1972-04-26NlO0
A regular meeting of the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held at the Albemarle County Court House on the 26th of April, 1972,
at 7:30 P.M.
Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr.,
William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.
Absent: None.
Officers present: County Executive and County Attorney,.
Upon motion by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Thacker, the.following
resolution was adopted by the ~following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
WHEREAS, the State Water Control Board in its Minute 49 has
required the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville to
create an authority or other institutional arrangement which would
obtain the ownership, and operation of all existing City and County
water and sewerage systems, as a condition precedent to allocating
any additional grants to the City and County; and
WHEREAS,~the County~of Albemarle is cognizant of the necessity
and expedience required in the formation of a regional entity; and
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is willing to form such a
regional entity; and
WHEREAS, the formation of such a regional entity must be on an
equitable basis; and
WHEREAS, the County and the City have been conducting negotiations
to the end of the formation of the regional entity; and
WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville has unilaterally suspended
such negotiations;
MOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the County of Albemarle does hereby
ratify and affirm its willingness to form a regional entity as required
by the State Water Control Board on an equitable basis; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle as an indica-
tion of its willingness to form such regional entity does hereby adopt
as a statement of intent the attached resolution captioned:
"CONCURRENT RESOLUTION SIGNIFYING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY
OF CHARLOTTESVILLE AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS OF
ALBEMARLE COUNTY TO CREATE A WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY UNDER
THE VIRGINIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHDRITIES ACT AAtD SETTING
FORTH ITS ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION."
101
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle in order
to facilitate and expedite the formation of a regional entity does
hereby request the State Water Control Board to arbitrate and resolve
the differences between Albemarle County and the City of Charlottes-
ville, and does further request theCity of Charlottesville to s~bmit
to such artibtation by the State Water Control Board.
CONCURREN~ RESOLUTION SIGNIFYING THE INTENTION OF THE CITY~'
OF CHARLOTTESVILLE AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS OF
ALBEMARLE COUNTY TO CREATE A WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY UNDER
THE VIRGINIA WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITIES ACT AND SETTING
FORTH ITS ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION.
WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville owns and operates water supply
and sewage treatment facilities which furnish water and provide sewage
disposal for all of the City and certain outlying areas and Albemarle
County, acting through Albemarle County Service Authority, owns and operates-
water supply and sewage treatment facilities which furnish water~ and
provide sewage disposal for certain areas in the County; and
WHEREAS, the state Water Control Board has imposed a moratorium
on the construction of new facilities and the enlargement~ bf existing
facilities for sewage ~reatment on the Rivanna River Basin pending the
development and implementation of an approved .plan; and
WHEREAS, the State Water Control Board has tentatively approved
Federal and State grants to the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle
County aggregating approximately $13,000,000 for sewage treatment
facilities but has advised the City and the County that as a condition
to receipt of %he major portion of-such grant funds the City and the
County'shall designate or establish a single political entity to speak
for both the City and the County and it has been determined that this
can best be accomplished by an authority to be created by the City and
the County pursuant to the Virginia Water and Sewer Authorities Act
(Chapter~28, Title 15.1,- Code of Virginia of 1950, as~amended) (the
Act); and
~WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County recognize
that substantially all of their sources of water supply are-located on
the Rivanna River Basin and that effluent from their sewage treatment
facilities is being diScharged into'.that same basin, which is a matter
of concern not only to theCity and ~the County but also_to the State
Water Control Board and the State Department of Health, and it-is
therefore considered desirable to place the responsibility for Water
supply for the City and the County in the hands of the same political
entity having responsibility for sewage treatment facilities;
i02
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS OF-ALBEMARLE COUNTY, IN
SEPARATE MEETINGS ASSEMBLED: ~
Section 1. The Council of the City of Charlottesville and the
Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County hereby signify their
intention to create a water and sewerL authority pursuant to the Actl
to be known as "Rivanna Water and sewer Authority."
Section 2. The purpose for Which the Authority is to be formed
is stated in its Articles of Incorporation hereinafter set forth.
Section 3. The Articles of Incorporation of the Authority shall
be as~foltows~. -?
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
OF
RIVANNA WATER AND SEWER AU~T~HORITY
The Council of the City of Charlottesville and the Board of
County Supervisors of Albemarle County having signified 'their
intention to create an Authority pursuant to the virginia Water
and Sewer Authorities Act (Chat~ar 28, Title 15.1, Code of Virginia
of 1950, as amended), which shall be a public body p~litic and
corporate, hereby certify:
(a,)~. The name of the Authority shall be "Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority" and the address of its principal office shall be
Charlottesville, Vir~nia.
(b) The names of the incorporating pOlitical subdivisions -
are the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County.
(c) The powers of the Authority shall be exercised by a
board of five members consisting of the four persons holding the
offices, from time to time, of city Manager and Director of Public
Works of the City ~of Charlott~ville and CountYExecutive and County
Engineer of Albemarle County and a fifth person appointed by the
concurrent action of the Council of the City of Charlottesville
and the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. The names
and .addresses of the first members are as follows:
Name
Cole Hendrix
Guy B. Agnor, Jr.
.T.M. Batchelor, Jr.
J. Harvey Bailey
The terms of~.the members of the board serving as such by virtue of
their offices with the City and the County shall expire upon their
ceasing to'hOld such offices. Any person hereafter holding any such
Address
1946 Michael Place, Charlottesville, Virginia
605 East Main'Street, Charlottesville~ Virginia
3-505 Marlboro Court, Charlottesville, Virginia
Rio Road, Charlottesville, Virginia
103
office shall automatically succeed to the membership of his predecessor
in such office on'the board of the Authority. The initial term of the
appointed member shall expire on May 1, 19'74, and his successor shall be
~pointed for a term of two years, except that a vacancy Shall be filled
only for the ~unexpired term. The appointed member shall hold office
until his successor has been appointed and qualifies and he shall be
eligible for reappointment to suCceed himself. The appointed member
shall receive ~uch sompensation not to exceed $1,800 per year as the
Board of the Authority may determine, but those members who are employees
of the City or the County shall serve without compensation. Each member
shall be reimbursed the amount of his actual expenses necessarily
incurred in the performance of his duties.
(d) The purpose for which the Authority is to be formed is to
acquire, finance, construct, operate and maintain facilities for developing
a supply of potable water for the City of Charlottesville-and Albemarle
County and for the abatement of pollution resulting from sewage in the
Rivanna River Basin, including sources of water supply, water intakes,
reservoirs, filtration and purification plants, pumping stations, trans-
mission lines and storage facilities, sewerage trunk or interceptor lines
and pumping stations and waste water treatment facilities, together with
'~all appurtenant equipment and appliances necessary or suitable therefor
and all properties, rights, easements or franchises relating thereto and
deemed necessary or convenient by the Authority for their operation.
The Authority may contract with the City, the County, any sanitary
district thereof or any authority therein created pursuant to the Act,
to furnish water and to treat sewage delivered to its facilities upon
such terms as the Authority shall determine; provided, however, that any
such contract shall include as parties thereto the City and the County
(or any agency of the County designated for that purpose by its Board of
County Supervisors). The Authority is expressly prohibited from contracting
with any other party desiring service in the City or theCounty, except
upon the written consent of the City or County, (or any agency of the
County designated for that purpose by its Board of County Supervisors),
respectively,
(e) The Authority shall cause an annual audit of its books and
records to be made by the State Auditor of Public Accour~ or an independent
certified public accountant at the end of each fiscal year and a certified
copy thereof to be filed promptly with the Council of the City of
Charlottesville and the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County.
i04
Pending completion of the necessary engineering studies and
estimates, it is not .p~mcticable to set forth herein preliminary-
estimates of capital costs and'initial rates for ~ervices of
proposed projects,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the County of the City of Charlottesville
and the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle-County have
caused~these Articles of IncOrporation to be eXecuted;~by their
presiding officers in the-name of the City of Charlottesville and
Albemarle County, respectively.
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
By
Mayor
Clerk
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
By
Chairman, Board of County
Supervisors
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
Section 4. The first members of the Board of the Authority shall
be those persons specified in the Articles of Incorporation. Their terms
of office shall begin on the date of issuance to the Authority of a
certificate of incorporation by the State Corporation Commission and
shall expire as specified in the Articles of Incorporation. The
appointed member shall receive such compensation not to exceed $1,800
per year as the Board of the Authority may determine, but those members
who are employees of the City or the County shall serve without
compensation. Each member shall be reimbursed the amount of his
actual e~penses necessarily incurred in the performance of his duties.
Section 5. The proper officers of the City of Charlottesville and
Albemarle County are hereby authorized and directed to execute the
Articles of Incorporation in substantially the form set forth above,
to cause the executed Articles of Incorporation to be filed with the
State COrporation Commission on or before the date of ~the earlier of
the public hearings required by Section 6 hereof, together with proof
of publication of the notices of such public hearings, and to do all
things necessary and appropriate for the creation of the Authority.
Section 6. Public hearings shall be held on this resolution by
the Council of the City of Charlottesville at 7:30 P.M. on May 8, 1972,
in its council chamber in City Hall and by the Board of County Supervisors
'3
of Albemarle County at 7:30 P.M. on May 8, 1972, in the-court room
of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County. Immediately following such
public hearings o~-any-adjournment thereof, each governing body~shall
cause to be filed with the State Corporation Commission a record of-,the
proceedings thereof, wDich shall indicate whether such governing body
called for a referendum pursuant to Section 15.1-1244 of the Act. A
copy of this resolution~shall published one time at least ten'days prior
to the date of such public hearings.in The Daily Progress, a newspaper
having general circulation in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle
County, preceded by a notice as follows:
"NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS"
"Notice is hereby given that public hearings will be held as
set out below on the following concurrent resolution heretofore adopted
by the County of the City of Charlottesville and the Board of County
Supervisors of Albemarle County signifying their inte~tion to create
a water and sewer authority as set out therein."
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
· 1972 Mayor
(SEAL) Adopted
ATTEST:
Clerk
(SEAL) Adopted
ATTEST:
· 1972
Clerk, Board of County
Supervisors
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
By.
Chairman, Board of County
Supervisors
At 7:40 P.M. the Chairman called for public hearings on zoning
reques~as advertised in the Daily Progress on April 13 and April 20, ~1972.
(1) ZMP-202. Application of Harold Whitlow to rezone 1.0 acre from A-1 Agriculture
to RS-1 Residential. Property is located on the north side of the C&O Railroad
right-of-way on an unnamed road approximately 1/2 mile north of Route 691.
Property is described as County Tax Map 55, Parcel 25A ~part thereofl. White
Hall Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey stated that there is no way this parcel could be construed to be a part
of the Crozet Community cluster. The staff would consider this request to be spot
zoning in the tru~sense of the word. Although the staff understands the situation of
Mr. Thurston (owner of the property) in his desire to accommodate his family, the
staff cannot in good conscience recommend this rezoning request since it would be in
direct conflict with adopted policies and objectives as it relates to spot zoning and
conservation and the trend it might create for additional zoning p~titions in this area.
106
The Planning Commission had recommended, unanimously, denial of this petition.
Mr. Whitlow was present in support of his application.
Mr. CarWile stated that he had severe problems in hiS own mind about telling
an individual attempting to assist in housing 'his ~'amily that it could not be
permitted and he thought this Should be taken into account in this zoning
request.
In view of the Planning Commission recommendation, Mr. Fisher made a
motion to deny this request.
the vote was as follows:
AYES:
-NAYS:
Motion having been seconded by Mr. Thacker,
None.
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
Mr. Wood stated that at times you have to take family into consideration
if it does not hinder anyone and rights of way can be wc~ked out.
Motion f~or approval of this petition was offered by Mr. car~ile, however,
he stated that he did not View this particular rezoning request as setting a
precedent for spot zoning because it involved a family relationship. Motion
having been seconded byMr. Henley, the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
(2)
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
ZMP, 204. Samuel D., Jr. and Barbara B. Stokes. Petition to rezone 2.25
acres from A-1 Agriculture to R-2 Residential. Property is located on
the west side of Route 631 approximately one mile south of its inter-
section with Route706. Property is described as County Tax Map 89,
Parcel 53D, Scottsville Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey stated that the property is in an area completely zoned A-1
Agriculture with one exception, that being a one acre tract zoned RS-1.
Property
is just north of an area of communiqy interest with subdivision of land Prior to
zoning have taken place. The average lot size if 5.0 acres with a range of
one acre to 60 acres. In his staff comment he advised thatrecently a zoning
petition for RS-1 zoning was denied just north of this parcel at the intersection
or-Routes 706 and 631 as being out of character with the area. He also stated
that the R-2 zoning is'completely out'of Character with the area and certainly
not in [COmpliance with the Comprehensive Plan. It would not be in the ~est
interest of the County as it relates to the impact of spot zoning and the trend
it would create and the cost to the County as a result of being an impacted
area. Mr. Humphrey stated that Mrs. Stokes should have applied for a special
· doe
use permit for a one duplex unit Whi'ch~.~" nog require rezoning but only approMal
of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission had recommended, unanimouslys
denial of this petition. Mrs. Stokes was present in support of the petitio~
Mr. Henley made a motion that the ~ecommendations of the ~lanning Commission
be followed and the petition denied. The motion having been seconded by Mr.
Carwile, the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, He-nley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
107
NAYS: None.
(3) ZMP-208. L. E. Bunch. Petition to rezone 2.515 acres from A-1 Agriculture
to B-1 Business. Property is located on the north side of Route 692
approximately 300 feet east of its intersection ~ith Route 29 South, known
as Cross Roads. Property is described as County Tax Map 99, Parcel 5,
Samuel Miller Magisterial District. ~
Mr. Humphrey gave the following report. This property abutts an existing General Store
which has frontage on Route 29. A Post Office and filling station exist across
Route 692 from the subject property. Thereare several dwellings in the immediate
area. The nearest is located to the north and east of each property. The entire
area is zoned A-1 Agriculture. The property has 336.97 feet of frontage on
Route 692. Mr. Humphrey stated that while everything would appear to be in order to
receive Commerical development, the staff is concerned about there not being suffici~t
land involved to make any commercial expansion availat~ with respect to access,
parking and later additions. He also stated that there should be a minimum of
five acres involved and the five acres should be the master plan for the alternate,
relative Go access parking and generallayout. This petition had passed the Planning
Commission with a vote of seven voting in favor, one objecting and one abstaining.
Mr. S. P. Higginbotham, attorney, appeared on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Bunch. Mrs. Bunch
stated that she had turned in several letters and a petition signed by 300 people
in favor of her petition. Dr. Drash, Mr. M. Y. Sutherland, Mr. A. E.. Cutrigh%,
Mr. Forbes, Mr. Richard Shepherd, Mr. Samuel Paige appeared against the petition.
Mr. Henley made motion to approve and same having been seconded by Mr. Thacker,
same was passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None. -
(4) ZMP-209. Arley E.- and Patsie H. Cutright. Petition to rezone' 4.91 scres
from A-1 Agriculture to R-2 Residential. Property is located on the south
side of Route 711 at its intersection with Route 29 South in the Red Hill
area. Property is described asCounty Tax Map 87, Parcel 51, Samuel
Miller Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey stated that the area is rural in character. One R-2 zone exists to
the north across Route 711. With one exception, the parcels of land in the area
are four acres or more. Sparse single family houses exist in the area. One
duplex exists in the aforementioned R-2 zone. In his staff report Mr, Humphrey
stated t~at pre~ious petitions in this area, including the hearing on the existing
R-2 zone, had been considered premature in this area. At the time the-existing
R-2 zone was heard there did not exist the provision of a Special Permit .for
duplexes or two family units in the A-1 zone. At that time the Commission and
Board were of the opinion that there was a need to provide for this type housing
in appropriate areas and did find this area conducive to some mixture of..housing
units. ~ile'-the R-2 zone was approved reluctantly by some members of both bodies,
they felt another approach was needed to assist in supplying thisneed. At that
time on the County's own motion an amendment was initiated and subsequently appr.oved
providing duplex structures in an A-1 zone on two acre minimum lots with. SpeCial
i08
Permit approval. The staff is of the opinion that this should be the process
in providing two'family dwellings as opposed to granting R-2 zoning which
will only mushroom as to the number of requests. If this trend does occur,
the County in the future will find itself involVed in providing~utilities
to meet a problem relative-tomalfunctioningseptic systems. The Planning
Staff and the Planning Commission recommended denial of the R-2 zone.
Mr. Cutright was present' in favor of his~petition. Mr. Ashby, Mr. Thurston,
Mr. curtis and Mr. Morris appeared in opposition. Mr. Fisher made a motion
to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny this petition4
The motion having been seconded by Mr. Henley, the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher~ Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
(5) ZMP211 - M. W. Worley. Petition to rezone 2.8 acres from A-1 Agriculture
to R-1 Residential. Property is located on the we'st side of Route 785
approximately 1/8 mile north of its intersed/.on with Route 649. Property
is described as County Tax Map 32, Parcel 29 (Part thereof), Rivanna
Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey reported that the staff recommends that the R-1 zone in light of
the present adopted policy WoUld not be in keeping~with the objectives for
future development in this area, relative to density 'and the use of Septic
Systems. At best, the area should be considered for~a density not to
exceed~the average 'of one dwelling unit per acre. The staff ~ecommends
RS-1 zoning. Mr. Humphrey stated that the Planning Commission, unanimously,
recommended approval as requested, that being for R-1 zoning. Mr. Wood
made a motion to approvelthe petition as requested for R-1 zoning. The motion
was seconded by~Mr.-Henley~and carried by'the follOWing recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs, Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
(6) ZMP-2t3.J~ John R. Dorrier.- Petition to rezone 3.61 acres from A-~i
Agriculture to RS-1 Residential. Property is located on west side
.of Route .20 North approximately one mile from Charlottesville City
Limits. PDoperty is described as County Tax Map 62, Parcels
24B and 31A~ Rivanna Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey stated that the subject property is situated between suburban
residential development (Key West) and urban development (Route 2'50 area-
Pantops). The property presently contains one four unit apartment structure.
· wo additionatfour unit apartment Structures exist to the immediate west with
no single family dwellings on property immediately south. Large acreage
abounds in the immediate area4 The property is well above the grade of
Route 20. Mr. Humphrey reported that the staff found the request to be
in keeping with the intent of the-plan as adopted. The apartment structure
is presently non-confOrming and will continue to be non-conforming under the
request as petitioned. Mr. HumPhrey stated that the ~lanning Commission had
unanimously recommended approval. Mr. Wood made a motion to follow the
109
recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve this petition. Same having
been seconded by Mr. Carwile, the motion cart,led by the following recorded vote:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and'Wood;
AYES:
NAYS:
(7)
None. -
ZMP-214. David Roach.
withdrawn.
Mr. Humphrey stated that'this petition had been
(8) ZMP-215. Harley Easter & Ashby Kennon. Petition to rezone 15 acres from
A-1 Agriculture to RS~I Residential. Prq0erty is situated off Route 675
(Lake Albemarle Road). Property is described as County Tax Map 41,
Parcel 66 (part thereof) and County Tax Map 4lA, Lots 171 through 190~
Lots 142 through 147 and Lots 152, 163 and 164, White Hall Magisterial
District.
Mr. Humphrey stated that RS-1 zoning, approved in 1969~, exists to the immediate
north. A-1 zoning exists~in all other directions. Phase I of Westover Hills
Subdivision located within the RS-1 zone is presently under development. Lake
Albemarle Subdivision, located to the south and east of the property, has but a
few structures. The'lot sizes in Albemarle Lake Subdivision are non-conforming
and in many cases less than 20,000 square feet. The general character of the
area is r~ral with surburban two acre and one acre development now occurring.
A subdivision fronting on Ro%the 675 exists with nine lots recorded, hav~ing 10t
sizes ranging from 1~06 to 1.87 acres. In his-staff report, Mrs. Humphrey stat~ed
that a part of :this request' involves minimum' non-conforming and probl~m'lots in
Albemarle Lake Subdivision. In, addition, the Board has established policylregarding
the immediate area by virtue~ or'granting RS-1 in' the immediate area. The rediMision
of the area would tend to upgrade the previous subdivision.. On this basis the
staff wou~ suggest approval relative to past Board policy~ Large five acre o3
more lots would be more in keeping with the residential objectives of the plan,
however, the proposal contemplated would-assist ~in correcting a. problem-~relative
to a greater density potential~under the r~corded subdivision. We-would hope any
approval would tend to encourage., an upgrading of the existing subdivision~ Mr.
Humphrey stated that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval.
Mr. Easter appeared in support of his petition. No one appeared in opposition.
Upon motion by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Thacker, the petition was approved by
the following recorded vote: ~.-
AYES:
NAYS:
(9)
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood~
None. -~
ZMP-216'. Harley Easter & Ashby Kennon. Petition t'o rezone 9.95 acres from
A-1 Agriculture to RS-1 Residential. P~operty is situated on west side
of Route-729 just north of Route 53.. Property ~i.s descr'ibed~ as County Tax
Map 93, Parcel 45, Scottsville Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey stated that the subject property contains one dwelling. Nine dwellings
and one church exist in the immediate area. Ten or more dwellings exist just west
of the immediate area of the request. There are several small ~ots~ containing a
little over one-half acres. Some eight parcels have from one acre to two acres. The
i10
small parcel subdivision that has,taken place has. occurred to the west. The
remainder of the area cOntains larger parcels ranging from four acres up to
over 100 acres. A-1 zoning exists for ~everal mi~s surrounding the property,
Mr. Humphrey's staff report was as follows: The generalized soil map indicates
the parcel to be in an area which has slight to moderate limitatiOns for septic
systems. The generalized Comprehensive Land Use Plan indicates this area
conducive to the Village Concept. Village objective within the plan reads
as follows:
"Villages should serve as smaller activity centers to complement the communities
and to service outlying areas.
1) Within each village there should be a village center which Would Provide
shopping and community facilities.
2) A village should be served by a small package ~ewage treatment.plant and
public water, when feasibility is assured by~pula~ion ~rowth,~
3) Each village should provide a site for a county elementary school, located
near the village center."
It would appear that the large lot (one acre) develoI~nent in villages
without public sewer and water is appropriate in view of recent Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisor positive action on similar requests in other
village conceptional areas. The staff would'suggest that percolation tests be
accomplished on the parcel as an indication of the potential in obtaining
individual well systems on the property. Mr. Humphrey stated that the Planning
Commission had unanimously recommended approval. Mr. Wood made a 'motion for
approval as recommended by the Planning Conm%issi~n, however, he stated that it
was becoming more difficult to justify the use of septic systems on one acre
lotS. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None'.
(10) SP-161. Charles Baker. To allow a permanent mobile home on 4.'5 acres
zoned A-1 Agriculture. Property is located off west side of Route 606
approximately 1 1/4 miles south of its interesection with Route 641.
Property is described as County Tax Map 21, Parcel 13D, Rivanna
Magisterial District.
Mr. Baker appeared in support of his petition.
No one appeared in op~sitia~' ~-~.?~ ~'~ Mr. Humphrey stated that
the Staff recommended normal Health Department approval of a septic system.
He stated that the B~!anning Commission had recommended approval with condition
as stated above. Mr. Wood made a motion that the recommendation of the ~lanning
Commission be accepted. Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the
following recorded vote:
~YES:
NAY S:
(~)
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
SP-162. Charlie & Jackqualyn Sandridge, To allow a permanent mobile
111
home on 2.85 acres zoned A~i Agriculture. Property is located off south
side of Rout~e 61-4 approximately 3/4 mile east of its inter-section with
Route 674. Property is described as COunty Tax Map.26, Parcel 56B, White
Hall Magisterial District.
Mr. Sandridge appeared in behalf of the petition. No one appeared in opposition.
Mr. Humphrey advised the the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to
Health Department approval of a septic system. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded
by Mr. Wood, recommendation of the Planning Commission was accepted. Motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
(12)
Messrs.' Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
SP-164. Stewart Kenny. To allow a permanent mobile home on approximately
2.0 acres zoned A-l, Agriculture. Property is located on east side of
Route 616, approximately 1/2 mile from its intersection with Route 22 at
Keswick. Property is described as County Tax Map 80, Parcel 157,
Rivanna Magisterial District.
Stipulated.
Commbsion.
vote:
AYES:
NAYS: NoRe.
(14)
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
CUP-150. Walter Cushman. Petition to install a central well water ~supply
to serve a subdivision, to be known as "Eeriwether Hills" in the Ivy area.
Property is located on the southeast side of Route 678, just north of Route
250 West, Property is described as County Tax Map 58, Parcel 87, Samuel
Miller District.
Mr. Humphrey read a letter from~Mr. Cushman stating capabilities of the well. Mr.
Humphrey stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application
No one appeared in support of the petition. Mr. Humphrey advised that the Planning
Commission recommended approval subject to Health Department approval of a se~ic
system. On motion by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Thacker, recommendation of the
Planning Commission was accepted. Motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
(13) SP-165. George O. Davis, Jr. To allow stabling facilities for light horses
and ponies on two acres zoned. R-1 Residential. Property is described asCounty
Tax Map 59C(1), Section 2, Lot 28, Samuel Miller Magisterial District.
is
Mr. Humphrey stated that this request/to house one or more horses on a lot in
West Leigh Subdivision on a vacant 2.0 acre lot adjoining a lot in the ownership
of the applicant. The property is located in Section 2 of West Leigh and is
bounded tF Emerson Drive and Lake Loch Leigh. The nearest home is that of the
applicant. The lot immediately east of the subject property is vacant. He stated
that the Planning Staff would recommend that the stabling facility be located
125 feet from the property line dividing lots 28 and 27 and setback from the lake
a distance of 200 feet, and review by Health Department. They also recommended
keeping the stable along the east property line and screening in that area and
stable be limited to thr-ee or less ponies. Mr. Davis was present in support of
his petition. The Planning Commission recommended approval-with conditions as
Motion was offered by Fisher to accept recommendations of the Planning
Motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and passed by the following recorded
112
as submitted for 52 dwelling units, subject to.additional storage. They
requested as a condition that pipe material be same as that used by the Service
Authority for possible tie-in to County system being servi~d by Service
Authority in this area. The staff would also like the Board to consider
possibility that at some future date the system be turned over to the Service
Authority for operation and maint~ ance. Mr. Fred Landes, Attorney, and
Mr. Cushman'appeared on behalf of the petition. Motion was made by Mr. Fisher
to defer action on this petition until May 8. Motion having been seconded
by Mr. Thacker, the motion carriedby the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
On request of the Chairman, this meeting was adjourned until May 8, 19727
at ~:30 P.M. in the ~Albe mar~.le C'~unty~ C~gur~ Hi~o~_u~.s e ~ motion being made
by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Thacker, and adopted by the following ~ecorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Chairman