2003-01-15(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 1)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on January
15, 2003, at 6:00 p.m., Room 241, County Office Building, Mclntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mr. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter
F. Perkins, Mr. Dennis S. Rooker and Ms. Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis,
Clerk, Ella W. Carey, and, County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m., by the Chairman, Mr. Dorrier.
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
Agenda Item No. 4. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Tom Dulaney Slonaker said for the last three years he has been the owner and operator of
Arby's Restaurant at Forest Lakes. He has barely managed to survive financially due to the difficult
economic times following 9-11, the sniper, the drought, increased water, gas, electricity, insurance costs
and tax burdens. There is also what he considers over-regulation by certain agencies, and this has had a
negative effect on his business. First was the insistence of the Architectural Review Board that the proto-
type Arby's design not be built in Albemarle County. It would have resembled the Kentucky Fried Chicken
restaurant on Emmet Street in Charlottesville. The ARB said that design was not Jeffersonian enough so
the roof had to be flattened and the colors muted. Then they were told they could not build the traditional
national sign, but had to have a small sign like other current business owners, but theirs had to be behind
the existing trees, so the business is not seen from Route 29. The signs had to be Iow-light because of the
Dark Skies Ordinance and that made for a dangerous situation in their parking lot. All of this has harmed
the business.
Mr. Slonaker said that most recently the Zoning Department has engaged in what he calls
harassment by insisting that he remove the Arby's flag from his flagpole. The flag has been on the pole for
three years. They have demanded on dozens of occasions that he remove his van (which has signage
identifying it as Arby's) from the front of his parking lot where it can be seen from Route 29. He said that
people in the restaurant business communicate with the public through pictures in their windows. Some
show pictures of food, some show 99¢ menus, some give operating hours. He thinks the County is trying to
destroy his ability to compete with other businesses along Route 29 that reside in the City by saying he is a
County business and "he can't do that." That is an anti-business attitude and he would like to see it
changed. As to his flag, it is a flag and it is not a sign. Yet the County has taken a "warrant in debt" out
against him because he is in violation of the sign ordinance by flying the Arby's flag. He said a number of
attorneys have come forward and asked to represent him in this case, including the Rutherford Institute.
They sent a letter to the County Attorney this week asking that he decease and desist on the order for the
warrant in debt. He asks that this Board support that request, and force the Board of Zoning Appeals to not
take him to court and fine him over the issue of flying the flag. Further, he asks that this Board bring some
sanity and reasonableness to this dispute by striking the clauses that refer to such activities as flags and
window signs as illegal signage. Plenty of case study has been unearthed by his attorneys to indicate that
these laws are unconstitutional and have been challenged and struck down.
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Rooker, seconded by Mr.
Bowerman, to approve Items 5.2 and 5.3 on the Consent Agenda, and to pull Item 5.1 for another meeting.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
Item 5.1. Approval of Minutes: March 25(A) and August 7, 2002.
No minutes had been read. They will be moved to the next meeting for approval.
Item 5.2. Authorize County Executive to execute Service Agreements with Earlysville Volunteer
Fire Company, Inc., and Scottsville Volunteer Fire Department, Inc.
It was noted in the executive summary that several years ago, Albemarle County established a
revolving fund to be used by the ten volunteer fire and rescue companies in the County. This fund,
currently funded at $2.0 million, provides the volunteer companies a means of acquiring needed flreflghting
and rescue squad equipment and buildings, interest free, with repayments being deducted from their
annual County appropriation. Requests for disbursements from the fund are monitored and approved by
Albemarle County's Fire Rescue Advisory Board (ACFRAB). The amount currently available in the
revolving fund is $361,301.33.
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 2)
Earlysville Volunteer Fire Company has requested, through ACFRAB, an advance of $43,750 to
purchase a new brush truck to be utilized for brush fires, drafting operations and for inclement weather
responses, and has executed the standard service agreement approved by the County Attorney's office.
This advance can be disbursed upon approval of this agreement by the Board.
Scottsville Volunteer Fire Department has requested, through ACFRAB, an advance of $90,000 to
replace its current outdated air packs. The new air packs have the capability of being upgraded as
technology advances. This would also help the department move toward standardizing packs and making
it easier on scenes when multiple companies are present. Scottsville has executed the standard service
agreement approved by the County Attorney's office. This advance can be disbursed upon approval of this
agreement by the Board.
Repayment of these allocations will be over an eight-year period beginning in FY 2003-04.
ACFRAB approved these requests on November 20, 2002. Staff recommends that the County Executive
be authorized to execute the service agreements.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board authorized the County Executive to execute
the following service agreements with the Earlysville Volunteer Fire Company and the Scottsville
Volunteer Fire Company
SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 16th day of January, 2003, by and between the
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision, (the "County"), and the
EARLYSVlLLE VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC., a Virginia Corporation, (the "Fire
Company").
WHEREAS, the Fire Company agrees to continue to provide valuable fire
protection services in Albemarle County in its delineated service area as set forth on the
Response Area Maps located at the Emergency Communications Center ("Service
Area"); and
WHEREAS, the Fire Company desires the County to contribute Forty-three
Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty Dollars ($43,750.00) for the purchase of a brush truck for
providing fire services.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above stated premises, the
County and Fire Company agree, as follows:
1. The County shall contribute to the Fire Company Forty-three Thousand Seven
Hundred Fifty Dollars ($43,750.00) to be used for the purchase of a brush truck. The
funds shall be allocated from the County's Fire Fund ("Fund") and shall be made
available upon execution of this agreement.
2. The Fire Company agrees that the County will withhold Five Thousand Four
Hundred Sixty-Eight Dollars and Seventy-five Cents ($5,468.75) from the County's annual
appropriation to the Fire Company's operating budget beginning July 2003 through July
2010. Thus at the end of eight (8) years, which is the term of this Agreement, a total of
$43,750.00 shall be withheld. This withholding may be used by the County to replenish
the Fund for so long as the County, at its discretion, continues such Fund. This
withholding is in addition to the withholding for all prior advances under the prior service
agreements with the Fire Company dated February 3, 1993, and September 9, 1999.
The Fire Company agrees that any amount of this repayment that may exceed the
County's annual appropriation will be remitted to the County no later than July 31 of each
repayment year.
3. The Fire Company agrees that the Forty-three Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty
Dollars ($43,750.00) contribution shall be used only for the purchase of the brush truck to
be used to provide fire services in Albemarle County. The Fire Company further agrees
that it shall not convey the brush truck or any interest therein to any party other than the
County without the County's prior written consent during the useful life of the brush truck
or the term of this Service Agreement, whichever is longer. For purposes of this
Agreement, the useful life of the brush truck shall be ten years from the date the brush
truck is placed into service. In addition, the Fire Company agrees that any insurance
proceeds received from a claim related to any damage to the brush truck shall be used
entirely for the immediate repair and improvement of the brush truck unless the County
expressly authorizes in writing a different use for such funds.
4. The Fire Company agrees that at such time as it no longer provides volunteer
fire protection services in Albemarle County while operating under the jurisdiction of the
County that it shall convey all of its interest in the vehicle described in paragraph 1 to the
County at no additional cost to the County upon the County's request.
5. The County and Fire Company agree that the covenants set forth in their prior
agreements dated February 3, 1993, and September 9, 1999, to the extent they are not
in conflict with this Agreement, shall remain in full force and effect.
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 3)
6. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prevent additional
appropriations by the County to the Fire Company, at the discretion of the County Board
of Supervisors, to support, enhance, or augment the services to be provided by the Fire
Company.
SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 16th day of January, 2003, by and between the
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision, (the "County"), and the
SCOTTSVILLE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT, INC., a Virginia Corporation, (the
"Fire Department").
WHEREAS, the Fire Department agrees to continue to provide valuable fire
protection services in Albemarle County in its delineated service area as set forth on the
Response Area Maps located at the Emergency Communications Center ("Service
Area"); and
WHEREAS, the Fire Department desires the County to contribute Ninety
Thousand Dollars ($90,000.00) for the purchase of air packs for providing fire services.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above stated premises, the
County and Fire Department agree, as follows:
7. The County shall contribute to the Fire Department Ninety Thousand Dollars
($90,000.00) to be used for the purchase of air packs. The funds shall be allocated from
the County's Fire Fund ("Fund") and shall be made available upon execution of this
agreement.
8. The Fire Department agrees that the County will withhold Eleven Thousand
Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($11,250.00) from the County's annual appropriation to the
Fire Department's operating budget beginning July 2003 through July 2010. Thus at the
end of eight (8)years, which is the term of this Agreement, a total of $90,000.00 shall be
withheld. This withholding may be used by the County to replenish the Fund for so long
as the County, at its discretion, continues such Fund. This withholding is in addition to the
withholding for all prior advances under the prior service agreement with the Fire
Department dated October 13, 2000. The Fire Department agrees that any amount of
this repayment that may exceed the County's annual appropriation will be remitted to the
County no later than July 31 of each repayment year.
9. The Fire Department agrees that the Ninety Thousand Dollars ($90,000.00)
contribution shall be used only for the purchase of air packs to be used to provide fire
services in Albemarle County. The Fire Department further agrees that it shall not
convey the air packs or any interest therein to any party other than the County without the
County's prior written consent during the useful life of the air packs or the term of this
Service Agreement, whichever is longer. For purposes of this Agreement, the useful life
of the air packs shall be ten years from the date the air packs are placed into service. In
addition, the Fire Department agrees that any insurance proceeds received from a claim
related to any damage to the air packs shall be used entirely for the immediate repair and
improvement of the air packs unless the County expressly authorizes in writing a different
use for such funds.
10. The Fire Department agrees that at such time as it no longer provides
volunteer fire protection services in Albemarle County while operating under the
jurisdiction of the County that it shall convey all of its interest in the air packs described in
paragraph 1 to the County at no additional cost to the County upon the County's request.
11. The County and Fire Department agree that the covenants set forth in their
prior agreement dated October 13, 2000, to the extent they are not in conflict with this
Agreement, shall remain in full force and effect.
12. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prevent additional
appropriations by the County to the Fire Department, at the discretion of the County
Board of Supervisors, to support, enhance, or augment the services to be provided by the
Fire Department.
Item 5.3. Adopt resolution to authorize financing of Permit Tracking System through SunTrust
Bank.
It was noted in the executive summary that in October, 2002, the Board approved the acquisition of
a Permit Tracking System to be funded through a lease/purchase agreement with the vendor. Interest
rates for this lease/purchase were requested from several banks. Based on the responses, the lowest
rate, 3.1 percent, was received from SunTrust Bank. In order to complete this transaction, the bank has
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 4)
requested adoption of a resolution authorizing the financing. Staff recommends that the Board adopt a
resolution authority this financing through SunTrust Bank with semi-annual payments for five years at a rate
of 3.1 percent.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED by the Board to award the financing bid as
recommended by the County Executive
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board to authorize the County
Executive and County Attorney to execute pertinent documents with SunTrust Bank for
the County's lease/purchase of computer software in the amount of $190,000.00 at the
3.10 percent rate.
Agenda Item No. 6. Public hearing to receive comments on a proposed lease agreement between
the County and Wachovia Bank, pursuant to Va. Code § 15.2-1800(B). (Notice of this public hearing was
advertised in the Daily Progress on December 30, 2002.)
Mr. Tucker said that on November 6, 2002, the County entered into a purchase agreement to
acquire the former Wachovia Bank Operations Center property located at 547 Old Lynchburg Road. As a
condition of the purchase agreement, the County agreed to lease space within the property to Wachovia
Bank for a one-year period. The County Attorney's Office, assisted by the Department of Engineering and
Public Works, is in the final stages of negotiating a lease agreement with Wachovia Bank for up to a
one-year rental term beginning on the date the property is transferred to County ownership. The rental
amount is based upon a fair market rental rate of $12 per square foot, with Wachovia agreeing to lease up
to 45,000 square feet within the facility. Wachovia would be responsible for all security and janitorial
services in connection with its use of the property during the rental term, and would also be responsible for
its share of utilities. Wachovia's use of the space would not interfere with any County uses of the property
during the one-year term.
Mr. Tucker said Virginia Code § 15.2-1800 authorizes the County to enter into a lease for this
purpose once a public hearing has been held. Staff recommends that the Board approve a lease of the
Wachovia Operations Center property and authorize the County Executive to execute a Lease Agreement
on the County's behalf after holding the public hearing.
At this time, Mr. Dorrier opened the public hearing. With no one rising to speak, the public hearing
was closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Martin that the Board approve a lease of the Wachovia
Operations Center property and further authorized the County Executive to execute a Lease Agreement on
the County's behalf. The motion was seconded by Mr. Perkins. Roll was called, and the motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 7. SP-2002-050. Shadwell Animal Hospital (Signs #60 & 61). Public hearing on
a request to allow veterinary office & hospital in accord w/Sec 22.2.2.5 & 5.1.11 of the Zoning Ord. TM 79,
P 19, contains 1.988 acs. Loc on S sd of Louisa Rd (Rt 22) approx 600 ft from intersec of Rt 22 & Rt 250.
Znd C-1 & EC. Scottsville Dist. (Notice of this public hearing was advertised in the Daily Progress on
December 31,2002, and January 6, 2003.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report. He said this will allow for operation of a veterinary
office and hospital in an existing 2112 square feet formerly occupied by a restaurant next to Shadwell
Antiquaries. Business hours would be 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to
12.00 p.m. on Saturdays. The applicants would employ two full-time employees, two part-time employees,
and one to one and one-half veterinarians.
Mr. Cilimberg said the property is surrounded by Route 22 on the north, the Shadwell Market to the
west, Route 250 to the southwest, and the CSX Railroad to the southeast. The applicant requested a
waiver of one section to reduce the required setback from 550 feet. Considering its location, staff feels any
noise generated by the animal hospital would be minimal compared to the noise generated by vehicular
and railroad traffic. The closest residence is approximately 650 feet to the southeast of the site. There
would be no outside animal facilities and animals would be boarded overnight for medical purposes only.
Mr. Cilimberg said the site is zoned commercial and would support this use. The existing
restaurant site is now vacant and the proposed use would provide a service to the surrounding area. Staff
noted the question of responsibility these applicants would have for road improvements at the Route
250/Route 22 intersection. Their contribution for any road improvements would be based on their traffic
which is actually less than what the restaurant was generating. This would be a matter to be addressed
with any site plan amendment, and does not need to be addressed with this special use permit.
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 5)
Mr. Cilimberg said staff recommended approval with one condition, and the Planning Commission,
at its meeting on December 10, 2002, by a vote of 4:0 also recommended approval subject to a condition
which requires that the amended site plan be submitted within 90 days of any approval by the Board. The
applicant has requested that the condition be amended to simply say "an amended site plan ... shall be
submitted for approval" specifying no time limitation. He said the petition was originally conditioned to
reflect a septic plan. The Health Department had expressed a desire to see the parcel subdivided so it
would be easier for them to identify the septic systems to the actual parcel. The Health Department has
now changed their opinion, and has approved a septic system for this veterinarian saying this use will have
less of an impact than the restaurant. He said Zoning reviewed the condition, but had no comments, but
they have noted that if the subdivision takes place, it will require a variance because of the relationship of
the use to the parcel. He said that in reality, any use of the building will require a zoning clearance. Any
particular aspects of the use related to the site would be addressed with that zoning clearance, and if a site
plan amendment was found to be necessary, it could be required at that time. So in actuality, the Board
does not need to condition the petition at all. If they do, the applicant is willing to accept the condition
stating: "An amended site plan showing the change in use shall be submitted for approval."
Mr. Rooker read a section from the Zoning Ordinance (5.1.11 .a) concerning a requirement for a
fence. He said that seems to be an ordinance requirement, and he asked if it is taken care of at time of site
plan approval. Mr. Cilimberg said it is part of zoning requirements so is simply not repeated.
Mr. Rooker asked about any contribution to road improvements being taken care of at the site plan
stage. Mr. Davis said if a site plan is required, it can be taken care of then. As a condition of the special
use permit, the Board can require a site plan so the Board will know that the site plan will show the
requirements of 5.1.11 .a. Depending on the improvements proposed by the applicant, it may require a site
plan anyway. Mr. Cilimberg said the need would be driven by the improvements proposed.
Mr. Rooker said for those two reasons, it might be reasonable to continue to require a site plan.
At this time, Mr. Dorrier asked the applicant to speak.
Dr. Richard Godine said he was present to answer questions. He said everything they want to do is
outlined in the packet of materials the Board has. He appreciates the Board's consideration.
At this time, Mr. Dorrier opened the public hearing.
Dr. Martin Schulman said he has practiced in Albemarle County for the last 20 years. His
experience has been that the impact on the roads and the septic system is very Iow. He would recommend
approval of the request.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was closed, and the matter
placed before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Rooker to approve SP-2002-050 subject to the one revised
condition reading: "1. An amended site plan showing the change in use shall be submitted for approval."
The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 8. SP-2002-057. Rivanna Ridge Giant Food Store-Outdoor Sales/Display (Signs
#72, 73 & 75). Public hearing on a request to allow outdoor storage & display of merchandise in accord
w/Sec 30.6.3.2.b of the Zoning Ord. TM 78, Ps 73A & 76. Loc on Rt 250 in Giant Shopping Center. Znd
PD-MC. Rivanna Dist. (Notice of this public hearing was advertised in the Daily Progress on December 31,
2002, and January 6, 2003.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report. He said the Giant Food Store at the Rivanna Ridge
Shopping Center proposes the sale of seasonal items on the sidewalk just outside the front door of the
store, along the building face. He said the ARB expressed no objections to the use, and recommended
conditions for its approval. Staff thinks that compliance with the ARB, and a site plan amendment will
protect the public's health, safety and general welfare. He said there is a condition which limits the area of
display allowing sufficient width of the sidewalk for pedestrians. He said staff and, the Planning
Commission at its meeting on December 3, 2002, recommended approval of this petition subject to
conditions.
At this point, Mr. Dorrier asked the applicant to speak.
Mr. John Cooney with JCA Architects was present. He said they have revised their request to abide
by the ARB comments and the Planning Commission.
The public hearing was opened. With no one from the public rising to speak, the public hearing
was closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Martin to approve SP-2002-057, subject to the conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thomas.
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 6)
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
The site improvements shall be developed in general accord with the attached
Minor Site Plan Amendment, entitled Giant Food Outdoor Sales/Display exhibit,
dated September 20, 2002;
The owner shall obtain an Architectural Review Board (ARB) Certificate of
Appropriateness;
Items shall be displayed only in the areas of the covered walkway identified in
green on the plan submitted for ARB review, entitled "Ground Floor Plan," dated
August 2, 2001;
No additional lighting shall be introduced to the site for the purpose of
illuminating this display;
No new signage associated with this use shall be permitted. Pricing information
shall not be displayed higher than three (3) feet;
Display areas shall be located within five (5) feet of the front wall of the building;
Displayed items shall not exceed seven and one-half (7 1/2) feet in height,
except that in areas where items are displayed in front of windows those items
may not exceed window sill height, but in no case can bagged mulch or bagged
potting soil exceed three (3) feet in height;
Display items may include fruits, vegetables, plants, trees, shrubs, bagged
mulch, and bagged potting soil; and
Sales not requiring permanent installations may also be conducted within the
display area.
Agenda Item No. 9. SP-2002-058. Crozet Baptist Church Parsonage Amendment (Signs #45 &
62). Public hearing on a request to allow office use in 2 existing church parsonages, in accord w/Sec
14.2.2.12 of the Zoning Ord. TM 56A1, Ps 82 & 100, contains 4.506 acs. Located on St. George Ave
approx 1/4 mi W of intersec of St. George & Crozet Avenue (Rt 810). Znd R-2 & designated Neighborhood
Density Residential (3-6 du/ac) in Comp Plan, in the Community of Crozet. White Hall Dist. (Notice of this
public hearing was advertised in the Daily Progress on December 31,2002, and January 6, 2003.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the request. He said there is an existing special use permit (SP-1999-
064) which was approved in January, 2000, allowing religious education activities on the first floor of two
parsonages owned by the church. The church has indicated that a rearrangement of office space is
needed for their volunteers coordinating certain functions such as weddings, dinners and special events.
The church proposes to relocate some equipment (desks and files) associated with these occasional
functions to the existing approved religious education space. It is anticipated that the two activities (religious
education and program coordination for these occasional functions) can co-exist easily since the schedules
vary widely according to the church member's time. No new use is being introduced at the site and no new
construction will result. He said that the staff and the Planning Commission (at its meeting on December
10, 2002) recommended approval subject to three conditions.
At this time Mr. Dorrier asked the applicant to speak.
Mr. Paul Gaertener said he was present to answer questions. There were none.
The public hearing was opened. With no one from the public rising to speak, the public hearing
was closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins to approve SP-2002-058 subject to the three conditions
recommended by the Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin. Roll was called, and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate
special use permit;
Any enlargement or expansion of the church use or structures will require an
amendment to the Special Permit (SP-2002-058); and
The use of the residences/parsonages for Sunday School/educational
classes/office use shall be permitted only on the first floor of each
residence/parsonage located on Tax Map 56A1, Section 1, Parcels 82 and 100.
Agenda Item No. 10. SP-2002-060. Floral Images (Sign #43). Public hearing on a request to
allow for floral arrangement business in accord w/Sec 10.2.2.32 & 5.2 of the Zoning Ord. TM 55, P 99,
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
contains 2.69 acs. Loc on W sd of Yancey Mill Lane (Rt 825), approx .25 mis SE from the intersec of Rt
825 & Rt 250 West (Rockfish Gap Turnpike). Znd RA. White Hall Dist. (Notice of this public hearing was
advertised in the Daily Progress on December 31,2002, and January 6, 2003.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the request. He said this is a request for a Home Occupation-Class B
permit for operation of a floral arrangement business. The applicants propose to construct a 1120 square
foot garage/studio that would be used for arranging cut flowers. Hours of operation would be Monday
through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., with occasional Saturday Hours. The applicants would not have any
additional employees. The applicants have been operating Floral Images for 13 years at the same location
in the Pantops Shopping Center. The business has been established, and it allows the applicants to
operate the business without walk-in customers, but there would be an occasional bridal consultation which
would take place at the residence. Business deliveries from a wholesale supplier occur two or three times
each week in standard cargo vans. The applicants would then deliver the finished floral arrangements to
the customer's site using a mid-size family van.
Mr. Cilimberg said the property is close to the end of a dead-end road, Yancey Mill Lane. There
are a total of four residences on the road. Staff does not believe the level of intensity would be
incompatible with the character of the rural area. He said staff and the Planning Commission, at its meeting
on December 3, 2002, recommended approval subject to one condition.
With no questions for staff, Mr. Dorrier asked the applicants to speak.
Mr. Joseph Strickler and Mr. William Herring, co-owners, were present to answer any questions.
They will never have more than seven clients per week on the property. Most of their business is conducted
over the telephone.
The public hearing was opened. With no one from the public rising to speak, the public hearing
was closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins to approve SP-2002-060 with the one condition recommended
by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The condition of approval is set out in full below.)
1. There shall be no more than seven (7) clients per week on the premises.
Agenda Item No. 11. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Tucker said he had sent an e-mail to the Board members indicating that a Resolution of
Support has been requested by VACO and VML to go to the General Assembly supporting House Bill 1397
which would give counties the same taxing powers as that granted to cities. He said a draft of the resolution
had been laid on the table tonight for the Board to review. He recommended adoption of the resolution.
Motion to adopt the following resolution was offered by Mr. Martin (and not a sound was heard),
seconded by Mr. Rooker, and carried by the recorded vote which follows:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT
HB 1397
ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
WHEREAS, sixty-two percent of the revenue generated by Virginia's local
governments to pay for local services is generated at the local level; and
WHEREAS, seventy-five percent of this local revenue is derived from four
sources: the real estate tax, the personal property tax, charges for services, and the
sales tax; and
and
WHEREAS, the real estate tax makes up the largest portion of local revenue;
WHEREAS, because counties have very few unrestricted revenue options
available, the burden to balance county budgets often falls on the real estate tax; and
WHEREAS, counties in Virginia need to diversify their revenue base to reduce
the burden on the real estate tax; and
WHEREAS, the Code of Virginia sets forth specific financial powers for cities and
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
towns that are not provided to counties; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1104 of the Code of Virginia gives cities and towns the
ability to levy cigarette taxes and admissions taxes, levy transient occupancy taxes without
a cap or restrictions, and levy a meals tax without a cap and without holding a voter
referendum; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.2 of the Code of Virginia should be amended to grant
counties the same powers of taxation as cities and towns; and
WHEREAS, HB 1397 (Hull) amends Sections 15.2-204 and 15.2-1200 of the
Code of Virginia to grant counties the same powers of taxation as cities and towns; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Albemarle County supports HB
1397 and urges its General Assembly delegation to support HB 1397 in the 2003
General Assembly.
Mr. Dorrier said the Board got some information about a bill involving the allocation of tourist funds.
Mr. Tucker said this is information that Mr. David Blount requested. He does not know the status of the bill.
Mr. Davis said there was to be a meeting this week of people from the tourist industry to discuss their
position on the bill.
Mr. Rooker said the Board was able to finish its business tonight in about 30 minutes. One reason
for that is the vigilance of the Planning Commission. If the Commission were over vigilant, the Board could
always correct that if it felt it was necessary. If the Commission were not vigilant enough, the Board would
have to look at the minute details of each application to determine whether or not additional things needed
to be discussed. Of the petitions on the agenda today, a review of the Commission's minutes shows
substantial debate over some of the factors that went into the conditions. He thinks it is often good that the
Commission sometimes errs on the side of being overly vigilant because they are often the only ones who
will bring some of these things to the attention of the Board.
Mr. Bowerman said that is an excellent point.
Ms. Thomas said before she became a Board member she was involved as a legislative liaison for
the University, so when staff sends out information from David Blount as to what is going on, she sometimes
gets involved in that because she enjoys doing so. She wanted to be sure the other Board members know
that she does this, because the Board members can have any level of involvement that they want to have.
On January 23, there is a lobbying day at the General Assembly, and there is still room in the car for
someone else to go along. She said there is no reason for her to "hog all the fun.
Mr. Bowerman said the Board might be out of this meeting tonight at 6:35 p.m., but in March and
April, it will be a different case. There could be public comment of a substantial amount at those meetings.
Mr. Davis said he has received a letter from the Rutherford Institute on behalf of Mr. Slonaker. His
office is reviewing the legal arguments being made and he will be discussing those issues with the Board in
the near future.
Mr. Dorrier said the one thing he wants to know more about is how a flag becomes a sign. Mr.
Davis said under the present Zoning Ordinance, other than State, Local and Federal flags, flags are
prohibited unless they are under a size that exempts all signs. That is a restriction in Albemarle County
which is different from that in other localities. Mr. Tucker said flags were tied in with pennants and banners,
etc.
Mr. Rooker said when a flag identifies a business it takes the place of a sign. It does the same
thing a sign would do. Mr. Davis said there may be a different approach that would not be subject to the
type of attack Mr. Slonaker has made. That may be something for the County to explore, but conceptually,
it is exactly that point, a flag can be a sign if it is identifying a business and do what a sign would normally
do.
Mr. Rooker said the County's sign requirements which minimizes sign visibility is relative from one
business to another. If a business is in an area where all signs are gigantic, companies have to have
gigantic signs to keep up with the guy next door. Driving through Orlando, Florida, you will see small gift
shops with signs almost the size of the building, lit with animation. In Orlando, the cost of signs has actually
driven a lot of companies out of business. In the long run it does not help business. Certainly the
attractiveness of Albemarle's community fuels the tourism, which then feeds the businesses that are along
Route 29 and the other entrance corridors.
Mr. Davis said this is an issue staff will be talking to the Board about in the future.
(January 15, 2003 - Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
Agenda Item No. 12. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting
was adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Chairman
Approved by the
Board of County
Supervisors
Date: 02/05/2003
Initials: EWC