HomeMy WebLinkAboutLOD199100012 Letter of Determination 1991-08-21,. 4OF n1,
K:i.H•
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
August 21, 1991
Mr. W. G. Pickford
23 0 ( Court Square
Charlottesville, VA 22901
.RE: Charles D. Kincannon
Tax Map 94, Parcel 21
Dear Mr. Pickford:
As stated in my previous letter to Mr. Kincannon, Planning
staff has consistently applied the Zoning'Ordinance Section
10.3.1 with regard to the 31 acre aggregate limitation. You
have not demonstrated how this parcel has been precluded
from compliance with top ordinance. Therefore, as you
requested in your letter of August 13, 1991, we are sending
a copy of this letter to the Zoning Administrator for an
official determination.
Sincerely,
c
Janice D. Sprinkle
Planner
JDS/blb
cc: Amelia Patterson
Kenneth Brown
t
PICKFORD AND PICKF01RDf�t11
ATTORNEYS AT LAW AUG 14 10
230 COURT SQUARE �,/�krp�`Fk'/n i1t1� 'n��
HERBERT A. PICKFORD, III CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 IFLAlY.1�bJ.1•V�7:1d.B�11-S YNE
AREA CODE 804
WILLIAM G. PICKFORD 298-8191
August 13, 1991
Ms. Jan D. Sprinkle
Planner
Department of Planning &
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia
Re: Charles D. Kincannon
Tax Parcel 94-21
Dear Ms. Sprinkle:
Community Development
22901-4596
On x)ehalf of Charles D. Kincannon I am,responding to your
letter of August 7, 1991, to him regarding the development rights
which belong to tax parcel 94-21. You cite the 31 acre aggregate
limitation as a bar to Mr. Kincannon's proposed division of said-
parcel
aidparcel of land. That limitation is inapplicable by the terms of
the very same section of the Albemarle Zoning Ordinance you cite,
namely Section 10.3.1. The November 8, 1989 amendment to that
section added the 31 acre limitation to the code, however in
doing so the amendment excludes its application "where division
rights have been allocated by division of land since adoption of
this ordinance but prior to the effective date of this provision
in such manner to preclude compliance with this provision....
The subject tract of land was divided in March, 1983, as is
evidenced by plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 763, page 60. A copy of
said plat is enclosed herewith. By said plat a 7.06 acre parcel
was divided off of the larger tract then designated as tax parcel
94-21, and the remaining four division rights were allocated to
the residue thereof, permitting each parcel divided thereunder to
contain up to 21 acres. Compliance with the 31 acre aggregate
limitation is thus precluded and the exemption to.its application
in this case is applicable.
In view of the foregoing, I request that you reconsider your
position concerning the 4 division rights which were allocated in
r -
Ms. Jan Sprinkle
August 13, 1991
Page 2
1983 and which fall within the exclusion of Section 10.3.1.
Otherwise, I request a formal ruling from the Zoning
Administrator.
Very truly ours,
W. G. Pickford
WGP/vmh
cc: Amel'.a M. Patterson
Charles D. Kincannon
Enclosure