1980-10-15October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
-3:4'4
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held
on October 15, 1980, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville,
Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony
Iachetta, C~ Timothy Lindstrom, Layton R. McCann and Miss Ellen V. Nash.~.
OFFZCERS PRESENT: Messrs. Guy B. Agnor, County Executive; George R. St. John, County
Attorney; and Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call To Order.
the Chairman, Gerald E. Fisher.
The meeting was' called to order at 7:33 P.M., by
Agenda Item No. 2. SP-80-55A.
1980)
Charles Edward Younger.
(Deferred from October 1,
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Director of Planning, read the Planning Staff report and recom-
mendations of the Planning Commission as follows:
Request: Mobile Home
Acreage: 5.8 acres
Zoning: A-1 Agriculture
Location: ~ax Map 123, Parcel 9, approximately four miles north of 'Scotts-
ville on Route 795.
Character of the Area: The applicant's property is wooded, with primarily
deciduous vegetation, on level land. No streams cross or abut the
property.
Route 795 in this area is bordered by open farm land to the east and a
series of residential lots, of approximately five acres each, to the
west. There is a single family residence on the southern border of
the property, and one across Route 795 to'the north. These are the
only existing residences potentially within site of the new mobile
home.
Objector to this petition owns an undeveloped parcel (34) to the
southwest of the applicant's parcel.
Staff Comment: As of the filing deadline for this report, staff had not
been able to contact the applicant concerning actual site location.
Should the Planning Oommission or Board of Supervisors choose to
approve the petition, staff recommends the following:
1. Compliance with Section 11-4-2 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Tucker said at its meeting of October 14, 1980, the Planning Commission unanimously
voted to recommend denial of this mobile home request. Mr. Tucker said neither Mr. Younger
nor his representative was present at either of the Planning Commission hearings.
Mr. FiSher asked if Mr. Younger or his representative was present. There was no one
present representing the applicant. Miss Nash stated she had attempted to locate Mr.
Younger, but found that no one knew him.
Motion was offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Dr. Iachetta to deny this special permit
due to the lack of appearance by the applicant. Roll was called, and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 3. SP-80-58. South Pantops Land Trust. Petition for R-3 Residential
uses on 18.0 acres zoned B-1. Property located southwest of Route 250 West on South
Pantops Mountain. Tax Map 78, Parcel 20, Rivanna District. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on October 1 and October 8, 1980.)
~ Mr. Tucker said the applicant has requested this item be deferred indefinitely. ~.
~e~ite~Ft~n~i~it~i~p~dpe~t~brdugh~tbagk~befm~e~th~ ~oard of Supervisors. Roll was
called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 4. SP-80-57. Mary H. Lupton and Thomas G. Lupton. Petition for a
planned community on 486 acres zoned A-1. Located on the east side of Route 743 behind
Earlysvil!e Green and Earlysville Heights. County Tax Map 31, Parcel 31. Rivanna District.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 1 and October 8, 1980.)
Mr. Tucker read the Planning staff report and the recommendations of the Planning
Commission as follows:
Request: Planned Community
Acreage: 486+ acres
October 15, 1981 (Reguiar Night Meeting)
Zoning: A-1 Agriculture
Location: Property, described as Tax Map 31, Parcel 31 and 46 is located
on the northeast side of Route 743 at Earlysville.
Character of the Area: This property surrounds Wakefield Farm and has a
total of about 3'400 feet of frontage in tWo locations on Route 743.
Earlysville Heights subdivision and Earlysville Green commercial area
are located to the north across Wakefield Farm Road. Whyte's store
and C and P Auto Service are to the west across Route 743. Happy
Valley Farm, recently approved as an RPN, is to the south.
This property is gently rolling with less than 4% of the land in 25+%
slopes. Tributaries of Chris Greene Lake run in an easterly fashion
through the property. The site is heavily wooded, a portion being in
commercial pine.
Applicant's Proposal: Forest Run Planned Community is proposed to consist
of 155 single-family lots with about 210 acres in common open space,
resulting in a gross density of one dwelling per 3.1 acres. A commercial
area of 3.8 acres is proposed at the intersection of Wakefield Farm
Road and Route 743. Surrounding the commercial area is an 8.56 acre
recreation area proposed for dedication to public use. Recreational
facilities would consist of two basketball courts, a football/soccer
field, softball field, and a children's play area.
Open space is employed for a variety of uses such as: defining small
residential clusters; providing trail linkages; protection of stream
environs; and providing a buffer on the perimeter of the development.
A lake is shown in the western end of the development to serve re-
creational purposes and provide protection to Chris Greene Lake.
Tennis courts, children's play area, and a fishing dock are proposed
at the lake.
A public road would meander through the development, discouraging
through traffic while providing access to existing public roads at two
locations. Private roads would feed off the public road to serve
individual residential clusters.
Comparative Impact Statistics:
Existing A-1 Zoning
Forest Run
Planned Community
Dwellings
Population
School-Aged Children
Traffic Generation
Gross Density
Net Density
220* 155
594 419
145 102
1606 vtpd** 1132 vtpd**
2.2 ac/du. 3.1 ac/du.
2.1 ac/du. 1.6 ac/du.
* Assumes 1 du/2.2 acres to account for road right-of-way and lot size
variation. Due to mild topography, no deduction for slope was considered.
**Based on 7.3 vtpd/du. Generation from Earlysville Heights is 7.9
vtpd/du. Traffic generation from commercial area and public recreation
area not calculated.
Comprehensive Plan: Earlysville is recommended as a larger Type I village
in the Comprehensive Plan with a residential density of 1 du/acre and
appropriate commercial uses. The surrounding area is recommended for
agricultural-conservation with a density of 1 du/5 acres. Staff has
estimated that 40-50 acres of the Forest Run property is within the
village area with the remainder in agricultural-conservation. This
estimate yields 133 dwellings compared to the request for 155 dwellings.
Therefore, while the Forest Run proposal does not strictly comply with
the'Comprehensive Plan's recommended density, the applicant is pro-
posing a substantial reduction from the estimated 220 dwellings achievable
under existing zoning.
Staff has also reviewed the Forest Run proposal in regard to the text
of the recently-adopted plan amendments (pp. 67-70) Excerpts from the
text and staff comment are as follows:
The southeastern boundary on Route 743 is established
in recognition of the fact that it is an open area at
the intersection with Route 660 following an approach
from the east which is heavily wooded on both sides,
i.e., a sense of place is evident because of this
change and the combination of both old and new (com-
mercial) development on either side of the road at this
point.
The three entrances to the village at the old village
boundaries (Route 663 north and Route 743 south and
east) should have existing vegetation preserved. The
transitions from open to wooded land provide a sense of
identity and a visual boundary that serve to alert the
traveller that he has arrived at a distinct place. The
Route 743 south entrance (at Route 660) is particularly
important due to the long uninterrupted woodlands
leading to the opening and the beginning of village
development. Destruction of trees in this area would
cause a significant change in the approach and character
of this portion of the village.
34.6
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
Most of the frontage of Forest Run in this area would remain wooded
and would be a part of the open space system. Development of the
commercial and recreational areas would alert the traveller prior to
arrival at the intersection of Route 660.
Other wooded areas to be preserved are those along
drainageways and streams and all wooded areas along
roads. As a general rule, in addition to specific
mapped recommendations, it is important to conserve as
many trees as possible during development wherever it
occurs in the village areas. An example of the value
of this policy is immediately evident in the treatment
given wooded areas in and around the development
between the school and Route 764 (the Pines).
As stated previously, sensitivity to these concerns is reflected in
the use of open space in the Forest Run proposal.
The commercial concentration at its present location of
the intersection of Route 743 with Route 660 should be
strengthened. The new and expanding commercial area
should be treated with additional landscaping devices
including berms and shrubbery to soften the visual
impact of this new activity center. The new commercial
area should be allowed to expand within a defined area
as indicated on the plan.
While the commercial area is not located as shown in the plan, the
proposal is to develop in a similar fashion to Earlysville Green to
provide consistency to the area.
Community facilities should be geared to retaining
existing activities and adding to them. New facilities
recommended include athletic/playfields and equipment
at the elementary school.
The proposed public recreation area would provide the facilities
called for in the Comprehensive Plan. While not located at the
elementary school, the proposal has been endorsed by the Parks De-
partment.
Existing Public Roads: Route 743 on the north of Forest Run is listed by
VDH&T as tolerable with 237 vtpd. On the west of Forest Run and south
of Route 660, Route 743 is listed as non-tolerable with 3355 vtpd.
Most traffic generated by the development would use the non-tolerable
portion of Route 743 with destinations in the urban area.
Staff is concerned about the adequacy of existing roads to accommodate
traffic increases generated by development and generally discourages
traffic generation in excess of design capacity. However, staff
recommends that flexibility in review is appropriate in order to
achieve the locational growth objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
Water and Sewer: Forest Run is proposed to be served by a central well
system and individual septic systems. The water system would be
designed in accordance with Albemarle County Service Authority speci-
fications.
In initial review, staff suggested that a cooperative effort by
Teledyne Avionics, Happy Valley Farm RPN, and Forest Run RPN might
result in economic extension of public water to serve the area.
Teledyne has recently purchased the Happy Valley Farm property and has
indicated no immediate plans for development.
The nearest public water line is on the east side of the Charlottesville-
Albemarle Airport. The Albemarle County Service Authority has recom-
mended for engineering and safety reasons that extension of the line
should bypass the runway. The Service Authority has roughly estimated
extension of the line to Forest Run to be in excess of $450,000.
Staff Comment Approval of Wakefield Farm road as a state road would increase
traffic behind the double frontage lots adjacent to it in Earlysville
Heights. Currently a wooded buffer exists between these dwellings and
the roadway. Staff would recommend that improvement to the road be
made on the Forest Run side and that consideration be.given to addi-
tional vegetative plantings or perhaps stockade fencing to further
buffer these residences (Should fencing be employed, staff would
recommend it be located along the top of the existing berm). Staff
opinion is that Viewmont Road should be extended to the new public
road to provide direct access from Earlysville Heights to the com-
mercial areas, public recreation area, and Fomest Run mesidential
areas. While this would increase traffic adjacent to six lots in
Earlysville Heights, staff opinion is that improved access for the
overall subdivision (56 lots) and the travelling public on Route 743
outweigh this concern.
Staff recommends approval of the Forest Run Planned Community for the
following reasons:
Staff opinion is that the proposed density substantially complies
with Comprehensive Plan recommendations; '
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
The plan reflects specific textual recommendations for Earlys-
ville in the Comprehensive Plan;
3. The proposal is generally compatible to the area.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
A. General
No final site plan or subdivision approvals sKa~!i~ii~ibe given until
three copies of a revised preliminary plan for the entire de-
velopment, reflecting conditions of approval contained herein,
have been submitted to the Department of Planning. Such plans
shall be submitted within sixty days of Board approval of this
petition·
Approval is for a maximum of 155 single-family lots subject to
conditions contained herein. Locations and acreages of various
land uses shall comply with the approved plan. In the final site
plan and subdivision process, open space.shall be decicated in
proportion to the number of lots approved. The Commission may
permit dedication of a lesser acreage of open space in a parti-
cular case due to the remoteness of open space areas from that
section platted; provided that, in no event, shall open space
consist of less than 25% of the cumulative area platted; and
provided further that the cumulative total of 209 acres shall be
dedicated concomittant with the approval of the final phase of
residential development.
No grading or construction on slopes of 25% or greater except as
necessary for road construction and lake construction as approved
by the County Engineer;
No grading shall~occur in any area until final subdivision or
site plan approval has been obtained;
e
County Attorney approval of Homeowners' Association agreements
prior to final approvals to include maintenance of private roads,
lake and dam, and common open space;
County Engineer approval of dam specifications;
Proposed recreational facilities shall be constructed and the
public recreation area dedicated to public use prior to any Phase
4 approvals;
Only those areas where a structure, utilities, streets, pedes-
trian ways, lake, or other improvements are to be located shall
be disturbed; all other land shall remain in its natural state;
Phasing of development shall be in the chronological order on the
approved plan;
10.
Zoning regulations governing development in the vicinity of the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport are currently under considera-
tion by the Board of Supervisors;
B. Commercial Area
No commercial use shall be approved until all residential lots of
Phase 3 have been approved and recorded;
Uses permitted within the commercial area may be established as
follows:
a. The following retail sales and service establishments;
3.
4.
5.
6.
10.
11.
12.
13.
15.
Antique, gift, jewelry, notion, and craft shops;
Clothing, apparel, and shoe shops;
Department store;
Drug store, pharmacy;
Florist;
Food and grocery stores including such specialty
shops as bakery, candy, milk dispensary, and wine
and cheese shops;
Furniture and home appliances (sales and service);
Hardware store;
Musical instruments;
Newstands, magazines, pipe and tobacco shops;
Optical goods;
Photographic goods;
Visual and audio appliances;
Sporting goods;
Retail nurseries and greenhouses.
The following services and public establishments:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Administrative, professional offices;
Barber, beauty shops;
Churches, cemeteries;
Clubs, lodges--civic, fraternal, patriotic;
Financial institutions;
Fire and rescue squad stations;
Funeral homes;
)ctober 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
20.
21.
Health spas;
Indoor theaters;
Laundries, dry cleaners;
Laundromat (provided that an attendant shall be on duty
at all hours during operation);
Libraries, Museums;
Nurseries; day care centers;
Eating establishments;
Tailor, seamstress;
Automobile service stations;
Electric,~ gas, oil and communication facilities ex-
cluding multi-legged tower structures and including
poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters, and related
facilities for distribution~of local service and owned
and operated by a public utility. Water distribution
and sewage collection lines, pumping stations and
appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle
County Service Authority;
Public uses and buildings such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated
by local, state or federal agencies; public water and
sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, owned or
operated by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority;
Temporary construction uses;
Temporary events of local non-profit organizations;
Medical center.
By Special Use Permit
1. Commercial recreation establishment's;
2. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and
related towers; gas or oil transmission lines, pumping
stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange
centers, micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and
relay towers, substations and appurtenances;
3. Hospitals;
4, Fast food restaurant;
5. Veterinary office and hospital.
A building, setback of 80 feet from the centerline of Route 743
shall be maintained.
C. Roads
County Engineer approval of private road plans;
Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of
public road plans prior to any final site plan or subdivision
approvals. In such review, Virginia Department of HighwaYs
should be mindful of the County's intent to limit encroachment of
the public road on Earlysville Heights to the maximum extent
practical.
The applicant shall provide connection between Viewmont Road and
the public road subject to Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation approval;
Prior to any final approval, the applicant shall propose a method
of buffering adjacent lots in Earlysville Heights from the public
road. If practical, such buffer shall be installed prior to any
grading and/or construction.
Utilities; Fire Protection
Virginia Department~of Health approval of two septic field
locations within each lot prior to Planning Commission approval
of any such lot. Any lot not having adequate septic field
location shall be combined with a buildable lot and/or added to
the common open space. In addition, Homeowners' Association
agreement shall include provision for use of open space for
residential septic drainfields, if necessary;
Ail uses shall be served by one or more central water systems
approved in accordance with the regulations of the Virginia
Department of Health, the Code of Albemarle County, and all other
applicable law. Water lines and appurtenances shall be sized and
designed in accordance with Albemarle County Service Authority
specifications for possible future acceptance;
If a central well system is employed, Fire Official approval of
apPurtenances for future possible fire hydrant installations.
Fire Official approval of dry hydrant system prior to issuance of
any certificate of occupancy in Phase 3;
If a public water system is employed, Fire Official approval of
hydrant locations and fire flow prior to issuance of any cer-
tificate of occupancy;
A building separation of 100 feet shall be maintained for dwellings.
Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting of September 30, 1980,
recommended approval of SP-80-57 with the conditions as suggested by the Planning staff,
but changed condition A-6 to read: "County Engineer approval of dam specifications;
County Engineer and Zoning Department inspection of the dam construction."; changed
condition A-7 to read: "The public recreation area shall be dedicated prior to any site
plan or subdivision approval. The private recreational facilities shall be constructed
prior to any Phase Four. approvalsl" The Planning Commission also added condition A-ii
reading: "Maximum possible buffer for Lots 36, 37, 38 and 39 from Wakefield Kennel."
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Tucker about the phasing of this project, and the dam which is
proposed. Mr. Tucker said the dam is scheduled to-be constructed sometime during or prior
to phase three. Mr. Fisher said he felt the applicant should address the question of
water runoff in this area and its effect on Chris Greene Lake~
At 8:06 P.M., Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing opened. First to speak was Mr.
Roy Parks, representing the applicant. Mr. Parks presented a series of maps showing
densities, wooded areas, soils and slopes, topography, drainage and roads. Mr. Parks
indicated that drainage from the proposed site would flow toward Chris Greene Lake, but
that sedimentation ponds will be used to prevent runoff and~erosion from~the site. Mr.
Parks said the proposed dam would also aid in preventing runoff into Chris Greene Lake, as
well as serve for additional recreation within the development. He said the road layout
was discussed with the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, and that there
would be a buffer of approximately 300 feet surrounding the site to act as a separation
for the subdivision.
Next to speak was Mr. Tommy Turner who said he is an adjacent property owner, who is
not opposed to the plan presented, only the possibility of opening Viewmont Road and the
road on which the kennel is located. Mr. Turner presented a petition containing 28
signatures representing a total of 102 persons. He said this street is presently used
like a cul-de-sac by dozens of children as a play area and people signing this ~petition
wished to retain Viewmont Road in its present state. Mr. Turner next stated his concern
about the proposed entrance to this development at Route 743 across from the entrance to
Whyte's Store. He indicated that this is already a dangerous and busy intersection, and
suggested the developer take advantage of the road frontage available, and move the
entrance one-half mile closer to Teledyne; thereby eliminating much congestion.
Next to speak was Mrs. Ann Zimmerman, who said she would like to see some protection
of the areas in Earlysville which are already developed, not only the proposed project
under consideration tonight. Mrs. Zimmerman said the plan as presented will disrupt
Earlysville Heights which is an already settled community and may in time cause it's
deterioration. She also reiterated Mr. Turner's concern about the safety of the children
and the opening of Viewmont Road.
Next to speak was Mr. Allan KindricM who said basically he has no objection to this
development, but that it would deprive him of access to his property. Mr. Kindrick said
at the time of construction of Chris Greene Lake, a private easement was taken by the
County for the park area, but that a public easement on the western portion of the pro-
perty remains. Mr. Kindrick indicated that this public easement is shown on the maps used
by Mr. Parks, and stated that if access to his property is not reestablished, he will have
no alternative but to take court action to regain his access. He requested deferral of
action until the matter of right of way is cleared, or pass this special permit request
with a condition that access be granted to his property.
Mr. Wendell Wynn, attorney representing Mary H. and Thomas G. Lupton, said the public
road does not now and never did exist. He said there are no records indicating the
existence of such a road as mentioned by Mr. K±ndrick. Mr. Wynn said in searching the
chain of title, back as far as 1857, there is no mention of a public road. Mr. Wynn said
Mr. Kindrick's property has access from Route 743, and therefore is not being left land-
locked by this proposed special permit, and stated it is not the burden of the Luptons to
grant additional access for Mr. Kindrick.
Mr. Russell Morris said he owns a lot adjacent to the Kennel Road. He said he is
opposed to the development of the Kennel Road area for a public park because if is likely
to lead to disturbances or vandalism of his property. He said he would also like to see
the entrance to this development moved away from the intersection of Route 743 as earlier
suggested by Mr. Turner. Finally, Mr. Morris said he was concerned about the availability
of water, since Teledyne and many homes in the Earl~sville Heights area have experienced
low water'levels.
Mrs. Linda Evers said she lives at the corner of Ridgemont and Viewmont, and stated
her concern for the children of Earlysville Heights if development of Forest Run takes
place as planned.
Mr. Kindrick spoke again saying that at the Planning Commission hearing, Deputy
County Attorney, Frederick W. Payne stated that "once a public right of way, always a
public right of way, unless removed by action of the government." Mr. Kindrick then asked
Mr. Parks if moving the proposed entrance to Forest Run would affect the highway plans.
Mr. Parks said it might affect the category of road which the Highway Department feels is
necessary to accommodate this development. Mr. Parks said if the entrance were moved i~
would not affect the requirements set by the Department of Highways and Transportation,
but that to move the entrance would be most difficult, as it would require crossing a
stream.
Mr. W. B. Coburn, Assistant Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Highways
and Transportation, stated it is the general policy of the Highway Department to align
intersections. He indicated that the only road in Earlysville Heights that is not a cul-
de-sac is Viewmont Road, which dead ends at the property line. Mr. Coburn said if this
were converted into a through street, he did not foresee a great deal of additional
traffic for Viewmont, because it does not create a "short-cut" to anywhere.
Mr. Eugene Wright said as soon as ¥iewmont is opened, it will become a more heavily
travelled road, because people will use it to get to the proposed park. He stated his
concern of it becoming a hangout for teenagers and asked if additional police protection
would be provided to the residents.
Mrs. Zimmerman spoke again adding her concern about the overcrowding of Broadus Wood
School. At this point, with no other member of the public rising to speak, Mr. Fisher
declared the public hearing closed. At 9:12 P.M., Mr. Fisher declared a five minute
recess. The meeting was called back to order at 9:20 P.M.
Mr. Lindstrom asked about the status of Viewmont Road. Mr. St. John said he felt
since the road was entirely a part of Earlysville Heights, no other developer could alter
the state of Viewmont Road without permission of the residents of Earlysvitle Heights. He
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
.350
added that there is no rule in the Subdivision Ordinance which requires a through road if
a road in a new development should directly align with a road in an existing development.
Mr. Lindstrom then asked if there could be a through road between Viewmont and the Kennel
Road. Mr. Turner said there were a number of trees which would block such an access. Mr.
Lindstrom asked Mr. St. John about Mr. Kindrick's claim to a pUblic road access to his
property. Mr. St. John said what the Board is being requested to do here is a simple
rezoning, and that if the developer decides to allow construction to take place on the
site of the disputed public road location, it is at his own risk. Mr. Coburn of the
Highway Department added that if the County wished to see Viewmont Road opened, funds
would have to come from Secondary Road Funds or private home owners.
Dr. Iachetta asked about the possible precedent of accepting land for public use as a
park. Mr. McCann said he felt the parks and recreation plan presented to the Board earlier
this year was far too elaborate and the acceptance of this land by the County should be
carefully considered. Mr. Lindstrom said if this location matches the location of additional
parkgrounds as stated in the Comprehensive Plan, he sees no reason not to accept the
property. He added that if the County does accept this land for public use, that it will
not leave the door open to accepting all private land offered for public parks, because
those pieces of land will not have been noted in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Agnor noted
a memorandum from Mr. Patrick K. Mullaney, Recreation Program Coordinator for the County
Department of Parks and Recreation, as follows:
"Our Department would be definitely interested in seeing the proposed 8.56
acre recreation area associated with the Forest Run Planned Community
developed and turned over to the County to be maintained and controlled as
a public recreation area.
I believe that the proposed facilities would be very heavily used. I would
recommend that the ballfield be developed so that it is adaptable for adult
softball, little league and junior league use and that any additional turf
area be graded flat and left undesignated to be developed in the future by
the County Parks and Recreation Department as multipurpose turf areas.
The location of this facility is excellent as we currently have a large
number of participants from that general area involved in our programs and
we will need additional athletic fields, outdoor basketball courts and play
areas as the population of the area increases in the future."
Mr. Fisher said he felt the overall plan as presented was very good, and
that possibly condition number seven referring to the acceptance of land for a public
park be reworded whereby the County could have that land reserved and then accept it at a
later time. Miss Nash asked about taxes on such property. Mr. St. John said until such
time as it is accepted by the County, the applicant would continue to pay taxes on the
property.
Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to accept the Planning Commission recommen-
dations, with condition 3c(3) regarding the connection with Viewmont Road being stricken.
Mr. Fisher asked if Dr. Iachetta felt additional soil erosion measures should be taken to
protect Chris Greene Lake in the early phases of development, before the sedimentation
lake is constructed. Dr. Iachetta said he felt the Soil Erosion Ordinance would handle
that situation. Mr. Agnor said to his knowledge, the provisions in the Soil Erosion
Ordinance has performed very well. Dr. Iachetta said he would add an additional condition
under General Conditions, #Al2 "Developer will provide sedimentation control provisions to
protect Chris Greene Lake until the major lake is constructed, subject to approval by the
County Engineer." Dr. Iachetta's motion was seconded by Mr. McCann. Mr. McCann said he
would have preferred to see the park land reserved for dedication by the County, but noted
that the land will probably be needed and would be very~expensive to purchase at a later~.
date.
There being no further comments, roll was called, and the motion to accept the
recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve this Special Permit 80-57 with the
changes as noted by Dr. Iachetta, carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 5. ZMA-80-14. Louis and Nancy Skidmore and Holkham Associates, Ltd.
Petition to amend ZMA-79-12 (Lewis Hill RPN) to add 2.57 acres to the residential planned
neighborhood. Located off the northeast side of Route 678 in the Lewi~s Hill Subdivision,
Section III, north of Ivy. County Tax Map 58, Parcels 181, 234, 233, 232, 231 and 230.
Samuel Miller District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 1 and October 8,
1980.)
Mr. Tucker read the Planning staff report and the Planning Commission recommendations
as follows:
Location: Property is described as parcels 181, 234, 233, 232, 231 and
230, Tax Map 58, Samuel Miller District; located off the northeast
side of Route 678 in the Lewis Hill III Subdivision, north of Ivy.
Proposal: To amend ZMA-79-12 to add 2.57 acres to the Lewis Hill RPN for
the purpose of adding two lots to the RPN.
Existing Zoning: The Lewis Hill III RPN (155.537 acres) is zoned RPN/A-i~
and the 2..57 acre parcel is zoned A-1.
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
Comparative~Impact Statistics:
Dwellings
?opulation
VTPD
School ChiZdren
Number of Lots
Total Lot Area
Average Lot Area
Gross Density (Proposed)
Gross Density (Permitted)
Open Space
Previous RPN
Approval
6O
186
420
32.4
60 lots
155.537 acres
1.66 acres
1 du/2.59 acres
0.5 du/acre
52.874 acres (33%)
Proposed Addition
of 2.57 acres
62
192.2
434
35.34
62 lots
15'8.107 acres
1.65 acres
1 du/2.55 acres
0.5 du/acre
52.874 acres (33%)
Staff Comment: The plat attached to the staff report shows the proposed
addition of the 2.57 acres and revisions to lots 57-60 to provide the
~necessary acreage for the addition of two lots.
In addition to the above noted request, the owner of Lot 1 of Lewis
Hill III, Mrs. Barbara Mahnesmith, has requested that an entrance on
Route 678 be allowed. Condition #11 of the Board's approval of the
RPN (June 20, 1979) stated that Lot 1 was to have access on the
interior road. The Mahnesmiths bought the property with the under-
standing that a circular driveway was approved but the condition of
approval was noticed pr±or to the closing. The new owners placed soil
over their driveway to close the entrance onto Route 678 for the
closing and are now requesting that this condition be deleted from the
Board's action on the RPN. This requested amendment would also apply
to the subdivision plat. Mrs. Mahnesmith's letter is attached to the
staff report (photographs were also sent with the letter).
Staff recommends approval of this amendment for the following reasons:
Staff opinion is that the, amendment request is in keeping with
the development in the surrounding area, though the lots are
smaller than those in Lewis Hill, Section Two, immediately to the
south;
The amendment does not appear to significantly alter the intent
of the original RPN.
Recommended Conditions of Approval
Approval is for the addition of two lots for a maximum of 62
lots. Location and acreage shall comply substantially with the
approved plan. Open space shall be dedicated to include these
two lots in Phase I.
County Attorney approval of inclusion of two lots into the
homeowners' agreement prior to final approval;
Writte~n Health Department approval of two septic field locations
for each lot. No septic field shall be sited on any slopes of
25% or greater;
Compliance with other applicable Conditions of ZMA-79-12.
"September 16, 1980
Mr. Robert Tucker, Director of Planni,ng
414 East Market
Charlottesville, Virginia
We purchased our house from R. D. Wade in the spring of this year. At that
time, the house was shown with a circular driveway with one entrance from
Holkham Drive and the other entrance from Route 678. We asked Wade to use
his high interest rate rebate to us to place a hard surface on the driveway --
including the.double entrance. We also paid an additional $400 for a
river rock coating over the entire surface.
At the time of our closing, our lawyer, Gary McGee, said that there was a
title problem with the double entrance since it had not been approved by
the Planning Committee. Wade has refused to assist us in this matter. His
only solution was to dump a load of dirt over part of the extra entrance,
not even evening up the surface level nor bringing it up to the curvature
of the driveway. We have had numerous cars, trucks and emergency vehicles
use the extra entrance as a turn around. Obviously, something has to be
done to remedy the unsightly appearance of the driveway.
We would appreciate your approval to remove the dirt and return the driveway
to the original hard surface. If this cannot be done, we will have to
remove the dirt, rock, hard surface, and sow. seed to remove the illusion of
a driveway. I am sure you can appreciate our desire to return the original
condition of the driveway considering the work and expense involved in
removing the rock. Any work involved in either remedy must be done by us
since our buil~der has'refused to help us.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
(signed) Mrs. James T. Mahnesmith"
October 157 1980 (Regular Night Meeting) .
Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission at its meeting of September 30, 1980,
voted 5-0-2 to recommend approval with an additional fifth condition as follows:
5. Recommends relief from Board's action on Condition 11 of
June 20, 1979 action on ZMA-79-12.
Mr. Tucker said that upon inspection of the property, there is an existing dwelling
on one of the lots which is being requested as part of the addition to this RPN. Mr. ~
Tucker said the septic system for this dwelling is located on the adjacent lot and that an
easement would have to be granted. Mr. Fisher asked where the additional two acres came
from. Mr. Tucker said it' is an adjacent parcel which has since been acquired by the owner
of the original RPN.
Miss Lynn Critzer of Holkham Associates who was present representing the applicant
stated that Mr. & Mrs. Louis Skidmore, the owners of this two acre lot technically own the
entrance to Holkham Drive, so through negotiations it was agreed that .57 acres would be
given to the owners of the two acre parcel adjacent to their lot in exchange for the .57
acres which will complete the entrance to Holkham Drive. Miss Critzer said soil samples
have been taken of lot 61 (where the present septic field is located), but no soil
samples were taken of lot 60 where the present dwelling exists.
Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing open. There being no one wiShing to speak
either for or against this request, Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed.
Mr. Fisher said he was not receptive to this proposal, because he did not like the
idea of eliminating the condition to allow access onto Route 6?8, he did not like approving
a lot with no soil test for drainfield sites and he did not like increasing the density of
this RPN. Mr. Fisher added that he would be willing to defer this request to such time as
the applicant can produce at least two septic field sites on lots 61 and 62, because he
did not like the idea of having a drainfield for lot 62 on lot 61.
Mr. James Mahnesmith asked if the matter of the circular driveway would also be
deferred. Mr. Fisher said he would go out to the site and view the problem, but that
there was no way the Board could act only on one portion of this request. Motion was then
offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to defer this request until November
12, 1980, at which time the applicant is to present soil tests for lots 61 and 62. Roll
was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 6. SP-80-59. Windham, Inc. Petition for a sewer package treatment
plant on 27.14 acres zoned A-1. Located on the_west side of Route 240 at Pow~ll Creek in
Crozet. County Tax Map 56, Parcel 11. White Hall District. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on October 1, and 0ctober~_8, 1980.)
Mr. Tucker read the Planning staff report and the recommendations of the Planning
Commission as follows:
Request: Package treatment plant
Acreage:
Zoning:
27.14 acres
A-1 Agricultural
Location: Property, described as Tax Map 56, Parcel 11, is located on the
west side of Route 240 at Powell's Creek near Crozet.
History: SP-78-64 was approved in_October, 1978, to permit location of
this plant on adjoining property about 900~feet upsDream fromthis
current request.
Staff Comment: This property is within the amended service area of the
Albemarle County Service Authority for Crozet. The package treatment
plant would serve as an interim measure until the Crozet interceptor
is constructed. The plant would serve the Windham property as well as
serving 32 existing dwellings and businesses which currently discharge
raw sewage to Lickinghole Creek. Theplant would not be visible from
Route 240 due to topography and existing vegetation.
Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions:
Site plan approval including screening from adjacent properties
by landscape plantings, earth berming, and/or opaque fencing;
County Engineering review to insure that plant is not located in
the flood plain or otherwise prone to flooding;
Approval of appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies. The
Albemarle County Service Authority shall request such agencies to
emphasize in their reviews the minimization of ~dors and noise
generated by the plant;
The plant shall be located below existing ground level to the
maximum possible extent provided such location shall not be
contrary to Condition No. 2;
The plant and all appurtenances shall be dedicated to the Albemarle
County Service Authority and operated thereafter in accord with
the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority's four-party agreement;
353
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
The plant and all appurtenances shall be constructed by the
applicant at his expense in accordance with plans approved by the
Albemarle County Service Authority;
Connections to the package plant shall be limited to the proposed
convalescent center, and existing connections to the Crozet Sewer
Company; no further connections shall be allowed Unless so ordered
by the Health Department or State Water Control Board to abate
existing health hazards;
Connection shall be mandatory for all Crozet Sewer Company con-
nections unless some other approved means of sewage disposal
could be provided;
Approval is contingent upon acceptance of the system by the State
Water Control Board and Virginia Department of Health as an
interim measure until the Crozet Interceptor is operational;
10.
The package plant shall be removed and the site regraded within
six months of the time when the Crozet Interceptor becomes
operational;
11.
0nly low phosphate soaps and detergents shall be used by the
convalescent center; unscheduled monitoring of the raw phosphate
discharge from the convalescent center shall be conducted by the
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority and the cost of this monitoring
shall be borne by the convalescent center. In the event that
total raw phosphorus output contributed by the convalescent
center exceeds 0.153 lb/day for three tests over a thirty-day
period, the applicant will be required to install additional
treatment facilities at his expense to achieve a level less than
or equal to 0.153 lb/day. Compliance by the applicant shall be
accomplished within 180 days after a written order to that effect
by the Zoning Administrator.
Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission at its meeting of October 7, 1980,
unanimously voted to recommend approval of this special permit with the addition of a
twelfth condition as follows:
12.
Site plan to show 100 year flood plain of Powell Creek and other
on-site streams, groundwater level at tank site, and depth to
which tank is to be buried.
Mr. Tucker'noted receipt of several letters in opposition to this request. Mr.
Fisher asked how this list of conditions differs from the conditions of the original
approval. Mr. Tucker said the only difference is the addition of condition number twelve.
Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing opened, and first to speak was Mr. Rick Richmond,
representing Windham, Inc. Mr. Richmond said the main reason for this change is to lower
costs and to meet sight distance requirements of the Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation.
Mr. Mark Osborne of Gloeckner & Lincoln spoke next on behalf of the applicant, and
stated that the 12 foot by 36 foot tank will be covered as much as possible allowing for
the high ground water table and potential for flooding.
Mrs. Richard W. Moyer said she would like to see the tank located on the spot where
the firm of Gloeckner & Lincoln have placed a stake~ She said this location is higher,
dryer, further from the stream, and more easily concealed. She presented a photograph of
the tank to the Board of Supervisors and stated that something of this size should be
concealed because it is a terrible eyesore. Mrs. Patsy Howard reiterated Mrs. Moyer's
comments.
Mr. Robert Jackson, representing Windham, Inc. said it is the intention of the appli-
cant to make the tank as invisible as possible and that all efforts will be taken to bury
as much of the tank as possible.
No other members of t~e public wished to speak either for or against this petition,
and Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Fisher asked about the condition
requiring lighting of the tank. .Mr. Osborne said there will be only one small light,
enough to make the tank visible for inspections and tests during evening hours. Mr.
Henley said he felt the applicant will do his best to bury the tank, and that he felt it
will not be very visible from the road. Mr. Henley then offered motion to accept the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve this special permit request with the
conditions noted. The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann.
Mr. Fisher, Dr. Iachetta and Mr. Lindstrom all agreed to support the motion with a
stress on the condition that the applicant make every effort to bury the tank. Dr. Iachetta
said if the tank cannot be buried, the Board always has the option to review the site
plan. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that be made a condition of the approval. Mr. Henley
agreed to amend his motion to include condition #13, that if the tank cannot be buried,
the site plan be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. McCann agreed to the amended
motion. Roll was called, and the motion as amended to approve SP-80-59 carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
October 15~ 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
'354
Agenda Item No. 7. SP,80-60. Wellagain'Ltd. PartnerShip. Petition for an 80-bed
residential care center on 6.6+ acres zoned B-1 and R-3. Located on the east side of
Route 780, northeast of its int--ersection with Route 631. County Tax Map 76, Parcels 54
and 46A. ScOttsville District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 1 and
October 8, 1980.)
Mr. Tucker read the planning staff report and the recommendations of the Planning
Commission as follows:
Request: Residential care center (Sections 6-1-21(3); 7-1-16)
Acreage: 6.6025 acres
Zoning: R-3 Residential and B-1 Business~
Location: Property, described as Tax Map 76, Parcels 54 and 46A, is
located on the east side of Route 780 across from Sherwood Manor.
Character of the Area: The southern portion of this site is heavily
wooded. The northern portion of the site is open, low lying land with
some flood plain area. Sherwood Manor is across Route 780. Other
properties in the immediate area are undeveloped.
Staff Comment: The applicant proposes a two-story 80-bed residential care
facility for treatment of alcoholics. Employment of 30 persons per
shift is anticipated.
Water and sewer lines are available at Route 780; sewer capacity will
be aVailable with the completion of the AWT plant. Route 780 is
currently listed as tolerable with 1,549 vtpd.
In view of the proximity of Sherwood Manor and steepness of slope at
the front of the property, staff would recommend building location be
restricted to the rear of the site. Staff opinion is that with
appropriate conditions of approval, this use would not be obtrusive in
the area. Staff recommends approval subject to the following cond-
itions:
Building setback of 100 feet from right-of-way of Route 780.
Existing trees in this area are to be maintained to the maximum
extent practical;
Site plan approval to include provision of access to proposed
realignment of Route 631;
e
ApproVal of appropriate federal, state, and local agencies;
Approval is for an 80-bed residential care facility. Any ex-
pansion shall require amendment of this special use permit.
Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission at its meeting of October 14, 1980, by a
a vote of ~-0-2 recommended approval of this special permit with the additional two
conditions as follows:
Dedication of 60' right-of-way for realignment of Route 780 as
designated by Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
~ubstantially in~ location shown on sketch "X" by plat received
prior to issuance of building permits. If Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation shall fail to provide data sufficient
to delineate such right-of-way prior to site plan approval, the
condition shall be of no effect;
County Service Authority approval of public water and sewer
facilities.
Mr. Fred Russell was present representing the applicant. Mr. Russell said this
proposed treatment center is a cost effective alternative to hospital care. He noted that
the hospital is recognized by Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Mr. Russell said a certificate of
need has been obtained from the State, and he noted that approximately 6% of the population
has an alcohol related problem. He said setback on the site will be done according to the
recommendations of the Planning Commission, and that screening will be done to retain the
appearance of the neighborhood. Mr. Russell said that this hospital will replace those
beds which are being eliminated at Western State Hospital.
Miss Nash asked if this facility would be -strictly for-alcohol treatment or if it
would also include drug abuse patients. Mr. Russell sai.d it would also include some drug
abuse patients, but mostly valium or librium.
Next to speakwas Mr. Gaston Fornes, who stated his concern about this type of
facility being located in a residential area. He said there is potential for expansion of
the facility which could create traffic problems or overcrowding of the roads. Mr. Fornes
said he would like to see a study done as to the potential impact on the area before
anything is approved.
Mrs. Kathy Squires spoke next, stating she is a homeowner in Sherwood Manor. She
stated her concern about the potential traffic problem, noting that there are~no sidewalks
in Sherwood Manor. She asked Mr. Russell about the type of patients that would be at this
facility. Mr. Russell said this is not a psychiatric hospital, and cannot~become a
psychiatric hospital. He said patients are there on a volmntary basis, and cannot be kept
against their will. He did note that some patients are placed in this type of facility
for abuse problems and must either receive treatment or go to jail. Mrs. Karen Kester
said she agreed with Mrs. Squires concerns about the project.
355
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
Mr. Bill McDermott, a member of the Board of Directors of the Sherwood Manor Home-
owners' Association, presented a written statement to the Board (NOTE: Copy of this
statement is on permanent file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.) in
which he summarized five major points. First, the Homeowners concern about the security
aspects of the facility; second, the problems of additional traffic; third, screening of
the proposed facility; fourth, location of the entrance to the facility; and fifth, avail-
ability of parking for the facility.
Dr. Philip Collins said he wished to assure the people in the neighboring area that
their concerns of violent, "crazy", desperate people is unwarranted. He said most patients
are very quiet people who are only seeking medical care for their particular problem.
Miss Missy Scott said she felt this type facility would help the everyday people who
have gotten hooked on alcohol or vallium because of problems at home or prescriptions
issued by a family physician. She gave the analogy of Betty Ford who required this type
of care, and noted that Mrs. Ford does not fit the example of a street corner drug dealer.
Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Lindstrom stated ~is concern
about the consistency of this use with that specified in the Comprehensive Pl'an. Dr.
Iachetta said he was biased against these type facilities in a residential area, because
he had two patients who escaped from such a facility, break into his home. Mr. McCann
said this proposed facility is something that most people feel is an asset to a community,
but don't want it located near them. Mr. Henley said if Mr. Tucker feels this is a proper
request for a special permit, then he will support the request.
Miss Nash asked about security. Mr. Russell said there is really nothing to secure.
The patients in this hospital are free to come and go as they Wish, and he reiterated that
they are not criminals. Dr. Collins said if the Board were to impose a condition that a
security guard be hired to keep watch of the facility he would have to comply, but felt it
unnecessary. Miss Nash next asked about the entrance being across from Sherwood Manor.
Mr. Coburn of the Highway Department said this was his first took at the proposed plan,
but noted there seemed to be several good locations for an entrance along Route 780.
Mr. Fisher stated his concerns for the roads in the area, and noted he would like to
see additional right-of-way donated which would help realign the roads in the area to
better accommodate the additional traffic. Mr. Fisher added he felt a great need for this
type facility in the locality, but was not sure an 80 bed hospital fits the definition of
low-medium residential as called for in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Agnor pointed out
that if the 80 bed hospital were looked at as being family units of about 3.4 members
each, that would be approximately 25 families, giving a total density for the 6.6 acres
equalling 3.8 dwelling units per acre which falls well within the definition of low
density residential use.
Miss Nash offered motion that this special permit be approved with the addition of a
condition #7 reading; "Site plan be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors showing road
improvements, visual barriers, 100 foot setback, new and old road alignment, main entrance
location and on-site parking location." The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley. Dr.
Iachetta and Mr. McCann felt this site plan should only be reviewed by the Planning
Commission. Mr. Lindstrom said he could not support this request, as he felt this facility
would not be conducive to the area. Roll was then called, and SP-80-60 was approved by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, McCann and Miss Nash.
Dr. Iachetta and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 8. SP-80-61. Antonio Martinez. Petition for a Home Occupation -
Class B - on 35.421 acres zoned A-1. Located on the east side of Route 20, .approximately
two miles northeast of Carter's Bridge. County Tax Map 102, Parcel 32A. Scottsville
District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 1 and October 8, 1980.)
Mr. Tucker read the Planning staff report and the Planning Commission recommendations
from its meeting of October 7, 1980 as follows:
Request: Home Occupation: Class B
Acreage.: 35.42 acres
zoning: A-1 Agriculture
Location: Property, described as Tax Map 102, Parcel 32A, is located on
the east side of Route 20 South.
Character of the Area: This property is open and rolling. The workshop, a
converted, garage, is located 200 feet from the nearest adjoining
dwelling. Situated 300 feet from Route 20 South, the workship is at a
lower elevation and not visible from the road.
Staff Comment: The applicant proposes to make hand-made custom guitars and
other stringed instruments in the 400 square foot workshop. Tools
involved would include a jointer, planer, band saw, and radial arm
saw. No employees would be involved. The applicant estimates 4-6
weeks of work to produce one instrument. Staff opinion is that this
use would not be obtrusive to the area. Staff recommends approval
subject to compliance with Section 16-44.1 Home Occupation: Class B
of the Zoning Ordinance.
356
October 15:
Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission recommended by a vote of 5-1 to recom-
mend approval of this petition.
Mr. Fisher asked if there was any controversy regarding this request. Mr. Tucker
said one Planning Commission member felt there should be a restriction on the hours of
operation. Mr. McOann said a request of this nature should be able to receive staff
approval. Mr. Henley felt it poor practice to schedule a request of this nature so late
on the agenda.
Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing open, and there being no one wishing to speak
either for or against this petition, declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Martinez
said he had no intention to expand the existing structure and felt his work would not
disturb any neighbors in the area.
Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to accept the recom-
mendation of the Planning Commission and approve SP-80-61. Roll was called, and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. PA. Lottery Permit - Woodbrook Elementary School P.T.O. Mr. Agnor
said they wish to hold a raffle on October 24, 1980, proceeds to go to school instructive
programs. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to approve this
lottery permit in accordance with the Board's adopted rules for issuance of such permits.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 9B. Lottery Permit - Maple Grove Christian Womans Fellowship. Mr.
Agnor said this organization wishes to hold a raffle to be held on November 8, 1980,
proceeds to go to church related activities. Motion was offered for approval by Mr.
Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, in accordance with the'Board's adopted rules for
issuance of such permitse. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 9C. Lottery Permit - LaLeche LeagUe of Virginia (Charlottesville
Chapter). Mr. Agnor said this organization wishes to hold a raffle to be held on October
18, 1980. Motion was offered for approval by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, in
accordance with the Board's adopted rules for issuance of such ~ermits. Roll was called
and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 9D. Lottery Permit - University of Virginia NROTC Honor Guard. Mr.
Agnor said this organization wishes to hold a raffle to be held on November 24, 1980.
Motion was offered for approval by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, in accordance
with the.Board's adopted rules for issuance of such permits. Roll was called and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 10. Resolution conveying easement to VEPCO for underground service
at Lane Building. Mr. Agnor presented the following resolution to the Board for its
consideration.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Chairman and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, be and they are hereby authorized to execute
a certain agreement of easement to bear date of October 15, 1980, conveying
to the Virginia Electric and Power Company, a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Virginia, a right of way across the
property of the County of Albemarle as shown by plat bearing Number CH-146-
80, exhibited to the Board of Supervisors, same to be signed by the Chairman
on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County and attested and
seal affixed by its Clerk.
357
October 15, 1980 (Regular Night Meeting)
Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom for adoption of this resolution as submitted.
The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 11.
matters to discuss.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
There were no other
Agenda Ztem No. 12. Adjournment. At 11:55 P.M., motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta,
seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adjourn to October 20, 1980, at 7:30 P.M. in the County
Executive's Conference Room. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash.
None.
Chairman