Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1975-07-02
164 6-19-75 6-25-75 7-2-75 ~-Mr. Sampson said the Board will be establishing a precedent by approving this request and will probably receive requests from other areas of the County. Mr. Batchetor noted that the County pays only $2.25 an hour. The County tried a similar program about six years about and programs in only two of the areas were successful. Mr. Wheeler said these are two areas are composed of low-income families. They cannot get transportation to either of the County parks. This iAi~the type of program that should be funded from Revenue Sharing Funds. Mr. Henley asked if Revenue Sharing funds can be spent on~ the project. Mr. Fisher said these would not be matching funds as they are not required before U.S.D.A. funds can be received. Mr. Wheeler said he did not believe these children will have any other summer recreation available and he is not worried about setting a precedent. Mr. Sampson asked if this program would involve the Parks Department. Mr. Wheeler said no. Mr. Thacker agreed with Mr. Wheeler that the Board should provide something for these children because of their lack of access to other recreational areas. He then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $1,600 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from Revenue Sharing Funds and trans- ferred to the General Operating Fund for expenditures of this program. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheel"er and Wood. None. Mr. C.arwile. Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said the Board has discussed membership on. the Welfare Board many times. He asked that a member of the staff check H.B. 1506 passed by the last General Assembly. Mr. Wheeler noted that a new Section of the State Code, Section 2.1-353.1, requires that local officers and candidates for local office must file a disclosure statement with the Clerk of the Circuit Court annually prior to December 31 of each year. Mr. Wheeler said there has been scheduled a public hearing at the State Capitol on July 17, 1975, at 9:30 A.M. to appoint a committee to study the relationship between electric companies and governmental entities. As a member of the Virginia Association of Counties Steering Committee he will be attending. Mr. Wheeler said he had recently received copies of two letters from the Directors~of the Farm Bureau in reference to the Rivanna River Reservoir~. He said items mention in this letters are the same items which this Board has requested of the State Water Control Board. He has talked to representatives of the Farm Bureau and has asked them to meet with the Board as soon as possible. Mr. Wheeler noted that Louisa County is joining the' Thomas Jefferson Planning District effective July 1, 1975. Claims against the County in the amounv of $2,210,177.67 were presented, exami.ned, and allowed and certified to the Director of Finance for payment and charged against the following 'funds: General Fund General Operating Fund School Operating Fund Cafeteria Fund General Operating-Capital Outlay Fund School Construction-Capital Outlay Fund Joint Security Complex Fund Town of Scottsville-l% Local Sales Tax Commonwealth of Virginia-Current Credit Account Over and Short Total 807.34 412,584.06 1,534,344.12 71,481.48 132,313.30 21,294.28 35,755.91 227.01 1,278.81 91.36 $ 2,210,177.67. At 1:49 P.M., upon proper.~mo~ion, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman 6-25-75 The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, scheduled for ~e~'~'~""i'~7'~,' ~a's' cancelled by vote of the Board taken on May 15, 1975. 7-2-75 Pursuant to the following notice~ which was mailed on June 25, 1975, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, met in special session at 7:30 P.M. on July 2, 1975, in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, with the following members: Present: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker~, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. Absent: Mr. Stuart F. Carwile. Officers present: Assistant to the County Executive, Robert Sampsor; County Attorney, George R. St. John; Director of Finance, Ray B. Jones; and Deputy County Attornmes, Frederick Payne-and James Bowling, IV. 7-2-75 16[ "This is to give notice of a special meeting called by Mr. Gordon L. Wheeler and Mr. William C. Thacker, Jr. for the purpose of discussing the following matters: 1) Bond Resolution - Western Albemarle high school 2) Continuation of the public hearing on Article 17 of the Zoning Ordinance known as Site Development Plan 3) Receive the proposed zoning ordinance and map fr,om the Albemarle County Planning Commission Messrs. Thacker and Wheeler have asked that this meeting be held at 7:30 P.M. on July 2, 1975, in the Board Room of the County Offi'ce Buil-ding." t) Bond Resolution - Western Albemarle high school. Mr. Ray B..Jones, Director of Finance, was present. Mr. Jones said the staff had negotiated with the State Debt Commission in March for the sale of $6,500,000 in school bonds, but since that time it was decided to sell $750,000 in bonds to the Literary Fund of Virginia at 39 ~nterest. The bond issue will now be only $5,750,000. These bonds will be for 15 years with the first 10 years reduced at $375,000 each year and the last five years reduced at $400,000. The first principal payment will be due on February 1, 1977. Included in'this series, is a call. feature after the first 10 years. This is a protective device. Several of a bond prospectus have been printed. On Jul~ 8 and July 9, Mr.-Jones said several hundred copies County representatives will go to New York City to have the bonds' rated by Standard and Poors and Moody's. This.rating will then be published in the Bond Index. At the present time, the County has a AA rating which is probably the best that it can receivesas long as it is. subject to annexation. The bond market today is more favorable toward 15 year bonds. The sale of these bonds will increase taxes by 105 a hundred dollars on the tax rate. The bond resolution presented to the Board was prepared by the County's bonding attornies, Hunton, Williams, Gay and Gibson. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Thacker, to adopt the resolution which follows: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING..THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $5,750,000 SCHOOL BONDS, SERIES OF 1975, OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, AND PROVIDING FOR THE FORM, DETAILS AND PAYMENT THEREOF WHEREAS, the contracting of a debt, the borrowing of money and the issuance of school bonds of Albemarle County, Virginia, in the maximum amount of $6,500,000 were authorized at an election held on March 19, 1974, and none of such bonds have been sold; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1. There are hereby authorized to be issued and sold school bonds of Albemarle County, Virginia, in the aggregate principal amount of $5,750,000. 2. The bonds shall be coupon bonds without privilege of registration, shatl be designated "School Bonds, Series of 1975", shall be dated August 1, 1975, shall be of the denomination of $5,000 each, shall be numbered from 1 to 1,150, inclusive, and shall mature in annual installments of $375,000 o.n February 1 in each of the years 1977 to 1986, inclusive, and $400,000 on February 1 in each of the. y~ars 1987 to 1991, inclusiwe. The honda shall bear interest at such rate or rates as determined at the time of sale, payable semiannually on FebTuary ! and August 1. Both principal and interest shall be payable at the principal office of United Virginia Bank,' Richmond, Virginia, The Bank of New York, New York, New York, or National Bank and Trust Company, Chartottesv'lle,i Virginia, at the option of the holder. 3. Bonds maturing on or before February 1, 1985, are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. Bonds maturing on or afte~ February 1, 1986, are subject to redemption prior t-o maturity at the option of the County on or after February 1, 1985, in wl~ole at any time or in part on any interest payment date, upon payment 0f the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed plus interest accrued and unpaid to the redemption date and a redemption pre~tium of one-half of one percent (1/2 of 1%) of such principal amount for each twelve month period, ~r part thereof, between'the redemption date and the stated maturity date of the bonds to be redeemed, provided that the redemption premium shall not exceed 3% of such principal amount. If less than alii of the bonds are called for redemption, bonds shatl be redeemed in the inverse order of their maturiti(,s. If less than all of the bonds of any maturity are called for redemption, the bonds to be redeemed shall be selected by lot by the County s Dmrector of Fmnance. The Board of Supervmsors shall ~ause notmce of the call for redemptmon identifying the bonds to be redeemed to be published twice in a newspaper of general circulation or a financial journal published in the Cities of Richmond, Virginia, and New York, New York, the first publications of which shall appear not less than 30 nor more than 60 days. prior to the redemption date. 4. The bonds shall be signed by the facsimile signature of the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, shall be countersigned by the Clerk of the Board and a facsimile of the Board's seal shall'be printed on the bonds. The coupons attached to the bonds shall be authenticated by the facsimile signature of the Chairman. 5. The bonds and coupons shall be in substantially the £ollowing form: (FORM OF BOND) No. $5,000 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA ALBEMARLE COUNTY Schoolt Bond, Series of 1975 Albemarle County, Virginia, for value received, hereby acknowledges itself indebted and promises to pay to bearer upon presentation and surrender hereof the sum of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000) on February 1, 19 , and to pay interest thereon from the date hereof to maturity at the rate of per cent ( %) per year, payable semiannuall~ on February 1 and August ! upon presenvation and surrender o~ ~he attached coupons as they become due. Both principal of and interest on this bond are payable in lawful money of the United States of America at the principal office of United Virginia Bank, Richmond, Virginia, The Bank of New York, New York, New York, or National Bank and Trust Com~a~v. Ch~]n~nv~]]~ V~~o o~ *~ ~^~ ~ school bonds auvhorized at an election held on March 19, 1974, and is issued pursuant to the Public Finance Act, as amended, to provide funds for acquiring, construction, improving and equipping school buildings and related facilities, including sites therefor. Bonds maturing on or before February 1, 1985,~are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 1986, are subject to redemption prior to maturity at the option of the County on or after February 1, 1985, in whole at any time or in part on any interest payment date, upon payment of the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed plus interest accrued and unpaid to the redemption date and a redemption premium of one-half of one percent (i/2 of 1%) of such principal amount for each twelve monthperiod, or part thereof, between the redemption date and the stated maturity date of the bonds to be redeemed, provided that the redemption premium shall not exceed 3% of such principal amount. If less than all of the bonds are called for redemption, bonds shall be.redeemed in the inverse order of their maturities. If less than all of the bonds of any maturity are called for redemption the bonds to be redeemed shall be selected by lot by the County's Director of Finance. The Board of Supervisors shall cause notice of the call for redemption identifying the bonds to be redeemed to be published twice in a newspaper of general circulation or a financial journal published in the Cities of Richmond, Virginia, and New York, New York, the first publications of which shall appear not less than 30 nor more than 60 days prior to the redemption date. The full fgithkand<-credit of Albemarle County are hereby irrevocably pledged £or the payment of pr~inc~pal of and interest on this bond. Ail acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and statutes of the Commonwealth of Virginia to happen, exist or be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this bond have happened, exist and have been performed, and the issue of bonds of which this bond is one,' together with all other indebtedness of Albemarle County, is within every debt and other limit prescribed by the Constitution and statutes of the Commonwealth of Virginia. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, has caused this bond to be signed by the facsimile signature of its Chairman, to be countersigned by its Clerk, a facsimile of its seal to be printed hereon, the attached interest coupons to be authenticated by the facsimile signature of its Chairman, and this bond to be dated August 1, 1975. COUNTERSIGNED: Clerk, Boardof Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia (SEAL) Chairman, Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia (FORM OF COUPON) No. $ February Onu. s~August 1, 19 , unless the bond to which this coupon is attached, if callable, has been duly called for prior ~edemption and provision made for payment thereof, Albemarle County, Virginia, will pay to bearer Dollars ($ ) in lawful money of the United States of America at the principal office of United Virginia Bank, Richmond, Virginia, The Bank of NeW York, New York, New York, or National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville, Virginia, at the option of the holder, being the interest then due on its School Bond, Series of 1975, dated August 1, 1975, and numbered Chairman, Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia 6. The full faith and credit of Albemarle County are hereby irrevocably pledged for the payment of principal of and interest on the bonds. There shall be levied and collected annual!y on all locally taxable property in the County an ad valorem tax over and above all other taxes authorized or limited by law sufficient to pay such principal and interest as the same respectively become due and payable. 7. The Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed to take all proper steps to have the bonds advertised for sale substantially in accordance with the Notice of Sale attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Director of Finance, in collaboration with the State Commission on Local Debt, may make such changes in t~e Notice of Sale not inconsistent with the provisions of this resolution as he may determine to be in the best interests of the County. The use of an Official Statement in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit B is hereby approved. 8. After bids have been received and the bonds awarded, the Chairman, the Director of Finance and the Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to take all proper steps to have the bonds prepared and executed in accordance with their terms and to deliver the bonds to the purchaser thereof~upon payment therefor. 9. Such officers of Albemarle County as may be requested are hereby authorized to-execute an appropriate certificate setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the bonds issued pursuant hereto in order to show that such expected use and investment will not violate the provisions of Section !03(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and reguSations issued pursuant thereto, applicable to "arbitrage bonds." Such certificate may be in such form as shall be requested by bond counsel for the County. 10. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to see to the immediate filing of a certified copy of this resolution with the Circuit Court of Albemarle County. 11. This resolution shall take effect immediately. NO~IC.E OF SALE Exhibit A $5,750,000 ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA School Bonds, Series of 1975 Sealed bids will be received for the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgini&, until 11:00 A.M., Eastern Daylight Time, on July 22, 1975 7-2-75 The bonds will be dated August 1, 1975, and wii~ mature in installments of $375,000 on February 1, in each of the years 1977 to 1986, inclusive, and $400,000 on February 1 in each of the years 1987 to 1991, inclusive. The bonds will be in coupon form without privilege of registration, and will be of the denomination of $5,000 each. Interest will be payable semiannually on February 1 and August 1, and both principal and interest will be payable at the principal office of United Virginia Bank, Richmond, Virginia, ~he Bank of New York, New York, New York, or National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville, Virginia, at the option of the holder. Bonds maturing on or before February 1, 1985, are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. Bonds maturing on or after February !, 1986, are subject to redemption prior to maturity at the option of the County on or after February 1, 1985, in whole at any time or in part on any interest payment date, upon payment of the principal amount of the bonds to be redeemed plus interest accrued and unpaid to the redemption date and a redemption~premium of one-half of one percent (1/2 of 1%) of such principal amount for each twelve month period, or part thereof, between the redemption date and the stated maturity date of the bonds to be redeemed, provided that the redemption premium shall not exceed 3% of suc~principal amount. If less than all of the bonds are called for redempt±on', bonds shall be redeemed in the inverse order of their maturities. If less than all of the bonds of any maturity~are called for redemption, the bonds to be redeemed shall be selected by lot ~by the County's ~Director of Finance. The bonds were approved at an election held on March 19, 1974. The full faith and credit of the County will be pledged to the payment of principal of and interest on the bonds. Holders of the bonds will be further protected by Section.15.1-225 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, which, upon petition of any holder of a general obligation bond in default for over 60 days as to payment of principal or interest, authorizes and directs the Governor to conduct a summary investi- gation to his satisfaction and, if such default continues for an additional 60 days, to order the State Comptroller to withhold all funds appropriated and payable to the County and apply the amount so withheld to payment of the defaulted principal and interest. Bidders are invited to name the rate or rates of interest which the bonds are to bear, in multiples of 1/8 or 1/20 of 1%. No bid may name more than four rates, any of which may be repeated, and the highest rate may not exceed the lowest rate by more than two percentage points. All bonds maturing~on the same date must bear interest at the same rate and interest shall be represented by only one coupon for each interest payment date. No bid for less than par and accrued interest and no bid for less than all of the bonds will be considered. The right to reject any or all bids and to waive irregularities in any bid is hereby reserved. Unless all bids are rejected, the bonds will be awarded to the bidder whose proposal results in the lowest cost to the County, sUch cost to be determined by deducting the amount of any premium bid from the aggregate amount of interest upon all of the bonds until their respective maturities. The premium, if any, must be paid in funds as part of the purchase price. Each proposal should be enclosed in a sealed envelope, marked on the outside '!Bid for Albemarle County School Bonds," should .be addressed to the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle~County, Virginia, c/o State Commission on Local Debt, Room 10i, Finance Building, Capitol Square, Richmond, Virginia, and must be accompanied by a certified or cashier.'s check for $115,000 drawn upon an incorporated bank or trust company and-payable unconditionally to the order of Albemarle County, Virginia, to secure the County against any loss resulting from the failure of the bidder to comply with the terms of~his proposal. The check of the successful bidder will be deposited and credited on the purchase price and no interest will be allowed thereon. The proceeds of the check will be retained by the County as liquidated damages in case the bidder fails tm accept delivery of and pay for the bonds. Checks of unsuccessful bidders will be returned promptly upon award of the~bonds. The bonds will be delivered at The Signature Company, New York, New York, or, at the option of the purchaser, in Richmond, Virginia, at the expense of the County, about August 20, 1975, upon payment therefor in Clearing House Funds~.of the city of settlement. It is anticipated that CUSIP identifi~cation numbers will be printed on the bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any bond nor any error with respect thereto shall constitute cause for a failure or refusal by the purchaser thereof to accept delivery of and pay for the bonds in accordance with terms of the purchase contract. Ail expenses in connection with the assignment or printing of CUSIP numbers shall be paid by the County. The unqualified opinion of Messrs. Hunton, Williams, Gay & Gibson of Richmond, Virginia, will be furnished to ~the successful bidder without charge, will be printed on the back of the bonds and will state that the bonds constitute valid and legally binding obligations of the County and that its Board of Supervisors is authorized and required by law to levy ad valorem taxes, without __ limitation as to rate or amount, on all taxable property in the County to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds. The usual closing papers will also be furnished, including a certificate signed by the officers who s±gned the bonds stating that no litigation is then pending, or, to their knowledge, threatened to restrain or enjoin the issuance or delivery of the bonds or the levy and collection of taxes to pay principal and interest, or in any manner questioning the proceedings and authority under which the bonds are issued. The Board of Supervisors will be in session at 11:00 A.M~. on the date of the sale for the purpose of taking prompt action on the bids. Bidders are requested to use the bid form which, together with financial information for bidders, may be obtained from the Director of Finance, County of Albemarle, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22901, or the undersigned.. STATE COMMISSION ON LOCAL DEBT Robert C. Watts, Jr.~Secretary Vote was taken at this time, and the motion to adopt the foregoing resolution carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Carwile. 7-2-75 No. 2. Continuation Of public hearing on Article 17 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance known as "Site Development Plan". This public hearing was continued from June 19, 1975. Mr. Wheeler noted that the Board had received, at their request, another copy of the original ordinance as proposed.by the Planning Commission and the ordinance as revised by the Board to this date. He then called on Mr. John Humphrey, County Planner, to speak. Mr. Humphrey said the County Attorney's office had prepared the ordinance using a recommendation that the staff be the approving agent for site plans. PZanning Commission members were present to discuss this. with the Board. Mr. David Carr, Chairman of the Planning Commission, said he had not seen a copy of the revised proposal. The Planning Commission has two major concerns and~he asked Mr. Fred Payne to summarize these concerns. Mr. Payne said the principal change in the draft is to make the staff the primary review body for site plans, with a provision for appeal to the Planning Commission. Section 17-7-6 contains a typing error. It states "any person aggrieved by any decision of the Commission in the administration of this Article may demand a review of the application by the Albemarle County Board of SuperVisOrs..." It should read: "the governing body reserves unto itSelf the right to review all decisions of the Commission made in the administration of this article which in its discretion'it shall deem necessary to the proper administration hereof." If the Board should chose not to review the Commission's decision, the applicant could go to court. Mr. Payne said there had been a number of changes in the text of the2ardinance since the Planning Commission last saw same. These were discussed with the Planning Commission last night, and they had asked Mr. ?ayne to being these to the attention of the Board. Section 17-3-3. This section lists five classes of persons who can prepare sit~e plans; architects, engineers, landscape architects, land planners and land surveyors. However, there are 0ertain items necessary to be shown on a site plan which landscape architects and landscape planners cannot perform under State law. The Board, on June 19, added to this section the words "nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to permit the unauthorized practice of any profession which is otherwise regulated by law;" Thins sentence was intended to allow these persons to perform that which is not land surveying, architectural or engineering. For any-site plan which requires engineering, surveying, or architecture, that work would have to be performed by a person licensed for one of these regulated professions. The Commission is concerned that should the ordinance allow one of these unregulated professions to prepare a site plan, the site plan, in.most cases, will involve at least two people and thus lead to a double fee situation. Also, since there is a fine line between activities which are required to be performed by registered professions and those activities which are not, th~e~ ~ Planning Commission fears they will become the body charged with determining what constitutes unauthorized practice. The obvious solution to this dilemma is to delete landscape architect and land planner as persons qualified to prepare site plans. The Commission did not feel this was an attempt to put the landscape architect or land planner out of business, but rather an attempt to require him to associate~with a surveyor or engineer. Mr. St. John said Mr. Payne had been working solely with the Plannimg Commission on this ordinance, but, he has wondered why this section was included, but never questioned it because he did not see anything wrong with the section. Now that this has come up~, he questions the wisdom of having a provision in.the ordinance which requires the Planning Commission, the Board, or the staff to look into the credentials of a person presenting a plan for approval. This section puts the Commission and the Board in the position of doing something they should not be doing and will detract from their concentration on the merits of the plan itself. Mr. Wheeler said if a citizen having a site plan prepared wants to take it to a landscape architect first, this is his business. If he wants to pay two fees, that also is his business. The State law is plain. The registered engineer, surveyor or architect has to put his seal on the site plan. Mr. St. John suggested that the entire paragraph (17-3-3) be stricken from the ordinance. Mr. Jack Rinehart, a member of the Planning ~ommission, spoke next, disagreeing with Mr. St. John. He said the Planning Commission has at times received site plans which could-not be deciphered. A professional can draw site ptans,~organize information and present that information in a form the approving bo.dy can interpret. The three types of plans the Planning Commission receives are' site plans, subdivision plats and plans for planned unit developments. Planned unit developments require creative design which a landscape architect can perform. If the State law is followed to the letter, it all boils down to surveying which is not creative design. He would like to see the signature Of a landscape architect on these plans because these people create a good living environment, rather than allowing people to congregate all in one area. Mr. Max Evans said that landscape architects are not registered in the State of Virginia because they have been unsuccessful in getting a bill through the Legislature establishing a landscape architect as a professional. However, in 36 other states in the United States, they are registered and have a description of what a landscape architect is professionally capable of doing and what areas of work fall in this profession. Mr. Evans said he feels that any plan brought before~the Board or Commission is really judged on its merits, and not whether the person drafing same is recognized officially by law. Reputation and quality of work enter into whether the piece of work is acceptable. In reply to the question of double fees, Mr. Evans said it has been his experience from working with surveyors and engineers that the fee is in effect deducted from the engineering work done on the project. Mr. Humphrey said the staff was interested in.having plans submitted which would be accurate. There is a need in the County for the professional landscape architect and ~and planner. The engineering profession, in all due respect, is doing a poor job of utilizing the land to its best. Capabilities of soils can best be determined by a landscape planner or architect. Mr. St. John said he did not think the Board has the power to either enlarge or d~in±sh State law. Mr. Wheeler said if the technical review committee does not understand a site plan~&nd needs more information, they can return it to the a~plicant. Mr. Thacker said the purpose of this ordinance is to provide the technical committee with specific items required on site plan approval. In all due respect to Mr. Rinehart, registr~tion does not denote excellence. He agreed with Mr. St. John that the section should be stricken. 7-2-75 Mr. Wheeler said there had been quite a lot of discussion on Sections containued under 17-7 regarding .the technical review committee and the procedure by which s~ite plans would be approved. In essence, a~e this time, the ordinanc.e provides that site plans be submitted to the Planning Department, who would in turn send these on to the technical committee. Upon completion of its review, the committee would make recommendations to the agent of the governing body. The agent, within 60 days, would either approve or disapprove the plan. Any person aggrieved by any such decision, could demand a review of the application by the Planning Commission. Mr. Wheeler then called on. the public for comments. Mr. Calvin Moyer asked if the public would be allowed any input at meetings of the review committee and if the plan would go to the Planning Commission. Mr. Wheeler said it would not go to the Planning Commisson unless someone requested this be done. Mr. Moyer asked if the site plan would be advertised or if the public would be notified~in any way. Mr. Humphrey said only adjacent property owners would be notified. Mr. Moyer asked who specifically would be notified., Mr. Payne said the applicant, adjacent property owners and any governmental agency or officer involved in the review. Mr. Moyer said it seems that if there was a subdivision facing a piece of property and that subdivision contained 200 homes, only the two or so families directly adjacent would be notified. Mr. Wheeler said if the 200 homeowners in the subdivision had an objection, they have a representative on the Board of Supervisors and he could bring this to the Board's attention. Mr. Tony Iachetta asked what would happen if the Supervisor choose not to do anything. Wheeler said any individual could bring it directly to the Board at any Board meeting. Mr. Mr. Thacker said basically this is a technical ordinance and the items in it are basically a matter of right. This is not zoning, but strictly site plans. Mr. Moyer asked what Mr. Thacker meant by '~right". Mr. Thacker said the applicant has a right to use his property as zoned~. He has a right to develop the land in accordance with the site plan ordinance under the zoning ordinance. This is not a vested right but a legal ri~ght. Basically, the site plan ordinance includes items such as grading, drainage, parking, screening, property setback, etc. Ms. Joan Graves, a member of .the Planning Commission spoke next. She said several members of the Planning Commission, including herself, feel public input is important to the planning Commission. During deliberation on the zoning map, the Planning Commission gave certain'zones with-the intention of seeing, site plans on those properties. There are tangible things to be heard from the public which may not be legally spelled out. The Planning Commission has been responsive to such input, but she did not believe a technical review committee would be equally responsive. Some of the members will be county employees; o~her members are not county employees and have-no responsibility to the citizens of the County. Mrs. Graves said she is glad to do the work given her as a member of the Planning Commission, and personally, she would iike to keep the work. Mr. Wheeler said this question is easily settled. When the Board approves a rezoning and they are interested in a site plan, they specify at that time that the site plan shall come to them.for final approval. This same thing can be done by the Planning Commission. Mr. Moyer said there is no way for the general public to know what is coming to the Planning Commission in the way of site plans. He requested that the ordinance include a provision for publicatio~ or other public notice. and Mr. Jack. Rinehart said there is a lot of public input at Planning Commission sessions/on site plans, the input has been tremendous. Preparation of the new zoning ordinance has overburdened the workload of the Planning Commission, but in the future this load will be lightened. In the past, the Highway Department has been very uncooperative, requiring, the County Planner to bring site plans to the Commission that have not been reviewed by the Highway Department. Mr. Wheeler asked if this was a true statement. Mr. Humphrey said the Highway Department is often late because of a new regulation which requires that all final approvals come directly from the Culpeper District Office. Mr. Thacker said the Planning Commission will not'be able to change this. Next to speak was Ms. Ellen Craddock, a member of the Planning Commission. She echoed Mr. Rinehart's words. The overview of site plans is vitally important to the County. Often, the present review committee is not able to establish a quorum. She asked that review of site plans be left to the Planning Commission. If the Board of Supervisors disagrees, she asked that Section I7-7-2 be changed to read that a rotating member of the Planning Commission shall sit, not as e~-efficio, but as a voting member for the review committee. Ms. Martha Seldon said many in her community urge the Board to continue the present routine site plan review by the Planning Commission. They have noted that the technical ~mmit~tee is inoperative, often with only a member of the Planning staff present. Only after watching a~number of Planning Commission site plan sessions can one appreciate ~he contribution of this group of citizens to.the efficiency, safety and general well being of the community. Sometimes changes are made"in response to concerns of the adjacent property owners who are legitimately concerned about the impac~ on their property values. The members of the Planning Commission have accumulated ~ expertise during their tenure in office. Ms. Seldon said~if ~he Planning'Commission is willing to continue t~is work, she feels it should not be taken away from them. Ms. Betty Scott read the following statement from the League of Women Voters: It is important, of course, to have technical review of site plans. However, technical review alone w~ould not represent the views of c~tizens who might be af£ect, ed by these decisions. Will the surrounding property owners receive understanding and concern about their opinions from the technical review committee? We have grave~doubts about this. Another consideration would be that the technical review board would undoubtedly hold its meetings during 'working hours when most citizens would find it difficult to attend, whereas the Planning Commission ~meets in the evening, making public input more convenient. The Planning Commission, which has been carefully appointed to represent the views of a broad spectrum of County residents, should certainly be included in these important~decisions. The League of Women Voters makes three suggestions for your consideration: 1. At least two Planning Commission members should be vo~ing members of any technical review board. 2. Any Planning Commission member should have the priviIege of bringing a site plan to the attention of the entire Commission if he believes further review is necessary after the technical board has made its comments. 3. Zt is essential that large scale development which has a great impact on the community - such as Planned ~nit Developments, high density residential and commeraial development - be reviewed by the Planning Commission. To assure availability of information for the public to review, we feel that a written report c~ntaining comments and recommendations of the technical boar~ should be included with the site plan." Mr. Pat Janssen asked what is wrong with granting the Planning Commission the opportunity of reviewing these site plans. Mr. Wheeler said it was thought by some Board members that it was not necessary for the Planning Commission to review every site plan, thus giving them more time to spend on zoning matters and planning matters. Mr. Wheeler said he had no objection to the Planning Commission to.okimg at every site plan and meeting every day of the week if that is what they choose to do. Mr. Thacker said many of these ~site plans will be very routine matters. There are two members of the Planning Commission on the review committee. They have the right to request that a site plan be brought before the entire Commission as does any other member of the Commission. Mr. David C.arr said the Planning Commission has discussed this a number of times. The Commission is interested in expediting matters., but does need more precise technical data. Mr~ Cart said he has been disappointed at some of the site plans which went before the unofficial review committee. The Commission has been dealing with site plans without having any rules and have been making up the rules as.they go along. He is amazed that the public has cooperated so well to this point, because at times this has placed a financial burden on developers. Some members of the Planning Commission want to continue to review site plans while other members are perfectly willing to transfer this to a well-organized and unified technical committee as long as the Commission has the right to review their work from time to time. The following statement was presented from Citizens for Albemarle: "Citizens for Albemarle urges the Board of Supervisors to give careful consideration to all consequences before changing the method of site plan approval. When the site plan is reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission, citizens, who have been appointed by you to pr~ovide good planning for Albemarle County, have the opportunity to make pertinent suggestions about any problems in the development, and surrounding property owners have the opportunity to present their views in a night meeting. It has been traditional since the zoning ordinance was adopted to handle difficult problems under site plan control so that developers could have a zoning category for operations which might prove harmful if not properly controlled but would be beneficia~ under careful site plan consideration by the Planning Commission. If all site plan review is handled at a Site Plan Review Committee between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. covering only technical considerations by the Service Authority, Highway Department, Engineering and Planning Departments, and those agencies only have a vote for approval or disapproval, the role of the Planning Commission and citizen input will be greatly diminished. Furthermore, the site plan applicant will have a strong advantage with technical consideration of his site plan, while the current residents of the area surrounding the site plan will not have their views represented by appointed citizens who are familiar with site plan review. Problems have already occurred with the current site plan review committee when affected agencies are not represented or send a representative who cannot provide adequate information and does not have the authority'to uphold certain decisions affecting his specific areas. During this vital period of adopting a new ordinance and establishing new zones, it is important to maintain the established pattern of compromise between the applicant and the Planning Commission so that new development will be~attractive and beneficial and provide protection ~for established development in Albemarle County." Mr. Wheeler said evidently the Planning Commission feels strongly that they should continue to review site plans. However, he hoped that at some point in the future, the Planning Commission would consider turning, over some of this responsibility to the committee and not look at every site plan. He then called, for action to be taken on adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Wheeler to interpret his last remark. Mr. Wheeler said he feels that after the Planning Commission has some experience with this ordinance and this official technical review committee, that they w±t! turn some over of the responsibility for approval of simple site plans to the committee. Mr. Fisher said many of those speaking tonight had voiced his personal concerns. He feels it would be difficult to note an appeal if the review committee keeps no minutes. This ~s best~.s~ left to the Planning Commission who has official minutes, and an agenda which is issued~as a matter of public information. In essence, he felt approval should be left to the Planning Commission as a routine matter. Mr. Payne said at the last meeting it was mentioned that if the Planning Commission was left as the approving ~ody that members of the Commission should not serve on the review committee. He said that question needs to be decided. Mr. Carr said it is the con~ensus of the Commission that this would not be necessary, but with the understanding that if any members of the Commission want technical committee input they must attend committee meetings. Mr. Payne then noted the following changes to be made: Section 17-6-2 should read "the agent shall be responsible for the receipt and processing of site development plans subject to the procedures as hereinafter provided." Section 17-7-2 is unchanged. ~n~on ~7-7-~ is unchanzed. Section 17-7-4 should read "the agent of the governing body shall, within 30 days after receipt of the committee's recommendation, transmit the same, along with his comments and recommendations to the Planning Commission for action.'" Section 17~7-5 should read "the Commission shall approve or disapprove the application within 60 calendar days from the date of the application. In so daing, the Commission shall give due consideration to the recommendations of the site plan review committee and the agent of the governing body. In addition, it may consider such other evidence as it deems necessary for proper review of the application." Section 17-7-6 should read "Any person aggrieved by any decision of the Planning Commission on the ~administration of this article may demand a review of the application by the Albemarle ~ounty Board of Supervisors. Such demand shall be made by filing a request therefor in writing with the Albemarle Comnty Planning Department within 10 calendar days of the date of such'decision. The Board may affirm, reverse or modify in full, or in part, the decision of the Planning Commission. In so doing, the Board shall give due consideration to the recommendations of the site plan review committee and the Planning Commission. In addition, it may consider such other evidence as it deems necessary for proper review of the application. For purposes of this section, the term 'person aggrieved' shall be limited to.the applicant, persons required to be notified pursuant to' Section 17-3-2 of this article and any interested governmental agency or officer thereof." Mr. Fisher asked if it s~ould be spelled out that the governing body reserves the right to review plans. Mr. Payne said old Section 17-7-7 should be stricken and in its place add the following wording: "The governing body reserves unto itself the right to review all decisions of the Commission made in the administation of this article which, in its discretion, it shall deem necessary to the proper administration hereof." Section 17-8 should read: "This ordinance becomes effective August 1, 1975." date agreed to by the Board members. This was the Mr. Wood then offered motion to adopt the Site Development Plan Ordinance, ~with the changes noted above, also with the elim~n~o~f~ection 17-3-3 and also the repeal of existing Sections~_ '- ~ " ~' ~ ' ~ ' ' mo 'o 6-9~-7-Z~,':8~2~;'..::..and 9-2.$~of t~e Al~ef~arle County Zonmng Ordmnanoe. The tm n was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. ~arwile. (T~e complete text of the ordinance, as adopted, is set out below.) ARTICLE 17 SZTE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 17-1 PURPOSE AND INTENT There is a mutual responsibility between the County of Albemarle and the developer to develop land in an orderly manner. The purpose of this article is to encourage innovative and creative design and facilitate use of the most advanta-~o~.~ geous techniques in the development of land in Albemarle ~ou~ty; to insure that land be used in a manner which is e~gAm~eAt, harmonious .wlth neighboring property and in accordance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan for Albemarle County; and to promote high standards in the lay-out, land- scaping, and construction of development. APPLICATION-OF ARTICLE 17-2-1 A site development plan shall be submitted for any construction, use, change in use or other development in all zoning districts; provided that no such plan shall be re- quired for the following: (a) The construction or change in occupancy of any single family detached dwelling unit, which is l~cated upon a tract or parcel whereon, are located or proposed to be located an aggregate of two (2) or fewer such units, in- cluding any units which may have been constructed on such lot or parcel prior to the enactment of this section; (b) any accessory building to a single-family dwelling; (c) any agricultural activity; (d) a change in any use involving an existing building or the construction of a new accessory or storage building neither of which involves a ~ew entrance way or additional parking area. 17-2-2 In the case of any construction, use, change of use or other development required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission under Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, the provisions of this Ordinance shall be deemed supplementary to the said section and shall be construed in accordance therewith. 17-2-3 Compliance with the provisions of this Article shall in no event be construed to relieve the applicant of the duty of compliance with all other provisions of the ~aw applicable i72 7-2-75 17-3 17-3-1 17-3-2 17-3-3 17-3-4 17-3-5 17-3-6 17-4 17-4-1 17-4-2 17-4-3 17-4-4 17-4-5 17-4-6 17-4-7 17-4-8 PREPARATION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN An informal meeting and discussion between the applicant and the County Planning staff shall be held prior to the submission of a site plan. The applicant shall present a preliminary schematic master Plan showing.: (a) boundary lines of subject property, (b) existing land conditions and existing topography at a maxAmum of ten (10) foot-contour intervals; (c) general layout design of what is proposed on a scale of not smaller than one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet, (d) building setback lines; and (e) zoning of subject property and adjacent parcels. This is not to be considered binding by the county or the owner of the pro- perty, but serves simply as a guide toward future develop- ment as each section of development is submitted for final approval. Notice of a site plan submission shall be sent by registered or certified mail to the last known address of all owners of property adjacent to the development. In any case in which the property so adjacent is owned by the applicant, notice shall be given to the owners of the next adjoining property not owned by the applicant. Mailing to the address shown on the currenv real estate tax assessment books of Albemarle County shall.be deemed adequate compli- ance with this requirement. No site development plan shall be approved within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the mailing of such notice. The novice shall state the type of use proposed, specific location of development, appropriate county office where the site plan may be viewed, and date of site plan revi'ew meeting. Site plans shall be prepared to the scale of one (1) inch equals forty (40) feet or larger; no sheet shall exceed 42 inches in size. The site plan may be prepared on one or more sheets. If prepared on more than one sheet, match lines shall clearly 'indicate where the several sheets join. Ten (10) clearly legible blue or black line copies of a site development plan shall be filed with the Albemarle County Planning D.epartment. Additional copies may be required if revisions are necessary. Topography shall be accurately shown with a maximum of two (2) foot ~ontour intervals up to a 20% slope; provided that in the case of slopes exceeding 20%, contour intervals may be no more than five (5) feet. Proposed finished grading shall be shown by contour supplemented where necessary by spot elevation. SPECIFIC ITEMS TO BE SHOWN Every site development plan shall contain the following information: Location of tract or parcel by vicinity map at a scale of nov less than one (1) inch equals two (2) miles and landmarks sufficient to properly identify the location of the property. Closure error for boundary surveys shall conform to standards specified by the Virginia Association of Surveyors and the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping; provided however that in no case shall.closure error be less than the ratio of one in five thousand (5,000). Plans shall indicate whether meridian referred to is magnetic or true north~ Ail horizontal distances shall be shown in feet and decimals of a fo.ot to the nearest one-hundredth of a foot. The name and address of the owner and developer, magis- terial district, county, state, north point, date, and scale or drawing and number of sheets. In addition, there shall be reserved a blank space four (4) inches by four (4) inches in size on the plan face for the'use of the approving au- thority. Location of existing wooded areas and an indication of which such areas or parts thereof are to be cleared. Existing and propased Streets and access easements, their names, state route numbers and right-of-way width. Right-of-way lines, widths, proposed rights-of-way lines, center lines and width of surface pavement or dis- tance between curb faces in relation to center line. When proposed streets intersect with or adjoin existing streets or travel ways, both edges of existing pavement, surface or curb and gutter must be indicated for a minimum of feet or the length of connection, whichever is the greater distance. Center line curve data, including delta, radius, arc, chord and tangent. 7-2-75 17-4-9 17-4-10 17-4-11 17-4-12 17-4-13 17-4-14 17-4-15 17-4-16 17-4-17 17-4-18 17-4--19 17-4-20 17-4-21 17-4-22 17-4-23 17-4-24 17-4-25 17-4-26 17-4-27 17-4-28 17-4-29 17-4-30 Radius of all curb return's to face of curb and on streets where curb and gutter are not required, radius to edge of bituminous treatment. The edge of proposed street surface or the face of curb as the case may be for full length of streets. Typical street sections to be used on the site develop- ment plan. Symmetrical transition of pavement at intersection with ex£sting street. Connection to proposed Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation construction when necessary. Existing. and proposed uvility easements of all types, ut shall be easements and rights-of-way ~f all ilities clearly defined for the purpose inte]~ded, and whether they are to be publicly or privately maintained. Existing and proposed water and sanitary sewer facilities indicating all Pipe sizes, types and grades and where connec- tion is to be made to an existing or a proposed central water and sewer system. Profiles to be submitted for all sanitary and storm sewers, streets, and cross s~ctions showing clearance(s) where utility lines cross one another and shall be submitted on standard profile sheets. Ail ~water mains, sizes, valves, fire hydrant locations. Alt sanitary and storm sewers and appurtenances, iden- tifying appurtenances by type and number; the station on the plan to conform to the station shown on the profile. Indicate the top and invert elevationMof] each structure. The name and location of~ all water courses and other bodies of water lying upon or running through the subject property. Existing and proposed drainage easements and the direc- tion of drainage flows in streets, storm sewer, valley gutters, streams, and subdrainage. The contributing drainage area in acres (statistically), showing all cu!v'erts, pipe c~rb inlets and other entrances exclusive of driveway pipes. The location of all springs either within or draining to street rights-of-way and p The location of all stre the street construction as pr proposed drainage ditches or shall not be considered part Detail to be furnished of typ ~oposed methods of drainage. ams or drainage ways related to oposed by the developer and stream location. Easements of the istreet right-of-way. ical drainage section and type of Stabilization to be provided. Type of stabilization to be approved by the governing body or its agent and the County Engineer. Type or class of co~ncret pipe to be installed and pave Established flood plain case shall the flood plain ii year flood plain limit. Fl©o shall be shown, when availabl reference to properties affec' or treated met~a! .drainage road slde ditahes as required. limits, if available, and in no mit shown be less than the 100 plain limit studies required , on ali profile sheets with ;ed and center lines of streams. Location, type and size of ingress and egress to site. Proper driveway entrance type, computed culvert size and/or Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation design designation. Ail off-street parking and parking bays, loading spaces, and walk-ways indicating type of surfacing, size, angle of stalls, width of aisles and a specific schedule showing the number of parking spaces provided and the number required in accordance with the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Required setback lines, departing lot lines, lot numbers, subdivision limits, limits of construction, and building location. Number of floors, floor area, height and location of each building, and proposed general use for each structure. In the case of multi,family residential structures, town- hous. es, and patioho.uses; the number, size and type of dwellmng unmts Shqtl be shown~ Densmty, acreage, bumldmng and lot coverage data shall be shown where applicable under the Albemarle County Zoning Omdinance. 174 7-2-75 17-4-32 17-4-33 17-4-34 17-4-35 17-5 t7-5-1 17-5-2 17-5-3 17-5-4 t7-5-5 17-5-6 17-5-7 17-5-8 Location, type, size and height of all fencing, screening, and retaining walls where required under the provisions of all applicable ordinances. A landscape and open space design plan, based upon accepted professional design lay~outs and principles. The plans shall include outdoor lighting proposals; recreational areas and open space; location and type of plantings; loca- tion, type, size, height, and illumination of signs; and location and screening materials for outdoor trash collec- tion areas and large receptacles. A minimum of one (1) datum reference for elevations used on plats and profiles and correlated, where practical, to U.S. Geological Survey data. Any notes which may be necessary to explain the intent and purpose of specific items on the plan or profile. MINIMHM STANDARDS AND IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED Ail improvements required by this Article shall be installed at the cost of~the developer, except where cost sharing or reimbursement agreements between the County of Albemarle and the developer are appropriate, the same to be recognized by formal written agreement prior to site develop- ment plan approval. Prior to the final approval of any site develapment plan, there shall be executed by the owner or developer an agreement to construct all physical improvements reqHired by or pursuant to this article which are to be dedicated to public use, together with a bond with surety approved by the governing body, or its agent, in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated costs of such improvements. In deter- mining the estimated costs of the improvements to be bonded, the owner or developer shall submit an estimate of such costs which shall be reviewed and approved by the County Engineer. The agreement and bond shall provide for and be conditioned upon completion of all work within a time spec- ified by the agent. The completion-of all other improvements required by or pursuant to this article shall be certified and/or bonded as provided in Section 11-2 of this Ordinance. Condominium and common wall house projects of all types shall indicate on the site plan those areas reserved for rental purposes and those areas reserved for sale purposes. Where adopted road plans for Albemarle County indicate a proposed right-af-way greater than that existing along the boundaries of the site development plan, such addition of right-of-way shall be reserved for public use when the plan is approved~. Where a site development plan is presented on public streets of less than fifty (50) feet in width, addi- tional right-of-way shall be dedicated so that the public street or right-of-way shall be a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from the existing centerline. Ali building setbacks shall be measured from the additional dedicated or reserved right-of-way. In the case of any street to be dedicated to.public use, except as otherwise provided by law, all street and highway construction standards and geometric~design stan- dards shall be in accordance with standards Of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation. For access roads, not to be dedicated to public use and not to be accepted into the State Highway System, the'design and construction shall be in accordance with standards promul- gated by the County Engineer, which standards shall be attached as an appendix to this Ordinance. The County Engineer shall approve the construction standards of ~all other paved areas. The governing body, or its agent, may modify street geometric design standards for local, collector, and minor loop streets, or private roads provided that: (a) Off-street parking spaces sufficient to compensate for the Zoss of on-street parking due to the modification of geometric design standards, and (b) Approval for modification is obtained from the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation where applicable. The pavement of vehicular travel lanes or driveways designed to permit vehicular travel on the site and to and from adjacent property and parking areas shall, be not less than twenty (20) feet in width. On any site bordering a primary, arterial, or inter- state highway, or adjacent to an existing service road in the State Highway System~ the developer, in lieu of pro- viding travel lanes or driveways that provide vehicular access to and from adjacent parking areas and adjacent property, may dedicate where necessary, and construct a 17-5-9 17-5-10 17-5-11 17-5-12 17-5-13 17-5-14 15-5-15 17-5-16 17-5-17 roads. In no such event shall tha~setback requirement be greater if the service road is dedicated than'the setback required without dedication, except that in no event shall a building be constructed closer than twenty (20) feet from the nearest right-of-way line. Upon satisfactory completion, inspection and application by the developer, the County shall take the necessary procedural steps to have such service read accepted by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation for maintenance. No cul-de-sac street shall be shorter than 200 feet in overall length including the turn-around or i00 feet in overall length exclusive of the turn-around. Ail turn- arounds shall have a turning radius of at least fifty (50) feet. In the case of any such street which is not part of the State Highway System, at least one sign of a type approved by the County Engineer shall.be posted.giving notice that such street is not a through street. Parking areas design and construction shall be approved by the County Engineer in accordance with sound engineering practices. Ail parking areas shall be so designed that no vehicle when parked thereon shall overhang property lines, sidewalks or.moving travel lanes, public or private. Where geometric design standards are modified under Paragraph 17'5-6 hereof, the developer shall be responsible for the placing of "No Parking" signs on all travel lanes, driveways~ or streets to prohibit parking on such roads or driveways. Where cul,de-sac turn-aroundS are utilized-under this modification, if the right-of-way radius is fifty (50) feet and the paved radius is forty (40) feet, the developer shall install "No Parking" signs for the complete circle on both sides. If the right-of-way radius is increased to sixty (60) feet and the-paved radius is increased to fifty (50) feet parking on the turn-around may be permitted. Adequate easements shall be provided for drainage and all utilities. Minimum width of easements shall be ten (10) feet; provided that, in the case of all utilities to be dedicated to public use for operation by any public entity, the minimum width of such easement shall in no event be less than the minimum width required by such entity. Where multiple structures or pipes are installed, the edge of the easement shall be no less than five (5) feet clear of the outside pipes. Where easements do not follow the estab- lished lot lines, the.nearest edge of any easement shall be a minimum of ten (10)~feet from any building. Adequate drainage for the disposition of storm and natural waters both on and off-site shall be provided. Provision shall be made for the minimization of pollution of all downstream water courses due to surface runoff. The extent and nature of both on-site and off-site drainage shall be determined by the developer in conference with the governing body or its agent. Ail provisions for soil erosion and sedimentation control shall comply with the provisions of the Albemarle County Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance. Adequate provision shall be made by the developer for all utilities, both on-site and off-site. Design require- ments shall be established by the developer in conference with the governing body or its agent. Percolation test and/or other methods of soil evaluation deemed necessary by the Health Director shall be the responsibility of the developer. When central water and/or sewer systems having sufficient capacity either exist or are proposed within a reasonable distance of the area of the site development plan, provisions shaltbe made to connect to the system. Ail public facilities, utility and drainage easements outside the right-of-way of public streets or access ways are to be shown on the final site development plan. Utility installation to be installed in public streets and rights- of-way shall be coordinated with street construction plans and profiles approved by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation resident engineer for Albemarle County and the governing body or its agent. Site development plans may include provision for the reservation and/or dedication of suitable areas for parks, schools, open space and other public or private recreational use, recognizing proposals for the same in the adopted ComDrehensive Plan for Albemarle County. The developer shall confer with the governing body or its agent and/or other~appropriate public officials of the County to ascer- tain if, and when, and in what manner such areas should be reserved for acquisition by the County. Nothing in this provision shall be construed to preclude the dedication of any property~for public use'which is not included in the Comprehensive Plan, provided such property is acceptable to the County for dedication and maintenance. The governing body may require, as a condition precedent to approval of the development, that the developer allocate space necessary 176 7-2-75 17-5-18 17-5-19 17-5-20 17-5-21 17-5-22 17-5-23 17-5-24 17-6 17-6-1 17-6-2 17-6-3 Where the particular development contributes in part, along with Other development or developments in the area, to the need for such facilities, the developer may be required to contribute lands, on a pro-rata basis, for such facilities as are reasonably attributable to the particular development. The governing body may further require, as a condition precedent to approval of the development, that the developer install and dedicate to public use such sewer, water and other utility lines and other facilities in connection therewith as may be reasonably necessary to serve the even- tual inhabitants of the proposed development. Ail such facilities shall conform to the specifications of the Albemarle County Service AUthority. Adequate fire hydrants and distribution systems shall be provided by the developer in areas where central or public water systems are available. Hydrant locations and specifiCations shall be as designated by the County Fire Marshal. Ail hydrants are to be installed and operable as soon as water is available. Access ways for emergency vehicles shall be provided as designated by the Fire Mar- shal. Provisions shall be made for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways which will enable pedestrians to walk safely and conveniently between buildings on the site and from the site to adjacent property.. Where feasible, pedestrian under- passes or o.verpasses are to be encouraged in conjunction with major vehicular routes. Provisions shall be made where appropriate for pedestrian walkways and equestrian ways in relation to private and public areas of recreation and open space, e.g. schools, parks, gardens, and areas of similar nature. Connections shall be made wherever possible of all walkways and equestrian and bicycle ways with similar fac- ilities on adjacent developments. Ail sidewalks and walkways shall conform to the provisions of Paragraph 15.1-381 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. Landscape planting, screening, fences, walks, curbs, gutters, and other physical improvements as required by or under any county ordinance or the regulations of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation or where the same shall be reasonably necessary to preserve the existing character of the neighborhood shall be provided by the developer. One set of apProved plans, profiles and specifications shall be at the site at all times when work is being performed. Upon the completion of all required water, sewer and gas lines shown on the approved site development plan, the developer shall submit to the Agent for the Governing Body three (3) copies of the completed as-built site plan or location plat for all water, sewer, gas lines and easements certified by an engineer, or surveyor. The "as-bui.lt" utility plan shall be submitted at least one week prior to the anticipated occupancy of any building or block of buildings for the review and approval by the Agent of the governing body for conformity with the approved site plan and the ordinances and regulations of Albemarle County and state agencies. The approval of a Site development plan or the in.stal- lation of the improvements as required by this Article shall not obligate the County to accept improvements for mainten- ance, repair or operation. Acceptance shall be subject to County and/or State regulations, where applicable, concerning the acceptance of each type of improvement. Nothing herein shall require the approval of any develop- ment use or pIan, or any feature thereof, which shall be found by the Planning Commission, the governing body or its agent, to constitute a danger to the public health, safety or general welfare, or which shall be determined by such commission, governing body or agent, to be departure from or violation of sound engineering design or standards. ADMINISTRATION The Director of Planning Of Albemarle County is hereby designated the agent of the governing body of Albemarle County for purposes of the administration of this Article. The agent of the governing body shall be responsible for the receipt, and processing and of site development plan applications subject to the procedures as hereinafter provided. Approval of a site development plan pursuant tO this Article shall expire 18 months after the date of approval unless building permits have been obtained for construction. Extensions may be granted upon written request by the applicant to the Albemarle County Planning Department prior to such expiration, and upon the appropriate extension of all bonding and surety agreements, if applicable. 7-2-75 17-6-4 17-6-5 17-6-6 17-6-7 17-7 17-7-1 17-7-2 17-7-3 17-7-4 17-7-5 17-7-6 17-7-7 All County and State officers and employees responsible for the supervision and enforcement of this Article shall have the right to enter upon the property at all reasonable times during the period_ of construction for the purpose of making periodic inspections for compliance with this Article. No change, revision, or erasure shaZ1 be made on any pending or final site development plan nor on any accom- panying data sheet where approval has been endorsed on the plat or sheet unless authorization for such change is granted in writing by the governing body or its agent. Any site development plan may be revised, provided that request for such revision shall be filed and processed in the same manner as the original site plan. The governing body, by resolution, may establish from time to time a schedule of fees for the examination and approval or disapproval of site development plans submitted pursuant to this Article. Such fee shall be payable to the County of Albemarle, and shall be submitted to the agent in the following manner: fifty (50) percent due and payable at the time of filing of site development plan, and fifty (50) percent due and payable prior to final approval. The agent of the governing body may from time to time establish such reasonable administrative procedures as shall be necessary for the proper administration of this Article. PROCEDURE Applications for site development plan approval shall be submitted to the Albemarle County Planning Department. There is hereby created a site plan review committee composed of a representative of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, the Albemarle County Health Department, the Albemarle County Planning Department, the Albemarle County Engineer's Office, the Albemarle County Service Authority, and~the Albemarle County Fire Marshal's Office. In addition~ two members of the Albemarle County Planning Commission, to be designated by'the Chairman there- of, shall serve as ex-officio members of this committee. The committee shall have the power to make rules for the regulation of its business, subject to the approval of the Planning Commission. The Albemarle County Planning~Department shall transmit all applications for site development plan approval to the committee for its review. The~committee shall review Ail such applications for technical compliance with the pro- visions hereof. Upon completion of its review, the committee shall make recommendations to.the agent of the governing body. The agent of the governing~ of receipt of the committee's re, same, along with comments and re Planning Commission for action. The Commission shall approv, cation within sixty (60) calenda~ application. In so doing, the C, consideration to the recommendat~ committee and the agent of the g. it may consi~der such other evide~ for a proper review of~the appli Any person aggrieved by any Commission in the administration a review of the application by ti Supervisors. Such demand shall] therefor in writing with the Alb~ Department within ten (10) calend decision. The Board may affirm, or in part, the decision of the ( the Board shall give due considez dations of the site plan review ¢ Commission. In addition, it may dence as it deems necessary for ~ application. For ~purposes of th] aggrieved" shall be limited to t~ to be notified pursuant to Secti¢ and any interested governmental The governing body reserves review all decisions of the Comm] istration of this Article which, deem necessary to the proper adm~ ~ody shall, within 30 days ~ommendation, transmit the ~ommendations to the or disapprove the appti- days from the date of the mmission shall give due Lons Of the site plan review ~verning body. In addition, ~ce as it deems necessary ~ation. decision of the Planning of this article may demand he Albemarle County Board of )e made by filing a request ~marle County Planning .ar days of the date of such reverse or modify, in whole lommission. In so doing, 'ation to the ~ecommen- ommittee and the Planning consider such other evi- · proper review of the .s section, the term "person .e applicant, persons required n 17-3-2 of this Article ~gency or officer thereof. unto itself the right to .ssion. made in the admin- in its discretion, it shall nistration hereof. 17-8 This ordinance becomes effecvive August 1, 1975. 7-2-75 Commission. Receipt of the proposed zoning ordinance and map from the Albemarle County Planning Mr. David Carr said the Planning. Commission regrets the ordinance and map are eight months late in being given to the Board. He thanked all those working on the ordinance; the Planning Commission, the staff, the legal staff, and the public. The Planning Commission, some months ago, 'presented their draft of the ordinance to the public at well-attended public, hearings and the public found fault with a number of provisions contained therein. The Planning Commission considered these provisions, reviewed proposed districts and in some cases revised the ordinance to delete same. There has been criticism that the Planning Commission ignored certain things, the most outstanding being the Rivanna River Reservoir. Mr. Carr said that through the years the Planning Commission has been con.cerned about the state of the Reservoir and has tried to deal with the problem as best it could. The Planning Commission was at an impasse when they suggested that the Board of Supervisors join with other concerned groups to have a technical study made of the reservoir. Mr. Cart s-aid the ordinance and map presented to the Board toni.ght, although not a perfect document, is a tremendous improvement over the existing ordinance and map. It is a step forward in future utilization of land in the County. Albemarle County will continue to grow, and at a rapid pace. The County 'government must do a better job in controlling that growth. If nc.t, there will be problems. He then asked Mr. Humphrey to give a resume of the ordinance and map. Mr. Humphrey said the Planning Commission finished their work on the text of the ordinance last Monday night. Within.ten days an addendum w.ill be issued to go with the copy of the ordinance presented to the Board tonight. The Commission still suggests retaining the ten-acre zone, however, only those citizens who specifically asked for a ten-acre designation have their land shown on the map tonight. As of this date, I0,000 acres have been requested for the ten-acre zone, ho,wever, it is available through the normal process of rezoning and will be known as AGR-10. The next zone is AGR-5 and is basically a combination of the old prime-agricultural and agricultural-limited. Then there is AGR-2 which is similar to the present A-1. These are the major changes and all deal with the agricultural structure of the zoning ordinance. Basically, the AGR-10 and AGR-5 zones constitute 60% of the County, with AGR-2 comprising about 30%. Ail other zoning categories represent about 10%. Mr. Humphrey said attempts were made by the Planning Commission .to bring much of.the land in the urban area into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission considered vested interests and modified their original thinking. Much of the land that was originally shown for down-zoning along Route 29 and in other areas has been changed. Basically, this dealt with much of the B-1 zoning which was proposed for Commercial-General. However, in many cases the density was reduced. Many B-1 areas have been changed to Commercial-Limited or Commercial-General because they are presently developed in that manner and fit with existing adjacent development. Mr. Humphrey said this propo.sed ordinance is 100% better than the existing ordinance since it is flexible from all points of view. The Site Development Plan, just adopted tonight, finally gives the Planning '~ Commission legal authority to impose certain requirements. The new ordinance also has built in flexibility providing for all types of developments. One of those types of development, considered Monday night, is called RPN (residental planned neighborhood). It is similar to the PUD concept in the present ordinance, however, deals with residential development as opposed to a new community. The PUD concept, in the existing ordinance, was intended for the establishment of self-contained communities. The Commi.ssion, by its action Monday n.ight, re-established that intent by approving, in principle, the RPN, which will allow flexibility in housing in other residential zones. Ms. Joan Graves said she had b.een a participant, in the preparation of the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Map since its inc.eption. First as.an interested citizen and then as a member of the Planning Commission. The map shown r. epresents a con~ensus Of the Commission reached through ~ compromise. She is concerned about five different areas of the proposal, namely: (1) the sub~ rogation of the conservation zone to the AGR-5 designation despite stated objectives of the Compr-ehensive Plan; (2) the reaffirmation of high-density zoning on portions of the reservoir thereby jeopardizing future preservation of a viable water supply; (3) the vanishing village cluster which is also an integral part of the Comprehensive Plan; (4) areas of heavy commercial zoning next to existing residential zoning with no special permit protection; and (5') areas of up-zoning with no input from adjacent property owners. She personally would like to see the CG-1 less extensive and with more special permit provisions. Mr. Jack Rinehart said he hopes this ordinance will be adopted soon and will not become a political issue. Mr. Peter Easter said he supports the proposed ordinance. It is a compromise but it is a plan that will help the County. It puts the mechanical operations in clearer prospective. Much needed technical matters have been incorporated. These were not controversial, therefore have not been publicized. Mr. Wheeler said the Board recognizes that the Planning Commission has worked hard on the proposed ordinance and map. He will call a meeting for Wednesday, July 9, 1975, at 4:00 P.M. at which time the Board will set up a s.chedule for adoption of this ordinance. He hopes the Board will take action on the ordinance by Labor Day.or at least by September 15. Mr. Fisher said it seems the proposed ordinance has been in the mill for a long time. He attended three public hearings held earlier in the year and therefore knows some of the criticisms received. Some of those criticisms have helped to mold the new ordinance. He thanked Mr. Humphrey and his staff for comparing new zones to existing zones and trying to provide an indication of population holding capacity in these zones. The question of up-zoning in certain areas is of interest. Mr. Fisher said he is not sure that setting a deadline of September 15 for adoption is realistic. Mr~_~:Thacker said the public should have every opportunity for input. It is unfortunate that this matter falls at this time of the year, but he agreed with Mr. Rinehart that this is something that must be pushed forward. Mr. Wood said he was pleased to see the ordimance presented to the present Boara of Supervisors. There hav.e been two long years of work and a great deal of expense_pu~ti~o~re~ising the existing ordinance. The Planning Commission has received a tremendous amount of public input on the ordinance and he felt this Board should do likewise. Ho.weber, he also felt'it is important that the current Board of Supervisors act on the ordinance. If this goes to the Board which will take office in January, it ~ill take a year for them to familarize themselves before feeling comfortable on voting on a revised ordinance that is in the best interest of every citizen in Albemarle County. Mr. Henley thanked the Commission~ for their work to date and said he had nothing new to add at~ this time. 7-2-75 7-9-75 (afternoon) 7-9-75 (night) Mr. Wheeler said When he stated that this ordinance should be adopted by September 15 he did not mean that as an ahsolmte. If it takes longer for the public to digest the ordinance, he expects to give them time for this. He said the Board'also needs to either approve or'disapprove a settlement with Central Contracting at the Airport, to discussion space needs with the Space Needs Committee and the staff, and to review Board actions taken in regards to salaries for the 1975-76 year. He requested that this meeting be adjourned until Wednesday, July 9, 1975, at 4:00 P.M. in the Board Room. Motion to this effect was made by Mr. Wood and seconded by Mr. Thacker. Mr. Wheeler said that Mr. Wood, the Director of Finance, the Clerk to the Board, the Sheriff and himself would be appearing before the'State Compensation Board tomorrow to appeal allowance for salaries and expect to report s.ome success at next week's meeting. The Board also needs to make an appointment to the Soil Erosion Review Committee. MS. Ellen~Craddock asked to make a statement. She complimented the Chairman of the Planning Commission for leading the others members in a forceful and intelligent way. Vote was taken at 9:30 P.M. and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker', Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Carwile. Chairman 7-9-75 (Afternoon) An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, scheduled to be held at 4:00 P.M. on July 9, 1975, was cancelled because all Board members could not be present. Ail matters which were to have been discussed at this meeting were reschedu!ed for the regular meeting held at 7:30 P.M. on this same date. 7-9-75 (Night) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on JUly 9, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr., and Gordon L. Wheeler. Absent: Mr. Lloyd F. Wood., Jr. Officers present: County Attorney, George R. St. John; County Planner, John L. Humphrey; Deputy County Attorney, Frederick Payne; and Administrative Assistant, Page Godsey. Mr. Wheeler called the meeting to order. He said that Mr. Wood, Mr. Batchelor, Mr. Jones and the State Treasurer were in New York today having the bonds which will be sold on July 22, rated by the rating services. They were to h~ve returned at 6:15 p.m. but because of bad weather the plane has returned to New York and they will not be able to leave again until 9:30 p.m. tonight. (1) ZMP-323. Draft Building Company. (Public hearing on tMis petition was deferred from June 18, 1975 Mr. Humphrey said this is a request to rezone 1.82 acres from A-1 to R-1. The area in question is rural in character with a farming activity taking place. There is a substantial amount of single- family development just north of the proposed rezoning. The property which is the subject of this petition, is open farm land and is being harrowed at the present time. The Comprehensive Ptan.~desig- nates this area for conservation (1 dwelling unit per five acres) because of its proximity to the mountains. Single-family lots directly across from this property average two acres each. Lots north of the property, in Newtown, range from four acres dow~ to 3/10th of an acre with the average lot size being 1.6 acres. There are nine two-acre lots south along Routes ~690 and 796, which are already approved. The staff feels this request is ~o~!.~n keeping with the Comprehensive Plan~ relative to public utilities, t~he assimilation of property in the Coum in the area. The staff also feels this approval would set a According to a subdivision plat, filed with this application, which is permissible under R-1 zoning. Approval of the subdi sewer and central water being made available. Without tried and disposing of sewer effluent, the staff feels the R-1 zoni Mr. Humphrey fini.shed by saying the Planning Commission recom he no~ed that the Health Department has suggested that for t~ ty or the existing residental development ~recedent for R-1 zoning in the area. the smallest ~ot proposed is 8,200 sq.ft, ~ision plat would necessitate public and proven methods of~providing water ng in such an outlying area is premature. mends denial of this petition. However, e purpose a central sewer system, there is a five-acre area adjacent,~wned by Mr. Tiffany, that can be utilized for this purpose. (2) SP-489. Public Service Company of Virginia, Inc. from June 18, 1975.) (Public hearing on this petition was deferred Mr. Humphrey said this request is for a central water .and sewer system on property located on the west side of Route 690. The area is rural in character and sparsely' developed residentially. The property in question contains several farm buildings and ~s presently being farmed. The applicant p oposes to serve a subdivision containing nine single-family lots (subdivision as yet unapproved) with the well presently used in the farming operation. The w~l! has an output of 22 gallons per minute. A central drainfield is also proposed for this subdi' receipt of a letter from Mr. Homer Chevacci, of the Health De' Newtown Subdivision located at Greenwood is suitable for sub-' such. There is enough space to install ~he required amount o buildings, with additional space (available) to install new d~ Mr. Fisher asked who would own these systems. Mr. Humph~ tions set up through the State Corporation Commission for the operation of the septic system will have to licensed and unde~ zision. Mr. Humphrey said he was in ~artment, which states: "Soil in ~urface drainfields in the lots as septic tank system necessary for the ?ainfields, if needed." ?ey said there will have to be corpora- water system~ The~maintenance and ?taken by a homeowners association.