste, Discussion on Voluntary Curbside Recycling
Pilot Program. ACCEPTED recommendation that effective January 1, 1992 the Pilot
Program be extended to 3000 households.
The Board adopted a Resolution asking the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority to
issue an RFP on a Waste-to-Energy Study, which will include incineration. Please
furnish the text to the Clerk, who will certify and forward to the Rivanna Solid
Waste Authority.
/'
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
September 19, 1991
Page 5.
Agenda Item No. 14. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
The Board asked that staff write a letter to State agencies concerning joint
efforts for air permits, water permits, etc.
Staff asked for clarification of the ZTA on rental of mobile homes, which
will be advertised soon. The Board stated it would hear the ZTA on October 2,
1991.
The staff was directed to review the question of requ1r1ng undisturbed buffer
areas in the same right-of-way as that of public utilities.
The staff is to look at an alternative name for the entire length of Route
53.
LEN:bwh
Attachments (2)
cc: Robert B. Brandenburger
Richard E. Huff, II
Roxanne White
Bruce Woodzel1
Amelia Patterson
George R. St. John
File
Distributed to Board: q - /'3 - q !
Agenda Item No. ql, OQI1(6" 0
"
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 (Consent
Agenda)
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and I~~
Community Development (Il
TO:
DATE:
September 12, 1991
RE:
ZMA-90-09 Cathcart-Turner
The above referenced ZMA resulted in the rezoning of some 24
acres from R-1 to PRD on Avon Street south of I-64. The
approval letter for that action is attached (Attachment A).
In developing more detailed site development plans and
working with the ARB, the applicant has found that an
alteration in the plan is desirable to reduce environmental
and aesthetic impact. The applicant proposes to substitute
a plan dated June 3, 1991 titled "Exhibit C2 Lakeside
Apartments" (Attachment B). The revised plan necessitates
changes to the internal road system, including relocation of
the entrances to the site. The internal through road has
been relocated to the southern entrance. To reflect this
change, the applicant proposes new wording for condition #2
(Attachment C). Furthermore, with the changes proposed by
the applicant, Condition #7 would no longer be necessary.
Changes in access and the internal road system have been
discussed with the Virginia Department of Transportation.
Entrance locations are acceptable. Ultimate approval of the
internal through road for acceptance into the state system
will be based on its ultimate connection into adjacent
properties and the resulting traffic volumes.
The Architectural Review Board has reviewed the proposed
plan and on June 24, 1991 made comments regarding the plan
(Attachment D). In general, the Architectural Review Board
was receptive to the plan.
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
September 12, 1991
Page 2
Staff opinion is that the proposed alterations are
consistent with the intent of the original approval and will
result in a development equal to or superior to the original
plan. Staff recommends the following substitutions for
Conditions #1 and #2 of ZMA-90-09 are appropriate:
1. Development shall be in accord with plan dated June 3,
1991 and titled "Exhibit C2 Lakeside Apartments".
2. The applicant agrees to reserve for dedication, upon
demand of the County, a 50 foot right-of-way from Route
742 to Tax Map 91, Parcel 2. The applicant agrees to
construct a 40 foot curb to curb cross-section running
approximately 600 feet perpendicular to Route 742 and
then approximately 200 feet parallel to Route 742.
Costs incurred in having the road accepted into the
state system shall not be borne by the applicant unless
the need for dedication is generated by this
development.
Conditions #3-#6 are unaffected and Condition #7 is no
longer necessary.
Staff recommends that the Board accept these changes as
meeting the intent of the original approval. With this
acceptance, staff will include these modifications in the
Cathcart-Turner file as part of the approved conditions.
WDF/mem
ATTACHMENTS
cc: Rip Cathcart
Amelia Patterson
[ATTACHMENT Al
"
-
,-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire- Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
'.
'.
'-.-
~ ti 1990
"' - .,.! ',' ,;.SSQCtATES
,'__,)L...I...;';'V-""~ "
. "~""'T'i1='~~
October 12" 1990
Cathcart-Turner Development Co
415 Lexington Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: ZMA-90-09 Cathcart-Turner Development Company
Dear Sir:
..' :~' ~..
. '.. ~ ..;
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
October 3, 1990, approved the above-noted request to rezone
24.06 acres from R-1, Residential, to PRD, Planned
Residential Development, with a maximum of 360 units.
Property located on the east side of Rt. 742 (Avon Street
Extended) east of The Armory (Neighborhood 4). Tax map 91,
Parcel 2 (part of). Please note that this approval is
subject to the following conditions:
t
1. Development shall be in accord with plan dated July 18,
1990, revised September 10, 1990, titled Lakeside
Apartments, pages 1-3;
2. The applicant agrees to reserve for dedication, upon
demand of the County, a 50 foot right-of-way from Rt.
742 to Tax Map 91, Parcel 2. The applicant agrees to
construct a 40 foot curb to curb, cross-section running
approximately 500 feet perpendicular to Rt. 742 and
then approximately 520 feet parallel to Rt. 742. Costs
incurred in having the road accepted into the state
system shall not be borne by the applicant unless the
need for dedication is generated by this development;
3. Recreational facilities shall be for the use of the
residents and guests of Lakeside Apartments only;
If
.. \."
Cathcart-Turner Development Co
Page 2
October 12, 1990
4. Staff approval of maintenance agreement for dam to
include a provision that the total lake level and lake
,?~ea.on 'this plan shall not be reduced;
5. A 15-foot pedestrian access easement shall be provided
adjacent to the lake for the benefit of the residents
of the Lakeside Development;
6. Administrative approval of final plans;
7. The southern road entrance to the future connector road
to be closed off at such time as the connector road is
accepted into the State Secondary Highway System.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
{)
~.
Development
VWC/jcw
. (
'0' .';";.',
"". ': .' cc:
Amklia Patterson
Richard Moring
Hurt Investments
Kurt Wassenaar
IATTACHMEt,riC]
WASSENAAR
ASSOCIATES
AR~HITECTS
August 8, 1991
Mr. Bill Fritz
Planner
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
RE: Lakeside Apartments; Project #90150
Site Plan Approval
Dear Bill,
Pursuant to your conversation with Rip Cathcart regarding the required information for
your presentation to the Board of Supervisors on 21 August 91, I am enclosing proposed
revised language for Condition #2 of the letter dated 12 Oct 91 from the County confIrming
approval of rezone application ZMZ-90-09. This new text addresses the new alignment
and location of the proposed VDOt section only, and is not intended to alter the condition
in any other way.
. . ..~~ ~;
"2. The applicant agrees to reserve for dedication, upon demand of the County, a
50 foot right-of-way from Route 742 to Tax Map 91, Parcel 2. The applicant agree; to
construct a 40 foot curb to curb, cross- section running approximately 600 feet .
perpendicular to Rt. 742 and then approximately 200 feet parallel to Rt. 742. Costs
. incurred iP having the road accepted into the state system shall not be borne by the applicant
unless the need for dedication is generated by this development;"
I have also attached one copy each of the above mentioned 12 Oct 91 letter and a letter from
W AA to the County dated 29 April 91 which addresses our proposed road revision at that
time. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance with this matter.
cc: Rip Cathcart
enclosure
P.O. Box 2666 · Charlottesville, Virginia. 22902
Telephone: 804 971-2920 · Fax: 804 971-7048
.
,
IATTACH~ENT DI
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
July 3, 1991
Greg Donovan
Cathca~t and Turner Development
415 Lexington Ave
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: ARB-P(SDP)-91-12 Lakeside Apartments (Route 742)
Dear Mr. Donovan:
On June 24, 1991, the Albemarle County Architectural Review
Board discussed in a preliminary conference, your proposal
to locate a total of 320 units on a total of 24.06 acr.es in
the Scottsville Magisterial District. Property described as
Tax Map 91, Parcel 2 is locate on the east side of Rt. 742
and east of the Armory. The following is a summary of the
suggestions made, please be aware this summary should not be
considered final. The Board made the following comments and
suggestions:
,,' ~':..
....~ ;>;
(1) ~rovide more detail regaiding the 40-50' planting strip
along Rt. 742;
(2) Show existing trees that are worthy of saving;
(3) Concern was expressed about the steep slopes (3-1);
(4) Suggestion was made to have a three board white fence
or berm along front of property or a healthy forest
edge (oaks, ash, maple, etc.) or straight row;
(5) Guidelines call for specific tree treatment along
entrance and secondary roads.
I.~ _'~ .
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Lipinski.
YL/jcw
. ,
cc: Wassenaar Associates
,~
T
t'J
~ OJ
:: I-
- ~ Z
- S 'W
.
~ ~ :a:
. ~ J:
U ~ ()
- ~ ~
- ~
~
~
~
~ ~ '"-l
.~ ~O\,
== ~ ~
~ =:
~~~
~.....,
~~~
"0
...
.0
...
.3
.~
"0
c:
;:l
...
.:.:
C':I
,.J
.
~~.
:i? ..a
F~
~~
-:::...~
!L-/3-91
Di:;:nburcd to Board: .
t;,:.;md:J lteID ND. CJ1Ji)Jlli~)
,.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Local Surveyors, Land Planners and Engineers / )
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning andcJGJJ~
Community Development
DATE:
September 5~ 1991
RE:
Subdivision Plat/Site Plan Extensions/Reapprovals
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting of
August 27, 1991, endorsed the following clarification in
procedure as regards requests for subdivision plats and site
plan extensions/reapproval. This procedural clarification
is intended to assure consistent consideration of such
requests as allowed for under the Albemarle County Zoning
and SUbdivision Ordinances. It will also allow staff and the
Commission to maintain review of plats/plans under ordinance
provisions in effect -at the time of extensionjreapproval.
Subdivision Plats
The Director of Planning and Community Development, as agent
for the Board of Supervisors, may grant extension of
preliminary plats under Section 18-50 of the Subdivision
Ordinance. The Director will review preliminary plat
extension requests administratively and base decisions on
circumstances related to unusual delay beyond the control of
the applicant rather than other factors such as economic
hardship and the like. Appeals of the Director's decisions
are available through the Board of Supervisors.
Extension requests for final plats are not provided under
current'ordinance regulations. In the future when the
allocated time for a final plat expires, it can be
reactivated by resubmitting the final plat on (or before) a
submittal deadline with the appropriate application, fee,
~ ~
Local Surveyors, Land Planners and Engineers
Page 2
September 5, 1991
_~id number of copies of the plat. The plat will be
considered as new business with complete review by the site
Review Committee under ordinance regulations in effect at
the time of resubmittal. Once revisions are received in
accordance with the site Review Committee recommendations,
the plat will be placed on the Commission's agenda for
action.
site Plans
The Director of Planning is empowered under section 32.3.3
to "establish from time to time such reasonable
administrative procedures" necessary to properly administer
the site plan provisions. The Director will review
preliminary plan extension requests in a manner similar to
the above stated policy "for preliminary plats; that is,
based on circumstances beyond the control of the applicant.
Approved final plans will not be granted extensions. As
with final plats, expired final plans can be reactivated by
resubmitting on a submittal date with an appropriate
application, fee, and number of copies. The plan will go
through the normal site review process and placed on the
Commission's agenda for action.
Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
VWC/jcw
cc: Bob Brandenburger
Site Review Committee Members
Planning staff
Planning Commission Members
Board of Supervisors
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Albemarle County Planning Commission Members
FROM:
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning & Community Development~vJ~
August 19, 1991
DATE:
RE:
Subdivision Plat Extension Requests
PURPOSE:
This memorandum regards subdivision plat extension or reapproval
requests and, if endorsed by the Planning Commission, would establish
consistent procedures for extension of preliminary plats and reapproval
of final plats.
BACKGROUND
Attachment A references the Subdivision Ordinance sections discussed in
this memorandum. Section 18-50 allows an applicant six months after
Planning Commission approval of the preliminary plat to meet the
conditions of approval and submit the final plat. This section contains
an allowance for extensions by the Board of Supervisors or its agent
(the Director of Planning). Such extensions have been granted based on
delays encountered as a result of a public agency's delay beyond the
control of the applicant or in case of severe weather, provided the
applicant has demonstrated he has continued to make reasonable progress
on the project. If the six month limit is met and the final plat is
properly submitted for review, the applicant is allotted, in accordance
with Section 18-54(c), an additional 18 months before the plat must be
signed by the agent. Section 18-53(c) requires the plat to be recorded
within six months of the signature date. This process allows for a
total of 2 1/2 years from the time the preliminary plat is submitted
until the final plat must be put to record.
., '
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Page 2
August 14, 1991
There is no specific provlslon for extension of final plat validity ~n
the Subdivision Ordinance. In lieu of extension, in the past,
applicants have requested reapproval without resubmittal for review or a
new application fee. Section 18-54(a) does provide the courtesy and
convenience of posting a performance bond to cover the cost of necessary
public improvements in lieu of construction in order to meet the 18
months time limit.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Director of Planning will continue to review preliminary plat
extension requests administratively and base decisions on circumstances
related to unusual delay beyond the control of the applicant rather than
other factors such as economic hardship and the like. Appeals of the
Director's decisions are available through the Board of Supervisors.
As previously noted, extension requests for final plats are not
provided under current regulations. In the future when the 18 months is
expiring, the applicant will be required to resubmit the final plat on
(or before) a submittal deadline with the appropriate application, fee,
and number of copies of the plat. The plat will be considered as new
business with complete review by the Site Review Committee under
ordinance regulations in effect at the time of resubmittal. Once
revisions are received in accordance with the Site Review Committee
recommendations, the plat will be placed on the Commission's regular
agenda for action.
ACTION:
Should the Planning Commission endorse this policy, staff will redraft
this memorandum for distribution to local surveyors, land planners and
engineers for their reference.
VWC/blb
. ~
ATTACHMENT A
Section 18-50 - Time Limit on File; Final Plat After Approval Of
Preliminary Plat.
Subdividers shall have not more than six (6) months after rece~v~ng
official notification concerning the preliminary plat to file in the
office of the commission, or its agent, a final subdivision plat in
accordance with this chapter. Failure to do so shall render preliminary
approval null and void. The Board of Supervisors, or its agent, may on
written request by the subdivider grant an extension of this time
limit.
Section 18-54 - Approvals And Conditions.
(a) The final plat shall not be approved until the subdivider has
complied with the requirements and standards of design in accordance
with this chapter and has provided a performance bond to cover the
cost of necessary improvements in lieu of construction, to the
satisfaction of the Board of Supervisors, or its agent, if such
authority has been so delegated. Approval of the final plat shall
be shown by attaching a certificate showing the approval of the
Board of Supervisors.
(c) Any final plat which shall fail to be approved by the Board of
Supervisors or its agent in accordance with this section within
eighteen (18) months after approval by the commission shall be
void; provided, however, that any final plat which was approved by
the commission on or before May 5, 1982, shall be valid if it shall
be approved by the Board of Supervisors or its agent as herein
provided on or before November 5, 1983. (Added May 5, 1982).
Distributed to Board: 9-1.3 -1/
fi:'1!id,. No, ~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
, .~
\,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
September 9, 1991
of Supervisors Ii ~
County Executive~1
Albemarle County Board
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.,
RE: Proposed Adult Day Care Center
County staff has been approached by representatives of the
Jefferson Area Board for Aging regarding the potential of using a
county owned parcel of land on Berkmar Drive adjacent to the rescue
squad building as a new adult day care center. Apparently, plans
to use a site owned by the Catholic Diocese of Richmond at
Branchlands has run into difficulties and alterntives are being
explored.
Mr. Gordon Walker, Executive Director of JABA, has requested to
meet with the appropriate county representatives and staff
recommends that the Board's Building Committee be instructed to
meet with Mr. Walker and bring a recommendation back to the Board
for its consideration.
RWT,Jr/REH,II/dbm
91.128
Distributed to Board: 9 - /3 -<:-11
Azenrh Item No, q I.Oqfg(Q'~
HUNTON & WILLIAMS
ATLANTA, GEORGIA
BRUSSELS, BELGIUM
FAIRFAX} VIRGINIA
KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE
RIVERFRONT PLAZA, EAST TOWER
951 EAST BYRD STREET
N~ :YORK, NEW YORK
NORF"OLK, VIRGINIA
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
WASHINGTON, 0, C.
RICHMOND) VIRGINIA 23219-4074
TELEPHONE (804) 788-8200
FACSIMILE (804) 788-8218
FILE No,: 32722,13
DIRECT DIAL: (804) 788-8727
september 5, 1991
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTED
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Industrial Development Authority
of Albemarle County, Virginia
$12,595,000 Residential Facility
First Mortgage Revenue Bonds
(Our Lady of Peace project)
series 1991
Ladies and Gentlemen:
In connection with the above-referenced financing, I enclose
for filing on behalf of the Industrial Development Authority of
Albemarle County, Virginia, a certified copy of United states
Internal Revenue Service Form 8038.
Please indicate the receipt of the enclosed Form 8038 by
stamping the enclosed copy of this letter and returning it to me
in the enclosed postage paid envelope.
Very truly yours,
I ! Ii (
LtC) C'l1
)i ('(/\2'-
Alison M. La Mura
Paralegal
Enclosures
cc: Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
Virginia
CERTIFICATE AS TO INTERNAL
REVENUE SERVICE FORM 8038
The undersigned Secretary of the Industrial Development
Authority of Albemarle County, Virginia (the Authority) hereby
certifies that attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct
copy of united States Internal Revenue Service Form 8038 filed
with the Internal Revenue Service in connection with the issuance
on Septmeber 5, 1991, of the Authority's $12,595,000 Residential
Facility First Mortgage Revenue Bonds (Our Lady of Peace
project), Series 1991.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Authority this day
of September, 1991.
~C:WJ J
cretary, Industrial Development
u hority of Albemarle County,
v' ginia
(SEAL)
Form
8038
Information Return for Tax-Exempt
Private Activity Bond Issues
(Under Section 149(e)}
~ See separate Instructions.
(Rev, May 1989)
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service
OMB No, 1545,0720
Expires 5/31/92
IDII Reporting Authority
Check box if Amended Return ~ 0
3 Number and street
C/O James B. Murray, Jr., Chairman, P.O.Box 1465
1 Issuer's name 2 Issuer's employer I~entlflcatlon number
Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County, A 52-1297503
Bonds
IDIII Type of Issue (check box(es) that applies and enter the Issue Price for each)
9 Exempt facility bond:
a 0 Airport (sections 142(a)(l) and 142(c)) . , . . , ,
b 0 Docks and wharves (sections 142(a)(2)and 142(c))
c 0 Mass commuting faCilities (sections 142(a)(3)and 142(c))
d 0 Water furnishing facilities (sections 142(aX4)and 142(e))
e 0 Sewage facilities (section 142(a)(5)) , . , . . , .
f 0 Solid waste disposal facilities (section 142(a)(6)) , , ,
g 0 Qualified residential rental projects (sections 142(a)(7) and 142(d)), as follows:
Meeting 20-50 test (section 142(d)(1)(A)) , , , 0
Meeting 40-60 test (section 142(d)(l)(B)) , , . . . . , , . , 0
Meeting 25-60 test (NYC only) (section 142(d)(6)) , , , . . . . 0
Has an election been made for deep rent skewing, (section 142(dX4XB))? 0 Yes 0 No
h 0 Facilities for the local furnishing of electric energy or gas (sections 142(a)(8)and 142(1)). .'
i 0 Local district heating or cooling facilities (sections 142(aX9) and 142(g)). , , , ,
j 0 Qualified hazardous waste facilities (sections 142(aX10) and 142(h)), , . . , .
k 0 High.speed intercity rail facilities (sections 142(aXll), 142(c), and 142(i)). , , ,
Check box if you elected not to claim depreciation or any tax credit (see instructions). . , . 0
o Facilities allowed under a transitional rule of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (see instructions) ,
Facility type. . . . . _ . . . _ . . . . . . _ . , _ . ..... .. . _. _ _ .
1986 Act section
10 0 Qualified mortg~~~' b~~d' '(-S~~ti~~" i43(~))'''' ~ - ,
Check box if you elect to rebate arbitrage profits to the U,S. . 0
11 0 Qualified veterans' mortgage bond (section 143(b))
Check box if you elect to rebate arbitrage profits to the U,S, , , , . , , . " . 0
12 0 Qualified small issue bond (section 144(a)). Check box for $10 million small issue exemption . 0
13 0 Qualified student loan bond (section 144(b)), , , , . . , , , . . , , ,
14 0 Qualified redevelopment bond (section 144(c)), . , , , , , . . , . . , . ,
15 0 Qualified hospital bond (section 145(c)) , , . , , , , , . , , . . , . . ,
16 a Qualified 501(cX3) bond other than a qualified hospital bond (section 145), . , , . , .
Employer identification number (EIN) of qualifying 501(cX3) organization 54-1582304
17 0 Nongovernmental output property bond (treated as private activity bondXsection 141(d)) . , . .
18 0 Other, Describe (see instructions) ~. _ . . _ _ . _ . , _ _ .. _ . .. . . . _ . . ... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ... _..... _ _ _ _ ..... .
IDIIII Description of Bonds
(a) (b)
Maturtty date Interest rate
(c)
Issue price
(d)
Stated redemption
price at maturity
19 Final maturity, , 8.00 % $ 1 064 250
20 Entire issue 12 522 550
For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see page 1 of the Instructions.
1 645 000
2 595 000
4 Report number
PA19 91 1
6 Date of Issue
September 5, 1991
8 CUSIP number
012672 DB 4
Issue Price
.
17
12,522,550
18
Form 8038 (Rev. 5-89)
~ Uses of Original Proceeds of Issue (Including underwriters' discount)
Page;
Amount
29
Proceeds used for accrued interest " . " ,.,.",
Issue price of entire issue (enter amount from line 20,column c) ,
Proceeds used for bond issuance costs (including underwnters' discount) ,
Proceeds used for credit enhancement, , ,
Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund
Proceeds used to refund prior issues (complete Part VI)
Total (add lines 23, 24, 25. and 26), , .
Nonrefundin roceeds of the issue subtract line 27 from line 22 and enter amount here
Description of Property Financed by Nonrefunding Proceeds
(Do not complete for qualified student loan bonds, qualified mortgage bonds. or qualified veterans' mortgage bonds.)
Type of Property Financed by Nonrefundlng Proceeds: I Amount
a Land, . , , , . . , . , . . ' 3 78 0 0 5
b Buildings and structures, . , , 547 629
c Equipment with recovery period of more than 5 years 378 . 005
d Equipment with recovery period of 5 "years or less '.' ,
Other describe D,ev:e~o~t; ~'e~, ,M"9rket:l~, 1 816 311
St d d' d t., 1ft" (SIC) f f d'
240,000
23
24
25 1 162 600
26
28 i 11 , 119 , 9 50
e
30
an ar In us na c assl Ica Ion o nonre un Ing proce s or e Inance pro/ec
SIC Code Nonrefunding proceeds $ SIC Code Nonrefunding proceeds $
a 8361 11,119,950 c
b d
IDID Description of Refunded Bonds (complete this part only for refunding bonds)
31 Enter the remaining weighted average maturity of the bonds to be refunded
32 Enter the last date on which the refunded bonds will be called . , , ,
33 Enter the date(s) the refunded bonds were issued .
~ Miscellaneous
..
..
year!
34 Name of governmental unit(s) approving issue (see instructions) . . . ?~?~~. ~r. ?l!P.E?~Y.~ ?q~.~. .9.f. . A-~,1;>~,Tfl~~J~.
.C;~':1~!-y. L.Y.~~gJ:l).~?__... ......... ,__, ........ ..... ....__.__ ...... ..........__..........."""'..""'.
35 Enter the amount of the bonds desi nated b the issuer under section 265 b 3 8 i III "",.
IiIIIDD Volume Cap Amount
36 Amount of volume cap allocated to the issuer, Attach state certification, , , , , 36
37 Amount of issue subject to the unified state volume cap , , , , , , , , , , 37
38 Amount of issue not subject to the unified state volume cap or other volume limitations:
a Of bonds for governmentally owned solid waste facilities. airports, docks, wharves or high.speed intercity
rail facilities, " "',.".".."" 38a
b Under a carryforward election. Attach copy of Form 8328 to this ;;:turn 38b
c Under transitional rules of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, . , . . . 38c
Enter the Act section of the applicable transitional rule, , , , ,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . _
d Under the exception for current refunding (section 1313(a)oft he Tax Reform Act of 1986) , , , , , 38d
39 Amount of issue of qualified 501(c)(3) bonds:
a Qualified hospital bonds. . , . . , , 39. 12, 595 , 000
b Qualified non hospital bonds 39b
c Outstanding tax.exempt nonhospital bonds, , 39c
40a Amount of issue of qualified veteran's mortgage bonds . 40a
b Enter the amount of the state veterans' limit , 40b
Arbitra e Rebate (see instructions)
41 Method of payment. ,.,",.""",.", 0 Check 0 Other
42 Amount being rebated. $
43 CUSIP number.
Under penalties of perJury, I declare that I have e mined thiS return, and accompanyi"l schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief,
they are true, correct, plete.
Please
Sign
Here
~ 5i nature of oHicer
Thomas McQueeney
Type or print name of above oHicer
~ September 5, 1991
r Date
Vice Chairman
Title (type or print) of oHicer
*U,S. Governllen.t Printins aff~ce; .~j-_._-..~l~O:2~
Form 8038 (Rev. 5-89)
~ Uses of Original Proceeds of Issue (including underwriters' discount)
Page;
Proceeds used for accrued interest ,. , , . . , , , , , , ,
Issue price of entire issue (enter amount from line 20,column c), . .
Proceeds used for bond issuance costs (including underwriters' discount) ,
Proceeds used for credit enhancement, , , . , . . , , , ,
Proceeds allocated to reasonably required reserve or replacement fund
Proceeds used to refund prior issues (complete Part VI) , , . , .
Total (add lines 23, 24, 25, and 26). . , , , ,
Nonrefundin roceeds of the issue subtract 'lne 27 from line 22 and enter amount here
Description of Property Financed by Nonrefunding Proceeds
(Do not complete for qualified student loan bonds, qualified mortgage bonds, or qualified veterans' mortgage bonds.)
29 Type of Property Financed by Nonrefundlng Proceeds: Amount
a Land, , , , , . , . . , , . 8 0 05
b Buildings and structures, , , , , . , , , . , 47 629
c Equipment with recovery periOd of more than 5 years . 78 005
d Equipment with recove1 period of 5 Fears or less , , ,
e Other deSCribe D,ev:e ,o~t; ,e~, ,~~et~g., $>r~-9P:~irig :~d :W<?r~: C?P~
30 St d d' d t. I If t' (SIC) f f d' ed f th fed' ts
Amount
23
24
25
26
1 162 600
21 11 025.61
22 I 1 2 , 5 2 2 , 55 0
28 I 11 , 119 , 950
1 816 311
an ar In us ria c assl Ica Ion o nonre un Ing proce s or e Inanc prolec
SIC Code Nonrefunding prOCeeds S SIC Code Nonrefunding proceeds S
a 8361 11.l119,950 c
b d
IDIII Description of Refunded Bonds (complete this part only for refunding bonds)
31 Enter the remaining weighted average maturity of the bonds to be refunded , ~ year!
32 Enter the last date on which the refunded bonds will be called . . , . , ~
33 Enter the date(s) the refunded bonds were issued ~
I2III!DI Miscellaneous
34 Name of go~ernmenta/ unit(s) approving issue (see instructions) ~ . .l?~~J;'~. ~~.. ?qP.~F:Y.i:~.q~.!? .9.f.. A-J.)?~,rp.~~.~~.
.c;~~~~y.!..Y.~~gJ:l).~9-.... ..... ....... .... ... :.. .................... ............... .............."....,._
35 Enter the amount of the bonds desi nated b the issuer under section 265 b 3 B i III ",.. ~
I2!II!.DII Volume Cap Amount
36 Amount of volume cap allocated to the issuer. Atuch state certification. , . , ,
37 Amount of issue subject to the unified state volume cap , . , , , . , , . ,
38 Amount of issue not subject to the unified state volume cap or other volume limitations:
a Of bonds for governmentally owned solid waste facilities. airports, docks. wharves or high.speed intercity
rail facilities, , , , , , . , , . , , . . , , , , , .
b Under a carryforward election. Attach Cl)PY of Form 8328 to this r..tum
c Under transitional rules of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. , , . , .
Enter the Act section of the applicable transitional rule, , . , ,~. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. .
d Under the exception for current refunding (section 1313(a) of the Tax Reform Act of 1986)
39 Amount of issue of qualifiect 501(c)(3) bonds:
a Qualified hospital bonds. . , , , , ,
b Qualified non hospital bonds , , . . , .
Outstanding tax.exempt nonhospital bonds, ,
Amount of issue of qualified veteran's mortgage bonds,
Enter the amount of the state veterans' limit .
Arbitra e Rebate (see instructions)
Method of payment ~ ....,.,..,...,
Amount being rebated ~ $
CUSIP number ~
. Under penalties of perJury. I declare that I have e1lilmlned thIS return, and accompanyi"l schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief,
theyar:::;o'i. P~//~~6
~//>~,. ~j ~/~/
r Signature of officer /
Thomas McQueeney'
Type or print name of above officer
36
37
38a
38b
38c
12,595,000
41
42
43
o Check
o Other
Please
Sign
Here
~ September 5, 1991
r Oat.
'Vice Chairman
Title (type Of prrnt) of offi~
-u.S. Governaeftc Prtfttinl OH:.ce: ...j-_ '_-. 'l/ao~~;
Hugh C Miller. Director
COMMONWEr\LTrl of VIRqtN1A
, . ,
Department oj Historic Resourceis.
221 Go\ernor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
I'
1 ()
':1 : I:
TOO (8P~) 786-1934
Telfi!J3Horje (804) 786-3143
, F-9-~; I~) 225-4261
"',' .!
I'" ,'.
~ ~ ''',...mJ
September 6, 1991
Harold W. Sinclair
Route 6, Box 282
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SOLITUDE, Albemarle county (DHR 02-571)
Dear Mr. Sinclair:
For some time the Department of Historic Resources has been
interested in including the above property on the Virginia
Landmarks Register and nominating it to the National Register of
Historic Places. Before this action is taken, I would like to
clarify for you the nature of these designations.
The Virginia Landmarks Register is an official listing of
places in the Commonwealth judged to have state or national
archaeological, architectural, and/or historical significance. At
its next meeting on Tuesday, October 8, 1991, the State Review
Board will have the opportunity to consider the inclusion of
Solitude on this register. Should the board determine the prepared
nomination for Solitude is acceptable, it will automatically
nominate it to the National Register of Historic Places maintained
by the Department of the Interior.
Listing in the National Register provides recognition and
assists in preserving our Nation! 5 heritage. Listing of a resource
recognizes its historic importance and assures protective review of
Federal projects that might adversely affect the character of the
resource. If Solitude is listed in the National Register, certain
Federal investment tax credits for rehabilitation and other
provisions may apply.
Listing in the National Register does not mean that
limi tations will be placed on the properties by the Federal
Government. Public Visitation rights are not required of owners.
The Federal Government will not attach restrictive covenants to the
properties or seek to acquire them.
You are invited to attend the State Review Board meeting at
which the nomination will be considered. The Board will meet at
10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 8, 1991, in Senate Room A of the
Re: SOLITUDE, Albemarle county (DHR 02-571)
September 6, 1991
Page 2
General Assembly Building, Richmond, virginia. We hope that you
can come. This nomination will also be considered by the Historic
Resources Board on October 9, 1991 at 10:00 in Senate Room A. This
meeting is open to the public and you are welcome to attend.
Enclosed, please find a notice that explains, in greater
detail, the results of listing in the National Register and that
describes the rights and procedures by which an owner may comment
on or object to listing in the National Register.
Should you have any questions about this nomination before the
Department of Historic Resources State Review Board meeting; please
contact me at (804) 371-0821.
Sincerely,
~
J~Christi~n Hill, National Register
State Historic Preservation Office
Assistant
JCH/sdm
Enclosures
cc: Frederick R. Bowie, Chairman
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Executive
Albemarle County
Keith Rittenhouse, Planning Chairman
Albemarle County
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Planning director
Albemarle County
Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Director
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission
Gina Haney, Consultant
Hugn C. Miller, Director
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Historic Resources
221 Governor Street
RiclunODd. Virginia 23219
TOO: (804) 786-1934
Teleonone (804) 786-314
FAX: (804) 225-4261
FAC'l'S REGARDING HAfiOHAL REGISTER DESIGHAT:r:OH
1. National Register designation officially recognizes the
cultural, architectural, and landscape features of an
historically significant property, bringing it to the attention
of the community, state, and nation.
2. National Register designation does not restrict an owner's
use of his or her property in any way as long as private, non-
federal funds are used. It does not, for example, prohibit any
owner from altering or demolishing any buildings, nor does it
restrict subdivision or sale.
3. National Register designation can help lessen the negative
impact on an historic property from government funded projects.
By law, an environmental impact study is required for any
federally-funded projects - such as road building, utility
installation, and public housing. Also, certain state projects
are reviewed for their impact on historic resources. If any
project is deemed to have an adverse effect on historic
buildings, archaeological sites, or landscape features, the
project may be redesigned to lessen that effect.
4. National Register designation confers two types of financial
benefits on historic property owners. First, it allows the owner
to claim investment tax credits for certified rehabilitations if
the building is used for income-prOducing purposes.
5. For additional information on the investment tax credit
program, contact the Department of Historic Resources, 221
Governor Street, Richmond, VA. 23219 (804)786-3143.
National Register designation also makes properties eligible
for matching federal grants for historic preservation.
CUrrently, federal funds are not available for preservation
projects.
6. Any restrictions on private property owners using private
funds can only be enacted by the local governing body - i.e. the
city or town councilor the county board of supervisors.
Imposition of such restrictions does not necessarilY follow from
National Reaister desianation.
.-,~-
~,=.;,;~
- '.. ....
,tit l.~. -:. "11'
It . '-'",.. ~i
~ r'''' '.
~....... ..;...1' ~;;
'~ i"".,r......
~"'~~ .;I
~~
COIvIMONvvE.4.LTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Historic ResoW'ces
221 Governor 5tree!
Ric:nmonc. VirgInia
rel.onone f8041 78e
reo: 804-78&-6276
RESDLTS OF I.ISTDlG m TBE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HiSTORIC PLACES
Eliaibilitv for, Federal tax orovisions: If a property is listed
in the National Register, certain federal tax provisions may
apply. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 revises the historic
oreservation ta~incentives authorized bv Conaress in the Tax
Reform Act of 1976. the Revenue Act of 1978, the Tax Treatmen~
Extension Act of 1980. the Economic Recoverv Tax Act of 1981. and
Tax Reform Act of 1984 and as of Januarv 1. 1987, orovides for a
20 oercen~ investment tax credit with a full adiustment to basis
for rehabilitatina historic. commercial, industrial. and
residential rental buildinas. The former 15 cercent and 20
percent investment tax credits (ITCs) for rehabilitation of older
commercial buildinas are combined into a sinale 10 cercent ITC
for commercial or industrial buildinas built before 1936. The
Tax Treatment Extension Act of 1980 provides federal tax
deductions for charitable contributions for conservation purposes
of partial interests in historically important land areas or
structures. Whether these provisions are advantageous to a
property owner is dependent upon the particular circumstances of
the property and the owner. Because tax aspects outlined above
are complex, individuals should consult legal counselor
appropriate local Internal Revenue Service office for assistance
in determining the tax consequences of the above provisions. For
further information on certification requirements, please refer
to 36 CFR 67.
Consideration in clannina for Federal, Federallv licensed. and
Federallv assisted croiects: Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requires that Federal agencies
allow for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation to have
an opportunity to comment on all projects affecting historic
proper~ies listed in the National Register. For further
information, please refer to 36 CFR 800.
Consideration in issuina a surface coal minina cermit: In
accordance with the Surface Mining and Control Act of 1977, ~ere
must be consideration of historic values in the decision to ~ssue
a surface coal mining permit where coal is located. For further
information, please refer to 30 CFR 700 et sea.
Oualification for Federal arants for historic creservation when
funds are available: Presently funding is unavailable.
RIGHTS OF OWNERS TO COMKENT AND/OR OBJECT TO LISTING
IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER
Owners of private properties nominated to the National
Register have an opportunity to concur with or object to listing
in accord with the National Historic presrvation Act and 36 CFR
60. Any owner or partial owner of private property who chooses
to object to listing may submit, to the state Historic
Preservation Officer, a notarized statement certifying that the
party is the sole or partial owner of the private property and
objects to listing.
Each owner or partial owner has one vote regardless of the
portion of the property that the party owns. If a majority of
private property owners object, a property will not be listed.
However, the state Historic Preservation Officer shall submit the
nomination to the Keeper of the National Register for a
determination of eligibility of the property for listing on the
National Register. If the property is then determined eligible
for listing, although not formally listed, Federal agencies will
be required to allow for the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation to have an opportunity to commment before the agency
may fund, license, or assist a project which will affect the
property.
If YOU choose to obiect to the listing of your property, the
notarized objection must be submitted to Hugh C. Miller, 221
Governor street, Richmond, Virginia, 23Z19 before the scheduled
meeting of the state Review Board noted in your letter.
If YOU wish to comment. on the nomination of the property to
the National Register, please send your comments to the state
Historic Preservation Officer at 221 Governor street, Richmond,
virginia 23219 before the state Review Board considers this
nomination. A copy of the nomination and information on the
National Register and the Federal Tax provisions are available
from the above address upon request.
REV 1990
300 East Lombard
Suite 1100
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
301-659-7500
September 9, 1991
Mr. Bob Richardson
Sovran Bank, N.A.
Post Office Box 26904
Richmond, Virginia 23261
Re: Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.)
Dear Mr. Richardson:
Enclosed please find the Bond Program Report and Monthly Report
Pursuant to Section 7(a) of the Deed Restrictions for the month
of August 1991.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me
at 301-659-7500.
Sincerely,
dJW1L ~ VrM~
Sheila H. Moynihan
Project Monitor
/shm
enclosures
_~~;i~tJil."(~0;~_8'-i(_fi'ift"
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
.-
BOND PROGKAI\.\ Rf.PORT
Monlh
August
VNr 1991
P t1 Arbor Crest Apartments
ropt y:
I' Charlottesville, VA
lOCi Ion:
Loretta Wyatt
M.n.a~r
(Hydraulic Road Apts.) Proj~t.:
051-35371
Num~( of Unit.
September 5, 1991
D.Te
Total Occupied
Bond Occupied
66
Effective 8/31/91
SubmlUed by.
66
15
I. LOwt" INCOME
The fOllow.ng unlls h.... ~n de-signAled a) "Iow~" Income" un,l)
1 Arbor Crest Dr. 2t Eleanor Blair 41 61.
4 Arbor Crest Dr. n Margaret Q. Sandford42 62,
2
5 Arbor Crest Dr. 23 Fannie G. Tisdale ~J aJ.
3
6 Arbor Crest Dr. 24 George C. Barnett 44 &4.
4_
5 9 Arbor Crest Dr. 25 Virginia Burton ~5 65,
6 12 Arbor Crest Dr. 26 G. Robert Stone 46 ~,
7 . 15 Arbor Crest Dr. 27 Jane Wood 47 67.
20 Arbor Crest Dr. 28 Evelyn Mandeville 48 M
8
9 24 Arbor Crest Dr. 29 Gertrude Breen 49 fig,
78 Arbor Crest Dr. 30 Ernest M. Nease ~ 70,
to
84 Arbor Crest Dr. 3t Juanita Boliek 51 71.
'I
86 Arbor Crest Dr. 32 Mary A. Hoxie 52, 72.
12.
90 Arbor Crest Dr. J) Florence Wheeler 53 73.
'3
U 94 Arbor Crest Dr. 3~ Sarah E. Fischer ~ 74.
106 Arbor Crest Dr. 35 Katherine T. Nowlen ~5 75.
t5 .
'6 J6 ~ 76,
\7 :\7 ~7. 17,
lIS 38 ~. 78,
19 39 - ~9 78.
:'0 40 60 10,
1 /'\c c/'\.n~s Itom pI e-v.ous fe-pc"l ff'f1e-Cled in th. .bov. ,"s\lng .'8
eel. Ilona Mdl1lone
t -11 11.
2 12 2 12,
3 13 3 13,
4 14 4, ,,,.
~ 1~ 5 15.
6 16 6 16,
7 \1 7 11.
I 16 8, "..
I 19 9 ".
\0 20 \0, 20.
..
Effective August 31, 1991
MONTHLY REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 7(a) OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS
TO: ABG Associates, Inc.
300 E. Lanba.rd Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
RE: Hydraulic Road Apartments - Aroor Crest Apa.rt:1rents
Charlottesville, Virginia
Pursuant to Section 7 (a) of the Deed Restr ictions (the "Deed
Restrictions"), as defined in an Indenture of Trust dated as of
April 1, 1983, between the Industrial Development Authority of
Albemarle County, Virginia (the "Authority"), and your bank, as
trustee, the undersigned authorized representative of
Richmond-Albemarle Limited Partnership, a Virginia Limited
Partnership (the "Purchaser"), hereby certifies with respect to
the operation and management of Hydraulic Road Apartments,
Charlottesville, Virginia (the "Project"), that as of the date
shown below:
1) The number of units in the Project occupied by
lower income tenants is 15 .
2) The number of units in the Project unoccupied and
held available for Lower Income Tenants is -0-
.
3) The number of units rented and the number of units
held available for rental other than as described in
(1) and (2) is 51
4) The percentage that the number of units described in
(1) and (2) hereof constitute of the total number of
uni ts in the proj ect is 23% .
5) The information contained in this report is true,
accurate and correct as of the date hereof.
6) As of the date hereof, the Purchaser is not in
default under any covenant or agreement contained
in the Deed Restrictions or in an Agreement of Sale
dated as of April 1, 1983, between the Authority and
the Purchaser.
IN WITNESS WHEREOFl the undersigned has signed this Report as of
September ~, 1991 ,~*
RICHMOND-ALBEMARLE LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, a Virginia
limited partnership
By: $u7ZZ.-- 7fJ-1/d~
Authorized Representative
Distributed to Board: q -/3 Jt {
Agenda Item No. G . (' C fj
Cj) . {j ~ 1[.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & C~mmunity Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
i
September 11, 1991
Schuyler Enterprises
ATTN: James E. Clark, Jr
1130 Oakhill Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: ZTA-91-04 Schuyler Enterprises
SP-9l-21 Schuyler Enterprises
Dear Mr. Clark:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on September 4,
1991, made the following'recommendations to the Board of Supervisors.
o ZTA-91-04 Schuyler Enterprises - Unanimously recommended denial.
o SP-91-2l Schuyler Enterprises - Recommended denial by a vote of
5-2.
Plea~e be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on
September 18. 1991. 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. YOU OR YOUR
REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT FOR THIS MEETING,
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
.~~I?~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: ~ettie
Albert
/'
Neher
Clark
Amelia Patterson
Fred Landess
Jo Higgins
Distributed to Board: q - i ,)-.-'11
Ag,'nd[\ item No. !lLJ)j[S 1471
q,. (;€1/,J, .j'7r
'''rT'
, "
'..I. r oL "", !';r.,
-~;,.!.r~-~" r' "'\
-...._,J.~._f.
..' .,
.i, .
i \
.lUI.
R 1C::I
~"'l
...
\
. '
, .
.::: Hel ios Path
Bal'~bouf"sv ill e,
~TuJ.y 5, :L9':H
"r" "
, . - ': .-'....~r;-.'. ..:/ /:'
. ( ~ i.' ( ,",_r L' !' " I '
. . ,"! . .~. .! 1
,'/;
V i l'~ gin i a c~i~~'3i:::3
Mr. Wayne Cilimberg
Director of Planning and Community Development
40:L McIntyre Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 2290:L - 4596
Dear Mr. Cilimberg,
This is in regard to the request to amend the zoning
ordinance (by exception or otherwise) to permit
a large garage to operate commercially in a rural area.
We strongly oppose illegal operations being made legal
by changing the law, rather than adhering to the usage
permitted under the law. We are especially concerned the
usage of lands in rural areas and with maintaining the ideals
of the comprehensive plan.
S i l'"ICel'~e), y,
//~. .' ~- /'7
./ ---- -' //
'././ c: ~''- . /'C"../: -.' ,
~C . -
Winthl'~op C. ay ~
-, ') yC'/
#/a/'c~(a"2~-/-~_ /1:;;1
Margar~t B. Ray C
cc. F. R. Bowie
Distributed to Board: q - ( -5 - () /
Agend3 Item No, eft, O(f! fd'11
q 1.6I(,g .4 '7;/
Friday, June 2(1991
Amelia Patterson
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22901
Dear Ms. Patterson:
It has come to my attention that the Schuyler Enterprizes Truck Garage is an illegal
enterprise and is operating in violation of county ordinances. I understand that this
structure was put up illegally and that the owner is trying to obtain approval after the
fact. If approval is given in these circumstances I feel that this action will serve as an
example and be repeated by others who wish to get around country ordinances, making
it very difficult to maintain the quality of rural life in Albemarle County. I understand
that the disposition of this Truck Garage will soon be up for review by the Board of
Supervisors. I would like to urge you and them to support denial of the request for
approval of this structure.
Sincerely yours,
d,--".fJ./JJ\../ A. lC(l Yc9--h..St'ltY-
VI
Lillian A. Robertson
~~~ :-.. '\."'~ ,.:-. '~..'. \-,; P Y;,;;!''1@~~ ..
f\ .. r''''l ~,':;fi :: \\,,; ,;11 ...\ II
V. ~ ~ i ,o"i?! /;" :. i ,0"1 I I
~< j~~1__~ ".........~~~_~ -;.;~;;;:; I ~
JUL 2 1991
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
ZONING DEPARTMENT
~\A-q\-0t\)
DISTR18UTED TO BOAfW },A,;::;NiiJiCRS
ON__ct.11-.91 .'. _
LEAGUE OF
WOMEN
OF CHARLOTTESVILLE & ALBEMARLE COUNTY
TO: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
FROM: League of Women Voters
RE: ZTA-91-04 Amendment of Section 3.0 to change the definition
of public garage.
September 16, 1991
While the two proposed additions seemed innocuous enough, we have looked
at some of the possible ramifications and we would like to bring them
to your attention.
We are concerned that the addition of "which together with the adjacent
land areas," might provide a loophole that would limit the discretion
of the zoning administrator.
Past approvals for public garages in rural areas have included as a
condition a limit of four vehicles awaiting repair. We understand that
it is not always possible to predict the time required for a repair
(e. g ., waiting for parts) but the inclusion of the word "temporary"
along with the expansion to undetermined adjacent land areas might be
seen as obviating the necessity for other or more specific limitations
in particular permits.
There may be rural and forestal areas of Albemarle County where a
"public garage" with an unregulated parking lot (whether operated by
a profit-making or a non-profit organization) would not be compatible
with the rural and forestal land uses stipulated in the Comprehensive
Plan.
We urge you to reject the proposed change and expansion of the
description of a public garage in a rural or forestal area.
Distributed to Board: q -/ "):<1L
A;2nJ[j Item No, 9/.ctlf!r. :1'lL_
(ll- 0 tll A-7f
September 4, 1991
Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22901
. ~ ;
'.'l(, :
f'
.>
: i 1
\ i'
~:.~::,'~ L.~:;
J :.'~
~-~: } _;\ L: i) r!' , ; f) f h "i >~ (" ,ll.{ (
Dear Sirs:
I am writing this letter in support of Schuyler Enterprises'
application for a change of zoning. As I understand it, the
purpose of zoning is to keep a proper balance in land use for the
greatest benefit to the people in the community.
Our area is zoned almost 100 percent agricul tural. The
majority of people in our area are not farmers and seek support and
jobs from commercial enterprises. Wi thout your help there is
little hope for our young people to work locally. There is little
hope for this area to become self-supporting such as their
neighbors in scottsville and Lovingston.
I would ask you to consider the following:
1. Schuyler Enterprises provides employment for over 40 of our
local residents.
2. They provide business and manufacturers with immediate
services for transporting their products.
3. The return trips enable these same and other businesses to buy
their raw products from a much wider market and make them more
competitive.
4. Their future growth may stimulate addi tional needed small
business ventures in our area.
5. Their establishment in Albemarle County will bring in much
needed taxes and revenues.
6. This enterprise can do nothing but strengthen our local and
county economy.
7. Last, but most important in my thinking, is the fact that this
is not an absentee owner business. This business is owned and run
by local people who live here. The profits will not be siphoned
out of the county but will be used to build and stabilize our area.
I would assume that this is a small business compared to the
businesses you usually deal with. However, it is the small local
county business that has to be encouraged and nurtured to enable
the fringes of Albemarle to raise their standard of living to meet
the other sections of the County.
I respectfully submit these thoughts for your considerations
and trust your decision will benefit both our area and the county.
Yours truly,
,. /,1 'e.fJ L) )
~,~kh#
./ Bi II/Luhrs
Route 1, Box 158
Schuyler, Va. 22969
Albemarle County
Distributed to Board: q -1.3-.J.L.
"'"j"-" ""1 t'o (1/ OOJP A4f1f1
f"ti)__~':i.,_;..J..tt,':ll't. . f.~_
ql.MIK.41J'
COOPER ELECTRICAL
COOPER DISTRIBUTION PRODUCTS
INOUSTRIES
August 19,1991
C' (J l j f;j Ci f" /\ L !~:' L :;. / .'-\ ~-:' t
"j f I'";:~:: r~ r'I:;':>'~ r-" .'''',' t~\ r"'~.,~,1 '"~'::'.~':
I' " ' \ --' "d'.' ..J .... ,r I" I
, i' ~." . ..~ .'.
\ ~ I '. j ; ,
, " ,~ AI..le; '.:..' .1()1'.,.1 . ' , : i
:~'\j(;\_ l~~ ,~:
I !;) r.l'~':~TS:-;~~'r~:;.,j "T'~:(, :.":
l'~ ': ,: c} ':- ~~ l.! 1- :.... :~~:' \/ ~
Albemarle Bpard Of Supervisors
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA. 22901
Dear Sir,
As a satisfied customer, I would like Schuyler Enterprise
to be able to store and repair their equipment at the
Schuyler location at routes 602 and 800. By them being
a local carrier, we can get much better service than we
can get from out of town carriers.
I urge you to support this operation from a safety point
for the community of Schuyler.
Sincerely,
cf~Y(~
Louise Morris
Traffic Manager
PO Box 9050
Char1ottesvli!e, Vlrglrda 229069050
(8041974-5100
C::iCUSEr-m'JUSlIJ DISTRIBUTIOf\J EOU!P~1Ef\F
;'f=<ROvV HARTlIJ WiRING DEVICES
ARROW HARTiIJ COMPONENTS
DISTRj311T~:; T() nOAf.1D h\E;/l.:}~~RS
oN_.,_CJ:if.--1.L.----....-- / Cl
LEAGUE OF
WOMEN
R VOTERS
M OF CHARLOTTESVILLE &AL~EMARLE COUNTY
"~eptember 16\, . 1991
TO: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
FROM: League of Women Voters
RE: SP-91-21: Special use permit to locate a public garage
on 25.0 acres zoned RA (Schuyler Enterprises)
The League of Women Voters supports recommendations of the staff and the
Planning Commission to deny this request. We agree that the operation
of a facility for the maintenance of semi-trailers is incompatible with
rural areas and inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
We applaud the applicant for including environmental considerations in
the plans, and we certainly support jobs for Albemarle residents.
However, it is our opinion that Schuyler Enterprises constructed and
operated a one-company trucking facility (not covered by any logical
expansion of the term "public garage") and that such a facility should
be 1) located in an area designated for commercial or industrial use
and 2) accessed by major roads designed to accommodate tractor-
trailers. Such a facility does not belong in an area served by rural
roads such as #800 or 602.
We believe that the approval of this petition would set an unfortunate
precedent and make it even more difficult to turn down similar or other
non-conforming requests in this or other parts of the county.
The petition should be denied.
4~,9-/?-::Y ~
Citizens for Albemarle, I ne.
Box 3151 University Station
Charlottesville, Virginia 22903
statement to the Board of Supervisors, September 18, 1991
Re: SP-91-21 Schuyler Enterprises
Mr. Chairman and members of the go~,r(\'
It is precisely for situations like this that the county labored
to produce our Comprehensive Plan, and then translated its vision
and values into the Zoning Ordinance to protect the long-range
interests of the county as a whole.
We have here a request to establish a private garage that is
labeled "public" only by distorting common sense. The facility is
transparently inappropriate for the Rural Area where it is
proposed, and inconsistent with what we intend for our Rural Areas.
The issue seems pretty simple, complicated only by the fact that
the facility has already been in operation -- illegally.
The question is not whether the applicant is a pillar of the
community -- on this issue we defer to the testimonials you have
heard. The question is simply whether this truck repair yard
should be allowed on this parcel of land.
We should not be misled by arguments that the facility provides a
source of income for a few nearby residents. If we follow that
line of thinking, ~ could justify dotting all our rural areas with
industrial parks. t It is obviously important that the county
encourages opportu ities for employment where residents need jobs,
but this objective should be achieved in the context of overall
county planning.
Less %+.ivolous is the applicants' claim that the truck depot should
qe~Ilo~d to remain because its location on that site reduces the
~isk of a~~dents~r,rBut the evidence for this alleged advantage is
/ unpersuasi ve') , pattlicularly in view of the statement by the
f Assistant Resid~nt Engineer that "this request would generate more
j traffic than would,be allowed by right in the RA zoning."
(~~,
\ T~excellent sta,f.f,re:port examines the criteria by which a Special
\ Us Permit might b~/ justified, and concludes that this request
\ sold be denied.,'
\ //
\ citizens for/}.lhemarle agrees. ~ AA, _/
\ -?<7/1.u1N.~~~___ .~,:U- '/~,
\ //
~//-.,,--~._-. __I
~
-
,
Virtually
precedent.
every Special Use Permit that is
This case would set two precedents.
granted
sets
a
First, it would send a message that we're not really willing to
protect our Rural Areas by steering development into Growth Areas.
Second, it would suggest that the guardians of our county can be
persuaded to wink at serious zoning violations, and legitimize them
after the fact,
Please don't send these messages.
STAFF PERSON:
PL~~:ING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
SEPTEMBER 10, 1991
SEPTEMBER 18, 1991
Z7A-91-04 SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES
Origin: Request by Schuyler Enterprises.
Public Purpose to be Served: The proposed amendment would
provide clarification of the activities permitted as part of
a public garage.
History of ZTA-91-04: The applicant originally submitted a
request to add contractor's office and equipment storage
yard in the Rural Areas and to amend the definitions and add
supplementary regulations for the use. Staff was unable to
recommend approval of that request and on July 16th the
Planning Commission deferred action on ZTA-91-04 until
August 6. Staff prepared a revised ZTA after discussions
with the applicant and the County Attorney. The revised
report was prepared on the addition of truck terminal to the
Rural Areas and to provide for supplemental regulations.
Staff was unable to recommend approval of that proposal.
The applicant then requested deferral of ZTA-91-04 on August
6. Subsequent to that request the applicant has now changed
the requested ZTA-91-04 to amend public garage and has
submitted a revised definition.
APplicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to amend
3.0 Definitions as follows:
Public Garage: A building or portion thereof, other
than a private garage, which together with the adjacent
land area is designed or used for servicing or
repairing and temporary storage (not to exceed 48
hours) of motor driven vehicles.
Staff Comment:
History of Pub~ic Garages
The following is a brief history of the County's approach to
the issue of public garages:
1
In a special use permit review in 1978, staff stated
that (SP-78-55 Walter Johnson):
"the definition of public garage, has been
problematic in the past. This use appears only in
the A-1 zone, and staff opinion is that "renting,
selling, or storing motor vehicles" are uses
inappropriate to that zone. Therefore, staff
recommends repealer of said wording thus
restricting such use to the 'repairing, servicing,
and equipping' of motor vehicles."
In a November, 1986 Comprehensive Plan worksession
report staff stated that:
"Some uses included in the RA zone bear little or
no relationship to the statement of intent and
need not be permitted (based on other zoning
provisions) in the RA zone. These are basically
uses permitted by special use permit, such as
motels, restaurants, and public garages."
In 1989 the Board of Supervisors amended the definition
of public garage to delete the equipping, renting,
selling or storing of motor vehicles.
Staff has identified nine applications for public garage
since the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. Of these nine,
one was dismissed, four were denied, three were approved,
and one was withdrawn. No applications for public garage
have been approved since the amendment of the definition of
public garage in 1989. All public garages approved by the
Board and all recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission (an additional two requests) had conditions
limiting to four the number of vehicles awaiting repair, or
a condition stating no storage of vehicles.
It is clear from past approval of public garages that the
intent of the Board was to limit the amount of activity and
the visual impact that garages have on the Rural Areas. In
1989, reference to storage of vehicles was deleted from the
definition of public garage. Under the prior definition,
storage could occur independent of any repair activities.
Under' the current proposed language, storage can occur only
as an accessory use to the repair activities.
,
Purpose and Intent of the Rural Areas Zoning District
In general, the purpose and intent of the Rural Areas zoning
district reflects the Comprehensive Plan and is to encourage
and preserve agricultural and forestal activities and to
discourage development not related to bona fide agricultural
2
and forestal uses. This intent is reflected by the uses
permitted in the district. The provisions for commercial,
non-residential, non-agricultural/forestal uses are
primarily for uses supportive of agriculture/forestry (Farm
Winery, Sawmill) or supportive of a rural population
(Country Store, Public Garage).
Public Garage would remain supportive of a rural population
under the applicant's proposal. Staff has discussed this
amendment with the Zoning Administrator who has stated that
temporary storage of vehicles is currently permitted as
accessory to a public garage. This interpretation is based
in part on the possible need to store a vehicle for a
limited time while awaiting parts necessary to complete the
repair. Therefore, staff does not object to the addition of
temporary storage to the definition of public garage. Staff
is concerned about setting a time limit to define temporary
storage. This would remove any discretion on the part of
the Zoning Administrator. In the past, storage of vehicles
at public garages has been addressed by limiting to four the
number of vehicles awaiting repair or restricting storage.
This allows for a reasonable storage time and grants the
Zoning Administrator and garage operator flexibility.
Summary:
The applicant's proposal would clarify the uses permitted at
a public garage. Defining a time period for temporary
storage may create an enforcement problem for the Zoning
Administrator and does not provide for any discretion to
allow for unforeseen delays in repair of vehicles which may
result in storage for over 48 hours. Staff recommends that
the following language be aqded to the end of the
applicant's definition "whether or not for compensation".
This additional language further clarifies a pUblic garage
in the event that a facility is operated as not for profit
by a club or individual or is used by only a single user.
Staff recommends approval of ZTA-91-04 with following
language:
Public Garage: A building or portion thereof, other
than a private garage, which together with the adjacent
land area is designed or used for servicing or
repa~r~ng and temporary storage of motor driven
vehicles, whether or not for compensation.
3
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
SEPTEMBER 10; 1991
SEPTEMBER 18, 1991
SP-91-21 SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES
Petition: Schuyler Enterprises petitions the Board of
Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a Public
Garage [This permit is being processed with ZTA-91-04] on
25.0 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as
Tax Map 126, part of Parcel 31A (31F) is located on the
south side of the intersection of Route 800 and Route 602 in
the Scottsville Magisterial District. This site is not
within a designated growth area (Rural Area IV).
Character of the Area: This site is developed with a
recently constructed garage and a graveled storage/parking
area. The areas surrounding the site are wooded and no
dwellings are visible from the site. The garage is visible
from the state road.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to use the
existing site to store and repair equipment used by Schuyler
Trucking only. The applicant currently has similar
facilities in Schuyler (Nelson County). Maintenance would
include, but is not limited to, repairing or replacing
tires, brakes, lights and routine truck maintenance. Hours
of operation would be 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Saturday. No freight will be handled or stored on site. A
description of this request as well as a justification has
been provided by the applicant (Attachment C). (Staff notes
that the previous use of this site has been in violation of
the Zoning Ordinance and as of the preparation of this
report the Zoning Administrator is pursuing action pursuant
to the violations.)
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with Section 31.2.4.1 of the
Ordinance and recommends denial. This report will be based
on the assumption that ZTA-91-04 has been approved and that
the general policy issue of permitting storage in
conjunction with a public garage has been addressed.
Therefore, the remainder of this report will be site and use
specific.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
May 2, 1990 - Board of Supervisors approved SP-90-11
allowing eight small lots on Parcel 31A.
1
June 21, 1990 - Staff approved subdivision plat creating lot
currently under review.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan states on Page
203:
"All decisions concerning Rural Areas shall be made L...
the interest of the four major elements of the
Comprehensive Plan. The four major elements are: 1)
preservation of agriculture and forestal activities; 2)
water supply protection; 3) limited service delivery to
the Rural Area; and 4) conservation of natural, scenic,
and historic resources."
Based on information provided by the applicant, this use
will have, at best, only an indirect relationship with local
agricultural/forestal activities as the products trucked
will typically have origin and destination outside of the
County. (This relationship would be a direct one if the
applicant's primary service was the trucking of agricultural
commodities produced by or used in Albemarle County
agricultural activities.)
This site is not located within a watersupply watershed.
This site is extremely remote to the developed portions of
the County and the provisions of services, primarily police
and fire protection, may be limited due to the distances
involved. Other issues listed by the Comprehensive Plan
will be discussed later in this report.
It is the opinion of staff that this request is inconsistent
with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the
Rural Area and that this use would be more appropriate in a
designated growth area.
STAFF COMMENT: )
~ ~-
n the past, staff has recommended that publ~c garage uses
are more appropriate to designated growth areas of the
Comprehensive Plan than to random location in the Rural
Areas. In past reports for public garages, staff has stated
that commercial use of the property be evaluated in terms of
appropriateness to the Rural Areas. That is to say, a
determination should be made as to whether or not this
garage would provide service to the area otherwise not
conveniently available.
It is clear that this use will not provide the limited
support services for the Rural Areas that a typical public
garage would provide. This is due to the applicant's
proposal which would limit use of the garage to the repair
2
and maintenance of Schuyler Enterprise equipment only. If
the proposal were for a public garage open to the genr=al
public it is the opinion of staff that the use would then
duplicate garage services which are available 1.8 miles from
the site at the intersection of Route 6 and Route 630
(Dennis Brown, a non-conforming garage).
The remainder of this report addresses the following issues:
1. Safety of Routes 800 and 602 in Albemarle and Nelson
County.
2. Suitability of the Site for Development.
3. Consistency with Items Contained in Section 31.2.4.1 of
the Ordinance.
Safety of Route 800 and 602 in Albemarle and Nelson County
The applicant in Attachment C notes that this location will
remove traffic hazards on Route 800 in Albemarle and Nelson
Counties. The applicant currently performs the activities
proposed on this site in Nelson County, but requires
additional area to support the business. The applicant
states that by moving this operation to Albemarle County it
will reduce truck traffic coming from Route 6 on the Section
of Route 800 between this site and Nelson County. Staff has
obtained accident information from the Virginia Department
of Transportation for Routes 800 and 602 (Attachment D and
E). This information indicates that in the past three years
there has been one fatal accident and that this occurred on
Route 800. This accident occurred between the site
currently under review and Nelson County. Based on the
applicant's information, staff agrees that this request may
reduce the number of trucks using Route 800 between this
site and Nelson County. However, this site will not remove
the risk of accidents as some trucks may still go to the
Schuyler operation. This site will also involve the use of
a portion of Route 602 previously unused for daily truck
traffic. Staff does not support uses which will increase
truck traffic on secondary roads in the Rural Areas which
are not designed for such regular use. Staff also notes
other traffic associated with the operation may increase on
Route 800 due to the geographic separation of the
applicant's two locations.
Suitability of the Site for Development
Staff notes that a portion of this site is currently
developed and that no site plan has been approved. A
variety of soils are located on this site, most of which are
not suited to agriculture. However, the potential of tree
production on-site is moderate to high except where
3
restricted by slope. Therefore, this use will not
substantially restrict future use of the site for
agriculture, due to the presence of unsuitable agricultural
soils. The potential use of a portion of the site for
forestal activities will be lost due to this development.
It should be noted that available soils information is
general in nature. Large deposits of soa~stone are located
in this area and they may reduce tree productivity. For
construction purposes, the soils on the developed portion of
the site do not have severe limits. Other soils on site
have severe to moderate limits and seasonally high water
tables.
provisions of Section 31.2.4.1
o The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself
the right to issue all special use permits permitted
hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in
this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the
Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property,
All property adjacent to this site is wooded and parcel
31A is restricted by the conditions of SP-90-11 which
allows division into lots of 21 acres or greater only.
This use will result in a industrial use which may
result in the storage of unsightly material and noise
from the repair operation as well as increased traffic
volumes on Route 602. This may result in a detriment
to adjacent property. .
o that the character of the district will not be changes
thereby,
The establishment of this Public Garage which is
unrelated to local agriculture and/or forestry is
inconsistent with the character of the district due to
the scale and characteristics of the activity.
Approval of this permit may encourage additional
requests for commercial activities in this area.
o and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose
and intent of this ordinance,
This use will result in traffic volumes higher than
what would be normally expected from a single family
dwelling. Staff is unable to determine what the
average traffic count to the site will be, but based on
the applicant's information it would be a minimum of 24
vehicle trips per day with a majority being truck
traffic. This increase may be considered inconsistent
.4
with the intent of the ordinance as stated by Section
1.4.2 "To reduce or prevent cOh-Jestion in the public
streets." This use would not appear to be consistent
with the intent of the Ordinance as stated by Section
1.6 as this area is recommended as Rural Areas in the
Comprehensive Plan.
o with the uses permitted by right in the district,
As stated in the intent of the Rural Areas District
Section:
"It is intended that permitted development be
restricted to land which is 'of marginal utility
for agricultural/forestal purposes, provided that
_.such development be carried out in a manner which
is compatible with other purposes of this
district."
As has been stated earlier this land is of marginal
uti~ity for agriculture. The by-right uses of the
Rural Areas District are limited. It does not appear
that this use would directly interfere with existing
agricultural/forestal operations in the area. However,
due to the scale of this use and its industrial
character, this use is not in harmony with the intended
by-right uses of the district.
o with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of
this Ordinance,
Section 5.0 contains no regulations governing public
garages.
o and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
Due to the existing development on site it is unknown
if storage areas can be adequately screened. The
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors should be
aware that the site was developed without site plan
approval and staff is unable to verify that all
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance have been met. This
site is served by private septic system and has
obtained Health Department approval. Water service to
the site is by the Nelson County pUblic water
system. Safety issues regarding public roads have been
previously addressed. Waste materials such as parts
will be placed in dumpsters and removed from the site.
Waste 'oil will be collected and used to heat the
structure. Other waste fluids will be stored in
barrels and then removed from the site. During Site
Review, staff will take measures to e~sure adequate
containment and disposal methods for all waste.
5
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
staff notes that a number of letters have been received in
support of this request (Attachment F) and opposing this
request (Attachment G).
In general, this use re~~esents the introduction of a use
which is inconsistent with the general character of the area
and is not supportive of local agriculture/forestry or the
existing rural population.
Staff has identified the following factors which are
favorable to this request:
1. The land is of marginal utility for agriculture.
2. Use may reduce truck traffic on a portion of Route 800
which is narrow and winding.
Staff has identified the following factors which are
unfavorable to this request:
'1. Inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan due to
incompatibility with the Rural Areas.
2. Lack of support of the Rural Area population or
relationship with local agriculture/forestry.
3. Possibility for an increase in total traffic volumes of
Route 800 due to the geographical separation of the
operations for Schuyler Enterprises.
4. A use of this nature {industrial characteristics) is a
potential detriment to adjacent properties.
5. A use of this nature (industrial characteristics) will
change the existing rural character of the area.
6. Use appears to be inconsistent with the purpose and
intent of the ordinance due to increased traffic and
inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Due to existing site conditions, ensuring compliance
with the Zoning Ordinance may be difficult.
It is the opinion of staff that there are significant
negative factors that make this use inappropriate in this
location. Therefore, staff recommends denial of SP-91-12.
Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve this
request, staff recommends the following conditions of
approval:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Planning Commission approval of site plan. Use shall
not commence until final site plan approval has been
obtained;
6
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday thro~g~ Saturday;
3. No outside storage of parts including junk parts.
Refuse awaiting disposal shall be stored in appropriate
containers;
4. No freight shall be handled or stored on-site;
5. All work shall be conducted within the garage;
6. Repair work and storage shall be limited to equipment
owned or operated by Schuyler Enterprises.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Applicant's Description
D Virginia Department of Transportation Comments
E - Accident Data
F - Letters in Support of this Request
G - Letters in opposition to this Request
7
("l
.~\~
\ ~ \
'\ HeardJ
J(~
\
[
)
)~
IATTACHMENT AI
-f"
-
't-
II
BOAl
MOUNTAIN
~8'~
.f 0~
/:...:. '._ .~t.f
,
.../
o
c-~
~
c.
\
\
..7~
4
ESMONT & PORTER AREAS
~OUA TIMES MAP SCAlf
~
~
... -.:;....--:;:
(
e
\.\
c
K
\
N
'-
f
SP-91-21
~
SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES __ .
125
, Y I \ <Z K \ /'" I \ '.r. I
IATTACHMENT BI
127
(
I ASSESSED IN
i NELSON
. .~7--~-
"-
---
/ !
/
----'"
/......
I
/ 13A
, '
I ~
, , ,
L/ - .
j
SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES
Schuyler Enterprise, Inr
A.A. Clark
P.O. Box 149
Schuyler, Virginia 22969
IATTACHMENT cl
May 7, 1991
Ms. Amelia M. Patterson, Zoning Administrator
County of Albemarle Zoning Department
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
RE: NEW S.P. 10.2.2 (U4)
IIContractor's Office and Equipment Storage Yardll
Dear Ms. Patterson:
This permit will cover approximately two (2) acres of a twenty-five (25) acre
plat of land located at intersection of State Routes 800 and 602, tax map 126,
Parcel 31A (part). Per map attached, this land has a building located in the
center of this plat on Route 602, 120' from highway, with a commercial
entrance approved by the State Highway Department.
Usage:
This building will be used as a rp.pair facility to repair equipment for
Schuyler Enterprise only. There will be no freight handled in or out of
this building or property. No work performed for anyone other than Schuyler
Enterprise, Incorporated. Records will be maintained for DOT; Department
of Transportation.
General Information:
Number of Employees - Three (3) or four (4) at a given time. Number of
Trucks - Six (6) to eight (8) at a given time. Type of work performed -
checking tires, lights, brakes and all safety equipment. Fix required
equipment.
Safety:
This location will increase the safety a great amount for the community of
Schuyler, Virginia located on Route 800 in Nelson County. At present, our
trucks have to travel on Route 800 approximately two (2) miles beyond this
building, located on Route 602. This two extra miles of Route 800, which
will be eliminated, is very curved and dangerous road.
Thank you in advance for considering this new supplementary regulations -
Contractor's Office and Equipment Storage Yard.
Sincerely yours,
James E. Clark, Jr.
. Transportation Director
/bbc
cc: Reve,rend Peter Way
i;
I
//'. ,
;,../ f7..,
/
Ladies & Gentleman of the Planning Commission:
!A~ACHMENT Cllpage 21
My name is James E. Clark, Jr. and I represent Schuyler Enterprises. I have
liv~d or worked in Albemarle County for 35 years and I am 'here tonight
requesting your approval of a Special Use Permit allowing Schuyler Enterprises
to repair our equipment plus park our tractors, sometimes with trailers, on a
Ii acre of a 25 acre parcel zoned RA. The ZTA will legalize an already
existing situation throughout the county:
a. Log and truck operations.
b. Earth moving equipment.
I would like to present Schuyler Enterprises initial actions in hopes to prove
that we were not attempting to deceive the County of Albemarle with this
endeavor.
1) On June 22, 1990, cash deposits of $2,500 was issued to the' Virginia
Department of Transportation. This deposit was for a commercial entrance and
approved by Mr. Tucker, Assistant Resident Engineer, on November 7, 1990.
2) Building Permit No. FB90-32 was issued July 11, 1990.
3) On September 7, 1990, Schuyler Enterprises applied for an Erosion Control
permit with Ms. Roberta Shaw, Engineer Department of Albemarle County, and site
plans were prepared and presented by Schuyler Enterprises' surveyor, Mr. Rodney
L. Lum. Permit was issued September 25, 1990.
4) February 26, 1991, Schuyler Enterprises received certified letter
#P701077243 from Mr. Jesse R. Hurt, Director of Inspections. This letter
stated that Schuyler Enterprises was in violation of the Virginia State
Building Code. At the point of inception of this letter, the site was strictly
being utilized as a combination of a farm, parking lot and repairing of some
trucks. There were approximately 2 trailers with. loads of fertilizer, a
posthole digger, a bushhog, tractor and various equipment. Schuyler
Enterprises was not cognizant that these items were not allowed.
jATTACHMENT cllpage 31
The certified letter also stated Schuyler Enterprises must obtain a building,
electrical, plumbing and mechanical pennit within 10 days. The day after
receipt of this letter, I spoke with Mr. David Cook about this matter and
proceeded to the Building Pennit Department applying for said pennits. I also
went to the Health Department and applied for a Sewerage Disposal Pennit. Mr.
John Crow with the Health Department issued Permit No. SD-91-063.
It was my finn opinion that with the above mentioned actions taken, Schuyler
Enterprises wan no longer in any violation of the Building Code.
5. May 7, 1991, I met with Ms. Amelia Patterson and Mr. Bill Fritz and was
advised to obtain a Contractor's Office and Equipment Storage Yard Special Use
Pennit.
6. June 14, 1991, Mr. David Cook advised Schuyler Enterprises to remove
trailers and to stop production on said site or Schuyler Enterprises would
receive a court order to do so. June 15, 1991, all equipment was removed and
production stopped at said site which was witnessed by a personal appearance on
June 17 and 18, 1991 by Ms. Patterson and Mr. Cook. No work has been perfonned
since June 15, 1991.
June 24, 1991, 9 summons were issued and delivered to my residence at midnight
on June 25, 1991. These summons stated Schuyler Enterprises was in violation
of operating in a rural area; 3 summons were for February 12, 1991, 3 summons
were for March 20,1991 and 3 summons were for June 13, 1991 violations.
From the beginning, we have tried to cooperate with county officials. We have
never knowingly tried to deceive the county about what we were doing. We
truthfully thought that a barn in which we would work on only our own equipment
was perfectly legal. The moment we were informed that there were in fact some
problems, we immediately met with county officials and obtained the pennits
they requested.
7. Schuyler Enterprises petitions the Board of Supervisors to issue a Special
Use Permit for a Contractors Office and Equipment Storage Yard approximately 1
mile from any other building, 1/10 mile from Route 800 on Route 602. This area
would be utilized explicitly to work and store equipment. The work at this
site would take place between 8 a.m.-5 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Page 2
I"ATTACHMENT C\ ~age ~
Schuyler Enterprises would like to reference that most of the area is
undeveloped, although it is zoned for rural. There would be no 48' trailers
traveling Route 800 from Route 602 to Schuyler, approximately Ii miles. Koute
602 is 21 wider than Route 800 and the building site is only 1/10 mile onto
Route 602. Route 602 is a straight and hard surfaced road to said site.
As a sideline, on Page 3 of objections, Schuyler Enterprises is indicated in
the involvement of a traffic fatality on Route 800. For the record, Schuyler
Enterprises was in no way involved in this fatality. We are very proud of our
driving safety performance and feel this statement is very detrimental to
Schuyler Enterprises.
Furthermore, Schuyl er Enterpri ses woul d 1 i ke, to express the potenti a 1 growth
development in said area. This area is well known to be one of the poorest
locations per populous in the central Virginia region. Schuyler Enterprises
not only provides employment for many peoples in this area, but also by
relocating its business in the Albemarle County region, provides revenue for
the County. Schuyler Enterprises is a clean, environmentally sound, operation.
Schuyler Enterprises, which includes myself as an Albemarle County residence,
truly trusts that this is the very type of Industry the County of Albemarle
would seek.
Page 3
[ATTACHMENT CllPage 5\
SUMMARY OF PAGE 6
Items 3-7: Factors Unfavorable
3. Schuyler Enterprises feels this statement is a fallacy. Route 800 goes all
the way to Schuyler, however, trailers would be parked at the Route 800/Route
602 site with drivers possibly taking tractors home. The few that live toward
Schuyler would be the only drivers with a need to drive Route 800, which I may
add they have been doing for years with their trailers attached. The new site
would eliminate said trailers trave]ing through the residential and populous
portions of Route 800. With the maintenance and storage at the Route 800/Route
602 site, Schuyler Enterprises personally believes the total volume on Route
800 through to Schuyler would actually decrease by at least 80%. Route 800 get
curvy and more residential after the proposed new site. This is very hazardous
in poor weather conditions such as snow and ice, especially with a trailer
hitched. The new site would eliminate these safety hazards.
4. Use of thi s property located at ROl,!te aDO/Route 602 as a. potenti a 1
detriment to adjacent properties is erroneous. As stated earlier, the closest
building is 1- miles from this site. In addition, the 25 acres which we are
discussing is in a "Vii shape and on the East, South, and West sides adjacent to
this property are soapstone quarries owned by the The New Alberene" Stone
Company. There is no possible way this land could be utilized for agricultural
purposes. Only 1; acres of the 25 acre parcel is being requested for the
Special Use Permit... Schuyler Enterprises is not producing or manufacturing
any products, nor are we digging into the soils for products. Schuyler
Enterprises is a clean, environmentally detriment-free enterprise.
5. Use of this site as changing the existing rural
not possibly be imposed by Schuyler Enterprises.
Company has preempted this argument.
character of the area could
The New Alberene Stone
I realize your concern that this operation might set a precedent throughout the
county, but we feel our situation in unique by the fact that we are bordered on
three sides by a commercial quarry operation.
Page 4
]ATTACHMENT CllPage 61
6. Traffic has' always been present with tractor trailers using Route 800
straight through to Schuyler. As stated before, with this new site, traffic
. .
would actually be reduced from the new site throuc~ to Schuyler. As stated
before, with this new site, traffic would actually be reduced from the new site
through to Schuyler ,with the exception of the few drivers who live in the
Schuyler area driving only their tractors home.
7. Due to the existing conditions, compliance with ZTA-91-04 could be possible
by planting trees, such as white pines, so that visibility would be obstructed
from any neighbors. It is not Schuyler Enterprises intent to run a IIgaragell.
Our only intent is to repair and work on Schuyler Enterprises. trucks and
equipment. The building is also not intended to be used for storage. Schuyler
Enterprises agrees to comply with ZTA-91-04.
In addition, all parts and waste will be recycled or disposed of properly.
A special furnace approved by the Environmental Protection Agency has been
purchased for incinerating motor oil, transmission and engine grease. A large
dumpster will be installed.to recycle used parts. Used tires will be hauled
off to be utilized in other industrial purposes. The noise level is minimal.
The trucks will be worked on inside the garage, which is well insulated.
Page 5
) IATTACHMENT 0\
Page 2
June 10, 1991
Mr. Ronald S. Keeler
Special Use Permits & Rezonings
4. SP-91-21 Schuyler Enterprises, Route 602 - This section of Route 602 is
currently tolerable. This request would generate more traffic than would be allowed
by right in the RA zoning. Also, this request would have larger vehicles, such as
tractor trailers associated with it. A permit for a commercial entrance was issued
last year for the access to this property on Route 602 and attached is a copy. Also
attached is a copy of the accident data for a three-year period on Route 800 from
Route 6 to the Nelson County Line. There were no accidents recorded on Route 602
from Route 800 to Route 613 during this same time period. There are no statistics
available for secondary roads to compare Route 800 accident data to a state-wide
average. From past experience, the Department feels that this accident rate is
relatively low since the average daily traffic on Route 800 is 1,382 VPD.
5. SP-91-23 Charlottesville Quality Cable Corporation, Route 53 - The existing
access off of Route 53 that serves Carter's Mountain is adequate.
6. SP-91-24 Jean Baum, Route 20 N. - This request for a commercial stable could
result in a traffic generation of 30 to 50 VPD based on information provided by the
applicant for the number of students and employees. There is an existing gravel
entrance that serves this property. The Department recommends that the access be
upgraded to a paved commercial entrance with a minimum of 550 feet of sight distance
in each direction. To obtain adequate sight distance to the north would require the
removal and/or cutting of trees and vegetation in that direction.
Sincerely,
~.Ct.~
J. A. Echols
Ass't. Resident Engineer
JAE/ldw
Attachments
. . ~ 't? Ie ~
- ~ "
~ 0
IATTACHMEtx, . \) ~ c::
cq \) \) \) ~
t"I (")
1- 0
I c::
\,J - ~ ~ t> z
C> ~
, , -<
~ "- ~ , '='
t-.a >
I , ~ . ~ ~ ~
.c t ~
..0 ~ t"I
- C ~ ~
...a \D
- - ~ - -- \)~ ~ ~~ ~
~\) ~ ~~ ~ ::: ~
r.'\ ~ ~ ~
\' ~ c.\ ~ ~ t"I l)
li\ ~ "-
XI i') 0 ~
~ ~
I
t t ~ ~ \) ::u
0
'" tl\ ~ '" i' C'Hn c:
OC: ~
"'" "1 --< "'i ~ Z::U t"I
'='
I I - ~
I ~ ~ '" < 0
- --
- - t"I
=
, ..
i ~ ~
I V\ ~ ~ I l'
I ~ ~
I """ \) I
I ~ ~ ~ I z
]) 1) ;b ):) I '" t"I
~ '" c::
- i:\ I - . ~ <
" r- ~ :::0 ~ t"I
~ ~ C\ '"
~
'"'\ -1
;
~ Ai () ~ ~ a:
r I' t"I
b - >
. '" () ~
- '" ~
."\ ~ c :4 =
" ~ t"I
"'. ""S
, '"
0
~ l;J~ ~~ '\J"'b ,>"'0 ~~
~ ~~ ])~ en
~ :l) 0 ~~ ~~ t"I ~~
~ '"t) 3~ < ~
t"I
b '" ~t\ :t>0\ :i>~ '"
...... G\ b -<.~ " ~ "iD ,... ~
d\"'" "'l"'" G\-t ~ ~j ~
~ ,... """t ~ :;;;
~~~ ...... ~ 3 ~ ~~ t : ~
~ 0 - 0
~~ - -t ~ "'b ~~
~ 0 2b 0
~\. ~ 'b ~ ~ '" () '"
~~~ .... - () ~ ""S r~
o ~ ~ ~ Cb C1'\ >
""4" " d I' ~ (") 0
~ ~~
0 ~ C' r ~ 0
~!:! ~ ct, '" ~~
~C) Q ::: ~ ~
,.... ()
0 t ~ ~
" ~ c:\ w ..
OG\ I'~ "'6\ (/\6\ > - I)
~G\ ~'ib t"" ~ ;-.
~7\) c.'(V 1rJ~ ~'N ,... ~
C)
~~ i'>1) ~l) ~b .1)~ z ~
"'~ <"t) - ~ - ~ :I:
n-, " ~II\ t"I
0', G'; 1'\0\ ra" "\t\ z ~
~
\ 'l: ':t ... ~
. "" "
\:::J
b ~ ~ ~ ~
.
. c.t U\ - C!~
. .(: 0 ~ ~ ~ enC""
.... ~t"I /'
~
..
....
~
:;;;
;:;
~
c.
/ rhTTACHMENT F, Page 11
June 21,1991
To Whom It May Concern:
Being a land owner near Schuyler Enterprises, Incorporated located at
Routes 602 and 800, I have no objections of Schuyler Enterprises
locating a contractor's office and storage area on this parcel of land.
Sincerely,
/U~~
.~
(
IATTACHMENT FI ~age ~
June 21,1991
To Whom It May Concern:
Being a land owner near Schuyler Enterprises, Incorporated located at
Routes 602 and 800, I have no objections of Schuyler Enterprises
locating a contractor's office and storage area on this parcel of land.
Sincerely,
4~f46
,ATTACHMENT F, Page 31
June 21,1991
To Whom It May Concern:
Being a land owner near Schuyler Enterprises, Incorporated located at
Routes 602 and 800, I have no objections of Schuyler Enterprises
locating a contractor's office and storage area on this parcel of land.
Sincerely,
/J /) /"'J;/ l' ~
1J114 ' ~l1//t/ !-<' uelttz..z.l/
i -
.~
) {ATTACHMENT F, Page 41
June 21,1991
To Whom It May Concern:
Being a land owner near Schuyler Enterprises, Incorporated located at
Routes 602 and 800, I have no objections of Schuyler Enterprises
locating a contractor's office and storage area on this parcel of land.
Sincerely,
~v0- '~CL(V--)
"I
,~
IATTACHMENT ~ Page 5\
June 21,1991
To Whom It May Concern:
Being a land owner near Schuyler Enterprises, Incorporated located at
Routes 602 and 800, I have no objections of Schuyler Enterprises
locating a contractor's'office and storage area on this parcel of land.
Sincerely,
~.
~.
.~~
,
~CL-~~
. There have been 49 additional
letters of support received.
"
I ATTACHMENT F;Page 61
DWIGHT RALPH MAYS, M.DIV.
-"
MINISTER
INDUSTRIAL CHAPLAIN
SCHUYLER~ VIRGINIA 22969
ROUTE 1 ' Box 67
804'831-2373
June 25, 1991
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
County of Albemarle
Commonwealth of Virginia
The purpose of this letter is to offer support
on behalf of SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES and Mr. ,Albert
Clark, that his new business location produces a
minimal environmental impact on the community,
and that Mr. Clark has acted in good faith to in-
sure that his property and facility comply with
accepted standards for health, safety and main-
tenance. In fact, Mr. Clark has added some
landscaping features to his grounds that make it
especially attractive beyond its use.
I supervise a volunteer group of youth and adult
sponsors in a Virginia Adopt-A-Highway project
that maintains the section of SiR 602 that in-
cludes the roadway beside SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES
as well as the portion of SiR 800 in Albemarle
County. From an environmental point of view as
we have cleaned these roadways, SiR 800 has re-
quired far more maintenance than SiR 602, in part
because Mr. Clark has voluntarily participated
in helping us to do our job better, by keeping
his property alongside the roadway clean and free
of debris, even during construction phases.
I trust this letter of support may be helpful in
giving SCHUYLER ENTERPRISES and Mr. Albert Clark
every consideration in the operation of his busi-
ness for the benefit of all citizens of Schuyler.
Unit
Cooper Industries
Cooper Distribution Equipment" Division
P.O. Box 9050
Charlottesville, VA 22906-9050
IA.TTACHMENT F; Page 71
--
COOPER
July 26, 1991
To Whom It May Concern:
The purpose of this memo is to show support of Schuyler
Enterprise, Inc. in their attempt to build a facility to support
their business.
Schuyler Enterprise has pI."OV ided a much n~eded transportation
service to my company since 1987. 'Being a local firm they have
the ability to provide services not available from firms not
local to this area.
These comments and
" ) n~e2:,ce- _so s,a;;i}.y, t tthose of
/;?z::7/~7~
t>/ John F. Via
Manager/Distribution
views are those
the company.
of
the writer
and
not
JFV/mhm
Route 660
Earlysville, VA 22936
(804) 974-5100
r;"1
.TTACHMENT F, Page 81
Mr. Bill Fritz
Dept. of Planning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville,Va 22901
Dear Mr. Fritz;
We the undersign residents of the community of Schuyler, Va., wish to
express our desire for Schuyler Enterprise to be able to work on and
park its equipment on the following location. The property at route
602 and route 800, approx. 1/10 of a mile from route 800 on route 602
which Schuyler Enterprises is only using approx. 1~ acres of a 25 acre
parcel. The reason we feel will have dual assets to our community of
safty and helps keep finance in ~ur neighborhood.
Thank-you in advance for making this known to the Planning Commission,
and Board of Supervisors.
Signed:
1.)~
2. ),;
3. )
4. )
5. )
6. )
7. )
8. )
9. )
10. )
11. )
,-;" '-...". -- ! .I
-<": ./ I r./ =
J",\
,I ,A-. ,
, ,
i.... ,
'. ',I
....
, ~ f :
('
L L/ .\,
II~~
.,..,.-"
"_.,r
18.)
-,*, . < '.-
( lc::' ,-~-T
-.
,f'
/
. i
. ,,J--' ,
'y ,I"; i'l/I; ,
/'!
"-- ~ _--. ,l _ .. __ ~
// ~_.. .;....l ::: :-_;!-;~_ ./ ..1--./
/ \.
19.) (, .C,--- "
20.) ;/ I
... ....-- ..--
I
{ ~'_ JF i . L
....------
r
,. ~:'/4 .;" ,,' /:'
'.
-
!
\
" ('/.r-,&:
S( I, ' \. _......~~,..</
l-J" '
I .- -' -'.._
"
21. )
~.
"~,' /', /
/, _.,~. ,,,'
22.)
..<_f'"
'~
I
i
i I ;~. ......\..'\. \.:'.:':--=~ " '" \;; . '_
t"..l_, \"--:..,-''-~,,
/ -- ,.
'('
ff I /
, . ,i
/~D,U._~
'I. " ,~.
. '!--,
I ,
r<,c~ '-.f ;;-V'\(-'I~':
, . (""'--
~ I ":"
~j .A
, .-".
\"",,-" /" \j,
'--" ..'-/~,C-4
..I
,//~ ',/" " -;,./;,..:,(
23. )
I /
....
,-
/1
/
, \-
'7-'-'
/I-()~ i-rz--
.....t
, .
/
24. )
__ ~ '--1
, -
,
~ ~..A'..
.-; ~ ," -+""
\....~.. .: ",_ J
r<~i
25.)
1 "
~- <~ ,
./
,~
.
V'" .:'/ I
,/' / ~
/
1~ C.;( ,~",-\
'/~
/
26.)
--'<0-
....;..:._.'_.
J
I
~---
'(
I __"...
27.)
r'
/., J
//
. " ~~--"" ,'~ \.,
12.)
13. )
14.X
15. )
16.)
1 7 .) '.
.'.~>.: ':~. ,.:-,:/ ", ! \
/ ')'" '/~://-
,/ ..~ '" ,,' f I
....
.I.' ...
..-/
" ,-/
/'
) / <./ 1/'
C~t'/ ,;.r
.....,,' i
~"-
"I :, t J
" ,/.
.....
~,)
f'
J
/:
')
28.) -+
?- ,,'--
^
:-/... _:-, -
~. :._ ~t--'
",' -,....,.-~_t/1
.
,--
'~r ';".-
,\/~d/
/1 >- --1".':': '- '-
')
, ,....
<- '-:.- '-- ,(,.,.;.(:-<.:.-;
29.)
/.
; \
"
, .;'-","'7/ -/v. ,
(: c ..~-c t ,.-; ~ ___.
,
',...- ,--
~~~,
30. )
.. ) (' /'
-..J .. I ,-/' ;' i-r-r
./ ..- ....' '\
I .
... I, )1(..
/ . \
'-f "I'
.f\ '. tr l.-
31. )
. -, '-
~-
J /'
(1)
~
COOPER
INDUSTRIES
IATTACHMENT FPage 91
COOPER ELECTRICAL
DISTRIBUTION PRODUCTS
~~m:nwJr.~
AUG 27 1991 '
August 19,1991
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
ZONING DEPARTMENT
Amelia Patterson
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Va.
22901
Dear Ms. Patterson,
As a satisfied customer, I would like Schuyler Enterprise
to be able to store and repair their equipment at the
Schuyler location at routes 602 and 800. By them being
a local carrier, we can get much better service than we
can get from out of town carriers.
I urge you to support this operation from a safety point
for the community of Schuyler.
Sincerely,
o)~ '7V(OAAA-J
Louise Morris
Traffic Manager
Po. Box 9050
Ch.arlottesville. Virginia 22906-9050
(804) 974-5100
CROUSE-HINDS$ DISTRIBUTION EOUIPMENT
ARROW HART$ WIRING DEVICES
ARROW HART~ COMPONENTS
To: Mr Bill Fritz
From: Residents of community of Schuyler, Va
38.) ~~ &/~ \''f
:::: :~t=- ::::
41.) 1/J<_)ifAt. ,
42. ) 'l'll~'it;<.~ / .I-f CL, ''L~
43.) l 4~
"---rj .-' . \
44.) , fJ J ~r--l..( ,?}
.-....)
/.17 (/J \, c.~ ..,
45.) VI "--~/ <L~(L(;(' 72.)
46)~~-. /J ~ j/vf~73.)
47l2& ;fA ~A.<p /YJ'1 ~~ 74,. )
48.) i ~ ~Q*,,'fKUvtN"~"'-G
(--!- I ,1~ .... ~ "-
49.) B~ j..JU ( .TCc::u.....Q
. . ()
50.) ,(l~I~J ~~tL
51.) , 0. . '/}
52.) ~~(cC
37.)
56.
57.)
. 58.)
59. )
,~
,:): r t-
If /..-_
./. ~ , . .
:' . ~.' l. I
(1
" .........1
-:/ / -If; Ci .!..."
,I! / 11 " I r ..Li ,/>,!;..,
'" "-,,,-" /""'/ './....... .
,-' ./ /', ,~,." / ../J~. , ____.
60.) ,'-',;.' -c;?.~-:<< /,/'';' /.:;.-i.,
. - J'" 1 "
" I ".:-' - 1
..,;."'\ (~ ~, "11 /,1'
61 ).r;..\/ ,',;//-.. /./)~..~4
. ;/'_' -,,'-+JOlt..-- _--' _- _~~__, _-ji
62.)
63. ~
64. )
65.)
68.)
69.)
70. )
.f:. ~:c-c,.:::-_ {
f (
I
'i ,.
\'
~ \ /,,, '
, I ~
(:\ ,
, (
:-ffi-' [
\ '
\ (, I
\. '-", /,
,-
"-)
,\
,
, -\ II... I.,
"i ( ",
L
, .
:.~\ t. r....
/ ,,,, i "
., I
) f ( I',,',' ,
\.
\
\. C' \ ... ~
,
/ ? / /1
J,. .;
" ( . I"~/ /
. (:.'/:~_.~,~-t~_.;
/
) ,f
71. -.:..;-,rJ, -)'l""'.L,..-
,
75.)
76.)
77 .)
78.)
79.)
80. )
81.)
82.)
83. )
"". ......t.
/ ( ., 'f'C ,k .
'\ -
~
,'", ',1.,_ .. -~_..__ ___
, .
"--~{_. ...
"
;1 //
i 6 ) i ,,L,/
L,. ," i..
j/. C~ t'
~ -L:a:, / i\ n,~ /
~~ ./].~~
1:</ - ,~// " /~ /
'''d~'-/- - :;!, t..:..r... /j--.---:
...-..,-_. ~'l- )-.' \. .
,,'-
I
.J
0;>-.___ "
. ,-,<-.j ,/---
" .
, '
)
.~_..~,.
-.-"
,"
_.~ .,., --
. : f ~ ....
~,_ r
,";',1
--' '.,., .~
I .;
'~7-;-!~/
,
:;/ r:7f. i,.' 1..,.,. /
!
, ~t;~(,-. _I. L~-l-~--'~~
-<.
'. ;
..~
/
, .
,
_.,-~.
...... ~_ f'_'--/
I ~
84.)', 'l " "
--i
1 '-
, .
'-
,", '---
~-;-")
,..
85) !, -'
. .' 'fZ::.~ ~'? ~ _~-L~.._..f-/
r '_.' ..:--..
-(-~- .. -~-/-~,/
.---
~_ ;- . c::'-:=(~',\
,,.- ~ .or;
86.) ,/2 ( . ~
87.)
88. )
(?'\
1-
'~
r
J"_
.",,;: i--;
,; < '/~..' ,,__ .;:. -"0'"
"..'""-
C~, ( ,
....-..... j \ r....i "......1 r:-:
.j
~.-\ ,1 ?,i '\'.~ (, I
i
I
124) I i;, ,'-' i
/' ~,c<...'-- (j _ ::}':_'~-,__;a';<'L-G/ 125)/~~"'\ ", /
" '1 ./ ". .. '.' /.."
; j. .'i'-/ ,,// ," i.' Ii
I----r-:- . /'-~'~<....:{,./':.\:, . /::'.::.C:..-..J'/ 126) /-1-1.,'
. --/ V . 'J-) - 'c' '
,: <' /(',,--i...' ,y' / l,,!t.~tt-t'ti'-<, 127) ,-)_/~ 'l)) ..' __'
J ~~ C{~."
To: Mr Bill Fritz
From: Residents of community of Schuyler, Va
//~ .
8 9 .~.:..:t, ,
( ...____-.~-~.: f" ./
_of"
: 1',
117)
- f
90. ) \
; : i'"''
I IY
91. )-'/ '.' ./K.
\
1 ,"
118)
,
, I! j'
, . '" '"
~;
/-
'-
..., .
....-).~.
~J:J ,,-
92;) -;.r.:,,/ /'D <'(./i,~. \ 120)
,/,/',,/ . /~ 4 If+-! f&:..t'l/3
93',J// ~~:;;:&:::._~_ c:- ~k'-"l!r-/l. 121)
CJ;.) _:-::~ C,~,-/~:_':-~;-~C~~?_- ~'~ - 122)
95"")'-'<'\ '. ."""'--'. 123)
I . \ ". " '. ")
11 9')
-
96.
98. )
99.)
. ~
100) :_\., ", I(
,,:[/ I
--' /
101) ,ie, n
---'--'-
/, l .,)
........'
128)
~ ./('
i ; _ :-.:.. ~~.
/ "'-'Y~
-,1
" '-' -./,:
I
,'.;,1i
..
129)
130)
..; 131)
.-
." .J
I i
./ i 132)
102)
J
" \ ;,-,
~' -...\.....;;t-~~/~-.::-:J.-.~__:
":~~:;..::-._- - \
103)
0-7' -r-,
"",1'.. / /-1z..l
104)
i
, #.- ,/~'
/1 ,-~...
I' '/'..J" ~ ,'" ,.<-_",,/1
<11' ,>#.;</ ;, ~,
)'"{ n../ ,i. ,'/'''.,..1.....2 -{
105)
,.'
;.- ,
,
. '
I . fl',...f ,.L'\:
1" j jl
133)
134)
.1.,:;-,
106)
i . j
", ,- ; I'" ;,0-1
/ \.. '/ ' , 'l, ~
,
".) i'''' _..~ j
107)
" -
\~C
!'-}
\
, ,
~J
,
>-- ,,-,
135)
136)
',.,.' ......~-...
,< ;1...(/,__1
)
\".:~
<) !
;_.-' :~_>({. ~)i~___
(;/__ s.?~__'_.:_' .I'-_(~ ~..~"~"___
,137)
138)
110)(
'/ J' !
(- /'f-'~/
.,. ...... /. (. "1 ,~.
) ,-". ,
111)
139)
112)
140)
!
~
,1:./ 141)
113
-~ ,
114~L~
11;) I; - .. -~~ -. i
116) (h" -, . I-I t!fi' (,.t.t1 ( /t!
,-,,-,~ -- . 1
.
142)
143)
144)
{~,
-
," k,
~
~,( , .
, ,e
, 'c ,/_(> "
'.
~\l,-"_''''j"'''''l: (',..
--
, .
" ::::....r,. ,
~ /1 '
//~'~ I.
/.' ", ~l ; ~ {,.
"- ,- I { _.....' ,_".
-/(i~, ' i__>"
.',
1/'
/
"7l.
. J
- / / -1-,
"i..,.,.. ~'.) / /
:........./i '" }-,
./'2/"" /'.0(~/~-~
r~ ~
/,
f '
,. ,.',
"-: .
---.. /' /'
II .', f, // .'
-.,.-. -...
1/
,/,~
!~.,
.
---
To: Mr.. Bill Fritz
From~ Residents of
145.) 91
146.)
174.)
176. )
177. )
~
U;:1f~ ~. t:'9iJ
rJv1A~~ r/I ~
~ evlJh/l
~,~~~~
178.)
1 79. )
152.)
153. )
80. )
81.)
,_ IV:!..
183.)
184. )
185.)
186. )
187. )
188. )
189. )
190. J
191.)
166. 194. )
195.)
196. )
\ 169. ) 197.)
\
198. )
"1. ) 199. )
200. )
201.)
. .;,., ;J';':"';;';'$~'i.:.:,:
',,- "i'll", {i"~~";;' ".'" ,','
.' _ . .:",",:',:.-1 ~if~"'''-.':'~''.;:l.}: "-, " .-''' ,
/ i
J uliaJJ,st
Rt. 1, Box: 66
Esmont, Virginia 22937
)
~ .
. IATTACHMENT GI 'page 1]
PLANN1NG DtVISION
~ Inv, ./4
~~
~ .dv ~ cPcJ':<' tfi-u.d ,r#-C! ~
'-yn:kJA./ " ~ ~~
~dE~~ I!.d-v ~~~
./If''--a, . dv{l~h~ ~~/~, ~ J~
, ~r~~;Z:~~1o.
~~~~~" ~2
't~~~7'-~~~?
::J ~ ~ ,C;<-~~
~ {X/ ~I ~ /tI-~??t~~d~u/t~ ~
~~()& - ~.~-~
~ ~~~ " ~;;do
~~ ~
~~ ,'ft-vAw- r/
.~ .~ft~~J
~ ~y~ ~-t~~~~~
~". ;~~~-r::-M
~ . ~ ~. __'>IL_ -,r-/
~' ~~
~~" ~th-- ~~..
~ ol~ ~'Ui-f-v J~I- /C-~ ~ ~
/f/U::v ~ ativ ~~~~tv<-d /d.i.LI./Jvrt-
; ~ ~ ~ --LJ6-/'..#-0-V A-u ~
1 a~x-n.dJ ~f 'r
n. J.. /let/
'/ .
,
dd~~
.
t=:r/~
IATTACHMENT GllPage 21
2 Hel i':'5 Path
Barbour5ville, Virginia 22923
J"uly 5, 1991
Mr. Wayne Cilimberg
Director of Planning and Community Development
401 McIntyre Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 - 4596
I~U';~~
. !UL 8 1991
Dear Mr. Cilimberg,
PLANNING DIVISlON
This is il"l t~egat~d tel the t~equest to:, amerld the Z-;:,"riing
ordinance (by exception or otherwise) to permit
a large garage to operate commercially in a rural area.
We strongly oppose illegal operations being made legal
by changing the law, rather than adhering to the usage
permitted under the law. We are especially concerned the
usage of lands in rural areas and with maintaining the ideals
of the comprehensive plan.
~" s~:..et~E?IY, t)
~ ~
'~ ~
nthro~y
-P;tVcg-(!t~r ~~
Mat~gat~et B. Ray
cc. F. R. BI:lw i e
ID~r:;", t..........e-".- ---
i) \t. i f~\ t ~~'~. ~: -', 'c': ..,''':~ i'
~af. /!if: fhftl ~ ~:~~~\~91(~~IA~~~~N~~. Page 3
,--,--; r PLANNING DIVISION I .
, ) rx U/f7~:PL/ ~v It 11b ~ #1 jrutt trA .
j ~Md JI5~fft/;1rJ l!J ttr . Ih f!f /
vafllJi( ~ . ff 1m . o/tMt#l~; . ~911 ' (ftJ
wpj/)mt f I~/ Ji1) ;1 Ia ~ Vi [1/8 ~
2 rard i!1/1J:A ~#l / Jtltl il ih '1f: 'rl /~
/;(d/If ~ #J I/dtJdtl t/I1t1t.
.1}JdI /lIltJ1Kl /iI//l{IM' ftJdJ 11m /tI!
#11 ~1. lr /lift Z )d#t(~f!(/th #JJ( Md? ,
If) /(/JCl ./fl iA1 f/lJYFh / -p If/;d (ructs
~ ,.
1Ud cidt! Cj( ii {!wJ f[~ In kJ d4 rtl1J
~&i0!WL J /zd (HrJ #h 1I/i. /1114 if ~" ")I~1l
ju/z' . jJ I 1)11 (/tf'. ;q/t/l!ifJ ;tI8 I/Z f1t
/l , !1/11/ {~ ~ fl 1M! Ix fjlf4 ' v io JJw
ifllAI {;(PJ:V,~ lrkf 7Kl[J -i ~!g{- !{f IJv Ih 9hrf 1tt/!1
~
~~. it1j11lvt [r11tn~Ai(I/t/;/~ IW/J1,
/~ /5/1vd{i/lfJ1c ttizl /1;1In fP&/;;t(
Ji #uu ft/fl)ln Jd f/)~L rtit f;. dIl/f A0",W
{)~Ifi! #tiJ ipt ~ tftdi /aitl~
~u _ i flltt f1~)15i/!1a ~ r/Irl. rtJIIZf 11M
lis, . itJ/1I:' bKIf. Y/if fa ~ ria
lib r#1lJ1. . .
? /~ 9NltJ Ik, 1lIliJf!'1)@/;; 9J ..
!IrI !MJ I(ItfJ/(/uJt pJl( !J Izly ~ itrl!! (;J ;ef .
~ /J;cIYtI1f
r tr~<<Jflrt f f kJ dI!jlfttlilrtl
v ~aftlt / /
JI/w;Jr$wlJ !LfltItfI
Mr. Bill Fritz
Department of Planning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22901
I '\TTACHMENT G, Page 41
~!lwq
JUl 2 1991
PLANNING 01V1S10N
Friday, June Zf 1991
.... .... ."
Dear Mr. Fritz:
It has come to my attention that the Schuyler Enterprizes Truck Garage is an illegal
enterprise and is operating in violation of county ordinances. I understand that this
structure was put up illegally and that the owner is trying to obtain approval after the
fact. If approval is given in these circumstances I feel that this action will serve as an
example and be repeated by others who wish to get around country ordinances, making
it very difficult to maintain the quality of rural life in Albemarle County. I understand
that the disposition of this Truck Garage will soon be up for review by the Board of
Supervisors. I would like to urge you and them to support denial of the request for
approval of this structure.
Sincerely yours,
rxfnlL'- 'A. l20 M'-<-~
Lillian A. Robertson
,ATTACHMENT G, Page 51
May 3, 1991
Ms. Amelia Patterson
Zoning Administrator
Department of Zoning
41 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Ms. Patterson,
I am writing to you concerning the large, blue parking garage for trucks which
recently appeared in the Schuyler /Howardsville area where I reside. In discussing
this situation with a neighbor, I was advised that you folks at the Department of
Planning are the ones who need to be contacted.
In all respect, I do not understand how an enormous truck garage could have
gone up this area when there are supposedly very strict ordinances preventing such
buildings in rural Albemarle County. This building is unenvironmental in every
way and counter to the rural setting of our neighborhood.
I understand that a permit has yet to be issued to the company who put this
building up. As a resident of this community, I must say that I do not support a
parking garage for Mack trucks being situated on Route 602. These people have also
trashed out the road in the surrounding area, and are not making any effort to clean
it up, which only leads me to believe that they will be irresponsible neighbors,'
(regardless of whether or not a "green screen" is put up).
I am in the hopes that you will give these points your serious consideration
in determining whether or not the truck garage stays or goes. Thank you very much
for your time.
"
Steve Jarp.es :
Howardsville ReSident", fJ.~' ,. ~" l1\l.Tl .,'
" ~t~..'":, ~ Hi ~;j!,. ~wn"
.' ~~ '""'i z.r? ~1 J~ ~ .
" _,.pi } ;;"l'T.I
, ~.~
~
. MAY 8 1991
cc: Mr. Ron Ke'eler, Chief of Planning
ALBEMARLE CO'lTr-nv
.zON1NG DEPARTMENT
'~7~
, 1b:hof~
! ~l t--(cLJy-JJ,
i C\J\\\~\ \JA ~qOl
i '~TTACHMENT G, Page 61
, i
~,r\ ~~j1WfJIt @
}"a '\;"" ~- ,
~'~ 1'l"f\.;~\,gbLi ~ ID
''ll ."."", '
~_.~ '..'
i.' ~
MAY 29 1991
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
ZONING DEPARTMENT
~~.~~
I. ~W(i~J +0 t 40 \)(0- ~ -+0 '3kJ-
~ ~ ~cd;E7V6 of ~ lC4! ~ ~ccL
~1r. 'tw:J- \M:6 f~ ~\. e.c~ (002-.
V\roX" ~ '2(f) ~"l \<<1 4\~k ~~.
I. ~€- \e.o.x~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~{. C\~, lS
'(\J~ ~ es-h~~ ) U ~J ~
\')v'\..~ ~-h-uckx-e....l SUrf~ ~ \WJL ~o..; <US
0w0.. cJ.; ~o.ikJ. ~ wW~ ~ ~ J. /5 cJsQ
I \)V\Sc.L~. ~ (0.02 ~ 0--- V\p..x"fe.Y, ;llO-Mll- ~
'food. 'n...a... ~ ~ ~ IWa +ro.cb-
. +r~ \<us up o.vJ. ~ 'ltus fco.cl \ ":l Q.v\. !2AJe,( - I
Ii iv'\.C{eo.si~ ~ '-\0 ~.~ \oc.J Ci-h~'S,
. I~ oP~ Q).~\ L0~ "Jse ~5 ~ 11 u
. I 0 ..----J~
rj .' I
(... P\eo..se- do ~. \"':-. ~ ~ to dose.- i
l'i'tNs ~Cu<<L'X'- ~ . ~ +rucks.~ !
~kcs (~d. lk~~. I I I ^ I . 1
- -. -- .
, , IATTACHMENT G, pag~ 71 .
. .
-'
-- ---
f)e~q /7&. fd-t~~.--'-' ----- ---
c!1~ r M4-~ /;..eUl. (!.d.1LU(
~ /If a~ cJI<<1 o/d<- ftJ~
. ~ t/lLLL "'- +w-{L ~ it
1 ~ 0;2& ~ [~+.~
tOM Yo ~ruf ~ c~
~Ci;J.1~ I-~ fk c4.
Z4JCJi~ee. IL ..d~ b-~, "
F:fuf AI ~ !wM..~ ~~y
-!o /}1U i-v ~(fd 1 all! ~
o-tv& vr~ v.. /e~ ~
cmf-L-/t4 Mr (7. f-I~ -7-~'
~~a~A--oje~ ~.
~. ~ tUL h- firud
~'
.. --------
__On' _~____
~ oV:6 ?<- /l~ ~-a)-
~ (~JC) t'J ~tud~
u ~. tJA~ t'vtL ~ [,~
~~#_ Ikc~
~p ./&jf ~~ /~~ , ~
M ~d; -t1?J ~r r ~
hd ~dt?~. -?Low 1Lr:C
~i~~lcyl,(~d~ .
:tJ ~::!]; ;::::- ~.
~~-
z} ~~ ~ ~ jJt:: ~.
.~.fr'- ~ r/h-t ~ ~
f/ r/t~ 'JULJ ~ 5'~- .
r ~ u.'1vLG~ 4.,f- o,)/~.
~'
/t~ ~u~ A- ~ ~ tH~C(
tjj~~ h41-1;;'J ~ fi T-tt ~ ~
/t~ t<-~l {/>>L~ F~'
<)10 ~ ~4 "~rf
dtu /zr ~/}I M~ ~ f4.--
~tll~~ r ~
t2-1/~rl-v'- -
~~#
-/k"" 7- 1
. ~ir' "
t2- /uuJ ~
~'
D
Mr. Bill Fritz
Department of Planning
401 McIntire Road.
Charlottesville, VA 22901
. .
,)ATTACHMENTG, Page 81
~~" ~"-'l\, '~~!7''';:;'';:~'\)'~-:;~T7?~. ~~
,. ,~ I ~"~ ." '"
r:7'< 'Qp.t.f, ~:~~!_~~ l'.
. ,1''<) .A"~""'"
rv1\ ..... :-,
JUN 10 1991
PLANNING D1V\SlON
June 2, 1991
Dear Mr. Fritz,
While passing through the Scottsville area this weekend, I came
across a sight which caused me great concern: a parking lot with
commercial trucks and cabs, and a large garage-like structure to house
them. Upon inquiring into this situation further, I was informed that
this outfit is owned by a company called "Schuyler Enterprises" and is
in direct violation of a county zoning ordinance--actually operating
illegally. Of greater concern is the news that the man in charge of this
operation is attempting to change the zoning ordinance which would
then allow for these kinds of structures to go up in other rural settings
throughout Albemarle County.
Speaking for myself and my family who, live in another part of
the county, I must say that I am absolutely opposed to an ordinance
being passed which would allow for this, and moreover, I do not
understand why this operation has yet to be closed down. As for re-
arranging the zoning ordinance, I can only hope that no such change
will be allowed to occur in the laws which protect the rural districts of
Albemarle County.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
1.JrH~.~
PeterW. Heymann, M.D.
(OJ ;qq(
I~TTACHMENT G, Page 91 I
, I~ I
/ . , 'p'f:<:':' '" > . . I
,~~L;'m:. ·
PLANNING DIVISION,
~'
/ (J. /I h I W ,/1 ",- -hI ~.. t ."",
fJ,UUA.-0 1/1A.; -/ Yl ro-
~ OM :lvi'Uf(J ti ~~
rwr ~M?vJ c-1 ,ctJ--Q ~
ACd~ uo-ti-J. ~ fyudt-
cter u:1 Vv-1 ~ fad 0 /.JtvJ
S~~.~~ ~g
I r;b; ~~ r(JJu to
il ~ ~.Y ~L~(dA'7~ ~
I, ~ ~ &'Uctv ~
II /'-o~ ~, U- '
I
I
I
0- Ctvt CWrJ ~~tH~
I
I
I
I
I
!
i
I
!
,- }ACHMENT G, Page 101
17 June 1991
Harry Wilkerson
165 Walnut Lane
Charlottesville. VA 22901
D ear Mr. Wilkerson:
It has come to my attention th~t you are a member of the Albemarle
Planning Commission and are going to be dealing with a very serious matter
that I feel. if allowed, will have serious negative effects on the county as a
whole, not to mention on the immediate area in question.
I am a HowardsvillejSchuyler resident in Albemarle County and recently
I have been witness to an absurd attempt by one of my neighbors to amend an
existing ordinance to fit his desires. My neighbor is a Mr. Clark who has
illegally built a truck garage on Route 602 near Route 800 in Schuyler. Not
only did he lie to the Zoning Department to get his "barn" built, but he is now
trying to get the ordinance which prohibits this kind of business in
agricultural settings changed to allow his business to operate. If this
amendment is approved, these structures could start appearing an)where
throughout the county in the rural settings, without regard for the
environment or the safety of the citizens.
I hope you and the other members of the Planning Commission see the
seriousness of what Mr. Clark is trying to do and will do all that you can to see
that this amendment is defeated and that this kind of disregard for the law
and the county ordinances is stopped.
Thank you for your attention.
A Concerned Neighbor
. .
~ ,\TTACHMENT GI [Page 11]
9C(~ 199 I
~.
Bi II Ffj b-
"Dr of P[Cuttv0v:~
_ ~'iOt ~c..~{e w.
Ow-loUeso\lk, VA- ;&'101'
11>> ~1? ~11\\~.~,.~'1ll
ll~~ ~ I..~ " ~M
. f"/ 3 0 1991
PLANNING DIVISION
......... .
. -..." t
~~ax- ~f. Ri f-z . .
If- ~o.s ~ -lo ~~ qkJ- ~~ o.J~
res ~S( b-h -G, (( ~ ~ ~ b..t ~ l,.j-
--6 ctk ~ ~. O~0i;;e6 CM~ru~~ ~
4vDcl ~ re.~ - o.vf2 ~ i~~~-
6 V\. A\~ ~ Y\QCU ~(e>r
. r. ~ Wli ~'^'\ VY\.Cu5~ ~ L d.o 110:>+
1.0\~ <+VUs I'SSe€- WJ .' cde- 4 0.. ~~
9L;O-<<el bJw~ ~ ~ I U r ~~ VUG\ S'
~ ~f, O~~s \~ ~ ~ '-\'WL~siti
&r&iV\0-V'(Q.. ) If Off"eveJ. 1 ~6) ~ ~~ G ci-
0-- Oi~o.~'.c..r ~ ~ ltws \VY\..VV1Q~O-.\Ii O-reo. I b.d-.
~ ~ evd(~ G
. P\eo& ck QAlQfJ "i. i,^,- k ~ -0 ~
%s ~ .g.~ ~S'5i~\. Ii-iS iToJiOL
1 . --..
..-..-.--------.-- ----....----.......
r.1' _
~ ~ Cit;UvE of' ~ S . \e(II~Js~II€- ....
of- ~ o.x-& ~\ G.-wi (( . ~(. 00-4
\t\o..s yt.() ('.Gv\.c~,,\ G l<s VUljJ~~ O1lrw~ 4udu(~
~Q 6- ~ b\-t- ~~ cvJ) wM--w~~
pOJ(~s o~ 4wL 10M). '!ws 16vJ.. C).f' dis r€SF-c+
~ ~ S rJ;>> ~I ~ Gvw\(~ D.M.& ~
C~ ~V'O- ~ OKJ. sWQ k S~. >
)0 Y\J )d--- i-'\i. Uolk sd- 0-. ~ce..cbJ- ~ l0;ll
~~~.
~~~~r~~~s.> >
- A GMc~ Sc.~~ l6si~
'.
_ ,ATTACHMENT GI!Page 121
~.
-----:----.-----."...............-.-..-.-...;.------.---'---......-. < ,,'
,-
-
~~~
.,
. _AtTACHMENT GllPage 131
('J N~CflI .
K~~\er
C'^-'eJ. ~ Pl~"'.:\i ~{.., ~1'4<0"""''''+
"tOl ~C~{e..--W. .:J . ~r - - .
~o~u~l\e, vA ~qO( .
. PLANN\NG D\ViS\ON
- ,,, ..,,.;.'';;..~_. ...;.~..........-- ~ .~-~,...",'...... .... '- ....
~ ~. kooJe1
r OJIVLo... ~cbv~\\e..f S:-~\e..r Y~ick.d- ;'" A\~wk
~ ~ ~ ux;-\-i~~ +0 ~[cM'\. obwi ~ htwL -truc.L
~~ ~ w:6 Iowl~ S~~~'~~J h2cLr~. Ccnrvv;uf
~ ~Coo;z. ~ ~OO.
AW ~':J tc~ i~ ~su\l\E:. -Gr ~ 7f1>-(~
r u.:o..c;, sk,c...~ 10 ~ '-tL.us '1f&- ~ ~(e.. ~I~ i"\.
wW wc...s ~ 0... 9iJ\e:t, t.0oOc:kD CJ..;(eo...l\OM..~ skocL.
is ~~...~ ~ bl~ W~7 M 0f w~~ -
terr Srcioi use F;vv0--\-. -!-:: ~es{;9v\.. ~s fu~o('
:crre.. - b.D~ ~ ~ ~ e~ 4w-. ~ ~ ~M
r\Gs. \b~ of \~'(esfCM-S~~c\i~(e.~OJJ {&r- ~ ~c\UecD
'flJ(al s~~ \~ b~ m:>kss'::J o-cl WiJJ'. .
I IJ'ID\&v- 40 (e0f1 ~ S;W~i~.Q;~ .
0-. ~ss \ cMsf . . . 5wccJ.l ~ cd--. ~~j",
1k. Q.(eD.- .whu~ weo..s WUe.. cui- ~ 40 ~ 'I"'---~ I~
'. 'S\1\r"'~ d~0 u~\ ~~ ,~~ \ ,5 b (~~~
CA Ve>\.uV\..4eu . N 1",- ~L:j (e.(- Lt ~\ \..tws s;-k IS
eM'\- rt1[[^\ ~QSef~ ~+ ~st' k ptJS~ da-;~ ~
\Y\-~ locoY O~Z€.KC;, W\CW&t V'A-Us0..(
I wwlc9 ~ ~ . ~ dol lcus ~ bJ.VL,\
~ WiS~ ~ ~ ~ -~als e\~4e~. c6 ~~
poslb ~<L Len-1SCtc9-<-^S of ~r ~f$v\5lla;(' \VLO+
'~ ~ ~ ~c\ W 40 ~ QJrwlr~ weJ l,
J:.--{;us.+ ~ wilL leal .ivdo ~s ~~-kk
wkw\e.veK ~s Qfl2.. V'QCeSSCW"\ +0 ~ ~k...r
N~ ~ (~~ ~ ~\J~~ :;~d;&I\.. "
_ l ~ wn~ ~s OvA~\~l~ <io ~e.,J- ~
ISSue.,. ~~ ~ ",' ()... F~ ~
.~r-~F'~~'. '
SAJ:~'
~~
"
-'
..1ATTACHMENT GIIPag~ 141
1W ~0R ~~~'~~fiil
lli$t~ij'U ~
, 1/ J N 1 0 1991
,PtANNJ NG. DIVISION
-.'..". ........;li"n:~ ...:....._
June 3, 1991
Mr. Bill Fritz
Department of Planning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Mr. Fritz,
As a resident of .Charlottesville city, I have become
concerned about, and am opposed to, any ordinance change which
will allow for garages housing large vehicles to exist in a
residential or rural area of Albemarle County.
Although I realize that it may be desirable for an employee
engaged in such work to have vehicles in close proximity to his'
or her home, the noise and the pollution resulting from this type
of commerce is intolerable to previously established neighbors.
I know this personally because across the street from me in the
city are two dump trucks, numerous family vehicles, a race car,
and a bulldozer (new this weekend) .
A great asset of.~he county is its attractiveness as a low-
density, non-commercial area, and those paying their county taxes
deserve to keep it so.
Sincerely,
(A.~~
A. Hollis Farris
-'
'.
,..ITACHMENT GllPage 15\
~. ~".. ~"'\~;IT~':':"r.-.~.
".. J ~ ,',', ., '
d ~ .~- J:.;.~l .
~.'~~'.l
.~...,
.......r,Jl~
JUN 19 ;'8'
/PLANNING DtVISION
June 17 1991
Bill Fritz.
Department of Planning
401 McIntire Rei.
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Mr. Fritz:
As a resident in the Schuyler area of Albemarle County, I am writing you to
urge you to do everything you can to defeat the proposed amendment being
brought forward to. the Planning Commission by our neighbor, Mr. Clark. This
amendment, as you know, will allow Mr. Clark to operate his currently illegal
truck garage in our rural setting and would .set a precedent that could easily
spread throughout Albemarle County with disastrous results -- not only for the
environment, but for the safety and comfort of the citizens.
I hope you and the other members of the Planning Commission see the
seriousness of this matter and will do your utmost to prevent it from becoming
part of the existing ordinance.
r am. unfortunately, writing to you anonymously as Mr. Clark is a neighbor and
I do not wish this affair to become a personal shouting match. However, this
does not diminish the seriousness I feel about this situation. This kind of
manipulation of the law and the ordinances that govern and protect our county
must be stopped and you are the people who can do that Please act with all of
Albemarle County as your concern. and not the desires of one irresponsible,
inconsiderate neighbor.
I thank you in advance for your help.
A concerned neighbor.
..
13 / / I Ff/T2-
.~,
-----)
'ATTACHMENT GlIPage 161
-'
~ vJ;; :: ~,
@1l&trl7
I
7b 6''ffe~ /11;-'--' ------- .
OffS/liO/1 70 FI. a::; orddnc.e!
'/Ita f (j)J !lId. a / /d I C1 r;r-12cJ)J7 /1I..lrCia I
~~ 10 build /J1 rLlrC(1 $t/l;1JB#
fOr t)(tl/TlftL Se.hJur -rruc)!jllf, ~
/blow iMI- a:b CL Ao/lUOJjI1..if j h
. a. rurell;xl/7frX fWrI- vtdtr htf
(}i}/lC/ikJJ(}, s)d;v/d 0/1 or4Q/IIU-bL-
{II/owed -tMr ffrtllJl3 3ucf. Rf1/CrjJJ7"Sa>,
PLANNING DIVISION
~r#lj
~J~
Veil/zen. a=I-
eClut) ,
..
"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE .~
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Lettie E. N~r, Clerk to the Board of supervisors
Kenneth Baker, Senior Planner
FROM:
DATE:
August 30, 1991
RE:
CPA-91-02 Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" study
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
August 27, 1991, unanimously recommended that the
Comprehensive Plan be amended to include the recommendations
of the Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" study. Proposed
amendments include both text and table changes and a change
to a land use designation on the Land Use Map. Attached
please find a staff report which outlines the proposed
amendment. The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to review
this proposed amendment at their September 18, 1991 meeting.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
KB/jcw
1.'" ;..
,
Ii
, il
,t
)
.
g:j -kJ [6
,I.,.
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
KENNETH BAKER
AUGUST 27, 199 I"~ It 'iC,
SEPTEMBER 18, i9\9'1.:~: ,.I
\ '
,,::
;,. i ~.::l r-
CPA-91-02 BLUE RIDGE NEIGHBORHOOD "AREA B" STUDY - Proposal
to amend the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan to include
the recommendations of the Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B"
Study as stipulated in the Three Party Agreement between the
County, City of Charlottesville and the University of
Virginia. Proposed amendments include both text and table
changes and a change to a land use designation on the Land
Use Map.
Text Chanqes:
o The expansion of the Growth Area to include that
portion of the Blue Ridge Hospital tract south of
Interstate-64 and north of Route 53 is based on the
condition that the area be designated for
pUblic/semi-public use and development in this area be
consistent with the Master Land utilization Plan for
the Blue Ridge Hospital tract dated May of 1991 (See
Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" Study). The Albemarle
County Service Authority jurisdictional area shall
remain on this tract. Expanded water and sewer
services will only be provided for development of this
tract consistent with the Master Land utilization
Plan.
o If the Forestry Department undertakes its proposed
office development on approximately 30 acres in the
northeast portion of the Hillcrest Tract adjacent to
PVCC, change the Comprehensive Plan land use
designation of that area from low density residential
to pUblic/semi-public. Concurrently, increase the
medium density land use designation by approximately 10
acres on the same tract in an area west of an unnamed
tributary stream of Moores Creek to replace the
residential holding capacity lost due to the
construction of the Forestry Department. This Land Use
Map amendment would not be effective until the Forestry
Department undertakes its expansion in this location.
o Evaluation of the feasibility of reconfiguring the
Interstate-64 and Route 20 Interchange to improve
traffic circulation in the area and determine the
impact such a reconfiguration would have on a future
Interstate-64 Avon Street Interchange.
o The Neighborhood presently contains Piedmont Virginia
Community College, a private school, two churches, the
...
Regional Joint Security Complex, the National Guard
Armory, the Thomas !efferson visitors center, and the
Blue Ridqe Hos?ital.
o Consider recommendations of the City/County/University
Planning and Coo~~ination Council's Blue Ridge
Neighborhood "L..:~a B" Study as a guide for future
development of that portion of Neighborhood Four within
the study area.
Map,Chanqes:
o Change the land use designation from Rural Area to
pUblic/semi-public for approximately 148.2 acres of the
Blue Ridge Hospital tract south of Interstate-64, east
of Route 20, west of Route 1102, and north of Route 53.
Table Changes:
o Revise Table 50 to read as follows (Revisions indicated
in bold) .
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR
Developable Dwelling
Acreage units
Residential-Low 850 850-3400
Residential-Medium 36 144-360
Residential-High 50 501-1000
RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL 936 1495-4760
Neighborhood 6
Industrial Service 149
Public 164
NON-RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL 319
Undeveloped Land Total 1255
Attached are the pages of the Comprehensive Plan which
include the proposed text and table amendments for
Neighborhood Four (See Attachment A) and a map displaying
the proposed land use designation change (See Attachment B).
Attached also are the recommended land use changes that
would occur with the development of the Forestry Department.
This is not a proposed map amendment at this time (See
Attachment C).
...
. NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR
LOCATION
Neigllborhood four is bounded on the west by
Biscuit Run, on the north by Moores Creek, on the
east by Route 20 South and on the south by a stream
tributary to Biscuit Run approximately 2,000 feet
south of the intersection of Avon Street Extended and
Route 20, Neighborhood Four also includes an adja-
cent area which is bounded by the City's corporate
limits, the lUvanna lUver, and Interstate 61, This in-
cludes the Woolen Mills and the Moores Creek Waste-
water Treatment Plant,
EXISTING IAND USE
Residential - The Neighborhood area is estimated
(1985) to include 141 dwelling units and a population
of 385 persons, More than one-half of the Neighbor-
hood units arc single-family detached. Willoughby,
Willow Lake, and Mill Creek have been the primary
residential development areas in recent years,
Commercial and Offiee - Very few retail commer-
cial uses exist in Neighborhood four. The area con-
tains less than 60,000 square feet of retail
development and 28,000 square feet of office develop-
ment, There exists no neighborhood shopping in the
area. However, a small commercial area was approved
in 1986 at the Mill Creek development.
Industrial - There are a variety of industrial activi-
ties located in Neighborhood Four which total
330,161 square feet of floor area,
Othcr Land Uscs - The Neighborhood presently
contains Piedmont Virginia Community College, a pri-
vate school, two churches, the Regional Joint Security
Complex, the National Guard Armory, the
Thomas Jefferson Visitors Center. and the Blue
Ridge Hospital.
ENVIRONMENTAL CIlARACTERlSTICS
The major portion of the area forms three sepa-
rate watersheds, one draining into Biscuit Run and
two smaller ones draining into Moores Creek. The
area from Lake Reynovia south forms the eastern half
of the Biscuit Run drainage basin. The two areas north
of this point, on either side of Avon Street Extended,
flow directly north into Moores Creek. Some steep
slopes on both sides of Interstate 64 and floodplains
along Moores Creek and lliscuit Run pose develop-
ment limitations in those areas.
The area contains two soil associations, Rabun-
Myersville-Catoctin Association and Elioak-l-Iazel-
Glenelg Association, These associations have some
IATTACHMENT AI
limitations for development activities (See Neighbor-
hoods One and Two for explanation),
PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER
I
Water service capacity sout11 of Interstate 64 is
being upgraded with the construction of the Avon
Street water tank (two million gallon capacity). Sewer
service could incrementally bc extended out into un-
developed areas through the Biscuit Run interceptor,
but limitations also exist in the Moores Creek inter-
ceptor.
ROADS
Avon Street has limited roadway capacity to
handle future development, East-west access is vir-
tually non-existent in the Neighborhood, No central
access to Interstate 61 from the Neighborhood, com-
bined with lack of cast-west connectors, has pre-
viously restricted development potential.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
. Development plans along Route 20 arc to be sensi-
tive to its status as an entry corridor to the Urban
Area and Monticello.
. Transportation improvements include:
Roadway interconnection of Route 20, Avon
Street Extended, and Fifth Street, which
would provide access to Interstate 64 and
traffic circulation within the Neighborhood,
Two roadway projects will accomplish
this-a connector road from Fifth Street to
Avon Street across the northern part of the
Mill Creek development, and a separate
connector from Avon Street to Route 20.
The first project to be developed should be
the Avon Street!Route 20 connector.
Interchange at Interstate 64 and Avon
Street.
- Evaluation of the feasibility of
reconfiguring the Interstate-64 and
Route 20 Interchange to improve traffic
circulation in the area and determine
the impact such a reconfiguration
would have on a future Interstate-64
and Avon Street Interchange.
. Establish medium and high density residential
along Avon Street near possible alignmenLe; of cast-
west connector roade;,
.
,. De~ignate open space for former landfill site in
northwest quadrant of Interstate 64/Avon Street
due to unsuitability for development,
· Construct Southern Area Elementary School along
Avon Street.
· Utility improvements include:
- Second two million gallon water storage
tank at Avon Street site based on demand,
- Southern water line interconnecting Avon
Street tanks with Observatory and Pantops
tanks to provide desired water flow and
pressure, Western loop of line to Obser-
vatory is immediate priority, Eastern loop to
Pantops based on demand,
Moores Creek interceptor relief lines, The
Quarry Road to treatment plant segment is a
short-term need with further analysis of
other segments needed in the utilities
master plan. Moores Creek interceptor
capacity will need to be increased to handle
ultimate flow of Biscuit Run interceptor cur-
rently under development.
- Ultimate expansion of Moores Creek Ad-
vanced Wastewater Treatment Plant from
15,() MGD to 3(),() MGD capacity (1995 or
later) ,
. Industrial service and neighborhood service desig-
nation on Avon Street across from L'lke Reynovia
limited to existing zoned land only.
. The expans ion of the Growth Area to
include that portion of the Blue Ridge
Hospital tract south of Interstate-64
and north of Route 53 is based on the
condition that the area be designated
for public/semi-public use and
development in this area be consistent
with the Master Land Utilization Plan
for the Blue Ridge Hospital tract dated
May of 1991 (See Blue Ridge Neighborhood
"Area B" Study), The Albemarle County
Service Authority jurisdictional area
shall remain on this tract. Expanded
water and sewer services will only be
provided to development of this tract
consistent with the Master Land Utilization
Plan.
· If the Forestry Department undertakes
its ,proposed office development on
approximately 30 acres in the northeast
portion of the Hillcrest Tract adjacent
to PVCC. change the Comprehensive Plan
land use designation of that area from
low density residential to publici
semi~public. Concurrently. increase
medium density land use designation by
approximately 10 acres on the same tract
in an area west of an unnamed
tributary stream of Moores Creek to
replace che residential holding capacity
lost due to the construction of the
Forestry Department, This Land Use Map
amendment would not be effective until
the Forestry Department under,takes its
relocation in this location.
.
Consider recommendat10ns of the City/
County/University Planning and Coordination
Council's Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B"
,Study as a guide for future development
of that portion of Nei~lborhood Four within
the study area,
· ciddsl.d.drl /rkir/JVrltfrNr/c'/4m/ /qf/ ft'rn flifY/(j-fj>y.y.-
~~yq~ifYfi~~QQ~g/~~9/g99~~91V9ryI99V?9Y
f61 1l1id .lli.~d iv.d.r/,ci!1/..f/JJj.tk/'/.rJ p/JNlj. f3N<J.y/ f\jcjaj. J'{I-
/#t>fjJrjatr/. / M~t>m /rFPNryt"f'lIJCPf}0fy5/ f'f'f! / ylF
(4)r/lNrfrf.9'rts'Jv~fP!1~ ~ fcJr;y.'f199yr; lJI'
TABLE 50
DEVElOPMENT POTENTIAL
NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR
DEVELOPABLE DWELLING
ACREAGE UNITS
Residential - Low .. 850 850-3400
Residential - Medium 36 144-360
Residential - High SO 501-1000
RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL 936 1495-4760
Neighborhood Service 6
Industrial Service 149
Public Jrj 164
NON-RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL ;I7r319
UNDEVELOPED LAND TOTAL /1;I~11255
Source: Albemarle County Department of Planning and
Community Development; 1988
.
::..-- - ~
c
H
A
R
IATTACHMENT 81
s '~~~ it
"-
, .'
--........ .
-.:..:.-
\\;,'~' ".. ,
~....,
"~
~
.
-
, .
'---\-
. .
'- \ -
I.I~I.I"I.I.I.!
...."'\, '.
LAND USE PATTERNS
\
I
'\
\
OFFICE SERVICE
OFFICE/REGIONAL SERVICE
INDUSTRIAL SERVICE
\
REGIONAL SERVICE
COMMUNITY SERVICE
\
"
NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE
VILLAGE SERVICE
VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
PU BLI C/SEMI-PU Bll C
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA
RECREATIONAL
INSTITUTIONAL
· ...i DENOT~S LAND '~SE CHANGE.
..
\ATTACHMENT cl
"-
"
...
II
POSSIBLE LAND USE EXPANSION AREAS
~
,--
SECTION 77E(1) 8. 77 E(2)
PVCC'
~ II \\ 'l\
~ 1/' II II
7/,,11 //11 ~~
/ ~ ~~::::: II ~ I; '" ~
.'", .1>. 1/ =: II ~" ~ 1/ -::- II ~ .::,.
',',', II ~ ~ .::,.11 II ""~ ~ ~ " \\
.::,. ~ ''::''11 ~ /I "" II
I ~" II~\\ II~I>.~~
~ ~~ \~~ ~
~ /I ~ II "> 'I'''' // ~ "'1 //
1,,//~== ~I\'::"~""~
~~" -\\~ ~ ~~~I
\\=:-",=\\11=\\
II "" II ~ Ii =: ~
~~~=~Il~u'::l
= ~ II ~ - ;,~
11.::,.11 '" //~" If
I '~~ _ ~~----..::::-
~ \\ /I "" \I ~ -::-.::,. =: f::::-.....-.------=
1/'.:::; ~ ~;
~~ == Ii ~ fBlrpuBLlc I SEMI.PUBLlC
" This is not a proposed amendment at this time.
..
;\ Distributed to Board: j -I ~ -'-7/
r~2Nldil Item No, q L Ctl{ il} 1{f.
. 'il ; ....
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
;' !"i rl
September 6, 1991
WCYl<
1705 Seminole Trail
Second Floor
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: SP-91-25 WCYl< AM-FM
Tax Map 61, Parcel 123A
Dear Sir:
1-;
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on September ~
1991, by a vote of 5-0-1, recommended approval of the above-noted
request to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is
subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval is limited to two, eight-foot or less diameter dishes;
2: Dishes shall be painted same color as building;
3. Dishes to be located as shown on Attachment dated August 21, 1991,
initialled W.D.F.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on
September 18. 1991. 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. YOU OR YOUR
REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT FOR THIS MEETING.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
~~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc:
Lettie E. Neher
Jo Higgins
Jefferson Savmes & Loan
Amelia Patterson
Terry C. Kile
)
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
JULY 2, 1991
AUGUST 7, 1991
SP-91-025 - WCYK - AM-FM
Petition: WCYK petitions the Board of Supervisors to
issue a special use permit to locate two receiving dishes
atop the Jefferson Savings Bank [23.2.2(3)] on 1.186 zoned
CO, Conunercial office. Property, described as Tax Map 61,
Parcel 123A, is located in the northeast corner of the
intersection of Route 29 and Rio Road in the Charlottesville
Magisterial District. This site is located in Neighborhood
II and is in the EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District.
Character of the Area: All properties in the area have been
developed and are occupied by conunercial establishments.
This tract is an out-parcel of Albemarle Square Shopping
Center.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes to locate the two satellite receiving
dishes as shown in Attachment C & D. The applicant has
provided a description and justification for this request
(Attachment E).
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
December 4, 1972 - The Board of Supervisors approved ZMP-243
rezoning property to B-1.
August 20, 1973 - The Planning conunission approved temporary
savings and loan.
April 15, 1974 - The Planning conunission approved temporary
firework stand for one month.
April 12, 1976 - Plat creating parcel approved.
November 16, 1976 - The Planning Conunission approved site
plan for bank subject to no conditions.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan states "Development plans along the
Route 29 corridor are to be sensitive to its status as an
entrance corridor to the urban area" (page 167).
Accordingly, the applicant has stated that shielding
material will be used to screen the dishes and both the
dishes and shielding material will incorporate the color of
the existing building.
1
STAFF COMMENT:
The applicant is proposing to relocate two satellite
receiving dishes from Crozet to this location. The
applicant has worked with the staff and has proposed
measures to limit the impact of the dishes. The shielding
proposed will close the dishes in on three sides, the
southwest side will remain open. The dishes are to be
located in the center of the roof and due to the angle of
vision will not be visible from the roadway adjacent to the
site. The dishes will be visible from a distance, however,
due to their limited size and the shielding proposed they
will not be objectionable features. The applicant is put on
notice that if there is a possibility that additional
receiving dishes will be required in the future, provisions
should be made to consolidate dish location. Staff has
reviewed the request for compliance with Section 31.2.4.1
of the Zoning Ordinance which states:
31.2.4.1
RESERVED TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself
the right to issue all special use permits permitted
hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided
in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the
board of supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the
character of the district will not be changed thereby
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose
and intent of this ordinance, with the uses permitted
by right in the district, with additional regulations
provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, and with
the public health, safety and general welfare.
It is the opinion of the staff that due to the commercial
character of the area and the limited activity proposed that
this use is consistent with Section 31.2.4.1 of the
Ordinance. Staff has reviewed this request for compliance
with Section 5.1.12 which provides for regulation of Public
Utility Structures/Uses.
Based on the above statements, staff recommends approval of
SP-91-25 WCYK subject to the following conditions.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1) Approval is limited to two satellite receiving dishes
similar to those shown in Attachment C whicn shall be
located as shown in Attachment D.
2) Shielding material and receiving dishes shall be the
same color as the exterior of the bank building.
2
Addendwn to SP-91-25 WCYK AM-FM
On July 2, 1991 the Planning Commission deferred action on
SP-91-25 indefinitely in order to allow for Architectural
Review Board comment. The ARB reviewed the request on
August 12 and made the following comment:
The Board was supportive of the proposal of locating
two (2) eight (8)-foot or less dishes on the roof of
Jefferson Savings and Loan Bank located on the
northeast corner of the southeast wing as indicated on
the "Charlottesville Savings and Loan Association" site
plan dated August 6, 1975 by Max Evans. The dishes
shall be painted the same color as the ,structure so to
compose well with the building.
It is the opinion of staff that this action by the ARB
addressed the concerns stated by the Planning commission at
its July 2 meeting. The recommended conditions of approval
reflect the comments of the ARB. The ARB did not require
screening of the dishes as they believed that any screening
measures would increase the visibility of the dishes. Staff
recommends approval of SP-91-25 subject to the following
amended conditions of approval:
,RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Limited to two eight foot or less dishes to be located
as shown on the attached sketch dated 8/21/91 and
initialed WOF;
2. The dishes shall be painted the same color as the
structure.
IATTACHMENT AI
o~
..qtv
G~
~~
t'
i 00
'~
I@
~~.
, ~
-"
, .
'\
\,
Irlotlesvi lie
,erVOlr
Carter M In
f T
I80;sn Lawn',
~
. A'j~
's ~v:"-
ITEl
.-f- _.c---..
I I
I I
. - I
L..il:e
rill1~
~o~
~~' ,.' \7' ~M'-'4 '~.:J'.~~J=.:l ~
' ,.'. . 40F :;. , "" - \ \ 6S 70
,. ~F4 '~7'/' :f-" 394~'
5F3 400 40C 408 ... \
4 . '~F' ~~,~40E 'Ot--~ -- ~ .
4 \ ,~ A1\ 1~' 39C -'- ,,"\"1"'" .. S6
, 170 ," ,.. "0 '31 3IA 'O.~H J4
: >T. ,.~ \ 'l L 37 I.. ,~, -
~/ "'7' ,.. \ ~......./.......", '
f ~ ~A >T:1T-;'~~:.,~, I,:: ,,~32 -.-tp:: IATTACHMEt-1T 81
cd 1,... ,~J+(;;
· ~ '( - ~G 7..\ ,.., ~! I T
: ~ OF 'A' ~62. /~ ..., '" '~':-i,
~,,~,)\~w:,~~~' " :1 &~
~~~.~'~"l'~ ,~~-.:.._:-" = n .u"n':~~~"'~. 1Mj'1--:. SCTO 08
, L ~ J "' ...If.. '.. "-':ZOO\ ,~." ~ :~,. ''i''~
Q 7 t / 31".... "'-';;;;\i91 ,.;---; ::~~..."v> ;) 700:: 16 7~ 80 &8C:8 ,~'
7A' 70 fI ." " ~\.. ~ ", 82. 81 ' ~
. ____ j{' ~ (;-'J ~.... ... -- <I .-: ?~,)' "" '".9 6eC-
.: '. '~ ~," .J 31. ~'" ~ 78 L,-.... ~ ,\~.1
..-t /''\ c' ..0 r. . 87 7"CA' )' >12 ,~ 68A
, ,9 l\ \1 67A .J' 86
~ _I,~ t. ~'~ 29 .----...~" ," ~
r-.. ,,~ #: ~ .~ · ' ~............, '~""'1 '
) "\~" "'0 ' . g;--..::. 0 109 "~.~
:' 'II" I <::: ZB 29 ~ ,,,-
~ 8 ,,;~IO ~~~ /V//'\"wz::::, 92" o;i ~~'~
" ~ ? -,,' /' ...." o. ..... .......,
, ~ ~~1I01[ /"''' . 1.~.." ... 1I0 .
18J ......1 lie II /40 25 ./--,~.,,' 9~" '.1, -
~ '80 :8~~' < ~, '~,:" ,:~. ' <~t~~ .s. _'
".. 2Qo IBM ~ IIY ~ i-!!:!.' .~~ ~', 27 ".'4 HA ~
'81 ,8N ~ 1-~'rii:A"~ ..c;~\"\_/'P;..'"'' >z %J~ ,';;''''1>0'
.. 20' I'M /~ II WS~ Ill.. -z.; r""'.....~~~. ft,jl.: ".., In SECTION
"c~", ........ liT II.. \' :\ '" I "
/ ,8F . -J!!:=:- ~'.II~'" '~~ '28 (' 211" .... "'. \
X- '80 '88 ~:~ ... ~ 94B '''' -,
V ~.. 22 ...-' \ ' ~1 ~ 7/-;0. "\
..__.__._ 18'~ '8A .~ -P.~' ~I" ~ ~~~~ ~
'8 .): - ,1/ R);~ ~~~ 'zo 125
_ , . I 11~ "" .... //" '.\
~ _\ 1/// NY., .' r
.---1' C< i==--SEC:- -+-- - -- /I/I'f) , , " ,/ 123 ( 124
- " ;.\ E~ E=r;r-Xl a X2. _ '1
;:.1. 618' ::::::FOUR-r""
" LSEASONS --
, .. :~~: ".7cc-~~~~ .
~ ~ ~ ~~ z.\> i !//////!,~/!f!tfo~i 1~1,0 ~:~~~~
~.:. ~ · 21 / / / / / / / / lI"i:~~ , /
Ll., '/Ii i/; 1/ M 0 ~
{:~E ~ ~ r.1. II) 1/,11 I
~ ~. IIJ.~'.f~Jf/~J N III ~
'J:"il ~"';;;;;~~ /1/
FJl-,...~ ~~ S~~~IW STFEib.l.,SR "N ~
~ .~ ~ ::s: ~~
~.. ".<,.~.'" ~ ~ ~:::::~
~ e..................... ~
:;>.~. ~ ~ ~~
~~... ~ .~~ -;: ~~ ~~
~.~~~~~
.~ ~~
~...~.
~~~ ~__ ~'--7/
~ ,~ ~ /"
~\ ' .' ~ /
~' '-". ' / ~-.,- ......... /
~T1ClIl_ ~. / 7
\:\.. /
'(7.
SEE
46./8D
1
~4J
;;..-- ------ ------ --"
60
\\\V--~
45C.
~~~~~
~k:;:::
~~
-~fI'
.". ..t. ~
I' 12~
,," /~....-
~'''I'':<'
." ,
""'NT (
s~c,~~'!.:. ,\ '\ \
,,~~ ,~''- '~~~
'~ ,:,.: '~, .~ "
;:. ~~ ~... ,,~~~~E~~~ ~
, , ~ ... ~ ~;s:~ ,," v;/ /
/, ~ ~ -r;;o. ,<:> '~
lzto /f,~/
, ~ %{:\/60C r 1
_~._--== ' :\ " " \;OA.;A r-
S~C.TIOH 61l- =--==:\, ~ ~ ......:.c./ ~ 160
BR.LMCH,LAHDS " 0.'0 )I/)i-- 1~iP.:~ I
'= II(' ,"~ (f~'"' I~:'~ ,"
~.~-~ i.('''(~(~~ ~'J~'I ''^ ~
:-..:: _, _ _=~..I-',~ '1(/ t(f;j577,,,,, "' -
l mN &IW c-- ---=~c.:,~': Ii ~ /
,~ ~,,~~'!'...~:' :, - ~'~ l ~ II.. \
, '~J' 0 144
. ~ _ __~:" ~ . ,,_ .s 't- :----.-
~ '-t '::1./. -u ",,' ~," '54
~"-...." T5' UNE ,~,>AIA ..1..'
.",-",~,.,.,~.,-,'e ~ -~,;'f ,-
..............'-~,~~.~ ~ \~147
~- "Yf,,~-:-..~'.:;r /. _ '64A
~~~_ ~'::--'~.~ ~I b"'O~ I'IA I
""'!>. ~ - ----"
h~<<~ otP.
~ s '{I';'ft
", Yi .
'" A r;;'~ 1&4
JII ~61. \
....-- ,
"z
, ,
'.
:~
"0
-
CITY
OF
SP-91-25
WCKY-AM-FM
/ //' /
\
~~
...
CHARLOTTESVll
~
L~
~
~.-
,~ . I
~~
~ ~~
~, . 'S-, ~
~ ~Q
~. 1
.~.~ I
~ \~ I
~ ~
~
L~
~
\f"Q
c'{
~
f
<::.J
1
IATrACtiMENT cl
. .
"
n
I ~ '.) \
.~~
fi1
~~~
'~ ~~
u. ..1~~
. ..0 ~
-, ':'-_:"-- i:~. .-
-_.- . ~ <:.L
lS"""-~ ~
--J ~
--J ~~~
.j ~~
I/)
~ ~
~ 'i
~
~
\':'
~
_ -; ~
~~
--
~1
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~
IATTACHMENT 01
~
~
~
~~
~~
i~
~~ \
. .~~
~ ~~
.~~~
~~~
_ .G-
.~ ~-4 '
~ ~~
.~.w~
~l~
'J)
t
Cl-
~
~ 1
~
.. -t-
~
'D,
'~~
~
"..~+.~
.~~~
0~~
~~
~~
'r- ,
..
,;
\~
IATTACHMENT EI
\...__..<
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Operation of WCYK AM-FM at the Rio Road location requires
that two satellite dishes from their present location on Hilltop
Road, Crozet, Virginia, be relocated atop the Jefferson Savings
Bank building. Appropriate shielding and color matching to
prevent their visibility from most view areas will be provided.
JUSTIFICATION OF REOUEST:
WCYK AM-FM has provided a valuable community service to
Albemarle County since 1970. In our new location we plan to
provide more availability of our radio time to community groups,
a meeting room for non-prOfit organizations and a higher profile
in all of Albemarle County. Recently, our FCC engineering staff
determined that our studios could be relocated to Rt. 29 and Rio
Road where our business office has been since April, 1990.
senior management of Jefferson savings Bank has acknowledged our
request and have offered assistance in relocation by improving
present facilities.
T
I
"-:-.....
'"
,
....,
..
...
,
...
I
'. /
"'t,
,
,
'-'
,
~-"....,..
'\..'
....
"
"',
"
...
,
...
...
'....... "
....
\.'
, I
...-- '
.
...
...
\
\
\
. \
. \
... \
\
, \
\ ,
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\
\
# \
,
I
\
\ \
\ .. i
.'
I'
\
~
::
..;
~ -~~j!l
/ C> <.......... .
~i
'" r .,., .i"'.... .~~.
'i .......,.~
"" t ;(0 '
--J;~'~ '
~, i ~ ~
,; I.v ,
~ ; J ;
,!~~"t
I'"
I
!
"
-....~
'"
"",
'-.....
~
"'-,
'"
""
;1 i~
y,~t
~i..t
~;~l.
'" ...
~::~
~~i.~
,
~".
"
~",
.'"
"'"
'",,-
~ ~~ ~
,,'\ ~
~ ~~,
\ ' ..
~~I..
... , ~
, , ..
\1:)\1
~~ '+.
\ ~ .
nJ'~ ::-
\~ ~ ~
~ ~ \, "
. '" . '"
~...Ii ~
~,,~ ~
~.." t
.,,~~{:
~ ~ ~ ~
't.: . -l "
~~? "'-
" <I
M' ~ ~
~ \ ,\ t
~ t ....
~~ ~ t
'ilq
~
~
\S' 'L-..
---==~
rS.~
-...--'--
f<' '
~
, j'
'" /
'............... /'
- ----
".
"
I
,/
,/
I II
U
,,'''/
,"
-,'
I ' "
j
, /i!
.-,-' 'lor
I
10
'; )_ >~i
t' -- I
",
~\\
, ~,
, .
'I
I
I
I
/
I
/
I
I
/
I
,
/
i
I
I
I
--
...
J
D...,'
~r, :J
2 :;
'"
.C1 -
...."
<i
LI
ct J
(
\J
I.r "
DI~'tributed to Board: 9 -13 -9} .
A,?Dflda item No. qj. OtUJ f 4..5' Q
.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE,
Dept. of Planning & Community DeveloplT\ent
401 McInti're Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
r
September 6, 1991
Richard Rike
P. O. Box 266
Batesville,VA 22924
RE: SP-91-38 General Machinery Corporation
Tax Map 84, Parcel 39
Dear Mr. Rike:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meet.ing on
September 4, 1991, by a vote of 5-1, 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 shall be limited to three persons, whether or not
same are employees;
2. No entrance to the state road or parking area shall be
allowed to serve this use;
3. Except as otherwise provided herein, compliance with
Section 5.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance;
4. Permit is limited to applicant only. 9,/0
Please be advised that the Albemarle Coun y Board of
Supervisors will review this petition receive public
comment at their meeting on Octobe 1991. Any new or
additional information regardin our application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
YOU OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT FOR THIS MEETING.
,
Richard Rike
Page 2
September 6, 1991
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
~7
,) ~G
william D. Fritz
Senior Planner
cc: Bruce.Garwood
Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
.
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
SEPTEMBER 3, 1991
OCTOBER 2, 1991
SP-91-38 GENERAL MACHINERY CORPORATION
Petition: General Machinery Corporation petitions the
Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a
home occupation class B to permit a telephone business with
two employees in an accessory structure [10.2.2(31)].
Property, described as Tax Map 84, Parcel 39, is located in
the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Rt. 636 and
691 in the White Hall Magisterial District. This site is
not located within a designated growth area (Rural Area 3).
Character of the Area: The site is currently developed with
a dwelling and an accessory structure in which the applicant
proposes to conduct the home occupation. The accessory
structure is located at the intersection of Rt. 636 and 691.
The property is mostly clear and adjacent properties are
mostly in pasture.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant has submitted a
description of the use (Attachment C). The applicant does
not anticipate any traffic from customers to the site and
the employees will walk to work as they live on ,the
property.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval
subject to conditions.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: None available.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This site is located in Rural Area 3 of
the Comprehensive Plan.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
This application has not received any objection and is
scheduled for review due to the fact that the structure to
be used does not meet the 75 foot setback required in the
Rural Areas. Section 5.2.2.1 of the Ordinance states in
part "Any accessory structure which does not conform to the
setback and yard regulations for main structures in the
district in which it is located shall not be used for any
home occupation". The accessory structure is an old country
store, the porch of which appears to be within the
prescriptive easement of Rt. 636.
~
Staff' will address each prov~s~on of Section 31.2,4..1 of the
Zoning Ordinance. That section states:
"The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the
right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder.
Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance
may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors
that such use will not be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property,"
The applicant's occupation is conducted 'entirely over the
phone. No customers or material will come to the site and
no traffic will be generated by this use as all employees
will walk to work. Based on the low level of activity on
the site and the existence of the structure this use will
not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property.
"that the character of the district will not be changed
thereby,"
As stated previously this use will have no impact due to the
low level of activity. Therefore, this use will not change
the character of the district.
"and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and
intent of this ordinance,"
Staff has reviewed the purpose and int~nt of the Ordinance
as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 and is of the opinion
that this use is in harmony with the purpose and intent of
the Ordinance.
"with the uses permitted by right in the district,"
This use will not interfere with any by-right uses in the
district. This opinion is based on the fact that the
structure is already present and that the applicant will not
generate any traffic or outward appearance of the activity.
"with additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this
ordinance,"
As stated previously this use will not comply with Section
5.2.2.1(b) of the ordinance. The site will comply with all
other provisions of Section 5.2.2 which governs home
occupations. Under the provisions of Section 5.1 "the
commission and board of supervisors may vary or waive any
provision of this section as deemed appropriate in a
particular case". Staff opinion is that approval of this
request with a reduction in setback would not be
inconsistent with the purpose of this section. This opinion
is based on the fact that the structure is existing and the
conduct of the business will not interfere with adjacent
uses and will not be apparent from the road.
6
"and with the public health, safety and general welfare."
The location of the structure at the intersection of Rt. 636
and 691 does not provide an entrance location at which
adequate sight distance could be obtained. However, the
applicant's situation is unique in that no entrance is
required for the conduct of the business. This is due to
the fact that the employees live on site and walk to work
and that no customers or deliveries are made to the site.
With a condition prohibiting the establishment of an
entrance to the state road to serve this use the public
safety will be preserved. The reduction in setback for a
building used for a home occupation will not change the
existing situation and the conduct of the business will not
be apparent from the state road. Therefore, this use will
be in harmony with the public health, safety and general
welfare.
Sunmary
The general intent of the home occupation regulations is to
limit the activity to a point that it is not apparent that
the use is occurring. The applicant's proposed use will not
generate any traffic and will not result in any outward
appearance of the activity. Permitting the use to occur
less than 75 feet from the right of way will not be
inconsistent with the provisions of Section 5.2.2.1 of the
ordinance. Based on the above comments staff is able to
recommend approval of the applicants request subject to the
following conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Use shall be limited to two employees;
2. No entrance to the state road or parking area shall be
established to serve this use;
ATl'ACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Applicant's Description
D - Virginia Department of Transportation
0 CASTLE ROCK
-.'
-r,
\~
'\ Heerds
("l ~
\
\ -
I 0 GENERAL MACHINERY CORP.
$
:z:
CI)
o
lU!!VlQ., ~ I _'. ~ _. u,. , '.
.---.rr-.,J, \ ----_<; '-- "
3 70 \::--'~4() . -.--&t1:.(._-,:" ...
~ I.~..\..-
/ra,nl -
~
10...
IATTACHMENT AI
c,
e-'f.S
~0
811
.::>
"
~
~
3B-
-z.
,~
('
<JI
-JLu!--A j \;\ "// ""
/1 r I) N\\ ", \
..~ ~~
IATTACHMENT BI
71
54
39
I
-~-
/
(
+
)
4011
\
\ liB
, -1--
t{/ '
,
\
I
83
12>
53
-
((
IATTACHMENT cl
G ENE R A L
MACHINERY
CORPORATION
--
j)
AUG 6 1991
PLANNING D1VIS'ON:
The Better Machinery D9~/er
P.O. Box 266
Batesvllle, V A 22924
Phone: (703) 456-6999
..
8/2/91
DEAR MR. FRITZ,
AS PER OUR MEETING AT THE WILLIAMS STORE, (RT.691 & RT.636) I
HAVE CONTACTED MR. JEFF ECKELS AT THE DEP. OF TRANSPORTATION.
ACCORDING TO MR. ECKELS,RT.636 IS A PRESCRIPTIVE EASMENT AND
RUNS 15 FEET FRON THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD.
AS WE DISCUSSED, GENERAL MACHINERY CORPORATION IS A TELEPHONE
OPERATED USED MACHINERY SALES ORGANIZATION. DUE TO THE SIZE
AND NATURE OF THIS MACHINERY, IT IS NOT PRACTICAL TO REMOVE
IT FROM THE FACTORY WHERE IT ORIGINATED UNTIL IT IS SOLD AND
CAN BE INSTALLED IN THE CUSTOMERS PLANT. PERSPECTIVE CUSTOMERS
TRAVEL TO SEE EQUIPMENT, BUT DONT HAVE TO TRAVEL TO OUR OFFICE,
AS THE'DEAL IS MADE OVER THE TELEPHONE. GENERAL MACHINERY CORP.
WILL HAVE THREE EMPLOYEES; MYSELF,GARY EPSENHART,AND IRENE
EPSENHART. WE WILL BE RESIDING IN THE FARM HOUSE ON THE PROPE~
AND WILL WALK THE 50 YARDS OR SO TO WORK EACH MORNING.
I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT. IF YOU ARE IN THE AREA
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO STOP BY AND SAY HELLO.
REGARDS,
RICHARD E. RIKE
V.P. GENERAL MACHINERY CORP.
(
..
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
AUG 23 1991
PLANNING DIVISION
J
jATTACHIVlENT 01
RAY D. PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
p, 0, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22902
D. S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
August 23, 1991
Special Use Permits
& Rezonings
September 1991
Mr. Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
CharlottesvilIe, VA. 22901
Dear Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
1. SP-91-38 General Machinery Corp., Route 636 - This section of Route 636 is
currently non-tolerable. This request is for two employees who supposedly will walk
to work and there would be no customers coming to the building. Therefore, there
would be no increase in traffic to this building should the above situation occur.
The existing old store building that will be used for this purpose is only 7 feet
off of the edge of pavement on Route 636. This would put the front of the building
approximately 15 feet from the center of Route 636. There is no existing entrance
for this building and there is a gate for the fence near the building that
apparently serves as access to the field. Obtaining sight distance for an entrance
near the building could be difficult due to the location of the building and
possibly due to the terrain. The existing entrance for the private drivew~y serving
the house west of the old store only has approximately 120 feet of sight distance to
the east along Route 636. The sight distance problem is due to a vertical curve on
Route 636 and a bank along the road. The private driveway should have a minimum of
250 feet of sight distance.
2. SP-91-42 McDonald's Corp., Route 20 N. - This special use permit is for a drive
through window as well as a fast food restaurant in the C-1 zoning. This request
for a 2,854 square foot fast food restaurant with a drive-through window could
generate between 1800-2000 VPD. Under the C-1 zoning, a by-right use'would probably
generate less traffic for most uses. Therefore, it appears that with this special
use permit more traffic would be generated on the property included in this site
plan than could be by-right under the existing zonings. The Department has
purchased right of way and easements on these properties and some of the proposed
right of way shown on the site plan is not in agreement with our road plans.
, \
f"
l ("\ \
; ; t"..3
, l :')
c,.) #
""",/
f0) [p. '{J,... ..1
t U ,) (
\:::y L,;
The undersigned Clerk of the Board of supervisors (the
"Board") of Albemarle County, Virginia (the "County"), hereby
certifies as follows:
"
1. A regular meeting of the Board was held on september
18, 1991, at the time and place established by such Board for its
regular meetings in accordance with Section 15.1-536 of the Code
of Virginia of 1950, as amended, at which the following members
were present and absent:
Edward H. Bain, Jr.
PRESENT: David P. Bowerman
F. R. Bowie
Charlotte Y. Humphris
Walter F. Perkins
Peter T. Way
None
ABSENT:
2. A resolution entitled "Resolution Providing for the
Issuance of $16,070,000 School Bonds, 1991 Series B, of Albemarle
County, Virginia, Heretofore Authorized, To Be Sold to the
Virginia Public School Authority, and Setting Forth the Form and
Details Thereof" was adopted by a majority of all members of the
Board by a roll call vote, the ayes and nays being recorded in
the minutes of the meeting as shown below:
MEMBER
VOTE
Mr. Bain
Mr. Bowerman
Mr. Bowie
Mrs. Humphris
Mr. Perkins
Mr. Way
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
3. Attached hereto is a true, correct and complete copy of
such resolution as adopted at such meeting.
WITNESS my signature and the seal of the Board of
Supervisors of Albemarle County, virginia, this 19~ day of
September, 1991. ----
Cl~~
Albemarle County, Virginia
(SEAL)
.)''''1'',,''''' ....,..D -.
.. """~v,,,, '~.ro~~,", ..,..,,_....
'l,":.:r~f' ':':z' ...\,) ""'''''.",
'...,'-, "/-"'"-'''
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
I
~ ,
'I
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
September 16, 1991
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
VPSA Bond Issue
Agenda Item 5.11 for the Wednesday, September 18, 1991 meeting was
inadvertently distributed without the benefit of a cover memo which
is needed to summarize the status of the proposed fall issue of
school bonds.
At the present time, we still have not been notified whether we
will receive the amount approved by the Board of $16,070,000
through the fall Virginia Public School Authority bond sale. Bond
counsel has advised us to proceed with the resolution included in
your packet in order to meet the tight time schedules which will be
imposed once VPSA makes a decision as to what portion of the total
package will be financed this fall through their financing vehicle.
Pages A-I through A-4 and Schedule I included with the resolution
are for sample purposes only. Pages 1-6 represent the resolution
which requires Board action at this time. This resolution sets
into motion those details required by VPSA and approved by the
County's Bond Counsel.
RWT,Jr/dbm
91.131
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Finance
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Telephone (804) 296-5855
. 'J 1(''')'
i - l~:' \
. lol .... , "'~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Robert W. Tucker, County Executive
Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance ~
FROM:
DATE:
September 13, 1991
RE:
VPSA Bond Resolution
Attached is the Bond Resolution for the VPSA Bonds which
must be adopted at the Board's meeting on September 18, 1991.
All six (6) copies must be completed and returned to me.
Exhibit "A" (Temporary Bond) Pages A-1 to A-4 and Schedule I are
samples only. They are not to be signed. These items will be
completed after the bond sale with the actual amounts and repayment
schedule.
All documents at this time are based on issuance of the
full $16,070,000; however, this will probably be reduced by VPSA
prior to the actual sale.
/bd
Attachments
Distributed to Board: ;'-/3-? I
~-.~
Agenda Item No. 9~ t?.yt:l~$
9/12/91
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $16,070,000
SCHOOL BONDS, 1991 SERIES B, OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA, HERETOFORE AUTHORIZED, TO BE SOLD TO THE
VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCH90L AUTHORITY, AND SETTING FORTH THE
FORM AND DETAILS THEREOF
WHEREAS, by resolution adopted April 3, 1991, the Board of
Supervisors (the "Board") of Albemarle county, virginia (the
"County"), authorized the issuance of its general obligation bonds
in the maximum amount of $19,070,000 to finance capital projects
for school purposes, of which $3,000,000 bonds have been issued
and sold; and
WHEREAS, the virginia Public School Authority, a state agency
prescribed by the General Assembly of Virginia pursuant to Article
VII, Section 10(b) of the Constitution of Virginia (the "VPSA"),
has offered to purchase the county's $16,070,000 school bonds
pursuant to a Bond Sale Agreement (the "Bond Sale Agreement"); and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. Issuance of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. The Board hereby
provides for the issuance and sale of the remaining $16,070,000
bonds (the "Bonds") of the $19,070,000 school bonds described
above in the form and upon the terms established pursuant,to this
Resolution.
2. Sale of Bonds. It is determined to be in the best
interest of the County to accept the offer of the VPSA to purchase
the Bonds, and to sell the Bonds to the VPSA at par upon the terms
established pursuant to this Resolution. The Chairman of the
Board and the County Executive, or either of them, are hereby
authorized and directed to execute the Bond Sale Agreement in
substantially the form submitted to the Board at this meeting,
which is hereby approved, and deliver it to the VPSA.
3. Details of Bonds. The Bonds shall be issuable in
registered form in denominations of $5,000 and whole multiples
thereof; shall be dated the date of their issuance and delivery;
shall be designated "School Bonds, 1991 Series B;" shall bear
interest payable semiannually on June 15 and December 15 (each an
"Interest Payment Date"), beginning June 15, 1992, at the rate or
rates, and shall mature on December 15 in the years (each a
"Principal Payment Date") and in the amounts, established in
accordance with Section 4.
Interest on each Bond shall be payable (a) from its date, if
it is authenticated prior to June 15, 1992, or (b) otherwise from
the June 15 or December 15 that is, or immediately precedes, the
, .
date on which it is authenticated (unless payment of interest
thereon is in default, in which case such Bond shall bear interest
from the date to which interest has been paid). Principal and
premium, if any, shall be payable, subject to the provisions of
section 6, to the registered owners upon surrender of the Bonds as
they become due at the principal corporate trust office of Crestar
Bank, Richmond, Virginia, the Registrar. Subject to the
provisions of section 6, interest shall be payable by check or
draft mailed to the registereQ owners at their addresses as they
appear on registration books kept by the Registrar on the first
day of the month of the interest payment date. Principal,
premium, if any, and interest shall be payable in lawful money of
the United states of America.
4. Award of Bonds: Interest Rates. The County
Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to award the Bonds
to the VPSA at a price of par and at an interest rate or rates
established by the VPSA, provided that no such interest rate shall
be more than ten one-hundredths of one percent (0.10%) over the
annual rate to be paid by the VPSA for the corresponding maturity
of the bonds to be issued by the VPSA (the "VPSA Bonds"), a
portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the
Bonds, and provided further, that no interest rate on the Bonds
shall exceed nine percent (9%) per year. Principal of the Bonds
shall be payable in installments in years and amounts as set forth
on Schedule I attached hereto; provided, however, that the County
Executive is hereby authorized to award the Bonds to the VPSA in
accordance with a principal payment schedule different from that
set forth on Schedule I attached hereto as the VPSA may propose,
provided that such schedule shall include annual payments in the
years 1992 through 2011, inclusive. The execution and delivery of
the Bonds as described in section 8 shall conclusively evidence
the same as having been approved and authorized by this
Resolution.
5. Form of Bonds When Owned bv VPSA. For as long as the
VPSA is the registered owner of the Bonds, the Bonds shall be in
the form of a single, temporary typewritten bond substantially in
the form of Exhibit A attached hereto. Upon 20 days I written
notice from the VPSA, the County shall deliver, at its expense,
Bonds in marketable form in denominations of $5,000 and whole
multiples thereof, as requested by the VPSA, in exchange for the
temporary typewritten Bond. Such Bonds in marketable form shall
be in substantially the form of Exhibit A attached hereto, with
such changes as shall be necessary or appropriate for the Bonds to
be in marketable form, as are not inconsistent with the terms of
this Resolution and as may be approved by the County officials
executing such Bonds.
6. Payment to VPSA: paving Aaent and Reaistrar.
a. For as long as the VPSA is the registered owner of
the Bonds, all payments of principal of, premium, if any, and
interest on the Bonds shall be made in immediately available funds
to the VPSA at or before 11:00 a.m. (Richmond, virginia, time) on
2
the applicable Interest Payment Date and Principal Payment Date or
date fixed for prepayment or redemption, or, if such date is not a
business day for Virginia banks or for the Commonwealth of
Virginia, then at or before 11:00 a.m. (Richmond, Virginia, time)
on the business day next preceding such Interest Payment Date and
Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption;
and
b. All overdue payments of principal, and interest to
the extent permitted by law, shall bear interest at the applicable
interest rate or rates on the Bonds.
c. Crestar Bank, Richmond, Virginia, is designated as
Bond Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bond (the "Registrar").
7. PreDavment or RedemDtion. The principal installments of
the Bonds held by the VPSA coming due on or before December 15,
2001, and the definitive Bonds for which the Bonds held by the
VPSA may be exchanged that mature on or before December 15, 2001,
are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated
maturities. The principal installments of the Bonds held by the
VPSA coming due after December 15, 2001, and the definitive Bonds
for which the Bonds held by the VPSA may be exchanged that mature
after December 15, 2001, are subject to prepayment or redemption
at the County's option prior to their stated maturities in whole
or in part, on any date on or after December 15, 2001, upon
payment of the prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as
percentages of principal installments to be prepaid or the
principal amount of the Bonds to be redeemed) set forth below plus
accrued interest to the date set for prepayment or redemption:
December 15, 2001 to December 14, 2002, inclusive
December 15, 2002 to December 14, 2003, inclusive
December 15, 2003 to December 14, 2004, inclusive
December 15, 2004 and thereafter
103%
102
101
100
Provided, however, that while the VPSA is the registered
owner of the Bonds, the Bonds shall not be subject to prepayment
or redemption prior to their stated maturities as described above
without first obtaining the prior written consent of the VPSA.
Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the
Registrar to the registered owner by registered mail not more than
90 nor less than 30 days before the date fixed for prepayment or
redemption.
8. Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be signed by the
manual or facsimile signature of the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of
the Board, shall be countersigned by the manual or facsimile
signature of the Clerk of the Board and the Board's seal shall be
affixed thereto or a facsimile thereof printed thereon; provided,
however, that if both of such signatures are facsimiles, no bond
shall be valid until it has been authenticated by the manual
signature of an authorized officer or employee of the Registrar
and the date of authentication noted thereon.
3
9. Pledae of Full Faith and Credit. For the timely payment
of the principal of and the interest on the Bonds provided for by
this Resolution as the same shall become due, the full faith and
credit of the County are hereby irrevocably pledged. In each year
while any of the Bonds shall be outstanding, unless other funds
are lawfully available and appropriated for timely payment of the
Bonds, the Board shall levy and collect in accordance with law an
annual ad valorem tax upon all taxable property in the County
subject to local taxation sufficient in amount to provide for the
payment of the principal of and the interest on the Bonds as such
principal and interest shall become due, which tax shall be
without limitation as to rate and amount and in addition to all
other taxes authorized to be levied in the County.
10. School Board Approval. The Clerk of the Board is hereby
authorized and directed to cause a certified copy of this
Resolution to be presented to the County School Board. The Bonds
authorized hereby shall not be issued by the County until the
County School Board shall have adopted an appropriate resolution
consenting to the issuance of the Bonds.
11. state Non-Arbitraae Program: Proceeds Aareement. In
accordance with the requirements of the VPSA, the Board hereby
determines that it is in the County's best interests to
participate in the State Non-Arbitrage Program in connection with
the Bonds, and hereby authorizes and directs the Director of
Finance to take such action as shall be necessary or desirable
therefor. The Chairman of the Board or the County Executive is
hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver a Proceeds
Agreement with respect to the deposit and investment of proceeds
of the Bonds by and among the County, the other participants in
the sale of the VPSA Bonds, the VPSA, Public Financial Management,
Inc., as investment manager, and Central Fidelity Bank, as
depository; provided, however, that such proceeds shall be
invested in such manner that none of the Bonds will be "arbitrage
bonds" within the meaning of section 148 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended,' including regulations applicable to the
Bonds (the "Code"). The Proceeds Agreement shall be in such form
as shall be approved by the County's bond counsel.
12. Maintenance of Tax-Exemption. The County hereby
covenants that it shall not take or omit to take any action the
taking or omission of which will cause the Bonds to be "arbitrage
bonds" within the meaning of Code section 148, or otherwise cause
interest on the Bonds to be includable in the gross income for
federal income tax purposes of the registered owners thereof under
existing law. without limiting the generality of the foregoing,
the county shall comply with any provision of law that may require
the County at any time to rebate to the united states any part of
the earnings derived from the investment of the gross proceeds of
the Bonds. The County shall pay any such required rebate from its
general funds.
13. Use of Proceeds Certificate. The County Executive and
the Director of Finance are hereby authorized and directed to
4
execute a Use of Proceeds certificate or certificates setting
forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Bonds
and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show
compliance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended (the "Code"), and applicable regulations relating
to the exclusion from gross income of interest on the Bonds and on
the VPSA Bonds. The Board, on behalf of the County, covenants
that the proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bonds will be
invested and expended as set forth in such Use of Proceeds
certificate and other certificates and that the County shall
comply with the other covenants and representations contained
therein. Furthermore, the Board, on behalf of the county,
covenants that the County shall comply with the provisions of the
Code so that interest on the Bonds and on the VPSA Bonds will
remain excludable from gross income for Federal income tax
purposes. Such certificates may also provide for any elections
such officers deem desirable regarding rebate of earnings to the
united States for purposes of complying with the provisions of
Code section 148.
14. Restrictions on Private Use. The County covenants that
it will not permit the gross proceeds of the Bonds to be used in
any manner that would result in (a) 5% or more of such proceeds
being used in a trade or business carried on by any person other
than a governmental unit, as provided in Code section 141(b),
(b) 5% or more of such proceeds being used with respect to any
"output facility" (other than a facility for the furnishing of
water), within the meaning of Code Section 141(b) (4), or (c) 5% or
more of such proceeds being used directly or indirectly to make or
finance loans to any persons other than a governmental unit, as
provided in Code section 141(c); provided, however, that if the
County receives an opinion of bond counsel to the County with
respect to the Bonds, and bond counsel to the VPSA with respect to
the VPSA Bonds, that compliance with any such restriction is not
required to prevent interest on the bonds of both issues from
being includable in the gross income for federal income tax
purposes of the registered owners thereof under existing law, the
County need not comply with such restriction.
15. No Sale of Bonds of Same Issue. The County covenants
that it will not, without the VPSA's consent, sell or deliver any
general obligation bonds which are part of the same common plan of
financing (and paid for from the same source of funds) as the
Bonds between the dates that are 31 days prior to the date of sale
of the VPSA Bonds and 31 days after the Closing Date.
16. Election of Prior Public Finance Act. Pursuant to the
provisions of section 15.1-227.65 of the Code of Virginia of 1950,
as amended, the County elects that the Bonds will be issued under
the Public Finance Act as in effect immediately before July 1,
1991, rather than under the Public Finance Act of 1991.
17. Filinq of Resolution: publication of Notice. The
appropriate officers or agents of the County are hereby authorized
and directed to cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be
5
filed with the circuit Court of the County and, within ten days
thereafter, to cause to be published once in a newspaper having
general circulation in the County a notice setting forth (a) in
brief and general terms the purposes for which the Bonds are to be
issued and (b) the amount of the Bonds.
18. Further Actions. The members of the Board and all
officers, employees and agents of the County are hereby authorized
to take such action as they or anyone of them may consider
necessary or desirable in connection with the issuance and sale of
the Bonds, and any such action previously taken is hereby ratified
and confirmed.
19. ReDeal of Resolutions in Conflict. All resolutions or
parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
20. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect
immediately.
6
EXHIBIT A
(FORM OF TEMPORARY BOND)
NO. TR-1
$16,070,000
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
School Bond, 1991 Series B
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA (the "County"), for value
received, hereby acknowledges itself indebted and promises to pay
to the VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY the principal amount of
SIXTEEN KILLION SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($16,070,000), in annual
installments in the amounts set forth on Schedule I attached
hereto, payable on December 15, 1992, and annually on December 15
thereafter to and including December 15, 2011 (each a "Principal
Payment Date"), together with interest on the unpaid installments
from the date of this Bond, payable commencing on June 15, 1992,
and semiannually thereafter on June 15 and December 15 of each
year (each an "Interest Payment Date"; together with any Principal
Payment Date, a "Payment Date"), at the rates per year set forth
on Schedule I attached hereto, subject to prepayment as
hereinafter provided. Both principal of and interest on this Bond
are payable in lawful money of the United states of America.
For as long as the Virginia Public School Authority is the
registered owner of this Bond, Crestar Bank, Richmond, Virginia,
as Bond Registrar, shall make all payments of principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on this Bond, without the
presentation or surrender hereof, to the Virginia Public School
Authority, in immediately available funds at or before 11:00 a.m.
(Richmond, Virginia, time) on the applicable Payment Date or date
fixed for prepayment. If a Payment Date or date fixed for
prepayment is not a business day for banks in the Commonwealth of
Virginia or for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then the payment of
principal of, premium, if any, or interest on this Bond shall be
made in immediately available funds at or before 11:00 a.m.
(Richmond, Virginia, time) on the business day next preceding the
scheduled Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment. Upon receipt
by the registered owner of this Bond of said payments of
principal, premium, if any, and interest, written acknowledgement
of the receipt thereof shall be given promptly to the Bond
Registrar, and the County shall be fully discharged of its
obligation on this Bond to the extent of the payment so made.
Upon final payment, this Bond shall be surrendered to the Bond
Registrar for cancellation.
The full faith and credit of the County are irrevocably
pledged for the payment of principal of and interest on this Bond.
A-1
This Bond is duly authorized and issued in compliance with
and pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of
Virginia, including the Public Finance Act as in effect
immediately before July 1, 1991, Chapter 5, Title 15.1, Code of
Virginia of 1950, as amended, and resolutions duly adopted by the
County's Board of supervisors and the County School Board to
provide funds, together with other available funds, to finance
capital projects for public schools.
"
This Bond may be exchanged without cost at the principal
corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar for an equal
aggregate principal amount of bonds in definitive form having
maturities and bearing interest at rates corresponding to the
maturities of and the interest rates on the installments of
principal of this Bond then unpaid, issuable in fully registered
form in the denomination of $5,000 and whole multiples thereof.
This Bond is registered in the name of virginia Public School
Authority on books of the County kept by the Bond Registrar, and
the transfer of this Bond may be effected by the registered owner
of this Bond only upon due execution of an assignment by such
registered owner. Upon receipt of such assignment and the
surrender of this Bond, the Bond Registrar shall exchange this
Bond for definitive Bonds as hereinabove provided, such definitive
Bonds to be registered on such registration books in the name of
the assignee or assignees named in such assignment.
The principal installments of this Bond coming due on or
before December 15, 2001, and the definitive Bonds for which this
Bond may be exchanged that mature on or before December 15, 2001,
are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated
maturities. The principal installments of this Bond coming due
after December 15, 2001, and the definitive Bonds for which this
Bond may be exchanged that mature after December 15, 2001, are
subject to prepayment or redemption at the County's option prior
to their stated maturities in whole or in part, on any date on or
after December 15, 2001, upon payment of the prepayment or
redemption prices (expressed as percentages of principal
installments to be prepaid or the principal amount of the Bonds to
be redeemed) set forth below plus accrued interest to the date set
for prepayment or redemption:
December 15, 2001 to December 14, 2002, inclusive
December 15, 2002 to December 14, 2003, inclusive
December 15, 2003 to December 14, 2004, inclusive
December 15, 2004 and thereafter
103%
102
101
100
Provided, however, that while the virginia Public School
Authority is the registered owner of this Bond or of the
definitive Bonds for which this Bond may be exchanged, the Bonds
shall not be subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their
stated maturities as described above without first obtaining the
prior written consent of the Virginia Public School Authority.
Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the
A-2
, .
.
Registrar to the registered owner by registered mail not more than
90 and not less than 30 days before the date fixed for prepayment
or redemption.
All acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution
and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia to happen, exist or be
performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond have
happened, exist and have been performed in due time, form and
manner as so required, and this Bond, together with all other
indebtedness of the County, is within every debt and other limit
prescribed by the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors
authorizing the issuance of the Bonds provides, and section
15.1-210 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, requires,
that there shall be levied and collected an annual tax upon all
taxable property in the County subject to local taxation
sufficient to provide for the payment of the principal of and
interest on this Bond as the same shall become due which tax shall
be without limitation as to rate and amount and shall be in
addition to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, virginia, has caused this Bond to be signed by its
Chairman, to be countersigned by its Clerk, its seal to be affixed
hereto, and this Bond to be dated , 1991.
COUNTERSIGNED:
(SEAL)
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County,
Virginia
Chairman, Board of
supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia
ASSIGNMENT
FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned sells, assigns and
transfers unto
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE,
OF ASSIGNEE)
PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF
ASSIGNEE:
A-3
.
the within Bond and irrevocably constitutes and appoints
attorney to
exchange said Bond for definitive bonds in lieu of which this Bond
is issued and to register the transfer of such definitive bonds on
the books kept for registration thereof, with full power of
substitution in the premises.
Date:
Registered Owner
Signature Guaranteed:
(NOTICE: The signature above
must correspond with the name
of the Registered Owner as it
appears on the front of this
Bond in every particular,
without alteration or change.)
(NOTICE: Signature(s) must be
guaranteed by a member firm of
the New York stock Exchange or
a commercial bank or trust
company.)
A-4
.. . ,""
SCHEDULE I
[THIS WILL COME FROM VPSA]
A-1
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
DISTRISUTED. T~OARD ^~Et^B~RS
ON__ 'l-.J q! ~'_
L
MEMORANDUM
9'~ tJ,/~ ,P'7f/'
,
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
September 16, 1991
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Voluntary Curbside Recycling Program
At your work session on Wednesday, September 11th, the staff
recommended your consideration to expand the proposed Voluntary
Curbside Recycling Program from a maximum of 1,000 households to a
maximum of 3,000. The ensuing discussion on this program raised a
concern that the pilot program, as proposed, may not succeed unless
the County funded some or all of the private hauler's collection
costs. The estimated participation of 3,000 households was based
on both Rivanna Solid Waste Authority's (RSWA) and the private
handler's assessment that 15-20% of all households will pay a small
additional charge to have curbside collection of recycled
materials. If the private hauler passes on some or all of their
collection costs, this is the level of participation expected.
RSWA met with the private haulers who are participating in the
program and was able to reaffirm that the pilot program should
generate 15-20% participation without underwriting or subsidizing
their collection costs. Individual haulers have not notified their
customers of the program and, thus, no firm numbers are yet
available.
The staff recommends proceeding with the 1,000 household voluntary
program as soon as possible with program availability to all
households (which is expected to be 3,000 households) on January 1,
1992. Delaying expansion to participation by all private haulers
at an estimated 3,000 households will allow for an initial
assessment of participation rates and more realistic cost estimates
for the expanded program for FY 92-93.
The broader issues raised during the work session will be studied
by the staff and provided at a later date for inclusion in the
budget process for FY 1992-1993.
RWT,Jr/dbm
91.130
(
f
F R. (Rick) Bowie
Rivdnna
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901.4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979.1281
October 2, 1991
Charlotte Y Humphris
,Jilck Jouett
Edward H Bain, Jr
Samuf?i Miller
David P. Bowerman
Charlottesville
Walter F PerkinS
Whill:' Hilll
Peter T. Way'
Scottsvil\",
Mr. F. A. Iachetta
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority
P. O. Box 18
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Mr. Iachetta:
Attached is the resolution adopted by the Board on September
18, 1991, requesting the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority to undertake
a study of the feasibility of waste-to-energy and incineration of
solid waste as alternatives to, or in conjunction with, other solid
waste management alternatives.
~:c ~~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
Board of County Supervisors
LEN:bwh
cc: Alvin Edwards
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
~.
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
TO RIVANNA SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY
TO STUDY WASTE-TO- ENERGY ALTERNATIVES
WHEREAS, the operation, maintenance, expansion and closure of
landfills continues to become more complex, regulated and costly;
and
WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia has mandated goals for
reducing household wastes going into landfill facilities; and
WHEREAS, there are alternatives to waste stream reduction
other than recycling; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County has supported the initiatives of the
Charlottesville/Albemarle Solid Waste Task Force of 1989 and the
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Solid Waste Management Plan of
July 1991; and
WHEREAS, the development of a comprehensive assessment of
solid waste management requires the consideration of all
alternatives;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, hereby requests the Rivanna Solid
Waste Authority to undertake a study of the feasibility of
waste-to-energy and incineration of solid waste as alternatives to,
or in conjunction with, other solid waste management alternatives.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular
meeting held on September 18, 1991.
.. ~,t;r.
Clerk, Board of ounty Supervisors
9-/3 _ci-L
Distributed to Board: --"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843
M E M 0 RAN DUM
FROM:
Board of Supervisors
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC ~
TO:
DATE:
September 13, 1991
SUBJECT:
Reading List for September 18 1991
April 3, 1991 - Page 15 (#7) - Page 19 (#9) - Mr. Way
LEN:ec