1989-11-15November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 1)
288
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on November 15, 1989, at 7:30 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County
Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., F. R. Bowie, Walter
F. Perkins and Peter T. Way.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke and Mr. C. Timothy
Lindstrom.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr. County Executive; Mr. George R.
St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
and Community Development.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at
7:30 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way.
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
Not Docketed. Motion was offered by Mr.~ Bowie, seconded by Mr. Bain, to
adopt the following resolution to certify that the Executive Session held on
November 15, 1989, was in accordance with Virginia Code section 2.1-344.A.3.
Roll was called and the motion carried by th~ following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE:' MR. RTING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County BoarR! of Supervisors has convened
an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded
vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of
Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that such
executive meeting was conducted in conf6rmity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thaf 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 ~s were identified in the
motion conv. ening the executive meeting Were heard, discussed or
considered by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
Agenda Item No. 4. Consent Agenda. Mo~ion was offered by Mr. Bowie,
seconded by Mr. Bain, to approve Items 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 on the Consent Agenda
and to accept Items 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 as information. Roll was called and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way..
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Item No. 4.1. 1988 Development Activity Report as prepared by the County
Department of Planning and Community Development, was received as information.
Item No. 4.2. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for November 2, 1989,
was received as information.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 2)
289
Item No. 4.3. Memorandum dated November 1, 1989, from Brenda S. Sprouse,
re: Refunds on Business and Professional Licenses, Real Estate and Personal
Property Taxes made during the period beginning July 1, 1989 through October 3]
1989, was received as information.
Item No. 4.4. Statements of Expenses for the Director of Finance,
Sheriff, Commonwealth's Attorney and Regional Jail for the month of October,
1989, were approved by the vote shown above.
Item No. 4.5. Resolution to take Greenbrier Drive in Branchlands PUD
into the State Secondary System of Highways. A letter dated October 17, 1989,
was received from Mr. James M. Hill, Jr., Virginia Land Company Building,
requesting a resolution to accept Greenbrier Drive into the State Secondary
System. The following resolution was adopted by the vote set out above:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229, the Virgin-
ia 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
Branchlands P.U.D.:
Greenbrier Drive:
Beginning at Station 0+00, a point in common with the centerline
of Greenbrier Drive and the end of previous dedication, thence in
a southeasterly direction a distance of 880 feet to Station 8+80,
the end of the cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Transpor-
tation be and is hereby guaranteed a 60 .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 867, page 32, and Deed Book 876, page 80.
Item No. 4.6. Resolution to take Earlysville Forest Drive, Carriage Hill
Drive, Beaver Creek Road, Buckhorn Trail and Quail Ridge Circle in Earlysville
Forest, Section 9, into the State Secondary System of Highways. A letter
dated April 13, 1989, was recevied from Mr. Mark Hutchison, Craig Builders of
Albemarle, Inc., requesting that Earlysville Forest Drive, Carriage Hill
Drive, Beaver Creek Road, Buckhorn Trail and Quail Ridge Circle in Earlysville
Forest, Section 9, be taken into the State SeCondary System. The following
resolution was adopted by the vote set out above:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229, the Virgin-
ia 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 roads in
Earlysville Forest, Section 9: ~,
Earlysville Forest Drive: ~
Beginning at centerline Station 79%93.99 of Earlysville
Forest Drive (Route 660), a point common with the centerline
intersection of Earlysville Forest Drive and the intersec-
tion of the edge of pavement with Saddle Court (Route 1587)
and the end of previous dedication, i thence in a northwes-
terly direction a distance of 3,958~43 feet along the
centerline of Earlysville Forest Drive to Station 119+52.42,
the edge of pavement of existing State Route 743 and the end
of this dedication.
Carriage Hill Drive:
Beginning at Station 10+10, a point in common with the edge
of pavement of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline
of Carriage Hill Drive, thence in a~northeasterly direction
1,083 feet to Station 20+93, the end of the cul-de-sac.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 3)
290
Beaver Creek Road:
Beginning at Station 10+10, a point in common with the edge
of pavement of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline
of Beaver Creek Road, thence in a southwesterly direction
953 feet to Station 19+63, the end of the cul-de-sac.
Buckhorn Trail:
Beginning at Station 10+10, a point in common with the edge
of pavement of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline
of Buckhorn Trail, thence in a westerly direction 393 feet
to Station 14+03, the end of the cul-de-sac.
Quail Ridge Circle:
Western Portion: Beginning at Station 9+90, a point in
common with the west edge of pavement of Earlysville Forest
Drive and the centerline of Quail Ridge Circle, thence in a
westerly direction 484 feet to Station 5+06, the end of the
cul-de-sac.
Eastern Portion: Beginning at Station 10+10, a point in
common with the east edge of pavement of Earlysville Forest
Drive and the centerline of Quail Ridge Circle, thence in an
easterly direction 1,131 feet to Station 21+41, the end of
the cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Transpor-
tation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way
and drainage easements along these requested additions as recorded by
plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
County in Deed Book 935, pages 321-323;'Deed Book 888, pages 489-491;
Deed Book 1036, page 226; Deed Book 944, page 132; Deed Book 959, page
61; Deed Book 951, page 361; Deed Book 952, page 548; Deed Book 1024,
page 301, Deed Book 920, page 398; Deed Book 1022, page 484, Deed Book
1011, page 621; Deed Book 1012, page 27; Deed Book 990, page 700; Deed
Book 901, page 387; and Deed Book 1016, page 107.
Agenda Item No. 5. ZMA-89-03. Preston Stallings. To rezone approxi-
mately 2.0 acres from Rural Areas to HC, HeaVy Commercial, with proffer.
Property on south side of Route 250 West about one mile east of the Rt.
240/Rt. 635 intersection at Brownsville. Tax Map 56, Parcels 109B and ll0A.
White Hall District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1 and
November 7, 1989.)
The following letter dated November 10, 1989, was received from Mr.
Donald J. Wagner, Great Eastern Management CQmpany:
"This will confirm the applicant's agreement with staff's suggestion
that in view of the additional informat{on we have provided, ZMA-89-03
should be referred back to the Planning iCommission rather than being
heard by the Board on November 15. ~
Also, because of reasons stated in previous correspondence, we believe
that it is appropriate that our requested zoning text amendment (ZTA)
concerning expansion of existing businesses by special use permit be
heard by the Board at the same time as ZMA-89-03. We have therefore
requested of the Clerk of the Board that the ZTA be deferred until the
ZMA comes back to the Board."
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to refer
ZM~-89-03 back to the Planning Commission forl reconsideration. Roll was
called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting) 291
(Page 4)
Agenda Item No. 6. ZTA-89-08. Great Eastern Management. To amend the
Zoning Ordinance to add a use by special use permit "Expansion of existing
uses in other districts adjacent to the RA district into the RA district
and/or into the setback adjacent to the JlA district. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on November 1 and November 8, 1989.)
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to defer
ZTA-89-08 until it can be considered simultaneously with ZMA-89-03. Roll was
called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 7. ZTA-89-16. J.W.K. To amend Section 4.10.3.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance as it relates to height requirements in regard to certain
architectural features. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1 and
November 7, 1989.)
Mr. Cilimberg said at the Planning Commission meeting on November 9, the
applicant requested deferral of this request until November 28. Since the
Planning Commission did not act on the request, the Board needs to also defer
action.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowie, seconded by Mr. Bain, to defer ZTA-89-16
until December 20, 1989. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 8. Public hearing to consider a request to abandon White
Pine Street, a 30 foot width right-of-way centered around a straight line
which begins at a point approximately 15 feet southeast from the westernmost
corner of the northern portion of tax map 130A(1), parcel 16, along its
southwest property line, thence proceeding in a northeasterly direction across
said parcel to a point approximately 78 feet isoutheast from the northernmost
corner of said parcel along its northeast property line, located in
Scottsville, Virginia. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1 and
November 7, 1989.)
Mr. Cilimberg said this is a request to vacate a right-of-way known as
White Pine Street in the Hayman Subdivision in Scottsville, Virginia. The
staff visited the site and sees no public purpose served in retaining the
right-of-way. There have been no comments from adjacent landowners regarding
the vacation of the right-of-way. Mr. Way commented that he also has received
no comments from the public concerning the right-of-way.
The public hearing was opened and Mr. Heinz Gadient, the applicant, said
he would request that this portion of White Pine Street be abandoned because
it runs through a warehouse he owns. The warehouse has been in this location
since 1930. Also as previously stated, the ~ight-of-way serves no public
purpose.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
After requesting from the County Attorney if the resolution presented to
the Board contained an accurate description, iMr. Bowie offered motion,
seconded by Mr. Bain, to adopt the following resolution to abandon a portion
of White Pine Street:
WHEREAS, the Board was requested by a citizen to abandon a
section of an old road not in the State Highway or Secondary System;
and
WHEREAS, the Board, on September 7, 1989, ordered that this
matter be advertised for public hearing in accordance with Virginia
Code Section 33.1-156 - 161; and
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 5)
292
WHEREAS, after holding a public hearing on November 15, 1989,
the Board finding that the said section of road serves no public
purpose;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that a right-of-way known as "White Pine
Street" (and shown on the attached exhibit) be abandoned to public use
as per the following description:
A 30 foot width right-of-way centered around a straight
line which begins at a point approximately 15 feet south-
east from the western most corner of the northern portion
(tract no. 2) of tax map 130A(1), parcel 16, along its
southwest property line, thence proceeding in a north-
easterly direction across said parcel to a point approxi-
mately 78 feet southeast from the northernmost corner of
said parcel along its northeast property line.
Roll was called and the motion carried by th~ following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 9. SP-89-84. Oliver A. Kuttner. Public hearing on a
petition to convert an existing wood shop toiautobody restoration fabrication
and classic automobile brokerage (wholesale)i Property on east side of Avon
Street Ext. (Rt. 742). Tax Map 90, Parcels 35R and 35S. Scottsville Dis-
trict. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1 and November 7, 1989.)
Mr. Cilimberg presented the following staff report:
"Character of the Area: The parcel waslformerly the site of Hall
Brothers' Cabinetry Shop. Adjacent uses include Certified Welding and
J. V. Farm Equipment to the north and Horseman's Saddlery and B. F. I.
to the south.
Staff Comment: The applicant is requesting a special use permit to
allow a body shop to restore classic cars in conjunction with his
automobile brokerage operation. The business presently exists as
Griffin Motor Car Company (and formerly~known as Pegasus Classic Cars)
in the City of Charlottesville.
The restoration and fabrication of carsl-at this operation is an
extremely involved process which may require as much as three years of
work on any given car. The meticulous craftsmanship involved in the
process limits the number of cars being restored and there is little
turnover. As a result, there is only a~very small amount of pollu-
tants, such as oils and thinners, which are extracted or used during
the process. The applicant has stated that such pollutants are safely
contained and removed from the site by a~contracted waste disposal
firm which he will continue to utilize. The operation plans to retain
the existing Halls Brothers' spray booth for occasional touch-up
painting but there will be no painting of entire cars. Staff inspected
the current location of the business and found it to be an orderly
operation. ~
The sales aspect of this operation is conducted by appointment only
with an international clientele. The applicant has stated that he
does not accept 'walk-in' customers and estimates only two appoint-
ments per week. Sales of these automobiles are often conducted with
the applicant acting as a middle-man with the car only being stored at
the site for a matter of days or, in fact, it may never be shipped to
Charlottesville. In terms of the sale of the restored cars, it is not
uncommon for a body shop to have sales subordinate to the main use of
the body shop. To insure the retail aspAct of the operation remains
subordinate to the body shop, staff offers Section 5.1.24 of the
Zoning Ordinance as a condition of approval. Section 5.1.24 states:
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 6)
293
Subordinate Retail Sales
This provision is intended to permit retail sales as subordinate
to the main use. To this end, the following regulations shall
apply:
Retail sales area, including but not limited to showroom and
outdoor display area shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent
of the floor area of the main use;
Retail sales shall not precede establishment of the main
use. Retail sales shall be permitted only after or simulta-
neously with the establishment of the main use and shall not
continue after discontinuance of the main use.
In this case the main use of this operation is the restoration of the
automobiles some of which will remain to be sold in accordance with
this provision. The applicant has stated he shall comply with this
restriction. (In addition, it should be noted that the Zoning Admin-
istrator has suggested that all uses permitted in Industrial Districts
be reviewed for their application and compliance with Section 5.1.24
to insure the retail aspects of the uses remain subordinate to the
main use. This may necessitate a Zoning Text Amendment in the future
to clarify exactly which uses in Industrial Districts should be
permitted to incorporate subordinate retail sales.)
The applicant has stated that all of the automobiles, whether for sale
or repair, will be stored inside of the existing structure and a
proposed warehouse, both of which requi~e site plan approval.
The Virginia Department of TransportatiOn has stated:
The main existing entrance to this property is not to commercial
standards. Therefore, the Department recommends that the access
to this property be limited to one paved commercial entrance and
that full frontage improvements be~constructed to tie into those
existing to the north on the adjacent property. This would
include 26 feet from the centerline to Route 742 to the face of
curb and appropriate storm sewer system.
The applicant has addressed these recon~endations with the revised
site plan.
The Comprehensive Plan designates the p~operty as Industrial Service
and the existing zoning is Light Industry. Staff opinion is this is
an appropriate location for this use as~!it is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan designation, existin~ zoning, adjacent land uses,
and staff recommends approval of this p~tition as it is in accordance
with Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Should the Planning Commission choose t~ recommend approval of this
special use permit to the Board of SuperVisors, staff offers the
following conditions: ~
o
Ail vehicles and parts of vehicles ,shall be stored indoors;
Ail pollutants associated with the~ipperation, including but not
limited to, paint thinners, antifreeze, oils and gasoline, are to
be safely removed from the site by a waste disposal firm regu-
lated by the Virginia Department o~! Waste Management;
Compliance with Section 5.1.24 of the Zoning Ordinance which
limits the subordinate use of retail sales to fifteen (15)
percent of the floor area of the main use (body shop);
Virginia Department of Transportation approval of a commercial
entrance and full frontage improvements along Route 742;
Site plan approval which shall include a certified engineer's
report to be submitted in accordance with Section 4.14, Perfor-
mance Standards, of the Zoning Ordinance.''
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
294
Mr. Cilimberg then presented the following letter dated October 5, 1989,
from the applicant:
"October 5, 1989
Mr. Richard Tarbell
Albemarle County Planning Dept.
401McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
IN RE: Proffers for Oliver A. Kuttner Special Use Application
Dear Rich:
The applicant, Oliver A. Kuttner, who presently operates a
business known as Griffin Motor Car Company in, the City of Charlottes-
ville, (formally known as Pegasus Classic Cars) has requested a
special use permit to relocate his business to 1825 Avon Street
Extended in Albemarle County. This site, which is surrounded by
several other non-conforming businesses, is in a Light Industrial zone
and was formerly occupied by the Hall Brothers Cabinet Shop. The
nature of the applicant's business, which is proposed to be operated
on one of the two adjacent parcels (Tax Map 90, Parcel 35 S) would
include a classic automobile restoration, fabrication, and brokerage
business. This special use permit is necessary to allow the applicant
to operate his specialized auto body business as well as the limited
auto sales that the applicant wants to perform at the site. In order
to properly and efficiently operate hislbusiness at the site, the
applicant is willing to make the following proffers restricting his
use of property:
1. The applicant will agree to warehouse all of his classic and
exotic automobiles in several enclosed warehouses which are proposed
to be built pursuant to a site plan whidh is being filed contempora-
neously with this special use permit.
2. The applicant agrees to install a central water supply system
and a central sewer system which will serve both parcels of land (Tax
Map 90, Parcel 35R and 35S). The applicant agrees, prior to leasing to
any other users on either parcel, to ob{ain approval from the
Albemarle County Health Department that~lthe size and capacity of both
the central water and sewer systems are~.adequate for all existing and
proposed uses, including the number of ~mployees to be located on both
parcels.
3. The applicant agrees to build alcommon entrance and common
exit to and from State Route 742 (Avon Street Extended) acceptable to
the Virginia Department of Transportation and the County Engineering
staff.
4. The applicant agrees that the J%bordinated auto sales portion
of his business shall be limited to no more than 15 percent of the
total enclosed premises pursuant to Albemarle Zoning Ordinance
Section 5.1.24, which allows for such s~bordinated sales use.
5. In operating the auto sales portion of his business, the
applicant agrees to have no outside cat,sales lot. All automobiles
which may be displayed to qualify for the applicant's automobile sales
license would be displayed inside closed areas of the maximum 15
percent showroom and office. The applicant agrees that customers will
be accepted by appointment only as the ~ast majority of it's customers
come from out of town. In fact it shoul~be understood that most 6f
the applicant's business consists of th~iapplicant acting as a middle-
man locating classic and rare cars for out of town customers which
cars are never shipped to the applicant'~ business location, but are
instead sent directly to the customer.
6. The applicant volunteers to allow the County Engineering
Staff to inspect his current operation on 1117 East Market Street to
determine the amount of noise generated by his business and his
handling of any pollutants.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
295
7. The applicant voluntarily agrees to provide documentation
that any pollutants, including oils and thinners, which are used by
the applicant in the operation of his business, will be removed from
the site by appropriate agencies. The applicant proposes that said
removal of pollutants shall continue at' the Avon Street site in the
same manner as the applicant is removing said pollutants from his
present Market Street site. Documentation evidencing the present
removal of such materials from the Market Street site is available for
review by the County staff.
Respectfully Submitted,
(Signed)
William D. Tucker, III
Attorney for Applicant"
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on November 9,
1989, unanimously recommended approval of SP-89-94 subject to the conditions
recommended by the staff, with an amendment to condition #5 as follows:
Site plan approval which shall include a certified engineer's
report to be submitted in accordance with Section 4.14,
Performance Standards of the Zoning Ordinance, and significant
landscaping as depicted on plan initialled RET, November 9, 1989.
The public hearing was opened. Mr. Bill Tucker, representing the appli-
cant, said the Planning staff did an excellent job reviewing this application
and the applicant has no problem with and wodld gladly comply with all of the
recommendations. This operation is not a typical body shop. The applicant
restores classic antique cars only. There are only a few cars worked on at
any time. The sales end of the operation also is not typical. The cars are
extremely valuable and therefore are restored inside of the building so as to
be protected from the elements. This use would blend in with the other uses
on Avon Street Extended.
There being no further comments from the public, the public hearing was
closed.
Mr. Bowie asked if the written proffers!~iby the applicant are included in
the conditions. Mr. Cilimberg said the intent of condition #5 is to include
the proffers and all of the landscaping as s~own on the plan presented.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowie, secondg~d by Mr. Perkins, to approve
SP-89-94 as proffered in letter dated Octobe~ 5, 1989, addressed to ~r.
Richard Tarbell, Albemarle County Planning D~partment, from Mr. William D.
Tucker, III, Attorney for the Applicant, and'~subject to the following condi-
tions as recommended by the Planning Commission:
1. All vehicles and parts of vehicles shall be stored indoors;
2. Ail pollutants associated with the ioperation, including but not
limited to, paint thinners, antifreeze, oils and gasoline, are to
be safely removed from the site by...a waste disposal firm regulated
by the Virginia Department of Waste Management;
3. Compliance with Section 5.1.24 of ~e Zoning Ordinance which
limits the subordinate use of retaill sales to fifteen (15)
percent of the floor area of the matin use (body shop);
4. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of a commercial
entrance and full frontage improvements along Route 742;
Site plan approval which shall inc%ude a certified engineer's
report to be submitted in accordance with Section 4.14, Perfor-
mance Standards of the Zoning Ordinance, and significant land-
scaping as depicted on plan initialled RET, November 9, 1989.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
296
Agenda Item No. 10. SP-89-86. Garland McDaniel. Public hearing on a
petition to locate a single wide mobile home on 13.36 acres zoned RA. Property
on west side of Rt 721 about three-tenths mile north of Rt. 6 intersection.
Tax Map 126, Parcel 22J. Scottsville District. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on November 1 and November 7, 1989)
Mr. Cilimberg presented the following staff report:
"Staff Comment: The mobile home is to be located well off the road
(Rt. 721) at the top of the hill. The parcel is heavily wooded. The
proposed location of the mobile home is 60 feet from the southern
property line, 150 feet west of Rt. 721, and 250 feet from the north-
ern property line of Parcel 22I. Currently, there are four mobile
homes located within a mile radius of this site.
Two letters of general objection to this application have been received.
One letter states the proposal is 'inconsistent with both the present
and future potential for the neighborhood.'
Should the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors choose to
approve this petition, staff recommends the following conditions:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
Albemarle County Building Official~approval;
Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable requirements
for the district in which it is located;
Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of the
mobile home to be completed within~thirty (30) days of the
issuance of occupancy permit;
Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the
satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and approval by the
local official of the Virginia Department of Health;
Maintenance of existing vegetation. Landscaping and/or screening
to be provided to the satisfactions.of the Zoning Administrator.
Required screening shall be maintained in good condition and
replaced should it die;
Mobile home is not to be rented; and
Special use permit is issued for the use of the Garland and
Marcia McDaniel family, and is non,transferable."
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on November 9,
1989, unanimously recommended approval of SP~89-86 subject to the conditions
as recommended by the staff.
The public hearing was opened. The applicant, Mrs. Marcia McDaniel said
this mobile home is to be temporary because she and her husband plan to build
a permanent house in approximately three yea=s. The land has already been
cleared and staked for the permanent house.
There being no further comments from th~ public, the public hearing was
closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to approve
SP-89-86 subject to the conditions of the Planning Commission. Mr. Bowie said
Mrs. McDaniel stated their intent to build alhome in the future and he thinks
that a condition should be added that the mo~ile home is to be removed when
the house is built. Mr. Bain included in hi~ motion condition #8 "Mobile home
is to be removed when house built." Mr. Perkins, as seconder, agreed with the
amendment. The conditions are as follows:
1. Albemarle County Building Official approval;
Conformance to all area, bulk and 0~her applicable requirements
for the district in which it is located;
Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of the
mobile home to be completed within thirty (30) days of the
issuance of occupancy permit;
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 10)
297
Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the
satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and approval by the
local official of the Virginia Department of Health;
Maintenance of existing vegetation. Landscaping and/or screening
to be provided to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator.
Required screening shall be maintained in good condition and
replaced should it die;
6. Mobile home is not to be rented;
Special use permit is issued for the use of the Garland and
Marcia McDaniel family, and is nonrtransferable; and
8. Mobile home is to be removed when house built.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 11. STA-89-2. Private Roads. Public hearing on an
amendment to Section 18-36 of the Subdivision Ordinance relating to private
roads to specify circumstances under which private roads may be permitted in
rural developments. (Advertised in the Daily Progress November 1 and
November 7, 1989.)
Mr. Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning, commented that the Board previ-
ously held work sessions on the proposed amendments, but to summarize, the
amendment to the private road provision is intended to limit the use of
private roads in the Rural Areas to those cases where environmental degrada-
tion is a consideration. There is no longer~a lot size attached to the
private road provisions and private roads wowld also be available in the Rural
Areas for two-lot divisions and family divisions. The applicant would have to
demonstrate that there is a significant difference between the construction of
a public and private road in order to be eligible for a private road. During
the work session this afternoon, a further change in the proposed language was
recommended to read: "No alternative publiclY!road alignment available to the
subdivider on the adoption date of this section would alleviate significant
degradation of the environment." ~'
The public hearing was opened. There being no one present from the
public to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowie, to adopt the
following ordinance to amend Section 18-36 of the "Subdivision Ordinance"
relating to private roads, as recommended by.~the Planning Commission, and to
include the modification recommended at the afternoon work session:
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT SECTION 18-36(b)(1)
AND REPEAL SECTION ~8-36(c)(1)
OF THE CODE OF ALBF_k~RLE, SAID SECTIONS BEING A PART
OF CHAPTER 18, SUBDIVISION OF LAND
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Sup~'visors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Section 18-36, Private RO~ds, of the Code of Albemarle,
is hereby amended and reenacted and repealed in certain sections to
read as follows: ~
Sec. 18-36. Private roads, i
(b) (1) For property zoned RA, Rurlal Areas, the subdivider, in
accordance with section 18-36(h) of thisl chapter, demonstrates to the
reasonable satisfaction of the commission that:
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting) 298
(Page 11)
Approval of such roads will alleviate a clearly demonstrable
danger of significant degradation to the environment of the site or
adjacent properties which would be occasioned by the construction of
public roads in the same alignments. Por the purposes of this provi-
sion, in addition to such other factors-as the commission may consid-
er, "significant degradation" shall mean an increase of thirty percent
in the total volume of grading for construction of a public road as
compared to a private road; and
No alternative public road alignment available to the
subdivider on the adoption date of this section would alleviate
significant degradation of the environment; and
No more lots are proposed on Such private road than could be
realized on a public road due to right-Of-way dedication.
(c) (1) Repealed by ordinance adopted 11-15-89.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 12. ZTA-89-05. Public hearing on an amendment to
Section 4.1, Area and Health Regulations, in the Zoning Ordinance, related to
utilities to reflect the practical review process of the Virginia Department
of Health. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1 and November 7,
1989.)
Agenda Item No. 13. ZTA-89-06. Public hearing on an amendment to
Section 4.2, Critical Slopes, of the Zoning Ordinance, to more clearly reflect
its original intent to control improvements and grading activity to steeper
areas. Minimum building site areas are morei~clearly defined by type of use.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1 and November 7, 1989.)
Agenda Item No. 14. ZTA-89-07. Public!hearing on an amendment to
Section 4.7.2, Open Space-Character, in the Zoning Ordinance, by repealer of
Section 4.7.3, Open Space-Character, and adoption of Section 4.7.3, Open
Space-Design Requirements. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 1
and November 7, 1989.)
Mr. Keeler suggested that Agenda Item Nos. 12, 13 and 14 be discussed
together. The Board has previously held work sessions on these proposed
zoning text amendments.
ZTA-89-05 is an amendment to Area and Health Regulations to reflect the
practical review process of the Virginia Department of Health, which is to
assume that a lot created for residential purposes would likely be developed
with a three-bedroom dwelling. The two drai~field locations have to be of
adequate size to support a three-bedroom dwe!ling.
ZTA-89-06 is an amendment to Critical Slopes to more clearly reflect the
original intent to control improvements and grading activity in steeper
areas. Minimum building site areas are more i~learly defined by the type of
use. There has been substantial revision to'Section 4.2.5 Modification of
Regulations which was requested by the Plann%ng Commission.
ZTA-89-07 is an amendment to Open Space iEharacter in view of preservation
recommendations of the pending Comprehensive Plan as well as proposed revi-
sions to the Critical Slopes provisions. Add%tional amendments may result
from adoption of the Open Space Plan element of the Comprehensive Plan in the
future.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 12)
299
Mr. Keeler said for a residential lot served by water and sewer, in
addition to having a "flat" area for the location of a house, a person must
also have minimum usable yard areas. To compensate for that, the staff would
allow land or land that should not be developed to be included in the open
space. It is the intent that the amendment to Critical Slopes and Open Space
Character balance out each other. The staff~has not been very successful with
the planned development approach under the current ordinance. People have
avoided that because of the restriction on the open space. Current provisions
require a substantial amount of developable land in the open space.
The public hearing was opened. Mrs. Sally Thomas, representing the
League of Women Voters, said the League had some questions which she thinks
have been answered. Mrs. Thomas commended the Planning Department and staff
for drafting the revisions. The League thinks that it is also important that
there be an adequate and well-trained staff to inspect developments to insure
that these provisions are enforced. The reasons cited by the staff for the
proposed changes are valid and the League urges the adoption, but that
adoption also entails financial commitment f~r enforcement.
There being no further comments from the public, the public hearing was
closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowie, to approve
ZTA-89-05, by adopting the following ordinance amending Section 4.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission:
AN ORDINANQE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
ARTICLE II, BASIC REGULATIONS, SECTION 4.0
GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE
ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Article II, Basic Regulations, Section 4.0, General
Regulations, in Subsection 4.1.6 of the.~!Zoning Ordinance, is hereby
amended and reenacted as follows: !~ii~
4.1.6 For lots not served by a central sewer system, no building
permit shall be issued for any building or structure, the
use of which involves sewage ~isposal, without written
approval from the local offic~ of the Virginia Department of
Health of the location and ar~a for both original and future
replacement septic disposal f~elds adequate to serve such
use. For residential usage, ~t a minimum, each septic
disposal field shall consist ~f suitable soils of adequate
area to accommodate sewage dislposal from a three (3) bedroom
dwelling as determined by current regulations of the Virgin-
ia Department of Health.
Roll was called and the motion carried ~y the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to approve
ZTA-89-06 by adopting the following ordinanc~amending Section 4.2 Critical
Slopes of the Zoning Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission:
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
ARTICLE II, BASIC REGULATIONS, SECTION 4.0
GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE
ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Article II, Basic Regulatkons, Section 4.0, General
Regulations, is hereby amended and reenacted as follows:
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 13)
3O0
4.2
CRITICAL SLOPES
These provisions are created to implement the comprehensive
plan by protecting and conserving steep hillsides together
with public drinking water supplies and flood plain areas
and in recognition of increased potential for soil erosion,
sedimentation, water pollution and septic disposal problems
associated with the development of those areas described in
the comprehensive plan as critical slopes. It is hereby
recognized that such development of critical slopes may
result in: rapid and/or large-scale movement of soil and
rock; excessive stormwater run-off; siltation of natural and
man-made bodies of water; loss of aesthetic resource; and in
the event of septic system failure, a greater travel dis-
tance of septic effluent, alliof which constitute potential
dangers to the public health, lsafety and/or welfare. These
provisions are intended to direct building and septic system
locations to terrain more suitable to development and to
discourage development on critical slopes, and to supplement
other regulations regarding p~otection of public water
supplies and encroachment of development into flood plains.
Where modification of regulations is sought pursuant to
section 4.2.5, such request shall address each concern
specified in section 4.2.
4.2.2.1
For uses not served by a central sewerage system the follow-
ing shall apply:
For each dwelling unit sArved by other than a central
sewerage system, the building site shall have an area
of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet or greater and
shall be of such dimension that no one dimension shall
exceed any other by a ra~io of more than five (5) to
one (1) as described by ~ rectangle inscribed within
the building site. Such building site shall have
adequate area for location of two (2) septic drain
fields as approved by the Virginia Department of Health
· n accordance with section 4.1 of this ordinance for
each dwelling unit.
For development subject ~o review under section 32.0 of
this ordinance, the building site shall have an area of
thirty thousand (30,000) square feet or greater and
shall be of such dimension that no dimension shall
exceed any other by a ra~io of more than five (5) to
one (1) as described by ~ rectangle inscribed within
the building site. Such~ibuilding site shall have
adequate area to accommodate all buildings and struc-
tures, septic drainfield~ as approved by the Virginia
Department of Health in ~ccordance with section 4.1 of
this ordinance, parking ~nd loading areas, storage
yards and other improvements together with any earth
disturbing activity necessary to accommodate such
improvements.
These provisions shall not apply to accessways, public
utility lines and appurtenances, stormwater management
facilities and the like necesMary to provide reasonable
usage of the property where nd reasonable alternative'
location or alignment exists.! The county engineer shall
require such protective and r~storative measures as he deems
necessary to insure that suchidevelopment will be consistent
with the intent of section 4.2.
4.2.2.2
For a use served by a centralisewerage system, the applicant
shall demonstrate that the building site is of adequate area
for the proposed development:i
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 14)
301
For residential development, the building site shall be
of adequate area to accommodate the proposed residen-
tial unit(s) together with an area equivalent to the
sum of the applicable required yard areas of the zoning
district in which such property is situated. Where
parking is provided in bays, such parking area shall
also be included in the building site;
4.2.3
b. For development subject to review under section 32.0 of
this ordinance, the building site shall be of adequate
area to accommodate all buildings and structures,
parking and loading areas, storage yards and other
improvements together with any earth disturbing acti-
vity necessary to accommodate such improvements.
These provisions shall not apply to accessways, public
utility lines and appurtenances, stormwater management
facilities and the like necessary to provide reasonable
usage of the property where n6 reasonable alternative
location or alignment exists.~ The county engineer shall
require such protective and r~storative measures as he deems
necessary to insure that such!development will be consistent
with the intent of section 4.2.
LOCATION OF STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS
Except as otherwise permittedilpursuant to section 4.2.2 and
section 4.2.6, the provisions of this section shall apply to
the location of any structureifor which a permit is required
under the Uniform Statewide B~ilding Code and to any im-
provement shown on a site development plan pursuant to
section 32.0 of this ordinance.
4.2.3.1
No structure or improvement shall be located on any lot or
parcel in any area other than a building site.
4.2.3.2
No structure or improvement nor earth disturbing activity to
establish such structure or improvement shall be located on
slopes of twenty-five (25) percent or greater except as
otherwise permitted under section 4.3.01.
4.2.4 LOCATION OF SEPTIC SYSTEMS (Amended 11-11-87)
4.2.4.1
Septic system location need not be restricted to the
approved building site; however, no septic system nor any
portion thereof shall be located in any of the following:
4.2.5
4.2.5.1
MODIFICATION OF REGULATIONS
As part of the review of any ~lat of subdivision or site
development plan, the commission may modify any regulations
and requirements of this section in a particular case,
subject to the following limitations, procedures and find-
ings:
A developer requesting such modification shall file a
written request in accordance with section 32.3.11.4 of this
ordinance and shall in such request address each concern set
forth in section 4.2. No such' modification shall be granted
until the recommendation of t~e agent shall have been
considered by the commission. The agent in formulating such
recommendation may consult wi~h the county engineer, Virgin-
ia Department of Health, watershed management official and
other appropriate officials. ~he county engineer shall
evaluate the potential for so~l erosion, sedimentation, and
water pollution in accord wit~ current provisions of the
Virginia Department of Transportation Drainage Manual, the
Commonwealth of Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook and Virginia State Water Control Board best manage-
ment practices, and where applicable, Chapter 19.1, Article
2, Protection of Public Drinking Water, Code of Albemarle.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 15)
302
4.2.5.2
The commission may modify, ~waive or vary any requirement of
section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that:
Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2
would not forward the purposes of this ordinance or
otherwise serve the public interest or that alterna-
tives proposed by the developer would satisfythe
purposes of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent
degree; or
Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the
property, location of the property or other unusual
conditions excluding the proprietary interest of the
developer, the requirements of section 4.2 would
effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use
of the property or wouldiresult in significant degra-
dation of the site or adjacent properties. Such
modification, waiver or variance shall not be detri-
mental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the
orderly development of the area, or to adjacent proper-
ties, or to sound engineering practice; or
Granting such modificatiOn, waiver or variance would
serve a public purpose of greater import than would be
served by strict application of section 4.2.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way. i
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowie to approve
ZTA-89-07 by adopting the following ordinance amending Section 4.7.3 of the
Zoning Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission:
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
ARTICLE II, BASIC REGULATIONS, SECTION 4.0
GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE
ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Article II, Basic Regulations, Section 4.0, General
Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, isi~hereby amended and reenacted
in Subsection 4.7.3 as follows.'
4.7.3 OPEN SPACE, DESIGN REQUIREME~S
4.7.3.1 In addiction to provision of s~ction 4.7.1 and section 4.7.2,
in review of any development proposing incorporation of open
space, the commission may require inclusion in such open
space of:
-Areas deemed inappropriate four or prohibited to development
such as but not limited to: iland in the one hundred year
flood plain and significant d, rainage swales; land in slopes
of twenty-five (25) percent or greater; major public
utility easements; stormwate~ detention and flood control
devices; and lands having permanent or seasonally high
water tables;
-Areas to satisfy provisions df section 4.16 Recreation
Regulations;
t
-Areas to provide reasonable ~nffering be ween dissimilar
uses within such development~"and between such development
and adjoining properties.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 16)
303
4.7.3.2
The commission may require redesign of such proposed devel-
opment to accommodate open space areas as may be required
under this provision; provided that, in no case, shall such
redesign result in reduction of the total number of proposed
dwelling units otherwise realizable under this ordinance for
conventional development.
4.7.3.3
In such case where open space is required by provisions of
this ordinance, not more that eighty (80) percent of such
minimum required open space shall consist of the following:
Land located within the one hundred year flood plain;
and
Land subject to occasional, common or frequent flooding
as defined in Table 16 Soil and Water Features of the
United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conserva-
tion Service, Soil Survey of Albemarle County, Virgin-
ia, August, 1985; and
Land in slopes of twenty-five (25) percent or greater;
and
d. Land devoted to stormwater or flood control devices
except where such feature is incorporated into a
permanent pond, lake or other water feature deemed by
the commission to constitute a desirable open space
amenity. '~
Roll was called and the motion carried ~y the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 15. ZTA-89-09. Public ~hearing on a request to amend
Section 25.2.1, Permitted Uses by Right in the Planning Development-Shopping
Center District in the Zoning Ordinance, by adding the following: "Veterinary
office and hospital. Section 5.11 herein shall apply except that the setback
requirements of 9.a. therein for soundproofe~ air-conditioned buildings shall
be modified to be identical to setback requirements otherwise applicable for
the PD-SC district." (Advertised in the Dai~y Progress on November 1 and
November 7, 1989.)
Mr. Keeler said this proposed amendment iwas heard twice by the Planning
Commission and was deferred to make some changes to the text and add some
additional language. The applicant, Great E~stern Management Company, re-
quests the addition of veterinary office andlhospital to Planned Development-
Shopping Center (PD-SC) in the Zoning Ordinadce. PD-SC, among other things,
is intended to provide a broad range of commercial and service facilities.
The subject veterinary office is located in ihe Earlysville Green Shopping
Center and has operated more than five years ~ithout problem or complaint.
However, such uses have been viewed as having!nuisance potential and are
permitted by-right only in the HI, Heavy IndUStrial, district. While special
use permits are required in the RA, C-I, HC and PD~MC districts, staff recom-
mends that veterinary office and hospital be ~permitted by special use permit
within the PD-SC distr~ct. The Planning ComMission agreed with the staff, but
requested a revision to the Supplementary Re~lations that deal with veteri-
nary offices. The staff then reorganized theWtext so that it is more logical
and added a Section 5.1.1i.d.
The public hearing was opened. Mr. Don Wagner, representing Great
Eastern, said he would be happy to answer anyi~questions Board members had.
There being no one else from the public ~o speak, the public hearing was
closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to approve
ZTA-89-09 by adopting the following ordinance!amending Subsections 5.1.11 and
25.2.2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 17)
304
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
SECTION 5.0 SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS AND
SECTION 25.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SHOPPING CENTERS - PD-SC
OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Section 5.0, Supplementary Regulations, is hereby
amended and reenacted in Subsection 5.1.11, and Section 25.0 Planned
Development Shopping Centers - PD-SC, is amended by the addition of
Subsection 25.2.2.5, of the Zoning Ordinance, all to read as follows:
5.1.11 COMMERCIAL KENNEL VETERINARY ANIMAL HOSPITAL
Except where animals are confined in soundproofed, air-
conditioned buildings, no structure or area occupied by
animals shall be closer than five hundred (500) feet to
any agricultural or residential lot line. For non-
soundproofed animal confinements, an external solid
fence not less than six (6) feet in height shall be
located within fifty (50)i feet of the animal confine-
ment and shall be composed of concrete block, brick, or
other material approved '~y the zoning administrator;
For soundproofed confinements, no such structure shall
be located closer than t~o hundred (200) feet to any
agricultural or residentS!al lot line. For soundproofed
confinements, noise measured at the nearest agricul-
tural or residential property line shall not exceed
forty (40) decibels; ~
In all cases, animals sh~tl be confined in an enclosed
building from 10:00 p.m.~'!lo 6:00 a.m. Noise measured
at the nearest agricultural or residential property
line shall not exceed forty (40) decibels;
In areas where such uses may be in proximity to other
uses involving intensivellactivity such as shopping
centers or other urban d~insity locations, special
attention is required toiprotect the public health and
welfare. To these ends ~he commission and board may
require among other thin~s:
-Separate building entrance and exit to avoid animal
conflicts;
-Area for outside exercise to be exclusive from access
by the public by fencing~or other means.
25.2.2.
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
5. Veterinary office and hospital (reference 5.1.11).
Agenda Item No. 16. Approval of Minutes~ October 19(A), 1988; January
18(N), March 22, April 5(A), April 20, May 10 and May 17, 1989.
Mr. Bain said he read the minutes of January 18, 1989, pages 1-20, and
found them to be in order with the exception Of some typos and he questioned
one of the conditions of approval for the petition on the museum for JWK
November 15, 1989, (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 18)
305
Properties. During discussion of the petition, Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr.
Williamson how long the events would last. Mr. Williamson responded the
events would be three-day events. The condition in the motion should read
that there are to be no more than two, three-day events a year. The minutes
read that there will be no more than two events that exceed three days. He
asked that the condition be reviewed.
Mr. Way read the minutes of May 10, 1989, pages 12-end and found them to
be satisfactory.
Mr. Perkins read the minutes of May 17, 1989, pages ll-end and found them
to be in order.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowie, seconded by Mr. Bain, to approve the
minutes of January 18, May 10 and May 17, 1989 as read. Roll was called and
the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 17. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda.
A person from the audience, who did not give his name, asked when the
Board would discuss the request to abandon a section of Route 629. Mr. Way
said the owner of the property asked that discussion on Route 629 be deferred
to December 13 so that he would be able to obtain different counsel.
Mr. Agnor said the Board previously discussed with the School Board the
matter of the County acquiring computer equipment for teachers and General
Government staff. Mrs. Cooke had recommended that before the staff proceeded
that it discuss the subject with the University of Virginia. He has been
informed by Mr. Overstreet that the University's problems with local merchants
was that the University was selling the compgters over-the-counter in the
Newcomb Hall Bookstore as an item. The County intends to put the request out
to bid for local vendors to supply the equipment and then the equipment will
be leased to members of the staff. From his~'~conversation with the University,
Mr. Overstreet felt this process was differeht and he would thus like to
proceed with the program. Mr. Agnor said he'd!had told Mr. Overstreet he would
discuss this with the Board before agreeing ~o proceed. Mr. Way said he is
not sure that was the only concern Mrs. Cooke had. He judged her concern to
also have something to do with the County coveting with private business.
Mr. Agnor said staff can wait until Mrs. Cooke is present to get further
comments from her before proceeding. Mr. Bowie said he also thinks Mrs.
Cooke's objection was more than the UniversitY's involvement. Mr. Way said he
would rather wait to have Mrs. Cooke's inputS!
Mr. Bain asked when the Board was meeting with its State legislators.
Mr. Agnor replied that this item has been scheduled for the afternoon of
December 13 ....
Agenda Item No. 18. Adjourn to Novembe~i 29, 1989. At 8:20 P.M., there
being no further business to come before the'i.Board, Mr. Bain offered motion,
seconded by Mr. Bowie, to adjourn to Novembe~i 29, 1989. Roll was called and
the motion carried by the following recordediyote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
None.
Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
CHAIRMAN