1991-08-21127
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 1)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on August 21, 1991, at 7:00 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County
Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., David P. Bowerman,
F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and
Mr. Peter T. Way.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive; Mr.
George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. ¥. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of
Planning and Co~hunity,Deveiopment
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order.
7: 00 P.M. ~by, the Gh~rman, Mr
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item'No~ ~3~ - Moment of Silence,
The meeting was called to order at
Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
PUBLIC. ~There were no.matters.from the public.
... Agenda Item-No. 9.. Public Hearing: ~An Ordinance. to-vacate a portion.~0f
a..ce~tain plat of~a~7portion~of Phase 1, Section 1, Mill Creek P.U.D.; this
property is shown on a plat recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court~ in Deed Book. 944, page 695. (Advertised in the, Daily.~ Progress on~ August
~-M~.~'~George Gilliam was present to ask that this item be deferred for two
weeks to,September 4, 1991. The Mill Creek Homeowners' Association, repre-
sented-~hy~Mr, Greg. John~on~ concurs~.With this request. Motion was offered by
Mr.~ Baiq,.peconded by. Mr. Way, 'to defe.r at the request of the applicant until
Sept~ber 4, 19.91. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. H~phris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
and,'secoAded by'Mr. ~ay,; ~o :approve,~ Items 5.1 through 5;5 and ~o accept, the
remaining'~:items on the consent agenda for information.~ Ro~l was called and
the motion carried by the .following recorded vote:
AYES: ::~.Messrs. Bain, B0werman, Bowie~ Mrs.~-H~phris, .Mr. Perkins mnd Mt.. Way.
NAYS ~ Mome '
~-':I~ 5;!. Mmorandm dated ~uly 29, 1991, ~from Mr., V.~Wa~e Cilimberg
re: Tree Caliper size requirements in the EC, Entrance Gorridor Overlay
District, was received as follows: . ....... ':
."On April t0, 1991,.the Albemarle County. Board of Supervisors adopted
the interimdesign guidelines for the Architectural Review Board..
This~action reflecte~'~tree~.ca~iper measutement~to3be-taken six
':~. ~above ground.ratherthan~e~g~teen~ inchesas-.o~gi~atl~ proposed.~.~Th~
.-. ac~ion% however~did-~not'~ adjus~minimumealiper sizes.~to~'accommodate'a
~!ower andwider~caliper.~area~.: In response,~the Architectural Review
Board-.~now reques~sthat the Board of. Supervisors increase tree caliper
_-~.~-~sizes~-:by o~ehalf inchfor~a!l~of tho.s~:~measurement gui~elines, that.?~
:~ ~we~e:changed from eighteen.inches to.six inches above the ground.!'
The.request-was approved by the. vote shown above by changing the ~nterim
Guidelines~0f the~Architectura!%Review Board in Article II, DesignSpecifies,
Paragraph H-,ent~tled' "Trees" as, set out below: ~--~ ~ .
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 2)
128
"H. Trees:
1. Treatment of frontage along EC streets:
Requirements
The EC street shall be clearly defined by large shade
trees con, non to the area which shall be planted to
align the entire frontage of developing parcels along
EC streets. In most cases, a three- or four-board
fence typical of the Albemarle area shall also be
required to align this frontage. Where warranted by
:~:-~_:existing~:conditions elsewhere within a designated
corridor, low stone walls may be required instead of
fencing. A planting area ten feet (10') wide to
accommodate such trees, fencing, or walls and such
shrubs, grass, or groundcover as may be required, shall
be:~estabtished~along such frontages, but out of the area
of road rights of way and utility easements.
Frontage trees shall be at least three and one-half
inches (3 1/2"),,minimum.caliper, (measured six:inches.-:
[6~.!:] abo~-,the-ground):when planted, and shatl~:be:-~
spaced no more than thirty-five feet (35~) on cente~,~
Nativeflowering ornamental trees.shall._beinterspersed
among, required shade~,trees~,- -.. ,
Treatment of,interior roads, and,pedestrian'ways:
Recommendations ·
Treesshould.align interior-roads~sPaced'no more,than:.,:
forty~feet~.(40') on center and'~measuring at least two
an~_~p~e~h~!f inches (2 1/2") in caliper (measured six
incheS f[6!']~above the-ground).· Trees spaced~no!more
than.twentyvfive-feet,(25!~),oncenter~and measuring~at
leasttwQ~-and,~:one~half~inches,~,(2:l~2'') in caliper.
(measured six,~inches [6?] abovethe!ground)~:.should~.*'~
align.pedestrian ways.
T=eatment.:ofparking areas:
Wi~h~w~pa~king~areas, trees shall be: planted in plant-
ers or medians protected bY curbing and shall be evenly
spaced ~and, planted at.:the rate~, of one~, (t)
every ten' (10) parking,:spacesi: Such. trees-shall
msasur~ a.t !east~ two and one-half inches ~ (2 ~1~27~) in
caliper (measured six inches [6"] ~above-,the :~g~ound)
- ~ ..... : ~.
~rees should alien the perimeter ,of parkin~ areas,
spaced forty feet (~0~:) on ~enter and measurinE at
least-~wo and onerhalf~inehes (2 1/2") in caliper
(measured six inches [6"] above the ~round), except for
~Xupe~:~}gn:~of the perimeter.which fronts, on an EC
street, in' which case the requirements for treatment of
fro.n%a~,ia!e~?iC.~ streets, shall .be complied with
~.~ps~:;-lhatt~i~e~planted to~ relieve the appearance, of
long exterior .walls. The spacing, size and type of
129
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 3)
such trees shall depend upon the length, height and
blankness of such walls.
5. Tree species:
Requir~.ents
Tree plantings required shall conform to the 'Generic
Landscape Plan Recommended Species List' adopted by the
County of Albemarle."
~ :Item 5.2. MemorandUm~dated.-August 12, 1991, from Robert W. Tucker, Jr.,
stating that the Albemarle County Service Authority's installation of addi-
tional water and sewer lines in the Scottsville area has been reviewed by the
Planning Commission and:-they,_have~determinedthat:.this?installation i~cin
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Received and approved as presented
without further comment.
Item 5.3. ResotutiQne~o:-~the Planning and Coordination Council (PACC)
designating PACC Tech as the Regional Coordination Body for Entrance Corridor
Guidelines. The following ~memorandum~was_received from Mr. V. Wayne~ ~
Cilimberg, Director of-:Planning and, CommunityDevelopment: ~'~- ~? ~
"The Architectural Review Board (ARB) has discussed the attached
resolution and can provide the following comments:
-. t, ..The ARB isseriouSty interested indistributing'information about
development-of its guidelines to,regional interests, receiving- _%~.:
- · .theircomments~and discussing the guide!ines-with:those~interest-
'ed persons~andorganizations. The-ARB:feels-that~ACC?Tech~san
~:appropriate~body for providing this type of review and comment
and would welcome PACC Tech's input.
2...:- The ARB .has~some~eservation. about the, designation-of. PACC~Tech
~ . as responsible for ?coordinating entrance:'~corridor'~guidetines-in::
· · the City, Count~ and. University. ~ It feelS that each jurisdiction
-~ has ay:somewhat, different perspective~in~dealing with corridors,.
the County under the ~pressure of new development, the City with
very.limited new development but redevelopment potentials, and the
~University and?its, interests as.a developer, particularly when
the University Real-Estate Foundation is considered. It is
-thnlikely ~that: guide!ines~wilt be .the same: in. each: jurisdiction~s
case ~ : Therefore, ;the A~ · feels ~ ' coordinating-entrance" corridpr
~ guidelines:~ should be a~general~referen~e to an: attempt to ~have~
complementary ~guidetines: rather' than ~eo~on: guidelines ~
3. The ~B~feets that PACC Tech's participation should be advisory
and non-binding, as is the case for other interested persons and
_ organizations/~ :,':' ~ -. ............ :~: ' ..~ ' :,
The. following resolution, was, adopted'by the .vote.':shown above:
' ' _ 'R:E S"O'L UT I'ON '. ,' - :'"
'- . . ?.' ' '~o ~'.:,- .
Planning 'and .Coordination: Council (..PACC) .
~ Designating PACC Tech aS. RegiOnal Coordinations-Body for Ent~an~e':'~orridor Guidelines -~. ,
~, the: City of Charlottesville (City), the Cowry of
Albemarle (Gouty), and the University-of ~irginia-(University); share
a n~ber of roadway/co=ridors ~leading to places of historic ~signifi~.~
cance' in the.region; and
Wqta~EAS, the City, County and University have a common interest
in~ the visuat quality and-the consistency .in-appearance~ of these
corridors; and:
August 21, 1991~ (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 4)
130
W~, the City, County and University each have review
mechanisms intended to promote and/or preserve the visual quality and
integrity of new development along these corridors;
NOW, T[[~,RFORE, BB IT RESOLVlgD that the Technical Committee of
the Planning and Coordination Council (PACC Tech) is designated as the
regional body responsible for reviewing and coordinating entrance
corridor guidelines in the City, County and University in an effort to
assure that such guidelines are complementary. Such review and
coordination is advisory only and non-binding.
j.~.~Item~5~4. Letter;~da~ed~June~.7~:~t991, from Alvin Edwards, Mayor, ad-
dressed to Frederick R. Bowie, Chairman, re: how the City and County can work
with the University in a partnership of looking to the future and discussing a
community visi~%~nd%letter from~the Chairman in~.repty. There~were--no
objections-,expressed~to.-the letter~prepared_-by~the-~Chairman~ .~.-~- -~-
Item 5.5. ? .M~M~R~id~ d~ed~iTA~ig~t~ t6, 1991, from .V..~Wayne-Cilimberg~.
DirectQr Of Planning and Community Development~ .re: ZMA-90-19,;Glenmore~
Clarification of~Proffer, ~was~received as follows:
'~ O U ' '
The~ Board. f S perv~sors, unanimously approved the'above-referenced
rezoning on December '5, 1990. .With this:approval, the Board accepted
the following proffer:
: .... '5~ To~:provide.water~-~.and sewer collection, distribution.and
..... :-treatment~facilities at his expense for the residentiat~lots in
Glenmore.and private country club.and to dedicate, such facilities;:
.~. to,the~Atbema~le~.County ServiceAuthority:-and[or theRivanna
Service::Auth~rity. These~facilities~.are:to ~be,cbuilt at no cost
to the taxpayers of.Albemarle County or to the customers of the
Albemarle County Service Authority.'
Recently, Mr~ ,Frank Kessler has-requested that the.Board accept~the.
~attached (se~out..below) as. clarification, of the~intent of this
proffer.
Stall.has reviewed the attached~?and believes:it.~is totally, consistent
with~the original proffer, simply providing a definitive description
of the sewerage treatment facilities to be built. Staff recommends
theBoard accept.::this_etarification on:its,c~nsent,:agenda..-Withthis
acceptance.~,:~staffwill,include this in, the Glenmore~file:as part~,of::
the approved conditions,!' ,,_ ,.., :- ~.~. ......
The Albemarle. County Board of Supervisors
RE:-'Rivanna Growth Area
Glenmore Associates,:Limited.,PartnerShip, as'successor:owner, to::
Frank A. Kessler of,Glenmore, represents tothe,,Countyof~Albemarle';
that the seweragetreatmentfacilities to'be builtbyGtenmOre Associ-
ates~for the Rivanna growth area will be a tertiary .treatment plant
with ultra~ioletdisinfection.- It will be located on approximately
2~acres ~ and be designed for 381,000 gallons per,day design flow
which is the amount of property and. flow required for a plant to serve
the presently, designated,-Rivannagrowth area. The plant will be
designed tob'~(capable of producing an effluent at the end of the
discharge p~pe~of~-'a quality of. 14 milligrams5 day b.o,d..per !iter~
30 day-average and 14 milligrams of suspended solids per liter,, 30 day
a~erage. You wilt'~recatl that at the time of your consideration of
the application for Glenmore (ZMA-90-19) it was represented to you
that the de,cia')er would build a plant at Glenmore such as that
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 5)
131
described above if the requested rezoning was granted. This letter
is, therefore, offered as simply a clarification of proffer number
five as set forth in a memorandum dated December 10, 1990 from Lettie
E. Neher, Clerk, to V. Wayne Cilimberg regarding Board Actions of
December 5, 1990.
The undersigned asks that this representation be accepted by the Board
of Supervisors of Albemarle County as a ciarification of said proffer
number five, and it is agreed by the undersigned that the County of
Albemarle may enforce the representations herein made against the
owner as a part of said proffer number five.
~ $incerely, ].i. ,,~ ..~:
.~ (Signed) Glenmore Associated Limited Partnership
By: Frank A. Kessler, General Partner"
The clarification-of~ the GlenmOre proffer was accePted~ by,,~.the~,~ote shown
above, , _ - -_, - ..... .- ~. ~
Item 5.6. Copy of letter dated August 9, 1991, from Mr. Gary L.
McAninch, AIPM SuPervisor, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services~.
addressed ~to- Mr..~Taylor .Wil!iams, Albemarle County ~ Gypsy~ Moth Office, stating
that treatment costs, in Zone.II~.will be 100 percent, funded by'~the AIPM-Pro-
gram, -was received for information.~, (Mrs. Humphris asked~what/.this means in
regards to the~ County..budget. ~Mrl Tucker explained that there will be no
additional funding from the locality necessary for the treatment, even the
$6000 ~ that :was~ budgeted will'~not~ be necessary. )
Item .5.7. Memorandum-dated_August 13, t991~ from. Ms,,~ Amelia Patterson,
Zoning,.Administrator~ re:- Status of .the draft Sign .Ordinance~ ..was received,~,as
follows .:
"The draft sign ordinance has been written and is currently under
review by other departments.-Public,work sessions..witl begin August
28th..:-;..It is, expected that formal zoning.~ext...amendment.
begins, in early~October with the Planning.Commission..
Our intern.::began, fullrtimelwork on the new ,ordinance as.of,July!.~!st~
We met to go.:over the- extensive .work and, research-:compiled, on..the
draft sign.'ordinance._ He has-since reviewed-all of this material and
· -reviewed key,.issues with.~George St. John.
On August 7th, we sent out 250~SUrveys to related 'design profes-
sionals' asking their quantitative opinionson~lB physica!~'issues
dealing with. signs,~such~as.height, slgnlarea, setbacks~=etc~.~ThiS~,~..~
group included all locally listed advertising consultants, architects,
graphic designers, landscape architects, and sign contractors, as well
as:~the design, faculty~of:the. School~of. Architecture~at~_UVA (which
comprised some:55~:members)~and~the SouthernEnvironmental Law Center.
At~this. time,-..,.we~inv~ted, thesemembers-of, thecon~nunity to a~-public
information-gathering meeting~on. August-28th at-7, p.m. .
Thismeeting:witl~have three, basic purposes: first.f it serves'as~a
good:.~public_retations.,medium,to express.our good intent~-Second, it
gives us the~pportunity~to:inform the. public at an..early.~stage:~in.~he
process,.and.with.:a less. formal-formattthan an official work session.
Third, it gives.the public a chance to address issues which we may not
have.~considered~..t Other-localities have'.experienced~significan~_
concern and.~confusionby~the, public that~I:feelwe~w~lt aVoid-:-th=ough.
this :approach, , - . -.
Following a_finat 'in~house! work session pursuant.to.the draft sign:~
ordinance,.copies will be-made.available to the:public one week:prior
to.the.August. 28th?~meeting-for their perusal'; We:wiit-meet~.with_the
ARB and Planning Commission-at a subsequent working.meeting, prepared
with the survey results, public input,-and.the efforts of the admini-
strative Zoning staff throughout a dozen work sessions."
132
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 6)
Item 5.8. Monthly Bond Report from Arbor Crest Apartments for the Month
of July, 1991, was received for information.
Item 5.9. Letter dated August 15, 1991, from Mr. Ray D. Pethtel, Commis-
sioner, Virginia Department of Transportation, noting that roads in Mill
Creek, Section 4, were taken into the State Secondary System of Highways
effective August 15, 1991, was receiyed as follows:. .
"As requested in your resolution dated August 7, 1991,. the following
additions to the Secondary System of Albemarle County are hereby
approved, effective August 15, 1991.
-:~ ADDITIONS
MILL CREEK - SECTION 4
Route:It57 .(G~istmill:~Drive) , From Route ll§8_to -
'_0.27'mile Southwest Route 1158-
LENGTH
0.27 Mi
Route 1161 (Alpine Court) - From Route 1157 to 0.03
mile Southeast~Route 1157,
/.'.Route-!~162!..(F~ags~°ne/Terrace)'' :::~' ~'~ 'Fr°m-Route i157 to
~:'Route':l163- ~ ~
0.03 '.:Mi
0.08 Mi
Route~l163 (Timberbranch Court):.- From 0.11. mile North-
eaSt~Route.l162 to-0.O9mile,Southwest Route.il62'~. 0.~20. Mi"
ItemS.i. t0. Letter dated August 16, 1991, from Mr. John G'.~..Milliken,
Secretary 9fTranspoctat~gn, in reply to the Chairman's letter of August
about, the?Route 29~Nor~h,improvements~ etc~was.received~as follows:
"August 16, 1991
The H6norable'F~*~R~.~Bowie, Chairman
~ Albemarle~CountyBoard of Supervisors
401:McIntire~R0ad . - .... -~ ._. -,, _.
Char,lottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 :_.
Dear.. Chairman !.Bowie.: .- . .-
I have received and read with some care your letter of August 1. I
believe-it to be a very~positive step forward, following up on the
productive meeting that~ we ~had at the ~end of-July ......
I .have asked:~th~-., staff,,,of the Department,.of Transportation and the
Office ~of the ~Attorney, General to work with me in an effort to respond
affirmatively to the request that you made in the last paragraph of
your letter.~ We share the County's commitment to the CATS Plan and to
the sequence,~of projects outlined in the Transportation Board's
resolution, and:~.summarized in Enclosure II of your letter.
In the%interim, we-are mindful of the importance of the process now
underway to determine a proposed line for a future Bypass sufficient
to address:,hardship, right~ofrway issues. In that effort and in the
formal design process, that wilt .-follow, we will be especially sensi-
tive to the protection of.,the Ivy Creek Agricultural and~'Forestal
District as..well as the often unique historic resources?that are to be
found, in your,,--County
We look.forward:to continuing to work:~,together:.on:these important~
matters.~ I witl respond-to.your~August:.t letter:in more detail after
I'ha~.~receivedcomments, from the Department.,~and its lawyers~
With~atl best wishes~
Sincerely,
(Signed) John G,~ Milliken"
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
133
Item 5.11. August, 1991Superfund Program Fact Sheet from the Environ-
mental Protection Agency re: Greenwood Chemical Site, was received for
information.
Item 5.12. Copy of order from the State Corporation Commission dated
August 15, 1991, establishing the 1991/92 fuel factor for North Carolina
Power, was received for information.
Item 5.13. Copy of Virginia Employment Commission, Charlottesville VEC
Manpower Bulletin for June, 1991, was received for information.
Agenda Item No. 6. Public comments will be received .at this meeting on
the appointment ~of.aSchootBoard.~member to represent theJack~Jouett~Magiste-
=ial District. (Advertised in the?Daily Brogress'on'August?6.~and~-August 13,
199t~).
Mrs. Humphris said she has interviewe~ six applicants for the upcoming
vacancy~on-the School Board created byMr Richard-Bagby,leaving the Jack.i.
Jouett District. ,There,are fourofthose persons present tonight~..They
introduced themselves as: -Mr.. Jim Esposito, Mrs. Karen Powell, Mr. Julian
Bivins, and Mr. Bill Tucker.
Mr,..BOwie opened the, public -hearing at this, time .... ~ ·
- 'Mrs. Karen Powell came forward; Mrs. Powell said she has been involved
wihh..the kibemarle County School system for 13 years and has lived in the
county, for ~15 years. ' She .has been' .active as ~ Chairman ~,of the Very 'Involved
Parents.of':.Albemarle High' Schoot~. ~M~,s.. Powetl stated that she has .attended'.
most of.~:the-,Albemarle School Board meetings., for?the past,year and a,half to_
try to understand the budgeting process and the problems facing the County
school system. She also has taken it upon herself to go to Richmond to try to
understand 'from the State level why. funding is being-.reduced and ,why the~local
government has to~'.:pick~ up:what the State doesn't'., fund~-~ ,'Mrs~ ?Powell. stated it
concerned~ her that. some School Board,members~do :not have: a good ,relationship
with the~Supervisor ~.appointing them~ ~.~Good-communicationTis a,must and She is
willing to:give the time needed to research all issues dealing with schools in
the County.
Mr. Julian Bivins came forward and stated that one of the reasons he was
attracted to.-the' position,~' on: the: School Board was that because 0f:.the. training
he,~received' he basically had .an open,'door-to opportunity.- The .country. is on
the: verge of..the. 21st Century, in ~a county that:has~:,attracted people f~r its
urban .life: and pastoral-,setting. Ali,'have a~ responsibility to. the children-to
make sure.that they are :not only educated,but that..:they:, are able-to communi,
cate and-to-function effectively in' a~'global, environment. Her':feels that~his
training as an attorney,, as an economist and a business person who,trades.
internationally, gives him a different., set of- skills that would,.be ~useful:~on..t,
the'School Board,as :it deals 'w~th.~mssues of. funding and curriculum, and,as it
works'with'School Board administration to ensure .that' the ,children ;.get-the
tYpe of~education' that ,the taxpayers are funding. --..- .,.
With no one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mrs.
Humphris said that her interviews with the six applicants have been a learning
experience.~ She.',feets that Albemarle County is fortunate to have six such.~
qualified people,~-~Over the~next several~ weeks~.:she, will be going over'-every~
thing she..has learned during the interviews and ,comparing that with what she
feels.would, be in':.the best interest of Albemarle:~County~ ,, She will pick 'the:i
person .she thinks, is: right .for the School. Board~ · : ' .: .. ~ ~.'-. ,~
Agenda Item,No. 7. SP-91-28..-., Emil Kutilek._,-~For-,a private'airpor~.'on
46~25 ac,zoned RA~ Property on. SE side of Rt 810 apprOx, 3/10.mi~S of. inters
of. Rts~-789/810. TM40B,P69. White Hall DiSt.,. ~Advertised in the Daily ~.-
Progress~ on::~August 6 and .August: 13; ~19,91. ) ~ .,
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report:
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
134
"CHARACTER OF THE AREA: Two dwellings and several farm structures are
located on this site. Thurston Subdivision is located to the east.
The property under review is a mixture of wooded and open fields. A
low voltage power tine is located to the~east of the proposed landing
strip. The minimum distance to the line is approximately 170 feet. A
high voltage power line is located a minimum of 900 feet to the east,
The minimum distance to a dwelling on adjacent property is approxi-
mately 800 feet. The closest structure on site is approximately 100
feet from the landing strip.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to use an existing
grassed field for a runway for personal use. No grading is proposed
,~,~,.~'~andithe runway~would!~'~emain--grassed. Not more than two single engine
'~-~airplanes will be on site at a time. The planes would be stored and
repaired in existing farm buildings. Fuel storage is proposed. The
app~.~aPt~ha~Ovid~d~a descr~p.tion_ofthe~request~ _~ ~ ~
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: TheCompr, ehensive Plan makes, n° specific>comments
regarding private airports, but.-does recognize~the Charlottesville~--~-
Albemarle Airport. The general intent, of the ComprehensivePlan,,is to
discourage~,..development~.in'the Rural~Areas'which is notdirectly
related to ~a ~bonafide~agricultural ,or'forestaluse. Staff,opinion is
that this request will~-have a neutral impact.on theRuralAreas,
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The applicant is proposing to base not
more than two, single engine planes on site.~ The planeswould-~be~used
for~private recreational use. Maximum.usage isestimated at one
th=ce,times per.~week:-~The-apptieant has'submittedinformation to.,--the
Virginia Departmentof Aviation as well as .the:Federal Aviation
Administration~ The applicant is seekinga.personalairport~as
oppose~.to'a~Privateairport...Apersonalairport;~will not-appear.on
aeronautical charts and will not be available for use by ~others.
The.applicant'.has provideda.letter:from.the~Chartottesv£tlerAlbemarle
Airport. In the opinion~:of staff, this letter,adequately, addresses
the comments of Section 5,1,.l(a). ~.. ~. ~
Staff has reviewed.this.request for compliance'~with Section31,2,4,1
of the Zoning Ordinance, as follows:
Such use will.nOtbe of..substantial detriment.~to adjacent-property;~.
Staff has received.:a petition,from the:adjacentpr.operty-owners
suppOrt of-'this-:request,.: The closestresidence.to-the runway',is
approximately'.880feet, distant, Theapproach. and.~takeoff, zone~isover
undeveloped<:,!and-whichis owned.~by a~partnership,which has s~gned the
petition in support of..:this .request. Due to support from the~adjacent
property owners, it is the opinion of staff that approval of.this
request~wilt..not:~beof~substantial detriment to'adjacent property~
The character ofthedistrict will not be chan~ed.
Adjacent property is zonedRA~,Rurat:~A~eas.~The properties to the
easthave been ~developed into a'subdivision with an average lot size
of three acres. The.landing strip will be a grassed strip in.the
existing fie~dsl-and:'no.~hanges,-~grading~clearing~r~a~e.~req~.~d~ A
limited amount of tree clearing may occur in the approach zone for
safety,purposes~_,~., No new~':structures.are.:proposed?-Basedon~the
timited activity~on:site, this use should_not change the.character of
the~district~ Staff notes, however, that. aircraft~.are~not.normatly
a~ticipated, i.n,~elatively close, proximity,to adeveloped_subdivision,,
The:use will>be in-harmonywith.the purpose and,intent of the ordi-
nance~',.~ith the.-.usepermihted by.,right.in:.the district,and
additional regulations provided in Section5.0 and with the public
health~.-safety'~and~general'welfare.
Currentfarming activities will?not be interrupted~by, the-landing*
st~ip.~': The'.~use is~not~clearly-supportive of the RA district'as it,as
not directlY, related to agricuttural/forestal~activities. · Therefore,
135
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
it is the opinion of staff that this use will have no affect on theRA
district. Staff has reviewed the provisions of Section 5.1.1 which
governs airports and is of the opinion that this request is not in
harmony with that section. Staff reviewed with particular interest
the provisions of Section 5.1.1.
The nearest dwelling on any adjacent property is approximately 800
feet horizontally from the runway. However, vacant parcels could be
built on which would result in dwellings approximately 285 feet
horizontally from the runway. The minimum distance to adjacent
dwellings in past requests was 1000 feet. (Staff notes that this
property owner is in support of this request). Storage of the planes
..... 'will occur in~-'existing~structures which are located within 500 feet of
-vacant properties. (Staff notes that both of these property owners
are in support of this request.) This use does not meet the minimum
distances listed~in,:the,-ordinance~ :If.this request.is approved,,it
would-be the,~-first.airport request which-does-~not meet the minimum;
standards of:Section 5.~1.1.
SUMMARY: .,Staffhas identified the following factors which are favor-
able to this request:
1,- Lack-of-~facilities~at the~Charlotte~ville~Albemarle~Airp~rt;
2. _ Support.'from, adjacent'property,owners;~-~? ~-
3.,~ ~Approach zones~areover undevetoped. Rural~Areas-land.~.,
Staff~has~,identified thefollowing factors~whichare unfavorableto
this request:~',.~.-~;,~-, ............. ·
1. Proximity of an existing subdivisionwhich may atlow..for:neW:~,?:~
.'.const~uction~85,-,f. eet from therUnway~,~,~,?,, ....
2, , Close'~proximity (t70..feet~ of a low.~oltage power line;
3. '-Proximity of the~developed area of Crozet;
4. Use is,for personal use.only and is not direct!y related to
.... agricultUral/forestal.,activities.. -: · .
In .regards.tothe unfavorable factors, staff notes that.the existing
power, line,is'located-.downhilt from thelandingstrip andis close,=to
the elevationof~the lauding'strip (the power lines are approximately
ten t~.fifteen.-.feet higher)~ The app!icant,!s information indicates
that the flight pathacross the power line will occurwhen the ~plane
is:at approximately,3~0feet. Shouldthis request-~be.approved,~staff
opinionis,that federal-.and,state approvals will ensureadequate
operational safety.
Staff opinion,,is that the~negative factors.outweigh the-positive
factors,,and,_the=efore, staff recommends denial.. However,,shoutd ,the
Planning Cox~ission,-and,.Board,.-approve,.~hisapplication, staff would
recommend ~hefotlowing conditions
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1, . Special,use permit is issued to the applicant~ogly;
2. Limited to. two base aircraft;
3. Landings-and. takeoffs shall,be limited-to~daylight, hours~,only~'
,,.except in.emergencies;
4. All maintenance, repair and mechanical,work, except~that of an
emergency.nature,:shall.be performed inan enclosed building;
5.. ~11 areas used by-aircraft-under its, own.power shall be provided
.--with a,~easonablydust~.free..surface;
6,,.',Approval/registration by/with the Federal Aviation Administration
and the Virginia:Department of Aviation. .
136
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 10)
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission at its meeting on July 16,
1991, unanimously recommended approval of SP-91-28 subject to the conditions
recommended by the staff, but amended No. 3 to read: "Landings and takeoffs
shall be limited to three per week during daylight hours only, except in
emergencies." The Planning Commission also added a No. 7 to read: "Airstrip
shall be located no closer than 500 feet to the nearest residential lot line."
Mrs. Humphris asked Mr. Cilimberg if he would again point out on the map
the relationship of the landing strip site to the school and the developed
area of Crozet. Mr. Cilimberg did so. He said the school is located to the
southwest of the strip and to the take-off and landing approaches. The area
north of Route 788 is not in the growth area but is zoned and developed in
~e~iden~ialiQses~s~,pointed~ont~M~,~Kutilek's proposal for the flight path
r~m~insiprimarily over undeveloped land area.
Mr. BO~erman~asked ifa. the :,~,£1ight path,'.and~:,the direction~0f~ landing i. and
takevoff ~is~.determined~,by the p~evaiting wild!at the._.time, Mr. ,Citimherg-
stated,~that it is.:,and~in certain,~ situations M~.',"Kutilek~may~not be?~,able,?to
take%off but-it ~wouldJ be, best for ~Mc~.~Kutitek> as' an~ experienced~ pilot
address, this issue. ~ ' ........
Mr. Bowie opened the meeting for a public hearing. Mr. lutile~, appli-
cant, c~e: f~ard .... Re-said the. prevailing-windS in this..are~ are out O~ ~he
west/n0rthuest and if: the:wind.-were'.strong enough it~,wo~ld: preBtude ta~ing
off.~ -. Mr. Bowie asked, what'~.~ould happen if M~. ,'-lutile~ '..were lin ..the air- and,-:.the
Charlottesville-Alb~arle Airport.,-?he wind blouing..f~om ~he southeast is
very_unlikely, anR.-i~'is his ,:intentlen.to just ~ly in the evenings~ .:Mr..
ln~ilek:stated he just wants to' fly fo~ pleasure, when the weather is nice and
ca~ and smooth.
,. ..-Mr;: Bowerman',,asked if _the p~e~ailin~,.~inds,..were ou~ ,,of
~est. -~est and west/northuest,',-Mr; ~:lutilek replied. ';?Mr~,~::Bowerman continued
bY' as~lng if the, take-off,, is to, th~::so~th~ast ;.,'~,.:Mr.. lutitel.'said -that is
correct..:Mr. Bowerman asked Mr~ lutile~ i~ he realized that
many times w~en he would not be able to take-off. Hr. lutilek replied, that,:is
~hy flying, is str~ctty for. pleasure... It does :no~-mak~ any, difference if: the
passed:,'around a, pmphlet on which .~he ~locatlons.,of the ,existing:-houses
marked;:::-He said',the~e is a:vattey an~.':,,two~'creek's:~and then:-the;property goes
nphil't,..tO._uhere ,t~e houses., arc,built'.,. He does not beli~ve,':.anyen~ :wonld.,want.
~o' buitd',.a':,house ?next',.to .~a cree~ :that ',floods :.out of: its ,banks.' whenever there:.,,:
is m heavy,rain. Also, there cannot be a septic syst~ within one h~dred
feet of the creek and no one ~nts.to pmp sePtic, uphill., Also if ,the house
is built do~, in'..:t~e: valley,,~here would be~no sight,~of the~Blne Ridge, Monn~.
tains-.beeause of;the trees,'-:: He also,, showed a,piCture-of::.the.~low:'~ension.:.tine
~hat: lS-,a hundred.tot-so -: feet, away~ .and. the -,fact that there:are: t~ees.' between
With:~:no. one':else:coming forward to speaR, -the- pnblic~ hearing was closeR.
Motion was offered .by Mr,' Perkins~ ~d seconded, by Mr, Way ,to approve
SP-91~28 subject, to ,the seven ,cOnditions reco~ended by;:the~lanning:;Co~ist
~,~,'~. '~r ~. Bain said,, he was:.opposed~to approval, on: generat,'policy~, it. does ~not
ha~e anything, to do,with ,the, ad~0ining 'property: o~e~s. There:is',.a. commity
in that ,~rea;. ~en',this',type of-~approval ~as granted,'-ln the past
place ;that._was mUch,more rural in,nature ~han:~this-, area.; He agreed.:..with>staff
Mrs. H~phris ,said~she. in~ends to vote against the petition; She stated
she agreed;with theft, staff repor~ entirely that aircraft are not..nomally
anticipated ,in relatively close ~rozimity ~o a developed subdivision. Also
she thinls~ the point?was~.we!l made at the ~Ptmnin~ ~e~ission--meetlng
policy decisions such as this should not be based on what the neighbors thin~
or it becomes some. kind of a_poputar~ty contest.. ,~e'possi~itity
the ~possibility for -an~.aceid~nt,':far-,outweigh~this-gentlemen' s
137
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 11)
being able to glide his plane out of thatTsite. She also thinks the Board
needs to look far enough into the future to realize that people will eventual-
ly live on those subdivision lots, and they are not going to like an aircraft
flying in and out of an adjacent site. The Board really needs to be cognizant
- of the danger of an accident and that is why she is not going to be able to
support the request.
There being no further discussion, roll was called and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bowerman, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: Mr. Bain and Mrs. Humphris.
.: (The conditions of approval are set out in full below:)
1'~-' Special use permit .-is. issued, to~ the .~applicant'~-~onlY~ and, ai:rffeld'-is
for. usage by-:the' ~p:plican~t ~only; .........
2 Limited to~ two base aircraft; . ,
3. Landings.'and takeoffs shall be limited to three per week during
daylight hours only, except in emergencies;
4.'. All maintenance, repair and mechanical work, except that of an
emergency nature, shall be performed in an enclosed building;
5.-. All.-areas used by ai-rcraft under its own power shall be provided
with~ a reasonably dust~ free surface;
6. Approval/registration by/with the Federal Aviation Administration
_and the :¥irginia-Department of Aviation;;
7. Airstrip shall be located no closer than 500 feet to the nearest
residential '_ lot i~ne.
Agenda Item No 8. SP-91-29.. CBC Partners.. For a miniature golf course
on 1.4 ac zoned HC & EC. Property on W side of Rt 29 adjacent to Keglerts ..
Bowling. TM45, ~lt2C'l,~'~ Charlottesville Dist. (Advertised:. in.t~he Daily
Progress on..August 6 and August:.13, 1991.) '
The applicant notbeing-present at this time,, the Boardmovedto.discus-
sion of the~ext:agenda-~tem.. ;.-
Agend-a~ Item 'No:.,-10v~: :S,Pvg0~iO:. -Contel (Deferred from-.August' 14, ',1991).
Mr. Tucker s~ated a'~letter.was',received from Mm, Fred Landess,~-represen-
tative foro-Centet~, that indicated that Contel plans to have the information
regarding these options back to the Board prior to its next scheduled meeting.
Motion .was offered byMr.-~Bain and seconded by-Mr.'Perkins'to defer..:--.-':
SP-90-10 at 'the request of. the applicant, to September 11, .1991. Rolls,as
called andthe motioncarried.by the~ following recorded.vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None~
..... Mr-]Pe~kins stated that the Board has received some information on
towers,~.~but~he feels the Boa=d--needs'to know ,howmany ~:owers will be. needed in
the county to provide these services for the people', i.e., cellular telephones
and Other communications equipment.. If ahalf doZen to,ers, are:.~needed~ ',but~:.~
scatterad, a~l o~erthecoun~y, then'he suggests that, the best site:be picked
and slated for all of those t,owers instead~of approving'.this, one .and that'.one
and dragging this out. The Board needs more information to be able to decide
whether-this particular toWer for~Centel is.needed.-. ..-.
.Mr...Tucker saidthe, sta~ff does.not have.thekinRof expertise needed to
do a definitive study of this question. Staff would have to solicit some help
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 12)
138
through a consultant or some group not tied to some other entity, whether it
is Centel or not; someone who could look after the County's interest, It is
possible to look into an antenna farm where the land would be purchased and
then rented out or the staff could try to determine specific areas that could
be zoned for that purpose.
Mr. Cilimberg said Centel has been asked to provide information on their
needs, but that is only one provider.
Mr. Bain stated that he agrees with Mr. Perkins in terms of policy. He
disagreed with the staff finding on this request; telephones might be a
necessity but cellular phones are not yet. The Board cannot just approve this
requeSt/and.that request or, ail,applicants will think they will get approval.
Mr. Bowie asked if the staff had an idea of the information the Board
wanted'~ ~Mr~ Tucker~replied?"yes~!! Mrs.~ Humphris~emarked~that-~the~,.technology
is evidently changingso~raPidly~thatit could be,in a~veCy short,~time that~
thesetowers will,no, longer be~,'.needed, so'she'~snot sure~that~the~Boa~d
should'_he, in any:hurry to have,towers all around.theCounty~ _?,,-
Agenda, Item.No~ ~11. -,RequeSt ~from the: School :Board for~ a t=ansfer ,of ~
funds to ',the Hollymead Etementary~and the Burley Middle School projects from
the Brownsville Masonry Repair project.
Mr Tucker: summarized, the ,following memorandum darted' July: 23, 1991, from
Dr~ Robert W. Paskel, ~Superintendent~ of SchoOls: .......
"The Burley Middle School Auditorium and Gymnasium renovations and the
Hollymead Elementary School classroom land 'library'~proj~ect. ~ere, placed
...... 'under.,,.,contract w~thout -adequate -contingency.funding~ (t0 .,pe~rcent
· p=oject cost).'.,;- . · ~ -- _-,* ---: ?
'~,', .: BecauSe the Brownsville-masonry repair,.bid_.:was ;less-than the, budgeted
, amo ~unt, funding is available for transfers to these two projects as
follows:
..... ~. $5~,00~: to,the Holl~ead Elementary Project. . , .. ~,,
~ 2, $32,000 to the Burley-Middle School Project
This ~will leave ~$79,750~: ~n = the~ ~Bro~mvitle~ pr~j ec~.~as ~a comtingency ~
~for .the Heating, Ventilating, ~and~Air Conditioning,~ repla~ent mnd
~ masonry repairs.
At its~'mee~ing:.on'.July '~5,~ 1991~ 'the-Sehool, Board voted~.~to',request~-the
tranSfer of~.$53~000 'to the.~,Hell~ead'?Etementa=y~Capitat Imp:o~ent~.~,~-
P~oject let.contingency and $32,000 to the, Burley :Middle School
Capital Improvment Project. fQr 'contingency from-the B~o~s~itle ~
Masonry Cap~tal,~:Improvement ~rogram,'.,Project.. -.- , ,:~ ":~,:
A1 ~Reaser and Jo Higgins are managing these projects and they will be
pleased to ,answer ~any~ questions you~ may have concerning~'.the need for
this ~ransfer ~o~ ~ f~ds."
Motion-~,was offered.by Mrs;-Humphris.and-seconded-~by.~Mr,, Way-:to:_approve~-~
the following appropriation,~esolution transferring ~funds.from ~Brownsvilleto
Hollymeadand Burley projects. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote: . ,~
AYES.: Messrs. Bai~, Bowermanj,:.~BOwie,'.Mrs,~:Humphris~-Mr~::Perkins.-:and~.:Mr.:Way.
NAYS: ~NOne ~ . ....
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 13)
FISCAL YEAR: 91/92
FUND: CAPITAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
TRANSFER FROM BROWNSVILLE TO HOLLYMEAD AND BURLEY PROJECTS.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
139
1900060205999999 HOLLYMEAD CONTINGENCY $53,000.00
1900060251999999 BURLEY CONTINGENCY 32,000.00
1900060202800902 BROWNSVILLE MASONRY PROJECT (85,000.00)
TOTAL $0.00
~MrYBain asked when the Hollymead project will be completed. Mr. Tucker
replied that he did not know the date at this time. There was no further
discussion on this matter.
AgendaItem
1991-92,'~
Set Meeting Schedule with the School Board for
Mr. Bowie:stated that because the School Board did not have a quorum
there,:~as..no jpint:>.me_eting last Wednesday,.'however~.hed~d. receive~'!anS~ers to
all threeiof the Board's questions-. The_School Board agrees tomeet as,~a
regulars,part of:,this:Board~'s normal, day meeting, but also requested that on
alternate months~the two boards meet--,at 5:001p.m.~on a Monday.
stated that he was not in favor of this change.
Mrs.~:~Hnmphr%s Commented that~she, thought that.adding~another meetihg:~:~to
the Board'~s schedule~was?not the bestuseof the?Board~!~s~time. Mrs. HumPhris
also stated that~she feels people are not at their best at that time of day
and_thatadding another meeting on a day which the Board is not accustomed to
would lend to inefficient joint meetings. Also attendance would not be as
good as~it~should~be at anadditional meeting.~ 'She thinks it would, be better
to,keep,meeting during the day meeting so that theBoard~eanhave time and
attendance and do a better job at a more efficient time of the day.
Mr~ Perkins'said~he~felt there was~a ~definite need~for ameetingof~he~'~
two Boardsin late~.July.~0rearlyAugustof~each Yearso:~this Board~can~iook at
the, paSt~schoot year~and!~also talk about~any concerns'that~the' members!~
constituents have.broughtupduring the summer~months. Thatm~eting needs~ to
be planned well in advance so, that this Board can have an update on What is
going on before school actuatlybegins.
. Agenda Item. No~ 13. Appointments
Motion was~,offered'by Mr. Bain andseconded-byMr~Bowerman to~,..reappoint
Mr.,William C.,~,Thacker to the BOCA~Code Board or'Appeals with saidterm
expire-onAugust 21,,1996; and toreappoint~Mr. D. James Firster~andMr~~
Thomas F,~ Stephens to the JordanDevelopment Corporation Board with said terms
to expire~,on August 13, 1992. Roll was called and the motion_carried by,the
folloWing recorded~vote: . ~ -
AYES:, Messrs. Bain~ Bowerman, Bowie,~ Mrs,-Humphris, Mr~.'~Perkins~and-Mr, Way.
NAYS: None, ' -- ,,.:~ ,' . ~..' ' . ' , '~'-
At this time, the Board returned to discussion of Agenda Item No.. 8.
SP-91-29. CBC Partners. Therebeing no one present to represent the apptir
cant,,~motion was Offered by.Mr.'Way and seconded by Mr. Bain to defer, SP~-9t-29
to September 4, 1991. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote: "..' ' . " -~,~.'~:
AYES: Messrs~-.Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs,, Humphris, M~. Perkins and Mr; Way.
NAYS: None. .'~'.' ·
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 14)
1 40
Agenda Item No. 14. Other Matters Not Listed on the. Agenda from the
BOARD.
Mr. Bain asked about the extension of Berkmar Drive, which will serve the
new Agnor-Hurt Elementary School. Mr. Tucker replied there are a lot of
things that have to be done, utilities to move, mobile homes that may have to
be moved, etc., however, staff is on target to go to bid in December so that
construction can begin later in the Spring of 1992. Mr. Bain asked if it
would be a six-month construction period for the road. Mr. Tucker replied
that it could be less than that. Mr. Bain asked if there would be a penalty
clause in that contract. Mr. Tucker replied that there would be no penalty
clause.
Mr. Bain also asked in reference to Item 5.5 on the Consent Agenda,
Clarification of Proffer, Glenmo~e,~.if'any~conditions ~ave'changed~'~or if~,~it
was ~ust to be put in the files. Mr. St. John responded that it just goes in
the file.
-,Mr-. Bowerman.said he had.a call. from severaiconstituentS, whofelt.;the
County.does not have a noise ordinance. Mr. Bowerman said,he-talked to
Captain John Miller,and to Ms~ .Amelia Patterson and found that the Coonty does
have~a'noise or~dinance on-the books. However,~both'Ms. Patterson-andChief
Miller felt that the.,ordinan~e was~not enforceable becauseofVirginia-court
actions which have stated that a county must have aspecific type of decibel
meter~which must to be calibrated frequently. Potentially there is a way that
this problem can be,-.dealt with in the courts, but he asked the Board's agree-
ment that staff be requested to study the question to see if there is some way
to make, the existing ordinance effective. 'Mr. Bowie saidlhe would-support the
request,. ~.There~wasa consensus ofthe board;
Mr.. Perkins asked if contingencY funding of ten, percent for Capital_
Improvements Projects is normally adequate. Mr. Tucker' replied "yes~." Mr.
Perkins asked what-kind,of records the County',keeps.~on change~ orderSvand~'~'~' ~
whether.of not' they can' tell from the change orders~,if they' came, about- due~to
some ~defi~iency on~ the ~part of the ,architect' s' drawing and if ~the ten -percents,
contingency had Proved to be. adequate. In the case of the new..Agnor-Hh=t~7
Elementary School ten percent~would be $600~000 and he. thinks that is-~a~ large
amount~of~,money to be added' to the'$6,000,000~ Mr,,-Tucker~responded that~m0st
of~ the problems which, have occurred were on renovation projeats, There ~is no
way ~to know what may~,be~ discovered when tearing do~ and~ reconstructing; .... -
things not obvious to the architects"in the~beginning. ~ ~ ' ~ ~
Mrs. H~phris stated that the Clerk has let her know that if the Board-~
intends to consider any of the applicants for the School Board appoin~ent who
were not present tonight, that the n~esmust be entered~into~the record. The
six applicants~a~e: Julian M~ Biwins, Jr.~, J~es P~Esposito,~Susan J~ ~
G~ossman,.;~Karen~.'L.' Powell, Christopher M~ R~bold, ~ and William D, ~Tncker~,~'~III.
Mr;"Way s~id:he-~ould't:like to-clarify for the~ Board:~and :p~blic, some,,
questions~,asked him'.regsrding 'last week's ~annexation~ discussion~ on ? :~ ~
Scottsvilte, Mr~ Way stated, to .clarify~the~ issue that:~:~ .... ~ ~ ~ ..... ~
-_ 1.-'..Nothing; is going: to happen~ in the'way of,.a S~ottsville annexation
~til all- of the~ information-is in and the Town .Council and' this~ Board. can
peruse tfiat~ information~ Also, the people that would~be affected.would .need .-
to ~have the information and an opportunity through a n~ber of public sessions
to give~ their input to that .issue~. ~ - : i~,. ~.~ ~-~.
2~ ~In discussions with'the Mayor, the. purpose, of ~the annexation:was ~
threefold;'. ~1) for additional people; 2)~ for more land area; ~'mnd 3)~ for
additional.-revenue. However, the Mayor assured Mr. Way because'- of the ~in.- .. ~
creased~ collection of utility taxes.' and .the increased cOllection of business
license taxes, that no additional property taxes'would have to be:paid by ~..'
people living in Scottsville .... In'other Words, the utility and. business~-~'
license taxes would sufficiently, cover the ~revenue. so- that.the~'Town of.. -
August 21, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 15)
141
Scottsville would not have to impose real estate and personal property taxes
over and above what is already being paid to the County. At the present time,
in addition to what residents pay the County they also pay fifteen cents on
real estate and a dollar on personal property to the town of Scottsville.
3. The last question concerns land use issues. There are ways of
possibly satisfying this issue, but they will certainly be presented and be a
part of the public hearing.
Mr. Bowie said it is important that the public know there will not be any
decision made until after public hearings are held, not only in Scottsville,
but also in other areas. Mr. Bain and Mr. Way are the appointees to the
committee~on the~iS¢ottsvilleAnnexation Study.
'.Agenda Item~iNo'; 15~=- Adjourn..There being .no-furtherbusiness~
meeting was'-adjourned'~at 8:02 p~m~ . -' ..... ~'~
CHAIRMAN