1970-12-17317
A regular meeting of the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held at the Office Building of said County on the 17th day of
December, 1970 ·
Present: Nessrs. E. N. Garnett, Joseph E. Gibson, F. E. Paulett, Gordon
L. ~neeler, Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. and l~. A. Yancey.
Absent: None.
Officers present: County Executive and County Attorney. (~r. Clyde Gould-
man sat in for Nr. D. B. Narshall for the morning session.)
The meeting opened with the Lord's Prayer led by Nr. Garnett.
Ninutes of the meetings of November 19 and December 8, 1970, were approved
as submitted on motion by Nr. Paulett, seconded by Nr. Wood, unanimously carried.
At the request of Nr. B. G. Warner, Besident Highway Engineer, the following
resolution was offered by ~r. Hood, seconded by Nr. Yancey, and unanimously
adopted:
~AS, certain changes have resulted in the Secondary System
due to relocation and construction of Interstate 64; and
~EAS, it has been determined that no public hearing will be
necessary in this instance due to the fact that property owners in-
volved have access to the new locations and/or own the property ~
both sides of the old location;
NOW, THEBE~, BE IT BESOLVED by the Board of County Super-
visors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following changes in
the Secondary System be and the same are hereby approved, each
section listed being indicated on sketch presented to this meeting
with letter from B. G. Warner, Besident Engineer, dated November 23,
1970, and made a part of this Board's permanent file:
Section 1 - To be abandoned (0.22 mi. )
Section 2 - To be abandoned (0.1 5 mi.)
Section 3 - To be abandoned (0.28 mi.)
Section 4 - To be abandoned (0.69 mi.)
Section 5 - To be added to secondary system (0.28 mi.)
Section 6 - To be added to secondary system (0.38 mi.)
Section 7 - To be added to secondary system (0.?~ mi.)
BE IT F~RTEER EESOLVED that copy of this resolution be forwarded
to the Virginia Department of Highways.
Nr. l~. G. Warner submitted for information Operational and Fiscal S~mmary
for Albemarle County for the fiscal year 1969-70 and copies were distributed to
each Board member.
Nr. Steve Amato, attorney for Dettor, Edwards and ~orris, Inc., appeared and
reviewed plans of said corporation for construction of new facilities and re-
qm~st for funds for industrial access to said facilities. A~ter discussion, the
following resolution was offered by Nr. Wood, se~onded by Nr. Yancey, and unani-
mously adopted:
WHEREAS, request has been received from Dettor, Edwards, and
~orris, Inc. for improvements under Industrial Access Law and a
representative of said Corporation has appeared at this meeting
and reviewed plans for such improvements; and
~HERE~S, it is the opinion of this Board that improvements
as requested are needed due to the need for relocating said Cor,
poration and construction of new facilities;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Super-
visors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department
of Highways be and is hereby requested to allocate Industrial Ac-
cess Funds for the following:
At the intersection of State Route 676 and U. S. Route 2~0
erect and maintain signs indicating industrial intersection
with blinking caution lights and a posted reduction of speed
on U. S. Route 250 of 45 miles an hour at the aforementioned
inter section.
e
Improve and repair the right hand turn lane on U. S. Route
2~0 driving East at its intersection of State Route 676.
3. Improve and widen existing road surfa~ on State Route 676.
Construct a right hand turn lane on State Route 676 at its
i~tersection with State Route 738.
Improve and widen State Route 738 from the Southwest corner
of the intersection of State RoUte 738 and State Route 676
proceeding East on State Route 738 to the furthermost property
line of the Corporation's property.
Remove the dangerous curve which, if proceeding West on State
Route 738, endangers intersection traffic proceeding from
State Route 676 on to State Route 738.
Nr. Paulett advised Mr. Warner that there is still about one mile of Route
719 near Schuyler which has not been paved and questioned schedule regarding
this stretch of road.
-~ ~LN~. Wood advised that the intersection of Peyton Drive with Route 29 North
is becoming more dangerous all the time and that accidents occurring on the
south lane at this location point to the need for something to be done. Mr.
'Warner stated that a study made of this location does not show that signaliza-
tion is warranted. Mr. Wood stated that in view of this the Board should be
most careful in approving any zoning requests involving high density in this
area.
Mr. Wood also called attention to the increasing number of accidents on
Rio Road. Er. 'Walter Norrison, Deputy Sheriff, gave accident report on this
particular road advising that a large percentage of the accident investigations
which he has worked are on this road. Mr. Warner stated that his department is
aware of the importance of the situation but that all improvements cannot be
made when needed. Nr. Gibson suggested the possibility of reducing the speed
limit to 2~ ~PH and/or 'making this road one-way during peak traffic hours. Mr.
Warner advised that his office had encountered ~Lifficulty in getting the speed
limit lowered to 3~ NPH. After considerable discussion, the following resolu-
tion was offered by Nr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Wheeler, and unanimously adopted:
'~AS, this Board is deeply concerned about the increasing
number of accidents occurring on Rio Road (Route 631) from its
319
intersection with Route 29 North to Park Street and feels that
immediate steps should be taken to correct~the dangerous and
hazardous conditions existing on this road;
NOW, TNEREFOBE, BE IT BESOL _V~TO~ by the Board of County
Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the State De-
partment of Highways be and is hereby requested to proceed
without delay on its Master Plan for this area and to review
traffic s~udy with regard to current speed limit on the afore-
mentioned section of Route 631.
In s,uswer to inquiry by Mr. Wheeler, Mr. Warner advised that negotiations
have been started by the Highway Department with regard to Route 640 to Ameri-
can Telephone and Telegraph Company.
Mrs. E~izabeth Rosenblum advised Mr. ~Warner that a center line or side line
on l~oute ?43 beyond the reservoir bridge would be of great help in foggy weather.
Mr. Clarence McOlure, Superintendent of Schools, appeared and advised that
the School Board wished authority to purchase school buses early. He advised
that the app?oximate cost would be $12~,000.00 and that this amount would not be
expended in the current fiscal year. However, due to the late delivery this year,
it was felt that buses should be ordered earlier in the year. On motion by Mr.
Wood, seconded by Mr. Wheeler, unanimously carried, the School Board was granted
permission to proceed with early order for school buses. Mr. McClure also re-
quested permission to give architects' the "go ahead" on preliminary plans for an
elementary school to be located north of Charlottesville and asked that the Chair-
man appoint a committee from this Board to work with the County Planner and the
School Board on selection of a site for said school. On motion by Mr. Wood,
seconded by Mr. Wheeler, unanimously carried, the Chairman was authorized to
appoint a site selection committee with instructions to set a time table For
September, 1972. The Chairman appointed Mr. 'V~eeler, Mr. Wood and Mr. Humphrey
to this committee.
Mr. Richard F. Pietsch and several other citizens from the Crozet area ap-
peared and presented petition requesting this Board to forego any plans to
develop the proposed recreation area at the Mint Spring Valley site. Er. Pietsch
stated that there was widespread feeling of people in the area that this is an
unnecessary and frivolous expenditure of funds and he Feels the majority of the
people in the area are against it. Mr. Garnett advised those present that all
people in the community will be given an opportunity to have all facts before the
project is begun.
At 10:00 A.M. the Chairman called for public hearing on Zoning requests as
advertised in the Daily Progress on November 27, December 4 and December 11,
1970, as follows:
32O
(1) 'Z~P-144 - Application of H. E. Brown and Others to rezone 20.0 acres located
on Route 70~ ) miles south of Charlottesville from A-1 Agricultural to
Re sidential.
Nr. Humphrey advised that the staff and the Planning Commission recommended
denial of the application. Mr. Brown and other oWners were present in support
of the application. Nr. Carl Dorman appeared in opposition advising that petition
had been submitted to the Planning Commission containing some 38 signatures of
residents in the area who were opposed to the zoning change. Mr. Brown advised
that some residents in the area supported his request. ~otion was offered by
Yancey, seconded by Mr. Wood, to grant the petition as requested. Mr. Gibson
stated that where the Planning Commission has unanimously recommended denial on
two occasions, their recommendation should receive very serious consideration.
The County Executive stated that growth should be guided to those areas where
water and sewer .facilities are planned. He also stated that the.Easter Plan is
near. Nr. 'Wheeler requested roll call vote on Mr. Yancey's Notion, which follows:
Ayes - Nessrs. Yancey and Wood. Nays - Nessrs. Garnett, Gibson, Paulett and Wheeler.
(2) ~Z~P-14~ - AppliCation of Investments Diversified, Inc. to rezone 0.86 acres
located on Route 743 from B-1 Business to B*3 Residential.
Mr. Humphrey advised that the staff and Planning Commission recommended approval.
Mr. George Gilmer appeared in support of the application. No one appeared in o~-
position. On motion by Mr. 'Wheeler, seconded by Mr. Gibson, unanimously carried,
the recommendation of the Planning Commission was accepted.
(3) ZMP-146 - Application of Knox Turnbull to rezone 10.1 acres from A-1
Agricultural to B-1 BusinesS. Property located on Route 616.
(Mr. Wheeler asked that the record show that he did not participate in the dis-
in the sale
cussion or vote on this application since his company was involved/of $2 subject
property. ) Mr. Earl Sowers appeared on behalf of the applicant. No one appeared
in opposition. Mr. Humphrey advised that the Planning Con,mission recommended
approval of only .6 acre (said parcel being triangular in shape in plat sub-
mitred) at this time.On motion by Nr. Gibson, seconded by Nr. "Wood, the recom-
mendation of the Planning Commission was accepted.
(4) ZMP-148 - Resolution of i~tent of the Board of Supervisors to amend the
Zoning Nap to rezone 220.74 acres from Industrial, Limited N-1 to Research
and Technical N&uufacturing District R-TM. Property located in northwest
quadrant of interchange of Route 637 and 1-64, owned by O. J. Langford
and Robert F. Howard; G.E. contract purchaser.
Mr. Humphrey advised that the Planning Commission held public hearing in accor-
dance with this Board's request and agreed with the resolution of intent to
rezone the subject property and amend the Zo~ng Map. No one appeared with
regard to this matter. On motion by Mr. Wheeler, seconded by Mr. Yancey, and
unanimously carried, it was ordered that 220.74 acres above described be re-
zoned to Research and Technical Manufacturing 1~istrict R-TM.
:321
(5) 'ZNP-143 - Application of David G. Campbell to rezone 10.23 acres located
0.7~ ~Ale north of Rivanna Reservoir on t~oute 643 from A-1 Agricultural
to ~-1 ~anufacturing. (Deferred from November meeting.)
Communication was received from the l~esident Highway Engineer advising that a.u
influx of large vehicles to a~nd from an industry could pose a traffic problem
with regard to safety on Route 643 and that the proposed facility would not
qualifY for industrial access Ikmds since Stackhouse, Inc. (the contract pur-
chaser) is not an industry as such. Ar. Forbes Riback, attorney, and ~r.
Bullord appeared on behalf of Stackhouse, Inc. Ar. Wheeler stated that he had
received a number of calls from citizens who were opposed to the rezonin~ request
but could not be present today. Ars. Rosenblum voiced opposition as did Ars.
Hugh Wolfrey who stated she represented the Broadus Wood P.T.A. Ar. Stackhouse
was present and advised that he is willing not to use this property if complaints
are justified. Ar. Wheeler stated that he had followed a school bus on Route 643_
and moved that the application be denied which motion was seconded by Ar. Gibson.
Ar. Gibson and Ar. Wood both stated that they had traveled this road and feel
that it is dangerous. The motion carried unanimously.
The following resolution, prepared by the County Attorney on request Of this
Board, was offered by Ar. Gibson, seconded by Ar. Wheeler, and unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, Ar. James E. Bowen has recently announced his intention
to retire from the position of City Aanager of Charlottesville which
he ha~ held for many years; and
~V~REAS, the members of this Board and the other officials of
Albemarle County have had the opportunity to become well acquainted
with Jim Bowen, working harmoniously with him when the interests of
the County and City were not opposed, and contending sharply with him
when those interests were opposed; and
~AS, we believe that Jim Bowen is due some recognition for
his long and devoted service, not only to the City of Charlottesville
and its citizens, but also to this entire community;
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED that Jim Bowen will be sorely
missed by all of us after he retires; we will miss him as a capable
partner in the many joint ventures which this County and the City have
undertaken, and we will also miss him as a formidable adversary with
whom we have contended sharply, but without personal bitterness; and
BE IT F~RTMER RESOLVED that all of the members of this Board
sincerely hope that Jim Bowen may enjoy many happy ~ears of leisure
in retirement, and that his eyes may hereafter feast upon the bea~y
of Albemarle County unaffected by any consideration of its territory
as a potential area for extension of municipal services and annexation°
322:
The following resolution was received from the Albemarle County Planning
Commission:
"WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Planning Commission is preparing
a Comprehensive Plan for future development for Albemarle County;
"~HEREAS, the Planning Commission has established certain Land
Use Objectives to arrive at the future development; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the element re-
lating to public sewer and water to serve those land use objectives;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Consultant in charge of the Land Use Ob-
jectives for the year 2000 and the Engineering Consultant charged
with the development of a sanitary sewer program have coordinated
and considered their individual efforts under the review of the Plan-
ning Commission;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Com-
mission hereby endorses the regional approach in providing public
sewer, as presented by McNair, Simmons-and Cline, Consultant Engineers,
and hereby recommends to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that
said Regional Sewer Plan be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan
of Development."
On motion by Nr. Gibson, seconded by Nr. Wood, and unanimously carried, the
recommendation of the Planning Commission was approved.
The following resolution was also received from the County's Planning Corn-
mission:
"'WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Planning Commission has recommended
a Major Thoroughfare Plan for the urban area of Albemarle County, as
prepared by the Virginia Department of Highways; and
'WHEREAS, said.plan was adopted by the Albemarle County Planning
Commission on May 6, 1968; and by the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors on May 16, 1968; and
WEERF~&S, said plan is now a part of the County Comprehensive Plan
as well as the City of Charlottesville Comprehensive Plan; and
~tEREAS, under Article 1~.1-4~6 of the Virginia State Code "Legal
Status Plan", such an adopted plan shall "conbrol the general or approxi-
mate location, character and extent of each feature shown on the plan",
including streets; and
'WHEREAS, there is the requirement, of approval of the location of
any facility involving a feature of said plan; and
WHEREAS, the location of a United States Postal Trucking Terminal
is proposed to conflict with the adopted County and City Major Thorough-
fare Plan; and
WMEREAS, no public hearing has been held fry each governmental body
on the proposals;
BE IT T~REFORE RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Com-
mission has on this date, condemned the location of subject facility as
being a violation of the adopted plan and in violation C the State Law
governing the location of facilities in conflict with said plan and
recommend to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that the plan as
adopted not be violated without due process of law."
The following resolution, drafted by the County Attorney at the request of this
Board, was offered by Nr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Gibson, and unanimously adopted:
WNEREAS, this Board has learned that the U. S. Post Office Depart-
merit has negotiated for acquisition of a tract of land located in the
City of Charlottesville but fronting on U. $. Highway 29 in Albemarle
County at a price of approximately $7~,000.00 per acre; and
32 3
~WEEREAS, according to the information available to this Board,
the Post Office Department plans to use this land as a location for
a large-scale trucking and storage operation designed to facilitate~
distribution of mail; and
~S, location of such a facility at the proposed site would
not conform with the ~aster Plan for Albemarle County presently
being developed by the County Planning Department; and
~qEAS, the decision to locate this facility was apparently
made without any regard for and conflicts with Eajor Thoroughfare
Plan recently prepared by the Virginia State Highway Department and
adopted by this Board and by the City Council of Charlotteswille; and
~EAS, the Albemarle County Planning Commission has adopted and
forwarded to this Board its resolution condemning the plan to locate
this facility at the proposed location;
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That this Board concurs wholeheartedly in the resolution of
the Albemarle County Planning Commission.
2. That this Board deplores the action of the U. S. Post Office
Department in proposing, to locate its facility without consultation
with the planning officials of Albemarle County and without regard
and in conflict with the County's Comprehensive Plan and t~ e State
Highway Department's Najor Thoroughfare Plan.
3. That the appropriate officials of the Post Office Department
and the City of Charlottesville be requested to consult with the
County Planner and this Board before approving any plan to permit
location of the proposed facility.
4. That the purported price of $75,000.00 per acre~ for said
land is grossly exorbitant for land in Albemarle County to be used
for the intended purpose and should be closely examined by all Federal
officials charged with the duty of conserving the taxpayers' money.
5. That copies of this resolution shall be sent to the Nayor of
Charlottesville, the Postmaster General of the Unified States, the
Secretary of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urbs~ Development,
Congressman John 0. ,~arsh, Congressmau-elect Kenneth l~obinson, Senator
Harry F. Byrd, Jr. and Senator William B. Spong.
Statements of expenses for the Department of Finance, the Sheriff's Office,
and the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney were submitted for the month of
November, 1970. On motion by Nr. Wood, seconded by Nr. Yancey, these statements
were unanimously approved.
3 24
Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance of the County Jail was
submitted along with summary statement of prisoner days for the month of Novem-
ber, 1970. On motion by Nr. Wheeler, seconded by Nr. Paulett, these statements
were unanimously approved.
Claim of the Jail Physician was submitted for ~e month of November, 1970,
in the amount of $28.00, of which two-thirds is reimbursable by the State. On
motion by Nr. Wheeler, seconded by Nr. Wood, this claim was approved for payment.
I~eports of the Department of Public Welfare were submitted for the month of
November, '1~970, in accordance with Sections 63-67.1 and 63-67.2 of the Code of
Virginia.
Claim was received From the University of Virginia Hospital in the amount of
$1,329.~4 for hospitalization of indigent patients under ELH for the month of
December, 1970. On motion by Nr. Wood, seconded by Nr. Yancey, this claim was
approved for payment.
S.L.H. report for the months of October and November, 1970, was received from
Dr. George ~oore, Joint Health Director.
Nr. D. B. ~arshall advised that he had prepared deed conveying property to
the State Community College Board, reserving easement as requested by the City to
construct, install and operate water, gas and sewer lines to the college. As re-
quested by Nr. ~arshall, the following resolution was offered by ~. Gibson,
seconded by Nr. Wood, and adopted: (lit. Paulett voted against the resolution
stating opposition to the site selected for location of the college.)
~AS, D. B. l~arshall, County Attorney, has this day submitted
deed conveying 97.43 acres, located a short distance south of the
City of Charlottesville and immediately south of Interstate 64, From
the City Of Charlottesville and ~he County of Albemarle to the Common-
wealth of VirgJ~nia (State Board for Community Colleges);
NOW, TtlEP~E~, BE IT t{ESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, that said deed be and the same is hereby
approved and E. N. Garnett, Chairman, is hereby authorized to execute
said deed on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, and June T. ~oon,
Clerk, is authorized to affix and attest its official seal.
Two easements were received From the Virginia Telephone and Telegraph Com-
pany for proposed underground facilities to be located on property owned by the
County on Route 641 between l~oute 29 North and Burnley, Virginia. On motion by
~r. Gibson, seconded by Nr. Yancey and unanimously carried, the Chairman was
authorized to execute these easements on behalf of this Board.
Nr. John Humphrey advised that Dr. John B. Lange had offered to donate to
the County a tract of land located on Interstate 64 to be used For recreation or
open space and recommended that the offer be accepted. On motion by Nr. Yancey,
325
r-
seconded by Nr. Wood and unanimously carried, the offer of Dr. Lange was ac-
cepted and the Clerk was directed to write letter of appreciation to Dr. Lange.
At 1:50 P.~. the Chairman called for public hearing on Zoning requests as
advertised in the Daily Prosress on November 27, December 4 and December 11,
1970, as follows:
(1) SP-76 - Application of Stanford C. Fuller to locate three mobile homes
permanently in an A-1 Agricultural zone, property containing ~8.82 acres
and located on Route 79~.
Nr. Fuller appeared in support of his request. No one appeared in opposition.
Nr. Humphrey advised that Nr. Fuller had amended his request to include only
one mobile home rather than three and that the Planning Commission recommended
the ~mended request subject to septic system approval by the Health Department
and location of the mobile home being approximately ~00 feet from Route 79~.
On motion by Nr. 'Wood, seconded by Nr. Yancey, the recommendation of the Plan-
ning Commission was unanimously accepted.
(2) ~-79 ~ Application of S. L. Williamson Co. to locate a sand and gravel
oper~ation in an A-1 ,Agricultural zone on 77.7 acres located on 01d Route
20 (Stony Point Road~.
Communication was presented from the S. L. Williamson Co., Inc. requesting that
it be allowed to withdraw its application without prejudice and would prefer
that this withdraw~Vrequest be granted in the form of a continuance for the
next ninety days. The letter further stated that during such time, it is hoped
that the City will have received definite and final word from State and Federal
authorities concerning approval or disapproval of proposed park near the subject
location. A~ter discussion with representative of the applicant, motion was
offered by Nr. Wheeler, seconded by Nr. Paulett and unanimously carried, defer-
ing this application until the regular February meeting.
(3) EP-80 - Application of-~ade H. Pritchett to locate a permanent mobile home
in an A-1 Agricultural zone on 2.886 acres located on Route 600, east of
Route 29 north.
Nr. Pritchett appeared in support of his request. No one appeared in opposition.
Nr. HumpP~ey advised that the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to
a 70 foot setback from Route 600 and Health Department approval for a septic
field. On motion by Nr. Paulett, seconded by Nr. Wheeler and unanimously carried,
the recommendation of the P~anning Commission was accepted.
(4) S~-81 - Application of Lawrence Dillard to locate a permanent mobile homein
an A-1 Agricultural zone on 12.0 acres located off Route 723.
Nr. Dillard was present. No one appeared in opposition. Nr. Humphrey advised
that this mobile home was sold to the applicant apparently in violation of the
County Zoning Ordinance by Nell's Trailer Sales of Harrisonburg. However, the
Planning Commission recommended approval subject to a minimum setback of 100 feet
from Route 723 and H~ealth Department approval for septic field. On motion by N~r.
Wood, seconded by Nr. Yancey, and unanimously carried, the recommendation of the
Planning Commission was accepted.
(5) EP-82 - Application of Robert. L. Hunt to locate a permanent mobile home in
an A-1 Agricultural zone on Route 29 South, property containing 5.54 acres.
Nr. Hunt was present. No one appeared in opposition. Nr. Humphrey reported that
the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to a 50 foot setback i~om
the rights of way of relocated Route 29 a~d old Route 29 and subject to a septic
field approved by the Health Department. He further advised, however, that his
staff had since viewed the property an& due to relocation of Route 29 he would
recommend a minimum setback of only 30 feet. After discussion, motion was of-
feted by Er. Yancey, seconded by Nr. Wood, to refer this application back to the
Planning Commission in view of this additional information. This motion failed
to carry by a three to two vote. ~otion was made by Nr. Gibson, seconded by Er.
Wood, to appr~Vet~he~app.~cation. This motion was unanimously adopted.
(6) ~EP-8~ - Application of Corrine Allen to locate a permanent mobile home in an
A-1 Agricultural zone on 1 55.38 acres located on Route 722.
~rs. Allen was present. No one appeared in opposition. Nr. Humphrey reported
that the Planning Commission recommended approval subject to the following con-
ditions: (1) that there be a minimum setback of 100 feet from Route 722, (2)
approval of a septic field by the Health Department and (3) that the pezm~it
remain in effect as long as ~Er~. Allen is a lessee of the property. On motion by
Er. 'Wood, seconded by Rrm. Gibson, the recommendation of the Planning Commission
was~ accepted. (Nr. Yancey did not vote ~on this application since he is o~ner of
the property involved. )
(7) ~-84 - Application of Blue Ridge Grocery Co., Inc. to locate wholesaling of
food products on Route 250 East near intersection with Route 20, property
containing 5.12 acres. '
Er. Sheffield appeared in support of the application. No one appeared in opposi-
tion. Er. Humphrey advised that the Planning Con,mission recommended approval
subject to r~view a~ter a two-year period with the objective of reviewing the
off-street parking in connection with the activity for possible additions to the
parking area. The Board gave considerable discussion to access from Route 250
and possible hazards to traffic at this location and it was their feeling that
this should be reviewed at the end of one year. On motion by Nr. Wheeler, seconded
by Er. Wood and ~uuanimously carried, the recommendation of the Planning Commission
was accepted with the time for review being changed to one year rather than two.
(8) ~P-85 - Application of Noah J. Robinson to locate a permanent mobile home i~
in A-1 Agricultural zone on 5.0 acres located on Route 53 in the Rose Hill
Community.
Nr. l~obinson appeared in support of his application. No one appeared in opposi-
tion. Er. Humphrey reported that the Planning Commission recommended approval
subject to 100 foot setback from the end of Route 729 and approval of a septic
field by the Health Depar~ment; On motion by Er. Paulett, seconded by Nr. Wheeler
and unanimously carried, the recommendation of the Pl~ning Commission was accepted.
327
(9) ~-86 - Application of Elizabeth Sweeney to locate a mobile home in an A-1
Agricultural zone on ~74.9~ acres located on Route 53.
Nr. and Nfs. Sweeney appeared_:in support of the application. Nr. Dave Wood,
attorney, appeared for Nr. Earl Nartin and Nfs. Paul Thomas, in opposition. Nfs.
Joyce Lively also appeared in opposition. Nr. Humphrey reported that the Plan-
ning Commission recommended denial and that the existing trailer be removed
within 30 days of action by the Board of Supervisors. After lengthy discussion,
motion was offered by Nr. Gibson, seconded by Nr. Wood and passed, to deny the
request and allowing two weeks to move the trailer dov~z the hill and out of view
on the Sweeney property. Nr. Paulett and Nr. Wheeler voted against the motion.
(!0) ~P-87 - Application of Walter Goins to locate a permanent mobile home in an
A-1 A~pficultural zone on property containing 28.0 acres and located on
l~oute ~10 beyond ~t. Fair.
Nr. Humphrey advised that the Planning Commission recommended approval subject
to a ~0 foot setback from Route 810 and Health Department approval of a septic
field. Nr. Goins was present and requested that he be permitted to locate this
trailer at another location o~ the same parcel oF land. On motion by Nr. ~o~o.~,
seconded by Nr. yancey, unanimously carried, this request was E~anted subject
to approval oF the new location| by the Zoning ~x~ninistrator.
Nr. Dave ~Wood submitted plat showing dedication of streets and division .of the
ands of David J. 'Wood, Jr., ~tals, R. C. Ninor Estate and the Albemarle CountY
School Board situated northeast of Charlottesville and off of l~oute ?43. On
motion by Er. Yancey, seconded by Er. Wood, and unanimously adopted, this plat
was approved subject to concurrence by the Cour~r and City Planning Commissions.
At 3:00 P.~. the Chairman called for further consideration of the Sign
Ordinance which was deferred from the last regular meeting. Nr. Garnett advised
that a joint committee from this Board and the Planning Commission had held work
sessions since the last public hearing and called on Er. Gibson for report of such
committee. Nr. Gibson reviewed three basi~ amendments to the ~mended ordinance
as submitted at the last meeting which his committee recommended. He further
recommended that the ordinance be effective immediately iF approved. Several
interested citizens were also
~heeler, seconded by Er. Wood,
amended Sign Ordinance, inclu&
l~epeal.'
Adopt:
A-1 Agricultural Sect:
A- 1 Agricultural:
.~eard. After discussion, motion was offered by Er.
and unanimously carried, to adopt the proposed
hug amendments suggested by the committee, as follows:
EIGNS PER~IT~
Lons 2-1-3, 2-1-4, 2-1-8 , ~ 2-1-1~, and 2-1-24 (11).
As
BUSINESS SIGNS. (Free Standing or Projecting Signs):
Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing, blinking, c.olor-changin
or. exposed, bare o~ uncovered neon mllum~natzon or lmght~ng; (b) the aggre-
gate area of such signs s~all not exceed 100 square feet; lc) no portion of
such sign shall be greater than thirty (30) feet from ground level or the
eav.e 1.ine 9f the ~roof of the main build~.'ng.19c.ated on the premises ~upon which
s.ucn~.smgn .~s erecved, whichever is grea~er, ~d) no more than two (2) free
s~anmzng s~gns on any one lot or premises; (e) no more than three (3)
projecting signs.
32'8:
BUSINESS SIGNS - Wall: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing,
blinking, color changing, or exposed, bare or uncovered neon illumination
or lighting; lcbt the aggregate area of all such signs shallnot exceed 100
square feet; no portion of such sign shall be greater than 30 feet from
ground level or the eave line of the roof of the main building located on
the premises upon which such sign is erected, whichever is greater.
HO~E OCCUPATION SIGNS: If illuminated, no flashing, blinking, color-
changing or neon lighting.
LOCATION SIGNS: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing,
blinking, or color-changing or neon illumination or lightin, g: (b) the area
of the sign shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet, (c) no portion
of the sign shall be greater than thirty (30) feet from ground level; (d)
no mor. e than six (6) .such signs directing attention to any one (1) estab-
lishment is permitted, and (e) provided further that no such sign shall be
closer to another~'.such sign than 1500 feet on the smme side of a right of
way.
E. DIRECTIONAL SIG~S: Provided:
them the same name.
(a) no more than four (4) such signs have on
F. TENPOBARY DIRECTIONAL SIGNS.
Ge
IDENTIFIC~Z~ION SIGNS: Provided: (a) nOt more than four (4) square feet
in area; (b) not more than two (2) on any lot or premises.
T~PO~Y EVENT SIGNS: Provided: (.a)~ not more than sixteen (~6) square
feet in area; (b) not more than two~2) on any lot or premises.
SALE 0B RENTAL SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than sixteen (16) square
feet in area unless the sign be more than 600 feet from a public road, in
which event such si.gn m.ay be as much as, but no greater than, sixty (60)
square feet in area, (b) n.ot more than one (1) on any lot or premises un-
less the same be fifty (50) acres in area or more and have frontage on two
or more public roads, in which event, one (1) sign may be erected for each
road on which such lot or premises has frontage.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-t~o' (32) square feet
in area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
K. PUBLIC SIGNS.
L. SUBDIVISION SIGNS.
HUNTING, FISHING OR TRESPASSING SIGNS.
N. POLITICAL SIGNS.
Repeal: l{S-1 Residential: Sections 2A-1-2, 2A-1-3, 2A-1-5.
Adopt: t{S-1 Eesidential:
A. TENPOR.~RY DIRECTIONAL SIGNS:
IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Provided: la) not more than two (2) square feet in
area; and (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises·
Ce
TENPORARY EVENT SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than four (4) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
SALE 0t{ P~WNTAL SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than four (4) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
E. POLITICAL SIGNS, PUBLIC SIGNS ~ND NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING AND FISHING SIGNS.
F. SUBDIVISION SIGNS.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one(1) on any lot or premises.
t{epeat: t{-1 Residential - Sections 3-1-2, 3-1-3, 3-1-5.
Adopt: 1{-1 Residential:
A. TE~PORAI{Y DIRECTIONAL SIGNS.
IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than two (2)
area; and (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
square feet in
329
TENPORARY EVENT SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than four (4) square feet
in area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
SALE OR RENTAL SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than four (4) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
E. POLITICAL SIGNS, PUBLIC SIGNS AND NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING, FISHING SIGNS.
F. SUBDIVI S~ION SIGNS.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one(1) on any lot or premises.
Repeal: R-2 Residential- Sections 4-1-2, 4-1-3, 4-1-5.
Adopt: R-2 Residential:
A. T~POILARY DIRECTIONAL SIGNS.
Be
IDENTIFICATION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than two (2) square feet in
area; and (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
~0RARY EVENT SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than four (4) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
SALE OR BENTAL S~GNS: Provided: (a) not more than four (4) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one (1) on any lot or premises.
E. POLITICAL SIGNS, PUBLIC SIGNS AND NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING, FISHING SIGN'S.
F. SUBDIVISION SIGNS.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided:
area; (b) notmore than one
(a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
(1) on any lot or premises.
Repeal: R-3 Residential- Sections ~-1-2, ~-1-3, ~-1-~, 5-1-9.
Adopt: R-3 Residential:
BUSINESS SIGNS: Limited to wall signs with an aggregate area not to exceed
twenty (20) ~iuare feet. If illuminated, no flashing, blinking or color-
changing or exposed, bare or uncovered neon illumination or lighting.
feet in area; (b) not more than 1) on any lot or premises; no
illumination permitted.
H0~E OCCUPATION SIGNS: If illuminated, no flashing, blinking, color-
changing or neon illumination or lighting.
DIRECTIONAL SIGNS: If illuminated, no flashing, blinking, color-changing
or neon illumination or lighting.
E. ID~IFICATION SIGNS. Same as R-2.
F. ~PORARY DIRECTIONAL SIGNS.
G. TEMPORARY EVENT SIGNS. Same as R-2.
POLITICAL, PUBLIC AND NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING AND FISHING SIGNS.
SUHDIVI SION SIGNS.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet
in area; (b) not more Shan one (1) on any lot or premises.
Repeal: B-1 Business- Section 6-1-6.
Adopt: B-1 Business:
BUSINESS SIGNS. (Free Standing or Projecting Signs): Provided: (a) if
iiluminated, no moving, flashing, blinking, color-changing or exposed, bare
or uncovered neon illumination or lighting; (b) the aggregate area of such
signs shall hot~exceed l~'00~square feet; (c~ no portion of such sign shall be
greater than thirty (30) feet from ground level or the eave line of the
roof of the main building located on the premises upon which such sign is
erected, whichever is greater; (d) no more than two (2) free standing signs
on any one lot or premises; (e) no more than three (3) projecting signs.
Be
BUSI~ESS 'SIGNS_..- Wall: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing,
blinking, color changing or exposed, bare or uncovered neon illumination,
or lighting; lcbt the aggregate areaoF all such signs shall not exceed 200-
square feet; no portion of such sign sh~tl be greater than 30 Feet from
ground level or the eave line of the roof of the main buil. ding located on
the premises upon which such sign is erected, whichever is greater.
~ GE RENTAL SIGNS: Provided: not more than two (2) signs with an ag-
gregate area of 64 square feet and limited to 16 feet in height.
D. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. Same as
E. TEMPORARY EVENT SIGNS~ Same as A-1.
PI[BLIC, NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING, FISHING, AND POLITICAL SIGNS.
LOCATION SIGNS: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing, blink-
ing or color-changing or neon ill~mination~or lighti, nM; lb) the area of the
sign shall not exceed one hundred ! 109) square feet, lc) no po. rtion of the
sign shall be greater than thirty (301 feet from ground level, (d) no ~ore
than six (6) .such signs directing attention to any one (1) establishment
are permitted, and (e) provided further that no such sign shall be closer
to another such sign than 1~00 feet on the same side of a right of way.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one(1) on any lot or premises.
Repeal: M-1 Manufacturing - Section 7-1-6.
Adopt: M- 1 Manufacturing:
BUSINESS SIGNS: Free Standing or Projecting Signs: Provided: (a) if il-
luminated, no moving, flashing, blinking,, cglor-changing or exposed, bare or
uncovered neon illumination or lighting; (~b) the aggregate area of such
signs shall not exceed 100 square feet; (c) no portion of such sign shall be
greater than thirty (30) feet from ground level or the eave line of the roof
of the main building located on the premises upon which such sign is erected,
whichever is greater; (~d) no more than two (2) free standing signs on any
one lot or premises; (e) no more than three (3) projecting signs.
BUSINESS SIGNS - Wall: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing,
blinking, color changing, or exposed, bare or uncovered neon illumination,
or lighting; I~t the aggregate area of ail such signs shall not exceed ~00
square feet; no-portion of such sign shall be greater than 30 Feet from
ground level or the eave line of the roof of the main building located on
the premises upon which such sign is erected, whichever is greater.
SALE 0R~AL SIGNS: Provided: not more than two (2) signs withan aggre-
gate area of 64 square Feet and limited to 16 feet in height.
D. DIBECTION~ SIGNS. Same as A-1.
E. TEMPORARY EVENT SIGNS. Same as A- 1.
F. PUBLIC, NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING, FIEHING A~iD POLITICAL SIGNS.
G~
LOCATI.0N SIGNS: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing, blink-
ing or color-changing or neon illumination or lighti, nM; lb) the area of the
sign shall not exceed one hundred l l0p) square Feet, lc) no portion, o? the
sign shall be grea~er than thirty ~30) feet from the grotmd .leyel; (d) no
more than six (6) ~uch sig~ s directing attention to any one (1) establish-
ment are permitted, and (e) provided, further that no such sign shall be
closer to another such sign than 1500 Feet on the same side of a right of way.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one(i) on any lot or premises.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
area; (b) not more than one(1) on any lot or premises.
l~epeal: M-2 Manufacturing - Section 8-1-~.
Adopt: ~-2 Manufacturing:
A®
BUSINESS SIGNS Free Standing or Projecting Signs: Provided: (a) if il-
luminated, no moving, flashing, blinking, color-changing or exposed, bare or
uncovered neon illumination or lighting; (b) the aggregate area of such
signs shall not exceed 100 square feet; (c) no portion of such sign shall
be greater than thirty (30) Feet from ground level or the .ave line of the
331
roof of the main building located on the premises upon which such sign is
erected, whichever is greater; (d) no more than two (2) free standing
signs on any one lot or premises; ,(e) no more than three (3) projecting
signs.
BUSINESS SIGNS - Wall: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no moving, flashing,
blinking, color'Jchanging, or exposed, bare or umovered neon illumination,
or lighting; (b) the aggregate area of all such signs shall not exceed 300
square feet;( c) no portion of such sign shall be greater than 30 feet from
ground level or the eave line of the roof of the main building located on
the premdses upon which such sign is erected, whichever is greater.
S&T~ OR RENTAL SIGNS: Provided: not more than two (2) signs with an ag-
gregate area of 64 square feet and limi~ted to 16 feet in height.
D. DIEECTIONAL SIGNS: Same as A-1.
E. TRu~01KARY EVENT SIGNS: Same as A-1.
F. PUBLIC, NO TRESPASSING, HUNTING, FISHING, AND POLITICAL SIGNS.
LOCATION SIGNS: Provided: (a) if illuminated, no movi. ng,. flashing, blink-
ing or color-changing or neon ill .u$ina~tion or li ~hting,. (b) the area of the
sign shall not exceed one hundred % 109) square feet; (c) no portion of the
sign shall .be greater than thirty [30) feet from ground level; (d) no more
than six (6) .such signs directing attention to any one (.1) establishment
are permitted, and (e) Provided further that no such sign shall be closer
to another such sign than 1%00 feet on the same side of a right of way.
AUCTION SIGNS: Provided: (a) not more than thirty-two (32) square feet in
area; (b) hat more than one(1) on any lot or premises.
SIGN DEFINITIONS
Repeal:
Existing Sections 1%-77, 1%-77-1, 1%-77-2, 15-77-3, 15-77-4, 1%-77-5,
15-78 and 1%-79.
Adopt:
15-77
SIGN: Any display of any letters, words, numerals, figures, devices,
emblems~ pictures, or any parts or combination thereof, by any means
whereby the same are made visible for the purpose of making anything
known, whether such display be made on, attached to, or as a part of
a structure, surface or any other thing, including, but not limited
to, the ground, any rock, tree,or other natural object, which display
is visible beyond the boundaries of the parcel of land on which the
same is made. A display of less than one (1) square foot in area is
excluded from this definition.
15-77-1 SIGN - AREA OF: The area of a sign shall be determined from its out-
side measurements, including any wall work incidental to its decora-
tion, but excluding supports, unless such supports are used to attract
attention. In the case of a sign where lettering appears back-teback,
that is, on opposite sides of the sign, the area shall be considered
to be that of only one face. In the case of an open sign made up of
individual letters, figures, or designs, the area shall be determined
as if such display were made on a sign with straight lines or circular
sides.
15-77-2
SIGN - I!J.U~INATED: A sign, or any part of a sign, which is exter-
nally or internally illuminated or otherwise lishted from a source
specifically intended for the purpose of such illumination or lighting.
15-77-3
SIGN - BUSINESS: A sign either free standLug or.pro~ectin8 or wall,
which directs attention to product(s), commodity(les), and/or service(s)
available on the lot, premises, or farm upon which it is situated.
1
SIGN - HO~E OCCUPATION: A sign not exceeding four (4) square feet in
area directing attention to a service available on the premises, but
which service is clearly a secondary use of the dwelling.
SIGN - GFAVERAL ADVERTISING: A sign which directs attention to a product,
com~nodity, or service not necessarily available on the premises.
15-77-6
SIGN - LOCATION: A sign which directs attention to the approximate
location of an establishment from which the advertised product, ser-
vice or accommodation may be obtained and not situated upon the
premises upon which such establishment is located.
332
1 ~-77-7
SIGN - DIRECTIONAL: A sign '~'one end of which is pointed, on which an
an arrow is painted, or otherwise indicates the direction to which at-
tention is called) not ill~nina~ed, four (4) square feet or less in
area, giving the name only of a person( s), farm, business or other
e st abli shment.
1 ~-77-8--- ~IGN - ~0RARY DIEECTIONz~L: A directional sign erected for a period
of not more than ten (10) days.
1 ~-77-9
SIGN - IDENTIFICATION: A sign which ident[ lies or otherwise describes
the name, ownership or location or the lot or parcel of land upon
which it is situated.
1~-77-10
SIGN - TEEPOBARY EVENT: A sign, not illuminated, describing a seasonal~
brief, or particular event or activity to be or being conducted upon
the lot or premises upon which it is located. Such sign m~ be erected
not more than one month before the event or activity described, shall
be removed within one (1) week of its conclusion, and in no event
shall such sign be displayed for a per:iod longer than six (6) months
in any one calendar year.
5-77-
SIGN - SASE 01~ BENTAL: A sign, not illuminated, which designates all
or portions of the lot or premises upon which it is located to be for
sale or lease. Such signs shall be removed within one (1) week of sale
or lease of the lot or premises upon which it is situated. The letter-
ing or message on any one side of such sign may be different i~om any
other side.
S%GN - ~CTION: A sign, not illuminated, advertising an auction to be
conducted on or of the lot or premises ,up,on which it is situated. Such
signs may be erected not more than one ~ 1) month before the date of the
auction advertised and shall be removed within forty-eight (48) hours
of its conclusion.
SIGN - PUHLIC: A sign owned by and erected at the instance of a Federal,
State or local government agency.
1~-77-14
SIGN -~E~. STANDING: A business sign located upon a lot or parcel of
ground within the required setback area, not attached to the main
building.
SIGN - PROJECTING: A business sign erected, projecting perpendicular-
ly to the building wall surface to which it is attached, no part of
which is more than six (6) feet i~om the wall surface of the building
on which it is erected.
1 ~-77-16
SIGN -SUBDIVISION: A sign, not illuminated, sixty (60) square fee~ 8r
less in aggregate area identiI~ying a subdivision and located thereon at
the entrances to such subdivision. Said sign shall be no greater in
height than six (6) feet and shall be set back from any right of way
to Drovide proper sight distance.
SIGN - HUNTING, FISI~ING 0B TRESPASSING: A sign, not illuminated, one
and one-half (1½) square feet or less in area erected on the apurtenant
premises solely as a warning or notice.
15-77-18
SIGN - POLITICAL: A sign not illuminated, two and one-hale .(2½) square
feet or less in area, presenting a candidate or issue, subject to a
Federal, State or local government plebiscite. Such sign may be
erected not more than one month prior to the date of voting and shall
be removed within 10 days thereafter.
SIGN - WAi~: A business sign erected or painted on a building visible
from the e~rior thereof, no part of which is more than twelve (12)
inches from the surface of the building on which it is erected, such
sign may be illuminated.
Adopt
New article entitled "SIGNS", to read as follows:
BEN_OVAL OF SIGNS: Whenever a sign becomes structurally unsafe or endangers the
safety of a structure or premises or the public, or is erected o~naintained in
violation of this Ordinance, the Zoning Administrator shall order such sign to
be made safe or comply with this Ordinance, as the case may be, or be removed.
Such order shall be sent by registered mail and shall be complied with within
12 days from the date of mailing said order by the person owning or responsible
for the sign. Failure to comply shall constitute grounds for the Zoning Adminis-
trator to have the sign removed, and the cost thereof shal~/oe added to any fine
imposed for violation under this Ordinance.
333
NON-CONF0~NG SIGNS AND DISCONTINUANCE: Any sign lawfully in existance at the
time of the effective date of this Ordinance may be:' maintained although it does
not conform with the provisions of this 0rdinmuce. If any non-conf~ming sign
is destroyed or damaged in any manner, to the extent that the cost of restora-
tion to its condition before the occurrence s~all exceed fifty per cent (50%)
of the cost of reconstructing such sign, it shall be restored only if such use
complies with the requirements of this ordinance.
~qAFFIC HAZARDS: No sign shall be located or illuminated in such a manner as,
in the opinion of the Zoning Administrator, to cause a traffic hazard. 'Where a
permit is required, the permit shall not be issued until the location and il-
lumination, if any, of the sign are approved by the Zoning Administrator, who
may consult with the l~esident Highway Office, Virginia Department of Highways,
to assist him in determining whether a traffic hazard exists.
SIGN PER~ITS: No sign, except auction and temporary event signs, in excess of
five (5) square feet in an area shall be erected without first obtaining a
Sign Permit from the Zoning Administrator. NO such permit shall be issued unless
the proposed sign conforms with the requirements of this Ordinance.
This amended Sign Ordinance shalt;i.be effective immediately.
Nr. Garnett advised that he had received communication from Nr. 'William
A. Perkins, Jr., advising that he did not wish to be re-appointed to the Planning
Commission. ON motion by Nr. Gibson, seconded by Nr. Wheeler, unanimously carried,
the resignation of Er. Perkins was accepted with regret and the Clerk was directed
to express to ~r. Perkins this Board's appreciation for his service. On motion
by Er. Paulett, seconded by Nm. Wheeler, Rt. James C. Sams of Scottsville was
no~huated for appointment to the Planning Commission for a term of four years
and was unanimously approved. It was also pointed out that the term of Nr. John
A. Wright, Jr. had expired and the Clerk was directed to also write letter of
appreciation to Nr. Wright. On motion by Er. Yancey, seconded by Er. Garnett,
Nr. Louis C. Staley of Crozet was nominated for appointment to the Commission for
a term or,bur years. This appointment was unanimously approved.
It was suggested that the membership of the Planning Commission be increased
by one to aid in obtaining a quorum for meetings. On motion by Er. Wheeler,
seconded by Nr. Gibson, unanimously adopted, it was ordered that public not-ice be
given of intent of this Board to amend the Planning Commission Ordinance and..9:~5
A.~. on January 2!, 1971, was set as the time for public hearing on this matte~;
Communication was received from the Auditor of Public Accounts advising that
the bond of the Director of Finance should be increased due to the amount of col-
lections during the past fiscal year. The amount needed as stated in this letter
to cover collections is an increase of $203,637.94. On motion by Nr. Gibson,
seconded by Nr. 'Wood, unanimously adopted, it was ordered that the bond of the
Director of Finance be increased by the stipulated amount.
The County Executive requested cancellation of check #616~, dated November
12, 1970, issued to the Treasurer of Virginia in the amount of $890.33. He ad-
vised that this check ~as issued in error to cover employees insurance and re-
tirement whereas separate checks should have been issued for the two State ac-
counts. On motion by ~r. Wood, seconded by Er Gibson, unanimously adopted,
cancellation of the subject check was authorized.
l~eport was received from the Auditor of Public Accounts on audit of the
office of .~. S. Cooks Sheriff, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1970, and for
the period of July 1, $970 through August 31, 1970, the date of Nr. Cook's re-
tirement.
l~eport was received from Dulaney and Salley on audit of the County's ac-
counts for the Fiscal year ended June 30, 1970.
Claim against the Dog Tax ~hn~d was received from A. G. Fray for 12 hens
killed by dogs. On motion by Nr. Wheeler, seconded by ~r. Yancey, unanimously
carried, Nr. Fray was allowed $i ;~21.5~..:for each of these hens.
The County Executive submitted proposed amendment to the County Code with
reference to license tax on circuses and carnivals as prepared by the County
Attorney. On motion by Er. Wheeler, seconded by Nr. Paulett and unanimously
carried, it was ordered that public notice be given of the Board's intent to
adopt this proposed amendment and 9:45 A.E. on February 18, 1971, was set as
the time for public hearing on same.
On recommendation of ~ae County Planner, Er. Humphrey, the following reso-
lution was offered by Er. Gibson, seconded by Nr. Wheeler, and unanimously
adopted:
BE IT BESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that this Board intends to amend the Albemarle
County Zoning Nap by the rezoning of 97.43 acres, located a short
distance south of the City of Charlottesville, immediately south of
Interstate-64 and being the site For the Community College, from
N-1 Zone to A-1 Zone; and does hereby request the Planning Commis-
sion to hold public hearing and make recommendation to this Board on
said proposed amendment.
The County Executive recommended that County employees be given Christmas
Eve, Dec~mber 24,1970, as a holiday in addition to Christmas Day which is
normally given. He advised that City Hall is observing the two-day holiday
this year. On motion by Er. Wheeler, seconded by Er. Wood, unanimously carried,
the recommendation of the County Executive was approved.
CIaims against the County amounting to $1,668,48~.99 were presented, examined
and allowed, and certified to the Director of Finance For payment and charged
against the Following funds:
General I~evenue Fund
General Operating Fund
School Operating Fund
Virginia Public Assistance Fund
Capital Outlay Fund
Textbook Fund
Dog Tax Fund
1~8.44
8~,213.38
5ffff, ffo3.2~
~2,~91.76
S18;~10.93
666.66
335
Crozet Sanitary District Fund
County ~Water Systems
Mental Health Services
Commonwealth~of Virgin. ia Current Credit Account
Town of Scottsville 1% Local Sales Tax
Total
$ ~,362.%0
2,671.77
4,070.09
107,907:~104
$1,668,484.99
On motion, the meeting was adjourned.
Chairman