Loading...
1974-08-188-28-74 9 ! A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held at 7:30 P.M. on August 28, 1974 in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. (Mr. Wood arriving at 8:08 P.M.) ABSENT: None. Officers Present: County Executive, T. M. Batchelor, Jr., and County Attorney, George R. St. John. Also present were Messrs. Fred Payne, Jim Bowling, John Humphrey, Robert Tucker, and Mrs. Ruth Miller. The Chairman called the meeting to order. (1) SP-368. William T. Payne. Action on this matter was deferred from July 24, and again deferred on August 14, 1974. Mr. Jack Kegley was present to represent Mr. Payne. Mr. Allen Desper presented to the Board a petition containing thirty-seven signatures of those in opposition to this request. He also brought to the Board's attention that over 400 residents of this area had signed petitions in opposition to a recent request for expansion of Mr. Breeden's trailer court. Mr. Thacker asked if any of those signing in opposition-to this request are adjacent property owners. Mr. Desper said only Mr. Snow. Mr. Thacker said consideration of this application was deferred because he was absent on July 24 and because of other problems which had occurred prior to August 14. He did not feel Mr. Desper's comments regarding signatures obtained against a mobile home park permit were relevant to this case. Information presented show that only one adjacent property owner is objecting to this petition. He feels Mr. Payne desire to be near his mother is commendable. He then asked the Planning Commission's recommendations. Mr. H~mphrey said the Planning Commission recommends d~nial. Mr. Thacker said he had visited the site and the trailer is to be located in a~relatively obscure area. With the conditions indicated by the Planning that staff, he really did not see½much harm in having a trailer there. He then offered motion to approve SP-368 because of the family situation involved and with the recommendations of the Planning Staff as follows: a) County Building Official approval, b) Screening from State Routes 20 and 742. c) A minim~n setback of 100 feet from Routes 20 and 742. d) Skirting around mobile home from ground/level to base of mobile home. And with the following added conditions: e) This permit is granted for a period of one year and is administratively renew~a-~ for four additional one-year periods if there is no 8-28,-.74 92 violation, f) The permit is applicable only as long as Mrs. Payne occupies the present house. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile. Mr. Carwile said he also had visited the site and feels that the location of the trailer will not be visible from surrounding property. This coupled with the reasons for the application led him to support same. Mr. Fisher said he also had visited the site and feels that with the time conditions that Mr. Thacker has proposed to serve the need of the family, he is willing to support the motion. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, and Wheeler. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Wood. (2] SP-370. Samuel James Lively. Public hearing on this matter was continued from August 14. Mr. J. L. Lively who had objected to the placement of this mobile home at the last hearing said he is now satisfied and will accept the Board's decision. Mrs. Sweeney, owner of the property, said she is also satisfied. Mr. Wheeler said Mr. Fisher, Mr. Wood and himself had visited the property yesterday and discussed with Mrs. Sweeney the location of the mobile home. The location they have picked would be in the vicinity of the barn which would place it back past the center of Mrs. Sweeney's property and it would not be seen from the mailbox by anyone. He had discussed this with Mr. Martin, who also objected and this location is even further back than Mr. Martin had suggested and the he suggested the board approve/location of the site best descmibed as the tree near the bar~ and that the permit be approved for a period of time so long as it is occupied by Mr. Lively but not to exceed five years. Mr. Fisher said the site Mrs. Sweeney has agreed to is so far inside her property line that he does not feel anyone will be able to see the mobile home and since she needs the help, he feels this is a reasonable way to solve the problem. He then offered motion to approve SP-370 with the following conditions: a) The mobile home is to be placed by the tree near the barn. b) County · uilding Official approval, c) Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of mobile home. d) Five (5) year time~!imit, e) The permit is issued to the apPlicant only and is not transferrable. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler. None. Mr. Wood. 8~28~74 ? 93 (3] Miss Sally Meade, a representative of the SPCA, was present to request the Board to adopt an ordinance forbidding the abandonment of dogs. She said the SPCA is charged with responsibility of caring for lost or unclaimed animals. One of the main problems encountered by the SPCA is that of abandoning animals on the highways. It is imperative that these animals be harbored for at least five days. Since there is no charge for bringing animals to the SPCA, they feel that if an ordinance is passed making this a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, this would discourage people from dropping animals. Mr. Fisher said the County Attorney should investigate to see what enabling legiSla~-~r-~--- ?-/~-J~ exists. He has some misgivings that an ordinance drafted in this fashion will deter many people. Mr. Wheeler recommended that these be refe~d to the dog committee and the county attorney bring a recommendation on same to the Board. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Thacker and he said the request is not limited to just dogs but to animals. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher. Mr. Wheeler suggested the dog committee be renamed the Animal Committee. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, and Wheeler. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Wood. ~(~) Land SubdivisiQn and Development Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia. Public hearing on adoption of this ordinance was continued from August 14, 1974. Mr. St. John said there are s0mei.~lanks on page 10. Since it has not been ascertained what other agencies may be involved in establishing sewer and drainage programs in the County, although the Albemarle County Ser~±ce Authority would be in charge of these. ~He?w0uld suggest putting in the words "or other appropriate agency as required by Virginia Code Secnion 15.1-466, as amended". Mr. Fred Payne said there had been two amendments added to bring the ordinance into conformity with new state statutes. These are sections 3-8~4 and 3-16-1 regarding street signs and sidewalks. Mr. Buddy Bolton, President, Monticello Home Builders asked that Section 3-19 not be interpretated to disallow all so called pipe stems lots. He feels~there is a definite need for this sort of thing. One being the cost of making lots available for low income housing.~ If pipe stem lots are eliminated it would contradict what the Board has attempted to do in appropriating revenue sharing money to hire someone to find land for iow income housing. He requested that Section 3-19 be revised to say that pipe stems, if properly designed are acceptable if approved by the Planning Commission. 8-28-74 9 4 Mr. Wheeler said he did not want to open the door to pipe stem lots. One of the things this Board has done is to allow ten lots on a restricted road and is now working with FHA to see if they will accept restricted roads. He personally feels this is a better solution than pipe stem lots. Mr. Bolton said FHA will accept restricted roads. Except for surface treatment as far as he knows there is no difference between the cost of a restricted road and a state road. Mr. Fisher_asked if Mr. Bolton interpret~R- /-?~-?j~ this paragraph ~abSQlUhety~f0~h~ pipe stem lots under any conditions. Mr. Bolton sa'i~d'~e was not sure and that was the reason for his asking for this clarification. Mr. Wheeler said he was not willing to>tsupport taking out that paragraph and leaving this wide open. Mr. Bolton said he was not requesting that but he did suggest that~there are good and valid reasons to allow pipe stem lots with proper design. Mrs. Betty Scott~was present to represent the League of Women Voters. She said they support the adoption of this Subdivision Ordinance asia step in ~t/~~~ /~/~ 7~ implemen the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan. However, they did have a few questions. What provision will be made for notification of surrounding property owners in the event of subdivision development? Mr. Humphrey said the Board has an adopted policy on site plans and subdivisions. This is not in the ordinance. If the Board adopts this ordinance tonight, they may wish to --] readopt a resolution establishing policy and directing notification. Mrs. Scott asked if all subdivisions of land will be considered by the Planning Commission. Mr~ Humphrey said yes. Mrs. Scott said they were unable to determine by Section 8-3 who would give final approval as agent. If the agent gives final approval of the plan, is Board approval required for any subdivision? the Mr. Humphrey said the Board would have to reiterate delegating/authority to the agent. and would have to state to what extent that delegation is, minor or major°and in what cases subdivisions should be brought to the Board. This is a policy procedure. Mr. Wheeler said the policy now is that the County Planner acts as the Board's agent. Mr. St. John said any time a Board of this type delegates authority of this kind to an agent, it can cal. t~the matter f~om the agent to itself. There is a provision in Section 12 for any person aggrieved by action taken by the agent to appeal the agent's action to this Board. This is designed to be mandatory before that aggrieved person can appeal from the Board to the courts. The final appeal is always to the courts. Mrs. Scott said they were interested in the fact that the city review in Section 8A-1 has changed from three miles ~to one mile. They asked what criteria was used to justify this change. Mr. St. John said by statute the city has a right to insist on jurisdiction of~ three miles within the limits of the city. City and county representatives met and negotiated this. 8-28274 The City voluntarily relinquished some of its jurisdiction. In return~the County agreed to give it some jurisdiction. They had to agree on some formula, if they had not it would have been left to the Court to decide whether the City or the County would have had exclusive control over this three mile area. Mrs. Scott said the legal basis for Section 9 under the state enabling legislation is not clear. In other areas which have tried similar plans, it was felt that a capital improvements program was an'absolute necessity~ to provide for legal evidence for denial of decisions. They feel this section needs a~support of revisions to the Zoning Ordinmnce and especially the capital improvements program. An unidentified gentlemen said he is concerned about the water supply and notification of adjoining property owners. The ordinance states that lots of one and one-half acres can have both a well and a septic tank. He feels this is too small of an area for a long period of time~ and that sizes of subdivisions should be run down by the number of lots. It is a quite a different matter to. have 100 lots on septic tanks then to have just a few lots on septic tanks. He also felt that if someone buys land around a subdivision and subdivides it people in the community should be notified and that the county should have up~ to date records on land transactions. at Mr. Wheeler said this lot size was arrived/after work with the Health Department. This is what they feel is necessary. In regard to his question about notification, Mr. Wheeler said the County is presently working on a new Zoning map. When this map is adopted, whatever that land is zoned for it can be used for that purpose and it should not come,as a shock to the citizens, if it is used in that way. Mr. W. S. Roudabush said the comments made at the last hearing about Section 9 are still valid. He also commented on the fee section. He asked that the Board look closely at the fees and give it their utmost consideration. He then commended the county for giving considerations to engineers and surveyors and those who work on subdivisions when drafting this~.~ordinance. Mr. Aubrey Huffman commended the Board on the preparation of the ordinance. However, express~ opposition to Section 9 since he did not feel it can be enforced. Mr. Louis Scribner, Jr., asked if 50 lots could be subdivided into two sections in order to avoid provisions in the subdivision ordinance for a central well. Mr. Humphrey said they possibly could if the Planning Department did not know that additional subdivision of the land was proposed. Mr. Roy Patterson, Citizens for ~lbemarle, spoke in favor of Section 9. He said if a request for a subdivision was denied by the Planning Commission, it could be appealed to this Board. If that got to be a distasteful practice, 8~28~74 procedure could be changed. Availability of housing for people of low income or medium income is a critical point. To allow subdivisions at distance locations to be developed and built would place on the Board requirements for providing roads and public facilities such as schools, etc. Whereas if a subdivision were built in a different location, existing facilities could be used. He felt Section 9 gives this Board of Supervisors ultimate control. Mrs. Frances Martin asked if Section 9 is deleted, if the Board will have any control over placement of subdivisions on land which are already zoned in order to prevent a waste of taxpayers money. Mr. Wheeler said if this is deleted and the land is zoned the land can be used. Mrs. Elizabeth Rosenblum asked several questions which were indistinguishable to the Clerk. A Mr. W~it~'~asked if it were conflict between the comprehensive plan and the adopted zoning ordinance which would take precedence? Mr. Wheele~ said the zoning ordinance. An unidentified man spoke in support of Section 9. that is better Mr. Morris Foster suggested/a five percent grade/for paved ditches. He said the engineers and surveyors have alot of ordinances and standards with~,which to work and often get confused. Until the county has road standards, he would like to Department of see this eliminated and say instead construction according to State/Highway standards in effect at the time of approval. Mr. Humphrey said it was the intention in drafting this ordinance to leave it all up to the State Highway Department. Mr. Wheeler said it is the intent of this ordinance to have all roads built to state highway standards. At this time, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Mr. Fisher said the Board of Supervisors has been working on this ordinance for a year and a half. Most problems have been ironed out. He feels that section 9 is something the County needs to work toward but does not believe that without a capital improvement program being tied to this so that people who own property will know what to expect as far as time data and know what is prematur~ that the Board can administer this section. He then offered motion to adopt the Land Subdivision and Development Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia with the following amendments and corrections: Number 1. Add Section 1-54-3. The Division of any 'parcel occasion~di~ by an exercise of eminent domain by any public agency. Number 2. Section 3-5. Change to read as follows: 3-5. Fees: 3-5-1. Preliminary Plat: The subdivider shall pay a fee at the time when the preliminary pf plat is filed. Such fee shall be zn the form of cash or a certified check payable to the County of Albemarle, Virginia, the amount thereof to be determined in accordance with the following schedule: 8a28-74 9'7 3-5-1(1). $8.00 per acre for the first 10 acres in the subdivision. 3-5-1(2). $5.00 per acre for each additional acre or fraction thereof over 10 acres in the subdivision. 3-5-1(3). Each filing of a preliminary~.~lat, whether or not a preliminary plat for the same property has been filed previously, shall be subject to the same requirements and fees as specified for filing of the preliminary plat. 3-5-2. Final plat: The subdivider shall pay a fee at the time the final plat is filed. Such fee shall be in the form'.of cash or a certified check payable to the County of Alb~ema~le, V±rginia~ the amount thereof to be determined in accordance with the following schedule: 3-5-2(1). Administrative approval: $15.00 for plats containing three or less lots-' plus $10.00 for field inspection if warranted. 3-5-2(2). Commission and Board of'~upervisors approval: $40.00 minimum for plats containing three or less lots; plus $2.00 per lot for each lot in excess of three, to and including .... ~t8 lots;~$1~00'~per tot for each lot over 18 lots. Number 3. Add section 3-8-4: The governing body, or its agent, may require the posting andr.maint~n~nce of signs or other appropriate markings regulating the operation and parking of motor vehicles pursuant to Chapter 12 of the-Albemarle County Code. Number 4. Section 3-13, add sentence to the end of the paragraph: "provided, however, that no such resub- division which, in the opinion of the governing body, shall constitute a more effective use of the property involved shall be denied for failure to comply with the provisions Of this ordinance." Number 5. Section 3-15-1~ Payment of sewer and drainage costs: ~-f~-~f-l(1). Each subdivider or developer of land in Albemarle County shall pay to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors his pro rata share of the cost of providing reasonable and necessary sewerage and drainage facilities, located outside the pro]~erty limits of the land owner or controlled by him but necessitated or required~ at least in part, by the construction or improvement of his subdivision or development. 3-t5-1(2). No such payment for sewer and drainage costs shall be required until such time as the Albemarle County Service Authority and the shall have established a general sewer and drainage improvement program for an a~ea having related and common sewer and drainage conditions and within which the land owned or controlled by the developer or subdivider is located. The Albemarle County Service Authority and the shall, as a part of said program, establish regulations setting forth standards to determine the proportionate share of total estimated cost of ultimate sewerage and drainage facilities required to adequately serve a related and common area, when and if fully developed in accord with the adopted comprehensive plan, that shall be borne by each subdivider or developer within the area. 3-15-1(3). Such proportionate share of total estimated cost of ultimate sewerage and drainage facilities required to adequately serve a related and common area shall be limited to the proportion of such total estimated cost which the increase sewage flow and/or increased volume and velocity of storm water runoff to be actually caused by his subdivision or development bears to total estimated volume and velocity or such sewage and/or runoff from such area in its fully developed state. 98 8-28-74 3-15-1(4). Each such payment received from each subdivider or developer shall be expended only for the construction of those facilities for which the payment was required, and until so expended shall be held in an interest- bearing account for the benefit of the subdivider or developer; provided, however,/that in lieu of such payment the Board of Supervisors may provide for the posting of a bond with surety satisfactory to it conditioned on payment~at commencement of such construction. Number 6. Section 3-16-1. The subdivider shall provide all improvements necessary to bring sidewalks in the subdivision into conformity with Section 15.1-381 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. Number 7. Section 3-28-3. Add sentence to the end of the paragraph as follows: "The fact that the responsibility for maintenance of restricted streetS shall be that of the owners of abutting lots shall be set forth in restrictions recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County prior to the sale of any lot be served by such restricted street." Number 8. Section 4-1, changed'to'read as follows: Street alignment: Provisions shall be made for the continuation of planned, existing, or platted streets into adjoining areas. Number 9. Section 7-2. In the first line, change the word "nine" to "ten" and add the following sentence to the end of that paragraph: "In the event such plat needs to be revised, seven copies of the revised plat shall be s~bmitted to the agent." Number 10. Section 7-9-12. The number, approximate dimensions, and area of all lots. Number 11. Section 8-1. In the second line, change the word "nine" to "ten", in the fourth line after the word "engineer" put the words "to the limit of his license" and add the following sentence to the end of that paragraph: "In the event the final plat needs to be revised, after original approval, seven copies of the revised plat shall be submitted to~ the agent." Number 12. Section 8-5-6. Add the following words to the end of that paragraph "with the area, in square feet, of lots indidated, for each individual parcel." Number 13. Section 8-5-11. Change to read as fOllows: 8-5-11. Signature panelS,.~ shall be provided as follows: 8-5-11(1) For land lying in Albemarle County, but within one mile of the corporate limits of the City of Charlottesville, for the Chairman of the Albemarle County Planning Commission; and the designated agent of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors; and for the Chairman and Secretary of the Charlottesville Planning Commission. 8-5-11(2) For land lying in Albemarle County, but more than one mile fr.om the corporate limits of the City of Charlottesville, for the Chairman of the Albemarle County Planning Commission; and the designated agent of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Number 14. Strike Section 9. Number 15. Relabel Section 8A as Section 9. Mr. Fisher's~motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile. Mr. Thacker said there had been a number of points brought out concerning the ordinance~and he .do~ not consider this to be a final ordinance but feels there will be amendments made when necessary. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: (The comp~'lete text of the ordinance~ as adopted~ is set out below and on the following pages. ) Land Subdivision and Development Or~dinance of Albemarle County, Virginia PURPOSE AND TITLE The purpose of this ordinance is to establish subdivision control standards and procedures for t~he County of Albemarle, Virginia, and such of its environs as may be under the jurisdiction of the governing body thereof. This ordinance is to guide and facilitate the orderly, beneficial growth of the community, to assure the orderly subdivision of land and its development, and to promote public health, safety., convenience, com- fort, prosperity, and general welfare. This ordinance is known and may be cited as "Land Subdivision and Devel- opment Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia, as amended to August 28, 1974. SECTION 1 -- DEFINITIONS - WORDS AND TERMS For the purpose of this ordinance, terms used herein shall be inter- preted and defined as follows: words used in the present tense shall include the future; words in the singular number include the plural and the plural the singular unless the natural construction of the word indicates otherwise; the word "lot" includes the word "parcel"; the word "shall" is mandatory and not directory; the word "approve" shat~. be considered to be followed by the words "or disapprove". The word "current" shall mean the point in time at which a matter is under consideration and shall not mean the date of adoption of this ordi- nance. Any reference to this ordinance includes all ordinances amend- ing or supplementing the same and the dates of their additions or deletions. Ail distances and areas refer to measurement in a horizon- tal plane. 1-1. AGENT: The Director of Planning for Albemarle County, Virginia, who shall act on behalf of the governing body of Albemarle County, Virginia. 1--2. ALLEY: A permanent service way providing a secondary means of vehicular access to abutting properties and not intended for general traffic circulation. ARCHITECT: A person licensed to practice as such in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 1--4. AREA CONSERVATIONIST: The official of the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District responsible for review of soil erosion control measures pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. 1--5. BENCH TERRACES: Flat areas constructed on sloping land to planned dimensions and grades. 1--6. BUILDING LINE: The distance of a building from the front lot line or a boundary line. 1-7. COMMISSION: Virginia. The Planning Commission of Albemarle County, ..... C©MPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan of Albemarle ...... i'C0un~y,.~irginia, adopted for future land use. 1-9..i:!2~.CHL~DE-SAC: A street with only one outlet and having an appropriate turnaround area for a safe and convenient reverse of traffic movement. 1-10. CRITICAL AREA STABILIZATION: The cutting, filling, and grading of soils with heavy equipment resulting in areas of exposed subsoils or mixtures of soil horizons.. 1-11. DEBRIS BASINS: See Sediment Basins. 1-12. DEVELOPER: An owner of property being subdivided whether or not represented by an agent. 100 8-28-74 1-13. 1-14. 1-15. 1-16. 1-17. 1-18. 1-19. 1-20. 1-21. 1-22. 1-23-. 1-25. 1-26. 1-27. 1-28. 1-29. 1-30. 1-31. 1-32. DIVERSIONS: A channel or ditch and a ridge constructed across a sloping land surface on the contour, or with pre- determined grades to intercept and divert surface run-off before it gains sufficient volume and velocity to create harmful erosion. EASEMENT: A reservation or grant by a property owner of the use of land for a specific purpose or purposes, other than a license revocable by the unilateral act of the grantor. ENGINEER: A person licensed to practice as such in the Commonwealth of Virginia. EROSION: The wearing away of soil or land by the action of water or wind. GOVERNING BODY: Virginia. The Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, HEALTH DIRECTOR: The Health Director of Albemarle County or his designated agent. HIGHWAY ENGINEER: The Resi~dent Highway Engineer of Albemarle County employed by the Virginia Department of Highways. IMPROVEMENTS: Ail public utilities and faci~lities, includ- ing, but not limited to, street.s, cul-de-sacs, storm and sanitary se~ers, water lines, curb and gutter, required pur- suant to the terms of this ordinanc.e or the Zoning 1Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia. JURISDICTION: The area or territory subject to legislative control of the governing body. JOG-STREET: An offset intersection of two streets resulting in a jog less than 250 feet between the two intersecting streets. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: A .person qualified to practice as such in the CommonweaLth of Virginia or a member of the American Society of Landscape Architects. LOT: .A~mubdivided parcel of land intended for transfer of ownership or for building development. LOT, CORNER: A lot abutting upon two or more streets at their intersection. The shortest side fronting upon a street shall be considered the front of tlhe lot and the longest side fronting upon a street shall be considered the side of the lot. LOT, DEPTH OF: The.mean horizontal distance between the front and rear lot line. LOT, DOUBLE FRONTAGE: streets. An interior lot having frontage on two LOT~ INTERIOR: A lot other than a corner lot with only one street frontage. LOT OF RECORD: A lot which has been recorded among the land records in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia. LOT, WIDTH OF: The mean horizjontal distance between the side lot lines. NON-CRITICAL AREA STABILIZATION: Areas of good soils on moderate slopes where the establishment and maintenance of good vegetative cover are relatively simple. PERFORMANCE BOND: A bond with surety and/or cash deposit, approved by the governing body in an amount equal to the full cost of improvements to be dedicated to public use in accord- ance with this ordinance and providing for completion of such improvements within a definite term. 8-28-7~1 101 1-33. 1-34. 1-35. 1-36. 1-37. 1-38. 1-39. 1-40. 1-41. 1-42. 1-43. 1-44. 1-45. 1-46. 1-~47. 1-48. 1-49. PLAT: A map or plan of a tract or parcel of land which is to be or which has been subdivided. PROFILES AND SPECIFICATIONS: Construction plans and specifi- cations showing all necessary data for all public and private improvements to be installed under the terms of this ordinance. PROPERTY: Any tract, lot, parcel or several of the same collected together for the purpose of subdividing. REMNANTS OR OUTLOT: Any tract, lot, parcel or several of the same, other than that specified for open space, park land, flood plain or well lots, which are below the minimum lot size as required by the Zoning Ordinance. SEDIMENT BASINS, DEBRIS BASINS: A temporary or permanent earth fill type dam or barrier downstream f.rom a development area which serves to regulate run-off and trap sediment. SEDIMENTATION: The action or process of depositing material caused by water or wind. STREET: A dedicated strip of land or right of way subject to vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic providing means of access to property. STREET (ARTERIAL): A highway utilized primarily as a supple- ment to, and as an extension of, the interstate highway system, defined in the Virginia State Highway Commission Standards as an arterial highway. A minimum right of way of 100 feet is required. STREET (COLLECTOR): A street that carries or is anticipated to carry a volume of through traffic exceeding 400 vehicles per day, the right of way of which shall not be less than 50 feet nor more than 80 feet depending upon existing or antic- ipated traffic volume. STREET (INTERSTATE): A highway utilized to carry interstate traffic with a minimum right of way of 300 feet in rural areas and carrying capacity in excess of 1500 vehicles per lane per hour. STREET (LOCAL): A street that oarries or is anticipated to carry a volume of traffic less than 400 vehicles per day, the right of way of which shall not be less than 50 feet. STREET (MAJOR COLLECTOR): A street that carries or is antic- pated to carry a volume of traffic exceeding 3000 vehicles per day, the right of way of which shall not be less than 60 feet nor more than 110 feet. STREET (MAJOR HIGHWAY): Any street or highway defined in Sections 1-40, 1-42, 1-44, or 1-46. STREET (PRIMARY): A street or highway anticipated to carry a volume of traffic exceeding 3000 vehicles per day, designed and maintained as a part of the Virginia Primary System, the right of way of which shall not be less than 80 feet nor more than 160 feet. STREET (PUBLIC): A street which affords principal means of access to abutting property, and encompassed by a right of way dedicated to public use and maintained by the Con~mon- wealth as a part of the State Primary or Secondary Road System. The right of way shall not be less than 50 feet. STREET (RESTRICTED): A street which affords principal means of access to abutting property, and encompassed by a right of way dedicated to public use and maintained by a private corporation or adjacent landowners within the platted sub- division, constructed to standards adopted by the County of Albemarle. The right of way shall not be less than 50 feet. STREET (RURAL): A street having minimum right of way of 50 feet located in areas or subdivisions divided into parcels of two acres or more, excepting streets carrying or antici- pated to carry heavy volumes of traffic or otherwise defined herein. 102 1-50. 1-51. 1-52. 1-53. 1-54. 1-54-1. 1-54-2. 1-54-3. 1-55. 1-56. 1-57. 1-58. STREET (SERVICE.DRIVE): A public or private right of way, generally parallel wish and contiguous to a major highway, primarily designed to promote safety by eliminating perni- cious ingress and egress to a major highway by providing safe and orderly points of access to ~the major highway. STREET WIDTH: The total width of the strip of land or right of way, dedicated or reserved for public travel including roadway, curb and gutter, sidewalks, bicycle paths, planting strips, and, where necessary, utility easements. SUBDIVIDE: The process of dividing land to establish a subdivision. SUBDIVIDER: An individual, corporation, proprietor, trust, trustee, joint venture, partnership, or other unincorporated association, owning any tract, lot, or parcel of land to be subdivided; or a group Of two or more persons or entities owning any tract, lot, or parcel of land to be subdivided who have given their power of attorney to one of their group or to another individual or entity to act on their behalf in planning, negotiating for, in representing or executing the legal requirements of the subdivision. SUBDIVISION: The division, including resubdivision and the establishment of any condominium regime, of or in a parcel of land into two or more lots, parcels or units, any one of which is less than five acres, for the purpose of transfer of ownership or building development; or, if a new street or access easement is involved in such division, any division of a parcel of land. But the following shall not be deemed a subdivision: The sale and exchange of.parcels between adjoining landowners where such sale or exchange does not create additional build- ing sites. The release of a portion of the security of any mortgage or deed of trust. The division of any parcel occasioned by an exercise of eminent domain by any public agency. SURVEYOR: Any person licensed to practice as such in the Commonwealth of Virginia~ THOROUGHFARE ABPELLATION: A designation, following the name of a street, such as street, lane, way, avenue, etc. WATER STABILIZATION STRUCTURES: Structural devices to dis- sipate the energy of flowing water by holding the waterway slopes and velocities within non-scouring limits. ZONING ORDINANCE: Albemarle. The Zoning Ordinance of~the County of SECTION 2 -- ADMINISTRATION 2--1. ADMINISTRATOR: The agent appointed by the governing body is hereby delegated the authority and power to administer this ordinance and in so acting the agent shall be considered the agent of the governing body. 2--2. DUTIES: The agent shall perform his duties as regards subdivisions and subdividing in accordance with this ordi- nanc.e and the Virginia Land Subdivision and Development Act. 2--3- CONSULTATIONS: In the performance of his duties, the agent may request opinions and/or decisions, either verbal or written, from other departments of the County governmenv, officials and departments of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and such other qualified persons as may from time to time be retained. 8-28-74 103 2--4. 2--5. 2--6. PROCEDURES AND POLICY: In addition to regulations herein contained for the subdivision of land, the agent, subject to the approval of the governing body, may from time to time establish reasonable administrative procedures and policy requirements as deemed necessary for the proper administra- tion of this ordinance. Procedures so established shall govern the administration of this ordinance. DEDICATION FOR PUBLIC USE: No plat of subdivision showing any public easement or right of way shall be recorded, nor shall any such easement or right of way otherwise be accepted for dedication to public use until such proposed plat or other dedication shall first have been approved by the governing body, or its agent, and evidence of such approval shown on the instrument to be recorded. Such approval shall not be given by the governing body until any such easement or right of way complies with all requirements of the Virginia Depart- ment of Highways and such other requirements as the governing body may impose. PERMITS: Ail public utility and drainage easements outside the right of way of public streets are to be shown on final plats. Where it is necessary to place public utilities with- in the right of way shown for public or restricted street purposes, a permit shall first be obtained from the governing body, or its agent, for such installation. Utility installa- tions to be constructed within public streets or right of way shall be coordinated with the street construction plans and profiles as approved by the Virginia Department of Highways. SECTION 3 -- PLAT PREPARATION - GENERAL PROCEDURES PLATTING REQUIRED: No tract of land situated within Albe- marle County shall be subdivided unless the subdivider shall cause a plat of subdivision with reference to known or per- manent monuments to be made, submitted, and approved pursuant to the terms of this ordinance and recorded among the land records in the Office of the Clerk. of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County. No plat of subdivision shall be recorded unless or until the plat shall have been submitted to the governing body and approved and certified by the governing body, or its agent, in accordance with the regulations set forth in this ordinance. No lot shall be sold in any subdi- vision before the plat shall have been recorded. Every such plat shall be prepared by a certified professional engineer, to the limit of his license, or land surveyor. 3--2. PRIVATE CONTRACTS: This ordinance bears no relation to any private easement, covenant, agreement, or restriction, nor is the responsibility of enforcing a private easement, covenant, agreement, or restriction implied herein to any public offi- cial. When this ordinance calls for more restrictive stan- dards than are required by private contract, the provisions of this ordinance shall control. 3--3. RIGHT OF WAY ADDITIONS: Where the Comprehensive Plan indi- cates a proposed right of way greater than that existing along the boundaries of a subdivision or lot, ~such additional right~ of way shall be reserved for public use, when the plat is recorded, by the requirement of additional setback in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan. Where a subdivision has occurred on public streets less than 50 feet in width, addi- tional right of way shall be dedicated in order that the pub- lic street or right of way shall be at least 50 feet in width. PLAT CHANGES: No change or erasure or revision shall be made on any preliminary or final plat, nor on any accompanying data sheets unless authorization-for such changes has been granted in writing by the approving body, or its agent. 3-5 · FEES: 3,5-1. PreZiminamy Plat: The subdivider shall pay a fee at the time when the.p~eliminary of plat is filed. Such fee shall be in the form of cash or a certified check payable to the County of Albemarle, Virginia, the amount thereof to be determined in accordance with the following schedule: 104 3-5-1(1). $8.00 per acre for the first 10 acres in the subdivision. 3-5-1(2). $5.00 per acre for each additional acre or fraction thereof over 10 acres in the subdivision. 3-5-1(3). each filing of a preliminary plat, whether or not a prelim- inary plat for the same property has been filed previously, shall be subject to the same requirements and fees as speci- fied for filing of the preliminary plat. 3-5-2. FINAL PLAT: The subdivider shall pay a fee at the time the final plat is filed. Such fee shall be in the form of cash or a certified check payable to the County of Albemarle, Virginia, the amount thereof to be determined in accordance with the following schedule: 3-5-2(1). administrative approval: $15.00 for plats containing three or less lots plus $10.00 for field inspection if warranted. 3-5-2(2). Commission and Board of Supervisors approval: $40.00 minimum for plats containing three or less lots; plus $2.00 per lot for each lot in excess of three, to and including 18 lots; $1.00 per lot for each lot over 18 lots. 3--6- MUTUAL RESPONSIBILITY: There is a mutual responsibility between the County of Albemarle and the subdivider to divide and develop land in an orderly manner in accordance with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 3--7. DRAINAGE COURSES: When any stream or substantial surface drainage course is located in the area being subdivided, provision shall be made for an adequate easement along the stream or drainage course for the purpose of widening, deep- ening, relocating, improving, or protecting the streams or drainage courses for drainage purposes. Such easements shall not be considered part of required street width. No plat of subdivision shall be approved without provision for adequate drainage. To insure development of lots containing sufficient land upon which to place structures without imped- ing natural drainage, the subdivider shall provide elevation and flood profiles as may be required. 3--8. IMPROVEMENTS: 3-8-1. Ail required improvements shall be inStalled at the cost of the subdivider. Where cost sharing or reimbursement agree- ments between the County of Albemarle and the subdivider are appropriate, the same shall be entered into by formal agree- ment prior to final plat approval and shall be subject to Virginia Highway Department inspection and acceptance. Ease- ments and lines for water and sewer services shall be subject to approval by the Albemarle County Service Authority and drainage easements shall be subject to approval by the Albe- marle County Engineer. In cases where specifications have been establi.shed, either by the Virginia Department of High- ways for streets, etc., or by this ordinance, such specifica- tions shall be followed. The subdivider's performance bond shall not be released until construction has been inspected and accepted by appropriate engineer or agent and by the Virginia Department of Highways, if applicable. Ail improve- ments shall be in accordance with the requirements set forth in .this ordinance. 3-8-2. The governing body, may from time to time, by resolution, adopt reasonable regulations to require subdivider .to share in the cost of providing off site sewer and drainage facilities. 3-8-3. The Commission and the. governing body, or its agent, may require as a condition prerequisite to approval of any subdi- vision that the developer provide space for necessary public purposes, including parks and schools, directly occasioned by and specifically attributable to the particular subdivision Qr..development.'~"~._~ 3-8-4. The governing body, or its agent, may require the posting and maintenance of signs or other appropriate markings regulating the operation and parking of motor vehicles pursuant to Chapter 12 of the Albemarle County ,Code. ~L 105 3--9. LOT SIZE: Lot sizes for residential lots shall conform to the Zoning Ordinance ih effect in the County of Albemarle at the time of the filing of the final plat. 3-10 · FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE STRUCTURES: The subdivider shall provide all information needed to determine what improvements are necessary to provide adequate drainage, including contour maps, drainage plans, and flood control devices. Contour intervals shall be not greater than five feet and shall be at such lesser intervals as specified by the agent. The subdi- vider shall also provide plans for all such improvements together with a statement from a properly qualified., certified engineer or land surveyor that such improvements, when proper- ly installed, will be adequate for property development. The subdivider shall also provide any other information required by the governing body, its agent, or the Highway Engineer. 3-11. SANITARY SEWER~AND WATER: No subdivision shall be approved where individual water or septic tank systems are to be used until written approval has been secured from the Health Direc- tor by the agent for the governing body. The Health Director, or his agent, shall determine the suitability of soil for the use of septic systems with subsurface disposal and shall not approve such subdivisions when satisfactory service is not reasonably anticipated. The Director, or his agent, shall require percolation tests or other methods of soil evaluation in determining the suitability of the soil for subsurface disposal. Percolation tests and/or other soil evaluation shall be the responsibility of the developer. 3-11-1. Where the subdivision contains 25 or more lots, of two acres or less, the subdivider shall, in addition to soil tests, provide: 3-11-1(1). documented proof that the soils and parent materials are such that waste disposal methods for the entire tract are satis- factory to the Health Director, or his agent, and that no well pollution can occur from proposed lot lay-out; except that such proof shall be required only as to lots intended for transfer of ownership; or 3-11-1(2). a central water and sanitary system for the development approved by the State Health Department, or its local agency, the State Water Control Board, and the governing body of Albemarle County. Such proposed systems shall complement or supplement the existing or proposed County utilities to the extent that the Commission shall find existing public util- ities inadequate. 3-11-2. Subdivision of lots less than 40,000 square feet shall have both a central water and sewer system. Subdivision involving lot sizes of 40,000 square feet to 60,000 square feet shall have either a central water system or sewer system. Subdi- vision of 1Otac-ave~ 60,000 square feet may have individual septi6ctank systems and water systems. 3-12. EROSION CONTROL: Ail subdivision plans shall show the pro- posal of the development for the provision of erosion and sediment controls, as required by the Zoning Ordinance, dur- ing the construction period. Such proposal shall be reviewed by the Area Conservationist. His written comments shall be forwarded to the agent for Albemarle County for his approval, prior to plat approval. 3-13. SUBSTANDARD SUBDIVISIONS: A subdivision recorded and/or developed prior to the adoption of and not in conformity with this ordinance may be resubdivided and redeveloped, in whole or in part, at the option of the owner of any group of con- tiguous lots therein as the case may be; but every such resubdivision shall oonform to this ordinance and all others currently applicable; provided, however, that no such resub- division which, in the opinion of the governing body, shall constitute a more effective use of the property involved shall be denied for failure to comply with the provisions of this ordinance. 3-14. UTILITY EASEMENTS: Adequate easements shall be required for drainage and utilities on any lot. Minimum easement width of six feet and their dedication may be required. 3-15. PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER: Where public water and/or sewer ser- vice is reasonably accessible, such service shall be extended 106 8-28-7a by the developer to all lots within a subdivision; and speci- fications, easements, and dedications shall be in conformity with requirements of the Albemarle County Service Authority. 3-15-1. Payment of Sewer and Drainage Costs: -3-15-1(1). each subdivider or developer of land in Albemarle County shall pay to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors his pro rata share of the cost of providing reasonable and necessary sewerage and drainage facilities, located outside the property limits of the land owner or controlled by him but necessitated ar required, at least in part, by the con- struction or improvement of his subdivision or development. 3-15-1(2). no such payment for sewer and drainage costs shall be required until such time as the Albemarle County Service Authority or other appropriate agency as required by Virginia Code Section 15.1-466, as amended, shall have established a general sewer and drainage improvement program for an area having related and common sewer and drainage conditions and within which the land owned or controlled by the developer or subdivider is located. The Alhemar!e County Service Authority or other appropriate agency as required by Virginia Code Section 15.1-466, as amended, shall, as a part of said program, establish regulations setting forth standards to determine the proportionate share of total estimated cost of ultimate sewerage and drainage facilities required to ade- quately serve a related and common area, when and if fully developed in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan, that shall be borne by each subdivider or developer within the area. 3-15-1(3). such proportionate share of total estimated cost of ultimate sewerage and drainage facilities required to adequately serve a related and common area shall be limLted to the pro- portion of such total estimated cost which the increased sewage flow and/or increased volume and velocity of storm water runoff to be actually caused by his subdivision or development bears to total estimated volume and velocity or such sewage and/or runoff from such area in it's fully developed state. 3-15-1(4). each such payment received from each subdivider or developer shall be expended only for the construction of those facil- ities for which the payment was required, and until so expended shall be held i'n an interest-bearing account for the benefi.t of the subdivider or developer; provided, how- ever, that in lieu of such payment the Board of .Supervisors may provide for the posting of a bond with surety satisfac- tory to it conditioned on payment at commencement of such construction. 3-16. FIRE PROTECTION: Where public water is available~ the installation of adequate fire hydrants by the developer in a subdivision at locations approve'd by the governing body or its agent shall be required as necessary to provide adequate fire protection. 3-16-1. The subdivider shall provide all improvements necessary to bring sidewalks in 'the subdivision into conformity with Section 15.1-381 of the Code of V~rginia (1950), as amended. 3-17.. BONDING REQUIREMENTS: Ail improvements required by the gov- erning body, or its agent, to be dedicated to public use shall be bonded before approval of final plat. 3-17-1. The owner or developer shall: 3-17-1(1). certify to the governing body that the construction costs have been paid to the person constructing such facilities; or 3-17-1(2). furnish to the governing body a certified check in the amount of the estimated cost of construction, or a bond, with surety satisfactory to the governing body, in an amount suf- ficient for and conditioned upon the construction of such facilities, or a contract for the construction of such facil- ities, and the contractors bond, with like surety, in like amount and so conditioned. 3-17-2. The subdivider shall set a time, subject to the approval of the governing body, or its agent, by which it is estimated 8-28-74 107 3-18. 3-19. the improvements sha~ll be installed and completed. Unless an extension of that time is approved by the governing body, or its agent, and a new estimated date of completion estab- lished, the County Executive, or his agent, shall take the necessary steps to proceed with the accomplishment and com- pletion of the improvements, making use of the certified check or calling on the surety of the bond. No building permits shall be issued until final approval of the plat and all inspections have been made. CERTIFICATIONS UPON COMPLETION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS: Upon the completion of the installation of all subdivision improve- ments, the subdivider shall furnish a statement under oath that all construction conforms to the requirements of this ordinance and the plans as approved by the governing body to the best of his knowledge and belief. LO~S, SHAPE: The lot arrangement, design, and shape shall be such that lots will provide satisfactory and desirable sites for building. Lots shall not contain peculiarly shaped elon- gations which are designed solely to provide necessary square footage of area or frontage on~a public road and which would be unusable for normal purposes. Setbacks for building shall be as specified in the Zoning Ordinance. 3-20. 3-21. 3-22. 3-23. 3-24.. 3-25. 3-26. LOCATION: All lots shall front on an existing, or recorded public street, or a street dedicated by the subdivision plat and maintained or designed and built to be maintained by the Virginia Department of Highways, except that restricted streets shall be permitted in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance. The frontage on said street shall not be less than 80% of the lot width required at the building set- back line. This regulation may be reduced for frontage on cul-de,sacs. When a new subdivision abuts one side of an existing or platted street, the subdivider shall be required to dedicate at least half the right of way necessary to make such street comply with the minimum width fixed for the same by this ordinance CORNER LOTS: Corner lots shall have extra width sufficient for maintenance of any required building line on both streets as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. SIDE LOT LINES: Side lot lines shall be approximately at right angles or radial to the. street line, except at cul-de- sac terminal points, unless an approved variance results in an improved lot lay-out. REMNANTS OR OUTLOTS: Ail remnants of lots or outlots below the minimum size remaining after subdividing a tract must be added to adjacent lots rather than allowed to remain as unbuildabte parcels. BLOCK WIDTH: Blocks shall be wide enough to allow two tiers of lots of minimum depth fronting on all streets unless pre- vented by topographical conditions or size of the property in which case the governing body, or its agent, may approve a sin- gle tier of lots of minimum depth. Double frontage or reversed frontage lots shall not be permitted except where essenS.ial~to~p~g~ide~sepa~tinntoferesidential~de~opment from streets or to overcome disadvantage of topography. BLOCK ORIENTATION: Where a proposed subdivision will adjoin a major highway, the governing body, or its agent, may require that the greater dimension of the block shall front or back upon such major highway to avoid unnecessary ingress or egress as the case may be. Any blocks designed for business or industrial purposes shall be designed specifically for such purposes with adequate space set aside for both off- street loading, and delivery facilities, as required by the Zoning Ordinance. SEPTIC TANK INSTALLATION: The Health Director shall require, whenever necessary for the satisfactory installation of sep- tic tanks, that individual lots be graded and drained so as to insure effective removal of surface water from each lot. When the contour of the subdivision is such that the use of 108 3-27. 3-28. 3-28-1. 3-28-2~. 3-28-3~. individual wells with individual septic tank systems will be endangered, the subdivision shall not be approved for the use of individual wells; irrespective of the provisions of Section 3-11, supra. PARKS, SCHOOLS, AND PUBLIC LAND: In subdividing property, consideration shall be given to suitable sites for parks, schools, and other areas of public use as contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Such recommendations for parks, schools, or other public land shall be indicated on the preliminary plat in order that Ut may be determined if, when, and in what manner such areas will~ be dedicated, to, reserved for, or acquired by the governing body for that use. This provision shall not be construed to preclude the dedication of property for public use not included in the Comprehensive Plan provided such property is acceptable to the County for dedication and maintenance. PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTED STREETS: Any subdivision involving the creation of a new private access easement shall be subject to approval by the Commission, but such approval shall be timited to the particular subdivision, and the particular u~se of the access easement shall not be construed to approve any further use of said easement or fur- ther subdivision of the land involved. Any such further sub- division of such land involving additional use of said ease- ment will be considered as a subdivision involving a new access easement and will not be exempt from these regulations. Restricted streets shall only be permitted in such instances as the Commission shall find to be in accord with principles of sound engineering, design, and planning for the orderly development of the general area and the surrounding properties. In no event shall any restricted street be approved which provides, or is designed to provide, access to more than 10 dwelling units. The connection of any two or more restricted streets is prohibited unless such streets have been approved for acceptance into the Virginia State Highway System. Maintenance~of restricted streets created pursuant to this ordinance shall be the responsibility of homeowners' associa- tions composed of all the owners of lots, parcels, or units of any subdivision containing such restricted streets. Such homeowners' associations shall be organized and incorporated according to the provisions of this ordinance and such reason- able regulations as the governing body, or its agent, may establish; provided that no homeowners' association composed of 10 or fewer members shall be required to be incorporated. The £act that the responsibility for maintenance of restricted streets shall be that of the owners of abutting lots shall be set forth in-restrictions recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court mf Albemarle County prior to the sale of any lot to be served by such restricted street. SECTION 4 -- STREETS - GENERAL STANDARDS OF DESIGN 4--1. STREET ALIGNMENT: Provisions shall be made for the continuation of planned, existing, or platted streets into adjoining areas. 4--2, 4--3. STREET LAY-OUT: Streets in predominantly residential subdivi- sions shall be designed to discourage through traffic, but offset or jog streets shall be avoided, whenever possible. STREET ANGLE: The angle oC intersection between streets shall be as close to a right angle as possible and in no case less than 80 degrees unless approved by the governing body, or its agent, upon recommendation of the Virginia Department of Highways Engineer for specific reasons of contour, terrain, or matching of existing patterns. 4--4. STREET HALF: Streets of less than the full right of way required by this ordinance shall not be permitted. However, where half streets exist on adjoining property, the provi- sions of this ordinance may be satisfied by the dedication of the remaining required right of way upon which the subdivi- sion in question abuts. No building shall be permitted with- out such dedication. 4--5. STREET ACCESS: The street arrangement shall provide adequate access to adjoining parcels where necessary to provide for 109 4--6. 4--7. 4-8. 4--9. 4-10. 4-11. 4-12. 4~13. the orderly development Ofthe County. STREET GRADE: Maximum street grades shall not exceed 8%, except that, in the case of special circumstances, the Com- mission may, in its discretion, provide for grades not in excess of 10%; but in no case shall grades in excess of 10% be permitted. Ditches on grades of 5% or more shall be paved and catch basins installed where required under the current standards of Albemarle County or the Virginia Department of Highways. Ail paved ditches shall be of an approved material and construction. STREET WIDTH: The right of way width for major highways shall conform to the widths designated on the major highway plan of the Comprehensive Plan. The right of way width for streets shall not be less than 50 feet. CUL-DE-SAC STREETS: Cul-de-sacs and dead end streets shall provide a terminal turnaround having a right of way radius of not less than 50 feet and a paved radius of not less than 40 feet. The permitted length of a cul-de-sac shall be deter- mined by the Commission upon recomendation by the agent, taking into consideration the terrain, density of development, and lot frontage. TEMPORARY CUL-DE-SACS: Streets more than 300 feet in length from an intersection, or proposed to serve more than four residences, that terminate temporarily shall be provided with a temporary terminal cul-de-sac having a radius of not less than 50 feet. The temporary cul-de-sac easement shall remain in force until such time as street extensions are added to the Virginia Highway System. ALLEYS: Alleys not less than 20 feet in right of way width may be provided in the rear of all commercial, industrial, and residential properties unless other provisions are made for parking and service. No dead end alleys of any kind shall be allowed. RESERVED STRIPS: Reserved or spite strips, restricting access to streets or alleys shall not be permitted; provided that nothing herein shall prohibit areas for scenic planting and landscaping where adequate access is otherwise available. SERVICE DRIVES: Whenever a proposed subdivision contains, or is adjacent to a major highway, sufficient land shall be reserved so as to provide for subsequent construction of ser- vice drives or service streets approximately parallel to such right of way; but the Commission may, when consistent with the public convenience and necessity, waive the requirement of such provision. Except where impractical by reason of topographic hardship, the area between the drive and the major highway shall be sufficient to provide for scenic planting and screening. The dimension of the area between the service drive and a major highway and the points of access between the same shall be determined after due consideration of traffic safety requirements. ACCESS ROADS: No subdivision shall be approved unless the principal means of access thereto shall conform ~to the stan- dards of the Virginia Department of Highways, or, in the case of a restricted street, to the standards of Albemarle County, throughout its length, including any distance between the boundary of the proposed subdivision and an existing public road. SECTION 5 -- STREET CLASSIFICATIONS The classification of proposed streets s~all be determined by an esti- mate of the anticipated vehicular traffic volume as currently pre- scribed, or as revised, by the Virginia Department of Highways and shall apply to streets proposed by a subdivider and to all streets shown on the Comprehensive Plan and major street plan. Subdividers shall be required to reserve rights of way for major highways and interstate highways where applicable but shall be required to construct only appurtenant service drives and access points. Subdividers shall be required to dedicate and construct other streets. 110 8-28-74 Ail construction shall conform to standards .of Albemarle County or, in the event no Albemarle County standards exist, to the standards of the Virginia Department of Highways. Unless otherwise shown, all material and construction technique specifications shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Virginia Department of Highways in effect at the time of the plan and specification submission. SECTION 6 -- MINIM~I STREET IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED 6--1, DESIGN AND STANDARDS-PUBLIC STREETS: Ail public streets shall be designed as required for acceptance into the second- ary highway system of the Virginia Department of Highways. 6-1-1. BITUMINOUS CONCRETE: Where bituminous concrete is used, it shall meet the requirements of the Virginia Department of Highways. 6-1-2. DRAINAGE: An adequate drainage system for natural and storm water shall be provided for each subdivision street by means of culverts under streets; side, lead, or outlet ditches; catch basins; curb inlets; or any other devices, including piping., necessary. Ail structures shall conform to standards of Albemarle County or the Virginia Department of Highways. Unless otherwise shown, all material and construction tech- nique specifications shall be in accordance with the require- ments of the Virginia Department of Highways in effect on the date plans and profiles are submitted. Pipe ~nstalled shall be reinforced concrete, corrugated'metal, or vitrified clay, properly designed to accommodate the flow of water and insure structure stability of the system. 6-1-3. SURFACE COURSES: In subdivisions where curb and gutter sec- tions are required and used, it shall be in accordance with specifications of the Virginia Department of Highways. 6-1-4. GRADED WIDTH: The roadway shall be graded to a minimum width in accordance with the current Virginia Department of Highways construction specifications and standards. 6-1-5. PAYEMENT WIDTH: Pavement-widths shall be a minimum of 20 feet or if specified in greater widths. 6-1-6. GRADES: The grades of streets submitted on subdivision plats shall be approved by the Virginia Department of Highways prior to final action by the agent for~the governing body and shall be in accordance with road designs and standar~ds of the Virginia Department of Highways. Where the grade of any street exceeds 5% and on grades of less than 5% where soil conditions and the general topography make such necessary as determined by the governing body, or its agent, in conjunction with the engineer for the Virginia Department of Highways, paved roadside ditches of a design satisfactory to meet the standards set forth in this ordinance and the Virginia Department of Highway standards shall be required. STREET NAMES: Proposed streets which are obviously in align- ment with other already existing main streets shall bear the names of the existing street. In no case shall the ~names of proposed streets duplicate those of existing streets, located either in ~he County of Albemarle or the City of Charlottes- ville, irrespective of the use of any thoroughfare ,appella- tion. Street names shall b'e indicated on the preliminary and final plats and shall be approved by the governing body, or its agent. Names of existing streets shall not be changed except by approval of the governing body. 6-1-8. STREET IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Street identification signs of' a design approved by the governing body, or its agent, shall be installed at all intersections by the developer. 6-1-9. 6-1-10. ~ROADWAY CUTS: At1 roadway cuts made in paved streets shall be replaced in accordance with the construction standards of the Virginia Department of Highways. PERMANENT MONUMENTS: Permanent monuments shall be placed by the developer in the ground at all corners, and angle points in the outer lines of the subdivision', and at all points of angles and curvature in the right of way lines of all streets, and at all lot corners within the subdivision. At designated points in the outer lines of the subdivision and at a minimum of at least two points in each block, such monuments shall be iii 6-1-it~ 6-1-12. 6-1-i3. 6--2, constructed with a stablemateria!, not less than four inches square in diameter, and at least thirty inches long. In all other locations, such monuments shall be iron or steel pipe not less than one-half inch nor more than one inch in diame- ter and at least twenty-four inches long. The top of all stone and concrete monuments shall be set not less than one- half inch nor more than four inches above the finished grade at their respective locations. When rock is encountered, a hole shall be drilled four inches deep in the.rock into which shall be cemented a steel rod one-half inch in diameter, the top of which shall be flush with the fin- ished grade line. CONCRETE: Sidewalks, curb and gutter where required shall be composed of Class A-3 concrete with a minimum depth of four inches and ~a width as shown in the typical section of the County Site Development~Handbook or of a material and design approved by the County Engineer. LANDSCAPING: Ail cut and fill slopes shall be landscaped, either seeded and stabilized, or sodded, with grass or plants suitable for such slopes, as determined by the agent, on advice of the Area Conservationist for Albemarle County. SIDEWALKS, CURB AND GUTTER: Ail public streets in subdivi- sions having lots containing less than 20,000 square feet in area shall be graded and payed as indicated in the County Site Development Handbook in accordance with the Virginia Department of Highways construction standards. Easements for sidewalk purposes shall be provided, ~except in cases where the Commission shall find that other adequate pedestrian ways are being provided or that due to the nature of the topography or other factors within the limit of sound engineering and design, sidewalks are not required. DESIGN AND STANDARDS-RESTRICTED STR'EETS: Ail restricted streets shall be designed only in accordance with standards adopted therefor by the governing body as found in appendix "A." SECTION 7 -- PRELIMINARY PLATS AND PLANS - FILING - APPROVAL PROCEDURE 7--2. Before the preparation of preliminary plan or plat, a sub- divider shall confer with the governing body's agent, rela- tiwe to the regulations contained in this ordinance, the Com- prehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and other appli- cable ordinances. The purpose of such a conference is to assure that the applicant is made fully aware of all the requirements and interpretations of the existing ordinances plus any amendments which are pending at the time of the plan or plat preparation. A subdivider shall file ten prints of a preliminary plat and plans prepared by a person qualified to do such work, including but not limited to, city planners, architects, landscape architects, certified professional engineers, and land surveyors. The preliminary plat and plans shall be filed in the office of the County Planner at least 21 days prior to the meeting at which the plat is to be considered by the Com- mission.. The plat shall be drawn on one °r more numbered sheets at a scale of 100 feet to the inch. Where conditions warrant, as determined by the agent, preliminary plats at a scale of one inch to 200 feet may be accepted. In the event such plat needs to be revised, seven copies of the revised plat shall be submitted to the agent. 7--3o A decision on the preliminary plat and plans shall be ren- dered by the Commission within 60 days after the filing. 7--4. At the time of the hearing before the Commission, the agent shall present to the Commission his recommendations concern- ing the preliminary plat and plans including, but not limited to, compliance with the applicable ordinance and an estimate of the amount of the performance bond that will be required as a prerequisite before the final approval of the subdivi- sion plat. 7--5- The subdivid.er shall be advised as to the recommendations and decision of the Commission. Such notification may be by for- 8-28-Va 112 7--6. 7--7- 7--8. 7--9- 7-9-1. 7-9-2. 7-9-3. 7-9-4. 7-9-5. 7-9-6. 7-9-7. mal letter and/or legible marking in red on the subdivider's copy of the preliminary plat showing the Commission recommendations. The approval of the preliminary plat and plans by the Commis- sion does not guarantee approval of the final plat and plans, and does not constitute approval or acceptance of the subdi- vision by the governing body or authorization to proceed with construction or improvements within~the subdivision. SIX MONTH LIMIT: Subdividers shall have not more than six months after receiving official notification concerning the preliminary plat to file in the office of the Commission, or its agent, a final subdivision plat in accordance with this ordinance. Failure to do so shall render preliminary approval null and void. The governing body or its agent, may, on written request by the subdivider, grant an extension of this time limit. PLANS, PROFILES, AND SPECIFICATIONS: Following official notification to the subdivider of the Commi~ssion's recommen- dation on the preliminary plat, five blue or black line prints of the plans and specifications for all required pub- lic or private improvements to be installed shall be prepared by a~certified land surveyor, to the limit of his license, or .licensed engineer and submitted to the governing body, or its agent, within 60 days from the gate of Commission approval of such plans and specifications. If approved, one copy bearing certification of such approval shall be reBurned to the sub- divider. If approved, all papers shall be returned to the subdivider, with the reason for disapproval in writing. In the~ event no action is taken in 90 days from the date of such submission, such planS and specifications shall be deemed approved. The requirements~of this section shall be accom- plished during the six months time limit for preliminary plats. CONTENT: The preliminary plat shall show the following: The title under which the subdivision is proposed to be recorded and the name and addresses of the record owner and subdivider and holders of any easements affecting~the property. The plat shall also show the name of the individual that pre- pared the plat; the date of drawing; number of streets; the north point; and the scale. If true north is used, the method of determination shall be shown. A vicinity sketch map at a scale of one inch to 2000 feet shall be included on the plat showing the relationship of the proposed subdivision to the adjoining property and the area within one'mile showing all adjoining roads, their names, numbers, town boundaries~ and subdivisions, and other landmarks. A topographic map compiled by either accepted field or photo- grammetric methods with a contour interval of not greater than five feet showing all the area covered by the. subdivision property related to' coastland geodetic survey data showing the boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided and the flood plain limits delineated where applicable. The location, width, and names of all existing or platted streets within or adjacent to the subdivision, easements, railroad right of way, and land lot lines, total acreage in each use, both proposed and existing, including utilities and water courses. Location and dimensions of proposed streets, alleys, lots, building lines, and easements, including a boundary survey or existing survey of record with a closing error not in excess of one foot in 5000 feet. Ail parcels of land intended to be dedicated, or reserved for public use, or to be reserved in the deed for the common use of property own~ers in the subdivision. Areas shown in the Comprehensive Plan as proposed sites for schools, parks, or other public uses, including flood plain, which are located wholly or in part within the land being subdivided. 8-28'74 11-3 7-9-8. 7-9-9. 7-9-10. 7-9-11. 7-9-i2. 7-9-19. 7-9-14. SECTION 8 8-1. 8--3. Preliminary sketch plans indicating the provisions for all utilities, including but not limited to, the proposed method of accomplishing drainage, water supply, and sewage disposal. Preliminary sketch plans for any bridges or culverts that may be required shall be submitted. When the subdivision consists of land acquired from more than one source ~f title, the outlines of the various tracts shall be indicate~ by dashed lines, and identification of the respective tracts shall be placed on the plat. The zoning $1assifications and proposed use for the area being.subdi?ided. Sedimentati¢ by the Area Soil Conser~ member in ac The number, Written and ,n and erosion control measures proposed on advice Conservationist of the Thomas Jefferson Water and ~ation District of which Albemarle County is a cordance with the Zoning Ordinance. approximate dimensions, and area of all lots. signed statements explaining how and when the subdivider proposes to provide and install all required sewers or o~her disposal of sanitary wastes, pavements, sidewalks, 2nd drainage structures, and dedic.ation thereof° Written and/si.gned statements of the appropriate officials concerning ~he availability of gas, electricity, water, and sewer to th2 proposed subdivision. -- FINAL PL~T - FILING - APPROVAL PROCEDURE A su~bdivider shall file a linen tracing, or other transpar- ency of scale true material, and ten prints of the final plat prepared by a land surveyor or certified professional engi- neer, to the limit of his license, who shall affix upon each plat a certificate signed by him, stating the source of the title of the owner of the land subdivided, and the place of record of the last instrument in the chain of title, and including the supporting data listed herein with the Commis- sion, or its agent. Such plat shall be filed at least 21 days prior to the meeting at which the plat is to be considered. In the event the final plat needs to be revised, after orig- inal approval, seven copies of the revised plat shall be sub- mitt.ed to the agent. A decision on the final plat shall be rendered by the Commis- sion within 45 days-after the filing of the final plat. The governing body retains unto itself the authority of final approval of final plat which authority the governing body hereby delegates to its agent, as defined in Section 1-1 of this ordinance, subject however to the provisions for appeal contained in Section 12 of this ordinance. The Commission shall consider final plats and make recommendations to the governing body. The governing body shall indicate approval or disapproval of all subdivisions received for consideration as a final plat. Approval of the final plat by the governing body, or its agent, shall be void unless the approved plat is recorded within six months after approval. Ail approved final plats shall be filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County. No such plat of any subdivision shall be recorded by the Clerk of said Court unless and until it shall have been submitted to the Commission and approved by the governing body, er its agent. The recordation of any plat in violatio.n of this ordinance, or any portion thereof, shall not be deemed to effect dedication to public use of any land, easement, right of way, or other property interest; nor shall such unlawful recordation impose any duty or obligation upon the County of Albemarle or the Commonwealth of Virginia. But this section shall not be deemed to preclude any public or private cause of action arising from or occasioned by such unlawful recordation. FINAL PLAT ABPROVALS.AND. CONDITIONS: The final plat shall not be approved until the subdivider has complied with the requirements and standards of design in accordance with this 8-28-74 114 8-4-1. 8-5-1. 8-5-2. 8-5-3. 8-5-4. 8-5-5. 8-5-6. 8-5-7~. 8-5-8. 8-5-9. 8-5-10. ordinance and has provided a performance bond to cover the cost of necessary improvements in lieu of~ construction, to the satisfaction of the governing body, or its agent, if such authority has been so delegated. Approval of the final plat shall be shown by attaching a certificate showing the approval of the governing body. Nothing herein shall require the approval of any subdivision or any part or feature thereof, which shall be found to con- stitute a nuisance, or to constitute a danger to the public health, safety, or general welfare; or which shall be deter- mined by the Commission, the governing body, or its a~gent, to be a departure from or a violation of sound engineering design or standards. CONTENTS: The p~!at shall be drawn to the scale of 100 feet to the inch and the sheet size for rec'ording purposes shall not exceed 11 inches by 18 inches with a one inch border on all sides. If plat is reduced for r~ecording purposes, the type size after reduction shall be no less than pica (ten characters per inch). The top of the sheet shall be approx- imately north. The plat shall be accompanied by certifica- tion from the Virginia Department of Highways Resident Engineer of Albemarle County stating that the highway speci- fications as to streets, grades, and drainage have been met. In addition to the requirements of-the preliminary plat and plans, the final plat shall include the following: The name or number of the section if a part of a larg-er tract. A statement that: "The subdivision of the land described herein is with the free consent and in accordance with the desires of~the undersigned owner, proprietors, and trustees." The statement shall be signed by such persons and duly acknow- ledged before some officer authorized to take acknowledgements of deeds. The boundary lines of the area being subdivided shall-me deter- mined by an accurate field survey with bearings shown in degrees, minutes, and seconds to the nearest ten seconds and dimensions to be shown in fee to the nearest hundredth of a foot to the accuracy of one in five thousand. Total acres in each proposed use plus flood plain delineation shall be shown. Streets shall be named but shall not duplicate existing or platted street names unless the new street is a continuation of an existing or platted street. Ail dimensions both linear and angular for location lots, streets, alleys, public ease- ments, and private easements; the linear dimensions shall be expressed .in feet to the hundredths of a foot and all angular measurements shall be expressed by bearings or angles expressed to the nearest ten seconds. Ail curves shall be defined by their radius, central angle, tangent, distances, tangent bearing and arc lengths. Such curve data shall be expressed by a curve being tabulated and numbered to correspond with the respective numbered curve shown throughout the plat. Lot numbers in numerical-order and block identification. Location of all minimum bUilding setback lines specified in this and the Zoning Ordinance, with the area, in square feet, of lots indicated for each individual parcel. Location and material of all permanent reference monuments. Monuments found or installed prior to plat recordation may be referenced if permanent and undisturbed. A definite bearing and distance tie shown between not less than two permanent monuments on the exterior boundary of the subdivision and further tie to existing street intersections where possible and reasonably convenient. Date and north point. Restrictions imposed by the governing body and their period of existence. Should these restrictions be of such length as to make their lettering on the plat impractical, and does not necessitate the preparation of a separate instrument, refer- ence shall be made thereto on the plat. J 115 8-5-11. 8-5-11(1). 8-5-11(2). 8-5-12. 8-5-13. 8-5-14. Signature panels shall be provided as follows: for land lying in Albemarle County, but within one mile of the corporate limits of the City of Charlottesville, for the chairman of the Albemarle County Planning Commission; and the designated agent of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors; and for the chairman and secretary of the Charlottesville Planning Commission. for land lying in Albemarle County, but more than one mile from the corporate limits of the City of Charlottesville, for the chairman of the Albemarle County Planning Commission; and the designated agent of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Temporary cul-de-sacs where needed. When one or more tempo- rary turnarounds are shown, the following shall be included on the plat: The area on this plat designated as temporary turnaround will be constructed and used as other streets in the subdivision until (street name) is/are extended to (street name) at which time the land in the temporary turnaround area will be aban- doned for street purposes and will revert to adjoining proper- ty owners in accordance with specific provisions in their respective deeds. Supporting data shall include previously approved plans for drainage streets, including cross sections and profiles, water supply and sewage disposal, including drainage courses and name, sedimentation and erosion control'measures, exist- ing sewers, water mains, culverts and other underground structures within the tract showing all pipe sizes, invert elevations and grades and computations as may be required by the governing body, or its agent. Monuments set after recording of p~lat: No monuments other than the permanent control monuments required in Section 6-1-10 of this ordinance shall be required to be set before the recording of the plat or the conveyance of land by refer- ence to plat if the land surveyor includes in his certifica- tion on such plat that any additional monuments required by this ordinance shall be set on or before a specified later date. The placement of any monument at any time after the recording of the plat shall be established both at law and in equity, at prorated positions as determined from direct remeasurements between the established monuments of record rather than as precisely stated or shown on the recorded plat. SECTION 9 -- CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE AND T~E COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE 9--1. In the case of any subdivision, any part of which lies within one mile of the corporate limits of the City of Charlottes- ville, the approval by the governing body Of any final plat pursuant to Section 8 of this ordinance shall wot be deemed final until such plan shall have be6n reviewed and approved by the planning authorities of the City of Charlottesville. 9--2. Upon approval of such final plat by the governing body, the Planning D~par~mant of Albemarle County shall transmit the same to the Director of Planning of the City of Charlottes- ville, requesting City review and approval thereof, to be indicated on such plat by the signatures of the Chairman of the City Pla.nnning Commission and Director of Planning for the City. Such City officials may administratively review the plat, or may at their discretion refer it to the City Planning Commission for review by that body; provided, how- ever, that in no event shall any applicant be required to make any further application or appearance before the City Planning Commission, but such applicant may be present during review of his plat by the Commission if he desires to do so. 9-2-1. Such review by the city authorities, whether performed admin- istratively or by the City Planning Commission shall in no event last more than 31 days, and the City Director of Plan- ning shall, not later than the thirty-first day after receipt 116 8-28-74 9-3- of the plat, notify the County Planning Department of the results of the city review. Such results shall be stated as approval, disapproval, or approval with conditions. Disap- proval or conditions imposed upon approval by the City author- ities shall be deemed valid only upon a showing that the pro- posed subdivision would otherwise have a substantial adverse effect upon a 'legitimate interest of the City of Charlottes- ville with respect to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the citizens thereof. If the proposed subdivision is disapproved by the City authorities, or in the case of conditional approval, if the applicant or the County governing body desires not to agree to the conditions requested by the City, the plat shall stand as disapproved pending a final determination of the validity of the City's objections by the Circuit Court of Albemarle County. Upon receipt of the results of the City's review, the Planning Department of Albemarle County shall forthwith notify the applicant of such results. Any disapproval, or conditional approval to which the County governing body or applicant does not agree, may at any time within 10 days after notification thereof to the applicant, be appealed by such applicant to the Circuit Court of Albemarle County pursuant to Section 15.1-475 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. SECTION 10 -- COMPLIANCEWITH ORDINANCE 10-1. PERMITS: No permit will be issued by any administrative offi- cer of Albemarle County for the construction of any building, or development, or other improvements requiring a permit, upon any land for which a plat is required, unless and until the requirements of this ordinance have been complied with. 10-2. VARIATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS: Whenever, because of unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the~property, or other unusual conditions, the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the developer, the requirement may be varied by the Commission, subject to the approval of the governing body, or its agent, to permit subdivision consistent with the spirit of this ordinance and provided any such variance shall not be detrimental to the public safety, health, and general welfare, and to the orderly development of the area. 10-2-1. Upon finding in any case that by substitution of technique, design, or materials of comparable quality but differing from those required by this ordinance, a developer can achieve results which substantially satisfy the overall purposes of this ordinance in a manner equal to or exceeding in the desired effect the standards required herein, then the Com- mission with the approval of the governing body, or its agent, may approve any such substitution of technique, design, or materials. 10-3. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply, whenever appli- cable by its terms, to any condominium regime. SECTION 11 -- ENFORCEMENT 11-1. Any person who subdivides, transfers, or sells any property in violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall be subject to a fine of not more than $100 for ev.ery lot so subdivided, transferred, or sold. 11-2. The governing body, in addition to other remedies, may insti- tute any appropriate action or proceeding, at law or in equity, to prevent violation or attempted violation, to restrain, correct, abate such violation, or to prevent any act which would constitute such a violation. 8-28-74 117 SECTION 12 -- APPEALS Any person aggrieved by the decision of the Commission in its advisory capacity, or of the agent, or of any administrative official whose deci- sion is required pursuant to this ordinance, may appeal said decision to the governing body as a whole by written notice filed with the agent within ten days of the decision complained of. Any person aggrieved by the final decision of the governing body as a whole, may appeal the decision of the governing body to the Circuit Court of Albemarle County or other Court having jurisdiction of the land involved, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.1-475 (1950), as amended. SECTION 13 -- CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS Any regulation or provision of this ordinance may be changed or amended from time to time by the governing body. SECTION 14 -- VALIDITY If any section, subsection, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise void, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. SECTION 15 -- REPEALOF CONFLICTING ORDINANCE All subdivision ordinances or portions thereof in conflict with this ordinance are. hereby repealed. SECTION16 -- EFFECTIVE DATE The foregoing ordinance shall be effective upon passage by the governing body. At this time the Board took a short recess and when they reconvened they took up zoning matters advertised in the Daily Progress on August 4 and August 11, 1974. (5) Section 11-13-3(f): "Whenever the governing body shall find that a use or activity by its nature will or is likely to produce detrimental impact upon the surrounding area or co~unity as a whole wherever it is located, but at th or will tend to sa the public health, of permits for sucl will satisfy the ~ granting of such the public need st or requirement foz additional uses be Mr. Humphrey asked the at this time. Motion was of the public hearing. The mot~ following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fish~ NAYS: None. same time is a public necessity ~isfy a substantial public need involving safety or welfare, then the number use may be limited to that which ~blic need for such use, and the ~rmit or permits as shall satisfy ~11 not give rise to any precedent the granting of permits for zond the public need~" ½oard's consideration of this matter be withdraTM ~ered by Mr. Thacker to wi'thdraw this item from ion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the ~r, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. o 8-28-74 11o (6) Section 2-1-25(29). That Section 2-1-25(29) of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance be amended to read: "Sanitary landfills: No sanitary landfill in Albemarle County shall be used to receive or dispose of wastes generated or produced elsewhere than in Albemarle County or the municipalities or other governmental subdivisions within Albemarle County". Section 11-13-3(e). That the present ordinance be amended to include, Section 11-13-3(e): "The use shall be in accord with the master plan for Albemarle County". No one from the public spoke for or against t.he proposed amendments. Motion to adopt the amendments as advertised was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. (7) SP-374. T. Eugene Worrell. (Public hearing on this matter was deferred from August 14, 1974). Mr. Humphrey said the area is rural in character and surrounded by pastureland. There are no structures visible from the property. The main structure, Round Hill, is presently being used as a single-family residence and is proposed for professional offices. The staff recommended that any approval of this petition be conditioned upon the following: 1. Only the main structure shall be used for professional offices and any addition to this structure for office purposes shall require an additional special use permit. 2. Any use of this property shall-be limited to professional offices and these offices shall be further limited to the legal, accounting, data processing, and executive professions. 3. Preservation and maintenance of all vegetation on the property. 4. Administrative approval of a site plan for the office building to insure adequate provision for parking. 5. Assurance that deed restrictions will pose no conflict for this property to be used as a professional office. The staff felt any consideration of this request should be in light of the intent of the A-1 Agriculture zone which states: "This district is designed primarily to accommodate farming and kindred rural occupations. While the basic aim is to preserve and promote this utilization of the land, the uses permitted are broad enough to allow development of residential areas as it is recognized that certain desirable rural areas may logically be expected to develop in this manner. It is the intent, however, to discourage the random scattering of resi- dential, commercial, or industrial uses in this type of district." The Planning Staff suggested that the intent of "professional office" in the A-1 zone is to provide services to the rural communities and surburban areas and not to permit office activities which in no way offer a direct service to these areas such as a doctor's or dentist's office. Secondly, the requested use is not near any existing commercial zone which would tend to indicate a change from a rural/surburban area to an intense urban/commercial area. Therefore, the staff is of the opinion that the proposed use would tend to change the character and established pattern of development. 119 Mr. Humphrey said the Planning Commission held several meetings on this appli- cation and do recommend denial to the Board of Supervisors. They agreed with the staff that the intent of the professional office does not include this type of use. However, in their motion for denial they also wanted to state that they feel the proposed use, in an area such as this, could be compatible. They felt if the Board should not go along with the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial they would recommend the following conditions being placed on the permit. The five conditions listed in the staff report; and 6) a maximum of 15 employees; 7) that the applicant and the Planning Staff reach an agreement on a buffer zone, a minimum of 15 acres, which includes the 4.4 acres which are the subject of this request; and 8) this permit will expire if the property is sold or transferred to a party other than Worrell Enterprises. During the course of the public hearing by the Planning Commission there were also additional conditions suggested by the Ardwood Homeowner's Association and Mr. Humphrey presented a copy of those conditions to the Board. Mr. Wheeler asked if as County Planner Mr. Humphrey was recommending denial. Mr. Humphrey said yes; it does not meet the intent of professional offices as found in the agricultural zone. Mr. Wood said the recommendation of denial comes with a qualification. The Planning Commission was concerned about setting a precedent for this type of thing but could not find a great deal of objection to the plan as presented for this piece of property. Mr. Wheeler said he did not understand it that way. The Planning Commission recommended denial but said if the Board would not go along with that recommendation then certain conditions should be attached to the permit. Mr. Humphrey said the Planning Commission felt this type of use for old homes was possibly a reasonable use in the County. They were tied to the intent of what they felt a professional office should be. Mr. Wood said the Planning Commission had a great deal of sympathy for this proposal although they were worried about precedents that could be set. That is the reason they felt, in this case, they would recommend to the Board certain conditions if the Board would not go along with their recommendation for denial. He wanted it to be known this was not a cut and dried decision on this piece of property. Mr. Wheeler asked if the recommendation for denial was unanimous. Mr. Humphrey said yes. Mr. Wheeler said he did not want anyone to get the idea that the recommendation came to the Board with anything but denial. Mr. Wood said he did not view it that way. He was at the Planning Commission meetings and was familiar with the conversations that took place. Mr. Carwile asked if Mr. Humphrey thought the proposed use is incompatible with the professional office category. Mr. Humphrey said the staff report indicates that it is incompatible with the A-1 zone. Mr. Carwile asked if there were an appropriate category in the ordinance if this use would be incompatible with the existing use in the area. Mr. Humphrey said if this were near an area where commercial zoning is already allowed and the applicant wished to apply for a special permit 120 8-28-74 instead of going into the commercial area, the trends and character of the area would indicate that this is a change of character. The Planning Staff does not feel that this relates in any way to an agricultural or rural community and it does not meet the intent of that zone. Mr. Clyde Gouldman was present to represent the applicant. He said the first question presented to the Planning Commission was whether they thought the subject use fits the definition of professional offices. They decided that question in the negative, but stated that the use, in that area, was ~compatible with adjacent land. He~said..~this.~na~e is~unique. The real issue on a special use permit is whether it is compatible with adjacent land and in harmony with the intent of the A-1 district. It is not often that a hotly contested zoning case comes to the Board that is not opposed by the neighboring land owners. In this case, the majority of the neigh- boring land owners have spoken in favor of the proposed use. He said the existing structure on Round Hill Farm is a mansion. If this use is granted, worrell Newspapers will set up offices to house four or five principals and supporting personnel; two attorneys~ and two C.P.A. 's and one data processing engineer. There is no definition in the County ordinance as to what a professional office is. If~ the neighbors are in favor of the use, and generally the Planning Commission is in favor of the use, not as it fits a defintion, but as it fits the area, he does not understand what the problem is. There have been two public hearings and he has not really had a chance to present the case on its merits. The opponents are worried about setting a precedent. They are worried about some unspecified use. If the Board passed a definition tonight to fit this use and that definition were very specific but fit their use and no other use, tomorrow someone with a new and entirely different use, quite objectionable, could file for a special use permit and say that although the use is not in the ordinance, Section 11-4 allows me to ask for a new use. In the past, the procedure has been to file a two-part request simultaneously. The Board considered both of these requests at the same time. No matter how many definitions are included in the A-1 zone, with a special permit, it does not prevent someone in the future from requesting an additional use. Mr. Gouldman said the proposed use is compatible with the area, and if a precedent is sen, it is a good one. Under the special permit provision the Board can weight each case on its merits. If next week the same outfit came to the Board for this same use in another section of the County, the Board would not have to grant that permit. The definitional game can be played and played, but cannot ~ be~reS-0-l~ed. If this is to be a defintional debate, he can persuade the Board that this use fits the definition of a professional office. Mr. Gouldman said Mr. St. John had taken the definition of a professional office from the American Law of Zoning and' he feels they fit that definition. Mr. Bernard Chamberlain will argue that they do not fit it. This point can be debated back and forth. If this permit is denied tonight, they can come back and ask the 8-28-74 121 Board to gr~ant the permit as an executive office use. It is a matter of form over substance. He said if the Board thinks this is a good use for the area, he urges the Board to grant the permit and not worry about a label. He did not think that passing a defintion will meet the objectiv~ some of the opponents are worried about. There will be no production or sale of goods on the property. There will be little traffic. Eighty percent of the hearings so far have revolved around a definition instead of speaking to the issue of whether the use is compatible with the area. He asked that the Board consider this question. He stated that Mr. Max Evans, a landscape architect, and Mr. Worrell were also present to'answer questions. Mr. Max Evans showed to the Board drawings of the property. He said a 119 acre farm surrounds the parcel in question. The special use permit is to use the residence as it exists. Mr. Worrell also holds purchase options on two farms on the right of the main road. The residence is on a hill, over 1000 feet from the road, and is separated by topography and acreage from any adjoining property. There are a number of trees and shrubs around the residence. The existing structure is adaptable for office use. They have proposed to change the paving in front of the residence and there will be less paving than what presently exists. Part of this is to enhance what already exists and to help make a better buffer. There will be no visual sighting from any adjoining hill tops. The surrounding farm area will continue to be farmed. Mr. Worrell raises cattle and will conninue to do that when he moves his offices here. The matter of a definition if not really arguable. The special use permit allows the Board and Planning Commission to set any number of conditions for the use of the land. In that sense, it is better than zoning. If the Board feels that the public needs protection, this protection can be spelled out in the granting of the permit. There will be very few people coming to this activity and few people working here. The general location of the facility is relatively isolated. These factors contribute to a physical condition that does non change the character of the neighborhood, but does allow this use to be adaptable to this particular site. Mr. Wyatt Owens, a resident of the area, spoke in favor of the petition. He said he knows there have been plans to make this land into a subdivision. Most of the people he has talked to are concerned only with the face of the property and not with whether this use is or is not professional offices. There is a bad curve in front of the Round Hill property and Mr. Worrell has indicated that he will donate land to have this curve straightened. Mr. Owens did not feel a definition is that important. The main concern of the community is to keep the community basically as it is. Mr. Charles Perry, Assistant Highway Engineer, was present. He said if property is deeded to the Highway Department this can probably be worked into their program but he could not given any date as to when this would be accomplished. 8-28-74 122 A gentlemen was present to speak for the Ardwood Homeowner's Association. He said they recommend the following conditions being placed on the permit. 1) All conditions r~ecommended by the County Planning Staff in their report of August 5, 1974. 2) A condition that the permit will expire if the property is sold or transferred to a party other than Worrell Enterprises. 3) A condition that the permit holder apply for a more appropriate zoning classification should such become available by future amendment or revision of the County Zoning Ordinance. 4) An indication that it is not the intention of the County government for this permit to serve as a precedent for future non-agricultural zoning or special permit uses along Route 743 between the reservoir and the airport. He said the majority of the homeowners are in favor of the conditions that have been suggested. Mr. Bernard Chamberlain said he was present to speak for Dr. & Mrs. Rosenblum, two members of the public who are interested in proper zoning for Albemarle County. He was not present to speak against the use of this property as an executive office building. It is an attractive use and one that would be easily granted. He said the members of the Board where chosen to be the people to act on special permits so there is no other decision to be made but that of the Board of Supervisors. The Planning Commission only recommends. The Board must make a decision which is best in their judgment and the Board members must have something in the zoning regulations on which to pin such a decision. Mr. Gouldman has said that this is an attractive use and the Board can place safeguards irrespective of what the zoning regulations say. If the Board grants this permit by saying that an executive office can come under a professional office use, they may be bound by that decision and not be able to place restrictions in the future. Several years ago an applicant asked to put an animal hospital in an agricultural zone. The Zoning Administrator, at that time, thought it was a good idea. Mr. Chamberlain said he had presented his case to the public and took the case to the Board of Zoning Appeals. They had tied on the question 2-2 and left this as an approved use. It was then taken to the Circuit Court for a declaratory opinion. Judge Waddell held that although there was some professional use in an animal hospital, on the whole it was a commercial hospital and it could not come under a professional use. He ruled that the zoning regulations should be amended and this was done. Animal hospital was added as a category or a permissible use, with a special use permit, in an agricultural zone. That is the procedure that is involved in this case. Executive offices do not come within professional offices. The Planning Commission recognized that and said so. They asked the County Attorney to propose some amendments that would allow this use. The County Attorney did this and Mr. Chamberlain read the proposed amendments. He said that the Board is being asked to approve this permit because it an attractive use. This is not proper zoning. This is spot zoning for influential people who 8-28-74 123 may have something that may fit an area but does not fit the zoning regulations. Mr. Chamberlain said the Board should consider the amendments at a public hearing and clear this matter up first. The applicants can then apply under the new amendments and it will be clear sailing. To grant this use now, even with the safeguards proposed by the Planning Commission, is sloppy zoning. He felt this matter could easily be taken to court for a declaratory judgement. If the ordinance is amended and the applicant reapplies, there will be no opposition to this permit. An unidentified gentlemen said this sounds like a more attractive proposal then another subdivision. The Board has just deleted Section 9 of the new Subdivision Ordinance and this would have given the Board some leeway. He felt that if the amendments for this use are adopted there should be some restriction as to the percentage of the property that would be left unused. Mr. Jack Rinehart, a member of the Albemarle County Planning Commission, said he had a conflict of interest during the hearings on 'this matter and did not participate in their decision. However, he was present tonight because he feels this use is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and what the Planning Commission hopes to achieve. Open space is needed between Charlottesville and the urban cluster of Earlysville. This use will provide that open space. The Board has an opportunity to have an asset in this community. If they fiddle around with the administrative process of getting something done, this asset will dry up and go away. He asked that whatever decision the Board makes they do it quickly. Mrs. Elizabeth Rosenblum said she feels it is good that this came to the Board before final adoption~of the new zoning ordinance. This may be a good use for large estates in the County and may provide for open space. She does not oppose this use of Round Hill property although the applicant has only asked for use of 4.4 acres. There is no requirement for any amount of open space. She felt that if the ordinance is amended to allow this use that certain minimal conditions should be placed in order to protect the residential area. Mr. Wheeler said if the amendments are considered and passed, Mrs. Rosenblum would have a change to speak at that time. That question is not before the Board tonight. No other member of the public rising to speak, the Chairman declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Wheeler asked that Mr. Humphrey convey to the Planning Commission that if they vote for denial of a permit, he will take it as a denial. He did not feel it is fair to the Planning Commission to have someone who sits in the hall to come in and give him an interpretation. Mr. Wood said Mr. Humphrey had offered to read some of the statements of the Planning Commission members and he felt this would be beneficial. Mr. Humphrey gave the following excerpts from Planning Commission minutes: "Mr. McClure said in his opinion that a professional office was devised to allow professionals to have offices in their homes." 8-28-74 124 "Dr. Sams did not feel the intent would require the office to' be part of the physical residence, but should primarily serve the surrounding area or immediate area." "Mr. Tinsley concurred with Dr. Sams. He did not think the intent covered professional type office intent in the agricultural area." "Mr. Carr said he had placed a broader definition on this type of arrangement and felt this type of dwelling can be adapted to this type of use. He did not think he could approve the request for 4.4 acres only." "Mrs. Craddock said if they could place certain restrictions on this special permit which would preserve open spaces, she though the Planning Commission could say approval of the permit would not set a precedent. She hoped the applicant could be encouraged to increase the acreage." "Mr. Easter said he would have a hard time supporting the permit if the immediate residents were against it." "Dr. Sams moved for denial of the request on the basis that the request does not fall in the definition of professional offices in the present Zoning Ordinance." Mr. Carwile asked for Mr. St. 3ohn's opinion. anything to what has been said about the definition. Mr. St. John said he cannot add His training and experience does not give him any better ability to define a professional office. If the Board does not think the use fits the definition, the Board should not approve something because it is desirable. If that is done, the Zoning Ordinance may as well be thrown away. It would no longer be enforceable. In addition to what has been said about this definition, there is a rule that where there is ambiguity or there is no definition, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of the applicant. Mr. St. John said he does not believe this use is what the ordinance intended. Mr. Fisher said with the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the Planning Staff and the County Attorney, he did not feel it would be appropriate for the Board to approve this use tonight. He felt the Board should move toward correcting the Zoning Ordinance and defer any action on this request until the Board has an opportunity to study the proposed amendments. Mr. Wood said the Board had taken steps, several years ago, to correct a problem they found when zssuing conditional use permits, which they could not deny, by changing to a special use permit, which they can either deny or place reasonable conditions upon. He felt issuance of a special use permit is a reasonable way to deal with this situation. This is a tract of land in a rural, residential area which should be preserved. Rather than going through the procedure of setting prescribed uses such as this, the Board should always have the discretionary power to deal with the situation rather than making it an absolute. Mr. Fisher said it is not his intent to ever make this a use permitted by right, but to clarify the special permit provisions so the Board will be operating within the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Fisher then offered motion to defer action on SP- 374 and to adopt the following resolution: :[25 BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, doth propose to amend the Zoning Ordinance to include the following sections: 2-1-25(24.1) Business executive offices on a minimum acreage of 15 acres in which are employed a maximum of 15 persons. 16-14.1 Business executive office: The office of a person,. firm, corporation or other entity charged with ~he management of any commercial enterprise, the use of which offiCe does not customarily entail direct contact with the public and which does not involve the sale, rental, supply repair or other processing of goods or services consumption. 16-68.1 Professional office: The office of a pers any occupation, vocation or calling, not purely mechanical, or agricultural, in which a profess~ or skill in some department of science or learn: in its practical application to the affairs of either advising or guiding them in servicing th or welfare through the practice of an act found~ manufacture, for public ~n engaged in commercial, ~d knowledge .ng is used ~thers, ~ir interests ~d thereon. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these amendments arc Commission for public hearings and recommendations t( possible date. Mr. Carwile gave second to Mr. Fisher's motion. He intent of the ordinance that this type of use be permitte use exception. He felt the Board should follow Mr. St. J( referred to the Planning this Board at the earliest id not believe it is the under the professional hn's advice and approve the permit under a specific definition rather than approving it because it is a good use. Vote was taken at this time and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. (7) SP-375. Christian W. Johnson. (Public hearing on this matter was continued from August 14, 1974.) Mr. Humphrey said this hearing was deferred in order for Board members to make a view of the site. The Planning Commission has recommended approval with the following conditions: 1) The parking area and driveway are to be covered with a dust-proof surface; 2) maximum number o~ trucks on site to be limited to 10; 3) screening from Commonwealth Drive with ~wo rows of evergreens,.~ 10 feet high on six-foot centers; 4) County Building Official approval of electrical outlets for refrigerated vehicles; 5) time limit of one year after which a new special permit must be obtained; 6) no operation after 12:00 A.M. (midnight); and 7) the permit is issued to the applicant and is not transferrable. Mr. Henley said he did not feel six-foot pines should be required for a temporary use. Mr. Humphrey said the Planning Commission ~ad recommended this because there is an office building alr~eady near this faciility and this operation may be a distraction. Mr. Johnson was present. He said he,has looked for another site, but this is the most favorable at this time. Mr. Wood said it not hisl intent to vote for a prolonged use at this site. Mr. Wood then offered motion ~to approve SP-375 as recommended by the Planning Commission, but eliminating condition #3 and changing condition #6 to read, "Facility is to close at midnight and open at 7:00 A.M. The 8-28-74 126 motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. The Board continued with a zoning matter which was advertised in the Daily Progress on July 17 and July 24, 1974: (8) SP-391. W. K. Smith has applied for a special permit to place a mobile home on 2.03 acres zoned A-1. The purpose is temporary housing while constructing a conventional dwelling. Property is located on the east side of Route 810 on State Route 668 (0.1 mile from Route 810). Property is described as County Tax Map 14, Parcel 48A, White Hall District. Mr. Humphrey said this area is rural in character and located in the northwest mountainous area of the County. There are six single-family dwellings in the immediate area. The applicant wishes to place a mobile home on his property to use as an interim means of housing for two or three years while he constructs a conventional single-family dwelling. The applicant intends to locate the mobile home in a north-soUth direction over 100 feet from State Route 668. There is one single- family dwelling clearly visible from the mobile home site and another dwelling is partially visible. Some evergreen scr~en±ng will be needed along Route 668. The Planning Commission recommended denial on the basis that the applicant now wants the permit for more than two or three years. Mr. Smith was present in support of the petition.. Mr. W. L. Madison said he had opposed this petition before the Planning Commission. He owns property in this area and at the present time. there are no mobile homes in the area. Mr. Edward Younger, an adjacent landowner, said he also opposed this petition before the Planning Commission. Mount Fair is an old community of subsistence farming and the hOuses are conventional. A mobile home will erode the character of the community. He said he would not be opposed if he could get some assurance as to when Mr. Smith would move to a conventional type home. A lady asked if this will be a conventional type home and not a mobile home which will have rooms added. She asked what will happen at the end of three years if a house is built. Mr. Wheeler said at that time the mobile home would have to be moved from the property. Mr. Smith said neither of the people speaking can see his mobile home. He has already obtained a building permit for the house. Mr. Henley said this will provide housing until Mr. Smith can get a home and he offered motion to approve SP-391 with the following conditions which were recommended by the Planning St~ff~: 1) County Building OffiGial approval. 2) Minimum setback from Route 668 of 100 feet. 3) Adequate evergreen screening from Route 668, as determined by the Planning Staff. 8-28-74 127 4) 5) 6) 7) Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of the mobile home. Time limit of three years. The mobile home is to be removed from this property at the end of three years. The permit is issued to the applicant only and is not transferrable. Mr. Fisher said he shares the concern expressed by those speaking in opposition, but~if'ilhiscwitl?erve~_~'the purpose of getting permanent housing in the County he would second the motion if Condition #6 is changed to read "The~nobile is to be removed from this property at the end of three years or upon occupancy of a permanent dwelling, whichever occurs first." Mr. Henley amended his motion to include this condition and the motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. (9) SP-382. Cushman Realty and Building Corporation has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a central well'to serve "Meriwether Hill" and "Lewis Hill West" Subdivisions on about 1.33 acres zoned RS-1 Residential. Property is situated on the east side of State Route 678, adjacent to Meriwether Hill. Property is further described as County Tax Map 58B, Parcel F. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Humphrey said the present well lOt is located on the east side of Route 678 adjacent to Meriwether Hill Subdivision. The applicant is requesting an auxiliary well to be located near the already existing well to supply water to the remainder of Meriwether Hill and Lewis Hill West subdivisions, which total to 38 additional lots. The existing well was approved on May 10, 1972, to serve 52 units. This well, after testing, produced 26 gallons per minute.. The applicant also intends to locate on the above well lot, one storage tank with mininum capacity of 15,000 gallons equipped with two booster pumps. It has been the feeling of the Planning Staff that to 'allow any additional central wells in the Ivy area would create future problems similar to those found in West Leigh. It has been suggested by the County Engineering Department that the water extracted by Meriwether Hill is from a different geologic formation than that of West Leigh. The Planning Staff has requested information from the County Engineering Department and Mr. Bailey is present tonight. The Planning Commission recommends approval with the following conditions: l) 2) 3) 5) Capacity of one gallon, per minute, per unit, is to be maintained. '~_ r Testing of both wells simultaneously with results to be approved by the County Engineering Department. County Engineering Department approval of location and size of water lines. Health Department and State Water Control Board approval of central well. The lo~s in Meriwether Hill and Lewis Hill West will be supplied with water from a system o~ed and operated by Cushman Realty and Building Corporation, the owner and developer. Said owner and developer agrees, on behalf of himself and successors, to assign the ownership of such system and to dedicate to public use all distribution lines, valve's and connections and water meters owned by it, but excluding 128 8-28-74 the well lot and all improvements thereon, other than distribution lines crossing it at such time ms he is unable to operate such system in compliance with any order which may be issued by the State Board of Health pursuant to Section 62.1, Chapter IV of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, including such right of appeals as provided for therein and by the general laws of Virginia. Mr. Humphrey said in order to clarify the condition relative to testing of both wells simultaneously, the staff felt if water should be reached in the second well at the same depth as the existing well, they should be tested simultaneously. They were concerned that both wells might be on the same water source. Mr. Fisher asked if both wells will be on the same lot. Mr. Humphrey said yes, the auxiliary well will be located near the existing well, both on one acre of ground. Mr. Fisher asked where the auxiliary well will be sited on the property. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer, said he did not know the exact location, but they may be within 50 feet of each other in order to allow for ease in connecting to a storage tank: Mr. Fred Landess was present to represent Mr.'Cushman. He said they anticipate hitting the same water supply. This well is looked upon as a back up to the existing well. Calculations have been worked out on 26 g.p.m, which is-the capacity of the pump. The permit issued by 'the Health Department for the existing well states 50 g.p.m. On that basis, they do not feel they need a source of water supply, but only as a back up in case something goes wrong with the pump. The Board feels there should be one gallon per minute. The State Health Department only asks for 1/2 g.p.m, and FHA only recommends 1/2 g.p.m, per unit. The amount of water needed is determined by any storage capacity. On the present water line in Meriwether Hill there is a 5000 gallon storage tank. ~On the new well there will be an additional 15,000 gallon storage tank. Mr. LandeSs said they also have pending before the Board tonight a 14 lot subdivision. The subdivision is for two-acre lots and they could have individual wells. This would be more detrimental to the water level in the Ivy area than a central system. In addition, all pipes for a central system will be installed and if the Service Authority wants to pipe this area, there will be no problems. There is an advantage to the homeowners because this type of system can also furnish fire protection. Their experience shows that one gallon per minute is an unusual requirement. Mr. Wheeler said this is the policy of the Board. the well goes dry they can foreclose on the mortgage. with this Board and the citizens of Albemarle County. FHA insures loans and if It is a different situation If the well goes dry and there is no water they will come to the Board for assistance and they usually get it. 8-28-74 129 Mr. Fisher said~he understands that FHA's requirement is for a minimum of 1/2 g.p.m, per unit. Mr. Landess reiterated that storage capacity makes the difference. Mr. Wheeler said this is the Board's policy and he will not change his mind. Mr. Cushman said the State Health Department had sent three members of their staff to check the proposed well site. The 37 units presently using the system are using 7 g.p.m., per day, on a 24 hour day. He said in all due respect that the Board of Supervisors, when pressed by annexation problems, had bought seven water systems, not tested the wells, and had run into problems. If the wells had been tested they would have found that the problem is not one g.p.m. Mr. Harry Marshall said he represents the Blue Ridge Swimming Club which is in the same general water area. The Board has already alluded to some of the problems caused by excessive pumpage. He is concerned about uncontrolled water-withdrawal from underground water sources and feels the whole area Will dry up from excellerated pumpage. He feels they should go to a public water supply that can be controlled by the government rather than have unrestricted pumping. Mr. Landess said this land can be subdivided into two or three acre lots and thus avoid a central water system. Individual wells would more likely deplete the overall water supply in the area. Mr. Fisher asked how far this subdivision is from the new Stillhouse-Ivy water line. Mr. Bailey said it is approximately three miles. There is another subdivision which has requested use of the West Leigh line. Mr. Fisher said if this system cannot supply water, it will go to the Service Authority and they will have to run the water line. Mr. Bailey said only if the Service Authority feels it Will be revenue producing. Mr. Fisher asked who will service this subdivision if there is no longer a water supply. Mr. Wheeler said the citizens will come to this Board, or the Board sitting at that time, and the County would probably end up running those lines. Mr. Fisher said Mr. Cushman seems to have an alternative of drilling the well, running pump-down tests and if he can meet the Board's requirements, to build the number of units certified by the County Engineer, or he can run water lines to the present source of supply. He said the staff's recommendation seems to be in order and in keeping with policy. Mr. Fisher then offered motion to approve SP-382, with the five conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and #6, when the pump- down tests are completed, the County Engineer is to report to the Board of SUPervisors the number of units he feels can be added to the system. vote: AYES: NAYS: The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and Carried by the following recorded Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. 130 8-28-74 (10) Cushman Realty and Building Corporation. Request for restricted roads to serve Lewis Hill-West was deferred from July 24, 1974. Mr. Humphrey stated that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this request with the restrictions shown on the plat. An unidentified lady said the citizens of Ivy are against any more subdivisions, but if there must be one this one is well planned. Mr. Fisher offered motion to approve this request with the conditions listed on the plat. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Wood. (11) Albemarle Square Site Plan. Action on this matter was deferred from July 25, 1974. (Note: Mr. Carwile abstaining during discussion of this matter.) Mr. Fred Landess was present to represent the applicant in the absence of Mr. Perkins. Mr. Humphrey said the Planning Commission has recommended approval of this site plan for 115,000 square feet of area only and with those conditions listed in the minutes of May 8, June 12 and July 25, 1974. Mr. Calvin Moyer was present. He said he had noth±ng new to add. Mr. Thacker said the Board has heard from the State Water Control Board and the Albemarle County Service Authority on this matter. It was brought to his attention by Mr. Moyer that nothing had been recommended by the State Health Department. Mr. Batchelor said the Service Authority is in compliance with State Health regulations at this time. Mr. Fisher said there have been so many conflicting statements about the Woodbrook lagoon over such a long period of time that even though a recent letter from the State Water Control Board indicates that they do not have any objections to this facility being connected to the lagoon, it is against his better judgment to allow this additional use on the lagoon. Mr. Wheeler said the Service Authority has given the Board their position in this matter and this Board is not in a position to overrule. He said the Board has had ample time to study this matter and he asked for a vote one way or the other this night. Mr. Thacker said he has no intention of holding up this matter any longer, but he had asked a question about the State Health Department and he would like to have an answer. Mr. Batchelor said the County Engineer, Mr. Bailey, could bring the Board members back up to date on the ability of the lagoon to serve this additional facility. Mr. Thacker said that was not what he wanted answered. He would like to know where the County and the Service Authority stand with the State Health Department. 8-28-74 131 Mr. Batchelor said the letter Mr. Moyer had furnished to the Board members was written at the time there was trouble with the lagoon and the lagoon was certified down. Mr. Bailey said there has been no further change in certification from that date. The Service Authority has a certificate from the State Water Control Board. Mr. Thacker asked how the State Health Department became involved and if they are still involved at this time. Mr. Batchelor said the State Health Department has to approve all mechanical devices or changes in the facility. The State Health Department became involved at the time aerators were installed on the lagoon. Mr. Moyer said their letter to the Woodbrook Homeowners Association said the installation of the aerators should not be used as a criteria for allowing additional connections. Mr. Batchelor said they had stated that the installation of the aerators could no~ be used to create more capacity than was originally in the lagoon. Mr. Moyer said that was not their statement. Mr. Batchelor said that was the Service Authority's interpretation. Mr. Wheeler said this Board has been presented with a site plan for approval. The Service Authority has given a permit and the Board must either approve it or turn it down. Mr. Thacker said based on present information from the State Water Control Board and information received from the Albemarle County Service Authority, he would move for approval. Mr. Wood said he would like to see the site plan approved with all the conditions given to date about the number of square feet and parking spaces and according to the plan presented to the Board, but with the condition that they not be allowed to hook to the Woodbrook Lagoon. The applicant has other remedies for disposing of the waste. Mr. Thacker then withdrew his motion. Mr. Wheeler said that Mr. Wood's conditions wouldnot be legal. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. St. John if the Board was in a position, after considering the amount of technical information presented, although some of it is conflicting, and with the experience factor of the lagoon, to do what they felt was best to safeguard the public safety and health. Mr. St. John said yes, but part of the information presented is a letter from the Albemarle County Service Authority which states that they can treat this sewage at the Woodbrook Lagoon. This Lagoon is now owned and operated by the Service Authority and it is in their jurisdictional area. If the Board approves the site plan and dictates that the applicant not use the Woodbrook Lagoon, or denies the site plan on the ground that this use of the Woodbrook Lagoon will be a danger to public health, the burden is then on the Board of Supervisors to show that the Service Authority does not know what they are talking about and this would be a difficult burden to bear. Operation of this lagoon is one of their duties and they are performing a governmental function. The Board of Supervisors would have to show by clear and convincing evidence that they do not know what they are talking about. Mr. Fisher said he has the impression that this may be true. Mr. St. John said he did not believe the Board could sustain this burden. The 8-28-74 132 applicant can go to court right away and have this Board's decision~reversed. New information may be received tomorrow that will show the Board is right and the Service Authority is wrong, and it might show even stronger that the Service Authority ~ is correct. With the information before the Board at this time, Mr. St.John felt the applicant can force approval of the site plan if the only question is the use of the Woodbrook Lagoon. Mr. Henley said he is glad all Board decisions are not based on such a mixed up packet of information as this. Mr. St. John said the Board is on sounder legal ground if they rely on the Service Authority's opinion. This is their function assigned by law. The Board would need the strongest kind of evidence to show that they are wrong. Mr. Fisher said no one can put the smell of that lagoon in the file. He knows what it is like and that is the reason he feels it is a mistake to approve this facility hooking to the lagoon. Mr. Henley said he hates to vote approval of something he feels is a mistake. Mr. Wood asked if the Board could impose some reasonable condition to take care of the situation if a mistake is being made. Six months from now, if the odor is bad, is there any check the Board can put on this approval? Mr. Bailey asked if Mr. Wood had detected any odors since the aerators were installed. Mr. Wood said he had. Mr. Bailey asked if they had been of such magnitude as to bring the problem to the Service Authority Board. The aerators helped to stabilize the condition of the lagoon. This is not the only thing that can be done; installation ~ of the aerators is not the last word in treatment. The Albemarle County Service Authority does not normally operate the lagoon. His data was taken from records of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. They cannot guarantee there will never be any odors, but there is no sewage treatment plant in the State of Virginia t~at can guarantee this. The Meadow Creek can be very unpleasant at times, but they have to work within the limits set. Mr. St. John said this is the evidence the Board would have to subpoena (pointing to Mr. Bailey) to show that the Service Authority does not know what it is talking about. He did not believe the Board could sustain that burden. The Board can say that in the past, whether it was a mistake or not, houses were built too close to the plant, and for this reason, even though there is capacity there, the Board will not allow a commercial sewage connection to this plant. If the Board does this they ~'i il cannot allow anymore houses to be built which will put sewage in this plant. Mr. Fisher said he does not feel the Board has any control. The Service Authority has already agreed to take on more houses. Mr. St. John said some of the houses may not be under control of the Board. If the property is already zoned, ~ the Board has no site plan control over that and no way to stop it. Mr. Fisher ~ asked if the Board could refuse issuance of building permits. Mr. St. John said no. Mr. Fisher Said he is convinced that approval of this is a mistake, but the Board seems to be on shaky legal ground in the face of the Service Authority recommendation. 8-28-74 133 Mr. Thacker said based on what Mr. St. John has indicated the Board's legal position to be, he would offer motion to approve the Albemarle Square Site Plan subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and the Albemarle County Service Authority; the site plan to be for only 115,000 square feet and adhering to minimum requirements for off-street parking. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley. Mr. Wood said the Board has an able County Attorney, but he has lived with that lagoon for eight years, read all the correspondence on same, and will vote against the motion because of his personal experience with that blasted lagoon. He would rather take his changes in court based on the history of the lagoon over the years and he can find no way to support approval of this petition. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Henley, Thacker and Wheeler. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Wood. ABSTAINING: Mr. Carwile. (12) SP-387. Mackie Engineering Limited has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a professional office building on .55 acre zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the north side of State Route 649 (Airport Road), near its intersection with State Route 606. Property is further described as County Tax Map 32, Parcels 17C and 17C(1). Rivanna Magisterial District. Mr. Humphrey said there are several single-family dwellings located along Route 649 and the propOsed site is located across from Deerwood Subdivision which is zoned R- i. An Avis car wash is located adjacent to the proposed site and further to the east is Benoit Nursery. Th~ property directly adjacent to the east of the proposed site is zoned M-1 Industrial. The applicant wishes to convert an existing structure into a professional office building for his engineering 'firm. The proposed zoning map indicates this area to be placed in the Industrial Limited zone which is comparable to the present M-1 zone. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the petition based on the following conditions: 1) Building official approval. 2) Site plan approval. 3) Ail equipment must be stored within an enclosed structure. 4) One free-standing sign on the property, not to exceed 10 square feet, and not to exceed a height of six feet. 5) One wall sign only on the primary structure not to exceed 20 square feet. Mr. Mackie was present in support of the petition. No one from the public spoke for or against. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Carwile to approve SP-387 as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. 8-28-74 134 (13) SP-392. Mildred Hart EwetI has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a two-family dwelling on part of 36 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the west Side of State Route 29 South about one mile south of its intersection with State Route 692 at "Crossroads". Property is further described as County Tax Map 98, Parcel 8, part thereof, Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Humphrey said this request is for a two-family dwelling for rental purposes. The area is rural in nature and thickly wooded. Chalk Mountain's Ridge forms the western boundary. There are several single-family dwellings and a grocery store/ service station in the immediate area. There are two single-family dwellings already existing on the property and both are being rented. The applicant proposes to build a two-family dwelling, for rental purposes, approximately 100 yards from Route 29 South. The closest village is Crossroads, which is approximately one mile north of the proposed site. Crossroads is projected for a population of 3000 by the year 2000. The Planning CommisSion recommends denial because of the rental aspects. In the past they have recommended approval of two-family dwellings only when the applicant was to occupy one-half of the residence. This petition is also outside of the village cluster. An unidentified gentlmen, present for the applicant, said he had written a letter to the Board rebutting two points just mentioned by Mr. Humphrey. The property now has two rental units and lends itself to rental units. The applicant feels this is a reasonable use of the property. Mr. Fisher said he-has discouraged people in his district from applying for such permits outside of the village center. He does not feel it is proper to allow this use with a special permit ouside of the village cluster and therefore would have to support the Planning Commission in their recommmendation for denial. He then offered motion to deny SP-392. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley~and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: Mr. Carwile. Mr. Wood said he hmd voted on the Albemarle Square Site Plan but had failed to mention that he had received an opinion from the Commonwealth's Attorney that he does not have a conflict of interest on this matter. (Note: Copy of that opinion, dated August 27, 1974, is filed in the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors.) (14) SP-3~3. William C. Cason has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a twofamily dwelling on 3.53 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the south side of State Route 250 East, opposite the intersection of State Route 731. Property is further described as County Tax Map 79C, Section 2, Block A, Lot 5. Rivanna~Magisterial District. Mr. Humphrey informed the Board that the Planning Commission has not yet acted on this petition and requested that the public hearing be deferred until September 11, 1974. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. 8-28-74 135 (15) SP-400. Charlottesville Broadcasting Corporation has petitioned the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to locate a radio tower on .0574 acre zoned A, 1 Agricultural. Property is situated on the west side of State Route 743 (Hydraulic Road) about 1000 feet northwest of its intersection with State Route 631 (Rio Road). Property is further described as County Tax Map 45, Parcel 18, part thereof. Jack Jouett Magisterial DiStrict. Mr. HumphreY said the property is located in the County's urban area, however, this property is thickly wooded at the present time. Four Seasons West development will be located near the proposed structure. The Charlottesville Broadcasting Corporation intends to erect a 323.15 foot radio tower along with transmitter facilities. The staff contacted the Federal Aviation Administration concerning the proposed tower since the tower will be erected within the approach zone of the CharlottesVille- Albemarle Airport. FAA telephoned today and they do have comments to make on the location of the tower, but it will be two weeks this report is received by the County. The proposed tower is to be located approximately on the 585 foot contour line. With the addition Of the 323.15 foot tower, the approximate height above mean sea level will be 908 feet. The altitude at which aircraft approach the area' of the proposed~radio tower ~s between 1050 feet and 1100 feet. The Planning Commission has rec.ommended approval based on the following conditions: 1) Final approval from FAA. 2) County Building Official approval. 3) No other structure be located within a radius of the tower, or 330 feet. Mr. Humphrey said he understands Condition #3 poses a problemrelative to the development of Four Seasons West. The staff had recommended this condition in the interest of public safety should the tower collapse. If the County approves this tower, they would not be liable for any damages in the event of the collapse of same. Mr. Collin Rosse was present in support of thepetition. He said the FCC will not grant permission to erect this tower if they do not receive approval from the FAA. Mr. Fisher asked what type of residential structures will be built within this 330 feet. Mr. Humphrey said he did not know, but it will probably be a mixture of apartment~s, townhouses, and single-family dwellings. Mr. Fisher said he had showed this proposal to a consultant and one of the questions he had been asked was about the people residing in such a strong field if there were to be high rise buildings. If they are to be low-rise residences this is not a significant problem, but it is becoming more a concern of people around the country. Mr. Wood then offered motion to approve SP-400 as recommended by the Planning Commission but with the elimination of Condition #3. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. 136 The next items before the Board all related to the Ivy Landfill; a contract for cleanup after the recent fire; discussion of Continental Can property; and assessment of that property. Mr. Wheeler said he felt it was too late at night to become involved in a lengthy discussion of the landfill question and asked that these matters becarried over. He said the Board needed to have nearly an all day meeting next week. Mr. Batchelor said there is~a fire hazard presently at the landfill. The staff has taken bids for work to eliminate this fire hazard. This is part of the maintenance procedure and does need the Board's attention. The low bid was for approximately $24,000-. He talked with the City Manager today and he indicated that the Cit% will particpate in this cost. Mr. Wheeler said he would prefer to adjourn this meeting until 9:30 A.M. in the morning. Mr. Batchelor said there is a memo in tonight's packet on this matter. Mr. Fisher said he had not had a chance to read any of the information presented. Mr. Wheeler said he did not think the County would be able to get any contractor to work on Labor day and would prefer that this matter be deferred until September 5'. Appointments to the State Transportation Study Committee were ordered carried over to September 5. Hearing date to amend Section 12-1 and-to enact a new Section 121.1 of the Albemarle County Code was ordered carried over to September 5. Mr. Wheeler said he had given to the Board members a list of charges to be given to a Housing COmmittee and he would like for the Bo~ard members to view some homes in the County next Thursday afternoon. Claims against the County in the amount of $990,278.94 were presented, examined, and allowed and certified to-the Director'of Finance for payment and charged to the following funds: General Fund General Operating Fund School Operating Fund School Construction-Capital Outlay Fund General Operating-Capital Outlay Fund Textbook Rental Fund Joint Security Complex Fund Town of Scottsville: Local Sales Tax Commonwealth of Virginia: Current Credit Account Total $ 1,920.70 335,205.47 294,352.46 217,800.71 113,908.23 18,689.18 7,045.74 202.32 1,154.13 $990,278.94 At 11:35 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Fisher to adjourn this meeting until 9:00 A.M. on September 5, 1974, in the Board Room of the County Office Building. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwite and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS · None. Chairman