HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-11-06
FIN A L
NoveIaber 6, 1991
7:00 P.M.
Roo. 7, County Office Building
1) Call to Order.
2) Pledge of Allegiance.
3) Moment of Silence.
4) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIc.
5) *Consent Agenda (on next sheet).
6) SP-9l-29. CBC Partners. Public Hearing on a request for a miniature golf course on 1.4 ac
zoned HC & EC. Property on W side of Rt 29 adjacent to Kegler's Bowling. TM45, PU2Cl.
Charlottesville Dist. This property lies in a designated growth area.
7) SP-9l-45. Roger L. Thomas. Public Hearing on a request for a Home Occupation-Class B on 2.03
ac zoned RA. Property on N side of Rt 618 approx 0.93 mi E of Rt 620. TMl15,P47G.
Scottsville Dist. This property is not located in a designated growth area.
8)
ZMA-9l-06. Greenbrier Square Ltd Partnership. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 3.1
from HC (Proffered) to HC & C-l (both proffered). Property on N side of Greenbrier Dr
500 ft W of Rt 29. TM6lW,P5,Sec 1,Blk A. Charlottesville Dist. Site is in EC Dist.
property lies in a designated growth area. (Defer to Nove.ber 20, 1991.)
9) SP-9l-47. Augusta Lumber & Supply, Inc. Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-82-9 which
permitted a sawmill. Request is to locate a planer and a bldg to house the planer on 20.6 ac
zoned RA. Property on W side of Rt 712 approx. 0.87 mi Sof Rt 692. TM99,P4~A. Samuel
Miller Dist. This property does not lie in a a designated growth area.
ac
approx
This
10) SP-9l-49. Homestead Partners. Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-90-45 & construct a
stream crossing in flood plain of Burruss Branch on 21 ac zoned RA. Property on W side of Rt
601 approx 1/2 mi N of Rt 665. TM29,PlK. White Hall Dist. This property does not lie in a
designated growth area.
11)
SP-9l-50.
crossing
Rt 67l.
area.
Claude E. & Carolyn S. Monger. Public Hearing on a request to construct a stream
in flood plain of an unnamed stream located on S side of Rt 668 approx 0.68 mi W of
TM16,P12&12B. White Hall Dist. This property does not lie in a designated growth
12)
SP-9l-5l. John E. & Kathleen Gruss. Public Hearing on a request to locate commercial boarding
kennel for cats in existing animal hospital on 3.0 ac zoned RA. Property on W side of Rt 743
approx 800 ft S of Rt 663. TM3l,P7B. White Hall Dist. This property is not located in a
designated growth area.
13)
Public Hearing on a request to amend the service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service
Authority to include GLENMORE PRD for water and sewer service. Property consists of approx
1141.7 ac bordered by US Rt 250 E on the N & by the Rivanna River on the S & W. Property
comprises the majority of the Rivanna Village, a designated growth area. TM70D,P6&7,Sec 3;
TM93,P59&60; TM94, P2&11. Rivanna Dist. This is a designated growth area.
14)
Request from Daniel Bieker to include property shown on Tax Map 79 as Parcel 25A near Glenmore
in the Albemarle County Service Authority service area boundaries for water and sewer
service.
15)
Appointments:
a) Appoint a voting member for the VACo Annual Meeting.
b) Milton Area Neigbborllood Studyeo-it1:.ee.
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
Discussion: Board's Meeting Schedule for January, 1992.
Approval of Minutes: April 3, May 8 and July 17, 1991.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Executive Session: Sale of Property.
Adjourn.
CON S K N T
A G K N D A
FOR APPROVAL:
5.1 Request for resolution to have Hunt Country Lane in Wingate Farm Subdivision taken into the
Secondary System of Highways.
5.2 Memorandum dated October 17, 1991, from Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance, to Robert W.
tucker, Jr., County Executive, in which Mr. Breeden noted that an OAR Pre-Trial Diversion grant
was recently revised and reduced by some $6030.53. The Board is requested to approve a
modification in the budget for both the revenue and expenditure of this grant.
5.3 Memorandum dated October 18, 1991, from Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled
"Request for Contribution to the Bicentennial of the Bill of Rights Committee." It is
recommended that a donation of $200 be authorized to be taken from the Board's contingency fund
to help sponsor this event.
5.4 Memorandum dated October 25, 1991, from Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled
"Granting Easement and Right-of-way to Virginia Department of Transportation for Walnut Creek
Park Road." The Board is requested to authorize the Chairman to sign both the deed and the
plats which convey easements and dedicate a 50-foot right-of-way to VDoT for the access road and
related drainage/utilities.
5.1ta Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road off of Route 712 known as the loop
circulation road at Paul D. Cale Kl~t:ary School.
5.4b Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road off of Route 810 known as the loop
circulation road at Crozet K1~t:ary School.
5.4c Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road off of Route 20 known as the loop
circulation road at Stony Point K1~t:ary School.
5.W Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road off of Route 627 known as the loop
circulation road at Benjallin F. Yancey Kl~t:ary School.
5.48 Request for resolution to have Oldfields Road in 'lhe no.estead Subdivision taken into the
Secondary SystEa of Highways.
FOR INFORMATION:
5.5 Letter dated October 8, 1991, from J. A. Echols, Assistant Resident Engineer, enclosing a copy
of the Fiscal Summary of the Albemarle County 1990-91 Secondary Budget.
5.6 Letter dated October 17, 1991, from D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Engineer, re: area near Route-.-
854/Route 29 where parking has been occurring.
5.7 Memorandum dated October 17, 1991, from John G. Milliken, Secretary of Transportation, outlining
several proposals to improve the delivery of transportation services in the Commonwealth.
Written comments will be accepted until December 15 and several public meeti~gs are scheduled
around the state to address the proposals. .
5.8 Copy of "Legislative Alert" from the Virginia Associiition of Counties re: Secretary Milliken's
transportation proposals.
5.9 1990 Development Activity Report as prepared by the Department of Planning and Community
Development.
5.10 1991 Third Quarter Building Report prepared by the County Department of Planning and Community
Development.
5.11 Copy of Minutes of the Planning Commission for October 8 and October 22, 1991.
5.12 Report dated September 30, 1991, from the Department of the Army, entitled "Status Report,
James River Basin, Virginia & West Virginia Drought Preparedness Study."
5.13 Copy of Letter dated October 25, 1991, from Amelia M. Patterson, Zoning Administrator,
addressed to Garland M. Gay, Jr., entitled: "Official Determination of Number of Parcels _
Section 10.3.1, Tax Map 99, Parcel 108, Tax Map 99, Parcel 108A and Tax Map 100, Parcel 14."
5.14 Copy of the 1990 Census of Population and Housing (Summary Population and Housing
Characteristics) for Virginia, from the U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (on
file in the Clerk's Office).
5.15 Copy of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Year Ended June 30, 1991, from the
Albemarle County Service Authority.
5.16 Copy of Application of Behind the Scenes, Inc., filed with the State Corporation Commission,
datBd October 1, 1991, for a certificate of public convenience and necessity as a special or
charter party carrier by motor v~hicle.
5.17 Copy of Application of B T S Brokers, Inc., filed with the State Corporation Commission, dated
October 1, 1991, for a li.;ense to broker the transportation of passengers by motor vehicle.
David P. Bowerman
Charlottesville
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 Humphris
l<-lel-: .JOUl!tt
Edward H Bam. Jr
Samu{>1 Miller
Walter F Perkins
While Hall
F. R (Rick) BowIe
Rivanna
I'der T Way
Scoll5viHe
FROM:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Directorplan ing and
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
November 7, 1991
Community Development
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT: Board Actions of November 6, 1991
Following is a list of actions taken by the Board at its meeting on Novem-
ber 6, 1991:
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
There was no one present to make a request of the Board.
Agenda Item No. 5.1. Request for resolution to have Hunt Country Lane in
Wingate Farm Subdivision taken into the Secondary System of Highways. ADOPTED.
Original resolution sent to Engineering.
Agenda Item No. 5.2. Memorandum dated October 17, 1991, from Melvin A.
Breeden, Director of Finance, to Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County'Executive, in which
Mr. Breeden noted that an OAR Pre-Trial Diversion grant was recently revised and
reduced by some $6030.53. The Board is requested to approve a modification in the
budget for both the revenue and expenditure of this grant. APPROVED modification
in the budget for both the revenue and expenditure of the OAR Pre-Trial Diversion
grant. Signed appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Agenda Item No. 5.3. Memorandum dated October 18, 1991, from Robert W.
Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled "Request for Contribution to the Bicenten-
nial of the Bill of Rights Committee." It is recommended that a donation of $200
be authorized to be taken from the Board's contingency fund to help sponsor this
event. AUTHORIZED.
. Agenda Item No. 5.4. Memorandum dated October 25, 1991, from Robert W.
Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled "Granting Easement and Right-of-way to
Virginia Department of Transportation for Walnut Creek Park Road." The Board is
requested to authorize the Chairman to sign both the deed and the plats which
convey easements and dedicate a 50-foot right-of-way to VDoT for the access road
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
November 7, 1991
Page 2
and related drainage/utilities. AUTHORIZED chairman to sign both the deed and the
plats which convey easements. Plats sent to Planning for signature. Deed sent to
Clerk of Circuit Court for recording.
Agenda Item No. 5.4a. Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road
off of Route 712 known as the loop circulation road at Paul H. Cale Elementary
School. ADOPTED. Original resolution forwarded to Engineering.
Agenda Item No. 5.4b. Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road
off of Route 810 known as the loop circulation road at Crozet Elementary School.
ADOPTED. Original resolution sent to Engineering.
Agenda Item No. 5.4c. Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road
off of Route 20 known as the loop circulation road at Stony Point Elementary
School. ADOPTED. Original resolution sent to Engineering.
Agenda Item No. 5.4d. Resolution to add and abandon certain sections of road
off of Route 627 known as the loop circulation road at Benjamin F. Yancey Elemen-
tary School. ADOPTED. Original resolution sent to Engineering.
Agenda Item No. 5.4e. Request for resolution to have Oldfields Road in
Homestead Subdivision taken into the Secondary System of Highways. ADOPTED.
Original resolution sent to Engineering.
Agenda Item No.6. SP-91-29. CBC Partners. Public Hearing on a request for
a miniature golf course on 1.4 ac zoned HC & EC. Property on W side of Rt 29
adjacent to Kegler's Bowling. TM45, Pl12C1. Charlottesville Dist. This property
lies in a designated growth area. APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Hours of operation shall be between 9 a.m. and 12 a.m. weekdays and 9
a.m. and 1 a.m. weekends;
2. Development shall be in general accord with plan stamped received June
10, 1991 and initialed WDF;
3. Restrooms must be added to the site.
Agenda Item No.7. SP-91-45. Roger L. Thomas. Public Hearing on a request
for a Home Occupation-Class B on 2.03 ac zoned RA. Property on N side of Rt 618
approx 0.93 mi E of Rt 620. TMl15,P47G. Scottsville Dist. This property is not
located in a designated growth area. APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. There shall be no change in the outside appearance of the buildings or
premises, or other visible evidence of the conduct of such home occupa-
tion other than one sign;
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
November 7, 1991
Page 3
2. Home occupation shall comply with performance standards set forth in
Section 4.14;
3. This home occupation shall take place within the shed structure located
in Attachment B of this report (as described on plat of lots 1 thru 5, a
division of property designated on Tax Map 115 as Parcel 47, the proper-
ty of Curtis Lee Naylor, located in the Scottsville Magisterial Dis-
trict, Albemarle County, Virginia, dated September 3, 1987, and prepared
by R. O. Snow);
4. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of sight distance;
5. No employees or customers coming to the site.
Agenda Item No.8. ZMA-91-06. Greenbrier Square Ltd Partnership. Public
Hearing on a request to rezone 3.1 ac from HC (Proffered) to HC & C-l (both prof-
fered). Property on N side of Greenbrier Dr approx 500 ft W of Rt 29.
TM61W,P5,Sec l,Blk A. Charlottesville Dist. Site is in EC Dist. This property
lies in a designated growth area. DEFERRED to November 20, 1991.
Agenda Item No.9. SP-91-47. Augusta Lumber & Supply, Inc. Public Hearing
on a request to amend SP-82-9 which permitted a sawmill. Request is to locate a
planer and a bldg to house the planer on 20.6 ac zoned RA. Property on W side of
Rt 712 approx. 0.87 mi S of Rt 692. TM99,P49A. Samuel Miller Dist. This pro-
perty does not lie in a a designated growth area. APPROVED with an amendment to
Condition #3 of SP-82-09 as follows: 3. Approval is for addition of drying
kiln, boiler plant and planer and planer building only. Any other additional uses
such as the proposed cut-up plan(shall require amendment of this petition. Planer
- -,,, '..oH_' '991 and initialled W.D.F.
~e~ /II/~ Pi-/Zl-
P/cC/L ^ I /\ tJ
/t<1h~ /e?/er u-/ /l/lrV &
!fI~J~J;;f4J~~/~::IRu;~'5
conditions of SP-82-09: 7.
~egetation to achieve ade-
s. Public Hearing on a
g in flood plain of Burruss
1 approx 1/2 mi N of Rt 665.
in a designated growth
Isi,on control permit;
~.
VV...t'~~_h__ II permit requirements per-
taining to disturbance of a perennial stream;
3.
Department of Engineering approval of crossing design to ensure compli-
ance with Section 30.3;
4.
Approval by the Water Resource Manager of a water quality impact assess-
ment.
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
November 7, 1991
Page 4
The Board asked if there would be any change to the initial Special Use
Permit issued to build a pond. Mr. St. John responded that it would not.
Agenda Item No. 11. SP-91-50. Claude E. & Carolyn S. Monger. Public Hear-
ing on a request to construct a stream crossing in flood plain of an unnamed
stream located on S side of Rt 668 approx 0.68 mi W of Rt 671. TM16,P12&12B.
White Hall Dist. This property does not lie in a designated growth area.
APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. The plat shall not be signed until the following approvals have been
obtained:
a. County Engineer approval of stream crossing to be designed for a
ten year runoff rate beneath the structure;
b. Water Resources Manager approval of stream crossing;
c. Staff approval of plat.
2. The crossing shall not be constructed until the following approvals have
been obtained:
a. Department of Engineering issuance of an Erosion Control permit
(Grading permit);
b. Issuance of VMRC permit and Corps of Engineers permit.
Agenda Item No. 12. SP-91-51. John E. & Kathleen Gruss. Public Hearing on
a request to locate commercial boarding kennel for cats in existing animal hos-
pital on 3.0 ac zoned RA. Property on W side of Rt 743 approx 800 ft S of Rt 663.
TM31,P7B. White Hall Dist. This property is not located in a designated growth
area. APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Animals shall be confined to an enclosed structure. Noise measured at
the nearest lot line shall not exceed forty (40) dec1bels;
2. Commercial boarding shall be limited to cats only.
Agenda Item No. 13. Public Hearing on a request to amend the service area
boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include GLENMORE PRD for
water and sewer service. Property consists of approx 1141.7 ac bordered by US Rt
250 E on the N & by the Rivanna River on the S & W. Property comprises the major-
ity of the Rivanna Village, a designated growth area. TM79D,P6&7,Sec 3;
TM93,P59&60; TM94, P2&11. Rivanna Dist. This is a designated growth area.
APPROVED amending the service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Au-
thority to include Glenmore PRD for water and sewer service. Parcels to be in-
cluded are, Tax Map 79D, Section 3, Parcels 6 and 7; Tax Map 93, Parcels 59 and
60; Tax Map 94, Parcels 2 and 11.
Agenda Item No. 14. Request from Daniel Bieker to include property shown on
Tax Map 79 as Parcel 25A near Glenmore in the Albemarle County Service Authority
service area boundaries for water and sewer service. PUBLIC HEARING set for
Memo to: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. and
V. Wayne Cilimberg
November 7, 1991
Page 5
December 18, 1991, to consider full jurisdictional area designation for all
remaining properties in the Village of Rivanna, including Mr. Daniel Bieker's.
Please provide Clerk with a list of names and addresses of landowner's by December
1, 1991, per Attachment C - parcel listing.
Agenda Item No. 15. Appointments:
a) Appoint a voting member for the VACo Annual Meeting. APPOINTED
Mrs. Humphris as the voting member for Albemarle County at the VACo
Annual Meeting.
b) Milton Area Neighborhood Study Committee. On agenda for next week.
Agenda Item No. 16. Discussion: Board's Meeting Schedule for January, 1992.
Set organizational meeting for January 2, 1992, at 4:00 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 17. Approval of Minutes: April 3, May 8 and July 17, 1991.
APPROVED April 3, 1991 minutes.
Agenda Item No. 18. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Agenda Item No. 19. Executive Session: Sale of Property. Voted to accept
the high bid of $30,500 for the Southside Health Center and $1,000 for the trailer
authorizing County Attorney to prepare deed conveying property and then authorized
Chairman to sign deed selling Souths ide Health Center property.
The Board asked for report on the cumulative effect of Official Determination
of Number of Parcels.
LEN:bwh
Attachments (10)
cc: Robert B. Brandenburger
Richard E. Huff, II
Roxanne White
Bruce Woodzell
Amelia Patterson
George R. St. John
File
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR
91/92
NUMBER
910021
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUND
GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
REVISION TO PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION GRANT
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
1100039000566110 PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION GRANT ($6,030.53)
TOTAL
($6,030.53)
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
2100024000240421
PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION GRANT
($6,030.53)
TOTAL
($6,030.53)
************************************************************************
REQUESTING COST CENTER:
FINANCE
APPROVALS:
SIGNATURE
DATE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
,?/;$t<'-
/o-/s-?/
//--?~~
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229,
the Virginia Department of Transportation be and is hereby
requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject
to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Depart-
ment, the following road in Wingate Farm Subdivision:
Hunt Country Lane:
Beginning at Station 10+25, a point common to the centerline
of Hunt Country Lane and the edge of pavement of State Route
676, thence in a northeasterly direction 3389.55 feet to
Station 44+14.55, the end of the cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Trans-
portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-
of-way and drainage easements along this requested addition as
recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court
of Albemarle County in Deed Book 903, page 251 and Deed Book 1084,
page 526.
* * * * *
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 Albema~i~.c.~ ou ~y'. Virginia, at a regular
meeting held on November 6, 199~~_ ~~~
Clerk, Board of county~p~rs
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229,
the Virginia Department of Transportation be and is hereby
requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject
to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway
Department, the following road in Homestead Subdivision:
Oldfields Road
Beginning at Station 0+25, a point common to the
centerline of Oldfields Road and the edge of pavement at
State Route 609, thence in a northeasterly direction
1551.49 feet to Station 15+76.49, the end of the
cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Trans-
portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50-foot unobstructed
right-of-way and drainage easements along the requested
addition as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 914, page
365.
* * * * *
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 November 6, 1991.
c
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route 9008 used by
buses at Stoney Point Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 20, thence in an southern
direction 526 feet to station 5+26, the end of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of pavement of
Route 20 and the centerline of the school's circulation road, thence in a
southerly direction approximately 526 feet to station 5+26, the end of the loop
circulation road.
';-c,-:***
I, Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervi~ors of Albemarl
County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
d;~
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route 627 used by
buses at Benjamin F. Yancey Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 627, thence in an easterly
direction approximately 520 feet to station 5+20, the end of the loop
circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of pavement of
Route 627 and the centerline of the school's circulation road, thence in a
easterly direction approximately 420 feet to station 4+20, the end of the loop
circulation road.
* * * * *
I, Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing wtiting is a true,
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarl
County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
A-J~
C1erk, Board of County Supervisors
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has constructed a new Route to
be used by buses at Paul H. Cale Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 712, thence in a south-
easterly direction 840 feet to station 8+40, the end of the loop circulation
road.
* * * * *
I, Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarl
County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
~~~
Clerk, Board of County Supervlsors
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has abandoned Route 9010 used by
buses at Crozet Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 810, thence in an south-
easterly direction 986 feet to station 9+86, the end of the loop circulation
road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of pavement of
Route 810 and the centerline of the school's circulation road, thence in a
westerly direction approximately 789 feet to station 7+89, the end of the loop
circulation road.
* * * * *
I,
correct
County,
Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing wtiting is a true,
copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarl
Virginia, at a regular meeting he~~~~
Clerk, Board of Co~nty Supervisors
~ ~ '""'l A
~ B.
r ~
=1 N .2-
-r {\i
.~ ~ ~ I
"1' \'J
\'J
r m -\ S
S 1\1
~ ~ In
,m iii
~ ~ JI
f' (\
IT, '"
, ~
, ,
r'-~'
.~
i .I
I
: ~ r
i
I i .
,
I ~
I (t\
~ ~
.,
~
()
J r
v
\...-
"
\ \
,
, ,
\ \
, \ \
, \
\ \ \.'
, '
- . -. - -
. ,
'--
------.....
"
"
,
, -,
,
, '.
- \
"
, \
\ \
"
/
/ I
I
. I
r
I
L \l
(I~=- :
I h
"
\ \ \ \
\
\
\
,
\
I
/
./
\ \
, ,
I
\
\ ..... "
-t.
\ ,
\, ,
~'--~~~~....:..;', \ ~~, 'c~' ~ _,~, ~ ~ _,<
, - , -- ,
; - , - ~\ ' ,
-r~-_.~~ ~ ' i;') : :/~~+~.c :;;
T-'_ ~'~i' ,
~ -- ~ ~,' '<:;.)': 'f", > ':'; ;-~::
,~ ~'/' , I, '__, J ,
. ---~~'~~' 1::'-'_'~,~:~ :..~~_<_,,;.
, , , '- - " - - - \
"
,---- , ,
' J"
L......___...
_J
,--
I
,
/
-
~
f\
-'
+-
X
J
L
\J
(l\
I I
I I
I "
I ,
\ I
J"
\\\
S'
~
~
I
-I
,
./ I
}"
I
S
~
1\
01
,
.. I
/ '
I
I
.r--~..__
"
'>1 .-
Il
- ----
~
1"
-4
~
I I '
! I
I I
,,)
,
\
\
\
"
r
-.... ...-
\
\
&6
(O~ ~ c(v-'
;'~\ cP-::\oY.,- --0/ -<l
"'\c 0 l\J, \').
ITi'f\ -\ --v~
~. ~ ~
~CJ
!
/ ._.~-\
/---- I
... I u2, /lI p55~1
-, - '-7-<---C)b 275 p-;e~
! J_
TTACHMl::N I vJ
IA
-~-------
L
ft."'S .,5.HOwN ON
[) e, 91 P '12.'1. '"
DEl. III P 553
\v..f
S
" E-E..
\;IV-<
~V'-11"
.... --(
L__, _I
\"
~O\ "
~ . --- -,--
~ . -~-,--,
----<-=-----------~ .:'
"'~'^~ &0'"","" [..~
J I Wi &^,~M<~hhi~
, ,
inN.
:: II
" : ~
; :
, .
~
1-
. !2i
(,,~ I
~\I
01;
~~
.~
'-'1
u \
~ :Ob
,., :1
l.
"
--.Q
~
~
~l
"-l
"/r~~
rI/' [ ";;
'^ II
0;- I
/'" ,~ '- X~/
'J ~ /
"';' ~ ;'
. ,::;.s: I "",j
'*'/
~ '
-j''':>/v
:,: / cf /\\
/ "'/
/
~," ,I
% --.'
~
>\{k>>,.,.
~
.-e;.~ c...
..,:...'"'{""op..". P\,....J
~ Bu\\..-
f Po'WE..LL
JAME..S
D E> ~iD'"
[TAL
.~O'.:''o!
.:'<1' ",. .
. ':V .. ", '"
. ilu::o.... Fc>,,::,~
5'-1'10\S'z...o
0,,-\1'
~f~~
H()~ fit .7J;i
" I
.\.-- . . ' . ===---- " - . ' . ."
- .'
,
\~ ....
- ' . 'S
.,.~
. ....~:~~~7-C. ./. "
....... ~ ~ ,.' '
~.,... ~''1D .....
,......', ;;\'?o~_-:..
. .
:.
OF 2718 AC.
SURVEY, ,
PHYSICAL PARCEL 49A
DESIGNATED :~D PARCEL A.
TAX MAP 99 ('.,,, M' AI ~n ^
,......,....,. ~,.,.- ^ 1'1 '" I r
p ~ZO
. )011 /q I
[.JOf
PHYSI
M
GLOEC
J-lUHVLllS
NOTE T:ll$ P~~?"I()Nt.T(O ^~)
IN AN nl1[ f~ ULS
IATTACHMENT CIIPag~ 1\
TAX MAP PARCEL
79 25A
79 25B
79 25C
79 25
79 26
79 28
79 29
79 30
79 31
79 32
79 33
79 34
79 35A
79 35
790 1
790 2
790 3
790 4
790 5
790 8
790 9
790 10
790 11
790 12
790 13
790 14
790 15
790 16
790 17
790 18
790 19
93 61B
93 61
93 62
93 61A
80 46A
80 46B
80 46C
80 460
80 46E
80 46
80 47
80 48
80 49A
80 49
80 50
80 51
80 52
80 53
80 54A
IATTACHMENT cl fPage 2/
80 54
80 55A
80 55B
80 55C
80 55
80 56A
80 56
80 57A
80 57
80 58A
80 58
94 lA
94 1
94 3
94 4
94 5
94 6
94 7A
94 7
94 8A
94 8C
94 8D
94 8E
94 8F
94 8
94 9
94 10
94 47A
94 47
94 48
94 49C
94 50
94 51
94 57
94 58
94 59
94 60
94 61
94 62
94 63
94 64
94 65
94 66
94 67
94 68
94 69
94 70
94 71
94 72
94 73
94 74
94 7B
94 49B
F R. (Rick) Bowie
Rivdnna
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 229014596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979-1281
Charlotte Y Humphns
,ldCI-. ,j(Juetl
Edward H Bam. Jr
S.'.lmuel Miller
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
Walter F Perkins
While Hall
Peter T Way
ScrJllSvdle
TO: Mr. Hoyt B. Alford, III, Civil Engineer
Engineering Department
FROM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CM~~-
DATE: November 8, 1991
SUBJECT: Road Resolutions
The Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on November 6, 1991,
adopted the attached resolutions requesting that the following
roads be accepted into the Secondary System of Highways:
Hunt Country Road
Oldfields Road
and, to add and abandon certain sections of roads known as the loop
circulation road at:
Paul H. Cale Elementary School
Crozet Elementary School
Stony Point Elementary School
Benjamin F. Yancey Elementary School.
LEN:bwh
Attachments
..
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229,
the Virginia Department of Transportation be and is hereby requested
to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final
inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the
following road in Wingate Farm Subdivision:
Hunt Country Lane:
Beginning at Station 10+25, a point common to the center-
line of Hunt Country Lane and the edge of pavement of
State Route 676, thence in a northeasterly direction
3389.55 feet to Station 44+14.55, the end of the
cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Trans-
portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 40-foot unobstructed
right-of-way and drainage easements along this requested addition
as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 903, page 251 and Deed Book
1084, page 526.
* * * * *
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 November 6'~ .~~
Clerk, Board of'County Supervisors
,.
I
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisor
County, virg\nia, that pursuant to Virginia de Section 33.1-229,
the Virginia ~epartment of Transportation b and is hereby
requested to a~cept into the Secondary Sys em of Highways, subject
to final inspec~on and approval by the sident Highway Depart-
ment, the followI~g road in Wingate Far Subdivision:
,
Hunt Countr L
Beginning at Sta 'on oint common to the centerline
of Hunt Country La e dge of pavement of State Route
676, thence in a no heaster y direction 3389.55 feet to
Station 44+14.55, the nd the c~u- -sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED t the Virg'nia Department of Trans-
portation be and is hereby g ara teed a foot unobstructed right-
of-way and drainage easeme salon thi requested addition as
recorded by plats in the fice of e Clerk of the Circuit Court
of Albemarle County in D d Book 903, age 251 and Deed Book 1084,
page 526.
* * * * *
regoing
by the
regular
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that
writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopt
Board of Supervisors of Albema~t~.c.~ou ty,.Virginia, at
meeting held on November 6, 199~~_ ~
Clerk, Board of County Supervis rs
..
,- jj-/-1 J
, 9 LI!Q~Zi:i~)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
~,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lettie E. Neher, Board of Supervisors Clerk
FROM: Hoyt B. Alford III, civil Engineer tt~
DATE:
RE:
October 17, 1991
Wingate Subdivision - Hunt Country Lane
The following is a description of Hunt Country Lane which is
located in the Wingate Farm Subdivision.
HUNT COUNTRY LANE
Beginning at station 10+25, a point common to the centerline
of Hunt Country Lane and the edge of pavement of State Route
676, thence in a northeasterly direction 3389.55 feet to
station 44+14.55, the end of the cul de sac.
This road has a fifty foot (50') right-of way and has been built
in accordance with the approved road plans. The deed book
references for right-of-way dedication and drainage easements
are deed book 903, page 251 and deed book 1084, page 526.
HBA/
~
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
September 17, 1991
Charlotte Y Humphris
Jdck Jouel!
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
Walter F. Perkms
White Hall
F. R. (Rick) Bowie
Rivanna
Peter T Way
Scollsvil1e
Mr. Brian P. Smith, P.E.
Vice President
Gloeckner & Osborne, Inc.
700 East High Street
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Mr. Smith:
Your request to have Hunt Country Lane in the Wingate Farm
Subdivision taken into the State Secondary System of Highways was
received September 12, 1991 and has now been referred to the County
Engineer. When he has certified that all work has been completed
in accordance with approved plans, this request will be placed
before the Board of Supervisors for adoption of the necessary
resolution.
Very truly yours,
~;~ -
Lettie E. N er, Clerk, CMC
Board of Supervisors
LEN:bh
cc: Mr. Hoyt B. Alford
. '
PRINCIPALS
GLOECKNER & OSBORNE, INC.
ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND LAND PLANNERS
700 EAST HIGH STREET
CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22901
TELEPHONE: (804) 971-1591
FAX NO: (804) 293-7612
ASSOCIATES
KURT M. GLOECKNER, P.E., P.L.S.
PRESIDENT
DAVID C. BLANKENBAKER, P.L.S.
SAMUEL E. SAUNDERS, III, P.E.
BRIAN P. SMITH, P.E.
VICE-PRESIDENT
September 11, 1991
r
Ms. Lettie E. Neher
Clerk for the Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
.,
1 II
Re: Wingate Farm Subdivision - Hunt Country Lane
85-541-02
Dear Ms. Neher,
On behalf of our client, Mr. William A. Edgerton, I am
requesting a resolution be created for Hunt Country Lane in the
Wingate Farm Subdivision. This project is located on the north
side of Garth Road (Route 676) approximately one (1) mile from
the Foxfield Race Course.
This road project has been completed to the satisfaction of
the Engineering Department and the VDOT and is now ready for the
acceptance into the state system.
Thank you in advance for assistance with this process. If
you have any questions or if you need additional information
please don't hesitate to contact me.
lkin ,erelY..Y7.". # '/" /
~... ~/
_ Brian~ :-- Snhth, P.E.
Vice President
BPS:tpm
cc: Mr. William A. Edgerton
Mr. Hoyt Alford
\wingate\neher
-' ,
.,
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979-1281
Charlotte Y Humphns
,Jock ,Jou('1l
Edward H Bam. Jr
Samuel MIller
Wdlter F Perkins
Whilt' H.'lll
F. R (Rick) Bowie
Rivanna
Peter T. Way
Scollsvill.!
MEMO TO: Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance
FROM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC ~
DATE: Novenber 8, 1991
SUBJECT: Revision to OAR Pre-Trial Diversion Grant/Approved
November 6, 1991
Attached is the signed appropriation form for modification in
the budget for both the revenue and expenditure of this grant.
LEN:bwh
Attachment
cc: Roxanne White
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR
91/92
NUMBER
910021
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUND
GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
REVISION TO PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION GRANT
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
1100039000566110 PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION GRANT ($6,030.53)
TOTAL
($6,030.53)
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
2100024000240421 PRE-TRIAL DIVERSION GRANT ($6,030.53)
TOTAL
($6,030.53)
************************************************************************
REQUESTING COST CENTER:
APPROVALS:
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
FINANCE
SIGNATURE
DATE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
~~~~.~
/0 -/s-?/
//7-%
. . c.
~,) B[)"'d: -' 1- 1- 1/
f.,;::';(!';, 1',.. '~). ~9J.j@{-!j,J.)
. .
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Finance
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Telephone (804) 296-5855
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Fin~nce ~
October 17, 1991
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Appropriation OAR Pre-Trial Diversion
Grant 92-A7641
Attached is an appropriation request for the Pre-Trial Diversion
grant. This grant was recently revised and reduced by $6,030.53.
The grant was originally awarded for $62,753.00. The revised
grant is valued at $56,722.47.
Attachment
Copy: Patricia L. Smith
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE OFFtCE
.
"
..
.,f ..
Edward H. Bain, Jr
Samuel Milll!T
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979-1281
M E M 0 RAN DUM
Charlone Y Humphris
,J,\ck Jouett
David P. Bowerman
Charlottesville
Wa.ller F Perkins
\,I,)hih:> Hall
F. R. (RICk) Bowie
Rivanna
Peter T. Way
Scolt5vill.:!
DATE:
NOVEMBER 11, 1991
TO:
ELLA CAREY
SUBJECT:
BONNIE HARRIS t; ~
CONTRIBUTION TO BICENTENNIAL OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS
COMMITTEE
FROM:
This is to inform you that the request for a $200 donation to
the Bicentennial of the Bill of Rights Committee was approved by
the Board at their November 6, 1991 meeting.
Should you have any questions, please advise.
bh
..
Distributed to l1oard:. tl /, )91
Agenda Item No. _q/,.. IIO/€'{fi;3)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors ~
1T
County Executive I
-.
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.,
October 18, 1991
RE: Request for Contribution to the Bicentennial of the Bill
of Rights Committee
Several local attorneys including Judge Helvin, are planning to
sponsor an event on December 14 at the Albemarle County Courthouse
to celebrate the bicentennial of the ratification of the Bill of
Rights. As part of the celebration, there will be a mock trial by
area high school students, debates by middle school students,
posters by elementary students, and games such as a Bill of Rights
trivia and an "Ask A Lawyer" booth at the Court House.
In order to purchase prizes for the game winners and gifts for
participants in addition to other necessary supplies, the group is
requesting a small contribution from Albemarle County. Since
Albemarle County generously donated $500 to the Bicentennial of the
Constitution Committee in 1987, it is recommended that a donation
of $200 be authorized out of the Board's contingency fund to help
sponsor this event. Should you have any questions on this project,
please feel free to call me.
RWT,Jr/RWW/dbm
91.181
..;'. ~
'oJ
t,') B0~rd: 11- L--:5 /, .
. '"'' 2L!J.L(Q(pj5&.)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
CC)iJr\: (;'.. (
Dl\f,;:~' ,.:-. .,
, I' .'
j f::
I:~.:: OCT ~:5
!: \.
U .~' ::,~;;, ':.
30f-,;,L,) C;
. ~, .:} t- ~ t
.1
.. r;;"'.
. "'. i ; ~,
" \'
\: It \
,I I ' \
.: I!
/ \, :
,'; I
,-\ - ,,~,'-'"
MEMORANDUM
: :~;O~~S
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Albemarle County Board of superVisors~
r--
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive 1
October 25, 1991
Granting Easement and Right-of-Way to VDoT for Walnut
Creek Park Road
The attached deed coveys drainage easements and dedicates a 50 foot
right-of-way to the Virginia Department of Transportation for the
Walnut Creek Park access road and related drainage/utilities as
shown on the attached plat.
I request the Board to authorize the Chairman to sign both the deed
and the plats on behalf of the Board of Supervisors.
RWT,Jr/RBB/dbm
9l.183
Attachment
of
THIS DEED, made t.his 8th day of Novembp.r , 1991, by and
between THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, GRANTOR, and THE
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, acting through its Department of
Transportation, Grantee;
WIT N E SSE T H:
WHEREAS, at a meeting duly called by the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, a resolut.ion was duly passed
authorizing the conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia,
Department of Transportation, of the below-described easement and
right-of-way;
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten
Dollars ($10.0Q) cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the
Grantor does hereby GRANT and CONVEY to the Grantee with Special
Warranty of Title, the perpetual right-of.-way and easement to
construct, reconstruct, alter, operate, and maintain a public
street or highway, including any necessary appurtenances thereto,
drainage and/or utilities over, above, upon, and across lands and
property of the Grantor, the area embracing the easement being
situated in the Scottsville Magisterial District, Albemarle
County, Virginia, known as Walnut Creek Park and described as
follows:
Being as shown on plat of Gloeckner & Osborne, Inc.,
dated August 27, 1991, entitled "Plat Showing Access
Road 50' Right-of-Way Walnut Creek," Sheets 1 of 4
through 4 of 4, containing 8.085 acres, more or less,
of land for perpetual easement; and being a part of
the same land acquired by the Grantor by deed recorded
in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
County, Virginia, in Deed Book 912 page 611.
t
For a more particular description of the land herein
conveyed, reference is made to copies of Sheets 1 of
4 through 4 of 4, attached hereto as a part of this
conveyance and recorded simultaneously herewith in the
State Highway Plat Book, Book , page
The Grantor covenants and agrees for itself, its successors
and assigns, that the consideration mentioned above and paid to
it, shall be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation for the
easement, and for damages, if any, which may result by reason of
the use to which the Grantee will put the same.
WITNESS the following signature and seal:
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
By. ~L;P~ e~
(Seal)
Title: Chairman
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Q~ The foregoing instrument was ackngwledged bef~re me this
U day of -9StoL'I,! 1991, by .....i, 1<, ~8owu.. ,
('.'hfl/r/ntJ.j} w~'7 ~ the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia. .
/f"fu, tJ(lr
Notary Publi
My commission expires:
, J::XPiRES rv1/\'( 29,1893
2
'\ "
G') ,
n ~s 3: ~co~ 0 o):'~O;ac:z:r:~
t:t: t;) f:.:I:j -< ~~,." ~ 0'" ,." Z ",
0 ~o ::o:::!:!~r;;;C:O):.::OfT1
~~I~ ,,::0'" ~~
0 ,.,,0 ~~::or-~~o~O
3:' ::0 . ~ 00""S5~~8_~
s: 3:~
~Ol - -I ::::13:'(1)(;)::0(1)-
(I) ""0 -:-l d () ,.,,' Z 0 ()
tzjtzjtIJ~ ~ ~Z o ~<: ~):.~~ 0
0 ~
UJ~ Z -(;) 0 :--I -I):. Z:-I ~
E"~ ~ (I) ~~o_ZoO:tO
~ ~ ~ fT1(1)<:(I)-<~"" Z ~
w ES~~ ~ r- 2: ~o
-0 COlJ;-<d::O",~ ", (/)
$'C)mo ;0 -< fT1~ ~::o~fT1
::r: I UJ ,." "'0 ~ (I)-I):.COI"l1(1) ."r- ~
(I) 03:' c: -I r- r-" ::0 w :--1::0):. :g
l;) C/J ~ lI:l ):.~ to O?or-O~lJ:t~S
~~ 0 C "'r-"(I)r-"O::Or-,, ~
-<-I 0 f- r-"rr,0 00 0
~BI~ ~~ 3:':--1);3:' lJ~OfT1 ~
-<::Or;:tr-,,-t3!(I)Z(I) r-
ro t:z:j (I) =,\c oor-,,;o(l)~
CO .. ~ <:r-,,~):."'d""~Qj
0 0):. <:(I)C::OO-lr-"
~ sa ~ ~~~ e.v>",):.O
(') g ~~~~
. -.. r-" Or-"
(.Q . '"
.I~ 0
::0
o ::00 -j-j-j
(JJ fTlfTl 5:: 5:: I
<nO LJLJ(j)
to on --
N CJ> ooLJ
r;.J:::!-joo~
LJ oO~~LJ
z-j
.. )> --J (J1 fTl
r ~
-<
(J)
)><><'CJ1>~
Cl-ir<iOClr
G)~tJj> "Cl>
CetI=jH~I?=j~
cnZ~L ~(J.)
--f ~ > Z c;1 (J.) Ul
~ > ES ,.... ~ ::d ~
- M~IO~
'JO>~
<.0 () I-J:j tj Z
<.0 0 I 41
C::::()~
~~~
..~ trj
trj
~
I n
+:>en..t>0Jeno
N' 0J+:>!XJZ
--JO(J1:--J-<n
. en' +:> 0 <n
..t>U1U1--JN-j
en --J
--J)>N)>)><n
n no
)>-n)>O::O
...u,,::O I]
OfTl' 'fTlfTl.,
::0 (j)::O<n<n
fTl fTl
<n <n
(Xl
(Xl
N
o
o
o
~
(J)
I
fTl
~
11
>
~
~
....
o
I]
~
o
II
::0
o
2
(J)
~
~
~
~
o
."
C
ITI
C
~
:::I
o
z
..
-j I )>
IfTlr
-::or
<nfTl
OO~
1]2)>
1])> 2
0::0)>
IT1 fT1 G)
. fTl
~~
r(J)
ofT1
5::
rfT1
OZ
o-j
)>(J)
-j(J)
fTlI
00
(JJ:E
-<2
sn
o
CD
UI
)>
n
:0
ITI
en
to
~~
~Gi
~
~~
~
~Ol
"'00
~O
SC:
(/)~
~~
(/)
2
o
-j
1:1
"UI-I
CfTlI
OJ::O(J)
rfTl
()0(}1
20
C_
(J)(J))>
fTl ()
. Ie)
fTlfTl
::O(J)
fTl(/)
OJ
-<::0
00
fTl)>
00
()O
~~
fTl()
0::0
-I OJ
OfT1
o
~~
~Gi
<=!;:J
~~
(;')~
Or-
0""
~O
~O
-c:
~~
~~
.
L;")
tajb
('") ~ tzj
::r: ~ (")
~cl~~
~oltzj
tzj tzj 00 .....
C1J5i~~
...; ;i P:
-
'."""QWO
,~ 1;.1\, P^
,.'J v...
. ". t:zI
z;1fo
>-4 t,o:j '=' ~
:~I'tjZ
N t:tj
a:> ..
o
..... ......
Z
(")
z
C))>;;O
III II
ONOl
IIOl....
NOla:>
(J1~a
~0>(J1
<0 - -
~
C))>;;O
III II
ONVI
II-'.f'>
NOl(J1
....~~
NOla:>
<0 - -
~
.....
....~
VlO
VI....
OOl
'-J(()
:s
~
(f)U)
IrTl
fTlrTl
~o
.f'>~
Or-
" .
~~
C))>;;O
I II II
ONVI
II~(()
N'-JOl
~~~
Vlol(()
~ . .
~
....~
VlO
VI....
0(J1
'-J~
fTl
z
....
Ol
,
Ol\
-' ~,
(J1 01 '
-' (J1 "
. - "-
.f'> VI "-
N ~~ '......
C))>;::O
III II
O~VI
II-'~
VI'-J---.j
tOO:""
NtOOl
~ - -
(J1
:E
C))>;::O
III II
O~VI
lI'-JtO
~'-J'-J
~:....:....
0>0l(J1
<0 - -
'-J
~~
(f)
I
0> fTl
0> ~
~ N
o 0
o "
'-J
~
(
C))>;::O
I II II
O(J1(J1
II-'Ol
~OlN
(()OJm
'-J'-J'-J
<0 - .
to
N
-,N
0101
(f) en !" q
IrTl VlO
fTl rTl -'-,
~o :
~~ :E
r;"' "
,_" .
\ ,,:~
\ "
"
"
,
C))>;::O
III II
om.....
IINOl
0l:""(J1
....OlO
OJ -0
....
C) )> ;::0 C) )> ;::0
I II II Z III II
o '-J .... 0 .... ol
IINtO II.....VI
---.j 0:-" -' q .... ---.j N
-' to VI O~ -' 0, 0"
m - N Ol VI '.J '-J VI
~ -OJ-~--
02~ q
(fTl
C))>;..u
I II II
ONOl
II VIol
NOltO
Uaa
~~(J1
L.J--
(J1
(f)
.....~
0l,.3
OlOl
<0....':
VItO
- :s
~q
......f'>
.VI
.f'> _
VI(J1
- Ol:
C))>;::O
III II
ON~
IIOl....
N(J1Ol
(J1aL.J
VlOl(J1
~ . -
~
~
~
z
C))>;::O
III II
ON~
11m.....
N'-JOl
Ola~
!"ol-,
Ol
-'
....
....Vi
'-J(J1
ol~
~ .f'>
~~
130'
C))>;::O
III II
ONU
II VIol
N~Ol
VI<O~
!='to.....
(()
to
t-:' ,
(f)
Vi
~(J1
ol~
.f'>~
~~
fTl
C))>;::O
I II II
OOlN
II....(()
(J1.f'>Ol
-'L.J:....
.....OOl
N - -
0>
(/)fn
:erTl
fTlrTl
fTlo
-IrTl
-'::"-1
)>
0-
TJr
.
-I"-UI
.
z
ol
N~
~ 0
....ol
N~
'-JOl
:
\...
....
C) )> ;::0........,
I II II "
OOlN "
1I.....f'>
~-'Ol
NN:'"
(J1(()0>
c.n-.
(J1
ol
Vi
o
ol
N~
'-J~
fTl
C))>;::O
I II II
OOlol
11m....
(J1.....N
~~m
N-,~
N . .
~
Z
N
~
0l(J1
NO
VlO
-' -'
:s
o
(f)
~
r
fTl
o
o
z
"
fTl
~
N
o
o
.f'>
o
o
o
.....(()
(()....:
ON
a -
VI(J1
.~
fTl
(f)U)
IfTl
fTlrTl
~o
~~
Or-
" .
~...A
.
C))>;::O
I II II
OOlV1
II.f'>Ol
~<oa
(()O>O
0, . .
o
$:
'3:~
-oC)
-I
C)
)>r
r-
...........z
fTl
f,
\ ...
."
z
-'~
qtq
(J10
OlVl
c5c.ii
-J>:
fTl
fTl
I\)
-,j-,j
=-0
1\).
,I\)
I\)
L.J ~ en
$: g} t-3
rz>
[2 C) t-3
-;UI~
O~L-.J
~~~
~~O
o rTl c::
Ol~
.-j
t:r:j
m
u:>
~
,
t;')
t-'
n ~o
::x: l;) tzj
~cll~
:::301~
r:;j tzJ CJl .....
UJ~~^,
e~~~
P1e3~
~~D30
~ IUJ
c;1 UJ ~ tI:J
-~ 0
Z~ ~
~tzJ
.....tzj
fi~
- D3z
()
.
z
VI
(J10l
!='o
0"
oui
::0 ITl -......
-z :I
~o
-I(J1
'0
o -
."
I
:E
:!( lJ ITl
)>z
::0-1
^~
Zz
C>o
)>1Tl
::0-1
~o
~
t'
(/)(1)
I/TI
1Tl/TI
~o
Z ~~
q Or-
(Xl VI ." .
0)>::0 0 ~ ~OJ.
I II II 0 (J1 /
O-f'o-f'o 0 CO
1I())(J1 :I .~
~VI"
~tn~
~(Xl())
o - -
N
......
...... q
(Xl VI
0)>::0 0 ~
I II II 0
O~~ 0 (J1
CO
11......0 :I
VlN"
COCo~ ITl
(J1~())
tn . -
N
z
(/)(1)
I/TI
1Tl/TI
~O
~~
Or-
." .
~"i
z
VI
......
VI .
VI
...... ())
()) N
...... '!
())
-f'o ~
O~
ON
CO(J1
/:1
< ",
o )>::0 ~
I II II "
ONVI
II VI())/
N-!"'~I
VI"trl
!='())~
" -I-
0/
. /
/
:E lJ-f-f
poe
:::0 :::0
ACDZ
zfTl
G>p5;
)>()O
:::o()e
~~ 1Tl0Z
p~o
~
"'0'"
OzO
-.!) :::00:::0
- CDP<
,
fTl-lo
(/) )>fTlo
I ()O-f
CO fTl :c-
CO ~ . z<
lJfTl
N e:C
0 VI
0 CD()
0 rr
0 ." -fTl
" ()(J)
~
I
,
I
I
I
I(/)
I
)())
~02
/0 VI
//. ())
, 0",
CO(J1
:I
ITl
VI
......
.
VI
())
())N
......"
:I
0)>::0
I II II
ON~
II())......
N"VI
())Otn
N(J1-f'o
~ - -
VI
ITl
Z
N(J1
~y
......(J1
. N
N -
,,0
-CO
:I
z
(J1
...... q
N ......
N CO
0
(J1 N
:I
0)>::0
:c II II
OCO~
1I(J1())
"VI CO
~o,~
o VI VI
~ - -
CO
/
I
I
'. /
<
- /.,~
0)>::0
:c II II
OCO(J1
II~"""
CO~CO
......tn~
CO())VI
0, . -
CO
(/)(1)
I/TI
1Tl/TI
~o
~~
Or-
." .
~Dl.
0)>::0
I II II
ON"
1I~(J1
N())VI
~Oc.,..
~VI"""
CO
~
0)>::0
I II II
ON"
IINo
NCOVl
N~c.,..
COO......
en - -
CO
CO
......
~
fTl
0
(/) 0
0 0
)>
r
fTl N
0
Z 0
."
ITl
~
~
0
0
I
I 0
fTl
~
-
r
..
..
())
..
..
~;1
0/
)/.
,0 \7 \ ::::----\
o
fTl
~
r
~OITl
)>::tJ&;
r-)>1Tl
Z-~
CZITl
-fl>~
G)::E
nfT10
::tJfT1:i
fT1)>cn
fT1CnI\)
"fT1Q
,,3::=1
)>fT1-<
::tJZJ!
,,-f~
Cnc
," .-;
..
..
0;9
,--7
/'........Oca
.09,-5-'
_ I\)
o
:: 9:===~~.
~
.08\
/_ CD
I -~
-
1\)-
Ul '"
. <9.'
0;-.
0""
fTl/
)>~ /
/....
-/0)
n9
I..
/ ..
N.
I ..
/
I
--, -J
,0
~
"
'0
\fTl
-1 0lJ'y/
~I\) ->
c;')~\~ .,/
l"'.I at'"" r; r
(1 Z
~ ~ t?=j /4'v ~
~ ~ ("')/ ' ..
S~ffl~~
~o Z
~ It?=j
Ul tr:l CJ.l ~
~~~P:>
. i:5o
~~~O
::t1 ,m
!;)~~td
2 ::t1 a
~~I~~
ro t?=j
co ..
o
.....
......
Z
("')
.
/
,/
_ _ :~L~>Ui
o
(X) (f)
I
(X) IT1 r
N ~ :;:~
0
0 ~ -
-
0 ~~
'--J
~
Q-5)-
~
- f\) ci>
o .
o
fTl
~
r
..
..
N
..
..
o
fTl
~
r
Nt 1t-57'~
UlL -1 I\) .
- I\) u:!
o
..
..
(N
..
..
~ _ _ _~'2.0' _ _ - - - -_90'
Ul/- --
,/-
\ /"-- oS,
\rl\) '" 0,
Ul "
o
fTl
~
r'
..
..
~
..
..
(f) 01
(') 0
~
r
UI IT1
~ '" 0
0 o --.r z 0
".//
fTl \,.?- M
~ \..-1\) ~
~
r N
0
0
..
..
(J1
..
..
Q ...
n ~s ~ (Offi~ ....
-< <0.,,1"11 o):'~o:tic:~:r:~ ,
tI: l;) t:r:j O~ 1"11 ~ [11
0 :-'0 ~ :~:qj ~ 5i 0 )> ::0 l"11
1;; I (') 0 \:tJd x:tJr- l"11oQ]o
8~ ~ ~ 1"11:tJ l"11l"11 on:t:tJo~
~ ~1"11 OOl"11lJl"11~o_tJ
- 1'l1G) -I ::::l~(J)G):tJ(J)-
~Olt%j (J) -to . ~o 0
~ 0 (3o~~ l"11psP
tzj tzj rJJ !;:C 0 ~~ ~ :-I -I)>o~::-f6 0
~~~ ~ -G) 0 ~
C (J) ~~~-~o~~~
~~;]~ ~ ~ ~ l"11(J)r-(J)-<~ SJ
~ E9 ~ :0 ~::-fo
lJ -< colJ:-<(3:tJrr, ~" U)
S Cj) f}1 0 ;0 l"11~ ~::o::-fl"11
tI: I UJ 1"11 'lJ ~ (J) (J)~ r- ~
-I -; ):. co ~ ~ ;a ):. :g
(J) o~ c: r-l"11 :-I ~
Cj) UJ ~ td ):.~ en ~~r-o~~~~o
~~ 0 C :0
-<-I 0 t- l"11(J)l"110o 0
> tz:l !;:C ~~ ~::-f~~l"11lJg8~ ~
~~I~ -<::OiTtl"11-t3!t/)~t/) r-
t/) :x;C: OOI'l1;ot/)~
CO .. ~ ~l"11~):.,,(3I"11~Qj
0 O):.~(J)C::tJo-ll"11
~ Z ~ ~~-l ~.Y>"po
I"11O(Jj:tJ ~
(") o 1"11):.~o
. ~ G) ~l"11
-..
<0 fT1 ~
_I~ 0
:tJ
o ::00 -J-t-J
(JJ fTlfTl 3:: 3:: I
(f)0 llll(f)
to 00 --
f'\) Cl> OOll
f?:1-J-J00~
II OO~~ll
Z-J
"l>~lJ1fTl
r ~
-<
en
-
<,CJ1>~
<i O(J~
> "(J~
H ==c t:J:j ~
L ""'""'4 U)
Z c.J U) CIl
,-I ::r: ==c S
y 1-30~
t-3t>~
() Ot;Z
o I-:I:j 41
~()I
Z ~
~~~
~~ t:Ij
t:Ij
~
I 0
~OJ~UJOJO
f'\)' UJ ~ OJ Z
~0lJ1:--J=-(f)
. OJ' ~O(f)
~lJ1~~f'\)-J
~l>f'\)l>l>(f)
o 00
l>::ol>g::O"T]
o fTl n fTl fTl ..
::O(f)::O(f)(f)
fTl fTl
(f) (f)
)>~>
C~~
(j)~tlj
CClt?=j
(/)~~
~25>
J\)~~
-.J ~
M
(!)
(!)
ex>
OJ
N
o
o
o
-.J
Ul
I
fT1
~
1j
>
~
~
....
o
"
~
o
II
::0
o
Z
Ul
~
~
~
~
o
'"TJ
C
",
C
~
::J
o
z
.0
SD
o
CD
UI
)>
o
::0
",
en
en
~)..
~Gi
~
~~
:0
~hi
'lJO
S}o
SC:
U)~
~~
U)
-J I }>
IfTlr
-:::or
C/)fT1
OO~
,,2)>
,,)> 2
0:::0 )>
fTl fTl G)
fT1
~~
rUl
ofTl
3::
rfTl
OZ
o-J
l>Ul
-JUl
fTlI
00
(JJ~
-<Z
Z
o
-J
f1:I
"'U:c-J
CfTlI
aJ:::OUl
rfTl
OO(JI
ZO
C_
Ul(f)}>
fTl 0
. :CO
fTl fTl
:::OUl
fTlUl
aJ
-<:::0
oS;
fTlO
o
00
)>fTl
-lUl
fTlO
0:::0
-jaJ
OfTl
o
~~
<:en
~~
<:)..
(;):0
gh;
~g
-c:
~<:
~~
())>;;o ())>;;o
())>;;o III II z III II
z III II 0'-.1-" O-"Ol ~
())>;;o 00l-" IINW ....II-"VI ,
())>;;o ..... I II II IINOl '-.10:-' .....q ......'-.II'V
...... 0J ONOl Ol:....~ -'lOVI O.J:>,-'01c..., ..
III II VI 0 1I()l-" ......COO en-I'V ~VI :---''-.1 VI
ONVI VI ...... NOlW 0,-0 '-.I CO - -- z
1I......p. 0 ()l~0 -" CO ()l b
1'V0l()l '-.I ()l ~CO()l - CX?s -
-"~~ lO to - -
:I (m
NOllO -J:>.
to - - :€
~
())>;.u
III II (/)
(/)U) ())>;;o 0J ON()l .....-l>- ())>;;o ())>;;o
II'T1 I II II VI II VIOl Olr--i III II
ml'T1 ONVI VI 0 1'V00W COco '-.Iq I II II O()lVl
...... VlOO ON '-.I
~C lI~lO 0 to...:: -'.p. 1I()l-" 1I.p.()l -''-.I
N'-.I()l ()l .p.-J:>.()l VlW 'VI -J:>.too qtq
.p.~ '-l W c..., - . .p. - I'V()lCO
-J:>.~~ :I - :I VI()l ()l0c..., WCOO ()l0
UJOlW ()l -CO 01-- OlVl
~ - - :€ :I VlCO()l
O. m ~ - - ~ Qui
" ~ m
. :€ ~ ~
~"l. (/)U) mm
II'T1
ml'T1
~C N
--J--J
~~ =-0
N.
.N
Z O. N
" .
-" ~~ c..., ~ en
()l
~ -" 3: gp-:3
t"'4
(') ~O z ())>;;o rz>
I II II ~ C') ""'"3
::r: Ii) tzj ())>;;o ...... ON-J:>. Z
~~I~ I II II ...... 0J 1I0l-, -i U tJ:.j
O~UJ '-l N'-.IOl N oq
1I......p. Ol ()l 0l0:':" ...... f'l
UJ'-.I'-.I .p. NOl...... Ol ()l ~~~
~Olt:r::j WO:"'" -J:>. .p. 01 - - I'V 0
\ '-l ~
()l\ NW()l ...... VI 0
tz:l tz:l CIl ~ -' ~\, :,:.. - - - ...... -" '-l~O
CI)~~ ()l :I
()l "- ()l o I'T1 c:::
~~~~ -' ~ "- CO~
.p. VI "- ...-3
::r:~ N -J:>.:I "-
- QV10 ())>;;o t:tj
~::r:,rn :€ ~_. , (/) III II (/)
ONUJ
" '" ~ 1Il ())>;o II VIOl I'V :s::: (j)
......0-3 0 I II II 1'V~0l
Z~ ~ O-J:>.UJ cncn '-.I 0J Vlto~ ......~ ~~ c..u
......t:Ej II'-lW IrrI ()l !='W-' Ol()l
>t:Ej Ol ~ (/) U) !'J ~ "'U()
N"~Z ~'-.I'-.I [TIrrI ..f>. W -I ........
~:.....:.... [TIC ~ W I I'T1 VI 0 ()
l\) tzj COOl()l '-.I ~ m I'T1 -"...... )>r
W .. to - - -lrrl ~C :I r-
0 .+:>-t .........Z
~ V1....... '-l o~ m ())>;o ~~ :€ m
Z "r- I II II
("') OOlN ro~
. II......W -"'- "
. .+:>U ()l:f"~
. 1- "- ;.
-"VI..... \ ,~
.....OCO \ , .
N - - ,
"-
CO "-
Z '....
....
Ol () )>;0 ....,
N 0J I II II "
-J:>. 0 O()lN ,
-" Ol ....
1I........f>.
I'V ~ ~:-'~
'-l ~ NN......
()lWCO
01--
U1
-
Ol
0J
0
())>;O Ol
I II II N -J:>.
O()l()l '-l CX?s
II-"Ol 0
~()lN [TI
lOOlen
~~ '-l'-.l'-l
to . - (/) 0
W (/)U) ~ 0
II'T1
ml'T1 r
~C m N
())>;o 0
I II II ~~ z 0
(/) 0()l0l
1I0l...... "
I ()l-'I'V o. [TI
CO rTJ ~~m " ~
OJ ~ .
N......'-.I ~c.n.
I'V N - .
0 N ~ .p.
0 0 0
0 " 0
'-.I c..
~
c;')
t""
~o
@ t;) t:I:j
> ~(')
s~~ES
>-301~
~ tzj en ......
UJ~~~
!;~P:'
;::l~~o
~ IUl
qUJ~tJj
......>-3 0
Z~ ~
l;:'tzj
......tzj
ro >-3 '1j ~
~ i~
- ~z
(')
.
z
VJ
()1O'l
!=>o
0-...1
a -
:;0 fTl - ~
-z I
~o
-;Ul
10
o -
"'Tl
I
:E
~ '"U fTl
)>Z
:;0-;
^~
Zz
G1()
)>fTl
:;0-;
~O
--
'-.,
C/)
ex> I
rrI
ex> ~
""
a VJ
a
a
0 "'Tl
-...I
~
(
z
VJ
.....
VJ
.....
m
.....
fTl
z
""Ul
~y
.....Ul
. ""
"" -
-...10
-(()
I
:E
-0-;-;
)>oe
::0 ::0
^OJz
zfTl
G1)>5;
)>no
::o\)e
rr10Z
)>3:0
3:
"'Tl0"'Tl
OzO
::00::0
OJ)> <
rr1-;0
)>rr10
\)0-1
I-
. z<
-ofT!
CI
CD\)
rr
-fT!
\)C/)
z
C/)cn
I",
fTl'"
~o
~~
or
"'Tl .
~'i
I
,
I
I
,
,C/)
I
)m
,:;:.~
/a VJ
/. m
~ a N
(()Ul
I
())>:;o
I II II
O""~
11m.....
",,-...IVJ
moo,
""()1~
~ - -
VJ
. '
C/)cn ..
I'"
fTl'"
~o
Z ~~
.....
..... q or
ex> VJ "'Tl .
())>:;o a ~ ~Of.
III II 0 Ul /
O~~ a (()
IImUl I *
~VJ-...I
~o,~
~ex>m
(:) - -
""
.....
..... q
ex> VJ
())>:;o 0 ~
I II II a
O~~ a Ul
11.....0 (()
VJ""-...I I
(()Co~ rrI
Ul~m
0, - -
""
fTl
z
Ul
..... q
""
"" (()
a -
.....
Ul ~
())>:;o
I II II
0""-...1
II~Ul
""mVJ
~00J
~VJ.....
Co -
~
())>:;o
I II II
oex>~
IIUlm
-...IVJ(()
~o,~
oVJVJ
~ - -
(()
())>:;o
I II II
0(()(]1
II~"'"
ex>~(()
.....o,~
(()mVJ
0, - -
(()
..-:
/'
v>-.. /'
v
)
/
/
I
/
/
.. I
<
- - /^')
(()
m
..... Ol
~VJ
Om
a""
(()Ul
/1
/ '
() )>:;0 ~"
I II II /
O""VJ
II VJm/
"" 7" ~I
VJ-...IU1'
!=>m~
-...I -/-
al
- I
/
.....
~
rrI
C/)(/)
I'"
fTlfTI
~o
~~
Or
"'Tl .
~Ol
0
C/) a
() a
)>
r
rrI ""
a
z a
"'Tl
fTl
~
~
0
0
())>:;o
I II II
0""-...1
II ""a
",(()VJ
""~0J
~a-...
m
ex>
CD
'.-_Ul
-----, -J
'- ,0
" , .
~ ~ '\
- <90~ '\
"-
0"
rr1/
-II
)>f.-
-10)
n9
/..
/ ..
N
..
/
/
I
o
\ rrI &Iv
~~///
c;1 -/
~ r;
1:'.10 t'v'
(') ~ t::w::j 1"(1 ~
~ ~ (')'/6l /
~cl~~ -S~
>-30 I t::w::j -['-V
~ ~ ~ :rc - - .~ q
E>-3~~
~~o
- SVlO
~~IU)
~rn td
Q>-3~O
~~~:rc ~
>~~IZ '-?
~ t::w::jc:;
'" .. :::0
~ ~
I-' ...... ~
~ o~
.
o
rrI
~
r
..
..
01.
..
.;:::-;1
<y
/
(Xl
(Xl
N
o
o
o
'"
,. :~
O~
'1
~
<;9::---
,.-
"""0'0
./ .,
--,-SN
,09 _ _
q
o
~.
r
Vi
..
o
rrI
~
r
N.
..
..
..
o
rrI
~
r
\
''',
I'
..
..
~
..
..
sc =1~
~~
01- .
-NCl2
q
..
..
1:'2.~' - - -
90'
- -------
-"'-
<.12/
/
\. /"--,SO'
v"rv "
Ul
o
rrI
~
~O~. _,
)>::Oen r
r-~~
ZZ~
C)>-; ........
-; G') =E ~::
(TItS
(")(TI:i
~)>en
rrt(J)~
^rrt~
"1J~~
)>(TIiJ
::oZo
-r--;~
"(J)~
..
..
UJ
,q
., (fJ'
OfTl
::om
ocn
mI
-;fTl
)>fTl
F-;
rv
o
0.,
-'"
o
rrI
~
r
UJ
I\)
-I'> -.r
0/
,/"
\,.?-
'vI\)
1'2
()l
(f) 0
()
)>
r .....
ITl 0
Z 0
'1
ITl
~
N
o
o
..
..
CJ!
..
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has constructed a new Route to
be used by buses at Paul H. Cale Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 742, thence in a south-
easterly direction 840 feet to station 8+40, the end of the loop circulation
road.
* * * * *
I, Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarl
County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
/1~ 6~,
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
~
;
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has constructed a new Route to
be used by buses at Paul H. Cale Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
-'Iff V
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with th~centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. }~i; thence in a south-
easterly direction 840 feet to station 8+40, the end' of the loop circulation
road.
I, Lettie Neher, do he:
correct copy of a resolutiol
County, Virginia, at a regu.
(!J1tJJU/, ~ 11:
~J~ ''y9xJ7~L
Li:Dcu-cr
/uJ~C0~
ing is a true,
s of Albemarl
G~\J;ru ,
r,~~ . CJ JJiftjJA)/~;7 /'
\..; J2J U'l 0 \ ~/'~1
~ 1lI;1ll \q \ Superv{sors
(.""',
IY
}
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has constructed a
new Route to be used by buses at Paul H. Cale Elementary School,
and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provid~s for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school
entrance roads on which buses are operated,
THEREFORE, the Albemarle County School Board does hereby
request the Board of Supervisors to accept the changes stated
below:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of
the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of pavement of Route
712, thence in a southeasterly direction 840 feet to station 8+40,
the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Charlotte C. Self, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing is a. true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
School Board of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting
held on October 14, 1991.
C~of'Ii~
'.,
.t
r:,'.
I
~ \
, \
. .. \
\ ~ \
',:0 \
~'. "-
~~~~
'-:, :Gvu'.
, ,.
".-=",-: ~~
\
\
(i
~, - "1::."
~ \"J
'2.1-:
(,1"
FIN 1=
5'30
--~
89,60 .
.00
'-
FI\
So
. .:.~..
'-.
'~f"," ...
-, ,
\ .1..... '(,JAM COI-JS.T
, ~NTRANCE
--
_.~
IiINl"
~ . ~;
l:'iA!;'IN-".
"5'2.8:
-J
;;;;;;;:;;.
._-
_<{III
,
,
,
,
\'..
,
INV 1$7/.0 .
INV ~70.?
LIMIT 01'"' WORK LI WE-
n .I
rrVUT II
Out lel Prolectlon la' 565.11 ..
Ell-I - .' .,
10. RCP 60' 568.81
OI-lD l-tO' 569.50
IS. RCP SO' 510.80 .
OJ_I ,. 511.1l1 ::'
-
5TUUCTUR(' I
4 .
) VEPCo k;'Lc XL. 38
::lPE.12.Ty C.';'~\JER..E.LE:Y 5ea.S3
VE:pco Po, c: YN-04,
ry CORNE::: ELE.Y. S"Ja. +~.
8 EII-I . ..
10" RCI' 66' S/O..JIl" .
10 OJ-3D l"W SIMA':;
..
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has abandoned Route 9010 used by
buses at Crozet Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
CirC\llation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 810, thence in an south-
easterly direction 986 feet to station 9+86, the end of the loop circulation
road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of pavement of
Route 810 and the centerline of the school's circulation road, thence in a
westerly direction approximately 789 feet to station 7+89, the end of the loop
circulation road.
* * * * *
I,
correct
County,
Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing wtiting is a true,
copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarl
Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
c~~~rs
-./
/
"
Distributed to &afti~ Ll..:~..j.L
~pM' I!'?m No, 1J_JLQ~(5,.{ b)
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has abandoned
Route 9010 used by buses at Crozet Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school
entrance roads on which buses are operated,
NOW, therefore be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following section be added to
the Secondary Road System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of
the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of pavement of Route
810, thence in a southeasterly direction 986 feet to station 9+86,
the end of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section as indicated by the shaded
area be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of
pavement of Route 810 and the centerline of the school's
circulation road, thence in a westerly direction approximately 789
feet to station 7+89, the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Lettie 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 November 6, 1991.
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
...,
...
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has abandoned
Route 9010 used by buses at Crozet Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school
entrance roads on which buses are operated,
'\'
THEREFORE, the Albemarle County School Board does hereby
request the Board of Supervisors to make the changes stated below
to abandoned Route 9010.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of
the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station O+OO~ a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of pavement of Route
810, thence in a southeasterly direction 986 feet to station 9+86,
the end of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section as indicated by the shaded
area be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of
pavement of Route 810 and. the centerline of the school's
circulation road, thence in a westerly direction approximately 789
feet to station 7+89, the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Charlotte C. Self, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
School Board of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting
held on October 14, 1991.
c~ L1;!f
"
)
~
\-
~
\f)
;titlE
:Et> f(1i'. i
_~ I
-I-
I
I
I
I.
'- I
" I
4
1'.\VEt.lfNT
. \ ~ ;i~
\ \. ~,r
t--\--r
\
~\,}
~~:~f\:;;':;'1
~...... s,....u '
OUL\IRCI",~I . :
)tL ",_.ut
CROZET . ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
, '.
,\UlOlARlI WJNlY. WlGlNlA _o..n-- STAlE PRo.ECT No, O1-JOA
~
..,...
000
-0
00
()")(])
....: .
o:t;
w
en
\
W
Z
o
I-
C/)
o
W
:r:
(I)
::>
0::
u
-0
N
3:
,
.0::
WIO
u-;
ZO
<!" (
0::.
I-Z
Zw
W...J
.0
r<>
1
-i'i
~
~
o
-q
o
~1
1 ' (
"
--c'
. ,
~':I
:r:
<!>
:I:...J
o
o
I-:r:
Wu
NC/)
o
0:::
U
~....
,.. -. . ~ .
'-.':., :.,
.~ ,
- '"
-......
-.! '.,",
......
.....
......
......
......
,-----
'" .
N
0
N
. . ..:
a:
0
l-
i
(>
~
0
\
~
l'- Z
. 0
...J :2: ~ u
W:r: W
.O.....U VI
O~~ ~O
UUCJ)WOI-
en 0:::
>-::>"0
:I: '0::: I- z W
WC><t<l:WO
- 0 .....1.....10
--'J:Z~ <t
Q::J-8t1 w
w W.....I m
.,.,. NO CJ) LL 0
., ~5g:~:
W~zt;<3~
(]) Z ~ <t CJ) CJ)
. 1<!t.OO
"---Ia:O~Z
' . '-~' <( ~ ~ ~
w I,
........
".': .
.......;
1
1
!
(
!
I
I
I
.
I
I
l
I
j
\
l
I
I
I
J.i'
CJ')
>-
cr.
Od
'.JI
'2~
8;
2;
<(i
t'''',
~.
~-I
'~"'i
. i
hJl
{'(\j
I.....
I
oi
J- i
. . ~
.
.. !
I
. ~
, " I
::!:
1-:
::=<!>
0_
ot
Z,
<!>I'l
(I),
WN
o
Cl3<i.
>
zo
~5
I-::l':
~x
Uu
go:
-
..
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS'lthe Albemarle County School Board has altered Route 9008 used by
buses at StonjY Point Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 20, thence in an southern
direction 526 feet to station 5+26, the end of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of pavement of
Route 20 and the centerline of the school's circulation road, thence in a
southerly direction approximately 526 feet to station 5+26, the end of the loop
circulation road.
* * * * *
I, Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true,
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervi~ors of Albemarl
County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
~..~
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
",,' ~
Oisi(i(M~1i tv s.::.,u> LI.:J.t:5.L
~"'M. I!~m Nn. -9J.:, IL9(;.(S.4~
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route
9008 used by buses at Stony Point Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school
entrance roads on which buses are operated,
NOW, Therefore be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following section be added to
the Secondary Road System and the following section be abandoned.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of
the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of pavement of Route 20,
thence in a southern direction 526 feet to station 5+26, the end
of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of
pavement of Route 20 and the centerline of the school's circula-
tion road, thence in a southerly direction approximately 526 feet
to station 5+26, the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Lettie 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 November 6, 1991.
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
,;
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route
9008 used by buses at Stony Point Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school
~
entrance roads on which buses are operated,
THEREFORE, the Albemarle County School Board does hereby
request the Board of Supervisors to make the changes stated below
for Route 9008.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of
the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station O+OO~ a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of pavement of Route 20,
thence in a southern direction 526 feet to station 5+26, the end
of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of
pavement of Route 20 and the centerline of the school's circula-
tion road, thence in a southerly direction approximately 526 feet
to station 5+26, the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Charlotte C. Self, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
School Board of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting
held on October 14, 1991.
~C.~
Clerk, Schoor Board .
S TO f\J F-\( PO I N T
SC H 00 L
,
:) PT -H ~J I
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
\,~.
..,
'-
1:',.
,
,
,
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
,
I
1
I
I
t
I
I I
: olr
I
I
I I
,
I
, I I
\ I I
\ I I
II I
II
"
,
,. \
, \
/
./I..l
:,-,TV
s-
.. ...~I.
7\i" 2U;JY(
t .' /,
I . // I
, . .
. /'." .
/' -
, , .
t ,
t \
(..K/;~ I --:t
t
"~"II
-LO.
t
,
. A.
~
A
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route 627 used by
buses at Benjamin F. Yancey Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for the Virginia
Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance roads on which buses
are operated,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that the following section be added to the Secondary Road
System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan, be added to
the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline of the loop
circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt. 627, thence in an easterly
direction approximately 520 feet to station 5+20, the end of the loop
circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point Common with the edge of pavement of
Route 627 and the centerline of the school's circulation road, thence in a
easterly direction approximately 420 feet to station 4+20, the end of the loop
circulation road.
* * * * *
I, Lettie Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing wtiting is a true,
correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarl
County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on November 6, 1991.
~-~
C1erk, Board of County Supervisors
t' , . . It ., J'i I
lJ.SinO'J~4;... .t~ i-\~';"Qr~" ~__
l\g~'fJI1. It..m ND __9.1- Jl()(~(5.4d)
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route
627 used by buses at Benjamin F. Yancey Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school
entrance roads on which buses are operated,
NOW, Therefore be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following section be added to
the Secondary Road System and the following section be abandoned:
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the
Code of Virginia:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt.
627, thence in an easterly direction approximately 520 feet to
station 5+20, the end of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of
pavement of Route 627 and the centerline of the school's circulation
road, thence in a easterly direction approximately 420 feet to
station 4+20, the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Lettie 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 November 6, 1991.
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
. "
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County School Board has altered Route
627 used by buses at Benjamin F. Yancey Elementary School, and
WHEREAS, Section 33.1-68 of the Code of Virginia provides for
the Virginia Department of Transportation to maintain school entrance
~
roads on which buses are operated,
THEREFORE, the Albemarle County School Board does hereby
request the Board of Supervisors to make the changes stated below
for Route 627.
The following section, as outlined on the attached site plan,
be added to the Secondary System pursuant to Section 33.1-68 of the
Code of Virginia: .
Beginning at station 0+00; a point common with the centerline
of the loop circulation road and the edge of the pavement of Rt.
627, thence in an easterly direction approximately 520 feet to
station 5+20, _the end of the loop circulation road.
In addition the following section will be abandoned:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point common with the edge of'
pavement of Route 627 and the centerline of the school's circulation
road, thence in a easterly direction approximately 420 feet to
station 4+20, the end of the loop circulation road.
I, Charlotte C. Self, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
School Board of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting
held on October 14, 1991.
~c.~
Clerk, School Boar
, '
YANCEY
SCH 00 L
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229,
the Virginia Department of Transportation be and is hereby
requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject
to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway
Department, the following road in Homestead Subdivision:
Oldfields Road
Beginning at Station 0+25, a point common to the
centerline of Oldfields Road and the edge of pavement at
State Route 609, thence in a northeasterly direction
1551.49 feet to Station 15+76.49, the end of the
cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Trans-
portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50-foot unobstructed
right-of-way and drainage easements along the requested
addition as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 914, page
365.
* * * * *
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 November 6, 1991.
C
. -
l:listrlbllteo b LF4Z=_YL.
Agenda ltern No, Cfj, f /Ofi~~
C01JNTY OF ALBEMARLE
COur-rrv{':!~,. ", '"
Fl ri::' (i>:,~J._,_~:-';', .'.'r:, L
I j ,Il}''''-''''''- , <;,)
t <.... . :! Ii
I i<! \ NOV 1 ,;~~8i ., ; I
U!.\ ;.'t-:' i! if
MEMORANDUM
f:~ '~~_~ r'... ;' \
_: I,....;'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Lettie E. Neher, Board of Supervisors Clerk
Hoyt B. Alford III, civil Engineer 1(643,
October 31, 1991
The Homestead Subdivision - Old Fields Roads
The following is a description of Oldfields Road which is
located in The Homestead Subdivision.
OLDFIELDS ROAD
Beginning at station 0+25, a point common to the centerline
of Oldfields Road and the edge of pavement of State Route
609, thence in a northeasterly direction 1551.49 feet to
station 15+76.49, the end of the cuI de sac.
This road has a fifty foot (50') right-of way and has been built
in accordance with the approved road plans. The deed book
reference for right-of-way dedication and drainage easements is
deed book 914, page 365.
HBA/ps
. '
. .
~'''",
u
Edward H Bam, 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
September 10, 1991
Charlotte Y Humph"s
,Jilck JOU(:'l!
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
Waller F Perkins
Whi(~ Hall
F, R. (Rick) Bowie
Rivanna
Peler T Way
Scollsvdl.:?
Mr. Bruce B. Gordon
Shelter Associates, LTD.
Post Office Box 39
Free Union, Virginia 22940
Dear Mr. Melton:
Your request to have Oldfields Road taken into the State
Secondary System of Highways was received September 10, 1991 and
has now been referred to the County Engineer. When he has
certified that all work has been completed in accordance with
approved plans, this request will be placed before the Board of
Supervisors for adoption of the necessary resolution.
ve,r,,~ tru"lY yOU, r"~,~,,,,~/'
;;u2>/~.". ~/ ,,//' .
, 1//# //> ., "
/// f VU lY f~/ /
YLettie E. Ne~er, Clerk, CMC
Board of Supervisors
LEN:bh
cc: Mr. Hoyt B. Alford
.:
~Shelter
~ associates Itd
MASTER BUILDERS
" f,: '-
september 9, 1991
~ (I
Ms. Letti Neher
Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville Va.
22901
Dear Ms. Neher,
As developer of the Homestead Subdivision, and at the
request of the VDOT I write to request a resolution from the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors for the acceptance of
Oldfields Road into the VDOT system.
Please contact me if you need any information regarding the
Homestead Subdivision or Oldfields Road.
Sincerely,
~~~
Bruce B. Gordon
p,o. box 39 . free union, virginia . 22940
(804) 973-8307
DATE~rdUAJ ~ 111 q J
AGENDA ITEM NO. q I.. II () t.v(S. 5)
AGENDA ITEM NAME
DEFERRED UNTIL
Form. 3
7/25/86
/1__/~'l J
ClJ. IIO~?~!?:}
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D. PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. 0, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE. 22902
D. S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
October 17, 1991
Route 854
,
!,t' :..:...'".
""- - "...',
BOAm)C:'~' .'. .___:J
.., ...") t.; r)f: ;'-,~ ~! i .SO ~?S
Miss Lettie E. Neher, Clerk
Board of Supervisors
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Miss Neher:
Reference is made to your letter of October 11, 1991, forwarding Mr. Bowerman's request
concerning Carrsbrook Drive near its intersection with Route 29.
After the Board meeting I reviewed this area. I am unable to tell whether the wide area
where parking occurs is part of the Department's right of way. I have, however, had
delineators placed along that stretch of road to keep vehicles from entering Qr parking in
the area. At this time I believe this is all the Department can do. Please advise Mr.
Bowerman and the Board of my action.
Yours truly,
d. 5~ce'S.c.J[,-IV-
D. S. Roosevelt
Resident Engineer
DSR/smk
cc: O. L. Huff w/attachment
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
AGENDA ITEM NO.
17 d1Li?ivU1.l 6 J 117 /
I
q/o //0& (s:: 1)
AGENDA ITEI'I NAME ilZimQ ~ftL ~ {j-, I~/f
/;/13/1;
DATE
DEFERRED UNTIL
Form. 3
7/25/86
AGENDA ITEM NO.
{) fYli/nJUi?../ {;; J I 9 L/ /
/
CfJ.I/Oft; (S:t)
-
DATE
AGENDA ITEM NAME 'I ~t;itJ t21v,.l1
DEFERRED UNTIL ilOl;'-&rrJJ/'J / ,,3/ /77/
I
Form. 3
7/25/86
lG
~ ~e rn
l '
--------'----"'-1_,..
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY REPORT
1990
I
AIr.;t,~ "''"''-_''~''___",..""...
)
" j
"
Co
....... ".
........ r>
County of Albemarle
Dept. of Planning and Community Develop'1lent
* Of the 462 approved lots, 242 (52%) were located in the Growth
Areas and 220 (48%) were located in the Rural Areas.
* Of the same 462 approved lots, 377 (82%) were located on state
roads and 85 (18%) were located on private roads.
Site Plans
* Five (5) major residential site development plans were approved
by the Planning Commission in 1990 representing 236
single-family, single-family attached, multi-family, townhouse,
and condominium units.
* Twenty-two non-residential site development plans were approved
by the Planning Commission in 1990. These plans represented
212,773 square feet of commercial/retail services space, 90,378
square feet of industrial space, 130,400 square feet of office
space, and 42,990 square feet of public/institutional space.
Land Use Taxation and A~ricultural/Forestal Districts
* Landowners have enrolled 40 percent of the Growth Areas and 70
percent of the Rural Areas in the land use taxation program.
The total area in the land use taxation program comprises 69
percent of Albemarle County.
* Voluntary enrollment by rural landowners in agricultural and
forestal districts increased by 10 percent in 1990 to a total of
62,541.62 acres, which represents 13 percent of Albemarle County.
Zoning
* A total of 2,333.27 acres were rezoned in 1990. 1,195.02 acres
were rezoned in the Village of Rivanna from Rural Areas (RA) to
Planned Residential Development (PRD) to accommodate the Glenmore
subdivision.
* The Board of Zoning Appeals approved a total of 64 variances of
zoning regulations. Setbacks comprised the largest category of
variances with 27 setback variances approved in 1990.
Twenty-five variances occurred in the Growth Areas and 39
variances occurred in the Rural Areas. Twenty-one of the 25
variances in the Growth Areas were for signs or setbacks.
.. .
*
A total of 84 special use permits were approved in 1990.
Sixty-five of the special use permits were approved in the Rural
Areas, and of these, 34 were for mobile homes.
.. -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
II. RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITY.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
A. Building Permit Activity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
1. Overview............................... '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Building Permits by Comprehensive Plan Area..... ....... ........2
3. Building Permits by Dwelling Unit Type....... ......... .........5
4. Building Permits by Magisterial District.. .... ..... ... ...... ...6
5. Residential Building Activity Comparison....... ........... .....6
B. Subdivision Activity...............................................9
1. Methodology.................................................... 9
2. Analysis of Signed Plats... ..... .......... ... ......... .... ....11
3. Historic Comparison of Subdivision Activity - Signed Plats....ll.
4. Dedication of Open Space...... .... ......... ..... ..... .... .....15
5. Subdivision Activity - Planning Commission Approved Plats.....17
6. Planning Commission Approved Plats - State vs. Private Roads. .20
C. Site Plan Activity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
III. INVENTORY OF LAND USE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
IV. ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MODIFICATIONS.... .......... .... .........27
A. 1990 Rezoning Activity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
B. Variances of Zoning Regulations.............. ... .... ..... .........30
C. Special Use Permits Approved in 1990. ..... ..... ... ......... .......30
D. Comprehensive Plan Amendments.. ... .... ..... .... ...... ... ... ... '" .34
APPENDIX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Comprehensive Plan Annual
Targets ~e. Actual Dwellings, 1986-1990.......... ...... ....... ..3
Table 2-2: Dwelling Units by Comprehensive Plan
Growth Areas by Building Permits Issued in 1990... ......... .....4
Table 2-3:
Table 2-4:
Table 2-5:
Table 2-6:
Table 2-7:
Table 2-8:
Number of Dwelling Units by Magisterial
District by Building Permits Issued in 1990...... ....... ... .....7
Building Permit Activity Comparison, 1984-1990... ... ..... .......8
Total Number of New Dwelling
Units from Building Permits Issued, 1971-1990......... ... ..... .10
Residential Subdivision Activity in 1990 - Signed Plats... .... .12
Distribution by Size (Acreage)
Based on Signed Plats Located in the Rural Areas..... ..........13
Table 2-9: Rural Area Average Lot Size (development right lots).. .........16
Changes in Subdivision Activity, 1979-1990 Signed Plats.. .... ..14
Table 2-10: Dedication of Open Space, 1990... ... ... .... ... ..... ..... ...... .16
Table 2-11: Residential Subdivision Activity
in 1990 - Planning Commission Approved Plats.. ..... .... .... ... .18
Table 2-12: Residential Subdivision Activity
1986-1990 - Planning Commission Approved Plats.... ..... ... .... .19
Table 2-13: Planning Commission Approved
Plats - State and Private Roads......... ... ........ ..... ... ... .21
Table 2-14: Major Residential Site Plans
Approved by the Planning Commission in 1990.... ..... ...........22
Table 2-15: 1990 Major Non-residential Site Plans
Approved by the Planning Commission... .... ...... ........ .......23
.- .
Table 3-1: 1990 Residential Land Use Summary. .... ....... ....... ..... ......25
Table 3-2: Commercial and Industrial Land Use Summary... ....... .... .......26
Table 3-3: Acreage in Land Use Taxation by Year and Land Use Type..... ....28
Table 3-4: Estimate of Distribution of County Land Under Land Use....... ..28
Table 3-5: Agricultural/Forestal Districts.. .................. ......... ...29
Table 4-1: Approved Zoning Map Amendments, 1990..... ............. .........31
Table 4-2: Variances Approved in 1990............. ..... .... ... ..... ... ... .32
Table 4-3: Special Use Permits Approved
in 1990 by Comprehensive Plan Area... ........ ...... ..... .......33
Table 4-4: Special Use Permits Approved in 1990 by Zoning District........33
~-
I. INTRODUCTION
The Development Activity Report is an annual review of the
residential, commercial, and industrial development activity
in Albemarle County. Throuyiluut the year, building permits
are issued, subdivision p:'._.~s are approved and signed, site
plans are approved, and changes to zoning regulations are
approved. The purpose of this report is to track these
changes, to analyze where new growth has occurred during the
past year, and to identify trends developing over a period
of two or more years. The location of new residential and
commercial growth is not only important to planners, but is
also useful information for those involved in rural
preservation, commercial development, or marketing
activities.
In July of 1989, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
adopted the 1989-2010 Comprehensive Plan. The new
Comprehensive Plan is similar in many ways to the previous
Plan. However, it is important to point out that an
amendment to the Plan, approved in December of 1989, created
a new Designated Growth Area, the Village of Rivanna.
Please note that some discrepancies may appear in
chronological data sets due to the addition of the Village
of Rivanna. In this report, some of the data previously
attributed to Rural Area 4 is now shown as belonging to the
Village of Rivanna.
The report is divided into three (3) major sections. The
first section addresses residential activity by analyzing
where building permit, sUbdivision, and site plan activity
occurred. The next section describes inventories of
residentially, commercially, and industrially zoned land,
including the distribution of county land in preferential
land use taxation. The third section presents the changes
in zoning map amendments', zoning variances, and amendments
to the Comprehensive Plan approved in 1990.
-. .
As in past reports, one purpose of the Development Activity
Report is to evaluate the effectiveness of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance, adopted December 10, 1980. One
objective of the Zoning Ordinance is to encourage development
in the Growth Areas; the specific Growth Areas are
described in detail in the Comprehensive Plan. While the
Comprehensive Plan outlines goals and objectives for
effectively managing Albemarle County's growth, the Zoning
Ordinance provides the legal structure by which the goals
and objectives are accomplished. For the purposes of this
report, 1990 development activity comparisons will be made
to the 1989-2010 Comprehensive Plan.
.' .
1
II. RESIDENTIAL ACTIVITY
A. Building Permit Activity
1. Overview
The annual number of new residential dwelling units is an
important indicator of growth in a locality. For this
report, the number of building permits issued for new
residential structures is the measure of new dwelling units
in Albemarle County. Though the total level of activity
from one year to the next is ascertained from building
permit volumes, the distribution of new housing by location
and by type of dwelling can also be analyzed from
information provided on a permit. The location and type of
dwelling relative to existing utilities and public
facilities provides direction for long-term planning
efforts.
2. Building Permits by Comprehensive Plan Area
In 1990, the actual number of dwelling units from building
permits totalled 804 (see Table 2-1). The 1990 total
represents a decrease of 505 dwelling units from the 1989
total of 1,309 dwelling units. The 1989 totals represent
the largest number of new dwelling units by building permit
since 1973. The 1990 total represents the second largest
number of new dwelling units by building permit since 1983
(1989 totals being the largest).
In 1990, the urban area, consisting of Urban Neighborhoods
1-7, decreased in propo 4~jn of total new dwelling units
created from 628 units in 1989 (48 percent of total new
units) to 271 units in 1990 (34 percent of total new units) .
Of the 271 new dwelling units located in the urban area, 239
units were located in Urban Neighborhoods 2, 4, and 7.
Neighborhood 7 accounted for the largest number of dwelling
units in the urban area with 102 units (see Table 2-2). In
1990, the total number of new dwellings in all of the Growth
Areas equaled 469 units, almost half of the 962 units which
were created in the Growth Areas in 1989. The combination
of Urban Neighborhoods, Communities, and villages accounted
for 58 percent of the total distribution of new dwellings in
1990.
~.
The Communities continue to show a substantial amount of new
dwelling building activity eveR though the total decreased
from 310 units in 1989 to 175 units in 1990. The five (5)
years prior to 1989 averaged a total of only 24 units per
year as compared to 175 units in 1990. The Community of
Hollymead, with the continued expansion of the Forest Lakes
subdivision, accounted for 100 of the 175 total new units in
the three (3) Communities. Thirty-nine units were
attributed to the Community of Crozet and 36 units were
attributed to the Community of scottsville.
2
TABLE 2-1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL TARGETS VS. ACTUaL DWELLINGS
1986-1990
GEOGRAPHIC ACTUAL DWELLINGS AND DISTRIBUTION
AREA (~rom Building Reports)
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
URBAN AREAS 302 41% 183 28% 217 32% 628 48% 271 34%
COMMUNITIES 22 3% 12 2% 41 6% 310 24% 175 22%
VILLAGES 22 3% 35 5% 22 3% 24 1% 23 2%
RURAL AREAS 391 53% 424 65% 393 59% 347 27% 335 42%
TOTALS 737 100% 654 100% 673 100% 1309 100% 804 100%
...
3
TABLE 2-2
DWELLING UNITS BY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GROWTH AREAS
BY BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN 1990
TOTAL DWELLING UNITS
GEOGRAPHIC AREA. SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MH URBAN RURAL
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 2 0 0 0 20 0 22
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 18 0 62 0 1 0 81
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 91 0 11 0 0 0 102
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 2 6 2 0 0 0 10
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 56 0 56
CROZET COMMUNITY 9 0 0 0 30 0 39
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 91 0 9 0 0 0 100
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 2 0 0 0 34 0 36
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PINEY MTN. VILLAGE 1 18 0 0 0 0 19
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 2 0 0 0 0 1 3
RIVANNA VILLAGE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 219 24 84 0 141 1 469
RURAL AREA 1 68 0 0 0 22 6 96
RURAL AREA 2 59 0 0 0 0 9 68
RURAL AREA 3 71 0 0 0 0 10 81
RURAL AREA 4 67 0 0 0 0 23 90
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 265 0 0 0 22 48 335
TOTAL 484 24 84 0 163 49 804
KEY TO TYPES OF HOUSING:
SF- Single-Family (includes Modular)
SFA- Single-Family Attached
SF/TH- Single-Family Townhouse
DUP- Duplex
MF- Multi-Family
MH- Mobile Home
4
The Villages have shown a consistent pattern of growth from
1986 to 1990. There were 23 total new units in 1990 as
compared to 24 new units in 1989. The five (5) year high
was 35 new units in 1987. Of the 23 total units in 1990,
19 were located in the Village of Piney Mountain due to
additions in the Briarwood subdivision. Little growth has
occurred in the remaining three (3) Villages (Earlysville,
North Garden, and Rivanna).
The percentage of residential building permits issued in the
Rural Areas increased from 27 percent in 1989 to 42 percent
in 1990. However, the 335 building permits issued in 1990
are 3.5 percent lower than the 1989 total of 347. The five
(5) year trend in the Rural Areas show a relative decline in
the total number of building permits issued from the 1987
high of 424 to 335 in 1990.
Overall, the total number of building permits issued in 1990
represents the second highest total over the past five (5)
years, but reflects a reduction of 505 permits as compared
to the 1989 total. This reduction occurred primarily in the
Urban Areas and Communities. A relatively consistent amount
of growth occurred in the Rural Areas and Villages in 1989
and 1990. .
3. Building Permits by Dwelling Unit Type.
As in previous years, the highest percentage of 1990
residential building permit activity occurred in the
category of conventional, single-family detached homes,
including modular homes (see Table 2-2). In 1990, 60
percent of all building permits issued for dwelling units
were for single-family homes, a significant increase over
1989 totals in which single-family homes represented only 45
percent of all dwelling units. Although the total
percentage of building permit growth in the category of
single-family detached homes reflects an increase, the
actual number of new single-family homes again reflects an
overall decrease in dwelling units, down from 595 in 1989 to
484 in 1990. In the Rural Areas, 79 percent of all dwelling
units were single-family homes. In the Growth Areas, 47
percent of all dwelling units were single-family homes.
~.
The total number of single-family townhouses decreased from
116 units in 1989 to 84 units in 1990. Urban Neighborhood 2
had the largest concentration of single-family townhouses in
1990 with 62 of the 84 single-family townhouses located in
the Stonehenge, Brookmill, and Branchlands subdivisions. Of
all building permits issued for dwelling units in Albemarle
County in 1990, 10 percent were for single-family townhouses.
In 1990, 163 (20 percent) of the 804 total dwelling units
were mUlti-family residences. This represents a significant
reduction in mUlti-family dwelling units as compared to 1989
totals where 496 (38 percent) of the 1,309 total dwelling
5
units we~~ mUlti-family residences. Barclay Place in
Neighborhood 7, The Meadows in the Community of Crozet, and
scottsville School Apartments in the Community of scottsville
were the largest mUlti-family developments in 1990.
4. B~~:ding Permits by Magisterial District
The magisterial district bo~ndaries used in this report are
those which existed prior to the adoption of new boundaries
on May 15, 1991. Of the six (6) magisterial districts, the
scottsville district recorded the highest level of
residential building activity in 1990 with 226 new dwelling
units (see Table 2-3). The Rivanna district was a close
second with 221 new residential dwelling units. The
scottsville and Rivanna districts combined represented 56
percent of all the residential building activity in the
magisterial districts in 1990. The Jack Jouett district
contributed only four (4) percent (3 units) of the total
number of dwelling units in 1990, a sharp contrast to 1989,
when the district contributed 21 percent (281 units) of the
total number of dwelling units. The Charlottesville,
scottsville, and White Hall districts all showed increases
in the number of new dwelling units in 1990 over 1989 totals
(37, 30, and 9 percent, respectively). The Jack Jouett,
Rivanna, and Samuel Miller districts decreased in the number
of new dwelling units in 1990 from the 1989 totals (89, 61,
and 8 percent, respectively).
.. -
5. Residential Building Activity Comparison
Building activity decreased from 1,309 units in 1989 to 804
units in 1990 (see Table 2-4), a decrease of percent.
The 1989 totals, however, were significantly higher than the
five (5) year trends. This decrease in total units was
absorbed primarily in the Urban Neighborhoods and
Communities. The Villages, however, showed a decrease of
only one (1) dwelling unit, from 24 units in 1989 to 23
units in 1990. The average number of permits issued per
year from 1984 to 1990 is 24 units in the Villages.
Since 1980, much of the growth in the Urban Neighborhoods
has concentrated along the U.S. Route 29 North corridor
(Neighborhoods 1 and 2) and around the University of
Virginia (Neighborhood 7). Although this trend still holds
true in 1990, future development potential is strongest in
Neighborhoods 2, 3, and 4 since large amounts of undeveloped
residentially zoned land exists there. It is worth
mentioning that the number of permits issued in Neighborhood
4 has increased each year since 1984. In 1990, new
development in Neighborhood 4 (102 new units) was equal to
the growth in Neighborhoods 1 and 2 combined (103 units).
This was primarily due to the expansion of the Mill Creek,
willow Lake, and Willoughby subdivisions in Neighborhood 4.
6
TABLE 2-3
NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
BY BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN 1990
MAGISTERIAL TOTAL % OF TOTAL
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MH D.U. D.U.
CHARLOTTESVILLE 25 0 35 0 76 0 136 17%
JACK JOUETT 10 0 0 0 22 0 32 4%
RIVANNA 163 12 36 0 1 9 221 27%
SAMUEL MILLER 62 6 2 0 0 11 81 10%
SCOTTSVILLE 160 0 11 0 34 21 226 28%
WHITE HALL 64 6 0 0 30 8 108 13%
TOTAL 484 24 84 0 163 49 804 100%
KEY TO TYPES OF HOUSING:
SF- Single-Family (includes Modular)
SFA- Single-Family Attached
SF/TH- Single-Family Townhouse
DUP- Duplex
MF- Multi-Family
MH- Mobile Home
7
TABLE 2-4
BUILDINC PERMIT ACTIVITY COMPARISON 1984-1990
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
GEOGRAPHIC AREA #Units #Uni ts #Units #Units #units #units #Uni ts
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD
ONE 149 141 126 60 4 21 22
TWO 102 66 127 60 ' 100 110 81
THREE 2 41 0 0 10 123 0
FOUR 0 21 22 57 " 80 104 102
FIVE' 1 0 1 3 21 2 0
SIX 12 15 21 2 1 3 10
SEVEN 9 4 5 1 1 265 56
SUBTOTAL 275 288 302 183 217 628 271
COMMUNITY
CROZET 7 5 2 11 19 12 39
HOLLYMEAD 17 11 20 1 22 296 100
SCOTTSVILLE 0 0 1 0 6 2 36
SUBTOTAL 24 16 23 12 47 310 175
VILlAGE
EARLYSVILLE 33 14 19 30 10 2 0
NORTH GARDEN 0 0 1 1 1 3 3
PINEY MOUNTAIN 10 0 0 2 3 19 19
RIVANNA 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
SUBTOTAL 43 14 ' 20 33 14 24 23
GROWTH AREAS TOTAL 342 318 345 228 278 962 469
RURAL AREAS
ONE 127 133 127 156 132 104 96
TWO 65 57 62 70 74 72 68
THREE 127 154 137 123 116 103 81
FOUR 64 52 67 77 73 68 90
SUBTOTAL 383 396 393 426 395 347 335
GRAND TOTAL 725 714 738 654 673 1,309 804
8
The Rural Areas reflect some fluctuation in the number of
building permits issued for new dwelling units over the past
seven (7) years (see Table 2-4). However, despite
occasional large fluctuations, the seven (7) year trend
indicates consistent residential development activity in the
Rural Areas. There has been a decrease in the total number
of dwelling units constructed since 1987, from a high of 426
units in 1987, 395 units in 1988, and 347 units in 1989 to
355 units in 1990. This may indicate that available units
in the Growth Areas are reducing demand for units in the
Rural Areas.
The 804 building permits issued in 1990 represents a
slightly below average year for housing construction within
the last two (2) decades (see Table 2-5). From 1971 to
1980, an average of 866 residential building permits were
issued annually. The next decade, from 1981 to 1990, an
average of 848 permits were issued annually. Consequently,
from 1971 to 1990, the average number of permits issued
annually equaled 857. The University of Virginia expansion
in the early 1970's continues to be the largest single
generator of new housing starts over the past 20 years.
B. SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY
1. Methodology
For the purpose of this report, the definition of a
subdivision is limited to the division of a parcel of land,
including re-divisions, that results in at least one (1) new
residential building lot. The creation of condominium lots
is separated from thL~ cf other residential lots in the
analysis of this report. Condominium units do not include
acreage as part of the individual loti therefore, it would
be misleading to include them in calculations such as
average lot size.
This section of the 1990 Development Activity Report
examines the characteristics of new residential building
lots created through subdivision activity during the year.
The Planning Commission granted staff the authority to
administratively approve final plats that were reviewed and
approved as preliminary plats by the Commission, provided
the final plat meets all conditions of approval placed upon
it by the Commission. This report includes data for plats
signed for recordation. Please note that where preliminary
plat information has been included, it is indicated as such,
and that they represent plats that have been approved by the
Planning Commission, but have not gone through final plat
approval. A final plat, once approved, has 18 months to
fulfill conditions of approval and, therefore, may not
become a signed plat during the same calendar year.
9
TABLE 2-5
1971-1990
TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW DWEI~ING UNITS
FROM BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED
NUMBER OF # CHANGE FROM
YEAR DWELLING UNITS PREVIOUS YEAR
1971 1,624
1972 1,412 -212
1973 1,367 -45
1974 659 -708
1975 510 -149
1976 452 -58
1977 863 411
1978 602 -261
1979 585 -17
1980 583 -2
1981 598 15
1982 482 -116
1983 1,063 581
1984 725 -338
1985 714 -11
1986 737 23
1987 654 -83
1988 673 19
1989 1,309 636
1990 804 -505
TOTAL 16,416
AVERAGE 1971-80 - 866 DWELLING UNITS/yEAR
AVERAGE 1981-90 - 848 DWELLING UNITS/yEAR
AVERAGE 1971-90 - 857 DWELLING UNITS/yEAR
10
2. Analysis of Signed Plats
In 1990, 150 residential subdivision plats were signed and
448 new lots were created (see Tdole 2-6). In addition, 22
new condominium lots were created in Urban Neighborhood 1.
The Designated Growth Areas accounted for 15 percent of the
signed plats, 45 percent of the new residential building
lots created in 1990, and 11 peroent of the total acres
subdivided (see Table 2-6). The major subdivisions in the
Designated Growth Areas that contributed a significant
number of new lots were: Riverrun and Branchlands in Urban
Neighborhood 2; willow Lake, Willoughby, and Mill Creek in
Urban Neighborhood 4; Forest Lakes in the Community of
Hollymead; and Briarwood in the Village of Piney Mountain.
The Rural Areas accounted for 85 percent of the total number
of residential subdivision plats submitted, 55 percent of
the new lots created, and 89 percent of the total acreage
subdivided in 1990 (see Table 2-6). This represents an
increase in the number of residential subdivisions in the
Rural Areas from 114 subdivisions in 1989 to 128
subdivisions in 1990. However, there was a decrease in the
number of new lots created, from 269 lots in 1989 to 245
lots in 1990, and a decrease in the total acreage
subdivided, from 3,404 acres in 1989 to 2,869 acres in 1990.
The major subdivisions in the Rural Areas that contributed a
significant number of new lots were: Beaumont Farms and The
Cascades in Rural Area 1; Watts station in Rural Area 2;
and Tandem Farm in Rural Area 3. Most of the subdivisions
in the Rural Areas were created through by-right divisions
and family divisions.
The distribution of new Rural Area lots by size is shown in
Table 2-7. There has been a steady decrease in the total
number of new lots created since 1988 in the Rural Areas.
This decrease is best represented in the two (2) tb 4.99
acre range and the five (5) to 9.99 acre range, where the
total number of new lots created has decreased by 26 percent
and 23 percent, respectively, since 1988. The percent of
total rural lots created for each year between 1988 and 1990
in the two (2) to 4.99 acre range has shown a decrease as
well, but the 10 to 20.99 acre range shows an increase in
the percent of rural lots created since 1988. None of the
lots created in 1990 were less than two (2) acres.
3. Historic Comparison of Subdivision Activity - Signed Plats
The comparison of subdivision activity in 1990 to that of
previous years is a useful tool for identifying growth
patterns (see Table 2-8). Data for years 1983 to 1990 is
based on modified Growth Area boundaries and, therefore, is
not strictly comparable to 1979 to 1982 data. 1990 data is
also based on the most recent changes in the Growth Areas
based on the 1989-2010 Comprehensive Plan as well as the
addition of the Village of Rivanna (CPA-89-01). 1990
11
TABLE 2-6
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY IN 1990 - SIGNED PLATS
GEOGRAPHIC SUBDIVISIONS NEW LOTS TOTAL ACREAGE
AREA # % # % Acres %
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 2 1.3% 6 1. 3% 27.96 0.86%
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 9 6.0% 55 12.3% 176.23 5.44%
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 0.00%
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 6 4.0% 101 22.5% 144.00 4.45%
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 0.00%
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 0.00%
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 0.00%
SUBTOTAL 17 11.3% 162 36.2% 348.19 10.75%
CROZET COMMUNITY 1 0.7% 1 0.2% 3.10 0.10%
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 1 0.7% 12 2.7% 1.01 0.03%
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 1 0.7% 1 0.2% 2.02 0.06%
SUBTOTAL 3 2.0% 14 3.1% 6.13 0.19%
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 0.00%
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.00 0.00%
PINEY MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 1 0.7% 26 5.8% 12.00 0.37%
RIVANNA VILLAGE 1 0.7% 1 0.2% 2.30 0.07%
SUBTOTAL 2 1. 3% 27 6.0% 14.30 0.44%
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 22 14.7% 203 45.3% 368.62 11.38%
.
RURAL AREA 1 31 20.7% 82 18.3% 584.40 18.05%
RURAL AREA 2 27 18.0% 48 10.7% 671. 59 20.74%
RURAL AREA 3 37 24.7% 65 14.5% 733.29 22.65%
RURAL AREA 4 33 22.0% 50 11.2% 880.12 27.18%
SUBTOTAL 128 85.3% 245 54.7% 2,869.40 88.62%
TOTAL 150 100.0% 448 100.0% 3,238.02 100.00%
* In addition, there were 22 new condominium lots in Urban Neighborhood 1.
12
TABLE 2-7
DISTRIBUTION BY SIZE (ACREAGE)
BASED ON SIGNED PLATS
LOCATED IN THE RURAL AREAS
1988 1989 1990
RANGE NEW LOTS % OF TOTAL NEY LOTS % OF TOTAL NEW LOTS % OF TOTAL
IN ACRES CREATED RURAL LOTS CREATED RURAL LOTS CREATED RURAL LOTS
UNDER 2.0 * 5 2% 0 0% 0 0%
2.0 TO 4.99 140 49% 114 42% 104 42%
5.0 TO 9.99 73 25% 69 26% 56 23%
10.0 TO 20.99 35 12% 34 13% 48 20%
21. 0 AND OVER 34 12% 52 19% 37 15%
TOTAL 287 100% 269 100% 245 100%
* Lot size variances granted by Board of Zoning Appeals.
13
TABLE 2-8
CHANGES IN SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY
1979-1990 SIGNED PLATS
1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
URBAN AREA
SUBOIVISIONS 23 24 14 13 14 17 19 22 8 22 15 17
NEW LOTS 205 306 78 284 191 210 162 81 96 167 200 162
ACREAGE 90 105 156 97 92 225 228 378 48 183 144 348
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 0.4 0.3 2.0 0.3 0.5 1.1 1.4 4.7 0.5 1.1 0.7 2.1
COMMUNITIES
SUBDIVISIONS 7 1 5 0 5 4 2 3 0 6 7 3
NEW LOTS 17 2 42 0 25 5 2 3 0 207 42 14
ACREAGE 87 29 28 0 75 21 49 126 0 99 24 6
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 5.1 14.5 0.7 0 3.0 4.2 24.5 42.1 0.0 0.5 0.6 0.4
VILLAGES
SUBDIVISIONS 7 5 7 4 5 2 2 3 2 2 2 2
NEW LOTS 45 15 121 18 110 33 2 35 29 3 2 27
ACREAGE 198 66 150 80 90 52 23 51 56 40 4 14
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 4.4 4.4 1.2 4.4 0.8 1.6 11.5 1.4 1.9 13.3 2.1 0.5
TOTAL GROWTH AREAS
SUBDIVISIONS 37 30 26 17 24 23 23 28 10 30 24 22
NEW LOTS 267 323 241 302 326 248 166 119 125 377 244 203
ACREAGE 375 200 334 177 257 298 300 555 104 322 172 368
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 1.4 0.6 1.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.8 4.7 0.8 0.9 0.7 1.8
RURAL AREA 1
SUBDIVISIONS 45 47 36 26 24 25 25 40 37 36 29 31
NEW LOTS 270 377 137 113 93 48 48 69 70 135 59 82
ACREAGE 1400 1396 1482 864 704 320 369 817 609 993 993 584
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 5.2 3.7 10.8 7.6 7.6 6.7 7.7 11.8 8.7 7.4 16.8 7.1
RURAL AREA 2
SUBDIVISIONS 14 18 23 11 12 22 12 21 16 23 26 27
NEW LOTS 28 28 89 33 42 37 27 38 23 60 51 48
ACREAGE 60 183 607 171 129 246 498 1109 136 649 786 672
AVERAGE LOT SIZE . 6.5 6.8 5.2 3.1 6.6 18.4 29.2 5.9 10.8 15.4 14.0
~'t ;
RURAL AREA 3
SUBDIVISIONS 29 33 41 22 30 28 23 42. 35 33 34 37
NEW LOTS 149 108 114 50 195 87 54 86 95 64 87 65
ACREAGE 450 518 1533 416 1035 493 306 809 671 515 862 733
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 3.0 4.8 13.4 8.3 5.3 5.7 5.7 9.4 7.1 8.0 9.9 11.3
RURAL AREA 4
SUBDIVISIONS 22 31 24 22 15 19 17 32 18 26 25 33
NEW LOTS 67 105 52 42 34 25 24 40 24 28 72 50
ACREAGE 186 677 n8 590 277 102 400 468 134 504 591 880
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 2.8 6.4 14.0 14.0 8.1 4.1 16.7 11.7 5.6 18.0 8.2 17.6
TOTAL RURAL AREAS
SUBDIVISIONS 110 129 124 81 81 94 77 135 106 118 114 128
NEW LOTS 514 618 392 238 364 197 153 233 212 287 269 245
ACREAGE 2096 2774 4350 2041 2145 1161 1573 3204 1550 2661 3232 2869
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 4.1 4.5 11.1 8.6 5.9 5.9 10.3 13.8 7.3 9.3 12.0 11.7
GRAND TOTAL
SUBDIVISIONS 147 159 150 98 105 117 100 163 116 148 138 150
NEW LOTS 781 941 633 540 690 445 319 352 337 664 513 448
ACREAGE 2471 2974 4684 2219 2401 1458 1873 3759 1654 2983 3404 3237
AVERAGE LOT SIZE 3.2 3.2 7.4 4.1 3.5 3.3 5.9 10.7 4.9 4.5 6.6 7.2
14
experienced a significant decredse in the number of new lots
created, down from 664 lots in 1988 and 513 lots in 1989 to
448 lots in 1990. However, the total number of subdivisions
and the average lot size increased to their highest levels
since 1985. The total numbe~ of subdivisions in 1990
increased by nine (9) percel.~ to 150 subdivisions over the
1989 total of 138 subdivisions. The average new lot size in
1990 increased by nine (9) percent to 7.2 acres per lot over
the 1989 average of 6.6 acres per lot.
Urban Neighborhoods 1-7 provided 162 of the new lots created
in 1990, a decrease of 38 lots from 1989. However, there
were 244 more acres subdivided in 1990 than in 1989 and the
average lot size increased ~rom .7 acre to 2.1 acres (see
Table 2-8). The Communities reflected an overall decrease
in subdivision activity in 1990. The Villages, however,
increased the number of new lots created from two (2) lots
in 1989 to 27 lots in 1990. The average lot size in the
Communities and Villages decreased from .6 to .4 acre and
2.1 to .5 acre, respectively.
In the Rural Areas, the 245 new lots created in 1990
represents a decrease of nine (9) percent (24 lots) over
1989 totals. In the years prior to 1984, the number of new
lots created per subdivision was fairly high (3 to 5 lots
per subdivision), and the resulting average lot size tended
to be smaller (see Table 2-8). From 1985 to 1990, many of
the Rural Area subdivisions created only one (1) or two (2)
new lots, and the average lot size tended to be larger,
ranging from seven (7) to 13 acres. In 1990, the average
lot size was 11.7 acres. This
The average new lot size for Rural Area lots that were
created with development rights (excluding lots greater than
21 acres) from 1987 to 1990 appear in Table 2-9. Rural
Areas 1 and 4 both reflect a decrease of 1.09 and 0.15
acres, respectively, from their 1989 levels. The average
lot size in Rural Area 3 has continued to increase each year
since 1987. Rural Area 2 reflects the largest increase in
average lot size, an increase of 2.3 acres, over 1989
levels.
4. Dedication of Open Space
As part of the subdivision approval process, common open
space within medium to high density subdivisions is
dedicated under provisions of Albemarle County's Zoning
Ordinance for clustering, density increases through bonus
factors, and/or the satisfaction of a condition for the
approval of a special use permit or rezoning application.
A total of 81.55 acres were dedicated in 1990 (see Table
2-10), which represents an increase of 45.41 acres over
1989's dedication of 36.14 acres. There were no approved,
but unsigned subdivisions in 1990.
15
TABLE 2-9
RURAL AREA AVERAGE LOT SIZE
(development right lots)
Change
AREA 1987 Size 1988 Size 1989 Size 1990 Size From 89-90
RURAL AREA 1 4.99 ac. 6.97 ac. 6.84 ac. 5.75 ac. -1.09 ac.
RURAL AREA 2 5.49 ac. 6.36 ac. 4.25 ac. 6.55 ac. 2.30 ac.
RURAL AREA 3 4.85 ac. 6.76 ac. 7.78 ac. 9.60 ac. 1.82 ac.
RURAL AREA 4 4.58 ac. 4.63 ac. 5.56 ac. 5.41 ac. -0.15 ac.
TABLE 2-10
DEDICATION OF OPEN SPACE - 1990
AREA IN
STATUS PROJECT NAME COMP PLAN AREA ACRES
Signed Mill Creek hd1.ghborhood 4 19.52
Signed Willoughby Neighborhood 4 11.58
Signed Riverrun Neighborhood 2 5.06
Signed Forest Lakes Hollymead 45.39
Total Open Space on Approved Plans - 0.00
Total Open Space on Signed Plans - 81. 55
Total Open Space Dedicated - 81.55
.
..
16
5. Subdivision Activity - Planning commission Approved Plats
The Albemarle County Planning Commission is charged with
reviewing subdivision plats to ensure their compliance with
subdivision standards as outlined in the Subdivision
Ordinance (Section 18 of the Albemarl~ County Code). This
review provides a public meeting and is the means for the
Planning commission to assure that the land subdivisions do
not adversely affect the public health, safety, and welfare
of the community. As discussed earlier, the Planning
commission has delegated responsibility for some steps in
the review process to the staff in the Planning Department.
In a number of cases, staff has been given permission to
review and approve subdivision plats. In 1990, the Planning
commission approved 27 subdivision plats that created 462
new lots and totalled 1,981 acres (see Table 2-11).
The Comprehensive Plan's Designated Growth Areas accounted
for 52 percent of the new lots in subdivisions gaining final
approval by the Planning Commission in 1990 (see Table
2-11). Of the six (6) subdivisions located in the Growth
Areas, three (3) were located in the Community of Hollymead.
and represented 153 of the 242 total number of new lots
created. While the majority of the approved new lots were
located in the Designated Growth Areas, 78 percent of all
subdivisions and 48 percent of all new lots were located in
the Rural Areas. Rural Area 3 contributed the largest
number of subdivisions and new lots in the County with 11 of
the 21 total subdivisions and 119 of the 220 total new lots
created. The Howell Farm and Watterson Farms subdivisions
as well as additions to Peacock Hill, Rosemont, and Ivy
Creek were some of the larger subdivisions approved in Rural
Area 3 in 1990. Rural Areas 1 and 2 contributed seven (7)
and three (3) new subdivisions and accounted for 82 and 19
new lots, respectively.
A five (5) year summary of final subdivision plats approved
by the Planning Commission appears in Table 2-12. In the
Growth Areas, there were fewer subdivisions and new lots
created in the Urban Neighborhoods and Communities in 1990
as compared to 1989 totals. The Village of Piney Mountain,
with an addition of 26 lots in the Briarwood subdivision,
represented the first subdivision activity in the Villages
since 1986.
In 1990, 21 Planning Commission subdivision plats were
approved creating 220 new lots in the Rural Areas as
compared to 22 subdivisions and 438 new lots approved in
1989 (see Table 2-12). These totals represent a decrease of
one (1) subdivision and 218 new lots. Subsequently, the
total acreage subdivided in the Rural Areas decreased from
2,845 acres in 1989 to 1,868 acres in 1990, resulting in an
average lot size of 8.5 acres, the largest since tracking
this particular data set. County-wide, the average lot size
increased from 2.6 acres per lot in 1989 to 4.3 acres per
lot in 1990, a 65 percent increase.
17
TABLE 2 - 11
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY IN 1990
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED PLATS
GEOGRAPHIC AREA SUBDIVISIONS NEW LOTS TOTAL ACREAGE AVERAGE
# % # % ACRES % LOT SIZE
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 1 4% 32 7% 13.2 1% 0.41
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 1 4% 31 7% 11.6 1% 0.37
HOLLYMEAD 3 11% 153 33% 85.2 4% 0.56
PINEY MOUNTAIN 1 4% 26 6% 2.5 0% 0.09
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 6 22% 242 52% 112.5 6% 0.46
RURAL AREA 1 7 26% 82 18% 633.1 32% 7.72
RURAL AREA 2 3 11% 19 4% 390.2 20% 20.54
RURAL AREA 3 11 41% 119 26% 845.3 43% 7.10,
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 21 78% 220 48% 1,868.6 94% 8.49
TOTAL 27 100% 462 100% 1,981.1 100% 4.29
18
TABLE 2-12
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ACTIVITY 1986-1990
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED PLATS
GEOGRAPHIC AREA 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS 1-7
SUBDIVISIONS 1 3 1 6 2
NEW LOTS 39 34 153 205 63
ACREAGE 26.9 20.3 122.0 126.5 24.8
AVERAGE LOT SIZE (ACRES) 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.4
COMMUNITIES
SUBDIVISIONS 0 1 3 7 3
NEW LOTS 0 1 204 553 153
ACREAGE 0.0 1.5 151.2 166.7 85.2
AVERAGE LOT SIZE (ACRES) 0.0 1.5 0.7 0.3 0.6
VILLAGES
SUBDIVISIONS 2 0 0 0 1
NEW LOTS 55 0 0 0 26
ACREAGE 94.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5
AVERAGE LOT SIZE (ACRES) 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
TOTAL CROWTH AREAS
SUBDIVISIONS 3 4 4 13 6
NEW LOTS 94 35 357 758 242
ACREAGE 121. 0 21. 8 273.2 293.2 112.5
AVERAGE LOT SIZE (ACRES) 1.3 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.5
RURAL AREAS 1- 4
SUBDIVISIONS 12 11 5 22 21
NEW LOTS 88 102 41 438 220
ACREAGE 664.8 621. 0 318.4 2845.3 1868.6
AVERAGE LOT SIZE (ACRES) 7.6 6.1 7.8 6.5 8.5
GRAND TOTAL
SUBDIVISIONS 15 15 9 35 27
NEW LOTS 182 137 398 1196 462
ACREAGE 785.8 642.8 591. 6 3138.5 1981. 0
AVERAGE LOT SIZE (ACRES) 4.3 4.7 1.5 2.6 4.3
19
6. Planniny Commission Approved Plats - state vs. Private Roads
Effective January 1, 1984, the provisions in the Subdivision
Ordinance regarding private roads were substantially amended
to state that private roads were to be the exception to
public.0ad construction in subdivision developments. The
1984 private road amendments imposed requirements of a five
(5) acre minimum lot size on a private road and stricter
construction standards.
Prior to this amendment, the number of subdivisions on
private roads were higher than the number on state roads.
After the amendment was enacted, the distribution of
subdivisions on state roads versus private roads shifted to
favor public road development (see Table 2-13). In 1990, 63
percent of all new subdivisions from Planning Commission
approved plats were located on state roads. While this
level is higher than the percentage of subdivisions on state
roads prior to 1987, it reflects a decrease for the third
consecutive year. Percentages of subdivisions on state
roads decreased from 82 percent in 1987, 76 percent in 1988,
and 71 percent in 1989, to 63 percent in 1990. The number
of new lots on state roads increased from 65 percent in 1989
to 82 percent in 1990.
C. SITE PLAN ACTIVITY
. .'
The approval of site development plans is another measure of
residential growth in Albemarle County. site development
plans are required to be submitted for Planning Commission
review prior to most new residential construction
(exceptions include some single-family dwelling~ and
duplexes as outlined in Section 32 of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance). Therefore, residential site development
plans approved by the Planning Commission generally reflect
new medium or high density developments. In 1989, the
Planning Commission approved 11 residential site development
plans which created 750 new dwelling units. . In 1990, five
(5) residential site development plans, totalling 236 new
dwelling units, were approved by the Planning Commission
(see Table 2-14). The 1990 approvals yielded a decrease of
six (6) residential site development plans and 514 dwelling
units, or 69 percent fewer dwellings approved by site plan
in 1990 than in 1989.
Non-residential site development plans approved by the
Planning Commission in 1990 appear in Table 2-15. In 1989,
there were 59 non-residential site development plans
approved by the Planning Commission which created 1,927,496
square feet of commercial/retail, industrial, office, or
pUblic/institutional construction. There were 22
non-residential site development plans approved in 1990 for
a total of 476,541 square feet of non-residential
construction. In 1990, there was a 63 percent decrease in
the total number of site development plans and a 75 percent
20
TABLE 2-13
PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED PLATS
STATE AND PRIVATE ROADS
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
CLASS I FICATION # % # % # % # % # % # % # % # %
# SUBDIVISIONS . STATE ROADS 17 34% 10 27% 19 59% 15 60% 23 82% 16 76% 25 71% 17 63%
By Preliminary Plat 15 30% 5 14% 12 38% 6 24% 12 43% 7 33% 7 20X 14 521
By Final Plat 2 4% 5 14% 7 22% 9 36% 11 39% 9 43% 18' 51% 3 11%
# SUBDIVISIONS - PRIVATE ROADS 33 66% 27 73% 13 41% 10 40% 5 18% 5 24% 10 29% 10 37%
By Preliminary Plat 21 42% 20 54% 7 22% 8 32% 3 11% 2 10% 1 3% 9 33%
By Final Plat 12 24% 7 19% 6 19% 2 8% 2 7% 3 14% 9 26% 1 4%
TOTAL 50 100% 37 100% 32 100% 25 100% 28 100% 21 100% 35 100% 27 100%
# NEW LOTS - STATE ROADS 539 61% 307 69% 163 78% 244 73% 733 90% 633 91% 778 65% 377 82%
By Preliminary Plat 337 38% 132 30% 83 40% 79 24% 108 13% 373 53% 182 15% 325 70%
By Final Plat 202 23% 175 39% 80 38% 165 49% 625 m 260 37% 596 50% 52 11%
# NEW LOTS - STATE ROADS 342 39% 138 31% 46 22% 92 27% 77 10% 65 9% 418 35% 85 18%
By Preliminary Plat 286 32% 98 22% 28 13% 89 26% 29 4% 25 4% 4 0% 82 18%
By Final Plat 56 6% 40 9% 18 9% 3 1% 48 6% 40 6% 414 35% 3 1%
TOTAL 881 100% 445 100% 209 100% 336 100% 810 100% 698 100X 1196 100% 462 100%
. .-
21
TABLE 2-14
MAJOR RESIDENTIAL SITE PLANS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN 1990
COMP PLAN TYPE OF NUMBER OF
PROJECT NAME AREA DWELLING DWELLINGS
Branch1ands, Phase IV Neighborhood 2 Townhouse, Condominium 18
Moorehouse at Branch1ands Neighborhood 2 Multi-family, 130
Group Quarters
Ednam, Section B Neighborhood 6 Single-family Attached 20
University Heights Phase II Neighborhood 6 Condominium 52
Willow Lakes Phase II Neighborhood 4 Single-family 16
TOTAL 236
. .-
. ,
22
TABLE 2-15
1990 MAJOR NON-RESIDENTIAL SITE PLANS
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AREA MAGISTERIAL COMP PLAN
PROJECT NAME USE (SQ FT) DISTRICT AREA
COMMERICAL/RETAIL SERVICES
Taylor Auto Body Auto Body Shop 4,000 Rivanna Neighborhood 2
Reliant Truck Corp. Sales, Service Center 4,200 Rivanna Holl ymead
Jefferson Nat'l. Bank Banking 1,920 Sal1lJel Mi ller Rural Area 3
Sovran Bank Banking 2,915 Charlottesville Neighborhood 2
Leisure Land Recreation 436 Rivanna Hollymead
Star Enterprise Gas Station 3,268 Charlottesville Neighborhood 2
East Exxon Gas Station 2,160 Rivanna Rural Area 2
Virginia Oil Gas Station 3,500 Rivanna Holl ymead
Townside II Retail 24,393 Jack Jouett Neighborhood 6
Walmart Retail 114,513 Charlottesville Neighborhood 1
Crossroads Village Center Retail 33,468 Sal1lJel Miller North Garden
Blue Goose Reta i l 18,000 Whi te Hall Crozet
SUBTOTAL 212,m
INDUSTRIAL
R.L. Beyer Office, Warehouse 27,750 Rivanna Rural Area 2
Wray Partnership Office, Warehouse 6,000 Rivanna Rural Area 2
Browning Ferris Industries Oumpster Maintenance 56,628 Scottsville Neighborhood 4
SUBTOTAL 90,378
OFFICE
Westfield Road Off ices 6,400 Charlottesville Neighborhood ~
State Farm Offices 124,000 Rivanna Neighborhood 3
SUBTOTAL 130,400
PUBLIC/INSTITUTIONAL
Senior Center at Pepsi Place Meeting, Recreation Center 10,900 Charlottesville Neighborhood 2
Southern Regional Park Boat Ral!1) 1,500 Scottsville Rural Area 4
Moorhouse at Branchlands Adult Care Building 8,000 Charlottesville Neighborhood 2
Northside Baptist Church Church, Classroom 15,090 Charlottesville Neighborhood 2
Paran Methodist Church 7,500 Rivanna Rural Area 1
SUBTOTAL 42,990
TOTAL 476,541
. '
. .
23
decrease in the total number of ~quare feet of
non-residential construction approved by the Planning
commission as compared to 1989 totals.
From 1989 to 1990, there was a decrease in the amount of
commercial/retail services s~ace approved by the Planning
Commission. 212,773 square feet of commercial/retail
services space was approved in 1990, the majority of which
was located in Neighborhood 1 as a result of the Walmart
discount department store site plan approval. This
represents a decrease of 724,359 square feet, or 77 percent
of the square footage of commercial/retail space approved in
1989. Site plans for industrial activity decreased by 35
percent from 139,691 square feet in 1989 to 90,378 square
feet in 1990. The amount of office space approved by the
'Planning Commission in 1990 represented the only increase in
the total square footage of construction over 1989 totals.
In 1990, 130,400 square feet of office space was approved by
the Planning Commission, of which 124,000 square feet was
attributed to the State Farm site plan approval. This
represents a 29 percent increase over the 1989 total of
101,165 square feet for office space. site plans for
pUblic/institutional space decreased by 94 percent from
749,508 square feet in 1989, of which 558,566 square feet
was for the Charlottesville/Albemarle Airport site plan, to
42,990 square feet in 1990.
The dramatic decrease in commercial/retail services space,
industrial space, and pUblic/institutional space brought the
overall square footage of non-residential site development
plans down from 1,927,496 total square feet in 1989 to
476,541 total square feet in 1990. This was despite an
increase in office space. Ninety percent of all
non-residential site development plans were located in the
Comprehensive Plan's Growth Areas.
III. INVENTORY OF LAND USE
An inventory of residential, commercial, and industrial land
was conducted to identify population and commercial centers
in Albemarle County (see Tables 3-1 and 3-2). The
development of the County's parcel data computer file
facilitated the identification and grouping of developed and
undeveloped properties in residential, commercial, and
industrial categories. The purpose of this annual inventory
is to examine the distribution of land uses in specific
areas of the County.
The inventory of residential, commercial, and industrial
development was assembled with the assistance of a computer
program which stored each Growth Area into developed and
undeveloped parcels within each zoning district. The parcel
acreages within each zoning district were totaled to
construct tables for each of the three (3) categories of
uses. For those parcels with more than one (1) zoning, the
parcel acreage in each zoning district was estimated with a
planimeter and distributed accordingly.
24
>-
""
i
:::J
VI
w
VI
:::J
... Q
I Z
,., <
....
w
.... ....
l:a <
< -
l- I-
Z
W
Q
VI
W
""
0
8:
...
"
0. N N ~ CO N 0. -0 I'- 0. CO I'- I'- Ci! -0 ,., 0 ~
l- N I'- -0 j;: ... -0 ~ ~ N 0. N ... ~ ,.,
> ... ,., N ~ ,., ~ '" ... ... 0 la
w ... ,., ... N ... N
.... 0
< Z
I- :::J
0 ...... ~ N ~ ,., '" CO ;e ~ CO N ... j;: '" ~ N I'- g; ...
l- I- ... -0 0. :0 CO 0 N ~ 0 '" '" '"
> '" N N 0 N ~ ,., 0 I'- CO ~ ... ~ 0
W ... ... ..... '" ... ... N ... 0
Q ...
I- -0 ,., 0 -0 -0 I'- 0 ~ 0. 0 I'- ;e N 0 ... '" ~ N
> ... CO '" ... ~ N CO ... CO ,.,
Q W ~ '" ... ... ,., 0
"" Q ... .... N
0. Z
...... :::J
9 ...... 0 ~ -0 '" ~ ~ co :0 ,., 0 C8 0. 0 0 ~ 0 co ~
I- ~ ,., N ... .... ... ... co -0 ... .... ,.,
0. > N ,., ... N ~ .... '" ....
w ....
Q
I- '" I'- I'- 0 I'- I'- N '" 00"'''' 00000 0
> N ~ N N .... ~ '"
w ... ..... ,., ,.,
Q
'" Z
.... :::J I'-
I ...... ~ :0 ... 0 N N -0 0000 00000 -0
"" I- .... N N N
> .... ....
W
Q
I- 0. I'- I'- 0 ,., ,., 0 0. 0000 00000 0.
> ,., ,., ... N .... ...
w .... ...
0 Q
.... Z
. :::J
"" ...... I'- OCOOON -0 ,., o~o~ 00000 I'-
I- -0 ~ N N
> .... ...
W
Q
l- N Ll'I N N 0 00 0: -0 0 I'- ~ 00000 ~
> ~ ... N ... ~ N
W ... ..... ... .... ,.,
Q
-0 z
. :::J
'" ...... ~ ,., 0 00.00 -0 ;e 0 '" 0 00000 I'-
I- '" N N 0 N 0
> .... ... N ,.,
I- W
U Q
""
l- I- ~ 0 0 -0 ,., 0.... ,., ~OO~ 00"'0'" N
VI > 0. N ~ 0. 0
- w -0 CO 0.
Q Q
-r Z
t:J :::J
z '" ...... 0. N 0 -0 ~ '" 0 CO 1'-0 0 I'- 00 I'- 0 I'- N
I- ~ ,., ~ .... -0 :0 -0 -0 N N CO
Z > ~ .... ....
0 W
N Q
>- I-
l:a > ,., -0 0 ... CO ,., ,., ~ 0- 0 '" ~ 00000 CO
w ~ N '" N CO ,., N ~
VI Q ... ... ~ .... '"
W N Z
"" , :::J
u "" ......
< l- I'- ~ 0 0 R: I'- ,., ~ ~ 0 '" .... 00000 '"
> -0 N -0 ~ '" '" CO
w ,., ... N ,., 0
Q ....
I- 0 -g ~ ... -0 g; '" 0. 0 0 I'- I'- 000'00 -0
> '" ,., ... ~ CO C8 ~ 0.
W N ... N N 0 ~ ~ ,.,
Q ... N
... Z
I :::J
"" ......
I- 0 I'- :g ... I'- Ll'I I'- ,., N 0 -0 ~ 00000 ...
> '" ,., 0. N -0 ~ 0 0. ~
W N ... 0. ,., -0 ~ I'- ,., 0 '"
Q ... ,., ... ~
I- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 '" CO -0 00 ;:! R:
> 0 0 N ~
W N N N
Q
z
"" :::J
> ...... 0000000 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 :g 00 C8 ~
l- N ~
> .... .... N ,., '"
W
Q
I- 00 N 0. Ll'I~ CO CO 0. ~ 0 ,., I'- CO 0 ~ ~ ;:!
> ... ... ,., ,., ... N N :g ... ,.,
W ... .... Ll'I Ll'I '" ,.,
Q ....
Z
< :::J N I'- I'-
"" ...... 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0. ,., ~ 0. I'- I'- CO ;;;
l- N ,., 0 ... CO ~ '" ... .... 0 ~ ,.,
> ... ... N ... .... N '" .... ... ,., ....
W ....
Q
.... .... .... ....
I'- < < < <
..... N ,., ~ '" -0 l- I- e: l- I-
0 0 0 0
gg88888 l- I- e: <ll l- I-
< l:a GI l:a GI GI ... l:a
W :::J - :::J - "0 5 :::J
"" J:. J:. J:. J:. J:. J:. J:. VI - "0 VI - ... VI
< ... ... ... ... ... ... ... '; III ,- III 0
.B.B.B.B.B.B.B I > t:J :E ~
:: ... <II <II
I- J:.J:.J:..s:.s:.s:.s: GI ... ).J:. ).
~ CI CI CI CI CI CI CI N ... - - ... Ql III
'Qj 'Qj 'Qj 'Qj 'Qj 'Qj 'Qj 0 0 - ... ... e: >
"" ... 0 0 III 0 .-
t:J Z Z Z Z Z Z Z U VI :: W Z 0.""
25
>-
'"
<
~
tJ)
w
tJ)
::l
0
z
<
.....
N
, .....
,., <
W '"
..... ...
CD tJ)
< ::l
... 0
z
-
0
z
<
.....
<
U
'"
W
~
U
. .-
... CO ...... N ...... ...... NCO CO -0
> ...... CO Il'\ CO ,., -0 "'" ~ 0 00 ,., 0:
w Il'\ N ,., N -0 0: ... ...... -0 ,., ,., -0 ... 0
..... 0 N 1"1 N 1"1 "'".
< Z
... ::l ...
0 ..... CO ......~ -0 ...... -0 ......
... ... 0 -0 0 ii 1"1 ~ 0.. -0 CO Il'\IC ~ 0.. 0 ;e
> CO N CO ... "'" N 0.. ~ Il'\ "'" Il'\ ~ CO - N
W N N N N N CO - -
0 . . ",.
- -
> 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 - 0 - 0000 0 0 0 0 0 -
W Il'\ Il'\ Il'\
0 N N N
il.z
';"~ 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0000 00000 0
0'"
a.>
w
0
...
> 0000000 0 00"'" "'" 0000 00000 "'"
W
0
Z
- ::l
2: ..... ......
... 0000000 0 0 -0 :0 0000 00 CO 0 CO Il'\
> ,., 0.. ,., ,., 1"1
W ...
0
... ......00 00............ ......
> ~ 00 Il'\ -0 ......0 Il'\ ~ 0-0 - 0 1"1
W ,., ... Il'\ -0 Il'\ Il'\ 0..
0 N N ,.,
Z
... ::i~ ICOI"I N 00 1"1 ~ - "'" 0 Il'\ 00 -0 -0 - N ;8N - Il'\
...
U > CO - ~ 0.. ,., "'" ~ CO -0 -0 0
W N 1"1 Il'\ -0 0..
'" 0 ^:
...
tJ)
- > 00 Il'\ 0 000 Il'\ 0 0 0 0 0000 0 000 0 Il'\
0 W ~ "'" ~
0 ... ... .-
CJ U Z
Z ~ ~
-
Z 0'" 00 ~ 0000 ~ 000 0 000 0 00000 ~
0 a.> Il'\ Il'\ Il'\
N W
0
>-
CD ...
> ...... NO 0 0 -0 0 Il'\ 000 0 000 0 00000 Il'\
tJ) W Il'\ "'" 0 0
W 0 - -
'" U Z
u '?~
< ~ ......
0'" -0 0 00.-0 IC N Il'\ 0 000 0 0000..0.. -
a.> .- ...... N N N
w -
0
... 0..
> CO 0-00- - 0 :g 1"1 Il'\ .- 000 0 000 "'" ~ ~
W 1"1 N ... - - -
0 - -
UZ
::1:~ ~ N ......,., 1"1 ~ a5 0 -0 Il'\ - 000 0 - -0 -0 CO - ~
... :0
> N 0 CO N ... ~ - N Il'\
W ... ... 1"1 ~
0
... ...... CO
> "'" 0 0000 :0 OCOO 000 0 00......0 ...... ~
W ... ~
0 ... .- -
z
8~ CO ~ 0-01"1 ...... -0 ......
... 1"1 001"1 1"1 000 0 Il'\ 0,.,0 CO
> ~ - 0.. ... - -
W .-
0
...
> ~ ;g 0 0001"1 la "'" ~ C CO c c c C N N Il'\ ~ 1"1 ~
W N ~ 1"1 1"1 - ,.,
0 -
Z
";"~ ...... CO CDO...:a-.- Il'\ 1"1 Il'\ "'" -0 Il'\ ......~O - 0..0.. Il'\ 0 ,., N
U...
> Il'\ Il'\ ... ~ 1"1 .- Il'\ - N ~ Il'\
W - N
0
..... ..... ..... ..... .....
< < < < <
... ... ... ... ...
0 0 0 0 0
- N ,., "'" Il'\ -0 ...... ... ... e: ... ... ...
!!i! CD CD .- CD CD
"8 "8 "8 "8-g "8-g ::l ::l e: l\I ::l - N 1"1 "'" ::l
tJ) ~ tJ) ~ ~ ... tJ) tJ)
tJ) 0000000 - - "'0 5 l\I l\I l\I l\I
Z < .c.c.c.c.c.c.c "'0 - - '- ~ ~ ~ ~
w w '- '- '- '- '- '- '- l\I '; .- l\I 0 '- '- '- '-
2: '" ..8..8..8..8..8..8..8 I > CJ ::E < < < <
w < ... <Il <Il
'" .c.c.c.c.c.c.c ~ ... ~.p ~ - - - -
a. z '" '" '" '" '" '" '" N - ... l\I l\I l\I l\I
15 < '_ 0- ._ ,_ ._ ,_. ._ 0 - 0 '- '- e: '- '- '- '-
..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '- 0 U l\I 0'- :J :J :J :J
u a. z z z zzzz U ::1: tJ) W za. '" '" '" '"
26
L parcel was considered developed if the current building
assessment was greater than $10,000. It was hoped that this
assessment level would eliminate sheds, barns, and garages
as being counted as developed, yet include those mobile
homes assessed as real 'property. Since all information was
based on individual parcels, it is not possible to determine
the additional development potential of a developed parcel.
Also included in this section of the Development Activity
Report is an inventory of land currently in the Land Use
Assessment Program (see Tables 3-3 and 3-4). This program
was created in 1971 when the Virginia General Assembly
enacted a law permitting localities to adopt special
assessments for properties in agriculture, forest,
horticulture, and/or open space. The County land use
ordinance was adopted in 1975. Since rural area
preservation has been an expressed concern in Albemarle
County, the inventory of parcels in land use is an estimate
of acreage currently being maintained in agriculture,
forest, horticulture, and open space. The percentage of
County acreage in land use dropped slightly in 1990 to 69.1
percent from 69.4 percent in 1989 (see Table 3-3).
In addition to enrollment in the Land Use Assessment
Program, rural landowners also have the option of joining an
agricultural and forestal district. Agricultural and
forestal districts are created voluntarily by landowners.
By joining an agricultural and forestal district, the
landowner agrees not to subdivide or develop their property
to a more intensive non-agricultural use during the period
which the property remains within a district. The districts
are approved for a period of six (6) tL 10 years after which
time they are eligible for re-approval.
. .
Increased activity in the creation of new agricultural and
forestal districts, as well as additions made to existing
districts, prompted the listing of these districts in the
Development Activity Report for the first time in 1987. The
total acreage for all districts had reached 31,779 acres as
of December 31, 1987. In 1988, the total acreage increased
to 47,409 acres, a 40 percent increase. In 1989, 9,373
acres were added to the districts bringing the total to
56,782 acres. As of December 31, 1990, a total of 62,541.62
acres were dedicated to agricultural and forestal districts
(see Table 3-5). This represents a 10 percent increase over
1989 totals.
IV. ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MODIFICATIONS
This section of the Development Activity Report is a review
of zoning and Comprehensive Plan changes that were approved
by the Albemarle county Board of Supervisors in 1990. The
ability to modify the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive
Plan provides flexibility in land use regulations. The
purpose of these actions are to mitigate unreasonable
27
TABLE 3-3
ACREAGE IN LAND USE TAXATION
BY YEAR AND LAND USE TYPE
LAND USE TYPE OPEN % OF COUNTY
YEAR AGRICULTURE HORTICULTURE FORESTRY SPACE TOTAL ACREAGE
1981 121,060 1,462 222,073 0 344,595 72.8%
1982 121,917 1,868 227,915 0 351,700 74.3%
1984 108,519 1,919 207,243 9 317,690 67.1%
1985 109,051 1,931 209,312 9 320,303 67.6%
1986 107,832 1,921 208,259 8 318,020 67.1%
1987 110,036 1,952 210,653 8 322,649 68.1%
1988 109,283 1,985 211,489 8 322,765 68.2%
1989 110,236 2,195 216,036 8 328,475 69.4%
1990 109,541 2,306 215,221 6 327,074 69.1%
Note: Totals for 1983 are not available.
Estimated total acreage of Albemarle County is 473,600.
TABLE 3-4
ESTIMATE OF DISTRIBUTION OF COUNTY LAND
UNDER LAND USE
I ACREAGE
IN NOT IN
CLASSIFICATION LAND USE LAND USE TOTAL
GROWTH AREAS 8,264 12,337 20,601
RURAL AREAS 318,810 134,189 452,999
TOTAL 327,074 146,526 473,600
Note: Total county land area is based on a total area of 740 square
miles x 640 acres/square mile - 473,600 acres. Approximately
14,000 acres of rural area not in 1artd use is owned by the
Federal government as a national park.
28
TABLE 3-5
AGRICULTURAL/FORESTAL DISTRICTS
NAME ACT! ON/ACREAGE CURRENT ACREAGE DATE REVIEW PERIOD REVIEW DATE
Totier Creek District Created/6,070.77 acres 6,070.77 acres 06-29-83 10 years 06-28-2001
Hatton District Created/2,913.69 acres 06-29-83 8 years 06-28-91
Withdrawal/40 acres 2,824.22 acres 12-19-84 10 years 06-28-2001
Eastham District Created/764.75 acres 764.75 acres 10-02-85 8 years 10-01-93
Blue Run District Created/1,136.00 acres 4,134.67 acres 06-18-86 8 years 06-17-94
Addition/2,998.67 acres 01-04-89
Keswick District Created/5,223.11 acres 5,922.12 acres 09-03-86 8 years '. 09-02-94
Addition/699.01 acres 09-07-88
Kinloch District Created/1,586.60 acres 1,650.00 acres 09-03-86 8 years 09-02-94
Addition/63.40 acres 05-02-90
Moorman's River District Created/8,035.98 acres 10,922.14 acres 12-17-86 8 years 12-16-94
Addition/2,269.03 acres 09-07-88
Addition/173.69 acres 01-04-89
Addition/443.44 acres 05-02-90
Hardware District Created/6,023.94 acres 6,230.82 acres 11-04-87 10 years 11-03-97
Addition/206.88 acres 05-03-89
Jacob's Run District Created/727.28 acres 1,227.71 acres 01-06-88 6 years 01-05-94
Addition/500.43 acres 05-03-89
Carter's Bridge District Created/7,969.72 acres 04-20-88 10 years 04-19-98
Addition/3,692.36 acres 11,662.08 acres 10-31-90
lanark District Created/966.05 acres 996.05 acres 04-20-88 10 years 04-19-98
Panorama District Created/1,066.11 acres 1,066.11 acres 04-20-88 10 years 04-19-98
Free Union District Created/1,394.60 acres 09-21-88 10 years 09-20-98
Addition/30.01 acres 1,424.61 acres 01-04-89
Ivy Creek District Created/578.03 acres 578.03 acres 11-02-88 7 years 11-01-95
Buck Mountain District Created/633.35 acres 633.35 acres 01-04-89 10 years 01-03-99
Yellow Mountain District Created/975.52 acres 975.52 acres 03-08-89 1u years 03-07-99
Chalk Mountain District Created/1,272.47 acres 1,272.47 acres 09-06-89 10 years 09-05-99
Sugar Hollow District Created/2,581.97 acres 3;279.69 acres 09-06-89 10 years 09-05-99
Addition/697.72 acres 08-01-90
Batesville District Created/906.510 acres 906.51 acres 05-02-90 10 years 05-01-2000
Total 62,541.62 acres (13.2% of 474,000 acres in Albemarle County)
29
hardships imposed by the ordinance, to recognize
compatibility with neighboring uses, and to acknowledge
changes in growth patterns that affect the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan.
A. 1990 Rezoning Activity
A total of 2,333.27 acres were rezoned in 1990 as a result
of 17 Zoning Map Amendment applications (see Table 4-1).
The most significant rezoning occurred in the Village of
Rivanna where 1,195.02 acres were rezoned from Rural Areas
to Planned Residential Development to accommodate the
Glenmore subdivision. other significant rezonings included
145.78 acres from R-1 Residential to R-4 Residential and
130.19 acres from R-1 residential to R-10 Residential in
Urban Neighborhood 5 for the Redfields subdivision; and the
rezoning of 435.56 acres from Planned unit Development to
Rural Areas and 237.98 acres from Planned unit Development
to Planned Residential Development in Rural Area 1 for the
Buck Mountain subdivision.
B. Variances of Zoning Regulations
In 1990, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved a total of 64
variances of zoning regulations. The distribution of these
variances by Comprehensive Plan Area, zoning district, and
type of variance is shown in Table 4-2. Setbacks comprise
the largest category of variances with 27 setback variances
approved in 1990. Seventeen variances of sign requirements
were approved to allow nonconforming sizes and setbacks of
signs.
Of the 6'4 variances approved in 1990, 25 variances occurred
in the Growth Areas and 39 variances occurred in the Rural
Areas. Twenty-one of the 25 variances approved in the
Growth Areas were for signs or setbacks. In the Rural
Areas, 21 of the 39 variances approved were for setbacks.
Typically, Rural Area setbacks are sought due to the larger
setback requirements for rural zoned property and the
greater differences in size, shape, and topographic
conditions of Rural Area properties.
C. Special Use Permits Approved in,1990
A total of 84 special use permits were approved in 1990.
The distribution of special use permits is measured both by
Comprehensive Plan Area (see Table 4-3) and by zoning
district (see Table 4-4). Sixty-five of the special use
permits were approved for uses ,in the Rural Areas, and of
these, 33 were for mobile homes. Of the 33 approved mobile
home permits in all areas in 1990, 26 were administratively
approved and seven (7) were approved by the Board of
Supervisors.
30
TABLE 4-1
APPROVED ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS, 1990
COMPREHENSIVE I ?REVIOUS NEW
PLAN AREA ZONING ZONING ACRES
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 R-15 HC 29.35
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 CO HC 7.62
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 RA HC 43.49
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 HC HC AMENDMENT
TO ZONING
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 HC HC AMENDMENT
TO ZONING
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 R-1 R-10 44.59
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 R-1 PRD 24.06
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 LI HC 1. 70
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 PUD, R-2 PUD, R-2 AMENDMENT
TO ZONING
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 R-1 R-4 145.78
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 R-l R-10 130.19
HOLLYMEAD R-1 R-6 3.71
HOLLYMEAD R-4 R-6 2.69
HOLLYMEAD R-1 C-1 4.15
HOLLYMEAD PUD PUD AMENDMENT
TO ZONING
CROZET C-1 PD-SC 2.05
PINEY MOUNTAIN PRD PRD AMENDMENT
TO ZONING
RIVANNA RA PRD 1195.02
RURAL AREA 1 PUD RA 435.56
RURAL AREA 1 PUD PRD 237.98
RURAL AREA 2 RA PRD 25.33
TOTAL AREA REZONED 2333.27
-
. ,
31
TABLE 4-2
VARIANCES APPROVED IN 1990
. ,
SCENIC TEMP/PRM
COMP PLAN AREA HWY/STRM PARKING AREA MBl HM/ SUBD I - ROAD
AND ZONING SETBACK SIGN SETBACK RQRMNT RQRMNT OFFICE VISION TOWER FRONTAGE OTHER TOTAL
NEIGHBORHOOD 1
1I 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
PUD 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
NEIGHBORHOOD 2
HC 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
R-4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
C-1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
R-1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
R-2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
NEIGHBORHOOD 3
HC 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
PRD 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
R-1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
NEIGHBORHOOD 4
PUD 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
NEIGHBORHOOD 6
HC 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
HOLlYMEAD
CO 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
RA 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
PD-SC 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
R-4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
CROZET
PRD 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
EARlYSVlllE
C-1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
PUD 0 1 (, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
RIVANNA
RA 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
RURAL AREA 1
RA 5 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 5 13
RURAL AREA 2
RA 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8
R-2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
RURAL AREA 3
RA 6 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 10
C-1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
HC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
RURAL AREA 4
RA 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
TOTALS 27 17 1 3 0 3 5 0 0 8 64
.
. .
32
TABLE 4-3
SPECIAL USE PERMITS APPROVED IN 1990
BY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AK~A
PRIVATE MISC.
COMPREHENSIVE MOBILE SUBD 1- HOME WARE- FLOOD PRIVATE RECREAT!ON DAY- DRIVE IN COMMERCIAL
PLAN AREA HOME VISION OCCUPATION HOUSE PLAIN SCHOOL FACilITY CARE WINDOW CHURCH USES TOTAL
Neighborhood 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Neighborhood 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 5
Neighborhood 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Neighborhood 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Neighborhood 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 4
SUBTOTAL 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 1 4 13
Holl ymead 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 5
North Garden 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
SUBTOTAL 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 6
Rural Area 1 0 0 2 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 7
Rural Area 2 6 0 1 0 2 1 2 0 0 2 1 15
Rural Area 3 10 2 2 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 3 23
Rural Area 4 17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 20
SUBTOTAL 33 2 6 0 5 3 3 1 1 4 7 65
TOTAL 34 2 9 0 5 6 4 3 3 7 11 84
TABLE 4-4
SPECIAL USE PERMITS APPROVED IN 1990
BY ZONING DISTRICT
PRIVATE MISC.
ZONING MOBILE SUBD I - HOME WARE- FLOOD PRIVATE RECREATION DAY- DRIVE IN COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT HOME VISION OCCUPATION HOUSE PLAIN SCHOOL FACILITY CARE WINDOW CHURCH USES TOTAL
R A 33 2 7 0 5 4 4 1 0 5 6 67
R-1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
R-2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
R-4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
R-10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
PUD 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
VR 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
C-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
H C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2
PD-SC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
l I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
NR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O. 0 0 1 1
TOTAL 34 2 9 0 5 6 4 3 3 7 11 84
33
A review of special use permits by zoning district indicates
that most activity occurred in areas zoned Rural Areas,
reflecting distributions described above. special use
permits approved for commercial and industrial zoning
districts included three (3) for drive-in windows and four
(4) for miscellaneous commercial uses.
D. Comprehensive Plan Amendments
A total of five (5) Comprehensive Plan Amendment -requests
were reviewed in 1990. Of those, none were approved by the
Board of Supervisors in 1990.
The following is a summary of the five (5) requests and the
actions by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.
o CPA-90-01 Route 20 South - Expansion of Urban Area
Neighborhood 4 - Request to expand the Growth Area
boundary for Urban Neighborhood 4 to include
approximately 200 acres west of Route 20 South, just
north of the University Health Sciences Support
Facility (Vivarium). The land uses requested were high
density residential (40 acres); low density residential
(90 acres); office service (40 acres); and commercial
service (30 acres).
Action: Planning Commission recommended denial on
April 10, 1990. withdrawn by the applicant.
o CPA-90-02 River Heights Associates - Request to
determine the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
of a rezoning request f.,' TiC, Highway Commercial zoning
for property north of Hilton Heights Road, and adjacent
to the Sheraton Hotel. The Land Use Plan indicated
both Regional Service and High Density Residential in
the general area of this request. On May 15, 1990 the
Planning Commission found the application not
consistent with the current land use plan and adopted a
resolution of intent to consider an amendment to the
Plan. The Board found the rezoning request with
proffers consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The
Board reviewed this issue in conjunction with the
review and approval of the rezoning request.
o
CPA-90-03 Amendment to the Land Use Plan, Hollymead
Request to amend the Land Use Plan for the Hollymead
Community for 175 acres west of Route 29 and south of
Route 649 (Airport Road). The land use changes were
from Industrial Service to Regional Service, High
Density Residential. The Planning Commission on May 15,
1990 did not recommend further study to the Board of
supervisors. The Board of Supervisors adopted the
resolution.of intent to consider an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan. The applicant subsequently
.
. ,
34
deferred this request. Consideration of the amendment
is pending the submission of additional information by
the applicant.
o CPA-90-04 Unisys Corporation Land Use Change,
Neighborhood 1 - Request to change the land use
designation from Industrial Service to Neighborhood
Service and Community Service in two (2) areas on the
Sperry-Unisys property. Neighborhood Service was
proposed along Hydraulic Road adjacent to Village Green
Shopping Center. The Community Service was proposed
along Route 29, north of Blockbuster/Price Goods
stores.
Action:
10, 1990.
Planning Commission recommended denial, April
Board of Supervisors denied June 13, 1990.
o CPA-90-05 Community Facilities Plan - Proposal to adopt
the Community Facilities Plan as an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan. The Plan established goals,
objectives, strategies, and service standards for
police, fire and rescue, parks and recreation, schools,
and library services.
Action: Planning Commission recommended approval
November 27, 1990. Board of Supervisors approved June
5, 1991.
. .
35
APPENDIX
36
GROWfH AREAS AND RURAL AREAS IDENTIFICATION 1989-2010
. .>
~
.
IUU
. , , t """I
---- -~
.. e, "" .......,...
Key:
Villages
Communities
Neighborhoods 1-7
37
~
. ..
.
. .
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
URBAN AREA NEIGHBORHOODS 1 - 7
i
A~
:t_..-.
."""_.,
'"
1- = APPROXI'MATELY 5800'
PREPARED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
38
Hall District
White
District
Rivanna District
Rivanna
District
r
.
Scottsvil1e District
ic....
Scottsvi lIe
J .
Albemarle County, Virginia
Prepared by thl DIPlrlml..1 of
Ple..nlnQ and Community De..lopment
. .I'
39
c,C
TYPE OF RESIDENCE.
1. Single-family residence
1 building, 1 lot, 1 dwelling unit
.
B
1 bldg.
~
1 lot
Examples: North Pines
Earlysville Forest
Wynridge
Oak Forest
.
.
2. Single-family attached
1 building, 2 lots, 2 dwelling units
Examples: Camelia Garden
Georgetown Court
Commonwealth Drive
Briar wood
1 dg~
---.....; ~
1 lot Z lot
3. Single-family townhouse
1 building, 3 or more lots, 3 or mOre dwelling units
Examples: Townwood
Birnam Wood
Minor Hill
41
. "... <( .
" i ; iliiL
..!. ~!!,Q;; t";::- "' I
-<~-.l~:!0
(., ~ (,.'.) 1../ 1\1', 'I \,i I','''.':: .r,
- " --- ..L~;r:f/
1991
TIllRD QUARTER
BUILDING REPORT
\ l~i~~l
E:O,!i,V~D i,:;;.
County of Albemarle
Department of Planning and Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
INDEX
I. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Month (Charts A - B)
II. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by l\'pe (Charts C - D)
III. Comparison of All Building Permits (Chart E)
IV. Comparison of Certificates of O~upancy (Charts F - H)
Key to l\'pes of Housing Used In this Report
SF Single Family (Includes Modular)
SFA Single Family Attached
SFfTH Single Family Townhouse
DUP Duplex
MF Multi-Family Residence
MHC MobileHomes in County
..... "-
-2-
During the third quarter of 1991, 161 pe~its were issued for
171 dwelling units. In addition, 7 permits were issued for mobile
homes in existing parks at an average exchange value of $2,500 for a
total of $17,500.
I. COMPARISON OF NEY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING uNITS BY MONTH
Chart A. Nine Year Comparison of New Residential Dwelling
Units by Month
YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
JAN 37 86 46 37 38 22 93 56 64
FEB 29 39 29 43 35 40 172 68 31
MAR 86 78 94 37 62 91 61 92 57
APR 131 60 48 78 70 71 49 82 62
MAY 65 78 121 73 73 83 89 75 44
JUN 100 66 60 92 56 83 220 85 54
JUL 113 63 57 159 80 30 67 42 58
AUG 57 47 86 32 46 49 74 87 58
SEP 73 52 35 49 45 46 72 90 55
OCT 59 41 40 52 60 52 56 48
NOV 72 33 45 50 49 60 301 37
DEC 241 82 53 35. 40 46 55 42
TOTAL 1063 725 714 737 654 673 1309 804 483
Chart B. Three Year Comparison of New Residential Dwelling
Units by Month
320
300
280
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120.
100
80
60
40
20
o
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
IZZl 1989
lSSl 1990
IZ:Zl 1 99 1
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
-3-
THIRD QUARTER 1991
II. COMPARISON OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE
Chart C. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by
Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type
MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC D.U. D.U.
CHARLOTTESVILLE 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 2%
JACK JOUETT 3 0 0 0 12 0 15 9%
RIVANNA 42 6 16 0 0 0 64 37%
SAMUEL MILLER 15 2 0 0 0 0 17 10%
SCOTTSVILLE 40 10 0 0 0 1 51 30%
WHITE HALL 16 4 0 0 0 1 21 12%
TOTAL 119 22 16 0 12 2 171 100%
Chart D. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by
Comprehensive Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type
DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL UNITS
COMP PLAN AREA SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC URBAN RURAL
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 3 u 16 0 0 0 19
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 . 12 10 0 0 0 0 22
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 I
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 3
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 12 0 12
CROZET COMMUNITY 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 25 0 0 0 0 0 25
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
PINEY MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 1 6 0 0 0 0 7
RIVANNA VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 46 18 16 0 12 0 92
RURAL AREA 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 17
RURAL AREA 2 13 0 0 0 0 0 13
RURAL AREA 3 16 4 0 0 0 2 22
RURAL AREA 4 27 0 0 0 0 0 27
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 73 4 0 0 0 2 1'1
TOTAL 119 22 16 0 -12 2 171
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
-4-
THIRD QUARTER 1991
III. COMPARISON OF ALL BUILDING PERMITS
Chart E. Estimated Cost of Construction by Magisterial District and Construction Type
MAGISTERIAL NEW *NEW NON - RES . NEw COMMERCIAL FARM BULDING
DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL & ALTER. RES. & NEW INSTITUT. & ALTER. COMM. TOTAL
No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$ No. Amount-~
CHVILLE 3 ' 241, 600 24 283,555 3 1,416,523 16 693,521 46 2,635,199
JOUETT 5 674,170 18 158, 777 3 136,578 9 2,535,350 35 3,504,875
RIVANNA 64 4,940,843 56 381,193 4 187,600 18 12,364,600 142 17,874,236
S. MILLER 17 2,705,312 48 846,718 2 70,000 10 292,500 77 3,914,530
SCOTTSVILLE 51 3,403,628 37 418,574 0 0 6 40,000 94 3,862,202
WHITE HALL 21 2,703,655 55 983,475 0 0 8 147,000 84 3,834,130
TOTAL 161 14,669,208 238 3,072,292 12 1,810,701 67 16,072,971 478 35,625,172
* Additional value of mobile homes placed in existing parks is included in Residential
Alteration category.
IV. CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY
Chart F. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by Elementary
School District and Dwelling Unit Type
SCHOOL DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL PERCENT
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC D.U. TOTAL D.U.
Broadus Wood/Henley 5 0 0 0 0 1 6 2.78%
Broadus Wood/Jouett 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.46%
Brownsville 1 0 0 0 30 0 31 14.35%
Crozet 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0.93%
Greer 1 0 0 0 52 0 53 24.54%
Hollymead 27 8 0 0 0 0 35 16.20%
Meriwether Lewis 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 2.31%
Murray 12 0 0 0 0 0 12 5.56%
Red Hill 0 0 3 0 0 1 4 1.85%
Ca1e/Burley 1 0 9 0 0 0 10 4.63%
CalejWa1ton 19 11 0 0 0 1 31 14.35%
Scottsville 3 0 0 0 0 1 4 1. 85%
Stone Robinson/Burley 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 1. 39%
Stone RobinsonjWalton 5 0 0 0 0 2 7 3.24%
Stony Point 8 0 0 0 0 0 8 3.70%
Woodbrook 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 1. 39%
Yancey 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.46%
TOTAL 94 19 15 0 82 6 216 100.00%
Prepared by Albemarle ~ounty Planning and Community Development
" ".... ~
-5-
THIRD QUARTER 1991
IV. CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY (continued)
Chart G. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by
Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type
MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC TOTAL
CHARLOTTESVILLE 1 0 3 0 52 0 56
JACK JOUETT 3 0 0 0 0 0 3
RIVANNA 39 8 9 0 0 0 56
SAMUEL MILLER 17 0 0 0 0 2 19
SCOTTSVILLE 26 11 3 0 0 3 43
WHITE HALL 8 0 0 0 30 1 39
TOTAL 94 19 15 0 82 6 216
Chart H. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by
Comprehensive Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type
DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL UNITS
COMP PLAN AREA SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC URBAN RURAL
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 1 1 12 0 0 0 14
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 16 10 3 0 0 0 29
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 52 0 52
CROZET COMMUNITY 1 0 0 0 30 0 31
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 26 0 0 0 0 0 26
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PINEY MTN. VILLAGE 1 8 0 0 0 0 9
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
RIVANNA VILLAGE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 47 19 15 0 82 2 165
RURAL AREA 1 12 0 0 0 0 1 13
RURAL AREA 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 10
RURAL AREA 3 13 0 0 0 0 0 13
RURAL AREA 4 12 0 0 0 0 3 15
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 47 0 0 0 0 4 51
TOTAL 94 19 15 0 82 6 216
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
/1-/ -:J L_
I;' ,9.1:_uttzis-Q.)
DEP ARTMENT OF THE ARMY
NORFOLK DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
FORT NORFOLK, 803 FRONT STREET
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA 23510-1096
: !;
:' _i ~ I
/: i it
,...1 tl J
, !. ~:~, l~
September ,3.01.. 19.9.1; ~"i,:,'Visor{s
i, "
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
Plan Formulation Branch
STATUS REPORT
JAMES RIVER BASIN, VA & WV
DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS STUDY
I would like to take this opportunity to update you on our Drought
Preparedness Study (DPS) which is part of the National Study of Water
Management During Drought. Since I announced the initiation of the study on
March 21 of this year, much has happened. More than any other study, the
DPS is based on intensive interaction with Federal, state, regional, and local
governments, as well as industrial, commercial, environmental, and academic
concerns.
To that end, much of the study effort has been devoted to doing research
and conducting interviews. As a result of this work, a group of key interested
agencies and individuals from the region has been identified to act as an
additional information source. This group was invited to a workshop held on
June 6, 1991 in Richmond during which we drew on their experience and
diversified viewpoints to provide information, opinions, and comments in a
stimulating discussion of drought problems and their impacts. A copy of the
workshop notes is enclosed for your information and includes the Workshop
Sign-In List (enclosure 1), Workshop Individual Comments (enclosure 2), and
Workshop Group Comments (enclosure 3).
The Corps of Engineers' Institute for Water Resources (IWR) held a
meeting for participants in the National Study of Water Management During
Drought in Park City, Utah in July 1991. Corps personnel and the local
sponsors from the four DPS regions attended. The local sponsor for the James
River Basin DPS is the State Water Control Board. Representatives from the
Office of the Secretary of the Army, the Office of the Chief of Engineers, each
Corps of Engineers District and Division, and the national team of experts
contracted by IWR for this study were also invited. The meeting provided an
opportunity for each group to interact with each other and benefit from the work
being done in other parts of the national study including the four DPS case
studies; demand forecasting (IWR-MAIN); supply forecasting (The National
Drought Atlas); Western Governor's Association/Western States Water Council;
Bureau of Reclamation; and the small case studies underway in California,
eastern Oregon, Pennsylvania, New England, and the southwest. The meeting
was well attended and very productive. .
'1'__ ,-
"
-2-
A second workshop is planned for October 18, 1991 in Richmond to deal
further with drought management. Notes of that workshop will also be made
available to you after the meeting.
We will continue to keep you abreast of the study as it develops. Please pass
this information on to anyone you feel may be interested. If you have any questions on
the DPS, please call the study manager, Thomas J. Lochen at (804) 441-7539.
Sincerely,
/C~. i:~z--
R. C. Q ns
Colonel, orps of Engineers
District Engineer
Enclosures
"
DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS STUDY
JAMES RIVER BASIN, V A & WV
WORKSHOP SIGN-IN LIST
JUNE 6, 1991
NAME ORGANIZATION & ADDRESS PHONE
Arrington, John Manager 804-539-2201
Lake Kilby Water Treatment Plant
Public Utilities
City of Portsmouth
105 Maury Place
Suffolk, V A 23434
Baxter, John Natural Disaster Program Manager 804-441 -7361
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Norfolk District
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510-1096
Brady, Patrick J. Director, Dept. of Public Utilities 804-672-4280
County of Henrico
P.O. Box 27032
Richmond, V A 23273
Button, L.S. ' Manager, Bureau of Flood Protection 804-371-7536
Department of Conservation & Recreation
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
203 Governor Street
Suite 206
Richmond, V A 23219-2094
Demm, Paul W. Assistant Operations Officer 804-674-2400
Department of Emergency Services
310 Turner Road
Richmond, VA 23225-6491
Flint, Franklin F. Secretary, Virginia Division 804-384-1254
Izaak Walton League
2427 Indian Hill Road
Lynchburg, VA 24503
Foster, James Technical Director 703-969-5583
Westvaco/Bleached Board Division
Riverside
Covington, VA 24426
I . . .
~'N~L
"
Graben, Anne Environmental Engineer 804-541-5731
Allied Signal
Hopewell Plant
P.O. Box 761
Hopewell, V A 23860
Hartman, Richard D. General Manager 804-590-1145
Appomattox River Water Authority
21300 Chesdin Road
Petersburg, VA 23803
Hively, Chris City of Lynchburg 804-847 -1322
525 Taylor Street
Lynchburg, VA 24501
Johnson, John A. Assistant Director, Public Affairs Dept. 804-225-7535
Virginia Farm Bureau Federation
200 West Grace Street
P.O. Box 27552
Richmond, V A 23261
Jones, Dale F. Chairman, Virginia Drought 804-527-5127
Monitoring Task Force
Virginia Water Control Board
P.O. Box 11143
Richmond, VA 23230-1143
Kover, Cynthia ODU Research Student 804-441-7771
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Norfolk District
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510-1096
Leahy, Tom Water Resouces Engineer 804-427 -8035
City of Virginia Beach
Department of Public Utilities
Municipal Center
Virginia Beach, V A 23456-9002
Leininger, Eileen Staff Engineer 804-247-8465
Department of Public Utilities
City of Newport News
Newport News Waterworks
2400 Washington Avenue
Newport News, V A 23607
2
,
Lochen, Thomas Study Manager 804-441-7539
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Norfolk District
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510-1096
Montvai, Zoltan HQ, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 202-272-1722
20 Massachusetts Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C.
Ogle, Robert Chief, Planning Division 804-441 -7761
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Norfolk District
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510-1096
Patron, Erlinda Virginia Drought 804-527 -5127
Monitoring Task Force
Virginia Water Control Board
P.O. Box11143
Richmond, VA 23230-1143
Poland, Mark Department of Public Utilities 804-780-4812
City of Richmond
3929 Douglasdale Road
Richmond, VA 23221
Prugh, Byron J. Chief, Hydrologic Data Section 804-771-2427
U.S. Geological Survey
Water Resources Division
3600 West Broad Street, Room 606
Richmond, VA 23230
Raper, Carol C. Vice President 804-643-7489
Environmental Affairs & Taxation
Virginia Manufacturers Association
P.O. Box 412
Richmond, VA 23230
Reid, Terry City of Lynchburg 804-847-1322
525 Taylor Street
Lynchburg, VA 24501
Rogers, Morgan Water Utility Administrator 804-780-6286
Department of Public Utilities
City of Richmond
3929 Douglasdale Road
Richmond, V A 23221
3
,
Smith, Sheila Department of Utilities 804-441-2674
P.O. Box 1080
Norfolk, VA 23501
Snavely, Keith Dept. of Public Utilities 804-672-4601
County of Henrico
P.O. Box 27032
Richmond, VA 23273
Stenger, Philip J. Virginia State Climatology Office 804-924-0548
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, V A 22903
Taylor, Robert Department of Health 804-786-1767
109 Governor Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Terry, Andrea Environmental Scientist 804-873-8700
Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.
11832 Rock Landing Drive, Suite 400
Newport News, V A 23606
Thrasher, Jim Appalachian Power Co. 703-985-2631
P.O. Box 2021
Roanoke, VA 24022
Walker, William Water Resources Research Center 703-231-5624
VPland State University
Blacksburg, V A 24061
Werick, William Institute for Water Resources 703-355-3055
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Casey Building, #2594
Fort Belvoir, V A 22060
Williams, George W. Executive Director 804-977-2970
Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority
P.O. Box 18
Charlottesville, VA 22902-0018
Yancey, Thomas Chief, Plan Formulation Branch 804-441-7775
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Norfolk District
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510-1096
4
,
DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS STUDY
JAMES RIVER BASIN, VA & WV
WORKSHOP INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS
JUNE 6, 1991
These questions were posed to the attendees during the morning
session; their answers follow.
1. What are your worst drought fears, concerns?
2. Are you prepared for a drought?
ArrinQton. John--Department of Public Utilities. City of Portsmouth
Concerns? Supplying drinking water to public, needing the ability to
regulate uses, and public pressure. Public confidence level diminishes if water
demands cannot be met. There is a need to regulate industrial and commercial
users. It is very hard to regulate the water consumption of a governmental
agency; they cite national security when threatened with water use restriction.
Prepared? No. Portsmouth needs information on t:..... _de yield of their
swamp water source; none exists now.
Brady. Pate-Department of Public Utilities. County of Henrico and American
Waterworks Association
Concerns? Lack of water for industrial and domestic customers and
determining essential uses. Defining essential use during drought may mean
choosing between an industry, which may employ 5,000 people, and a one-
man car wash that provides a family's only livelihood. If a man's livelihood is a
car wash, do you eliminate that in a drought situation? Also, should water use
restrictions apply to irrigation?
Prepared? No.
Button. L. S.--Bureau of Flood Protection
Concerns? The drought's effect on agricultural production.
Prepared? No.
~ ( L 'L_
,
Demm. Paul--Department of EmerQency Services
Concerns? Will there be enough drinking water during an emergency
situation?
Prepared? No.
Flint. Dr. Franklinulzaak Walton League (Virginia Division)
Concerns? Protecting our streams (the Izaak Walton League has eight
or nine projects in Virginia), the availability of quality water, and the continuation
of the Chesapeake Bay Program and Save Our Streams.
Foster. James--WESTV ACO Corporation
Concerns? The loss of cooling and processing water for the plant.
Prepared? No.
Graben. Anne--Allied SiQnal
Concerns? Insufficient water supply could cut production and affect
1,000 employees. The cooling system at Allied requires 135 million gallons of
water per day. Water use is nonconsumptive.
Prepared? No.
Hartman. Richard--Appomattox River Water Authority
Concerns? Not providing enough water for customers; their reservoir
has a safe yield of 79 million gallons per day and their water treatment plant can
produce 46 million gallons of drinking water per day. Definition of "essential
use" depends on viewpoint. Restriction of "no outdoor water use" causes
landscapers to lose their jobs. Does water need to be drinking quality? Not all
uses require drinking-quality water; like industry, agriculture, and lawn watering.
There is an inability to get local community to plan for drought; a water plan is
not wanted until draught occurs.
Prepared? No.
Johnson. John--VirQinia Farm Bureau (represents 35.000 farmers)
Concerns? Food and fibre production.
Prepared? Some of the farmers are prepared; it varies from farm to farm.
2
..
Jones. Dale--Virginia State Water Control Board
Concerns? As Director of Water Resources Planning, he is concerned
that the general populace doesn't see the need to create additional reservoirs.
Water storage throughout the James River Basin must be increased to prevent
water shortage in case of drought. The streams are mostly clean, but there are
still local problems. As population and urbanization increases, so does water
use. Many new demands are made after a water project is completed that the
project was never intended to meet (like whitewater canoeing). No one will die
of thirst in a bad drought, but fish, biota, and canoeing (recreation) may suffer.
Prepared? No.
Leahy. Tom--Public Works. City of Virginia Beach
Concerns? In the drought of 1981, people lost their jobs. There are
several large water users in Virginia Beach; the hospitals and malls. At present,
Virginia Beach is using more than the rated safe yield and conditions are much
worse. Conservation measures are already being implemented to the extent
that Virginia Beach has the lowest per capita water use in the state. Cutting
water use any further means making serious sacrifices. Cutting back even the
easiest category of outside use causes unemployment among landscapers, etc.
Prepared? No.
Leininger. Eileen--Department of Public Utilities. City of Newport News
Concerns? Not being able to serve customers. The current water system
is under stress. The water managers don't know when a drought starts or even
if one has started already or when they should start conserving water to prevent
a shortage later.
Prepared? They are prepared for the worst drought of record, 11Q1 the
worst possible drought that may occur.
PruQh. Byron--U.S. GeoloQical Survey
Concerns? Is there sufficient funding and manpower to handie drought
situation? There is an upcoming publication on historical droughts in Virginia,
plus a water summary of floods and droughts, available this summer. Providing
water statistics and quantitative data. Also concerned with providing efficient
funding and data collection. Droughts sneak up on you. (They need to improve
data collection by having more stream gages in more locations).
Prepared? Not really.
Raper. Carol--Virginia Manufacturers Association (600 members)
3
t
Concerns? The main concern is adequate water for cooling and
processing.
Reid. TerrynCity of LynchburQ
Concerns? Providing water to customers (industry uses 60% of the
water) and the effect of the wastewater treatment plant discharge during
drought. A quick fix is dangerous and may cost more later.
Prepared? Yes.
ROQers. MorgannDepartment of Public Utilities. City of Richmond
Concerns? Adequacy of regional water supply and the impact of
minimum instream flow laws. Public conservation must be perceived as uniform
and fair in order to avoid negative voter reaction. There is no regional plan to
handle situation during drought.
Smith. Sheila--Department of Utilities. City of Norfolk
Concerns? Not meeting water demands of a growing population. We
are currently experiencing continuous near-drought conditions; there is a daily
strugglr to meet ii'~I'easing demand. There is a direct economic impact when a
near-drought condition occurs and water use must be cut. Action must be taken
before a drought; even this will result in some economic restriction. A quick fix
is tempting, but will erode previous environmental progress, is dangerous, and
may cost more later.
Prepared? No.
Snavely. Keith--Department of Public Utilities. County of Henrico
Concerns? Will there be enough water for customers? There needs to
be more water available for growth. Any drought planning must be on a
national basis.
StenQer. Philip J.--Environmental Sciences Department. University of Virginia
(represents State Climatologist)
Concerns? When to notify the public when we're in a drought situation
and when it will be over. Reliable data is needed for predicting size of drought
area, severity, duration, and frequency. They have both a water summary of
floods and droughts, and a Virginia drought history from the U.S. Geological
Survey.
Prepared? Limitations on providing drought information.
Taylor. Robert--Virginia Department of Health
4
Concerns? The infrastructure of large water systems has enough
flexibility during drought to at least provide drinking water, even if other users
suffer. Small systems with a single source of water may lose all their water if
that source is disrupted.
Prepared? For individual crisis-eyes; for numerous crises--no.
Terry. Andrea--Malcom Pirnie. Incorporated
Concerns? They need the most up-to-date data for their customers.
Prepared? Working on it!
Thrasher. Jim--Appalachian Power Company
Concerns? Meeting expectations of the city of Lynchburg.
Prepared? Yes, they have a contingency plan, so they are prepared.
Walker. Dr. William--Water Resources Research Center. VPI and State
University
Concerns? He doesn't feel that the state is institutionally prepared.
Prepared? No, it took 11 years to get policy from the Water Study
Commission.
Williams. GeorQe--Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority
Concerns? The same as expressed by others (not meeting customer's
needs).
Prepared? They have a plan, but it is not adequate. Opinion: One can
never be prepared for drought. Public perception may be more important than
facts, as in the case of a re-circulating fountain shut down due to public outcry.
5
,
DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS STUDY
JAMES RIVER BASIN, VA & WV
WORKSHOP GROUP COMMENTS
JUNE 6, 1991
These questions were posed to the attendee groups during the afternoon
session; their answers as given in presentations by group spokespersons
follow.
1. What are the greatest vulnerabilities of regional drought. Rank them.
2. Is the region prepared for drought? What are the planning problems
or missing links? What should you do to prepare?
3. If there is severe drought, would the way water would be allocated be
considered "smart" or "fair"? If not, how could the plan be made better? What
are roadblocks to improving plans?
GROUP 1: Richard Hartman. spokesperson
(Group members included John Baxter, L.S. Button, Paul Demm, Richard
Hartman, Chris Hively, Eileen Leininger, Terry Reid, Keith Snavely, and William
Walker.)
Vulnerabilities:
a. Never enough storage, especially with small systems (one source,
small streams or run-of-river)
b. Inability to predict drought (and the jurisdiction's reluctance to admit
that there is a drought)
c. Economic impact of drought including the cost of water increases and
the loss of revenue; loss of jobs and closing of businesses
d. Lack of planning; no plans to address:
(1.) Fair and equitable restriction
(2.) Possibility that leday, 1 Q-year low flow may not be met,
jeopardizing wastewater treatment and possibly leading to such consequences
as fishkills
(3.) Vulnerability to contamination at any time and the ability to
react such as with an oil spill; this would cause an additional water shortage
Crv,-L ~
f
(4.) Drought-induced algal blooms
(5.) System losses, routinely 5 to 10 percent, which will loom
larger in a drought
e. Inability to fight fires and the consequent liabilities
Prepared?
No
Planning problems:
a. Lack of information on drought prediction
b. State laws do not address the true situation; for example, they say that
goundwater and surface water are not related
c. The State Water Control Board emphasizes the regulatory aspect but
needs to emphasize the water supply planning aspect more
d. Lack of leadership role by the state; lack of state policy
e. Mind set; hard to educate people and cnly politically popular during a
drought
f. Proximity of water; it is not located where it is needed in the state;
requires interbasin transfer
g. Lack of money; there is seldom enough for planning, reservoir
construction, and interconnecting systems
h. Difficulty in getting localities to cooperate
Allocation fair?
a. It is not possible to get a consensus on what is fair; there always seem
to be inequities and hardships
b. If consumption allowed is reduced by percent, it is difficult to
administer, hurts the groups already conserving, and may put some businesses
out of business
c. The fairest plan is done well in advance and is well publicized; that
way people can better prepare
d. Citizen input is needed
e. The plan should be well thought out
2
GROUP 2: Tom Leahy. spokesperson
(Group members included Franklin Flint, Anne Groben, Tom Leahy,
Erlinda Patron, Byron Prugh, Philip Stenger, Andrea Terry, Jim Thrasher, and
Thomas Yancey.)
Vulnerabilities:
a. Economic impacts: Jobs lost, production reduced, etc.
b. Environmental impacts: Close behind economic impacts in
importance; example includes saltwater intrusion into groundwater aquifer
which would cause wells to fail
c. Social impacts: Change in lifestyles; less car washing, canoeing, etc.
Prepared?
No
Planning problems:
a. Lack of knowledge of safe yields, precipitation, general data, etc.
b. Convoluted process; anyone can stop any initiative anywhere using
the present system
c. The State Water Control Board does not have the authority or
resources to match the responsibility for water resources planning; we need
decent state laws
d. It is very difficult for small jurisdictions to solve water supply problems
on their own
e. Lack of storage; more reservoirs are needed; most of the flow from the
James winds up in the Atlantic; some of the 10,000 square miles of drainage in
the James River Basin must be available for storage
f. Serious jurisdictional problems exist in Virginia; a regional water
authority of appointed officials and established in state law is needed
g. Wasted water: Leaks of 10 to 40 percent and the mind set here in
Virginia that water is plentiful
3
To prepare:
a. Increase storage
b. Conservation; southeast Virginia has made 15 percent permanent cut
through conservation
c. Enact better state water laws
d. Cooperation must be developed with regions, voluntarily or by
mandate
e. The state must take a leadership role
f. Water reuse must be employed
Allocation fair?
a. The existing allocation plans are not fair or smart now; they are
politically based
b. However, the 1980 to 1981 drought experience showed that people
did share water well; there were problems with payment though
c. Cutting back allocations: Usually the easiest way is chosen; outdoor
first; however, it is we have no knowledge of whose water to reduce first
GROUP 3: Dale Jones. spokesperson
(Group members included John Arrington, Patrick Brady, James Foster,
Dale Jones, Cynthia Kover, Robert Ogle, Mark Poland, Carol Raper, Morgan
Rogers, Sheila Smith, and George Williams.)
Vulnerabilities:
a. Lack of storage
b. A long lead time is required to implement plan, permits, etc.
c. Lack of comprehensive drought plan for the state or basin
Prepared?
No
4
,~ .
Planning problems:
a. Plan not prepared; should recognize the whole basin, but deal with
area according to its particular supply and demand situation; for example, not
necessarily apply one set region-wide allocation reduction for the entire basin
b. Need uniform definitions; tied to strategic growth plans (industry,
urban, environmental)
c. Economics: Must assign true costs of water to users; look at limited
use for short periods as a drought supoly plan
Roadblocks:
a. There are no state growth policies: There is a lack of state leadership
in water policies; a lack of direction being provided to the localities on how to
best develop their water resources
b. Lack of statewide and region-wide coordination on conservation
information and regulations
c. Local interests are not willing to give up their resources and authority
to the region
5
to j I ~1:5..L,
Agenl!a Item No, } I".LI ~-C~..,," 3)
"
t ~
~
(', (" '
I..~., \.. .
,r-. r', I
,II' ,:, ri L,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
1'; ;. .
i
Ii !",
i: '<
I, /, l: ~ '
: j\ \
i ;' \ i \
! : ~
l.-i \..,
:-. ':~',:::] 1":"'::-
'-'I.-~..... . I ~
"\ 'I i
'I
8().~..
....,~ ~~'" c:--
October 25, 1991
Garland M. Gay, Jr.
3611 Manton Drive
Lynchburg, VA 24503
RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PARCELS - section 10.3.1
Tax Map 99, Parcel 108, Tax Map 99, Parcel 108A and
Tax Map 100, Parcel 14
Dear Mr. Gay:
The County Attorney and I have reviewed the documents you have
submitted for the above-noted property. It is the County
Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination, that
this property consists of five (5) separate parcels:
Tax Map 99, Parcel 108 is two (2) parcels;
Tax Map 99, Parcel 108A is one (1) parcel; and
Tax Map 100, Parcel 14 is two (2) parcels.
Each of these lawfully separate parcels is entitled to associated
development rights.
This determination considered the descriptive clauses of the
deeds, which delineate and enumerate the property as consisting of
four (4) parcels. This consideration is based on the findings of
the Va. Supreme Court in the case, Faison v. Union Camp 224 VA 54.
In addition, parcel 108 is divided by dedicated road right-of-way
for Route 631. This is based on the Sanford V.A.C. Board of Zoning
Appeals case.
The most recent deeds of record as of the date of adoption of the
Zoning Ordinance describe the following parcels:
1. (TM 99-108) Approximately 5 1/2 acres lying on the east side of
Route 631 - 2 development rights possible; (DB 107, Pg. 227
dated May 7, 1895 from W. H. Garland, Jr. to Nathaniel Garland,
Jr. )
"..,.,...
.
October 25, 1991
Garland Gay, Jr.
Page 2
2. (TM 99-108) Approximately 3 1/2 acres lying on the west side of
Route 631 - 1 development right; (DB as for #1 preceding.)
3. (TM 99-108A) Approximately 1 1/2 acres - 1 development right
possible; (DB 175, Pg. 455 dated November 23, 1917 from Ned
Reed and wife to D. M. Garland.)
4. (TM 100-14) 72.74 acres - 5 development rights possible; (DB
116, Pg. 100 dated August 21, 1899 from M. Woods to D. M.
Garland. )
5. (TM 100-14) 165.25 acres - 5 development rights possible. (DB
143, Pg. 430 dated July 26, 1910 from Charles Jones to D. M.
Garland, and DB 146, Pg. 183, dated May 5, 1911 from R. H. Wood
to D. M. Garland.)
Anyone aggrieved by this decision may file a written appeal within
thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
~1r\IP~
Amelia M. Patterson
Zoning Administrator
AMP/sp
cc: Jan sprinkle
Gay Carver
Estelle Neher, Clerk to Board of Supervisors
David Carter, Attorney
Reading Files
.. '
.~"'0FC~..,.I. ~l1it~N)q J. 11(J{P(51/4)
I ~.' ~ ~~ UNI'iED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERC{
~ . Bureau of the Census
\ . 1'1 Washington. D.C. 20233-0001
'704Tn ~
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
FROM THE DIRECTOR
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
, 'r., :\11,':), K U:.
..'....../J~:-:> , r';.~j
.,...., :! !!
\)1' r ,.. 'I i 1 · H
" -.,/ .tb'~ . i \ : I
...: l !'
. "d
L:~J ", ,,". .~~,.' t::J
,,,D l.,. """","II"""IL'S
# '-l<..jt..~;\V~)l;-\
We are pleased to provide you with a copy of the 1990 Census
Summary of population and Housing Characteristics report for your
state.
This report provides total population and housing unit counts as
well as summary statistics on age, sex, race, Hispanic origin and
other characteristics for local governments, including American
Indian and Alaska Native areas.
We thank you for your work and support of the 1990 census and
look forward to maintaining a working relationship with you over
the next decade.
Sincerely, ~
~ \~<-- ~~~3a.,-\
Barbara Everitt Bryant
Director
Bureau of the Census
(tcl~ VJIfl1No.ql.IJO~.(5.'5)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY
p.o. Box 1009 401 MciNTIRE RrJ CHARLOTTESVillE, VA 22902 (804) 296-5810
October 29, 1991
Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Humphris and Gentlemen:
Enclosed please find a copy of the AI~emar~e County
Service Authority's Comprehensive Annual Flnanclal Report
for the Year ended June 30, 1991.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Very truly yours,
i~\ L_O (~, ;j}"\ C^lc./~ '-- "
Lisa Thacker
Administrative Secretary
c.c: JLettie Neher, Clerk
Bob Tucker, County Executive
, "1'\OCtlMENT CONTROL CENTER 9 0 .IOishlbut~ to fJard9-n'[ij ,-j/
:<:c-w _. '". ,. Agend~Jtem,No._ .CfI"qWl~~/G?)
IS9j OCT -I PH J.27 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA cau~\\ 11 (,i; ~'. ".";',, .,!L
STATE CORPORA nON COMMISSIOft'l\ F;~~i""" ";"\":'\ n~~\
\ ~;l OCT 25 1::J91 1 i ; 1\
1\" \ / I: II
1111\..\ "c~-" ."'. ..,.,"<"'-'''TT/ 1.11\
~E :#f-.L~1\Ift-.~lbi()9:)
BOf\Rp, oY'$'Oyt.~Vl~O~S
-~.
APPLICATION OF
BEHIND TIlE SCENES, INC.
For a certificate of public cORvenience
and necessity. as a special or charter party
carrier by motor vehicle
October 1, 1991
HEARING EXAMINER'S RULING
Pursuant to an order of the Commission dated September 18, 1991, this application
for a certificate of public conveflience and necessity as ~ special or ch3.J.-ter partj carrier by
motor vehicle was scheduled for hearing on November 6, 1991.
On September 30, 1991, the Applicant, by counsel, filed a motion requesting that the
hearing be continued to a future date. In support of its request, counsel states that his
position as Chainnan of the Electoral Board of the City of Charlottesville requires him to
be present in Charlottesville on the scheduled hearing date.
Good cause having been shown, I find that Applicant's request for a continuance should
be granted and a revised procedural schedule establIshed. Accordingly,.
IT IS DIRECfED:
(1) That the public hearing currently scheduled for November 6, 1991, is rescheduled to
November 21, 1991 at 10:01 a.m. in the Commission's 3rd Floor Courtroom of the
Jefferson Building, Richmond, Virginia;
(2) That on or before October 31, 1991, the Applicant serve a true copy of this Ruling
on: (a) the mayor or principal officer of the city or county in which the point of origin is
located; and (b) every specIal or charter party carrier operating within the area proposed to
be served by the Applicant as shown by Appendix A attached hereto. Service shall be
made by receipted registered mail, or by first-class mail, to the last known address of the
p~rs.on .to be s~rve~. If service ~s made by' f~rst-class ~ail, prc?of s~all be verified by
affiaaVlt submntea by the Applicant certIfying complIance WIth this paragraph;
(3) That any person who expects to submit evidence, cross-examine witnesses or
otherwise participate in the hearing as a protestant shall file, on or before November 12,
1991, an original and fifteen (15) copies of a protest with the Clerk, State Corporation
Commission, c/o Document Control Center, P.O. Box 2119, Richmond, Virginia 23216,
and simultaneously send a copy thereof to Leroy R. Hamlett, Jr., Esquire, P.O. Box 298,
Charlottesville, VA 22902-0298. The protest shall set forth (i) a precise statement of the
interest of the protestant in the proceeding; (ii) a full and clear statement of the facts which
the protestant IS prepared to prove by competent evidence; and (ill) a statement of the
specific relief sought and the legal basis therefor. Any corporate entity that wishes to
submit evidence, cross-examine witnesses or otherwise participate as a protestant must be
represented by legal counsel in accordance with the requirements of Rule 4:8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure;
.,
(4) That any person who desires to make a statement either supporting or opposing the
application, but not otherwise participate in the hearing, need only be present at the,
hearing and make known his or her desire to comment;
(5) That, on or before ~ober 31, 1991, the Applicant publishthefollowingnotice in a
newspaper or newspapers ha~g general circulation in the area to be served:
PUBLIC NOTICE
---~ -
Notice is hereby given of a public hearing before a
hearing examiner in the State Corporation Commission's 3rd
Floor Courtroom in the Jefferson Building, Bank and
Governor Streets, Richmond, Virginia at 10:01 a.In. on
November 21, 1991, to consider the application of Behind the
Scenes, Inc. for a certificate of public convenience and
necessity as a special or charter party carrier by motor vehicle.
A descnption of the authority to be transferred may be
obtained by writing Judy McPherson, Deputy Director, Motor
Carrier Division (Rates and Tariffs), P.O. Box 1158,
Richmond, Virginia 23219 or by telephoning (804) 786-3683.
Any person desiring to make a statement at the hearing
need only attend the hearing. Any person desiring to
participate in the hearing as a protestant must file, on or
before November 12, 1991 an original and fifteen (15) copies
of a protest with the Clerk, State Corporation Commission, c/o
Document Control Center, P.O. Box 2118, Richmond, Virginia
23216 and simultaneously send a copy thereof to Leroy R.
Hamlett, Jr., Esquire, P.O. Box 298, Charlottesville, Virginia
22902-0298. The protest shall set forth (i) a precise statement
of the interest of the protestant in the proceeding; (ii) a full
and clear statement of the facts which the protestant is
prepared to prove by competent evidence; and (iii) a statement
of the specific relief sought and the legal basis therefor. Any
corporate entity that wishes to submit evidence, cross-examine
witnesses or otherwise participate as a protestant must be
represented by legal counsel In accordance with the
requirements of Rule 4:8 of the Commission's Rules of
Pnictice and Procedure.
5i3- ~ ~2:L-
Russell W. Cunmn
Senior Hearing Examiner
Document Control Center is requested to mail or deliver a copy of this Ruling on
October 1, 1991 to Leroy R. Hamlett, Jr., Esquire, P.O. Box 298, Charlottesville, Virginia
22902-0298; Graham G. Ludwig, Jr., Esquire, Commission counsel; and to Judy
McPherson, Deputy Director, Motor Carrier Division (Rates and Tariffs).
2
--
..
APPENDIX A
. .
SPBCZAL OIL CDR'!BR pun ~.QIBllS
A-34
-
Al:2bott Bus Lines, Inc.
1703 Graney Streat
Roanoke, Virqinia 24012
Airlines Transport Company, Inc.
625 Campostella Road
Norfolk, Virqinia 23523
B-310
A-42
B-328
The Airport Connection, Inc.
Washington International Airport
East Building Room 101
WaShington, D. C. 20001
A-39
Aries Bus Company
P. O. Box 192
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22404
Atlantic Greyhound Lines of Virginia, Inc.
c/o Greg Alexander
901 Main Street
Dallas , Texas 75202
A-l1
B-362
Brown Bus Company, Inc.
8217 Tyndale Road
Richmond, Virginia 23227
A-6
Carolina Coach Company
1201 South Blount street
P. O. Box 28086
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Cavalier Transportation Co., Inc.
2101 Loumour Avenue
Richmond, virqinia 23230
Dominion Charter Company, Incorporated
Post Office Box 149
Earlysville, Virginia 22936
A-41
B-391
B-350
Dominion Coach Company
Virginia OVerland
P. O. Box 328
920 E. Wythe street
Petersburg, Virginia 23804
Griffin Transportation Company
Route 1 Box 530
Roseland, Virginia 22967
A-44
----
..
A-3
Groome Transportation, Inc.
P. o. Box A-23
Richmond, virginia 23231
J.am.es River Bus Lines
10-17 W. Graham, Road
Richmond, Virqinia 23220
Raymond Harry Kincaide
928 Rockaway street
staunton, Virginia 24401
A-12
B-354
B-390
Luv Bus, Inc.
Post Office Box 6361
1965 Pleasant Lane
Charlottesville, Virginia 22906
National Coach Works, Inc. of Virginia
10411 Hall's Industrial Drive
Fredericksburg, virginia 22401
Quick-Livick, Inc.
708 C street
staunton , virginia 24401
Schrock sightseeing Service, Inc.
444 Musket Drive
winchester, virginia 22601
B-327
B-345
A-5
B-393
B-318
scotsville Bus Lines, Inc.
P. o. Box 356
scotsville, virginia 24590
B-279
Shenandoah Travel, Inc.
2309 Poplar Street
Staunton, virginia 24401
Tour-Am Ltd.
Route 3 Box 2.5A
Petersburg, virginia 23803
Trailways Lines, Inc.
901 Main Street
2590 Interstate Plaza
Dallas, Texas 75240
Travel Mates of virginia, Inc.
P. o. Box 2
Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801
A-43
B-179
A-1
B-360
B-394
-~
..
B-329
B-348
A-10
B-177
B-376
B-376
B-366
B-373
A-36
B-208
B-382
B-275
A-16
....
V. I. P. , Celebrity Limousines, Inc.
Post Office Box KE
Williamsburq, Virqinia 23187
Alonzo David Walthall , Houston Walthall
A....and H Tour Service
Route 1 Box 469
Rustburq, Virqinia 24588
Washington, virqinia , Maryland Coach Co., Inc.
4115 Dorforth Drive
Fairfax, Virqinia 22030
Herman Manley White
822 E Washington street
SUffolk, virqinia 23434
D. F. Whitlow
625 Campostella Road
Norfolk, virqinia 23523
williams Bus Lines, Inc.
P. O. Box 10135
Alexandria, virginia 22310
Williamsburq Limousines, Inc.
15201 warwick Lane
Newport News, Virqinia 23602
winn Bus Lines, Inc.
1831 Westwood Avenue
Richmond, virqinia 23227
winter Hawk Tours, Inc.
316 Hillside Lane
Fredericksburq, Virqinia 22401
Yellow Cab, Inc.
109 West 35th street
Norfolk, Virinia 23508
Yellow Coach Lines, Inc.
P. o. Box 13458
Chesapeake, Virqinia 23325
APPLICATION OF
B T S BROKERS, INC.
o rAstdbuted tt~ noOd~ _'Ii, ?/_:J.l
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Agenda Item No. q,.. I ~t..5./J)
STATE CORPORATION COMMISSIONCOUNTY OF ALCErfjA!~LE
f:::=? '-;=0 r-:~J r': :-"1 r~; r~:J r'~:;1
n\ I i L_.\-'-~-~'~'--""";>_\.. \,._~..,,,:,~. \ \ q
. V " ..\ It
I U' \ i\ \ \
";~CT 25 1991 ;: i ci
\ \ /\ i ! ~
.., i~~M~~9~j ~~! iJ l
__. _____ \._.;!J. ~....., ,_......
80/-\FW OF SUPEF<\/ISOC~S
October 1, 1991
30CU.N\ENT CONTROL CENTER.
. ~- ~'l ,. '17
',..,..\ r:, ' _ I 'I:' .J: L
iJ~ Uv' ; I, ,-
For a license to broker the transportation
of passengers by motOF vehic~
HEARING EXAMINER'S RULING
Pursuant to an order of the Commission dated September 18, 1991, this application
for a broker's license was scheduled for hearing on November 6, 1991.
On September 30, 1991, the Applicant, by counsel, filed a motion requesting that
the hearing be continued to a future date. In support of its request, counsel states that his
position as Chairman of the Electoral Board of the City of Charlottesville requires him to
be present in Charlottesville on the scheduled hearing date.
Good cause having been shown, I find that Applicant's request for a continuance
should be granted and a revised procedural schedule established. Accordingly,
IT IS DIRECTED:
(1) That the public hearing on this application currently scheduled for November 6,
1991, is rescheduled to November 21, 1991 at 10:01 a.m. in the Commission's 3rd Floor
Courtroom of the Jefferson Building, Richmond, Virginia;
(2) That on or before October 31, 1991, the Applicant serve a true copy of this
Ruling on: (a) the mayor or principal officer of the city or county from which the Applicant
----~ desires to provide service; and (b) every broker authorized to provide and offering service
from points of origin proposed to be served by the Applicant as shown by Appendix A
attached hereto. Service shall be made by receipted registe~ed ~ail,or by first-class ma~l,
to the last known address of the person to be served. If servIce IS made by first-class mail,
proof shall be verified by affidaVIt submitted by the Applicant certifying compliance with
this paragraph;
(3) That any person who expects to submit evidence, cross-examine witnesses or
otherwise participate in the hearing as a protestant shall file, on or before November 12,
1991, an original and fifteen (15) copies of a protest with the Clerk, State Corporation
Commission, c/o Document Control Center, P.O. Box 2119, Richmond, Virginia 23216,
and simultaneously send a copy thereof to Leroy R. Hamlett, Jr., Esquire, P.O. Box 298,
Charlottesville, VA 22902-0298. The protest shall set forth (i) a precise statement of the
interest of the protestant in the proceeding; (ii) a full and clear statement of the facts which
the protestant IS prepared to prove by competent evidence; and (iii) a statement of the
specific relief sought and the legal basis therefor. Any corporate entity that wishes to
submit evidence, cross-examine witnesses or otherwise participate as a protestant must be
represented by legal counsel in accordance with the requirements of Rule 4:8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure; .
(4) That any person who desires to make a statement either supporting or opposing
the application, but not otherwise participate in the hearing, need only be present at the
hearing and make known his or her desire to comment;
(5) That, on or before October 31, 1991, the Applicant publish the following notice
in a newspaper or newspapers having general circulation in the area to be selVed:
PUBliC NOTICE
Notice is hereby given of a public hearing before a
hearing examine't in the State COl-poration Commission's 3rd
Floor Courtroom in the Jefferson Building, Bank and
Governor Streets, Richmond, Virginia at 10:01 a.m. on
November 21, 1991, to consider the application of B T S
Brokers, Inc. for a license to broker the transportation of
passengers by motor vehicle to all points in Virginia from
points of origin located within the County of Albemarle and
the City of Charlottesville, Virginia.
---~ -
Any person desiring to make a statement at the hearing
need only attend the hearing. Any person desiring to
participate in the hearing as a protestant must file, on or
before November 12, 1991 an original and fifteen (15) copies
of a protest with the Clerk, State Corporation Commission, c/o
Document Control Center, P.O. Box 2118, Richmond, Virginia
23216 and simultaneously send a copy thereof to Leroy R.
Hamlett, Jr., Esquire, P.O. Box 298, Charlottesville, Virginia
22902-0298. The protest shall set forth (i) a precise statement
of the interest of the protestant in the proceeding; (ii) a full
and clear statement of the facts which the protestant is .
prepared to prove by competent evidence; and (iii) a statement
of the specifIC relief sought and the legal basis therefor. Any
corporate entity that wishes to submit evidence, cross-examme
witnesses or otherwise participate as a protestant must be
represented by legal counsel in accordance with the
requirements of Rule 4:8 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure.
~~-<
usse . c..'Unmn
Senior Hearing Examiner
Document Control Center is requested to mail or deliver a copy of this Ruling on
October 1, 1991 to Leroy R. Hamlett, Jr., Esquire, P.O. Box 298, Charlottesville, Virginia
22902-0298; Graham G. Ludwig, Jr., Esquire, Commission counsel; and to Judy
McPherson, Deputy Director, Motor Carrier Division (Rates and Tariffs).
2
~-
,-
\
B-123
B-60
B-9
B-122
B-109
B-19
B-26
and
B-27
---~
B-103
B-53
B-111
B-115
and
B-116
APPENDIX A
BRODRS LXS'!
Armed Forces Reunions, Inc.
Post Office Box 11327
" ::- Norfolk, yirginia 23517
Automobile Club of Virginia
2617 West Broad street
Richmond, Virginia 23220
Beach Travel Service, Inc.
303 34th Street
virginia Beach, Virginia 23451
Bennett Tours, Inc.
22 East Market Street
suite 300
Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801
Nancy Brockman, Inc.
T/A Brockman Tour and Travel
2316 Atherholt Road, suite 204
Lynchburg, Virginia 24501
Byways Travel Agency, Inc.
200 Hickory Road, East
Chesapeake, Virginia 23322
Continental Trailway. Tours, Inc.
315 Continental Avenue
Dallas, Texas 75207
Cosmo Travel Service, Inc.
2006 Memorial Avenue
Lynchburg, Virginia 24505
Cosmopolitan Travel Service, Inc.
2224 West Main Street
P. o. Box 489
waynesboro, Virginia 22980
Dashing Cavalier's Tours, Inc.
Post Office Box 144
Topping, Virginia 23169
Going Place. Ltd.
9200 Waterloo Court
P. o. Box 29351
Richmond, Virginia 23229
. \ ,
, ..
B-125
B-121
B-132
B-94
B-119
B-14
B-106
B-134
----
B-76
B-111
B-30
Hanover Tours and Travel, Inc.
6005 Carneal Lane
Mechanicsville, virginia 23111
Holiday Motor Tours, Inc.
__ 127 Tunstall Road
-, Oanville, -virginia 24541
K , M Travel and Tours, LTD.
Route 198, Post Office Box 489
Coccs creek, Virginia 23035-0489
Old Dominion Chapter
National Railway Historical Society
Box 8583
Richmond, virginia 23226-0583
ROTJ, Inc.
2407 E. Grace Street
Richmond, virginia 23223
Ester Ruffin
Ester Ruffin Personal Tour
Planning , Escort Service
330 Burns Lane
williamsburg, Virginia 23185
Shenandoah Tours, Inc.
2309 poplar Street
staunton, virginia 24401
Supertravel, Ltd.
211 Ruthers Road
suite 102
Richmond, Virginia 23235
Tourtime America Ltd.
2600 Buford Road
Richmond, virginia 23235
Universal Tour and Travel Services, Inc.
5739 Hull Street Road
suite 214
Richmond, virginia 23224
Jack O. williams
5081 Boonscoro Road
Lynchburg, virginia 24503
Edward H, Bain, Jr
Samuel Miller
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Offfte of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979-1281
October 23, 1991
Charlo!!e Y Humph",
,Ji:l(-k .Jouell
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
Walter F Perkins
Whilt:' Hall
F. R. (Rick) Bowie
RivdTma
Peter T Way
Scollsvdl"
CBC Partners
Attn: Frank Stoner
PO Box 6786
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: SP-91-29 CBC Partners
Tax Map 45, Parcel 112CI
Dear Mr. Stoner:
This is to notify you that the above-referenced petition has
been rescheduled for public hearing by the Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors for Wednesday, November 6, 1991, at 7:00 p.m. The
meeting will be held in Meeting Room #7, Second Floor, County
Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
You will receive a copy of the tentative agenda one week prior to
the meeting.
YOU OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Very truly yours,
~.~. r, Clerk,
LEN:ec
cc: First Gold Leaf Land Trust
Keglers of Charlottesville
Rio Associates Limited Partnership
Schewel-Charlottesville
V. Wayne Cilimberg
., " "" >"'1;\' r;:l..t'9Ij8.~O.c'f
\'" <"",:"-J' <,' .:.\v" l, <5
vi"" ~\ ,.., .~l,'" ' I. J
, 9/,tJnJ. T& 7
A~F~lld2 H'~m No.
'0.
,t .1
,
/ ; ',~ t_ i,.~l t
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
; . ';, i C~:1'~'.~~';':l~rc:i~:5,1 ,I / ; ,'.
j , F '" ".-."
I' " ....
;.iI( , '
;,f'l JUL 2') )()'~l I';
I ~ \ h4 ") " , :
:' \ \.., /! '
': :, I'--n--......-~'r'i'"'..rj i
, ; l :::-; I..::::-} L:-.. U U Ll..:J'"
!\ f) I) !:- !,:~'.~ ,~) ~ F",' : .";
July 18, 1991
CBC Partners
ATTN: Frank Stoner
P. O. Box 6786
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: SP-9l-29 CBC Partners
Tax Map 45, Parcel 112C1
Dear Mr. Stone:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on July 16,
1991, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to
the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to
the following conditions:
1. Hours of operation shall be between 9 a.m. and 12 a.m. weekdays and
9 a.m. and 1 a.m. weekends;
2. Development shall be in general accord with plan stamped received
June 10, 1991 and initialed WDF;
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on
August 21, 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,
v~/r
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
'. ... ~~~....'"- ----y;_''N____n__:J;f! __~_ t:. "'i ~ ";~_ ~_ :~'I_~_--'_: :2
I " I,
I I
-J)I "I i
~ ~I i
I I !
'1 , . ~}--;J ~f
Cf\OI
I ,I
. 'I
I \
, i . ~
1\
.l ">l \ 1
r--..:f '1
I ~ I . :'
~ t( 1\
I~~ I,~)
.1 ''-!_
"t'7 -;
t, r-: ._~:.. _~~__~~
I
I
1
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I !
i I
j,,; ':"~' "r'
. "~.::'l"~:,~~ .
:'I:~ ')'l',(ifl,
I __!, ' ,'"
I' ' ,.'" I
"'j '"; I
I 1/ I
I I'
, I
I I
I
i
I
"
,"~ '1'
n..:.t,
~~, I
::::.
~; , "'
I 0 I ~~ I~ I. I
;, L '. ' ;'0;' ;,,1' , f ~! :: m ~ ' + : ~ ~ ,
':) ",I ~;: to ,,:, ::" :,j ,1 " ~ : ", 0:, I
:t ' _ ~ tH:; !" :,'," S 'D * ;~: ., ~,~~, ",',,'; :~
,,', ~,~:,-".."".',' ~:',::.,~.,-.,.':',.,:. ~"..,1'.,.,., :':'<'~"'~"':":"" ::: :,.,:,c:",.,:,.,',::, :::,.,,:,',',:,;".,:,', ::'.,',~,.:I,,:,. 0 ~
'1 : kg ~~ ~':I ::;;Io~ "1 ';
< m~ HI 1 1 i i !"
~2 ~;: " : :1" " :11, I I I I I : I I I
(.):~ , .J~: l ,;1 I I I I~ I :1 I i ~
L ~ ',: r~ , ' L', :g I I ;~ i j l" "rt j , I
'i ,:' '; -: 'i :: - j;" 1.11 " - c: I I ' :,': J , , ,'- -: :'j ::' ' '=: ~ -:; ",' ",: ,I
'l -, ~': ') ': ',: c: " _ 'I ':1 ' ' ''': '" "':': ~~: '..' ) ",{ "
,: ,; '1~ " : :1',; ~ ~ ~ :~ l= ~Jl:~ ~: ~:~ :' 'j' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ': ~ ~ ~:~ i ~: ~ ~~ ~~) ~ f~ ~l,-
. . C 1'- "r"'I~ ci': ,'::j/'1' (;l':'l~ g"c'l":'j ""
-~~-. m-.-~'''-~'''''')n''-. "--';;~"~-""-'J~"l-"-~-II(l-'.D t~lro-!Jl 01-" ,1,..,,-..J1f'o-' l;l-tn-"::---NJn"'''',<-'-fu-l~ o--j~-n-~I.-,_"_,
~ - - - - - - - - - N N {' "'~-.!.-.~~__~_'!.J..!2.......::!-.:! .:1...-'--..:!...t.:=--'lf_::, L~2-!.-.~ol "1 Il'l 1") _'!:'.-!,_II~....L"2-"~_':1.-
L I IL II I j'" wJ
_..i
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
JULY 16, 1991
AUGUST 21,1991
SP-91-29 CBC PARTNERS
Petition: CBC Partners petitions the Board of Supervisors
to issue a special use permit for a miniature golf course
[24.2.2(1)] on 1.4 acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial.
Property, described as Tax Map 45, Parcel 112C1, is located
on the west side of Rt. 29 adjacent to Kegler's Bowling in
the Charlottesville Magisterial District. This site is
located in Neighborhood I and is in the EC, Entrance
Corridor Overlay District.
Character of the Area: The site is currently vacant and was
graded during the development of Kegler's which is located
adjacent to this site. The adjacent property to the north
is developed with a furniture store. The general character
of the area is commercial.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing an eighteen hole miniature golf
course. Access will be by the existing Kegler's entrance
road and the miniature golf course will utilize excess
parking provided on the Kegler's site. A description of the
facilities and a sketch showing the location of the golf
course are provided as Attachment C and D. The applicant's
justification for the request is provided as Attachment E.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the
provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and
recommends approval subject to conditions. -
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
March 18, 1987 - SP-87-05 is approved by the Board of
Supervisors. This was a permit for a bowling alley.
August 11, 1987 - The Planning Commission approved the
preliminary site plan for Kegler's. The final plan was
signed on November 19, 1987.
May 20, 1988 - Plat creating parcel currently under review
was approved.
1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
This area is recommended for regional service in
Neighborhood One. This use may be considered consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations in regards to
land use. Route 29 is an entrance corridor and the
Comprehensive Plan recommends that development be sensitive
to this. The applicant has submitted information to the
Architectural Review Board. The applicant has stated a
willingness to work with the Architectural Review Board to
address issues such as lighting, landscaping and general
issues of design. Based on the comments of the ARB, this
use may be considered consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan's recommendations for development plans on Route 29.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
As has been stated previously, the applicant has submitted
information to the ARB and received comments. The ARB has
recommended several changes to the site and requesting
additional information. In general, the ARB did not object
to the applicant's proposal.
The applicant is proposing to utilize existing restroom and
parking facilities at Kegler's. The use of the existing
restroom facilities at Kegler's is permitted by the Building
Code provided that documentation is provided which indicates
that the two parcels are under the same ownership, lease or
control. Therefore, staff will recommend that adequate
documentation be approved by staff prior to final plan
approval. During the development of Kegler's a total of 57
excess parking spaces were provided. The miniature golf
course requires 36 parking spaces. Staff will recommend
that prior to final plan approval suitable easements are
provided which grant adequate and reasonably located parking
spaces for the golf course. Staff opinion is that joint
utilization of parking is reasonable in this case due to the
similar recreational aspects of the use and- the close
relationship the two uses will have. Due to the joint use
of parking and restroom facilities by Kegler's and the
miniature golf course, staff anticipates higher than average
pedestrian activity in the parking area. This will be
reduced somewhat by the location of parking directly
adjacent to the golf area (See Attachment C). However,
access to Kegler's will involve crossing the main traffic
aisles in the parking area. It is the opinion of staff that
safe and convenient pedestrian access can be provided
through design features such as raised pedestrian walkways
(This technique is currently in use at the airport). Staff
will require sufficient measures to insure pedestrian safety
at the time of site plan approval.
2
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the
provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinanc~ and
is of the opinion that this use will not be of detriment to
adjacent property, will not change the character of the
district and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of
the Ordinance. Staff has reviewed this request for
compliance with Section 5.16 and in particular 5.lo\d) which
states:
"The Board of Supervisors may, for the protection of
the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the
community, require such additional conditions as it
deems necessary, including but not limited to
provisions for additional fencing and/or planting or
other landscaping, additional setback from property
lines, additional parking space, location and
arrangement of lighting, and other reasonable
requirements."
The majority of these prov~s~ons are intended to protect
residential property located adjacent to recreational uses.
Staff opinion is that items such as lighting, landscaping
and fencing will be adequately addressed by the ARB during
its approval process. Staff is concerned about the
relationship of the use to Route 29. Staff opinion is that
the provisions proposed by the applicant are adequate to
insure that this use will not impact Route 29. The
applicant has indicated a 60 foot setback from Route 29 and
has shown a 4 foot berm with landscaping adjacent to Route
29. These provisions together with landscaping in the
golfing area will reduce adverse visual impact on Route 29.
The Virginia Department of Transportation has prvided
comment regarding access to this site (Attachment F). The
existing access to the site is adequate. The existing
crossover on Route 29 may be closed causing U-turns. (It
should be noted that the crossover at Better Living is also
scheduled to be closed.) This use should generate traffic
at a rate similar to other "by-right" He development. No
exact figures on traffic generation are available for this
use.
In summary it is the opinion of staff that this request is
consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 and
therefore staff recommends approval subject to the following
conditions:
3
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Hours of operation shall be between 9 a.m. and 12 a.m.
weekdays and 9 a.m. and 1 a.m. weekends;
2. Development shall be in general accor~ with plan
stamped received June 10, 1991 and initialed WDF;
3. Administrative approval of site plan. Site plan shall
not be signed until the following conditions have been
met:
a. Staff approval of documents indicating that Parcel
112C1 and Parcel 112C are under the same
ownership, lease or control. Use shall
discontinue at such time as the two parcels are no
longer under the same ownership, lease or control.
b. Staff approval of parking easements;
c. Staff approval of pedestrian crossings in the
parking area;
d. Architectural Review Board issuance of a
Certificate of Appropriateness.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Sketch Showing Layout of Site
D - Description of Facilities
E - Applicant's Justification
F - Virginia Department of Transportation Comments
4
@]
GIBSON MOUNTAIN
IATTACHMENT AI
LITTLE
FLAT
MTN
~-~/1~7
@
~/~~
~
w.n.~)
l, ~??
~/~
~ ."
.~\@
1]
-/ '7S
~"<:~
..,
Car1ef Mln
FT
SP-91-29
CBC PARTNERS
,i~.
'<,~ ~
Gill. ,cO"
I.~ 'C.J c; r
~(
.,;"
~._____!G]il ,;.. ""
~; r7:iTl
.~
- I:
c;/
/"
~)
.....\;1
....
.;/""<"~/.,
:4 '
~~ ~{~,~
'.
ALBEMARLE
IATTACHMENT 81
44
I
!
SEE
46-180
SP-91-29
eRe PARTNERS
~
t.. .
---
,t..
t_
.
61
CHARLOTTESVILLE. RIVANNA a
JACK JOUETT DISTRICTS
SECTION 45
...
J
\ "t>-......._
, , , , "
\ ( '\
\
~, "".
, '/:~"~ \, {:I
"~. ~(:J
" I' <:.:.- ""'~:~~~: //i
\ /' '-J-~-"~.-:-.-___I' , ~~
'. , . -----, , " . .'" ,
' , -, \ . ..~::~
\", ,:/n.'--__. _(; 't':.;",/ " .,' '~~:'~(
\ ,;;/ / I,' / .~~,. ;
\ \ I 11- ----~I_".j' " .
' , , ", ,. .
' ',. '~'--"
, / "I' :
' '. ,
1/' 'r-._.~ .', /
'., "--' '.,
' , '" II
".I . '. I: .
' 'r--,:; ~
.J' ) ~":: (': ,l
~ i 1__11 /I T; it' , '~""'l
J ,I, ," ~~~~...\
~ 'J--'~ -It 1 \ - \ ~II~ ~~ ~ '~
: - I " 1J. ~'"
,,[, ,. ". ',1. ~
: , II I J '\
'.. ~v.'" ~ Q.... /., ~ ~'il
' .,: I I,. 005z:, f'.' f ~~ .G.LI
~>~:--"'" (_~~rj :':,' ~ Ii
' '-.--.~'- "--, r'. ,,_ lj
, ", '. ''''- --- ~
':'.[~~:~'-"~:" <,] , . :f(-',,:::' . '---
c_.. _ _ _._ _ _. _ _ _: . _ . / ',' _I: ~ ~_~
- - - - - - . - - '- -, . . - - -/ -. I
~c:.~:,::~, i,;' '.,<
' ;->':;0.- _ '_, ' ~ , \ \.. ~ ".-
' .." . \ ',-,---, '-.-...,
7'- ,'7-" -:c .. "- ~-, '__. '" ,. _" ..... ...',...-.--1"..
I
I
I'
I
/'
\
\
I,
, I
,I I
I
_\ ..
I
"~j)
II 'l
-
"
/
/
--,
~
/
I
, \
\
, ...~. \ I
\ \
\ \ \ \
\ \
\ \ '. \
\ \
,
\ \
" \
"-
\
"-
----------
"
I'
I
/
/
"
\
'. "
,
"
"
,," '".....
. - - -"" ...
- - - ..... " "'\ . " \
' 'I
\ \ - \
\ \
I, \ I
\ \
\ .
"
'\
""
~
~
f""\
J. r
() ~
$
~
Q) III
1
J ~
~ I
f..J
~
, i
V .f\ ID
g -J
V' '2
ill ~ 1.1)
ill lL
S Ii ~ ,
~ ,
LV J
<:l ~ [ ~.
IJ
] ~
W .L. ,
\i ~ E \::
a ~ J
~ l--- ~ r
hI
\L
~
~
J
1
\ll
Q
-
]
:t
x.
-:t
S
:t
-
"I
IATTACHMENT 01
Description of Facility Operations
Championship M''1iature Golf is quality recreation. Our design is patterned after
full-sized golf courses \'Ale feature water hazards, miniature sandtraps, and large contoured
greens. Neither Pebble Beach nor Augusta require plastic giraffes, windmills and fake pirate
ships to create beautiful courses, why should we? We landscape with rock, timbers, water,
brick and a wide and varied assortment of blooming trees, shrubbery and flowers. This
course features four ponds, two waterfalls and two winding brooks. Japanese goldfish will
swim lazily among the lily pads and beneath the arched bridges which span the lower pond.
Two airy garden gazebos will provide relief from the summer sun and afternoon showers.
In the evening, visitors will be enticed through the course by a sparkling trail of low
landscape lights along the sidewalks, steps and fairways. Most of the greens will be
individually lit creating small, private islands of light to be integrated into a shimmering
mosaic of light and shadow, texture and form. The garden will seem larger at night, and
when viewed from the highway, more distant and sublime.
Our look is natural, the experience relaxing, but the course is challenging too, a
thinking person's course with rewards and hazards for both daring and skill, while still
accommodating the magic of lady lucl.c.
We consider a beautiful, relaxing course good business. Many people assume
miniature golf is tawdry, garish and silly, and it often is. However, such courses are more
appropriate in locations where hoards of tourists congregate looking for tacky summer fun.
A key point is that the tourist only plays once and then packs up the kids in the RV and
shuffles off. In Charlottsville, Championship Miniature Golf is striving to integrate itself into
the community, to create an environment that people will return to again and again. We
want to design a garden which changes with the seasons, a course which is challenging and
difficult to master, and an environment to which people who would typically never play
miniature golf will agree to visit because of the extras; the water, the landscaping, the
flowers. Our other courses have won major design awards from city government and
community service awards from local charities which often enjoy free use of the facilities.
Championship Miniature Golf is a team community player.
Our hours of operation will correspond with those maintained by Kegler's.
9arn - 12arn weekdays
9arn - lam weekends
IATTACHMENT EI
Justification for Request
1)
2)
Proposed use is both user and seasonally compatible with the recreational theme
established at Kegler's.
No heavy construction or permanent buildings will be required because:
a. Adequate parking is already available at Kegler's which currently maintains fifty-
seven parking spaces in excess of those required by ordinance for bowling. In
addition the miniature golf peak summer season corresponds with Kegler's low
season. Our operator is affiliated with twenty courses and no planning agency has
yet required more than two spaces per hole, or thirty-six spaces for an eighteen hole
course.
b. Championship Miniature Golf will be operating on the same site as Kegler's
and is well within the required five hundred foot distance afterwhich bathrooms are
required for additional facilities (BOCA 1990 Plumbing Code Sect.1202.4-5) Kegler's
has adequate public restrooms in place.
c. No food or beverages, except a soda vending machine, will be offered at the golf
course thereby nearly eliminating waste food and serving container litter.
.. ~~
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
IATTACHMENT FI
RAY D. PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE. 22902
D. S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
June 10, 1991
Special Use
& Rezonings
July 1991
. ~1a@ma!~~~l1i1
Permlt. ll'f ~
.JUN 11 1991
PLANNING DIVISiON
Mr. Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA. 22901
Dear Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
1. SP-91-25 YCYK AM-FM, Route 29 N. - This request should not result in any
increase in traffic. Attached is a copy of a Site Plan Review letter for this
property, dated January 24, 1990, with comments on the existing access.
2. SP-91-28 Emit Kutilek, Route 810 - This request is for a private airport that is
only for the property owner's use. This section of Route 810 is currently
non-tolerable. Therefore, there should be no additional traffic generated from this
request once the airport is in operation. Attached is a copy of a letter to Mr. J.
Y. Brent addressing the existing access to this property. The existing sight
distance to the south of the entrance is 260 feet. To obtain the minimum 350 feet
of sight distance in this direction would require the removal of several trees,
grading of the bank, and a sight easement. The existing sight distance to the north
of the entrance is 325 feet. To obtain adequate sight distance in this direction
would require trimming and/or cutting of some trees, possibly grading of a bank and
possibly a sight easement on property across the road.
3. SP-91-29 CBC Partners, Route 29 N. - This request is for a 18 hole miniature
golf course. The traffic generation for this request should be in line with other
uses allowed in the HC zoning. The Route 29 Corridor Study shows the closure of the
existing crossover (i 15). Therefore, eventually the existing entrance road off of
Route 29 would only have right turns in and out from Route 29. The Department
recommends that the access to this property be to the existing internal road and
that there be no new access to Route 29. The improvements approved for Route 29
with Alignment 10 would take most, if not all, of this site.
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
\
COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
118 S. Fraser St. . State College, Pennsylvania 16801 . (814) 234-7100
/'Jf:IJ /1/6 /q I
September 12, 1984
Messrs. Joe McCarthy & Kevin Ream
Championship Minature Golf
250 W. Hamilton Avenue
State College, PA 16801
FOCUS ON APPEARANCE
The Design Review Board seeks to recognize those properties,
businesses, individuals and organizations which enhance our
community through excellence of appearance,and design.
The Board has selected Championship Miniature Golf as the September
recipient of the Focus on Appearance Award for the improvements
made to an otherwise barren site behind the University Plaza Shopping
Center. The Board congratulates you for a well designed, colorful
miniature golf course that serves as an excellent example of the
results of hard work and planning. It is always encouraging to see
the young members of our community make such a positive contribution
to the Borough. We commend you for your concern with enhancing the
aesthetic qualities of the community, and wish you continued success
with your new enterprise.
Sincerely,
"
C~ C. IY~
Ernest C. Dabiero
Secretary
Design Review Board
cc: Bob Kemper, Centre Daily Times
Municipal Reporter
!fJi.. 'a
,. i".e, A. - - 7L
~..} ~';"('lrU. __. ,"
"'i) ()folIC .158
. ':::~._.._-,~,_._-~.~-~-
"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
\i~ .:,
...
..1 '.. <)(
October 3, 1991
Roger L. Thomas
Rt. 1, Box 591-T
Scottsville, VA 24590
RE: SP-91-45 Roger L. Thomas
Tax Map 115, Parcel 47G
Dear Mr. Thomas:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
October I, 1991, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
conditions:
~ :
1. There shall be no change in the outside appearance of
the buildings or premises, or other visible evidence of
the conduct of such home occupation other than one (I)
sign.
2. Home occupation shall comply with performance standards
set forth in Section 4.14.
3. This home occupation shall take place within the shed
structure located in Attachment B of this report.
4. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of sight
distance.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on November 6, 1991. Any new or
. .
'.
Roger L. Thomas
Page 2
October 3, 1991
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the'Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Yolanda Lipinski
Planner
YL/jcw
cc: Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
Lettie Neher
of 1
to."
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YOLANDA LIPINSKI
OCTOBER 1, 1991
NOVEMBER 6, 1991
SP-91-40 ROGER L. THOMAS
Petition: Roger L. Thomas petitions the Board of
Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a cabinet
making business on 2.030 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas.
Property, described as Tax Map 11S, Parcel 47G is located on
the north side of Route 618, approximately 0.9 miles east of
the intersection of Route 620 and Route 618 near Woodridge
(Attachment A).
Character of the Area: The area is wooded with moderately
sloping (3-7%) slopes. Lots 1 and 3 both have one dwelling
each and cannot be further divided.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing a cabinet
making business in an existing shed which does not meet
setback regulations and therefore must be reviewed by the
Board of Supervisors (see Attachment B).
Planning and Zoning History:
(SUB-87-091) Curtis Naylor - Proposal to subdivide Tax Map
lIS, Parcel 47 into five lots. Signed September 4, 1987.
(SUB-89-1S7) Curtis L. Naylor - Relocation of twenty foot
right-of-way from this property to Parcel 47I.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
The applicant proposes to utilize a shed located 17 feet
from Tax Map 11S, Parcel 47F. Section S.2.2.I.b states
that:
"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 applicant must obtain a modification from the Board of
Supervisors to allow a 17 foot setback.
No letters of objection have been received. The adjoining
property owner supports this request (see Attachment C).
The applicant proposes to use a lathe, a skill saw, a saw
table, a shaper and a IS" planer.
Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed this
request (see Attachment D). Staff recommends virginia
Department of Transportation approval of sight distance.
1
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes and intent
of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance states in part that:
"Special use permits for uses as provided in this
ordinance may be issued upon 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 such use
will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
ordinance with uses permitted by right in the
district..."
As stated earlier, the adjoining property owner most
affected by this petition supports the petition. The
activity will take place within the existing shed. The
activity is not seen as detrimentally affecting the district
or changing its character. Staff supports this request with
the fOllowing conditions of approval:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
I. There shall be no change in the outside appearan~e of
the buildings or premises, or other visible evidence of
the conduct of such home occupation other than one (I)
sign. Accessory structur~s shall be similar in facade
to a single-family dwelling, private garage, shed, barn
or other structure normally expected in a rural or
residenttal area and shall be specifically compatible
in design and scale with other development in the area
in which located. Total floor area devoted to such
home occupation shall not exceed 1500 square feet of
total floor area.
2. Home occupation shall comply with performance standards
set forth in Section 4.14.
3. This home occupation shall take place within the shed
structure located in Attachment B of this report.
4. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of sight
distance.
----------------
ATl'ACHMENTS:
A - Location map
B - Plat
C - Letter from neighbor
2
,/-
/~
/
~.
.;-
f
~
,
/
"
~
/
-..)
o
(J
~
~
~
~~ "
't)
D\
Q.
~
~
..;)
,0-::1/ )
v
<<.
>-
"
~
-
SP-91-45 ROGER L~ THOMAS
-
o
-
-
"
_ t:S t:. M A HLEu U"COU NTY
! )...:.
!; t r';
\
A.LBEMA
104
)
.
\
..
"- \ ..
\---tl
:)
., ~\~
!j ~~
.
.'
iL
\
) \~
( ,
\ "'.
'\
, /"
~. .
,
'\ "'"
.. \ \
12 '\ \--t-----.
" lA, '\ \
~ \ ,
,~~' \. \ .
'1---\\
\ /;
') \ ,.~
\ x--
'" '--,
)
\
\
\
\
-)- -)
,)(
158 \ \ /
i
-~P"':91-45 ROGER Li THOMAS
14
.
REVISED Ig4'
~
o
.'"
~
ATTACHMENT B
566047' 07 "E'
82.50 -
S580,,'51"E \~
103.46 ~
;it
,~
~
~
,~
'"
... "-
~: ~:ri
o C7t~ ~'ft"
lOT 4
2.03 Ac,
~:~ N600 E 3'2.25
~~
~ ~ ~ .
-'"
z
T.M. 104' 8
West Vlrglnio Pulp a
P .per Co.
Iron
SIP
'"
CD
cD
....
'"
~
~
CD
..
'"
'"
o
..
....
z
f:.
NOTE:
THIS PLAT MACE TO SHOW CORRECT
MERIOIAN FOR PLA T PREPARED BY
R.O. SNOW , INC. DATED 4-15-87 l
RECOROED IN D.B. 935 - 553,
"
1/
,/
"
S20045'44"E 'f!
318.30~,
'I
"
'1
'I
II
LOTS
/8.49 Acres
0, B. 462 -347- 349 PI.t
Iron
Found
56016 '27"W
60.55
, V
, ,
"t/J
o ~~' O~
S&8 4.Z8 \(0..6
\ fO.
1:101. /15' 47E
Curti. l.. Naylor
0.8. 498 . 264
PLAT OF
LOTS I THRU 5
A DIVISION OF PROPERTY DESIGNATED ON
T. M. 115 AS PARCEL 47
THE PROPERTY OF CURTIS LEE.NAYLOR
LOCATED IN THE SCOTTSVILLE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
SCALE I" = 200' DATE: 9-3-87
---------
R,O, SNOW, INC.
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA.
/
6493
~1~=91-~ IATTACHMENT cl
~adtDiUe,... .2459n
~'J-"t /97/
~/o f
W Vt ~ ::A- j1!l4 Y COt/[ l-€/ Vf '
,
_ )~ l, '1- V'e VI D ohJ e.. ~+t~S
QJCt,lv..~-t- "R~v- \'^~~ us(~ ~,,,~
jClrlA.j<--- 4$ "" wU:x9-W&I (c~ Shoe.
,-
""
~-,.~,,~~ H. t3etteV\~cll-{) J')..,
.1
Vf.~
~
~..i ~
'1
l
, O':";::C;'i-'~-'''_:-...::;)'-:-~
11---\) ......."...._..;..~-/.. ..... _..~' ~,
;!~~~.Ls~.J,:~ \~:l ~ ,~~ i j ~
, "':-~,1
"<'~1' .
~:''I.;'
,~.:
" - - 1 2 1991
-,
,-,. .";".",,, ,,", ,,' \ [~ ':;'1.... PI,:
l~'-\r,:! ~.{.{~...";l L.}. :~.;.v..~~
RAY D, PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
COMMONvVE.f\.LTrI of VIRGINIA IATTACHMENT 01- .
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
po, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE. 22902 D, S, ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
September 11, 1991
Special Use Permits and
Rezonings For October 1991
Mr. Ron Keeler
Chief of Planning
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
1. SP-91-40, Roger L. Thomas, Route 618 - This request is for a cabinet making business
with no employees or customers coming to the site. The existing entrance is adequate for the
usage indicated except for trimming of some tree branches to the north to obtain adequate
sight distance. This section of Route 618 is currently tolerable.
2. SP-91-46 Villiam Vibert (applicant), Ha To Ly (owner), Route 1403 - There is not
enough information to determine if there would be any traffic impact due to this request.
The existing entrance to this property is gravel and does not have adequate sight distance
particularly to the northwest. To obtain adequate sight distance in this direction would
require a sight easement on the adjacent property as well as clearing and grading as a
minimum. A sight easement could also be needed to the southeast along the frontage of other
properties. The Department recommends full frontage improvements (26' from the centerline of
Route 1403 to the face of curb) in upgrading the access to commercial standards if this
request is approved. Some additional right of way may be needed to accommodate the full
frontage improvements. These factors could effect the parking on this property.
3. SP-91-47 Augusta Lumber and Supply, Inc., Route 712 - This request is for an
additional facility for the property and apparently will not result in an increase in usage
at the site. The two existing entrances for this property have sight distance problems due
to vegetation along the frontage of the property. Additional trimming of the vegetation
between the two entrances needs to be done to obtain the minimum sight distance. The two
existing entrances are paved commercial entrances, however, it would be beneficial to
increase the radii at both entrances to accommodate the traffic (particularly trucks) that
use the entrances. This section of Route 712 is currently non-tolerable. There should be
adequate on-site parking to accommodate all of the vehicles.
4. SP-91-49 Homestead Partners, Route 601 The stream crossing should be designed so
that it does not impact any existing or proposed State roads.
5. SP-91-50 Claude E. and Carolyn S. Monger, Route 668 - The stream crossing should be
designed so that it does not impact any State roads.
TRAN!=:pnRTATlnN ~nR TI-l~ 11 C:T r~NTIIRV
korro.
DEFERRED UNTIL
>/ /&/1'
q/.// OL~, 15 7'
cIV1A -91-o~~ l:Juux1uU~~
c).1/Y~d ~a17.Jp~ I
Illo?o/qj
I ( ,
DATE
AGENDA ITEM NO.
AGENDA ITEM NAME
Form.3
7/25/86
1f) lL.:l..:.1L
I~::,. g..L.J!.o~, 71p1
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community DeveloPJl1eIjlt.; . ( . "
, ...../.
401 Mcintire Road , ., ",
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596: i
.. (804) 296-5823
, \ ! .;~ " " . ~~ i-.- '
:'...,' i r
>I
October 4, 1991
Homestead Partners
P. O. Box 2555
206 Fifth street, NE
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SP-91-49 Homestead Partners
Tax Map 29, Parcel 1K
Dear Sir:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting
October 1, 1991, by a vote of 5-1, recommended denial of
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors.
.
on
the
. '
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on November 6. 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.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
vLf)~
william D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Sam Saunders
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
PRINCIPALS
GLOECKNER & OSBORNE, INC.
ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND LAND PLANNERS
700 & 710 EAST HIGH STREET
CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22901
TELEPHONE: (804) 971-1591
FAX NO: (804) 293-7612
. ." " . :: iL.:iR::Jl
'~!J, -9JJMfp~..1iJ
ASSOCIATES
KURT M. GLOECKNER, P,E., P.L.S.
PRESIDENT
DAVID C. BLANKENBAKER, P.L.S.
SAMUEL E. SAUNDERS, III, P.E.
BRIAN P. SMITH, P.E.
VICE-PRESIDENT
October 30, 1991
C<
\.
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
,-
I
\
, '
Re: SP-91-49 Homestead Partners
I~) ~.~';:)
~ \... ~
Gentlemen:
This letter is to provide additional information and some
clarifications concerning SP-91-49 which requests permission to
construct a stream crossing through the flood plain of Burruss
Branch. On July 1, 1991 I submitted a technical report to the
planning and engineering departments giving the results of
hydraulic and hydrologic computations and outlining the prelimi-
nary design of this stream crossing. This report was left out of
the staff report provided to the planning commission because of
its length. I will summarize the highlights with this letter.
The object of this special permit is to build a simple steam
crossing to provide access to the western portion of Lot 12 of
the Burruss Branch Subdivision. This stream crossing will take
the place of a pond already approved in SP-90-45. The stream
crossing proposed will consist of two 48" diameter corrugated
metal pipes (CMP) with approximately 6' of fill over them (see
attach). The pipe culverts will have erosion control and slope
stabilization on the inlet and outlet ends. I believe this
arrangement is a convenient and environmentally sound way for the
land owner to gain access to the western portion no matter which
side his house is on.
with the two 48" CMPs proposed above, the ponding effect
from a 100 year storm would not be more than 1 foot at the
upstream property line. This request meets the requirements of
section 30.3.6.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance which
outline the technical criteria for this type of request. The
County Engineer's office has recommended approval.
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
October 30, 1991
Page 2
Some additional information which is important to judging
the proposal is the area of flood plain impacted. The pond that
was previously approved would have required that approximately 1
acre of flood plain land be cleared to accommodate the normal
pool. The stream crossing envisioned with this proposal will
require clearing approximately .2 acres of flood plain land.
While both the pond or the stream crossing could be accomplished
in an environmentally sound manner the stream crossing proposed
will impact less land.
I recommend that you approve this proposal. It is technical-
ly sound and consistent with the design criteria used by the
county to approve many other similar requests. It disturbs less
land than the previously approved SP.
Thank-you for your attention to this matter. Please feel
free to call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
~ 5- 2;.~(_~ ar
Samuel E. Saunders, III, P. E.
Enclosures
cc:william Fritz
Henry Browne
,
\
\
\
~
~
~
..--
..--
..--
~
~ ~
~~ ~~ .,/
~~ ~~ ..--
~~~~..-- ..--.......
~~ ~ ~-----
~~ ~/ ~ ---- ~
\-~~ ~/ ~ ~ ---
./\ ~/ ~ ~ ~ --
~ ~ ~ / / ~ ~ ........---
~~ / ~ ~ / / / / / ~ ~ ~
~.-/"//~ .......- / /~/
-- // / /~
--/ //0:::
----- /
~
~
~
0...
o
0:::
0... /
.- /
~ / I
/ /.. (f)1 /
// / ~ /
/ I / U/
/ I / fu
/ / /~
/ / /
/ / /
/ /
/ /
/
o 0... __
o Oc 0::: ___
(. -----
OOl. I ___ ____
o 0/ / ____ ___
OO~ ...-- ~
00(" /' ___ ___
OO~ /"" ___
("/ /' --- -- --
/' ~ ---
/' /' ~cr> ..
/' / ._ u 0
/' / 3: (f) C c::!--
/ ~~~II
> L rn ...
/' 0 .......-:: ~
/' c"""-::::: (f) ~
/ /bE~Q)
/ /CL~r-o
,/ ./ /L:J 0
/\ / // u:;~
,( /'
/ /'\ / /""
'/ /
// / / \ /
/ / / / / /'\
/ / / /
/ / / /
/ / / /
/ / / /
/ /
~
~
...-/
/'
/
/ /
/ /
/ / /'/ /""
/ /' / /
/ /'
\
\
\
\
\
_rtJ
a..
~
u
.
IX)
'It
I
N
\
\
/
I
I
/
L'<;L<;
9'90<;
0'00<;
L'lO<;
<;'90<;
Z'll<;
Z'<;l<;
:::.. O'OZ<;
~~
~~
E--,"t
~
o
<.0
+
.-
.-
o
N
+
.-
.-
o
co
+
o
.-
E
o
Q) -+-'
L L Q)
U) g >
0...
LLO
O1m N
6 (f) II
L U)::
L::;~
-+-' L
L N
C ::;.-
o m 0
I
01
C
.-
U)
Cf)
o
L
o
o
"<t
+
o
.-
~
o
Q)
(f)
o
u
.-
~
I-
o
o
+
o
.-
...
o
~
II
...
...
~
. .
Q)
o
u
(f)
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
OCTOBER 1, 1991
NOVEMBER 6, 1991
SP-91-49 HOMESTEAD PARTNERS
Petition: Homestead Partners is petitioning the Board of
Supervisors to allow the construction of a stream crossing
in the floodplain of Burruss Branch [30.3.5.2.1(2)] on 21
acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map
29, Parcel 1K, is located on the west side of Route 601
approximately 1/2 mile north of Route 665 in the White Hall
Magisterial District. This property is not within a
designated growth area (Rural Area I).
Character of the Area: The property is currently
undeveloped and wooded adjacent to the stream, the remainder
of the property is open field. This parcel was part of a
thirteen lot subdivision.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to
construct a stream crossing in order to. access a building
site on the other side of the stream. The applicant has
submitted a letter of justification for this request
(Attachment C). This request would amend SP-90-45 which
permitted a pond in the floodplain.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance and recommends denial of SP-91-49.
Planning and Zoning History:
January 31, 1989 - The Planning Commission approved the
preliminary subdivision plat.
October 2, 1989 - The final plat was approved
administratively.
June 20, 1990 - The Board of Supervisors approved SP-90-45
which permitted a pond in the floodplain.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan states a number
of concerns for activity in the floodplain including
"Encroachment into floodplain lands by development and other
inappropriate uses can result in increased danger to life,
health and property; public costs for flood control
measures, rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion,
sedimentation and siltation; pOllution of water resources,
1
and general degradation of the natural and man-made
environment." (1989-2010 Comprehensive Plan page 61). The
Comprehensive Plan states as a strategy to preserve water
quality "Restrict all clearing, grading and construction
activities to the minimum required for the proposed
development." (page 67).
STAFF COMMENT: The original special use permit for this
parcel, SP-90-45, permitted a 2.5 acre pond to be created.
This pond would have provided for some water quality
protection due to the settling that would occur in the pond.
The current proposal is for a crossing only.
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section
31.2.4.1 and in particular the purpose and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance as stated in:
Section 1.4.1 "To provide for adequate light, air
convenience of access and safety from fire,
flood and other dangers"; and
Section 1.4.4 "To facilitate the provision of adequate
police and fire protection, disaster
evacuation, civil defense, transportation,
water, sewerage, flood protection, schools,
parks, forests, playgrounds, recreational
facilities, airports and other public
requirements"; and
Section 1.4.6 "To protect against one or more of the
following: overcrowding of land, undue
density of population in relation to the
community facilities existing or available,
obstruction of light and air, danger and
congestion in travel and transportation, or
loss of life, health, or property from fire,
flood, panic or other dangers"; and
Section 1.5 "This ordinance is designed to treat lands
which are similarly situated and
environmentally similar in like manner with
reasonably consideration for the existing use
and character of properties, with
Comprehensive Plan, the suitability of
property for various uses, the trends of
growth or change, the current and future land
and water requirements of the community for
various purposes as determined by population
and economic studies and other studies, the
transportation requirements of the community,
and the requirements for airports, housing,
2
schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation areas
and other public services; for the
conservation of natural resources; and
preservation of flood plains, the
preservation of agricultural and forestal
land, the conservation of properties ana
their values and the encouragement of che
most appropriate use of land throughout the
county."
During the review of the preliminary plat, the building site
for this parcel (known as Lot 12) was shown such that no
stream crossing was involved. In fact, the approved septic
fields as shown on the signed final subdivision (Attachment
D) indicated that no stream crossing is required to obtain a
building site. Approval of this request may be considered
inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning
Ordinance. Permitting this site or other sites to develop
in a manner requiring crossing of the 100 year floodplain
may result in increased danger to life and property and an
increase in public rescue or relief efforts. If the Board
of Supervisors approves this request, they should consider
requiring that the crossing be designed to pass the lOa year
flood so as to permit access in time of flood and that the
crossing be designed so that it is able to support the
weight of fire trucks. This request is for a culvert type
crossing which will be overtopped in a 100 year storm. The
Board of supervisors in approval of SP-90-24 Michael
Shifflett did not require that the crossing be adequate to
support fire trucks. It is the opinion of staff that this
request would also be inconsistent with the statements of
the Comprehensive Plan. A building site is available that
would allow for use of the land and would not involve any
crossing.
Staff opinion is that this request is solely for the benefit
of the applicant in order to permit construction in a more
aesthetically desirable location. It is the opinion of
staff that the potential environmental degradation and other
potential negative factors as stated in the Comprehensive
Plan outweigh the aesthetic considerations stated by the
applicant. Staff opinion is that reasonable usage of the
property can be enjoyed without the stream crossing and can
determine no public purpose to be served by such crossing.
Based on the above comments, staff is unable to support this
request and therefore recommends denial of SP-91-49.
Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors
choose to approve this request, staff recommends the
following conditions of approval:
3
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Department of Engineering issuance of an erosion
control permit;
2. Compliance with all local, state, and federal permit
requirements pertaining to disturbance of a perennial
stream;
3. Department of Engineering approval of crossing design
to ensure compliance with Section 30.3;
4. Approval by the Water Resource Manager of a water
quality impact assessment.
A'rl'ACBMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Letter of Justification
D - Plat of Signed Final Subdivision
E - Memorandum from Water Resources Manager
F - Memorandum from Engineering
4
./
IATTACHMENT AI
.-
.....
'"
~
G
601 1/
""J ~
~
J\I
~
C
LITTLE FLAT MTN. 0
U
GIBSON
7
Charlonesvill,
Airport
16061
/
,C
IATTACHMENT 81
--(
/
c:.-
33
33AI
-/ ~ 36A
i l
-
./
........-
/
'" )j
...~..~~j .
.~
) '').~......
~ .:
r 3S~ j
-1
'II
'II
,II
(~ \.
33
3:1
'2\
~
!
r 34A
\
~
8
SP-91-49
HOMESTEAD PARTNERS
-
.
HENRY J. BROWNE, AlA
EDWARD L. EICHMAN,JR., AlA
JOHN D. DALGLIESH, JR., AlA
W. DOUGLAS GILPIN, JR., AlA
ROBERT L PAXTON, AlA
IAffAl;HMENT CI
~"};: ' '. -~, ':
't; '. "
BROWNE, EICHMAN, DALGLIESH, GILPIN & PAXTON,I~!J,l:J-' " "". .....:~,,;.L,.,
~~ .~
'ARCHITECTS c:cp 5 1991
MARGARP~~~~~Wi
Associate
September 4, 1991
~,...~
" ,M5GAN'11J....J,9.Y.r.? ' .
Business Administrator
County of Albemarle
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901-4596
ATIN:
Mr. William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
RE:
SP-91-49 Homestead Partners
Dear Mr. Fritz:
I have received your letter to Mr. Sam Saunders regarding our request to relocate
a building site at Burruss Branch.
I find that very often schematic concepts can be at odds with the spirit of regulations
which our county has adopted; to further the best planning principles which is the whole
spirit of the regulations,we all should contrive to study each parcel to arrive at the best
possible solution.
I understand that regulations tend to be very narrow at times, but it seems to me that
in this particular situation there are extenuating circumstances.
As Burruss Branch has continued to develop, homeowners have selected various
areas for the placement of their residences and as we have begun to study various alternate
sites for the location of residences, and in keeping with this concept of building on the fringe
of the woods or in wooded areas leaving the open spaces and meadows in the most natural
state, I think that consideration must be given to the on-site realities as opposed to the
initial preconceptions during early design phases where blocks indicating building sites show
potential location of structures.
In our attempt to place the buildings back into the tree-lines, we have discovered that
a residence can be placed on the other side of the stream, fit into the wood-line, leaving the
open meadow on either side of the creek visible and without any impact of building.
P. 00 BOX 2555, 206 fifth Itreet. n,eo, CHARLOTIESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22902-2555
TELEPHONE 804-977.4480
BROWNE, EICHMAN, DALGLIESH, GILPIN & PAXTON, P.C.
County of Albemarle (cont.)
September 4, 1991
Page Two
We feel, as we have studied this, that this gives us greater flexibility in adhering to
the spirit of the regulations and would ask that consideration be given to this now that the
overall subdivision is being built and other aspects of the design process influence the
overall built environment.
Your support of this request is therefore appreciated.
Sincerely,
BROWNE, EICHMAN, DALGLIESH, GILPIN & PAXTON
By
J
A/
-7~
Henry J. Browne, .
HJB:bwp
cc: Mr. Sam Saunders
L.J
.."
'~
-~
'0-0
iSll$",
V'>.s>
I.u
~.
t\lQ
tl)le
.. .. .. .. .. ... ... .. ....... .. ... ... .. .. ... ..
~~~~~~~~OM_~~~NOOO
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~MNN~~~mN~-O~~N-~N
~~~MNN~-~M~~~~~m~~
v,e
>~
I'l:l<t
"'~1j &
~~~ ~
=>=<t
>--:t l>:i
~ ~~ (\J
Cl<: /Lu It)
<.0
~
!;l:l
I-
Z
.....
q
u..
0
I-
::.
:::
e l-
e ~
'"
q
u..
0 15
c
CU Cl<:
II
, L...
.... e
e V,
CU Lu
Q V)
...J ~.~ g;
<to 0
W W
v,
e
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
000000000000000000
ooooomruv~mmMMMruMOO
I I I I I I , [ I r I 1 I I I I I I
~ru~~~~Mro_Oru~~_vMvm
_MvOvruruMruru_O_ruruov_
I I I I I I , I , I I I , I I , I I
_~_~mooo~_m~oom~moMOO
MM~~~mm~~mmm~mm~m-
zzzzz~~~~~~z~zzzzz
~~>~X~N<~U~WL...~Z-,~
<<<<<<<~~~~~~~~~~~
OM~OOVOO~OOOMroOOOOOOM
mm~~~mMVm~~~m~m~~o-
_v~~_M~~M_m_MMv~N~O
OOOMM_~_~_MM~~VMV~ruOO
ru - -
~'
~
~
Q:l
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~oooooooooooooooooo
ruMMmNOO~vMmoNo~oruNO
I I I , , I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1
m~mru~ovm~o~M~~~-Nm~
Mo~m~ONMm-MM~MNmmmN
I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I ,
OOO~OO_M~_~~O~V~M_O_O
m~m~MmMmO~~vmm~Mvvv
~~~zz~~~~~ZZZZZZZZZ
<~U~WL...~Z~,~~~ZO~C~~
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<c<c
~
vi~
V)-
_~<.O
<<a:ll..
"':J(\J
m<xl(l)
t\l ,I'--
ll..:O,
:0 :t a:,
1-,-,,0
:J
:z:
~~~
E~~
~5~
~ ~ r<:>
.:E~~
.... tl:l; .....
c~~
;;,
t
/
C')
I-
0,
...J
u'
Z .,:
.....; 8'
. Cl>
r::I t'ol
Z...~:i
~~r.:l~
o ~i!S
~ {fl~
(f.)' :I: >
O~~ .
"':I:~
~~E-<....
:;,{fl;>
~.,<rn
r::I I r.:l r.:l
Z&1~~
~~r--S
U", e;j
r:.:::li:j :I:
o U
....:l
t..:l
~
o ro
o lrl
<Ii
o \D
o t\l
'"
l-
e
...J
)w u
) ~
t\l<l: ~
/ :lrl Lu
~~
( - e~ <<-J
-J"'; '-"a
t\l
I ~<<
\ o <xl
=:/1-
:::lLu
\ <xlV)
~//
\
~./
./'
....---:;' ,
___ ' ra~'
~ \>' ~ \D
\'o~ ~~ " ~ ~
'\ ~ cu~~1j
cb LJ ~~
CUell~"
~~~~
I-I.u .
, ~ ll:J
~ ~,
L.J
,..-
,..-
....
....
I- \
(5-'~'-~. )
'-. -./'
-----
\
"--
...............,
')
\
) (/
G___
./"
/'
f'-..'
~
CJ
l.r)
Lu
LJ
<:t
Q
cr: ~
".
i:o;.i
too' '
i'
to
to
';1
, ,~ i
_< i
:. i
.'
, '
I. :
,
/
/ '
)
l~j IA~t1II1.t:NT El
ALBEMARLE - CHARLOTTESVILLE
OFFICE OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
40 1 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22901-4596
(8041 296-5841
MEMORANDUM
TO:
william D. Fritz, Senior Planner
FROM:
J. W. Peyton Robertson, Jr~~ Water Resources Manager
, /A~~4-
July 15, 1991 / ~ /..-
DATE:
RE:
The Rocks/Burruss Branch Stream Crossing
This memo will serve to provide comments on the above
mentioned items as relates to the recently adopted Water
Resource Protection Areas Ordinance.
Item 1: The Rocks
In review of steve Driver's letter to you dated July 8,
1991, it appears that use of private roads will result in
significantly less earthwork and realignment of existing roads
than would the use of public roads. To the extent that use of
the existing crossing of Ivy Creek can be utilized, private
roads should provide for greater overall protection of water
quality, both during construction and after completion.
I have also reviewed the supporting documentation of
McKee/Carson which was submitted for the Rural Preservation
Development dated February 6, 1991. Under the section on
Potential Environmental Impact, page 6, paragraph 3, the
applicant indicated a willingness to voluntarily comply with
what was then the proposed Water Resource Protection Areas .
Ordinance. I don't know if this was made a condition of
approval or not, but if it was, I propose that a water quality
impact assessment be submitted prior to the issuance of a
grading permit. The required items for this assessment are
outlined in the recently adopted Water Resource Protection
Areas Ordinance and have not changed since the draft with which
the applicant agreed to comply.
Item 2: Burruss Branch stream Crossing
While this proposal will likely result in less impact to
Burruss Branch (during construction) than the building of a
dam, I would recommend that a water quality impact assessment
be submitted for this project. From the description of the
proposed crossing (it sounds as if less than 10,000 square feet
.,) IATTACHMENT EllPage 2/
memo to Fritz
page 2
of area will be disturbed), only a minor water quality impact
assessment would be required. This essentially equates to a
site drawing which shows the location of the crossing, a
delineation of the Resource Protection Area, and any BMP's
which will be used to mitigate the impact.
If you or either of the applicants have any questions on
these items, please feel free to contact me.
ws91-124
IATTACHMENl fl
<",
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Engineering
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5861
M!H>RANIXJM
'1'0: Mr. Bill Fritz
LlJ
FRCM: Charlie Steinman
DATE: September 12, 1991
RE: Burruss Branch / / Special Permit 90-045 / / SUB 88-214
cc: na
Bill,
Towards memorializing our position relative to Special PerIni t 90-045 ('being
currently a single-family drivewa"j crossing of the Burress Branch Creek
floodplain) we continue to support the application, and the original Planning
Commission approval of June 5, 1990. It appears that no upstream property owners
nor public roadways are effected by the current proposal.
HC7.~r we will not issue a relevant Erosion Control PerIni t (Ccndi tion of
Approval No.2) until such time as the applicant has satisfactorily addressed our
Comments as set forth and outlined in that certain memorandum from our off ice to
you dated July 30, 1991 (attabced).
FAX (804) 979-1281
"
/
.
,..,---
, I'-..Q"
IATTACHMENT F/ [Page 2j
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Engineering
401 McIntire Hoad
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5861
MEMORANDUM
'1'0: Mr. Bill Fritz
FROM: Charlie Steinman
DATE: July 30, 1991
c~~
RE: Burruss Branch SP 90-045 / / Logan Development SUB 88-214
cc: Ms. Jo Higgins, Mr. Bobby Shaw
Bill,
As requested TI~ have reviewed the submittal items associated with the down-
grading of the proposed encroachment into the Burruss Branch floodplail1. from a
dam structure and associated empoundment, to a simple driveway crossing and have
the following Comments:
Cor.t.1ENTS:
1) Relative to the Board of SUpervisors' 'action letter' of June 27,
1990, the foll~'ling Conditions of Approval no longer apply:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
No.1:
No. 'l.
....
No. I).
u.
No. 4:
No. 5:
No longer applies to a "dam design", TI~ are therefore
considering this Condition to apply to t.'1e design of the
driveway crossing;
Remains applicable (Erosion Control);
Remains applicable (VMRC approval) ;
No longer applies;
No longer applies;
(continued)
fAX (R()4) 979-12Rl
..
~.
/;
IATTACHMENT FllPage 3\
Mr. Bill Fritz
July 30, 1991
Page Two
CCMo1ENTS (Continued)
2) Please provide a plun view (on the preliminary plat) of the alignment
of the proposcd drivcv.:ay, the location of the proposed stream
crossing, and a plan view Detail of the culvert crossing indicating
the applicable items O'p,tlincd in Comment No. 6 below;
3) Plcase provide a typical cross-section of the proposed driveway at
a cut & a fill section indicating a pavement specification, cut &
fill side slopes, and a fill compaction and material specification;
4) As it appe<:lI'S that slopes in excess of 25% arc prescnt in the
vicinity of thc proposed driveway crossing alignment please provide
a profile of the proposed dri~i centerline extending 350' to
either side of the stream centerline indicating driveway profile,
driveway profile grades, existing ground, etc.
5) Please provide a Pipe Backfill Detail;
6) Please provide a profile of the proposed 48" culverts indicating the
following items:
a) horizontal dimensions referenced from the driveway c.l. for
fill top-of-slopc and toe-of-slopc;
b) culvert size, material, length, slope, and invert elev. 's;
c) provisions for channel scour control directly upstream and
downstream of the culv"Crt ends;
d) provisions for the protection of the drive-~y embankment in the
vicinity of the culvert in~et and outlet;
e) embcmkment seeding and Imllching specification.
Upon the satisfactory address of the above items we will be in a position to
support final approval of the revised propoSZll (subject to the approval of the:!
Erosion Control Officer), and the subsequent issuance of a 'Grading Permit I to
perform the work.
Should additional information be required please contact us.
'I
'. .1, ZL::l:JL
',,. 9JjJQ~J_7~o'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
.. (804) 296-5823
October 4, 1991
Augusta Lumber & Supply, Inc
ATTN: Howard Carr
P. O. Box 68
North Garden, VA 22959
RE: SP-91-47 Augusta Lumber and Supply, Inc
Tax Map 99, Parcel 49A
Dear Sir:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
October 1, 1991, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted r~quest to the Board of.Supervisors. Please
note that the Planning Commission recommended amending
Condition #3 of SP-82-09 as follows:
3. Approval is for addition of drying kiln, boiler
plant and planer and planer building only. Any..
other additional uses such as the proposed cut-up~
plan shall require amendment of this petition.
Planer shall be located as shown on sketch dated
October 1, 1991 and initialled W.D.F.
The Planning Commission also recommended adding a newj#7 to
the original conditions of SP-82-09:
7. Planer shall not be located on site until clearing of
vegetation to achieve adequate sight distance has been
performed.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on November 6, 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.
Augusta Lumber & Supply, Inc
Page 2
October 4, 1991
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
..
0;;Li/96
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
~ 1
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
OCTOBER 1, 1991
NOVEM:\3ER 6, 1991
SP-91-47 AUGUSTA LUMBER
Petition: Augusta Lumber petitions the Board of
Supervisors to amend SP-82-09 which permitted a sawmill.
The current request is to locate a planer and a building to
house the planer on 20.6 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas.
Property, described as Tax Map 99, Parcel 49A, is located on
the west side of Route 712 approximately 0.87 miles south of
Route 692 in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. This
site is not located within a designated growth area (Rural
Area 3).
Character of the Area: The property is developed with a
sawmill and lumber yard approved with SP-82-09. A single
family dwelling exists immediately adjacent to the north.
In 1978, a special use permit (SP-78-01) was approved for
the location of a sawmill on property to the south and west
(Tax Map 99, Parcel 49).
ADDlicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to locate
a planer and a building to house the planer as shown on
Attachment C. This planer is for a more efficient operation
of the sawmill and will not result in a substantial increase
in activity onsite. Condition 3 of SP-82-09 (Attachment D)
stated:
"Approval is for addition of drying kiln and boiler
plant only. Any other additional uses such as the
proposed cut-up plant and planer shed shall require
amendment of this petition."
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance and SP-82-09 and recommends approval of SP-91-47
Augusta Lumber.
Planninq and Zoninq Historv:
May 19, 1982 - Board of Supervisors approved SP-82-09
Augusta Lumber to allow a sawmill and lumber yard.
April 15, 1988 - Plat creating three tracts of approximately
two acres each was administratively approved.
September 5, 1990 - Board of Supervisors approves SP-90-61
which expands the hours of operation.
1
Comprehensive Plan: This property is located in Rural Area
III of the Comprehensive Plan. The sawmill and lumberyard
represents utilization of the forestal resources of the
County which is supportive of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF COMMENT: The applicant is requesting the amendment of
SP-82-09 to permit a planer and buildin~ to house the
planer. The equipment will be used to improve the
efficiency of the operation and improve the quality of
materials produced. No new employees are proposed and no
significant increase in on-site activity is proposed. The
planer would be located as shown in Attachment C. This
location is approximately 1,000 feet from the nearest
dwelling on adjacent property and is within the area
currently used to store lumber. Therefore, this use should
have no effect on the visual appearance of the site. The
building will be enclosed and staff will require that the
applicant submit information to insure compliance with the
noise limitations of section 4.14. Staff has received two
letters of support regarding this request (see Attachment
E). Staff has noted the properties owned by these
individuals in Attachment B.
Staff opinion is that this use will not result in any
additional impact on adjacent properties and that this
request is consistent with the original approval for this
site. Therefore, staff recommends approval of SP-91-47
Augusta Lumber.
The Department of Transportation has recommended
improvements to the entrance to the site (Attachment F) .
Staff is not recommending a condition requiring that this
work be done as it is not directly related to this request.
Trimming of vegetation should occur periodically in order to
maintain adequate sight distance.
Should the Planning commission and Board of Supervisors
choose to approve this request, staff recommends that
Condition 3 be amended as follows.
3. Approval is for addition of drying kiln, boiler
plant and planer and planer building only. Any
other additional uses such as the proposed cut-up
plan shall require amendment of this peti.tion.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B Tax Map
C Sketch Plan
D SP-82-9 Action Letter
E Letters of Support
F VDOT Comment
2
\
''l
't~~~ -Y
a;: @!.iJ
-' HIGH
16941 TOP
.~
CASTLE ROCK
Heards Mtn F T
BOAZ
MOUNTAIN
(
;L
\
\
,L.
-
-
Alt.-a-. _
.
ALBEMARLE COUNT',)
IATTACHI\JIt::.N I t)l
COMMENTING PROPERTY OWNERS ~
~
100
j "'""
SP-91-47 ,
AUGUST A LUMBER & SUPPLY
o~
SCALf .. FffT
..... _ _ . ... 1100 ,_ I~
SCOTTS~YLLE AND
SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICTS
SECTION 99
- -_.. . -. -- ~'-..
/ ~----J
/ I Do /71 p55:,
- - -7--r--.--------=::
i Db 2.715 P '1.3<
i
,
I.' . . "-
--.---
---~-- -
'~j,: 6
tc,~+ ~~~rZ ~
Y:(~.ffi\('~ ~\\~
0, '0'- ~
~CJ
It. "5. .s.,..Ow'N ON
[) ~ "II P 0;2.0; "'-
D 5. III P 55:'
\0-1
S
- E..E.
'og/
~V- fI' _
.L'!,:
~;;
fk;
"'~Y
~rT~"
~;',
i'
~~i'
~i>
H~:. 'i~
..,;. ":
-'..
?.~,
i~~
~{~.
.......j./ ':~.
..' !J 1
.' :;-.. #
.' 'Of I
.....r.. '-...' / 1:' , ;'
.' - -.<'..... ~ ^"i
'J -............... "
.., " ............. ;'
......" / . .........../
~'/
~/
'! ity
:: / <f /\'
/ "1-/
I
............,...... /
% '-.:
...................,.........
....
~ -- --.-
==---------~'-------7'
--~- ,
,
I"\~T^,- Bu,,-o,,.,,c:.. ~:....':
} wi '^,~M<~.::
, .
, ,
'/':f' .'
I :
, .
, .
, ! 'lI
[=::,-j
\.,
~o\_- _!
J
,--
i.
~i
'o,~ .
~i
"'~
"'"
"
'"
u
.....s!
"
l.
"
~
~
~
-..
\
0'0
I
~q.~:---
l<j
H'---",
'"
t-
__....C,o~ c...
--""l""O I:) ,~
-" ~UIL-
, .
'o'::.~/
,:I(i .... .
r:v.. .'.... "
. \""... ~C>...~"
' 5"1'1.'52.0
O,~I'
F!l.OtA PILOP&tt..'T"( I
'{1. c..P""~
lwlRllvt
HO~ ill J'1
,
\.,
\..
. \
'.\ .
..'.(
.,~..- .-----\.f~..:
. ~ - ...--:': ~
,.-. . --=:'t,. ..'
.....-..:..~'''\o.. .
...~;;\~,.~-=... .
'6,~o.
".~
6-0 ~.'/,;.. -
,..~~ 00'
~- 2,.00'1'1l
~~'I'I.
f Po'" E..L..L-
JAM E..:,
o E> ~..'" P ~ zo
E.TAL
, I
PHYSI
~?
OF 2718 AC.
SURVEY ,
PHYSICAL S PARCEL 49A
DESIGNATED :ND PARCEL A
TAX MAP 99 '" '7r; ^r ^I ~n ^
I""< "'-, ~ I "'T"'" ! . I I . , ('
GLOEC
i-'UOI-'UH'1 Lll S
NOTE r:t1sj\ DrSIGNATCD A~.
It~ AN AUf.
-
. .I
j'''~
1J4.IIAl,nlvu:.NI UI
.
'J -
-
/'
ROBERT W. TUCKER, JR.
Olrector 0' Planning
DEPARTMENT of PLANNING
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22901-4596
804-296-5823
May 20, 1982
RONALD '5. KEELER
Assistant Director 01 Plar
R. KE ITH MASE
Principal Planner
NANCY MASON CAPERT
S."ior Planner
KATHERINE L. IMHOFf
Planner
Augusta Lumber and Supply, Inc.
Post Office Box 68
North Garden, Virginia 22959
Attention of Mr. Howard Carr, Vice President
Re: SP-82-9 Augusta Lumber & Supply, Inc.
Gentlemen:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on ~tay 19, 1982, voted
to approve your above-referenced special use pennit request, suhject to the following'
condi tions :
1. Compliance \'1ith Section 5.1.15 of the Zoning Ordinance except as modified or
waived below:
a. Section S.l.lS(a) shall not apply to existing development of the property;
provided that any building or storage area currently within 100 feet of a
property line shall not be expanded or extended in the direction of the
property line. Buildings and storage areas which are in conformance with
Section S.l.lS(a) shall remain in conformance with that section.
b. Section S.l.lS(b) shall not apply to existing development of the property;
provided that any machinery or building hollS ing such machinery currently
within 600 feet to any dwelling on other property in the area shall not be
expanded or relocated in the direction of such dwe lling. Nachinery and
buildings housing machinery, which are in conformance with Section S.1.15(b),
shall remain in confo-r;mance with that section;
c. No sawing, planing, chipping or operation of other processing machinery
(except the boiler plant and drying kiln) shall occur between 7 p.m. and
7 a.m.. No loading/unloading of wood/wood products shall occur betYleen
9 p.m. and 6 a.m.;
~ Noise measured at the closest dwelling shall not exceed current levels.
~ The applicant shall submit a certified engineer's report to the County
- Engineer which shall specify current noise levels during normal operation
of the milling plant.
-
Augusta Lumber and ~..-ly~' Inc.
SP-82-9
~Aj jAGHMENT D/lPage 21
-,
May 20, 1982
Page 2
2. Compliance with Fire Official recorranendations, dated March 30, 1982;
3. Approval is fOl addition of drying kiln and boiler plant only. Purl other
additional uses such as the proposed cut-up plant anc.i planer shed shall require
amendment of this petition;
4. Compliance with State Air Pollution Control Board and Environmental Protection
Agency standards for ~od-fired boiler;
S. Cedication of twenty-five (25) feet from the centerline of Route 712;
6. TI].ese conditions shall be met prior to issuance of a building pennit for the
drying kiln or boiler plant.
If you should have any questions with regard to this approval or these conditions,
you may call'Mr. Ronald S. Keeler at 296-5823.
Sincerely,
-I' .'
:JliuuJ ^. 'Lulw1,
Stuart 1. Richard
Department of Planning
sIr
cc: County Engineer
Director of Inspections/Zoning Administrator
IATTACHMENT EI
August 12, 1991
TO: County Administrators
Dear Sirs:
This is to inform you that Howard Carr of Augusta Lumber has
talked to me about installing a Pinheiro Planer. I can see
no problem with him installing a planer so long as it is not
operated at night.
Harry Campbell
~~ tJ,~
rL~- ',~~
AUI:J 1 3 1991
PLANN1NG O\VlS10N
lIP
"
IATTACHMENT ~IPage 21
August 12, 1991
TO: County Administrators
Dear Sirs:
This is to inform you that Howard Carr of Augusta Lumber has
talked to me about installing a Pinheiro Planer. I can see
no problem with him installing this planer especially if it
is inside a building and located behind the log pile where he
showed me. Thank you.
Samuel Henderson
~~~
paw~
AUG 13 1991
PLANNING DIVISION
.~
~~;:..--::-,.,:~:;:~nAGHMENT F
I V} , ::;;; P~";,., :~,. .. .' " '
_ \l l~, ../'- ... ...> ~...>'L~';~''''~ "~:f 1i.'~:..lJ I .... "
,...- '..- 4 "_ ....~., ~i >,. . ,1
~\J}.~;-:S~) : \t>~-~~11'
U 11"' J "'-'Jf:;l ~
1 2 1991
PL~NN!NG DiVISiON
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
, - .
RAY D. PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
p, 0, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE. 22902
D. S.. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
September 11, 1991
Special Use Permits and
Rezonings For October 1991
Mr. Ron Keeler
Chief of Planning
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
1. SP-91-40, Roger L. Thomas, Route 618 - This request is for a cabinet making business
with no employees or customers coming to the site. The existing entrance is adequate for the
usage indicated except for trimming of some tree branches to the north to obtain adequate
sight distance. This section of Route 618 is currently tolerable.
2. SP-91-46 William Wibert (applicant), Ha To Ly (owner), Route 1403 - There is not
enough information to determine if there would be any traffic impact due to this request.
The 'existing entrance to this property is gravel and does not have adequate sight distance
particularly to the northwest. To obtain adequate sight distance in this direction would
require a sight easement on the adjacent property as well as clearing and grading as a
minimum. A sight easement could also be needed to the southeast along the frontage of other
properties. The Department recommends full frontage improvements (26' from the centerline of
Route 1403 to the face of curb) in upgrading the access to commercial standards if this
request is approved. Some additional right of way may be needed to accommodate the full
frontage improvements. These factors could effect the parking on this property.
3. SP-91-47 Augusta Lumber and Supply, Inc., Route 712 - This request is for an
additional facility for the property and apparently will not result in an increase in usage
at the site. The two existing entrances for this property have sight distance problems due
to vegetation along the frontage of the property. Additional trimming of the vegetation
between the two entrances needs to be done to obtain the minimum sight distance. The two
existing entrances are paved commercial entrances, however, it would be beneficial to
increase the radii at both entrances to accommodate the traffic (par~cularly trucks) that
use the entrances. This section of Route 712 is currently non-tolerable. There should be
adequate on-site parking to acco~odate all of the vehicles.
4. SP-91-49 Homestead,~artners, Route 601 - The stream crossing should be designed so
that it does not impact any existing or proposed State roads.
5. SP-91-50 Claude E. and Carolyn S. Monger, Route 668 - The stream crossing should be
designed so that it does not impact any State roads.
-c
to .JL-J::_/i,
Agenda Item No. !lL. /1 al~&1.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
October 3, 1991
Agnes F. Monger
Rt. 2, Box 403
Crozet, VA 22932
RE: SP-91-50 Claude E. and Carolyn S. Monger
Tax Map 16, Parcels 12 and 12B
Dear Mr. Monger:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting
October 1, 1991, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
conditions:
on.
" '
1. The plat shall not be signed until the following
approvals have been obtained:
a. County Engineer approval of stream crossing to be:
designed for a ten year runoff rate beneath the
structure;
b. Water Resources Manager approval of stream
crossing;
c. Staff approval of plat.
2. The crossing shall not be constructed until the
following approvals have been obtained:
a. Department of Engineering issuance of a Erosion
Control permit (Grading permit);
b. Issuance of VMRC permit and Corps of Engineers
permit.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on November 6, 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.
, 0.#
Agnes F. Monger
Page 2
October 3, 1991
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted actiop, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Planner
YL/jcw
cc: Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
Lettie E. Neher
Claude & Carolyn Monger
" 1
STAFF PERSON:-
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
YOLANDA LIPINSKI
OCTOBER 1, 1991
NOVEMBER 6, 1991
SP-91-50 CLAUDE E. AND CAROLYN S. MONGER
Petition: Claude E. and Carolyn S. Monger petition the
Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit to allow
a floodplain crossing (30.3) on 14.404 acres zoned RA, Rural
Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 16, Parcel 12B and
12, is located on the south side of Route 668 approx:Lmatelly
3/4 mile from the intersection with Route 671 (see .
Attachment A) .
Character of the Area: This site is heavily wooded 'with
critical to hillside slopes (16-25%). Parcel 12B contains a
dwelling unit located between the stream and the road. ~~he
proposed right-of-way is located on Parcel 12. The stream
crossing is located at the property line between Parcel 12
and 12B.
A~Dlicant.s ProDosal: The applicant is proposing to cross a
tributary of Ward's Creek using three corrugated metal pi.pes
three feet in diameter and twenty feet in length (see
Attachment B). This crossing will serve a family division
on Tax Map 16, Parcel 12B (see Attachment C).
Planninq and Zoninq Historv: In 1983, the Board of
Supervisors approved i. stream crossing on Tax Map 16, Parcel
6. This approval did not include a condition requiring
access to Parcel 12B.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan states a number
of concerns for activity in the floodplain including
"Encroachment into floodplain lands by development and ot;her
inappropriate uses can result in increased danger to life,
health and property; public costs for flood control
measures, rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion,
sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources,
and general degradation of the natural and man-made
environment." (1989-2010 Comprehensive Plan page 61). '!'he
Comprehensive Plan states as a strategy to preserve water
quality "Restrict all clearing, grading and construction
activities to the minimum required for the proposed
development." (page 67).
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: This plat was originally
submitted as a family division. Staff does not believe
fording of a stream provides reasonable access as noted on
the plat. Prior to signature, staff will require compliance
with section 30.3 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows a
floodplain crossing by special use permit only.
1
The County Engineer and Water Resources Manager have both
reviewed this request and recommend approval subject to
conditions (see Attachment D).
Past actions by the County have attempted to minimize str4~am
crossings by providing access to multiple tracts. No
adjacent properties would benefit from the proposed strealn
crossing as they do not require a crossing or already hav4a
one.
staff opinion is that stream crossings should be permitted.
only when no alternative building site is available. Given
the existing development and area and bulk requirements,
staff does not believe an alternative building site exist:s.
staff has also reviewed this request in accord with ~,:ectilon
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Given its scale, this
proposal should not harm adjacent properties and should not
change the character of the district. Therefore, staff
recommends approval subject to conditions.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The plat shall not be signed until the following
approvals have been obtained:
"a. County Engineer approval of stream crossing to be
designed for a ten year runoff rate beneath the
structure;
b. Water Resou/ces Manager approval of stream
crossing;
. c. staff approval of plat.
2. The crossing shall not be constructed until the
fOllowing approvals have been obtained:
a. Department of Engineering issuance of a Erosion
Control permit (Grading permit);
b. Issuance of VMRC permit and Corps of Engineers
permit.
1.1
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Design of Floodplain Crossing
C - Proposed Plat
D - Comments from Engineering and Water Resources Manager
/
2
(--'- \\,
v
'.
. \,
"'~,J
IAy-rACHMENT AI
[page fl .
~ G
-<..
~~ 601
R
0
CJ ~
~ ~
~?-
~~ I\t
......... ~
FLAT MTN,
..............
GIBSON MOUNTAIN
r:-:-::~
~
;;t
""'-
~
J
~
MOUNT AIN
ALBEMARLE
I ~.
,~
COUNTY
rATTACH~ENTAI
Ipage ~
i'
..............
'~
, ""
~ '~
"'--
I.
/ X
~ ~ l
-----<' r--~ ~
'-j . ~.~."
.
2
17
6
---
~--
,!.SP"':,91 =5(j.':,A GNES ',~ ~.."MOt~iG[:R: -
" "- .. .. ."" .
.... AGRICULTURAL' ~ FORESTAL DISTAICT
SCALE IN FE.ET
-
. - --
...
1100
,...
....
,
WHITE HALL DISTRICT
SECTION
16
"
a:1
J-
Z
w
::E
J:
()
~
<t
("'c.--_
f
"
.,;
-0'
"0
C
C
,n
;;
:c;
'0
,0.
\,_,', >0...
~
It)
"
~, J
;'.. ,.z/",
,.'
.....,.. .
'0
I
"10
.......
.,
o
-'
10
, -
PEAVIN,E HOLLOW
-.
,'~
DRAINAGE BASIN
-
\
J
\
.. ""'.
7 'YIAII I'L 000 Q" 62AO.1\0:24", III' "'l
A" 0.. _;..~.. '$"1011"/_" \
Ill'" LlIS, "
Q'2lIl1ch' 668 ')
.1
<!-:l
L O~Tl0N PLAN
SCALI""' 2000'
o
,1\1
.....
(!)
z
en
en
o
~ 0::
U~
~';,>
W"-
'Ww
---- 0:: ~
U~
lL.
~O
Z
<(
..J
Q..
-1
-- --- - -----.--
,~:,
" \
,;
.):
,,\
'1'""""'-
'\\l'l'fil l:"
4.,,\'\\\\' '.t4;>~
.~. ~"C "
.,Q~ ~;'~ .'~
,:~ ~~.....,.... ~ ~~
r""", ~,"'" ',~ N~ ..
oJ ",' ,_ "'....' ~
~. .:Ii".:~'N ~ :::
\0:\ -i! -1- "', ""
, 7:,:,?;:;:j e; ~ ~
~~= U1 '1.~\
. ",'~I~ '~'J1
'?;:J,fO'.) , \9
, ----""
~~,
671/10'
TO I'IIEI UNtO,"
I'
-
~
.~l
...J'
1Il-
'1 ~
Cl
j ~
_-. a:
0, "<4' ;. 'I' a:
1'1 II' 1Il
X 0 " ' ,ili
ID Z .',' , ~
I<l 'i ,) ;' u
1'1
o
ci
II'
(/)
1Il
o
<(
a:
Cl
d
.",
~
:11-
:l;
u
,."
o
~
.c
u
o
..
N
o
I c
.E
-N
,'IT
,lIl
a..
'" 0::
~ <i
~ "J:j ~
(/) <l:
-: ~ ..J
;\ i:l ~
,. . 0::
t, J 'Q. C)
.,. ;i ~
a.. !5
.~ a: 8
IS>
1'1.'
:::, ,
r'
~
., ,
:0 /'~
;; ii
,'~
\.
\
,\ '
:,
, .
of,.
'..
~
<.9
$:
QI
<(
I
<!
C!l
(\J
--,
I
to
--
0._
00;:::::-
-====
1--
I
~)
-~
L_
(f)
(f)
C)
O:~
()
-?
.c.._
,<C
'_J
;:G.~: .
:,,{f11) .
,~~",
'J~~
';~t~
j"
.-
:"Li_
1
, .
r~
"
1,' fl~
" :"i1~i
~;,!;#.
~ :
"
~11
,~IA
-;r
: "~'
"",
i,'4
, ,',:
i I'
i ; d!
\ , ,~I
'~i
~
..
'.1
"
I
i
i
I'
; .~ .~.~
'''':
r~'1;,':
o":f:No~'>"
:.' :..
"
~ ~,
;. .
.
i
,0
APPROVED FOR RECOR DATION
THE DIVISION OF LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN I S WITH THE FREE CONSENT
AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRE OF THE 'UNDERSIGNED
OWNER, PROPRIETORS AN D TRUST EES, AN Y REFERENCE TO FUTURE
POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS TO BE DEEMFD AS THEORETICAL
ONLY, ALL STATEMENTS AFFIXED TO nus PLAT ARE TRUiE
AND CORREC,T TO THE BEST, OF MY KNO~
"~fi ~ ~n1
, 1!,~/(j;W R
VA Tt.
IRON IATT :;j'
FOil NO ACHMENT C~J
DATE
\ '
\
IRON H
FOliNO
:'0
...~ III
:8. ....
.::'i' If).
..:~x in:
>-g", -: ~
.coz ....
~;:; ...
i!'"'c z
~o
;.;~!'-
----6"':"
WARDS .. -
~-IRON
FOUND
--
-.;..
.R.UNNEYMAE FARM
1M 16-7
01 101'-440
" .~
AGNES MONGER
TM 16,-12
DB 59:3-103
I
I
1
/
, ,
, NOTES: I. NEW PARCEL G HAS 30,000 SQ. FT.
OF CONTIGUOUS AREA IN SLOPES
,OF, LES S THAN 25 %.
2. ,PARC'EL 12B BOUNDARY LINES A
THROUGH J WERE SURVEYED. OTHER
LINES AND INTERIOR ~NGLES 'WERE
TAKEN FROM SURVEYS BY FRANK A.
GREGG DATED SEPT. 19700.90 ACRES)
AND' JAN. 1969 (2.11 ACRES) WHICH
TOGETHER MADE UP THE OR 1 GlNAL
PARCEL 12B.
,I ,3. THIS IS A FAMILY DIVISION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 18-57
OF THE ALBEMARLE CO. SUBDIVISION
ORDINANCE. SUCH PARCEL SHALL NOT
BE TRANSFERRED FOR A PERIOD OF
ONE (I) YEAR FROM THE DATE OF
RECORDATION EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE
, WITH THIS SECTION OF THE SUBDIVISION
, ORDINANCE.
4. FOUR DIVISION RIGHTS REMAIN IN
TMP 16-12 B.
PLAT SHOWING 'A 2.39 ACRE LOT
CREATED BY TH.E SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL
TMI6...12BANDAN ACCESS RIGHT OF WAY
FROM STATE ROUTE 668
WHITE HALL,DISTRICT, ALBEMARLE CO~NTY, VA
j5CALE ,III: 200. JUNE'5,1991
WI LLlA-M, W.FINLEY, PE, C,LS
tREE UNION, VA.
,
~
..'{:
"'0."
}
f;
!! '
",,'\
. :--- .:
r
'.J~~
"':J<i
' ,',!t<
~~i
\\~!
, .
~
1
'I
i
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Engineering
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296.5861
IATTACHMENT I~
. ~age 1)'
MEM)RANIXJM
TO: Ms. Yolanda Lipinski
FRCM: Charlie Steinman Lt~ l~aWq]
DATE : September 13, 1991
J 12 1991
RE: Special Permit No. 91-50
cc: Mr. Bobby Shaw PLANNING DIVIISION
Relative to the proposed stream crossing associated with the family divisic)n of
'I'M 16-12B, we have reviewed the applicant's proposal and are in a positicn to
support approval of the Special Permit.
The following items are hereby ~morialized for the applicant's benefit:
1) The driveway crossing may require upgrading when the remaining four
division rights are executed such that the structure safely passes
the 10-year runoff rate beneath the structure (the current proposal
has been designed to pass the 7-year runoff rate);
2) As the proposal falls within a perennial streambed, a permit from
VMRC (and Corps of Engr.) will be required by the Erosion Control
Officer prior to the issuance of a Erosion Control Permit (Gr.lding
Permit) .
Should additional information be required please contact us.
FAX (804) 979-1281
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
'-,'
-:-
ALBEMARLE - CHARLOTTESVILLE
OFFICE OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901.4596
(804) 296-5841
MEMORANDUM
Yolanda Lipinski, Planner
J. W. Peyton Robertson, Jr., Water Resources Manager
~W?';Z+-
August 30, 1991
Wards Creek stream Crossing
I have reviewed the plan for the above referenced stream
crossing to determine if it meets the requirements of the
recently adopted Water Resource Protection Areas Ordinance.
I would like to see the following additional items added
to the plan for the creek crossing:
o
A 100 foot buffer scaled landward from the edge of the
streambank on both sides of the creek labeled "Resource
Protection Area" or "RPA".
o
A note or other ~rrative which indicates that the
approaches to the crossing will be reseeded following
final grade and/or gravel will be used along with grass
cover to stabilize the soil.
Inspection of the site following reseeding and
establishment of grass cover should be conducted to insure that
the Resource Protection Area (RPA) is maintained as a vegetated
buffer area.
ws91-139
If you have any questions, please contact me.
'- ,-" -" j,-, ",.) II" L/.:;.t.;..:!i.l!l>iO"
'(i :-"", I;, CiJ.JIO~; 7&3
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
~Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
~ ,,~:,... "" ,"" ?
/\ :.. ,'..> :l,- .J.ir. .{,
~ j, ,..,~
',.
(1
~ J;;.'.:n
i.,
October 4, 1991
John E. & Kathleen W. Gruss
Rt. 3, Box 100
Earlysville, VA 22936
RE: SP-9l-5l John E. & Kathleen Gruss
Tax Map 31, Parcel 7B
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Gruss:
The Albemarle County Planning
1991, unanimously recommended
Board of Supervisors. Please
following conditions:
COIl1!Ilission, at its meeting on OCjtober I,
approval of the above-noted request to the
note that this approval is subject to the
1
1. Animals shall be confined to an enclosed structure. Noise measured
at the nearest lot line shall not exceed forty (40) decibels;
2. Commercial boarding shall be limited to cats only.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on
November 6. 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.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
V~i/T--
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
cc:
Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
OCTOBER l, 1991
NOVEMBER 6, 1991
SP-91-51 JOHN GRUSS
Petition: The applicant is petitioning the Board of
Supervisors to permit a commercial boarding kennel for cats
in an existing animal hospital [lO.2.2(l7)] on 3.0 acres
zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax map 31,
Parcel 7B, is located on the west side of Route 743
approximately 800 feet south of Route 663 in the White Hall
Magisterial District. This site is not located within a
designated growth area (Rural Area l).
Character of the Area: The site is located west of the
Village of Earlysville. The site is developed with a 3,700
square foot animal hospital. Property to the north is
developed with a single-family residence. Other adjacent
lands are vacant.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to utilize
existing facilities to board cats (Attachment C). This
operation would be in addition to the animal hospital. The
animal hospital was approved with SP-89-06, however boarding
was not permitted as part of that approval.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section
3l.2.4.l of the Zoning Ordinance and SP-89-06 and recommends
approval.
Planning and Zoning History:
July 5, 1989 - Board of Supervisors approved SP-89-06
permitting an animal hospital.
December 21, 1989 - Final site plan approved
administratively.
December 27, 1989 - Subdivision plat approved
administratively.
STAFF COMMENT:
The boarding of animals was not part of the original special
use permit request for this site. The applicant proposes to
board cats only and will use facilities currently in place.
No exterior modifications will be require~. Activity on
1
site should not increase as no extra trips to the site
during non-business hours will be required. Retu~~ trips to
the site during evenings and weekends are currently required
to care for sick or injured animals.
During the review of SP-89-06, staff received three letters
concerning the animal hospital (Attachment D). Staff has
included these letters for the Planning Commission and Board
of Supervisors use.
It is the opinion of staff that the proposed use will not
appreciably increase activity at the site. Staff is unaware
of any complaints about the animal hospital. Based on the
limited impact of the proposed use, staff recommends
approval subject to the following conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Animals shall be confined to an enclosed structure.
Noise measured at the nearest lot line shall not exceed
forty (40) decibels;
2. Commercial boarding shall be limited to cats only.
ATrACBMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Letter from Applicant
D - Letters from Adjacent Property OWners
E - Virginia Department of Transportation Comments
'"
L
)
j
IATTACHMENT AI
HN,
G
601
~
s
s
~
s
c
o
u
GIBSON
AIN
, '\
\ \...,
,_~.J-- ~
'/
G'~Q
~)':
0,0
~
~
;A
~
:iJ
-
SP-91-51 JOHN GRUSS
N'\...J
.\-"'"
M L-OL..VIr\f\ L..C
19
V.VV&'4 . .
11""\ A
.""""", ..........".. i
....1
R~
'011I11 T
SEC I N 311
32
.... AGRICULTURAL &. F'CRESTAl DISTFiICT
SCALf IN FEn
-
-
....
.
RIVANNA, WHITE HALL AND
CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRICTS
SECTION 31
I~ I 11"'\\Jl'lavaa.:.u a "'I
EARLYSVILLE ANIMAL HOSPITAL
p, 0. BOX 67
EARLYSVILLE, VIRGINIA 22936
804.973-9699
~a~Y1~'~ffip~]JlFI1?4,- ~
~), ,.i',"; ,I t,li '\ ~,"?lE~l {fj l;a, .
n'" ~"'" ~ ~. ,
;;\':1 '
t~, i . +
p.~\
AliG 9.8 1991
PLANNING DIVISION
August 26, 1991
w-...~--- .-._.~-
. ..~-~
Albemarle Caunty Dept. of Planning
and Cammunity Develapment
401 McIntire Raad
Charlattesville, Va. 22901
Attn: Mr. William Fritz
Dear Bill:
As per aur discussian last week, Kathi and I are requesting
a new special use permit that will allaw us to. baard cats. We
feel the intent af the no. baarding restrictian was because af
the naise generated by dags. This shauld nat be a prablem with
cats.
There wauld be no. change in haurs af aperatian ar staffing.
There will also. be no. change an the interiar ar exteriar af the
building.
We did nat anticipate this change when we applied far aur
special use permit befare but since we have maved into. aur new
building several peaple have requested this service and we wauld
like to respand to. this request. We still have no. intentians af
baarding dags at this time.
Thank yau far yaur assistance in what we hape will be a
simple pracess.
Sincerely,
LI-/
; ,,4.-r',-----
ohn E. Gruss.
DVM
JEG:rh
/
..'.....~
I'
. - I
jATTACHMENT Dlpage 11
~f:~:'~. s~'~~ ~~~~;~~i~~._'_~~ ~
j~J;Jj-T.~ j ,.( .~(. .: -,~Ji( ,.._,~,~
8jy?:' 'i"~c~:j \~' it~l~fJ
M,~R 6 1989
SR 1, Box 13
Earlysville, VA 22936
;::! :~,~, ; ~. ~ : ~ ;' .'~ """,; \ I ~ ,.... . ....'~ i;\ .
.1 ~~. 0; . . .; ~ , \: .:..:..4 1-;' ~ 'J i::: ~~.J i It
March 1, 1989
Mr. William D. Fritz
Department of Planning
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901-4596
Re: SP-89-06 John Gruss
Dear Mr. Fritz,
Thank you for your letter of 17 February.
I would like to plead that the petition in question be denied for these reasons:-
(1) At present all the commercial establishments in Earlysville are concentrated at
or near the intersection of routes 743 and 660, the exception being an old, small country
store in the fork between routes 663 and 743. One is afraid that if an exception is made
in this instance it will be a precedent for permitting other commercial establishments North
of Route 660 on 743. At present it is a peaceful residential road. To permit further
commercial enterprises would threaten us with hamburger joints, etc., i.e., a diminutive Rt.
29 N., for Earlysville is growing rapidly in population.
(2) During the rush hour particularly, Rte 743 through Earlysville is now heavily
travelled. To introduce a new commercial entrance as requested would entail traffic turning
into and out of it across the North-South flow and would constitute a traffic hazard.
Sincerely, !--:J
2), c. }-( ~.LJ",u.\.. \'...... l Lc..v~
D.C. Y aldeh. \homson
IAI'rA(';HIVIENT DIPage ~
I
I
j
D~~~'i ~.~:-_~; ';,"~":, '"'___ ...
I'" ,,/.. ",..'!!.,' ,'", ",~~
l.!.';! .,,'Jt.',f;' .'.,',. ; """"~'~
fj, '> . ,.;'" I .~...., '.' .,' ,.... -' " .' '-',
C,-' 1\' '", JII'! _ '-, .- '-, '. ,'. ~ :' ,'. ",-#
"',~" I ,'~ "'4' ".",." ,'j ., -,' ", ," ,':,' I:J
,~ ' ';, ~ .- - - .~. ~~:: j ~fr.) ;;): ~1
~\~\i ~:"'...;" .;,'
-ll~ ''--:::''<:'' .: i I
~'I ~!'4
FEe 22 1989 ,~';.~
[" (\ ~'r\""
r../"\, ~ I n ;\,!Gi'n/l~; ~
u. "' ',-,,~'I\J
February 17, 1989
Dear Mr. Fritz:
I support the proposed construction of the Earlysville
Animal Hospital. I do not object to the reduced set back for
the building to allow it to fit properly on the lot. We
understand adequate sound proofing will be required. no out-
side kennels, and there will be no boarding allowed.
,q~~~~~) o/rr{j~
IJ-\.' 'A\",n IVI eN I ulPage ~
~ Irna~genlent
I I ~ serviceS corp. '.'
real property managers and brokers
826 cabell avenue/po box 5608/charlottesvllle va 22905
phone 804-977,2702
'f ,,(
,II .... ,.
:,
,;V .':
"..1f [,
...:. .
June 14, 1989
Mr. William D. Fritz
County of Albemarle
Department of Planning and
Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901-4596
Dear Mr. Fritz:
As an adjacent property owner and resident of the Earlysville area, I am opposed
to putting a veterinary hospital on the tract of land next to the historic Earlysville Church
and across the road from the historic Buck Mountain Church.
Earlysville is a charming, attractive, small residential community in which the County
has been adamant in preserving the residential zoning. Even duplexes have been prohibited
as well as other commercial development. The commercial zoning in Earlysville should
remain near Kelly's Corner and the comer owned by Mr. Whyte. Allowing an animal
hospital next to two historic churches ruins the residential charm and aesthetic appearance
of this post-Civil War country town.
. I understand that a veterinary hospital is a special use permitted in a rural area. I
believe, however, that the intention of the special use exemption was to provide for large
animal veterinary services for farmers in rural areas since livestock is their principal
business and not having reasonable access to a vet clearly impacts their ability to make a
living and also increases the risk of losing expensIve livestock. This is not the case for the
petitioners since they deal in small animals, namely dogs and cats, which are easily
transported in automobiles.
I think the present location in the commercial district of Earlysville is an excellent
place for the veterinary practice to be. I do not believe that having a large parking lot or
a building out of character with the residential and historic buildings on the proposed
building site is either good planning or a necessity for the community.
Most important, this very issue brings up a large shortcoming on the part of the
County Planners to provide sufficient commercial zoning in an area which is already largely
developed to provide land and space for businesses to grow and prosper like the Earlysville
Animal Hospital and others. Clearly, Earlysville is one of the dynamic growth centers in
Albemarle County and will get larger in the coming years. I urge the County to take steps
to zone land around the Earlysville commercial intersection to give a reasonable supply to
individuals who desire to provide goods and services. I might add such commercial land
as is available is largely owned or controlled by two individuals which makes it very difficult
to acquire land since choices are limited. A large automobile repair service center,
certainly a drug store, perhaps another restaurant, and a larger shopping center will be
needed in the area soon, in my opinion.
The County could do a great service to the citizens of Earlysville by providing
sufficient commercial zoning tastefully and conveniently integrated into the charm of the
existing community.
Finally, I would like to say that Dr. Gruss has been an excellent asset to the
community and I have been particularly indebted to him since he held his office open for
me one night when my dog impaled himself on an iron rod obscured by high grass. Dr.
Gruss has been the veterinarian for my cat and dog and I appreciate having him available.
However, reasonable men can differ. On this issue, though I appreciate his desire to move
into his own building, I do not think the presently proposed building site is appropriate for
the reasons stated above.
. ~trulY:~~
DO~ E. CATON
President
----,...
DEC:tr
~
IATTACHMENT E
V DOT LomlYlel'\b,
Mr. Ron Keeler
Special Use Permits & Rezonings
October 1991
Page 2
September 11, 1991
6. SP-91-51 John E. and Kathleen Y. Gruss, Route 743 - This section of Route 743 is
currently non-tolerable. This request would result in some increase in traffic from the
existing use. The existing commercial entrance is adequate.
7. ZMA-91-05 Greenbrier Square Ltd. Partnership, Route 866 - This request is to rezone
3.1 acres from HC (proffered) to PD-MC. The PD-MC request also has some proffered uses. The
Department does not support any request that would result in higher traffic volumes being
generated from the property than allowed by the current zoning with proffers. This property
is on Route 866 and not very far from the intersection with Route 29 which is a heavily used
intersection. Traffic volumes from the property can add to the congestion at the Route
29/866 intersection. The western entrance needs to have a tree trimmed to the east to obtain
adequate sight distance and this comment applies for this as well as the next three items.
8. ZMA-91-06 Greenbrier Square Ltd. Partnership, Route 866 - This
rezone 3.1 acres from HC (proffered) to HC (proffered) and C-l (proffered).
of the property would be C-l and the rear of the property would be HC. The
not support any request that would allow for higher traffic volumes to be
this property than is allowed by the current zoning with proffers.
is a request to
The front part
Department does
generated from
9. SP-91-52 Greenbrier Square Limited Partnership, Route 866 - This request is for an
emergency veterinarian office on this property. There would probably be some additional
traffic generated by this request.
10. SP-91-43 Greenbrier
billiard center and would
information in the ITE Trip
given as to the size and type
Square Limited Partnership, Route 866 - This request is for a
probably result in some increase in traffic. There is no
Generation Manual for a billiard center and no indication is
of facility to be provided.
11. ZMA-89-09 Rio Hill West, Route 29 North - The Department's most recent comments for
this request in a letter dated August 12, 1991, still apply.
12. ZMA-91-07 Redfields Development Corporation, Route 781 - This request is to rezone
1.9064 acres from RA to PRD and to rezone 7.7551 acres from PRD to RA and R-l. The
understanding is that this request will not result in any additional lots from the originally
approved rezoning (ZMA-89-19) on this property. Property is being transferred between this
development and adjoining privately owned parcels. There could be some increase in lots in
the future if and when these adjoining parcels develop. This section of Route 781 is
currently tolerable but will become non-tolerable with developments approved.
.
Yours trulY~ ~ n
~-.a,~
ffA. Echols
Assistant Resident Engineer
JAE/smk
Cdribuled '(0 f!oarcl: ,/tf :!l-2.l
l\,qn'1:1 ~!"y", !c'o Ch / tJ If 5 //,.,
~t.~.""\;L J4'Yil: ,'. . LL.L.___l12___-"T"-.._
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
.r
:, ~
\ ~ ., ..
.. ;.,,-,,'....1.
, 'j'
:j'
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
(For Approval on October 16, 1991 Consent Agenda)
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning & ,jn0 /
Community Development tI~
FROM:
DATE:
October 8, 1991
RE:
GLENMORE PRD AMENDMENT TO ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE
AUTHORITY JURISDICTIONAL AREA
Property: The property consists of +1141.7 acres described
as Tax Map 79D Section 3 Parcels 6 and 7, Tax Map 93 Parcels
59 and 60, Tax Map 94 Parcels 2 and 11 (see Attachment A).
The property, bordered by U.s. Route 250 East on the north
and by the Rivanna River on the south and west, comprises
the majority of the Rivanna Village, a designated growth
area in the Rivanna Magisterial District.
Request: To schedule a public hearing for amendment to the
Albemarle County Service Authority jurisdictional area for
public water and sewer on the above referenced parcels.
Background: provision of public water and sewer was at the
center of consideration for the Rivanna Village and, more
specifically, approval of the Glenmore PRD (ZMA-90-19).
Public water and sewer were both a condition for development
in the Village and proffered in ZMA-90-19 to be provided at
the expense of the applicant (Frank Kessler). During the
review of ZMA-90-19 the applicant submitted a letter to
request inclusion in the jurisdictional area (see Attachment
B). This letter was included in the staff report as an
attachment. The staff report stated:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Page 2
October 8, 1991
"The applicant has submitted a request to the Board of
Supervisors for inclusion of Glenmore into the
Albemarle County Service Authority jurisdictional area
for a public water and sewer service. The Board in its
action on this request can adequately address this
matter."
However, this item was not specifically addressed in the
action nor was it listed on the Board's agenda as a separate
item. In order to definitively resolve this matter, staff
recommends the Board state a resolution of intent to forward
this request to public hearing. This public hearing is
recommended to be held at your November 6, 1991 meeting.
Attachments:
A - Tax Map
B - Applicant's Request Dated October 22, 1990.
VWC/blb
cc: Frank Kessler
File
\~~\~
'~f .~
if\:
~Li
DW.1
.,,>f
-.-' ::-.-
/
/
"^ /'
"v/~~)=-
~
+
5~
dill
f
~3
GLENMORE
~
',,'
IATTACHMENT 81
FRANK A. KESSLER
P 0, Box 5207
CHARLOTTESVILl:E, ViRGINIA 22905
-;:'1' f)":. 7 ~"l/'"?? ',;:::{.\ ,::(,-~,~;---"
~ .., ~ ; ~ ;'1 ! :~:.~.' i _\t \.~/ 9" 1 :."'~.!?!Ii'
.. 'f I ;'=;r< ; 'V" ,<,.. ,~ ",.? ,,)~, '. I
" ... '" ~~',~ ',", I 'j' '1
:"l ~_ i '!2I't. ~'..-J__ l iJ i ,.., ! 'j I '
!\ ~ ~ ~ ~.~~..".!;~ I "1
&;'\t\.i ...."......~i;_1~I,1..
(_"'l:_~ : .~ ! "
-,. 6:-
OCT 22 19SO
PLANNiNG DJVlSlON
October 22, 1990
Albemarle County Chief of Planning
Albemarle ~ounty Zoning Administrator
Albemarle County Service Authority
Rivanna Water And Sewer Authority
To whom it may concern:
As part of the Glenmore rezoning, I would like to
request the Glenmore area before you be included in the
Albemarle County Service Authority jurisdictional area.
Water and sewer will be made available to the area by the
Developer, at no expense to the County of Albemarle or it's
ci'tizens, the Albemarle County Service Authority, the
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority or any of its customers.
ReSP~llY submitted,
1./ I!c
\.-. 1---/ I ~//
-d1,:U(/;/f;tt' zU
~F~~nk A. K)1ssler
v
DATE
\~~uo ~I /q~'1
/
AGENDA ITEM NO. l/irMLLLf ~ 0~ ~!..~ V~
AGENDA ITEM NAME 9' ));~)(Lclu"XU j) (j~WA YJW1JJ/KiLtid~
II
DEFERRED UNTIL PuIdU: AJa/lbKfJ ~/..,)sJ1J ~j I !#
Form. 3
7/25/86
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 979-1281
November 8, 1991
Charlotte Y Humphns
Jack Jouell
Edward H, Bam, Jr
Sallluel Miller
Walter F Perkins
Whit,=, Hall
F, R (Rick) BowIe
Rivanna
Peter T, Way
Scolt5vill...
James D. Campbell, Executive Director
Virginia Association of Counties
100l East Broad Street, Suite LL20
Richmond, VA 23219-1901
Dear Mr. Campbell:
The Board, at its meeting, November 6, 1991 appointed Mrs.
Charlotte Y. Hurnphris voting member for the VACo Annual Business
Meeting to be held Monday, November 1l, 1991.
~ct'~
Lettie E. Neher
Clerk, CMC
LEN:bh
V ACo 1991 Annual Meeting
Voting Credentials Form
Voting Delegate:
Name
Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris
Title
Supervisor
Locality :r.lnpmrlrlp ('()l1nt-y, V;rg;n;rl
Alternate Delegate:
Name
Title
Certified by:
Name
Title
Clerk, CMC
Locality
Albemarle County, Virginia
V ACo 1991 Annual Meeting
Proxy Statement
County authorizes the following person to cast its vote at the
1990 Annual Meeting of the Virginia Association of Counties on November 20,1990.
, a non-elected official of this county.
-OR-
, a supervisor from
County.
This authorization is:
D Uninstructed. The proxy may use his/her discretion to cast
votes on any issue to come before the annual meeting.
County's
D Instructed. The proxy is limited in how he/she may cast County's
votes. The issues on which he/she may cast those votes and how he/she should'vote are:
(List issues and instructions on the back of this form)
Certified by: Name
Title
Locality
. -1>1'('J((/""/
Steven A. McGraw
Roanoke County
. 4~('..i((!r,,,/- / h,(l
Kathleen K. Seefeldt
Prince William County
;-'ft;;'J/ 'j,~.-,'/jJn'J((Ir,,,/
Ann L. Hess
Montgomery County
[1istribuied tl,BOaIC1: ,J } - ) - {ll,
j.LIlCtP. Z~
. It'I'I''''! Y(~y,-. -f>n'_uJni/
Harry Go Daniel
Chesterfield County
, /r'lon'/ar'l-//-;I'aoul;'('f'
E. Virgil 'Sampson, Jr.
Scott County
,'1/11((/(,(;',(,(1' ,11,.;/-/~r('j((Ir,((/
W. D. "Berry" Gray
Richmond County
VIRGINIA AsSOCIATION OF COUNTIES
//(IYf((,N ('''I' ..J/(ljuwjl'NI((/t"'I('
, William E. Belvin
Gloucester County
./f/I''1(('N //~'I' ..Jj'/,}n'Jnda/t"f'"
, John J, Purcell
Louisa County
. /f!';'1((I" ,-"72n'(' ,..IJlI}n'o"'Jd((k(If'j
C. F. Currin, Jr.
Chesterfield County
David A. Kaechele
Henrico County
;-..I/lI'f"j((IN ,j;;;',,;, ,-4?I}n>.k'JfI((It"If'J
, Marvin W, Scott
Prince Edward County
Peggy R. Wiley
Greensville County
,Jf!I"I((J" ;%1)(' '~/};'('J(,Jflakl/(!
( J. Michael Davidson
Campbell County
..J/?(;'1'()Jf. ;'."r./f{,}n'JeJd((!/II('
Robert J, Schwartz
Orange County
,.y(('1((Jff , /"11('(1 ,/f?I} rl'..i/'(lI((/'-OI'.)
, Edwin C. King
Prince William County
John M, Porter
Stafford County
,-/f?I;'1'(!(I cf~1/d, -1'/1/,n'..indu!/'I"..i
Ellen M. Bozman
Arlington County
Katherine K. Hanley
Fairfax County
Gerry W. Hyland
Fairfax County
Audrey Moore
Fairfax County
Mary Margaret Whipple
Arlington County
//((',/((IN. j(~(I'..J/?<I(n'';(,'lflak(1('J
A, R. "Pete" Dunning, Jr,
Clarke County
Harper R. Wagner
Bath County
;-"1(1'1((('11 ;"E(( ,/f?I/,n'.Jf'lIla//o('..i
Girardus G. "Gus" Forry
Franklin County
Wanda C, "Wendy" Wingo
Botetourt County
/1?~'1'(IN ci;;'('f'f( ~'-1lI/,n'jNdalfo<'
Mason A. Vaughan, Sr.
Pulaski County
~-4?~'1'(iJl ;~I(>/,II' :.Jf?f}J"('..A'JI/a!/(I('J
William H. H. Blevins
Smyth County
G. Fred Dotson
Wise County
;'1I:IJ/.--1J;'I'J((k'N/J
Jack D, Edwards
James City County
Harry G, King
Prince George County
Martha V. Pennino
Fairfax County
{klte,,,/ (:.;1(1.11.)('/
c, Flippo Hicks
(~'l"rrUI,o'II' r:J),>('(.II),
James D. Campbell
@
recycled papef
MEMORANDUM
CONNECTING COUNTY GOVERNMENTS SINCE 1935
1001 East Broad Street, Suite LL20
Richmond, Virginia 23219.1901
Ch . C B d f S' , ' (804) 788.6652
amnen, ounty oar 0 upemsors ( C 6t1 NJ~)\18fJ<1D8~ "
County Chief Administrative Officers " ~~, ',' ,....,I, '''"~~', ;'''~ L, '~,;. E M, ",11.1;' L, t"
James D. Campbell, Executive Direc~ .. )) r=..:L:', i, ;:,otl.~..L.ari~,:i fTI:]
'-...,/ III \ OCT 19 lHBl \: i
V. C ed 'al ti th An alB' M liL;~~,... ," /Iil,'
otmg 11 entl s or e nu usmess ~t,\YS:, i" ' ,..', , ......-.r."'" :1)1 i
.; !,~:.::,' :..~-)
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
October 16, 1991
The 1991 Annual Business Meeting of the Virginia Association of
Counties will be held on Tuesday, November 12, from 10:00 a.m. to Noon at
The Homestead in Bath County.
Article VI of the V ACo Constitution provides that each county shall
designate a representative of its board of supervisors to cast its vote(s) at the
Annual Business Meeting. However, if a member of the board of supervisors
cannot be present for this meeting, the Association's Constitution does allow
for a county to designate a non-elected official from your county or a member of
a board of supervisors from another county to cast a proxy vote(s) for your
county.
For your county to be certified to vote at the Annual Business Meeting,
your annual dues must be paid in full and either a completed Voting Credentials
Form or a Proxy Statement must be submitted to V ACo prior to November 1,
1991. Alternatively, this information may be submitted to the Credentials
Committee at its meeting on Monday, November 11 at 4:30 p.m. or to the
registration desk prior to this meeting.
REGIONAL CAUCUSES
In several regions of the state, more than one candidate has emerged to
be considered for the V ACo Board of Directors. We hope that 'these contests
can be decided within the region before the Nominating Committee prepares its
slate for consideration by the full membership. Accordingly, we have set aside
some time Sunday afternoon, Nov. 10th, for regional caucuses, if they are
needed. If your region would like a meeting room, please advise me ASAP.
Please call me at (804) 788-6652 if you have any questions about this
process.
JDC:bp
Attachments
cc:
V ACo Board of Directors
1/: ~~~Cj ~:( S
1991 V ACo Membership Voting Credentials
Those counties that have paid their 1990-91 annual dues to the VA Association of Counties are entitled to vote in the
Annual Business Meeting. According to the Association's constitution, each county is entitled to at least one vote and an
additional one vote per 50,000 population, or fraction thereof. Each county is shown with its 1991 provisional population
estimate, as furnished by the Center for Public Service and the corresponding number of votes to which it is entitled.
COUNTY
Accomack
Albemarle
Alleghany
Amelia
Amherst
Appomattox
Arlington
Augusta
Bath
Bedford
Bland
Botetourt
Brunswick
Buchanan
Buckingham
Campbell
Caroline
Carroll
Charles City
Charlotte
Chesterfield
Clarke
Craig
Culpeper
Cumberland
Dickenson
Dinwiddie
Essex
Fairfax
Fauquier
Floyd
Fluvanna
Franklin
Frederick
Giles
Gloucester
Goochland
Grayson
Greene
Greenville
Halifax
Hanover
Henrico
Henry
Highland
Isle of Wight
James City
VOTES
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
17
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
5
2
1
1
1
POP.
31,703
68,040
13,176
8,787
28,578
12,298
170,936
54,677
4,799
45,656
6,514
24,992
15,987
31,333
12,873
47,572
19,217
26,594
6,282
11,688
209,274
12,101
4,372
27,791
7,825
17,620
20,960
8,689
818,584
48,741
12,005
12,429
39,549
45,723
16,366
30,131
14,163
16,278
10,297
8,853
29,033
63,306
217,881
56,942
2,635
25,053
34,859
COUNTY
King and Queen
King George
King William
Lancaster
Lee
Loudoun
Louisa
Lunenburg
Madison
Mathews
Mecklenburg
Middlesex
Montgomery
Nelson
New Kent
Northampton
Northumberland
Nottoway
Orange
Page
Pittsylvania
Powhatan
Prince Edward
Prince George
Prince William
Pulaski
Rappahannock
Richmond
Roanoke
Rockbridge
Rockingham
Russell
Scott
Shenandoah
Smyth
Southhampton
Spotsylvania
Stafford
S urry
Sussex
Tazewell
Warren
Washington
Westrnoreland
Wise
Wythe
York
VOTES
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
POP.
6,289
13,527
10,913
10,896
24,496
86,129
20,325
11,419
11,949
8,348
29,241
8,653
73,913
12,778
10,445
13,061
10,524
14,993
21,421
21,690
55,655
15,328
17,320
27,394
215,686
34,496
6,622
7,273
79,332
18,350
57,482
28,667
23,204
31,636
32,370
17,550
57,403
61,236
6,145
10,248
45,960
26,142
45,887
15,480
39,573
25,466
42,422
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
M E M 0 RAN DUM
David P Bowerman
Charlottesville
F, R (Rick) Bowie
Rivanna
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC~
DATE: November 1, 1991
SUBJECT: Reading List for November 6, 1991
Charlotte Y Humph"s
Jack ,JoUIe'II
Walter F, Perkms
White Hall
Peter T, Way
Scottsville
April 3, 1~~1
r~gc 15 (,+7) - rage 19 l #~) - M.L. r.,iay ~~
July 17, 1991 - All - Mr. Bain
May 8, 1991 - pages 1 - 19 (#7c) - Mrs. Humphris
pages 19 (#7c) - 34 (#19) - Mr. Bowerman
pages 34 (#19) - 46 (#27) - Mr. Bain
LEN:ec
MOTION: Mr. Bain
SECOND: Mr. Bowerman
MEETING DATE: November 6, 1991
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has
convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an
affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provi-
sions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1
requires a certification by the
Supervisors that such executive
conformity with Virginia law;
of the Code of Virginia
Albemarle County Board of
meeting was conducted in
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of
each member's knowledge, ( i) only public business matters
lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia
law were discussed in the executive meeting to which this
certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public
business matters as were identified in the motion convening
the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by
the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
VOTE:
AYES:
Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris,
Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
[For each nay vote, the substance of the departure from the
requirements of the Act should be described.]
ABSENT DURING VOTE:
ABSENT DURING MEETING:
NONE
NONE