The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1994-04-14April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) 000164 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on April 14, 1994, at 7:00 P.M., Room 7, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin (arrived at 7:10 p.m.) and Mrs. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: Mr. Walter F. Perkins. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Deputy County Attorney, James M. Bowling, IV, and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., by the Vice Chairperson, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris. Mrs. Humphris announced that Mr. Perkins, the Chairman, was in an automobile accident this afternoon. She said he was going to be fine, but he was unable to attend this meeting. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public. There were none. Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to accept the items on the consent agenda for information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Item 5.1. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for March 15 and March 29, 1994, received for information. Item 5.2. Letter dated April 5, 1994, from Mr. F. E. James, Jr., Acting Maintenance Operations Manager, Department of Transportation, to Ms. Ella W. Carey, Clerk, re: notice that VDoT intends to repair the existing structure over Green Creek (Route 630) during the period of April 11, 1994 through April 15, 1994, received for information. Item 5.3. Copy of letter dated April 4, 1994, from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, to Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, re: Residency Reorganization, received for information. Item 5.4. Copy of'letter dated April 8, 1994, from The Honorable Walter F. Perkins, Chairman, to Sheriff Terry W. Hawkins, re: additional funding, received as follows: "In response to your letter of March 28, the Board has carefully reviewed your comments and has decided not to take any further action on your requests at this time. Although you have identi- fied major problems in the current funding methods and areas of responsibility between the state and the county and have presented the increasing workload demands of your office, the Board does not agree with your contention that the County has been negligent in their responsibilities and that your office has been treated unfairly. If you will review the attached (on file) information, which presents the funding history for your office over the past seven years, you will see that the County has been increasingly support- ive of your operations. The County's share of funding for your office has grown from nine percent in 1987-88 to almost 39 percent in 1994-95, a 30 percent increase in the local funding share and an actual increase of 585 percent in local funding over the past seven years. The County, which did not fund any positions in 1987-88 now funds with the City's support 3.63 FTE locally funded positions. This reflects a 36 percent increase in staff since 1987-88, all locally funded. Although more may need to be done, the County has put forth what it considers to be a good faith effort over the past seven years in responding to your requests for additional staff and increased local funding for operations. In this difficult budget year, many needs went unfunded throughout County departments and community agencies; your office was not singled out for less than equal treatment. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 2) 000'165 The County will support you in your future funding requests to the Compensation Board for additional deputies or bailiffs and will work with you to more clearly define the responsibilities of your office to state and local requirements and expectations." Agenda Item No. 6. SP-93-41. Pagebrook Farm. Public Hearing on a request to locate six impounding structures in flood plain on 315.86 ac zoned RA. Property on E sd of Rt 231 approx 0.25 mi N of Rt 231/640 inters at Cash's Corner. TM50,P34. Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 28 and April 4, 1994.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file with the permanent records of the Board. He noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 8, 1994, unanimously recommended denial of SP-93-41. The Commission's denial of the request was based on the possible detrimental effect on properties downstream in periods of low flow, and because no specific definition of agricultural use was provided during the application review process. Mr. Cilimberg said the applicant has responded to the concerns of the Commission by providing additional information last Friday which included an "Agricultural and Stream Enhancement Plan Summary Report". The Engineering Department responded today to the latest plan, and he handed this information to the Board members. He told the supervisors that if they choose to approve this application, he would suggest the original staff conditions #1 and #6 be replaced with conditions #1 and #4 set out in today's memo from the Engineer- ing Department. He said these conditions are more specific to the proposal as it was shown in the latest submittal. Other than this change, the other recommendations would stand as they were originally shown. Mrs. Humphris asked if the Commission has reviewed the report. Mr. Cilimberg replied, "no". Mrs. Humphris remarked that the supervisors need to discuss whether or not they should consider the matter at this time. She noted that the Board's policy has been that it considers the same information as the Commission. She also commented that the supervisors like to have a recommendation from the Commission which reflects all of the information available. Mr. Bowerman stated that, based on the Commission's minutes, there was clearly a lot of confusion and a lot of information was lacking. He thinks if the Commission had received this additional report, the commissioners may have made a different recommendation to the supervisors. Motion was then offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to send this petition back to the Planning Commission for them to review again since they did not have all of the information now available to the Board, i.e., "Agriculture and Stream Enhancement Plan Summary Report for Pagebrook Farm" from McKee/Carson. (Mr. Martin arrived at 7:10 p.m.) Mrs. Humphris then described the situation and the motion to Mr. Martin. Mr. Martin said he has already discussed this matter with Mr. Bowerman, and he concurs with the motion. Mrs. Humphris asked if the applicant was present at the meeting. Mr. Steve Blaine, the applicant's counsel, stated that he understands a motion has been made, but he wondered if the applicant would have an opportu- nity to respond to the question of whether the matter should move forward tonight. He next introduced Mr. Steve Driver, who is the consultant for the Pagebrook Farm project. Mr. Driver can provide some technical informa- tion. Mrs. Humphris commented that the Board is not interested, at this time, in the technical part of the application. She noted that it is this Board's policy to act on matters coming forward from the Commission, based on the Commission's recommendation. In this case, the supervisors noted on Page Five of the Commission minutes that the applicant was presently unsure of the exact use of the water. The Commission's action did not relate to everything this Board has been asked to consider. It is this Board's policy, in such circum- stances, to send the matter back to the Commission for another recommendation. Mr. Blaine asked if there will be any instructions to the Commission as to what they should consider. Mrs. Humphris answered the commissioners are supposed to review all of the information available, and discuss the issue again. Mr. Bowerman pointed out that the Commission's recommendation could not have been more negative. Mr. Blaine indicated that this was satisfactory with the applicant. Roll was then called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) 000166 Agenda Item No. 7. ZMA-93-20. Albert DeRose. Public Hearing on a request to amend Buck Mountain Planned Residential Development to allow subdivision of a 5.4 ac parcel zoned PRD. Property on E sd of Rt 601 approx 0.33 mi N of 601/667 inters. TM17,P62. White Hall Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 28 and April 4, 1994.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file with the permanent records of the Board. He noted that the Plannin9 Commission, at its meetin~ on February 8, 1994, unanimously recommended denial of ZMA-93-20. The Commission felt that if there is a change, the PRD should be considered as a whole, and not just as individual lots. He noted that the unusual aspect to this application is that, because it is a PRD area, there is no subdivision potential, whereas, under rural area zoning, which could replace the current zoning, there would be subdivision potential. There were no questions for Mr. Cilimberg from the Board, so Mrs. Humphris opened the public hearing. Mr. John Dezio stated that he represents Mr. and Mrs. DeRose, and said he has a two-part presentation. Me went on to say the bulk of the presentation will be made by the DeRose's daughter-in-law. He then explained that the purpose of Mr. and Mrs. DeRose's buying of this property was to serve as a retirement residence, and when it was purchased, they were told by the developer that this property could be divided, because of its size, and that one part could be used to build a retirement cottage, at some point when they would not need the big house. He noted that Mr. DeRose is at the meeting tonight, but he will not be able to speak because of medical problems. He said that if there is any question about what he (Mr. Dezio) or Mr. DeRose's daughter-in-law have to say, Mr. DeRose will indicate an affirmative or negative answer, because he is the expert on the situation. He noted that Mr. DeRose's sole purpose in making this request is so that he can divide the property in the future, build his retirement home, and sell off the front of the property with the larger home. He reiterated that the daughter-in-law would speak about the more technical part of the issue, and then Mr. Dezio indicated that he would make a presentation. Mr. Martin commented that he would rather defer this matter until Mr. Perkins can be present. Mr. Bowerman asked if Mr. Tucker had spoken with Mr. Perkins about this matter. Mr. Tucker responded that he did not talk to Mr. Perkins about the DeRose's request. He only talked to Mr. Perkins about the budget, and Mr. Perkins suggested that the Board take action on the budget. Mr. Bowerman stated that if there is a 3:2 vote on the DeRose request, then he thinks it would be appropriate to defer it. He added, though, that if there is a 4:1 or 5:0 vote, in either direction, then he thinks the public would best be served if the Board proceeds with the matter. Mr. Marshall asked how the matter can be deferred if there has already been a vote taken. He went on to say, however, that he agrees with Mr. Martin. He said that if this property were in the Scottsville District, and he were not at the meeting, he would appreciate it if the other supervisors would wait until he could take part in the discussion. Mrs. Humphris commented that Mr. Bowerman's point is that it might serve the applicant better, if there is a vote that is going in one direction, anyway, to go ahead with the matter tonight. Mr. Bowerman stated that if the vote is close, he would certainly want to defer the matter. Mrs. Humphris concurred. She would not want the vote to go one way or the other, if Mr. Perkins' vote would be the deciding one. Mr. Martin wondered if the applicants have a preference concerning deferring this item. Mr. Dezio remarked that Mr. DeRose has indicated that it would make sense to defer the matter, and the whole presentation can be made at another time. Mr. Tucker suggested the petition be deferred until April 20. Mrs. Humphris asked if Mr. Tucker feels sure that Mr. Perkins will be able to attend the April 20 meeting. Mr. Tucker answered that, at this time, he is unsure if Mr. Perkins would have recuperated and be able to attend the meeting. He said the staff can communicate with the applicant, once it is known when Mr. Perkins will be back. Mr. Dezio was agreeable to this suggestion. At this time motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Martin, to defer this application because Mr. Perkins was not present and the property lies in his district. The applicant was agreeable to deferring until April 20, 1994, or to a date when Mr. Perkins returns. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the followin9 recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 4) Agenda Item No. 8. SP-93-34. Putt-Putt Golf & Games (applicant); Lloyd & Patricia Wood (owners). Public Hearing on a request to expand existing miniature golf course with add't activities (gameroom/clubhouse, bumper boats, batting cages, go-kart track). Property on N sd of Rio Rd approx 0.3 mi E of Rt 29. TM61,P124El&P124E2. Charlottesville Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 28 and April 4, 1994.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file with the permanent records of the Board. He noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 24, 1994, unanimously recommended denial of SP-93-34. He stated that the Commission was concerned about noise and the lack of any relevant testing as to noise at the time the Planning Commission heard the request. Since the Commission's meeting, there has been sound testing done, and the supervisors have received a copy of this report. The staff has not had an opportunity to review the report, and there are no comments from Engineering. Secondly, the Commission was concerned about the impact of this proposed recreational use, particularly the go-kart track, to the high density residential area, which is an area proposed for apartments. The sound study that the applicant has provided is in response to the Commission's concerns, and tests were conducted on March 22, 1994. He reiterated that the Commission did not have this information at its meeting. Mr. Marshall mentioned that he was in that area a few days ago, and it seemed to him that the property where the proposed apartments are going to be built is behind Albemarle Square. Mr. Cilimberg pointed out the Albemarle Square property, and said the proposed apartments would be built on land to the rear of Albemarle Square. Mr. Bowerman asked if there is a parcel of land between the property in question and the land where the apartments are proposed to be built. Mr. Cilimberg answered that he believes there is a parcel of land between the two properties. Mr. Bowerman indicated another piece of property and asked Mr. Cilimberg for the zoning designation. Mr. Cilimberg pointed out the property on the map, to which Mr. Bowerman referred, and responded that the property is zoned R-10. There were no further questions for Mr. Cilimberg from the Board, so Mrs. Humphris asked if the applicant would like to speak. Mr. Richard Carter, representing Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd Wood, stated that he was going to keep his comments brief, because Mr. Wood had a few words to say. He said that there was also an expert on sound at the meeting, who is avail- able to give his opinion or to answer any technical questions. Mr. Carter stated that he knows there are a lot of people present who want to speak about this matter, but he would like a chance for rebuttal, if the speakers do not talk too long. He noted that the Putt-Putt Golf Course has been in the same location since 1966, and it has always been a family-owned and operated business. The new proposed business will also be a family-owned and operated business. He asked why is this important, and he indicated that it was important for a number of reasons. When families operate a business, families care about things, such as safety. One of the negative things that has been associated with this application is the safety aspect. If the supervisors will look at the design behind them, they will see that it is designed for safety. People do not have to cross any roads, and once a person is in the parking lot, there is no other road to cross to get to the Fun Center. He said the safety aspect is the reason that a variance was obtained from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the property to the east. Mr. Carter noted that families care about security, and he said the design for this establishment is secure. He emphasized that there is only one entrance, and that the rest of it is completely enclosed for security reasons. There will not be children wandering from the parking lot back and forth into this area. The facility is also designed for security in that it has one door and one cashier, and people will have to go out the same way they come in. He stated that families care about their reputation. When a family runs its own business, its reputation is on the line, and the success and failure of that business is up to the family. The owner of a family business is not an hourly employee, or someone from out of town coming in for a commercial venture and the owner is not an absentee landlord. Family members work for the family business, and if the business is successful, it is good for their reputation, and if it is not, it is embarrassing to the family. He reiterated that the Wood family has run an amusement center since 1966 in this area, and they care, and they will make it work. Families are more likely to take pride in a safe operation and care that it does not have a bad reputation. He read in the newspaper that one of the concerns was that this would be a place where kids would congregate and there would be vandalism and crime. He hopes it is a place for kids to congregate, and he thinks that the youth in this area need a place to go to ride bumper boats, play Putt-Putt, hit the baseball and ride the go-karts. Whether these children are two years old or 82 years old, they need such activities and, particularly, the kids under 22 years old need a place to go. He asked why this amusement center will be different from other places. He emphasized that it will be different because it is run by a family who lives one-half mile from it, and has always lived there. He noted that there will be no alcohol served there, so that would not April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) 000 65 be a problem. He said parking lots are going to be patrolled, just as parking lots are patrolled now. There never has been a problem at the Putt-Putt Golf and Games facility with misbehavior in the parking lot or vandalism. The Wood family wants to be good neighbors and good friends, and he thinks they have demonstrated this over the years. Mr. Carter noted the letters from the different church groups, which indicate what the Woods have done for them, with the operation of the Putt- Putt facility. He said there will be speakers at this meeting who will speak to the fact that the Woods are good neighbors and good friends. He reiterated that the Woods live in the neighborhood, and they want this to work. He brought out the fact that the Woods own the Bonanza Restaurant next door to the facility, and they do not want anything happening at the amusement center which will drive customers away from their restaurant. He said the Putt-Putt facility has been a training ground, and many of the leading citizens have gone to the Putt-Putt business training school as teenagers. These people worked the counter, cleaned up the golf course, vacuumed, took in the money and learned how to run a business. This is the type of business that the amusement center will be. Mr. Carter commented that the applicant agrees with the staff report, and asks that the supervisors look closely at it. He pointed out that in the immediate area there is NationsBank, Bonanza Restaurant and Fashion Square Mall, and Albemarle Square Shopping Center 200 yards down the road. There are also real estate offices, banks and other offices in the area. He asked the supervisors to remember, when they hear the residential character of the area, that residential is not the only activity represented in that area. He next discussed the noise aspect of the situation, and he said the members of this Board have seen and heard the noise that a go-kart makes. He knows Board members will agree that it is not the same go-kart that he and the supervisors remember from the 50s and 60s. He said the tracks are not the same as then. The tracks are there for safety reasons, as well as to cut down on the noise, so that there will not be ten cars abreast going around in a circle. He mentioned that the supervisors have a letter in their packets from a resident in Dallas who lives in an apartment complex next to a Putt-Putt Fun Center. Mr. Carter read from this letter which indicated that the man's apartment is approximately 150 feet from the Center, and the Center can be seen from his bedroom window. This man noted that the noise from the go-kart track and other attractions cannot be heard inside his apartment, and he does not consider this a detriment to living there. Mr. Carter indicated that this is the way Mr. Wood's facility will be run. It will be run first class because it is going to be run by a family who cares and a family who wants to make it work. There is a noise ordinance in this County, and the amusement center will have to comply with this ordinance. If the amusement center cannot comply with the Noise Ordinance, then it will be closed down. He pointed out that if the go-karts had jet engines, and the applicant could comply with the noise ordinance, then they should be allowed. He reiterated that if the applicant cannot comply with the noise ordinance, then he should not be allowed to have the go-karts. He said experts tell him that with the proper screening, the applicant can comply with this ordinance. Mr. Carter mentioned adverse impact on adjoining properties, and said he has some sympathy to the Raintree Subdivision people who are at this meeting. The distance they are from this facility, and considering the noise is not going to be that great, he thinks they are too far away for it to make any difference. He remarked that other Raintree residents' concerns, while valid, can be addressed by proper management. He believes the proven management can address concerns, such as the gathering areas, crime and vandalism, etc. He then mentioned the adjoining R-15 property, and he pointed out that Mr. Wood sold this property, and it is proposed to be developed with apartments. The property this application concerns was high industrial and zoned for highway commercial use at the time the R-15 property was sold. He pointed out that this has not changed, and he thinks the buyer of this property knew this when he bought the property, because he does not see how he could have missed the Putt-Putt facility, or the Bonanza Restaurant or the NationsBank. This property owner is saying the go-karts are going to bother him, and that he cannot put modest income housing in Albemarle County. The supervisors have a letter in their packets from the realtor who sold this piece of property to the current owner. He read from the letter which indicated that during meetings and conversations, the realtor made it very clear to disclose that the existing Putt-Putt facility and adjacent properties were commercially zoned. The letter continues by saying that there is no doubt in the realtor's mind that the purchaser knew he was purchasing R-15 land adjoining C-1 and H-C commercially zoned property with a pre-existing Putt-Putt Golf Family Center that would be expanded within the existing commercial area. Mr. Carter emphasized that he has sympathy for the neighborhood, but he does not have sympathy for a developer, profit driven, to come in and say that he cannot provide modest priced housing in Albemarle County because there is a go-kart track there, or a batting cage. The Squire Hill apartments back up to the Fashion Square Mall, and the road which goes to Toys-R-Us and Food Lion, is becoming a major thoroughfare. These apartments are rented. He said that what will drive modest priced housing in Albemarle County to be successful is for it to be available, so that people do not have to drive from Palmyra or Greene County. If he lived in Greene County and had to drive Route 29 North every day, he would rather drive by a batting cage and a go-kart track to these apartments. He said modest priced housing, when it is developed in this April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) 000 .69 County, will attract people. If the price is moderate, the people will come. He concluded his remarks by saying the business is family operated, well thought out, designed by Putt-Putt and it would be operated right. This is a modification of a 1966 Putt-Putt golf course into a 1994 use. He stated that Mr. Wood wanted to speak briefly, and there is a sound expert available to answer questions. Mr. Carter said he would also be available for questions. Mr. Lloyd Wood stated that he and his wife are proposing this develop- ment, and he believes he can comply with all of the ordinances. He went on to say that when he began this venture, the concerns were noise, lights and hours of operation. He assured Board members that since the Commission meeting, tests have been done and submitted, which show that the decibel levels can be met at the property lines, both on the eastern and northern sides. The lights have been designed in such a fashion that they will not be a problem. He noted that it was suggested, at the Commission meeting, that tests be done here, rather than relying on tests submitted from out of the State. He reiterated that Backstage, Inc., from Richmond, has conducted these tests, and the results have been submitted. These results complement the other two studies which were submitted showing the Noise Ordinance can be met with the proper decibels, which range between 60 and 65 at the property line. He asked Mr. Cameron Granger, from Backstage, Inc., who conducted the tests with one of Mr. Wood's cars at the Rio Road location, to discuss the results of the tests. He said Mr. Granger would also explain how the decibel rating can be obtained on this particular piece of property. Mr. Granger stated that he is one of the principals with Backstage, Inc. in Richmond. His company does acoustical testing, sound design, system design and 'installations. He informed Board members that he was asked to measure the levels of sound that a go-kart generated at the property lines, and also at certain distances into the adjoining property on the east side of the site. The supervisors have the report which goes into detail and includes a lot of technical print-out. The tests basically show that in the eastern direction, toward the development which is already there, the woods are sufficiently dense and the distance is sufficiently long, that even if all of the go-karts were running on the track at the same time at full throttle, the sound pressure level 250 feet out into the woods would only reach 55 decibels. He noted that this is considerably below the limit, and it is well away from the property line. He pointed out that it is a different story in a northern direction toward the proposed apartment area. The distance is shorter and there are no woods or adjoining natural barriers. Calculations showed in that area, if all 15 cars were running, the sound pressure level at the property line would be close to 74 decibels, which is in excess of the required decibel level at the property line. However, it is common practice in all types of commercial activities to build sound barriers, which can be earthen berms, constructed fences or even buildings. In those cases, Mr. Granger stated the potential sound reduction, through a properly designed barrier, is 15 to 20 decibels or more. There is no reason to assume that a suitable sound barrier cannot be built along the northern boundary of the go-kart track, which would sufficiently block the sound levels coming off the track to acceptable levels as far as the sound ordinance is concerned. He would be happy to answer questions relative to the methodology of the testing or any specific details about the results. Mrs. Thomas said she needed help reading the charts. She asked Mr. Granger if, when the top line shows the number, "60," and the next line shows a "minus 18," does this mean that the line is indicating 42 decibels. Mr. Granger answered affirmatively. However, the graphs indicate a special distribution and show the frequency range and all of the levels, but the actual sound pressure level is in the lower right corner of the graphs. He asked Mrs. Thomas to which graph she is referring. Mrs. Thomas responded that she is looking at the graph marked, "Site H, 250 feet, Engine Full." She asked if the actual sound pressure level is 43.6 for this situation. Mr. Granger answered, "yes." He said this is the sum of all of the levels. For reference, Mr. Granger indicated at Site H, that the ambient noise level was measured, at 39.9, so at that particular point, it was just barely above the noise of the woods. He noted that the ambient noise level at the property, where the bumper boat area is located on the map, is around 42 or 43. He pointed out that this noise level relates to a single go-kart, when a single go-kart 'is tested, but there is the assumption that there will be 15 go-karts running, it is a worse case assumption. He said the assumption would be that all of the go-karts would be running at full throttle, side by side, and the sound would add together coherently. The totals at the left of the page relate to this type of situation. It is highly unlikely that the numbers would ever reach this level, because the tracks circle throughout the whole proposed area, and the go-karts would be spaced widely apart. Mrs. Thomas asked if Mr. Granger tested in any way the bumper boats' motor sounds. Mr. Granger answered that there had been no bumper boat testing on the site. He then noted that the loudest thing tested by his company representatives was a leaf blower, and the noise level was consider- ably louder than the go-karts. Mr. Marshall asked if a riding lawn mower has been tested. Mr. Granger responded that tests were done on a conventional push lawn mower and a lawn tractor. He said the conventional lawn mower was slightly less noisy than the go-kart, and the lawn tractor was slightly more noisy. He noted that the current generation of go-karts are four cycle Honda engines that are very different from the one with which he was familiar. The report mentions that April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) 000 .70 the go-kart was tested on an elevated, hardwood platform, because the proposed area is a grassy field. If tests had been done on a grassy field, lower readings would have been obtained, and this would have been unfair to the potential neighbors. He said a hardwood platform was used for the testing, so that the reflections would be the same as if the go-kart was running on a track. He pointed out that the go-kart was taken to the existing parking lot and the sound was measured again, after all of the other testing was done, and on an asphalt parking lot, the sound was slightly lower in level than it was on the raised platform. There were no further questions from Board members for Mr. Granger. Next, Mrs. Humphris told Mr. Wood that she has gotten different interpre- tations of the bumper boat noise, so she would like to know all about it. Mr. Wood answered that the bumper boat has a much smaller engine and a different engine than the four cycle Honda engine, with overhead valves, that is in go-karts. He said the bumper boat has only a two horse power engine, and it only generates enough power to spin an innertube type of bumper boat in a 360 degree circle or propel it forward at a low rate of speed. He went on to say that all of the noise and emissions are emitted under the water, so it is muffled as the exhaust comes out from under the water. He pointed out that there was not a suggestion that the bumper boats be tested, because there was not a question that decibel ratings would be needed at the property line between his land and the property immediately to the east. Mrs. Humphris wondered if the engines on the bumper boats are above water. Mr. Wood replied, "yes." Mrs. Humphris then asked if the exhaust on the bumper boats is underwater. Mr. Wood answered affirmatively. He said the exhaust is totally below the water, and he reiterated that there are no emissions above the water. He noted, too, that there is no way that gas or oil could get under the water. He added that, basically, the questions have related to the sound level of the bumper boats. He emphasized that the sound is muffled under the water, and he said that this is a better muffler than the manmade mufflers which are on other engines. He has never had a problem with the bumper boats. He then stated that decibel levels will be met at the property line, whether they relate to go-karts or bumper boats. All of Mr. Granger's tests indicate this can easily be done With the three methods which Mr. Granger mentioned. Mr. Wood next reaffirmed what Mr. Granger had said by stating that there is plenty of stored earth on the property, which can be used for the earthen berm. He said, too, that land- scape architects and engineers will be consulted and the surveys will be used to decide what plantings would be best to muffle the noise. Thirdly, Mr. Wood informed the Board members that the sound barrier fence could be constructed. He stated that a combination of one or all of these methods will adequately meet the sound ordinance. He does not mind the conditions, and he will comply with the ordinances that are set by the County. Since there were no more questions from Board members for the applicant or his representatives, Mrs. Humphris opened the public hearing. She said first of all, the members of this Board have read the minutes of the Commis- sion meeting, as well as the letters and they have listened to the phone calls, so they have an excellent background of information. She went on to say that the supervisors want everybody to have an opportunity to say every- thing that they want to say, but she asked that the speakers be brief. She said it is obvious that a lot of the people in the audience are at the meeting for this issue, so she asked that the speaker not repeat what other people have said. She added that speakers can ask for a show of hands of people who agree with their statements, and this would help a lot, and there would be a clear understanding of their feelings. Mr. Donald Lyon stated that he is President of the Raintree Homeowners Association, and he introduced Mr. John McDowell, the Association's Vice President. He said their purpose at this meeting is not to discuss the need for such a facility, if, in fact, one is needed. If there is a need, it should be put in the long range plan and placed where it will be the most benefit for the County, and not solely for the profit motives of a developer who previously voiced his opposition to a similar facility at Kegler's. When this proposal went before the Commission, the developer stated that this was an expansion of an existing use. He added that an expansion of an existing use might be another 18 holes of golf. This is more than a mere expansion. This is going to be an amusement park. Mr. McDowell commented that one of the major concerns of the Raintree Homeowners Association is the rationale of saying that this is an expansion of an existing use, would be the same as if he, personally, said that just because he has a private residence, he can develop a high rise on it. He said the scope of this operation will be changed drastically. This is not a quiet or semi-quiet type of operation. This is a large operation which has dissimi- lar activities. Mr. Lyon stated that there have been two previous disapprovals by the Board of Supervisors for similar facilities and one recent disapproval by a unanimous decision of the Commission. Mr. McDowell commented that one of the things that was brought up was the fact that there would be no additional police required. He said this is based on an assumption that this is nothing more than merely an expansion of an existing use. The Police Department has not been involved in this, however, April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) 000 ? he understands they would welcome the opportunity to take a closer look at this operation and what impact it might have, as far as the local community is concerned. He said the Association has a major concern, but he thinks it will be discussed more in detail as'the presentation takes place. He mentioned that the staff report indicated this activity would discourage future residen- tial development. He contended that it would destroy future residential development. Once a carnival environment has been created, or a carnival atmosphere, the only type of activities that will be developed will be those things that are compatible with a carnival environment. He anticipates that if this application is approved, toward the end of the summer, when the elephants, tigers and hot air balloons come around, they will probably be located down a little way from this activity. Mr. Lyon stated that it is already known what the concepts of operations are. He said there are batting cages and raceway bumper boats. He wondered what else will locate in that area if it is zoned in this manner. He noted that the Association members have had a meeting with Mr. Wood in the past, and Mr. Wood explained that, on peak nights, the business will be open until 1:30 a.m. He said being so close to a residential community, the Association finds this very troublesome. He mentioned that Mr. Wood had said he would have someone to police the area, but Mr. Lyon wondered who is going to police the grounds outside of the park in the parking lot and in the wooded areas abutting Raintree Subdivision. He stated that the Association has genuine concerns, and they need to be addressed. Mr. McDowell commented that representatives of Mr. Wood say they will not sell alcoholic beverages, which are allowed, with this type of activity. He wondered how many adolescents buy alcoholic beverages from over the counter in a public location, when crime and an increase in destructive behavior are considered. He said this will most likely happen. He next said Mr. Wood had mentioned in a previous statement last fall that one of the reasons the Arcade was closed in Fashion Square Mall was because the Mall could not afford the security costs of policing the area. He noted that many people are not aware of the fact that there was a contract which included two off duty security policemen to be at the Arcade, and they were backed up by the normal security police. He added that in this situation, there is one individual who will manage the park and take care of all of the activities within the park. He asked if it is the citizens' responsibility or the police's responsibility to take care of the areas that are not controlled. He thinks it is a shared responsibility. Mr. Lyon remarked that crime cannot be projected, but when a large crowd is attracted to a certain area, the potential for crime is real. He realizes a small percentage of the population is responsible for the percentage of crimes which are committed, but he noted that large crowds increase the chances and likelihood of crimes and vandalism. He noted that recently there was a rash of vandalism in Raintree during the Easter break. The Association feels, that because the neighborhood is within such close proximity to this facility, there will be joy riders throughout the neighborhoods and there will be cruising in cars. He reiterated that the potential is real, and the Association is worried about this problem. Mr. McDowell stated that during the past two weeks, there were some problems in the area, such as four break-ins of cars, numerous vandalism, destruction of mailboxes, etc. He understands the police caught these individuals, and they are underage, but the homeowners do not know the details. This possibility exists, and the Association members believe that by attracting more people to this area, there will be many more problems than there have been in the past. The park has been touted as being a family activity park. He believes, however, that the focus is going to be primarily for teenagers and young adults. He understands there will probably be a petition presented to this Board that was signed by a number of Albemarle County high school students to show their support. He then mentioned the traffic. He said that, in previous statements, he believes the petitioner had mentioned the people who hang around'Fashion Square Mall will go to the location which was proposed toward Kegler's. His Association members believe that if this were true at that time, then they believe this is true today, and the park will attract those undesirable type of people to this area. He mentioned that these people will be moving across the street taking an immediate right from the mall, and then an immediate left into the park. He emphasized that the park will be open until 12:00 a.m. to 1:30 a.m, depending upon how many people are actually in the area. He next said the park will be a nuisance to the community, and he and Mr. Lyon would talk more about the major concerns of the residents of Raintree, and the problems that this facility will create. He then mentioned personal safety and he brought out the fact that there are a lot of people in the community who jog at night. Raintree is not well lit, and joggers run, not only in the subdivision, but also on Old Brook Road and Rio Road. There are already problems with people speeding, and almost hitting joggers and people who walk at night with their families. He anticipated that there will be a percentage of joy riders who ran out of money when they were at the arcade, but do not feel like going home, so they are just cruising the neighborhood to see what they can do to keep themselves occupied. Mr. Lyon remarked that with the increased people at the proposed facili- ty, there is the problem with home security. There are a number of homes that will be backing up to this facility, and there will be nobody in the woods to spot people. He asked who is to say that there will not be people looking at April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) 000 ?; these homes to see who is at home and who is not, and then burglarizing the houses. He mentioned that with the attraction of crowds, there are prowlers. These threats are real and are legitimate concerns, and the homeowners need to voice their opinions. He had already expressed the concern about noise to the Commission. He knows the go-karts are going to generate a lot of sound, as well as the public address (PA) system. There will also be noise from the music and the crowds screaming, yelling and having fun, and the cumulative effect will be overwhelming. Mr. McDowell pointed out that a letter was written by a resident in Dallas. He talked to the manager of the Dallas Putt-Putt facility approxi- mately a month ago, and the manager mentioned that immediately at the end of the race track in Dallas there is a six foot brick wall and a parking lot. The manager pointed out that on the other side of the parking lot there is a two foot earthen berm with an eight foot wooden fence on top of it. The manager noted that at the apartment complex, there are four Trane air condi- tioning units that power the air conditioning for the whole complex. Mr. McDowell said he does not think there will be anything near this amount of buffer at the proposed facility in Albemarle County. Under the circumstances that he has described, he does not think the people in the apartment complex in Dallas could hear much beyond their complex. Mr. Lyon concurred that the air conditioning units displace a lot of air. They are like an air curtain, and they have a sound dampening effect, which the Raintree neighborhood does not have. Next, Mr. McDowell discussed the issue of light pollution. He said the proposed area is four times the size that the business is now, with the emphasis on safety. This will result in a lot of lighting, with near daylight conditions. These lights will not only be seen in close proximity to the park, but also throughout the area. Mr. Lyon stated that there is a five year printout from the Police Department on crimes committed in Fashion Square Mall. He noted that there was no comparison with Raintree and Fashion Square Mall. He said Raintree's five year printout shows violations mostly of parking and noise complaints. He reiterated that the threat is real, and the residents are very disturbed about something of this nature coming into the community. Mr. McDowell asked where places such as the proposed park are normally found. He said that by studying some of the information produced by the petitioner and the staff, two specific locations were cited. He said the Rainforest Family Recreation Center is located in Atlanta, Georgia; the Colt Road Putt-Putt is in Dallas, Texas; and finally the Putt-Putt, operated by Mr. Wood, is in Charlottesville. It was mentioned in the initial report that this type of activity is not normally found in office service designation. He noted that in other places, such activities are located near industrial manufacturing or C-4 type areas which is clearly not the case in this particu- lar situation. Mr. Lyon stated that the conclusions of the Homeowners' Association are that this will cause irreparable damage to the existing community, it will increase crime, property values will drop, and it will destroy future develop- ment within this area. Mr. McDowell stated that the major factor to consider has to do with future development. When Putt-Putt Golf and Games was established in 1966, there was not much in that area. Now that civilization has moved there, consideration has to be given to the type of development that will occur in that area. He believes if there really is a need for this type of activity, then the supervisors need to look at it in the context of a long range plan. This Board needs to decide how it wants this community to look. The Associa- tion members know that there is going to be development, and that something is going to be built there. The supervisors know this, and he noted that there will be things built all around that neighborhood. He commented, though, that the community and this Board need to be judicious, and they need to decide what they want in the community. The petitioner had referred to this type of activity in an earlier statement as being, "trendy." This means that this activity is popular now, but it would not be five years from now. He asked what happens five years from now. He wondered if this type of environment is already established there, will it stay the same, or will it be increased to include more things. This is the biggest concern of the Association. He asked what is envisioned for this area now, and what is envisioned for this area in the future. Mr. Lyon brought out the faCt that there was an amusement park in Salem, Virginia that had money problems and went bankrupt. He inquired if this property is zoned for the amusement park and it does not succeed, what is going to follow this activity. Mr. Lyon stated that the Association members would like to see the Board deny the special use permit for this amusement park. This park is not in character with the existing communities and will be a detriment to surrounding areas. Any such park should be exclusively zoned in an area with the same zoning. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 10) Mr. McDowell commented that if the locations of such activities are examined, they will be found in areas with the same zoning. He said that this concludes his and Mr. Lyon, s presentation, and he added that they would be happy to answer questions. At this time, Mr. Lyon read a letter from the Vice President of the Fieldbrook Homeowners Association in which the Vice President stated that the matter had been brought to his Association's attention by the Raintree Homeowners' Association. As indicated in the letter, the Vice President went on to say that there appear to be predominantly negative factors involved with this amusement park. Mr. Lyon read from the letter that most significant of these factors are the disruptive sound levels and the enhanced potential for juvenile misconduct in a largely residential area. The Vice President of the Fieldbrook Homeowners Association noted in the letter that the Fieldbrook Board membership share a common opinion that the proposed expansion of the Putt-Putt facility would not be in the best interest of this community, and is confident that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, consistent with the views of the Commission and the opinions expressed by other residential areas in this area, will oppose this proposal. Mr. McDowell stated that he has coordinated some of the things that the Homeowners' Associations have to say. It is hoped that the comments by these Associations can be presented, so that the officers can speak for all of the Associations' members. Ms. Alice Feehley-Maus, President of the Homeowners' Association of Northfields, stated that, although this will not directly affect her neighbor- hood, her Association members concur absolutely with everything representa- tives from the Raintree neighborhood have said. The amusement park will be detrimental. She mentioned that there are children who will be presenting petitions at this meeting, and she does not feel the location will stop the children from coming to the facility. She thinks the wrong location has been chosen. She then pointed out that every neighborhood association from Carrsbrook to Rio Road and Route 29 to Dunlora is represented at this meeting. She thinks the supervisors need to think about this fact. A student representing other students from Albemarle High School stated that she has petitions in favor of the facility. Every person to whom she presented the petition was in favor of it, and she said this facility would mean that there is finally something to do in Charlottesville. She asked if parents would rather have their children walking the streets, going to parties or having fun at a recreational center that is being supervised. She said this center will not make more children on the streets in Raintree, but, instead they will be going to the center to have fun. The Putt-Putt facility is a great place, and she has played Putt-Putt there, and she has never seen any vandalism. She has played Putt-Putt as late as 11:30 p.m., and there have been many children there her age, and not one child has ever presented a problem that she has seen. A junior from Albemarle High School stated that she believes the Putt- Putt Golf Course is already an asset to the community, and it would be enhanced by adding these proposed expansions. She agreed with the previous speaker that there are few activities for children her age to do, and espe- cially for children who are not involved in extra curricular activities or sports, or even those students who are involved, and have extra time on their hands. The children enjoy coming to the Putt-Putt Golf Course, because it has such a great reputation for being good, clean, wholesome entertainment. She said that parents often enjoy sending their children there because it is always well supervised. She has petitions from just a sampling of students from Albemarle High School who would love to have this expansion. She stated that, of all the sites proposed, so far, Putt-Putt is the best and most logical choice because of the central location. In addition, she said the facility is already established, and it has ample parking. A gentleman stated that, after listening to the presentation of the Raintree President and Vice President, he has the feeling that he should move to another town because of the crime rate. He hopes the supervisors will give this proposal an opportunity for the children in the community. He commented that he has six children, and he has known the Woods for many, many years. He is a part of a family business also, and he knows what that is all about. After watching the Raintree presentation, he finds it ironic that the Raintree representatives showed the different Putt-Putts all over the country, but when they spoke of the one in Charlottesville, they showed the church. He pointed out that the Raintree residents were opposed to that church. The Raintree residents have been in the limelight quite a bit with the wrecker situation with Charles Jones, among other things. He stated that Mr. Wood is a busi- nessman who has lived here all of his life, and he wants to put something into the community. Mr. Wood is not taking anything away from anyone. The company which did the sound testing is not a slipshod operation. He said it is a highly recommended company, but he believes the company representative failed to mention one thing. Being a musician, he knows that high frequencies do not travel. He added that it is the bass frequencies that carry, and he knows this because he has played music outside. He reiterated that the high frequency from these motors will not carry. He pointed out that when he plays for large rooms of people, there has to be equipment to get the highest frequencies to the back of the room. He emphasized that the highest noise with the go-kart motors will drop, and the bass frequencies will carry, and there is not that type of frequency involved with the go-karts. He asked the April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 11) 000174 Board to consider this request in a different light, and he has compassion for people who do not want noise. This facility is like a prison because every- body wants them to be available, but they do not want them in their back yards. The Putt-Putt Golf Course has been in operation since 1966, and he has played golf there. He recalled that when he was a child, the only place that his brother took him was to the Kenny Burger, and after that, they rode around in circles. He commented that he would like for his children to have a decent place to go. If the crime rate is as high as the people have indicated it is at the mall, then he does not want to shop there anymore. He hopes this Board will give the Woods a chance to show how nice this park will be, so that other children can enjoy it, as well as the supervisors' grandchildren. He reiter- ated that he has six children and he loves them all, and he hopes they can have a nice place to go to have fun. The Woods have certainly provided that with the Bonanza Restaurant and the Putt-Putt Golf and Games. Ms. Joan Shaw, a member of the community of Camelot Subdivision, said that she appreciates the fact that Mr. Wood has run a respectable business as long as she has lived here. It is nice to have the four "Ps" in the area -- the pool, the park, Putt-Putt and the playground at Pantops at McDonalds. She noted that these are about the only places around here that she can take her children. She said that after 16 times down the slide it is nice to have something besides this around the area. She is looking forward to raising her children in this county, and she would like to know that there are going to be things that, as they get older, they will be able to do that will be clean and supervised. In her profession, she knows a person tends to judge someone who is being hired, based on their past performance. She added that an employer does not go by what the applicant says he or she is going to do, but by what they have done in the past. Mr. Wood has shown in the past, by his years of service in this community, that he is capable of fulfilling the things that he has promised. If Mr. Wood says he will keep the noise down, based on his past actions, she believes that he will do that. As far as security issues are concerned she has never thought that the Putt-Putt was a "hangout, or she would not go there with her young family. She concluded by saying that she hopes the supervisors will consider approving this expansion because she would like to see it in this community, as a service to her family. Next to speak was Mr. Rob Ingram, representing the Rio Hills Associates Limited Partnership, which is the affordable housing project which may go on the property adjacent to the proposed go-kart track. He addressed a concern by Mr. Forrest Marshall, which he expressed at the last meeting, about definitions of affordable housing. He said the Rio Hills Associates Limited Partnership has not vested itself with an affordable housing title, but it is one which has been conferred upon it by the State and Federal government. His Partnership has qualified under the relevant code sections of the Internal Revenue Service for low and moderate income housing, and as part of that qualification, the Partnership is entitled to use the term, "affordable housing." He reiterated that this is not his term, but it is a governmental tax credit term, and he asked the supervisors to note that this term repre- sents low and moderate income housing. Mr. Marshall asked what area pertains to this low and moderate income housing. Mr. Ingram answered that he is referring to the Albemarle County area. He said qualifications are done on a regional basis. He said that low and affordable moderate housing in Washington, D.C. may have a vastly differ- ent price scale and meaning than low and affordable housing in Radford, Virginia. Mr. Marshall recalled that he had asked Mr. Ingram at the last meeting how much he was going to charge for the housing. Mr. Ingram replied that he is prepared to speak to that right now. The State and Federal government, which everyone answers to including this Board, has designated these apart- ments as affordable housing. It is low and moderate income eligible housing, and it compares to rental units of similar quality and similar nature in the area. This shows that his company is, in fact what it states it is, regard- less of government designation. He next showed the Board a rental cost comparison which he got by calling the rental offices of the listed apart- ments. He pointed out that the Rio Hills Apartments are the cheapest of the group. Mr. Marshall stated that these are not the figures that Mr. Ingram had given him at a previous time. Mr. Ingram responded that these figures have been corrected, and these are figures from a public record with the Virginia Housing Development Corporation. The figures have also been so signified in other documents, and he would be more than happy to present them to the Board. He then mentioned that these apartments represent a 15 year obligation that has to be met by his company. He noted that there has been a lot of time, effort and valuable resources involved to meet this obligation. Mr. Marshall remarked that he is curious about the figures, because Mr. Ingram had previously quoted figures of $550.00 to $600.00, and now he is reporting figures of $408.00 to $505.00. Mr. Ingram replied that when Mr. Marshall asked him the question at the last hearing, he was not prepared to answer, and he was answering off the top of his head, based on the challenge that Mr. Marshall presented to him. He has gone back and documented fully what is meant by affordable housing in terms of the governmental designations and the rights and privileges pertaining thereto, in terms of pragmatic comparisons to rental units of comparable quality in a comparable style in the area. If Mr. Marshall takes issue with the correctness of those statements, April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 12) 000:1.75 then he encourages him to investigate the matter with the Virginia Housing Development Corporation which gave his company the tax credit, the signature of the Director of the Corporation is on the designation in the declaration giving his company the right to claim that title. He then read to the supervisors some quotes from the September 15, 1993, Board of Supervisors minutes, when this Board was reviewing the application of Todd Shields for the proposed identical facility at Kegler's. He quoted, "In the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan of four years ago, this area was stressed as, needing residential affordable housing." When addressing how it would change the character of the area, the speaker said, "Let's not take away from the good things we have done and spent tax dollars on in the last four years." Addressing the intended uses, the speaker said, "Go-karts and batting cages are trendy. They are hot and they are cold. Fifteen years ago, you could not give away a batting cage. I had six of them. I finally gave three to the Little League for batting practice, and the rest I use for spare parts. Land use is not a trendy thing. It is for life." The speaker went on to address the problems that the Mall had with a game room facility such as is proposed at this particular location. He quoted, "Sears in the Mall got rid of their game room because of vandalism, drugs, counterfeit money being passed in there and constant problems controlling violence and other things." He said the game room was terminated for, "lack of security and lack of being able to afford proper security to keep out drugs and violence." The speaker noted that the proposal would be, "transferring those bad elements from the Mall." The same speaker at the September 15, 1993, meeting went on to estimate that this similar project would draw in excess of 1,000 people a day, if it is peak time in the summer. The speaker had good reason for making this statement, because he had experience with this type of thing. Mr. Ingram went on to quote the speaker by saying that, "Once you do away with affordable zoning for R-6 land, it is gone forever. The die will be cast for a future commercial strip, and the residential signs will be gone forever." The speaker concluded by saying that he was speaking on behalf of the parents and children through- out the County. Mr. Ingram stated that he believes everyone will have to agree with him that this is an eloquent condemnation of this type of activity. He then said the speaker at the September 15, 1993, meeting was L. F. Wood. Mr. Ingram asked what has changed in the intervening time since these very cogent and honest and forthright comments of L. F. Wood were made in Septem- ber. Mr. Ingram said nothing has changed, except Mr. Wood's opportunity now to profit at the expense of the very children and parents he purported to represent just a few short months ago. Mr. Ingram stated that he would like to take this opportunity to introduce to the supervisors a sound expert which his company has retained, and he distributed the expert's curriculum vitae for the Board members' review. He would preface the introduction of Mr. Jeffrey A. Straw by saying that some time shortly before noon today, Mr. Wood's expert tendered his report. He said that Mr. Wood's expert's report was from an assessment done on March 22, 1993 and observed by some members of the Board. He cannot account for the delay in presenting this report to the Board, but his com- pany's expert has had just a brief opportunity to look at it. He said Mr. Straw would address the Board briefly, and he will be able to speak to some important issues regarding the validity of the one go-kart test that Mr. Wood conducted, and he will also be able to give the supervisors the results of a comparable, fair, valid and appropriate test that he has been asked to conduct on his company's behalf. He said after Mr. Straw has finished his presenta- tion, he will have one short comment. He then introduced Mr. Jeffrey Straw. Mr. Jeffrey Straw stated that he appreciated the opportunity to speak to the Board members. He is Vice President and Area Manager of Geosonics, which is an international vibration and acoustic consulting firm. He has the distinct opportunity to run the office in Florida, and during the past winter, he was glad that he was there and not here. He informed the supervisors, for the record, that his company's address is: 1900 North University Drive, Suite 101, Penbrook Pines, Florida. His credentials will state that he has, for the last 16 years, done vibration and acoustic consulting work dealing with varied areas, such as interior, exterior measurements, operations related to mining, quarrying, development and highway traffic noise. His company has even monitored aircraft over flights. His company has also done some work in regard to Navy sonic booms, as they relate to the response of individuals, which he says is the crux of the matter with this issue. He distributed a report which his company prepared, and he said that he was contacted approxi- mately three weeks ago to prepare a general report evaluating noise. He has waited in anticipation to be able to review the applicant's report on noise. He saw the report this afternoon, and he has had an opportunity to briefly review it. Mr. Shaw said he was asked to evaluate noise on residential apartments adjacent to this site, which are the closest neighbors to this proposed facility, as well as to the surrounding community. The apartments are not yet built, but they are ready to be built. Based on this information, Mr. Straw said that, rather than taking guesswork and trying,to extrapolate some general numbers, he used a go-kart track facility that was close to his office in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. He pointed out some photographs and general information in the back of his report. The photographs show what the go-karts are like and a viewpoint of the general facility. The facility that he tested operates 40 to 50 carts simultaneously in an area one-half mile long by one quarter of a mile wide. The noise testing period ran approximately from 9:30 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. on a Saturday evening. The site on the western side is bordered by 1-95, and it probably has twice the traffic as Route 29 North. The site is April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) O00~L~G (Page 13) located within an industrial park, and one and one-half miles south of the Ft. Lauderdale International Airport, which has commercial and airline traffic operating 24 hours a day. On the south side, there is a silica sand opera- tion, according to Mr. Straw, and he said that geographically, and from a land use standpoint, this facility is well buffered. This facility has a central corridor, and on the south side is the serpentine go-kart track that is pictured, which is similar to the applicant's proposal, except it is larger in size. On the north side of the site, there are batting cages, a larger version of the Putt-Putt Golf and Games, another small NASCAR style circular go-kart track and some other recreational facilities, such as bungee jumping, etc. There are two major parking lots, and during the time that he was standing within 60 feet, which would be about where the closest property line is to the residential apartments on Mr. Wood's site, he could not hear 1-95 at all. He could watch the airplanes land, but he could never hear them. He did not hear the Putt-Putt Golf Course, the batting cages or anything on the north side because of the decibels that were produced by this go-kart track. He stated that two studies were done, and the distance of approximately 35 feet was measured, so that he could study some general up close noise. He said that two things were determined. First of all, Mr. Straw stated that the noises ranged from 65 decibels for a single go-kart operating to approximately 78 to 79 decibels for multiple go-karts. He has listened to the applicant's expert talk this evening about how the go-kart track operates, and he (Mr. Straw) was led to believe that the go-karts travel in a single line, and they go around in a circle. This just does not happen. He has never seen more hard fought racing than there is at the go-kart track. He feared for his life when he left in his vehicle hoping that the people he just watched with the go-karts were not on the road. The cars travel in packs of three to eight, and a single car would go by, and then there would be eight cars going by together. The fact that there is a single test done is not applicable to this site. In addition, Mr. Straw stated that the aggregate noise from all of the other facilities has not been brought out. He said the go-kart track over- shadows all of them, but they are there in the background, and in the middle of the facility or toward the area of Raintree, there is an aggregate total from all of these things. The geography of this site, in the direction of the residential apartments, is very flat, and the noise will carry. The area toward Raintree has some valleys, and depending upon the direction of the noise and the prevailing winds, the noise will travel up those valleys and will focus in some of those areas. On days when there is cloud cover, the noise reflects up and off the clouds, and it focuses at different spots, so what is done within a small area within the perimeter of a go-kart track, can be extended. He noted that people respond to noise. He said that scientists, engineers and evaluators address this very technically. He pointed out that people respond typically to one thing, and that is what is the interference level to them. At the 77 to 78 decibels that were produced and measured at this operating facility, he had to shout to be heard by a person three feet away from him. The supervisors use a PA system to talk to the people in the back of the room. There is also supposed to be a PA system at Mr. Wood's site, and there is one at the track in Ft. Lauderdale. He stated that every 45 seconds or more often as the place got busier, the PA system was talking, and it talked all night long. He informed the Board members that the facility operates all day long, but it begins to get busy about 7:00 p.m. or 8:00 p.m. at night, and it goes on until 2:00 a.m. The hours presented for Mr. Wood's site run until 1:30 a.m. The other thing that people are concerned about is how this will interfere with their speech, sleep and activities. At 77 to 78 decibels, at 60 feet, which is where the residential apartments will be, it will interfere on the outside, and there will be complaints. He pointed out that, at that distance, the sound is in violation of the County ordinance, although the applicant says that he can comply with the ordinance. He next talked about the report from the applicant's expert. One go-kart was used, mounted on a flat bed trailer so that a test could be conducted and monitored at different areas. When the test was monitored at close range, it measured 93 decibels. He stated that 93 decibels is like a chain saw running seven to ten feet away. He has a power, circular saw, at home, and he used it to cut some wood last night. It measures 93 decibels, three feet away, which is as far as from where he is standing now, to the other end of the podium. The OSHA standards for hearing and noise compliance indicate that, at these measurements of noise, hearing protection should be worn. These are noisy types of vehicles, and he is trying to give Board members an accurate picture of what is going on. It is also an irregular noise. The applicant's test involved one go-kart on a flat surface on a trailer, the accelerator was held down by the applicant, himself, so there is no correlation as to what went on, and a decibel reading was made. He stated that this is not an appropriate test, because the engine is not under load and it is not an irregular noise. Instead, it is a constant pitch, and so the octave analysis, to which the applicant's expert referred, does not hold true for the site. He also conducted a test on lower frequencies, to show how bass and treble sounds are heard. The gentleman who talked about the music is quite right. High pitched noise does not travel quite as far. He added, however, that he is wrong about the fact that most of the noise that is here is in the lower pitches, and it will travel a long distance. This is why vehicle noise is such a problem. In addition to the engine noise, the voices of the people who are having a good time have to be considered. He added that they are yelling back and forth to each other, they are squealing, and the tires squeal as they go around a corner, and the vehicles bump into each other. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 14) 000:1.77 Mr. Shaw called attention to the pictures that he brought to the meeting, and he said the cars are not in perfect condition, because they run into each other. The study also said that, technically, the noise meter was set up to exclude sounds of short and fast durations. The problem is that these sounds need to be picked up, because that is the noise to which every- body responds. He stated that sharp, high pitched, very fast sounds make up the characteristic of what is going on at the site, so if the study does not show it, then the study is not valid. The applicant's study does not take into consideration the construction that is there, and there are buildings located there. The study does not take into consideration any type of reflection, because the go-kart was set up on a trailer, and that is not a reflection off of the ground. He said that this is not free field measure- ment. Free field measurement is when a car is operating and running on a track, and he pointed out that there is a difference between asphalt and a trailer, because the noise reflects. The study does not mention anything about the weather, and he said that sound travels very differently in different conditions. If the weather is monitored during cool, low humidity conditions, the noise travels much further and is more audible, such as during the month of March, when it is cooler. The way sound travels may vary, and that was not tested by the applicant's expert at all. He said that his (Mr. Straw's) report gave the applicant the benefit of the doubt. He pointed out there was a 20 mile an hour wind blowing at his back in one direction, and there was some increased noise levels on the other side. He also heard tonight that the ambient noise level at the site was 39 decibels. He did a noise test before he came here on that site, and it is 54 decibels. This is a significantly different number, and he wonders how different are all the other numbers. He does a tremendous amount of work in earth work operations in noise measurement and evaluations, etc. The type of berm that is necessary has to go within the piece of property that was recently rezoned, between the apartments and the race track, and it will have to resemble a buffer that is located on Route 29 or larger. It will have to be very tall, well planted and almost solid. This is great when the go-kart tracks are close, because some of the noise will be reflected. He told the supervisors, however, that the problem is when the go-karts are at the other end of the tracks, and they are still making the low frequency sounds, but, then, the berm is absolutely worthless, because it will not provide any kind of noise buffer at that point. The wave lengths that are produced by the longer, lower frequency waves reflect up and over the berm. He has seen this and has demonstrated it. He noted that the effective way to use a berm is to have a single point source on one side of the berm and then measure on the other side. This is not the case at this site. There is a go-kart track that is spread out over a long distance, there is a proposed berm, and there is an area on the other side, so that the noise barrier does not work very well. He added that a concrete wall will cause reflected noise. He understands the berm is approximately 50 feet wide or more, and there is access to another residential parcel, and that is the only access available. He noted that it would be hard to build a berm where there could be access to other property, so this will limit what can be done. Mr. Shaw next referred to the bumper boats, and he said that the supervisors have been led to believe that they do not make any noise at all, or the noise is very limited. He emphasized that the bumper boats do make noise because the engines are above the water. He stated that the exhausts may come out under the water, but it does not make any difference, because they will eventually bubble to the surface, and the engine rattles the whole compartment. Mr. Straw said that based on what his company has reviewed, such as the site's specific characteristics, these two land uses are not compati- ble. The residential use does not mesh well with what is proposed. He added that the study by the applicant's expert is not thorough enough nor is it correct, in his opinion, to give the Board enough information to make a positive recommendation. His studies clearly indicate from an operational track, that Mr. Wood's proposed facility will violate the ordinance. He said that when an ordinance is violated, there will be complaints, and the County will have to expend money to enforce those complaints. The supervisors and the County staff will get calls at all hours, because the greatest noise annoyance will be late in the evening, from 10:00 p.m. and later. He talked to an off-duty Florida highway patrolman who patrols the park where he (Mr. Straw) monitored the noise. This officer wanted to know who he was and why he was there, and he mentioned that there are three other officers there who watch the operation all the time. He emphasized that this patrolman stated that the vehicle traffic does not stop at 2:00 a.m. when the park closes down. The officers try to get everybody out of the park, but they just move down the road, so there is a tremendous increase in traffic. He emphasized that there can be a tremendous increase in traffic here, which again adds to the noise level. He would think a park of this nature would be more compatible on Route 29. He looked at the site which was recently denied, and he stated that this is an area where there will not be a problem with noise, although there are other aspects with which to deal, such as ingress and egress. He added that, as a recommendation from him, Route 29 would be an ideal place to put a park such as Mr. Wood's. He conducted a noise test with bumper boats at another amusement park in Florida, and this park also had batting cages, and a golf driving range. It was next to 1-595, which is a small interstate in Florida, and it is also in the middle of an industrial park. He would be glad to answer any questions. Mrs. Humphris asked if Board members had any questions for Mr. Straw. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) 000iTS (Page 15) Mr. Martin stated that he has questions, but he is unsure to whom they should be directed. The machine that he listened to this afternoon, at the Charlottesville Putt-Putt facility, was measured by one sound expert at less than 60 decibels. Yet, another sound expert is saying that a person has to yell in order for other people to hear what is being said, if he is in such a facility. He pointed out that this is a tremendous discrepancy. He is in court often, and he hears psychologists disagree as to whether or not people are responsible for what they are saying, but he has never heard such a discrepancy even in this type of situation. He is not questioning either expert's data, but he actually listened to and rode on a machine this after- noon. Mr. Marshall commented that he means no disrespect to either sound expert, and he understands that they are scientists who are supposed to inform the Board members. He stated, though, that the go-kart in the photographs is not the same go-kart that he and Mr. Martin experienced this afternoon. It seems to him that the comparisons are not valid. Both experts Want to get their points across, and the supervisors have to make a judgment, but he is not going to believe things that are not true from either person. He has a farm with three farm tractors and two lawn tractors, and he cannot say how many hours he has ridden on those tractors. On a scale of from one to ten, if his lawn mower was considered a ten, the go-kart that he rode would probably be measured at a four. The go-karts in the photograph are the same as the ones he has seen at Myrtle Beach, which do not have any mufflers, and they sound like rockets. It is like comparing apples to oranges. Mr. Straw responded that the go-kart in the photograph is a two person go-kart. There are approximately five to ten of these go-karts, which are designed for adults with small children. The other go-kart pictured in motion is much closer to the ones at Mr. Wood's site. It is not the same as compar- ing apples to oranges, because the issue relates to noise. Mr. Marshall replied that this is what he is talking about. The two experts disagree, and they both are trying to convince the Board, but they are contradicting each other. He is of the opinion that he cannot believe either one of them, so he has to believe himself. Mr. Straw stated that he understands what Mr. Marshall is saying, and the comments about the lawn mower and the single go-kart are very important. He is not talking about a single go-kart. He is looking at aggregate noise. Mr. Martin commented that the applicant's expert had included a worse case scenario, with all 20 cars side by side. Mr. Straw answered that there would not be a time when there are all 20 cars side by side. He said that all 20 cars side by side are not moving, and are not influenced by wind, tempera- ture and humidity. The applicant's expert has done some nice guesswork, but it is just extrapolation, based on formulas. He could do the same thing, but the correct number has to be used in the beginning. By taking a test of an engine under load, while the cart is moving and using the whole aggregate noise, there will be a lesser number. He noted that it is not the same as taking numbers such as 70 and 70 and adding them together to get 140, but he indicated that this is the sort of thing that the other expert has used to make his calculations. Mr. Straw went on to say that when these go-karts are put into operation at Mr. Wood's site, with the closest residential property only 60 feet away, there will be complaints, annoyances and most of all there will be a violation of the County ordinance. This noise cannot be buffered. Mr. Martin remarked that Mr. Straw is talking about the proposed apart- ments. He asked what he has to say about the Raintree area. Mr. Straw replied that with the prevailing winds and where some of the homes are located, the sound would probably be approximately 65 decibels. He added, though, that if the wind is blowing in the right direction, there will be a violation. He will not tell the Board members that this will happen every night, but he said that at this time of season, the wind is blowing generally toward the area of Raintree, and there will be increased levels of noise. He told the Board members that they should not think of this as one noise. It has to be thought of as the aggregate noise that goes up and down until 1:30 a.m. He emphasized that it is not the same as running 20 cars side by side. He said that it will be 20 cars that will accelerate and decelerate until 1:30 a.m., and he pointed out that the community quiets down significantly in the evening. There were no further questions for Mr. Straw, so, at 8:55 p.m., Mrs. Humphris stated that the Board would take a five minute break. At 9:02 p.m., the Board reconvened. Mr. Ingram stated that he was not aware of any kind of proposed expansion of the Putt-Putt Golf Course, and if his company had known of it, this particular site for the apartments would not have been chosen. He mentioned a statement by Mr. Tom McCrystal, who is one of the real estate agents who was involved in this, and Mr. Ingram said Mr. McCrystal is a disinterested party. He only had one copy of the statement, so he read it, as follows: "I, Thomas McCrystal, do hereby swear and affirm that to the best of my recollection and belief, L. F. Wood never discussed or disclosed any plan or intention of placing an amusement park including without limitation a go-kart track adjacent to or near the parcel purchased by Rio Hills Associates Limited Partnership, hereafter RHA, prior to closing in November of 1993. Furthermore April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 16) 000179 the first mention of any such plan or intention was not disclosed by Mr. Wood, to my best information and belief, until months after this November closing date. In fact, based on my understanding of RHA's development proposal, such a use, that is an amusement park, would have been totally inconsistent with my clients' development plans." Mr. Ingram submitted the statement to Mrs. Humphris, and told her that it is his only copy. Mr. Ingram said he was not making an idle statement. He assured the Board of Supervisors that Rio Hills Associates Limited would not build on this property if this proposal is passed because he does not feel that a multi- million dollar project there can be marketed. He was touched by the young people who came before the Board. This is a marvelous introduction to government, and he thinks that what they have said is absolutely right. He added that the County needs this type of entertainment, and an alternative. The interest needs to be balanced for the need, and it is a desperate one versus an appropriate place to have an amusement park. This BOard has been offered an alternative, because Mr. Wood's former partner, until just a few days ago, Todd Shields, has proposed a location which has the same things just a few miles up Route 29, and it would probably serve more people. He said to the young men and women who are looking for an alternative, that he hopes Mr. Shields' proposal is approved. His experts have looked at Mr. Shields' site, and they will testify to this Board as to how great the site is. He then concluded his remarks by asking Board members if they can responsibly trade, 139 or perhaps as many as 300, additional affordable housing units for 20 go-karts. Mrs. Humphris commented that the Board has asked her to move this matter along. She said that the Board members have heard a lot of information tonight, and they will continue to hear everybody who wants to speak. She then asked the speakers not to be repetitious, because the Board would like to get to its deliberations and decision making process. Mr. Michael Schulte stated that he is a professor at the School of Engineering, at the University of Virginia, and he has a Master's Degree in acoustics. He told the Board about his background, and he mentioned this because of the Board members' confusion that the expert's opinions were so different. He understands that both gentlemen might have done their measure- ments in good faith, but it is extremely difficult and unreliable to rely upon one test. He agreed with the expert from Florida that weather conditions, etc., have to be taken into consideration. He had heard the number of 62 decibels of sound discussed at the Planning Commission meeting, but he feels that 75 decibels of sound would be more accurate. Both experts mentioned the same number, but at different points, relative to this property. The great difference is how noise is perceived. He mentioned that when a test is done in a business type of environment, the sound will be much louder, and it is surprising how the waves of sound affect people. He remarked that noise pollution is the most difficult and expensive pollution to control, and once it is there, it cannot be removed. It would take him months just to under- stand what is going on, because it is not a point of source that is being considered. Each activity at the site can be considered a source of noise, and the location where measurements are taken is very important. He added that on the basis of his best judgment, it would be a terrible source of noise. He then made other points which he said that the other speakers have not addressed. The letter from Mr. Wood indicated that the people would rather live at the medium priced apartments than to drive from Greene County to work every day. Mr. Schulte said this might be true. He came to this country without a single penny, and he thinks that all citizens have to be respected of all incomes, races and of foreign national backgrounds. He does not think it is right to indicate that people with low or medium incomes will be living there anyway, and other people do not care about them, and it is better for them to live there and listen to this noise, than it is for them to drive from Greene County. He disagrees with this attitude, according to all he knows about acoustics, etc., he thinks that a park such as the one Mr. Wood proposes will disturb the neighborhood, and that is his best judgment. He said the supervisors will have to rely on their own judgments. He next mentioned that one gentleman compared the park to a prison being put next door to a neighborhood, and that nobody wanted a prison in their backyards. The country cannot do without prisons, but it can do very well without go-karts. It is really nice that the students have the attitude that they can come and change the course of events by addressing the governing body. He encouraged the students to use resources available to them to try to understand what is occurring, and to try to form their own opinion. He concluded his remarks by saying that if this use is allowed on the site, there will not only be a dispute about it at this time, but it will carry over into the future. Mr. Rick Johnson, Secretary of the Raintree Homeowners Association, and owner of one of the houses which will be the most directly affected by the noise, stated that as he listened tonight, it seemed to him that there was a confusion of facts, one of which is noise. In reality often on Friday and Saturday nights, he can hear the people at the Putt-Putt Golf Course through the woods. To say this is a quiet area and that no noise will come through the woods is not true. He does not know how the sound gets there, because he is not an expert, but he does hear the noise from his driveway at night. He addressed a comment to Mr. Marshall by saying that the noise from one lawn mower is fine, but 20 lawn mowers over the crown of a hill at 1:30 a.m. would disturb him (Mr. Marshall), and that is what has to be taken as an aggregate, conclusive measurement. He had thought the Commission advocated buffers of quiet type retail and office buildings between residential properties and April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 17) oooa.$o commercial and highway properties. This proposed use is exactly the opposite of a buffer. The office buildings, to which the petitioner referred, are there to serve as a buffer between Route 29 and the first group of houses, as well as a church which is located in the area. There is a valley and the noise goes through the valley. He next gave definitions of different nuisanc- es, which he said came from Black's Law Dictionary, and he pointed out that the noises that would be generated if this application is approved would clearly fit these definitions. He then mentioned the cost of buffers, and he brought out the fact that the buffer for this project would not be a six foot fence at the edge of the property. It would have to be a major buffer, and a big investment, to keep the noise down, and he does not see this on the plan. If this is the way the plan is proposed and accepted, the petitioner can simply say that he does not have to do it, because it is not on the plan. He next stated that the petitioner continually asks to be a good neighbor, and he thinks this is terrific. He likes the Putt-Putt Golf Course, and would have probably supported the application if it was expanding to 36 holes. As a good neighbor, Mr. Johnson said that he does not make drilling and circular saw noises late at night to affect everybody around him. This is exactly what will happen, if this application is approved. Ms. Nan Jefferson stated that she is a life-time resident of the Charlot- tesville-Albemarle County area. She has lived all of her 43 years in this area, and has played Putt-Putt golf since she was 15 years old. She left her own children there, who are now teenagers, for hours at a time while she has gone shopping, because teenagers do not like to go shopping with their parents. She is a 13 year member of a local rescue squad and fire department. There is nothing more serious than picking up teenagers who are out on county roads joy riding, and who have flipped a vehicle going 55 miles an hour or more. It is terrible to have to do CPR on a child who is already dead. She stated that a park such as the one proposed is needed in this area for families. A good wholesome environment is needed for them. She has constant- ly heard complaints tonight about crime. She lives next door to a State police officer, and her home has been burglarized. There is not a person in this room who is immune to crime. If these speakers think that living in a certain area and limiting activities will prevent crime, it does not. She implored the Board members to take into consideration that the proposed park is not just for a few people in a certain area. She emphasized that it will benefit the complete county. Mr. Randy Jones remarked that he has petitions with 450 names in favor of this project, and he gave them to the Clerk. There has been a lot of discus- sion tonight about the park staying open until 1:00 a.m. or 2:00 a.m. He pointed out that Mr. Wood's normal hours of operation with the Putt-Putt Golf Course has been from 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 midnight. It is his understanding that these will be the enforced hours of operation. Mr. Wood lives down the road from this operation, and he has lived at the same place for many years. He feels confident that Mr. Wood will not let things get out of hand. He added that people are concerned about loitering and unruly crowds, but he said that he thinks if people consider the Putt-Putt Driving Range's history over the years, there has been no trouble there. He, personally, does not expect there will ever be trouble at that site. Mr. Wood takes pride in the fact that he has operated this business for a number of years, and it is family owned. It needs to be considered that this is not something that Mr. Wood has decided to do on the spur of the moment. Mr. Wood has given the project careful consideration, because he is also a neighbor to this site. He added that Mr. Wood is actively involved in this project, and he is not located in another county or city. The Putt-Putt Golf Course is a national organization, and it is a quality organization, which has been around a long time. This organization tries to do things right and tries to fit into the community. He is not an expert on sound, but he hopes that Mr. Wood's expert will be given a chance to rebut some of these items which have come up, because he thinks this is only fair. He recalled Mr. Marshall's comments about comparing apples to oranges, and he agreed that it looks as though there is conflicting data. That is why the first party needs to respond to some of the comments which were made by the second sound expert. He hopes the Board will consider this matter, and he said that he would look forward to participating in this sort of recreational activity. Ms. Rebecca Adams announced that she really did not come to this meeting to speak, but she felt, now, that there were a few things she needs to share with everybody. She would not reiterate everything that has been said with regard to the noise, but she pointed out two things. First, in the absence of absolute conclusive data about what is going to happen at the Putt-Putt site relating to noise, she would rather for the Board to take into consideration a real test and the data generated from this test, versus an experiment which would try to simulate what might happen and then extrapolate the results. Secondly, she mentioned a letter which was written from a person in Texas who said that the go-kart could not be heard. She noted that, generally, she expects the people in that apartment complex keep their windows closed at night. One of the things that she likes about living in Charlottesville and Central Virginia is the wonderful temperate climate that is here, and it is her pleasure to live in a place where she can keep the windows open most of the spring and summer months. She does not use the air conditioning in her home, unless there is a significant heat wave. She would not be happy if she had to close her windows after dark when the noise levels begin to increase. She concluded her comments by noting what really happens at Raintree. She recalled the last eclipse, and she mentioned that she lives on a cul-de-sac. Most of Raintree is located on cul-de-sacs, and whenever there is a meteor or April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 18) 000 .8 . an eclipse, the neighbors come out with the children who are old enough to stay up that late, and they sit in their lawn chairs at the end of the cul-de-sacs, and watch the eclipse or meteor shower. It is a wonderful neighborhood community buildin9 activity, and she would hate to see the light pollution, the noise and all of the other distractions take away from the charm and appeal that the Raintree Subdivision provides to its residents. Ms. Nancy Pugh remarked that she also lives in the Raintree Subdivision, and her home will be approximately 700 feet from the proposed development. She does not understand all of the acoustical engineering data, but, from a common sense standpoint, she knows that when she is in her back yard, she can hear a single truck engine on Route 29, which is 3,000 feet from her home. She mentioned that this winter, when the weather was bad, she could hear groups of five or six children shouting at the Putt-Putt Driving Range. If there were ten go-karts, nine batting cages, bumper boats and a lot of people shouting, she has a hard time understanding how she would not hear the noise, when it would be even closer. She then mentioned the earlier comparison which was made to a lawn mower, but she pointed out that a lawn mower might run once a week for an hour. The proposed activity would be for seven days a week for the long hours that were mentioned. She wanted to respect the other concerns which people have voiced, but she thinks there are other options, and this type of facility could be placed elsewhere in the County where it would not be adjacent to so many homes and planned apartments. There are other uses, in terms of developing this land, which would be much more consistent with the County's long range plans, such as office service. This would provide a natural progression from commercial highways into residential areas, as compared to a use such as the one proposed, which would be an abrupt conflict. As a homeowner, she does not know what else she can do besides live in her home or sell it, and if it becomes unpleasant to live in and very difficult to sell because of this proposed amusement park, she does not have many other options as far as what can be done with the property. Mr. Don Wagner, of Great Eastern Management Company, read a prepared statement in which he stated that he was representing the Encore Investors Limited Partnership which owns three parcels of land totaling a little more than 11 acres between the Putt-Putt Driving Range and Raintree. The Partner- ship members have no objection to Mr. Wood's plans if they can secure approval for compatible commercial zoning adjacent to his land. He then referred to the second paragraph on Page Four of the Backstage sound report, where it speaks to sound attenuation in the wooded area to the east of the site, but does not mention that the trees are on Encore's site. Encore's plans will include buildings, which might well be more effective sound barriers than the existing trees, but he wanted to avoid any misunderstandings. A wide undis- turbed area adjacent to the Raintree Subdivision would be left, but most of the trees close to the Putt-Putt Driving Range would be lost. He also mentioned that the staff report speaks of screening between the site and adjacent residential property. He said the BZA recently granted Mr. Wood relief from setback requirements from the residential portion of the Encore property, partly because it assumed the Encore property would be put to commercial use. Assuming that Encore's request for compatible zoning adjacent to the Putt-Putt Golf Course is approved, the Partnership will not want heavy screening along the property line. This portion of the Encore property is currently visible from Rio Road, and if the Putt-Putt expansion is approved, it will probably stay visible for a long time into the future. (See Mr. Don Wagner's comments for Board of Supervisors meeting dated April 14, 1994.) Mrs. Thomas asked Mr. Wagner if he is saying that he does not want screening along the property line. Mr. Wagner replied that, presently, the line between the Encore Property and Mr. Wood's property is commercial back to a certain point, and, past that point, it is currently zoned residential. He explained that under the Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Wood would have been required to set back 50 feet from the residential portion of that line. The BZA granted a waiver to that on the basis that this land was in the Comprehensive Plan for commercial use, it would be developed for commercial use, and, therefore, the setback was not necessary. Once past Fashion Square, the property line becomes visible, so any commercial building that would be built there could be seen from Rio Road. He would hate for screening to hide these buildings from Rio Road, and if he is successful in his bid for rezoning of the property, he does not want a lot of screening at the property line. Mr. Marshall asked Mr. Wagner what he is going to build on the property that he just mentioned. Mr. Wagner answered that his Partnership is working on a plan to request rezoning for that property of either C-1 or PDSC. He has already started working on this plan with staff. Mr. Marshall asked how tall are the buildings, which are proposed for that site. Mr. Wagner replied that he is uncertain, at this point. He mentioned that, several years ago, when the Northside Library people were looking for a site, there was an attempt to put the library there. He said some plans were developed, and his Partnership worked with the members of the Raintree Board, at that time. The general idea then was to have the windows in the walls of the buildings which back up to the Raintree Subdivi- sion looking out toward the Raintree Subdivision, with parking behind them, so that between Raintree and the remainder of the site, there would be screening by buildings and parking areas. 00018 April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 19) Mr. Marshall asked again, if Mr. Wagner knew how tall the buildings were proposed to be. Mr. Wagner replied that there would certainly be the possi- bility of some two story office type buildings. Mr. Ernest Pugh, a resident of the Raintree Subdivision, commented that the batting cages have not been discussed much tonight. From talking to people who have been around batting cages, it seems that the cages are very loud and irritating. He recalled that when he went to a major league baseball game years ago, and sat 400 feet away from home plate, he could distinctly hear every person who batted. Raintree is 700 feet away from the proposed facility, and instead of this happening every minute or two, it will happen in a batting cage every four to six seconds in an irregular pattern. This reminds him of a popcorn popper, and it is not needed in his development. Secondly, he mentioned that the car dealerships on Route 29 sometimes have loud speakers, and these are heard in his development. The loud speakers are approximately five times farther away than the proposed park.' There would have to be a loud speaker used with go-karts, so it would be heard distinctly, and regularly, and it would be irritating. He then recalled what Mr. Wood said in September about go-karts being trendy, and that they could be here today and gone five years from now. Once this land is rezoned from residen- tial use, it is gone forever. Rev. Louis Boyd commented that he is a husband and father who lives in the area, and he is a minister at one of the local churches. He has done youth ministry with teenagers for 20 years, and has spent a lot of time around town, some of it good and some of it not so good, but he has enjoyed it. He has found, in working with the Woods, that they are attached to families, and the families have needs as well as teenagers. The days are gone when families sat around the radio and listened to The Lone Ranger, and he went on to say that this is not family recreation, anymore. Families now want to go somewhere and be entertained or entertain themselves in some way. Mr. Wood's facility is that sort of thing, and although it will not be a "fix- all," it will be a good start. He disagreed with the two gentlemen who spoke on behalf of the Raintree Subdivision using the term, "teenager" as though it was some sort of deviant. His youth group just had 32 children who stood up in front of the church, one at a time in front of God and their peers, and vowed sexual abstinence until marriage, these children are also looking for a place to go and something to do. These children are likened to the ones who spoke earlier and asked for somewhere to go and something to do. He is glad to have someone in the community who has the vision to get something done for families and teenagers. The location of the park has been discussed. He appreciated the Board members for listening to all of these comments. He added that they have heard reports on sound, etc., but he feels that if the location is a problem in terms of sound, then it should be closed down. From what he has heard, one expert says it is okay, and one says it is not. These things can be determined, and if Mr. Wood breaks the law, then the place should be closed. The families should not be penalized in the community for the fact that all of the correct information is not available. Mr. Wood will probably make a fortune with this business, and that does not bother him at all. In fact, Mr. Wood will probably make more money in a year from this business then he (Rev. Boyd) will in two or three years. The reason that Mr. Wood will make the money is because this amusement park will be popular because people are looking for something to do just like this. The location is prime, because it is in the middle of everything. As stated earlier, Rev. Boyd pointed out that there are all types of businesses in that general area, and it is a good, central location. He hopes the Board members' decision is not based on the number of people at this meeting speaking for or against the request, because this does not represent the entire County. He added that it represents the community which is near the facility. He agreed, however, that these are the supervisors' constituents. He would rather have the facility closer to Hollymead. He hopes the supervisors' decision is based on facts and what they have seen. They have seen and heard the go-kart, and he encouraged the supervisors to get other facts, if they are needed, and make the determi- nation from this information. Mr. George Payne spoke next, and he said that he lives on Old Brook Road in the Raintree Subdivision. He has visited the facility in Dallas, and it is in the middle of a light industrial section. One side of the facility is bordered by a railroad track switching yard, and an interstate highway, which is highly traveled. There are no residential communities anywhere near that facility, and it is perfectly located for what it does. He did not have the opportunity to test the go-kart at Mr. Wood's site, himself, but he expects that it is probably new and shipped in for this purpose, and probably well tuned at this point in time. He pointed out that as the car is used, it will be in disrepair, and will probably get louder as time goes by. As far as the ambient noise levels are concerned, one was measured at 39.9 decibels, and another one was measured at 54 decibels. He suggested the ambient noise at 1:30 a.m. now is much less than either of those figures, and it will not be if this facility is approved. Next, he remarked that bumper boats may have smaller engines with two stroke motors as opposed to four stroke motors, but he expects that they are not muffled nearly as well as the engines which would be on the four stroke Honda go-karts. The bumper boats may produce as much noise as the go-karts. He then talked about the woods to the east of the property, to which Mr. Wagner referred, and Mr. Payne emphasized that these woods are not owned by Mr. Wood. These woods do not come under Mr. Wood's control, and there would be no regulation as to whether or not the woods will be there in the future, so they should not be considered as a barrier to the sound. He agrees with Rev. Boyd that the Charlottesville/Albemarle community April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 20) O00J.8 would greatly benefit by a facility of this nature, and he thinks that Rev. Boyd's idea that he would not mind having it near his community of Hollymead where the other Putt-Putt Golf Range is proposed would be wonderful. Mr. Jonathan Williams remarked that he would like to speak for the people under age 21. He said the County police come around the parking lots and there are children in the parking lots who want to sit and talk. These children might not have $5.00 to go to the movies, plus they cannot talk in the movies. He asked what are the children going to do if the police are covering every parking lot. The people representing the apartment complex will be making their thousands every month, but they do not care anything about the children, which are the future. He asked if the children do not have fun now, what will they do later. Sometimes all the children have to do is get involved with drugs. There are policemen on the radio telling parents that they should know what their children are doing, because they might get into drugs. He asked what else is there to do in Charlottesville, except to ride up and down the roads, and drag race in the country. He went on to say that Mr. Wood wants to build something for the children that will not cost the State anything. It will be Mr. Wood's money, and Mr. Williams wondered what is the big deal. If the people in Raintree want privacy, why do they not live in the country. It has been said that in ten years, that area will be in the middle of Charlottesville, and he asked how there will be privacy for Raintree residents then. Mr. Kenny Mellis, Regional Manager for Liberty Construction Company, mentioned that he talked to Mr. Wagner on the telephone approximately a month ago, and Mr. Wagner's comment was that he would go along with this proposed change, if he could also have his property rezoned. He added that Mr. Wagner said if this request is not approved, and he has to keep this property in office use, as it is now, then he wanted no part of it. Mr. Wagner did not actually say that at this point, but he pointed out that the Encore represen- tatives are already asking for a zoning change, and he wonders where it will all stop. Mrs. Humphris announced that she needed to find out from the other Board members how much more they are prepared to listen to. The supervisors can obviously not stay here all night to allow everybody a rebuttal. Mr. Carter asked, in the beginning for a chance for rebuttal at the end of the speakers. She thinks three minutes should be enough time for him to make his remarks. Mr. Carter remarked that everybody has been mentioning the 1:30 a.m. time, and they seem to think it is extreme. It is only during June, July and August that the place is open later. Usually, on weekends, the place is closed at midnight. The applicant is subject to any reasonable rules that this Board wants to impose, but the 1:30 a.m. closing time is not considered to be a problem, because there is not going to be anybody at the site at 1:30 a.m. on Thursday nights, even in the middle of the summer. He then referred to Mr. Wood's words which were quoted from the previous Board of Supervisors meeting. Mr. Wood's words referred to a rezoning, and this is not a rezoning request. Mr. Wood identified himself as speaking on behalf of some of the concerned parents at the Agnor-Hurt School. There is nothing that prevents people from reevaluating situations, and he noted that Mr. Wood's comments were made about a different matter at a different time. He believes the record will reflect that the Fieldbrook Subdivision had only eight responses to its call, relating to this matter. He emphasized that this is a family business and it is something that is needed. Mr. Wood's site is the place to put it, because it will never be put somewhere that will please everybody. This reminds him of what Mr. Bowie used to say when he was Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, which was, "Don't ever buy a view." He thinks this is exactly what the developer should have thought about when he bought this property because he knew what he was getting himself into. At this time, Mrs. Humphris closed the public hearing. Mr. Bowerman stated that the Board has heard a lot of comments for and against the application, and he appreciates the fact that the comments which were made were orderly. He has listened to everything, and he has tried to keep an open mind. Based on what he has heard, it seems, at the very best, there is the potential for significant nuisance. Whether or not there is a nuisance, would depend upon the number of people who use the facility, the wind direction, the atmospheric conditions and the children and parents who are at the facility. There has to be an overwhelming public benefit from having a use such as this one, where there is a potential problem with an established neighborhood and with a planned apartment complex immediately adjacent to it. He agrees that one of these establishments needs to be located in the community, but he does not agree that it should be in this location. It is for this reason that he will not support the application. Mr. Bowerman then offered motion to deny SP-93-34. Mr. Marshall asked if Mr. Bowerman would be in favor of the application, if the go-kart track was removed from the project. Mr. Bowerman replied that he had thought about this possibility, but he believes the batting cages could be possibly more of a nuisance than the go-karts. The crack of a bat on a hard ball, whether the bat is aluminum or wood, can be quite extreme, and the sound carries very well. With six batting cages, Mr. Bowerman believes there is a lot of potential for a lot of noise. It is a great activity, but he does not think that it is an activity that should be adjacent to residential neighborhoods. He sees the total use as being a nuisance, and it is not just 000184 April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meetin9) (Page 21) one thing in particular that keeps him from supporting this application, and he pointed out that it is the combination of activities that is proposed. He is also concerned about the location of the facility. He reiterated that he would support something like this in another location, and he said that if it would not impact residential communities, it would be ideal. Mrs. Thomas stated that she would like some discussion with the staff about the noise ordinance. She said if this facility cannot comply with the standards of the noise ordinance, if it is a substantive noise ordinance, then the question is moot, because if they cannot comply, then they cannot proceed with the operation. She had understood that the noise ordinance would require a 40 decibel limit at some point, but she believes now that it requires a 65 decibel limit. Mr. Bowerman responded that the ordinance requirements change according to the time of day or night. Mr. Cilimberg commented that 40 decibels is in the ordinance for recreational facilities such as swim and tennis clubs. The 40 decibel analysis is used to try to determine what kinds of screening or buffering would need to be provided to reduce noise limits at property lines. The 40 decibel limit is not applicable to this application. Mrs. Humphris informed the other Board members that Mr. Bowerman has reminded her that the motion either has to be addressed or abandoned. She said there should be a second, if there is going to be one, before the discussion. Mr. Martin remarked that he would have seconded the motion, but he is going to vote against it. Mr. Bowerman stated that it makes no difference if a Board member proposes a motion or seconds it, as to whether or not he or she supports it. Mr. Martin commented that it is stated in the Board of Supervisors' Rules of Procedure, unless the supervisors vote to suspend their rules, that a supervisor cannot second or propose a motion and then vote against it. He added, however, that the motion can die, and the discussion can continue. Mrs. Humphris said the motion has died for lack of a second. Mrs. Thomas asked if the noise ordinance limits the noise before the evening hours. Mr. Bowling responded that the noise ordinance only limits the noise between 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m., as it is currently written. Mrs. Thomas stated that, because of the way the noise ordinance is written, it does not allow her to do what she was thinking of doing. She was also influenced by the suggestion of the applicant's neighbor that there not be fencing on the east side. The east side is exactly the side that should be buffered in order to keep Raintree Subdivision from being impacted, although it is to the north that will have the closest residences. She had thought that noise meter readings could be required on the other side of the property line all day long. She asked if this can be required. Mr. Cilimberg replied that this Board can put conditions on the special use permit. The conditions could cover whatever decibel reading over whatever period that the supervisors would like to enforce. Mr. Bowling mentioned that there has to be some basis for reasonableness. Mr. Bowerman suggested that the application of the noise ordinance to buffer a potential use is probably a last resort, and, therefore, he would think that a use which contemplated the existence of a noise ordinance to make it satisfactory is probably not undertaken in the correct way. Mr. Martin stated that there could be a requirement that the decibels remain under a certain level, and if there are complaints, then they would be investigated to see if the complaints are founded or unfounded. Mr. Marshall commented that the Board has done this before at Boar's Head Inn. Mr. Bowerman concurred. He asked Mr. Bowling how difficult it is to enforce the noise ordinance. Mr. Bowling answered that it would be difficult. Mr. Bowerman stated that if the noise exists, complaints are made, the police take action and it is a repetitive problem. He said the courts will not likely remove a special permit because of a noise violation. He added that if this is a significant concern, and the supervisors have to be satis- fied with the application of the noise ordinance to try to buffer the use, then he has doubts about the approval of this application. Once the com- plaints have been made, the problem exists. If there is a potential for this problem, with the approval of this application, then he does not support it. Mr. Martin inquired that if there is a condition of a special use permit that is being violated, can the special use permit be revoked. Mr. Bowerman replied that the special use permit can be revoked by this Board, but he does not think it can be revoked by the courts, without exceptional circumstances. Mr. Martin stated that he was not suggesting the special use permit be revoked by the courts. Mrs. Humphris pointed out that a situation such as Mr. Martin is suggest- ing will put everybody in a terrible position. Once the applicant has invested a large amount of money, and the amusement park is in place, and then April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 22 ) complaints occur, it is too late. She asked will this Board then shut the business down, and cause him to lose all of that investment. Mr. Martin responded that he is not arguing either way. He is unsure, at this moment, which way he would vote on the motion. He added, though, that the applicant would be taking that risk, himself, if he puts capital into the business. Mrs. Humphris stated that there would be lots of people coming before this Board saying it is such a great thing for families, and that this Board cannot shut the business down. She is going to state her position because she has some strong feelings. She asked Mr. Wood when she met with him to tell her everything that he could to enlighten her about the situation. If she had a choice of where to live and one of her choices was in an apartment next to this recreational area, she would choose to live somewhere else. She thinks it is important that the high density zoning be maintained in that area. She will not respond to the threat that she heard tonight, and if anybody knows her, they know that she does not threaten very easily. It is important to the County to maintain high density residential zoning in this urban growth area. She agreed with Mr. Bowerman that the potential nuisance is great with the noise from the go-karts, the boats, the crack of the bats and the yelling of the people. She knows how sound travels in her own neighborhood, and how far across the lake, etc., she can hear people when they have a party in the neighborhood. She would not wish it on anybody else's neighborhood. She concurs that there would have to be some overwhelming public need to cause this Board to put this recreational facility in this particular area next to a high density residential area. She cannot support doing that. At 10:03 p.m., Mr. Bowerman moved for denial of SP-93-34 for Putt-Putt Golf and Games. Mrs. Thomas seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mrs. Humphris. Mr. Marshall. Mr. Perkins. (Mr. Marshall left the meeting after the vote). There was some informal discussion among Board members and Mr. Bowling about whether or not a Board member can make or second a motion, and then vote against it. Mrs. Humphris asked that a ruling be provided on this matter. Agenda Item No. 9. SP-92-27. Stamm Family Land Trust. Public Hearing on a request for an extension of the time period of approval for SP-92-27 which authorized a stream crossing in the flood plain of Muddy Run & Buck Mountain Creek. Property on N sd of Rt 687 approx 0.75 mi W of Rt 601. TM7,P29A. White Hall Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 28 and April 4, 1994.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file with the permanent records of the Board. He noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 15, 1994, unanimously recommended approval of SP-92-27 subject to three conditions. Mrs. Humphris opened the public hearing, and asked Mr. Kurt Gloeckner, representing the Stamm family, if he wished to speak. Mr. Gloeckner commented that the Stamms still live in England, but they plan to return some time soon. He asked the Board to approve the stream crossing in the flood plain of Muddy Run and Buck Mountain Creek. No one else came forward to speak, so Mrs. Humphris closed the public hearing. Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to approve SP-92-27 with the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: 2 o This approval shall allow construction of only one of the two options outlined in this report; A building permit to construct a crossing shall not be issued until the following conditions are met: a. Department of Engineering final approval; Water Resources Manager approval of water quality impact assessment plan; ,. Compliance with all federal, state and local requirements pertaining to a perennial stream; Department of Engineering issuance of an Erosion Control Permit (Grading Permit); 3. Approval of this permit shall expire January 1, 1997. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 23) 000186 Roll was called on the foregoing motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mrs. Humphris. NAYS; None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins and Mr. Marshall. Agenda Item No. 10. SP-94-01. Allen & Edna Dunbar. Public Hearing on a request for additional development rights on 4.1 ac zoned RA. Property on pvt rd 0.4 mi W of Old Lynchburg Rd approx 1.1 mi S of inters with Dudley Mtn Rd. TM89,P52. Samuel Miller Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 28 and April 4, 1994.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file with the permanent records of the Board. He noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 15, 1994, sent the above-noted request to the Board, with no recommendation. The Commission failed to make a recommendation due to a tie vote. There were no comments from Board members to Mr. Cilimberg, so Mrs. Humphris opened the public hearing. (Mr. Marshall returned to the meeting at 10:08 p.m.) Mr. Dunbar stated that he has two acres that he can give to one of his sons, and this will leave him and his wife the two and one-half acres on which they currently live. He has already given his daughter two acres of land, and his younger son will eventually get the property on which he and his wife live now. He is going to try to pay the oldest son the cost of the land so that all of his children will be treated the same. Mr. Kevin Cox remarked that he is present to support Mr. Dunbar in his request, as he was at the previous meeting when Mr. Dunbar asked for the other division right. Mr. Dunbar has four acres left, which he wants to cut in half and give two acres to his son. This is the only way that Mr. Dunbar's son can afford to get a home on a single lot, where they can have a yard for their two small children. He emphasized that this is the only way that these people can build a home in Albemarle County. He said they looked for lots, but everything was completely out of their price range. This situation is identical to what happened before, and it was said before that if there was a similar request, it would be approved. This is a similar request, and he pointed out that the Dunbars paid $995 to apply for this permit, which is nonrefundable. He understands that the permit fee is intended to recover 100 percent of processing the permit. In this case, the staff used the staff report from the previous special use permit, and it is obvious that the staff did not have to do as much work. However, the fee is the same, and he thinks the Board should consider refunding some of this money. He added that it is a considerable amount of money and these people do not have a lot of money. In principle, he thinks it would only be right to take this into consideration. He certainly hopes the Board will approve this application. No one else wanted to speak concerning this application, so Mrs. Humphris closed the public hearing. Motion was offered by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Martin, to approve SP-94-01 subject to one condition reading: "Staff approval of subdivision plat." Mrs. Thomas stated that she has been out to the site, and it is truly affordable housing and it is not desirable or usable for other uses. She added that it is not in a commercial subdivision or watershed area. There are deed restrictions for family use. Mrs. Humphris said that she did not understand the deed restriction, and she asked Mr. Cilimberg to explain it. Mr. Cilimberg replied the staff understands that the deed restriction pertains to family members, and he said there was a statement made in the Commission meeting about having this restriction removed. He added, however, that the deed restriction was not part of the staff's consideration and review, other than providing it as additional information. Mr. Dunbar might be able to speak to this matter. He also noted that it is a 20 year restriction. There were no other comments. Roll was then called on the foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS; ABSENT: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. None. Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 11. SP-94-04. B&B Partnership. Public Hearing on a request to permit outdoor storage & display of vehicles within the EC Dis- trict. Property W of Brady Bushey Ford on Rt 250 E. TM78,P6. Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 28 and April 4, 1994.) April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 24) 00018"7 Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file with the permanent records of the Board. He noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 15, 1994, unanimously recommended approval of SP-94-04 subject to three conditions. Mrs. Humphris noted that there is not an overall picture of how the final business will look. Mr. Cilimberg responded that there is nothing in the existing area that the applicant is proposing to do that is of any consequence within the site plan. He noted that the site plan is applicable to the new area where the business will be expanding, which currently holds two dwellings and an old hotel. Mrs. Humphris next wondered if all of the buildings will remain the same on the original site. Mr. Cilimberg replied that he understands the buildings on the original site will remain the same. Mrs. Humphris stated that she is questioning this because she cannot see the total picture, and she is concerned about the entrances. She asked how many total entrances will there be and how close together will they be, when the business has expanded. Mr. Cilimberg replied that the business will have the same number of entrances which currently exist along the entire frontage. He noted that there are already three entrances there. There is an entrance into the old hotel. Mrs. Humphris asked if anyone commented at the Commission meeting about the number of entrances. Mr. Cilimberg responded that there were comments about combining two entrances rather than having a separate entrance. He added that the applicant responded by saying the Brady-Bushey dealership wanted to keep some separation to the activities, so they did not want to have the only entrance for the activities through a common access point. He said the other site can be reached by going through a customer parking lot. He noted, too, that the entrance already exists, so the County officials cannot require the entrance be closed. If the applicant was establishing a new entrance, the staff would not recommend approval. Mrs. Humphris inquired if Mr. Cilimberg is saying that the applicant is allowed to keep all of the existing entrances. Mr. Cilimberg answered that the applicant can keep all three of the existing entrances, if he so chooses. Mrs. Humphris opened the public hearing. Mr. Bryan Smith, representing the applicant, stated that there was minimal discussion about the entrances at the Commission meeting. His response to the Commission members was that this property is not going to be combined into one parcel. It will remain as two parcels, and it is owned by two separate entities. It is hoped that the flexibility of the separate entrances can be retained, because the property may be sold in the future, or it might be used for another dealership, such as the jeep dealer- ship. Mr. Marshall asked if three of the four buildings would be removed. Mr. Smith replied affirmatively. He said that one building would remain for the night watchman and caretaker, because he will continue to live there. With regard to any changes to the existing Brady-Bushey dealership, Mr. Smith stated that the used car dealership salesmen's offices will be removed, and the operation will be located more centrally to both sides, but it will be put on the parcel that the applicant is developing. He knows of no other changes on the existing Brady-Bushey Ford property. There were no further questions for Mr. Smith. Motion was then offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to approve SP-94-04 with the following three conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued by the Architectural Review Board; Development shall be in general accord with site plan titled Brady-Bushey Ford dated November 5, 1993, revised February 10, 1994; 3. Administrative approval of the site plan for this use. Mrs. Humphris stated that she has a concern relating to three entrances along that very busy short stretch of road. She asked if there is anything this Board can do about that. She asked if the three entrances have to be allowed. Mr. Cilimberg replied that the special use permit is specific as to entrance corridor considerations, so he does not think this Board could require closing that entrance. If the entrance is closed, it would mean that the only entrance to the property that is subject to the special use permit was being closed. Mr. Bowling concurred. Mrs. Thomas noted that the Commission also made comment about the height of the sign, even though the Sign Ordinance would allow it to be a certain height. She mentioned that since the business is on a hill, it could make the sign very high. She shares this concern, even though there is nothing that April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 25) 000 8 this Board can require. Mr. Cilimberg responded that he believes the allow- ance for sign heights now in the ordinance is a 20 foot maximum height. Roll was then called on the foregoing motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS; ABSENT: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. None. Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 12. Approval of the 1994-95 County Operating Budget. Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albe- marle County, Virginia, that the operations budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1994, be approved as fol- lows: General Government Administration Judicial Public Safety Public Works Human Development Parks, Recreation and Culture Community Development County/City Revenue Sharing Refunds Capital Improvements Education - Operations Education - Self-Sustaining Funds Education - Debt Service Contingency Reserve $ 4,292,536 1,439,322 7,560,671 1,967,208 4,688,133 2,680,923 2,012,826 4,475,120 51,000 1,360,000 60,721,862 5,245,000 6,845,880 25,790 TOTAL $ 103,366,271 Roll was called on the foregoing motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS; None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 13. Set tax rates for 1994. Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to adopt the following resolution setting the tax levy for calendar year 1994: BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby set the County Levy for the taxable year 1994 for General County purposes at Seventy-Two Cents ($0.72) on every One Hundred Dollars worth of real estate; at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight Cents ($4.28) on every One Hundred Dollars worth of assessed value of personal property; at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight Cents ($4.28) on every One Hundred Dollars worth of assessed value of machinery and tools; and at Seventy-Two Cents ($0.72) on every One Hundred Dollars worth of assessed value of public service assessments; and FURTHER orders that the Director of Finance of Albemarle County assess and collect on all taxable real estate and all taxable personal property, including machinery and tools not assessed as real estate, used or employed in a manufacturing business, not taxable by the State on Capital; including Public Service Corporation property except the rolling stock of railroads based upon the assessment fixed by the State Corporation Commis- sion and certified by it to the Board of Supervisors both as to location and valuation; and including all boats and watercraft under five tons as set forth in the Code of Virginia; and vehicles used as mobile homes or offices as set forth in the Virginia Code; except farm machinery, farm tools, farm livestock, and household goods as set forth in the Code of Virginia, Section 58.1-3500 through Section 58.1-3508. Roll was called on the foregoing motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS; None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. April 14, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 26) 000189 Agenda Item No. 14. Approval of Minutes: March 25, June 17 and October 7, 1992; March 17 and December 1, 1993; March 2, March 14(A), March 16(N), March 21(A) and March 23(A), 1994. Mrs. Thomas had read March 14 (A), 1994, and found them to be in order. Mrs. Humphris had read March 16 (N), 1994 and turned in a list of typos. She had also read March 21 (A), 1994, and March 23 (A), 1994, and found them to be in order. Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to approve minutes which had been read. Roll was called on the foregoing motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS; None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 15. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BO~kRD. Mr. Tucker handed out a list of responses to budget comments from citizens. He said that a detailed explanation of compensation issues will be forwarded to Martha Harris. He noted that he had also obtained answers to questions raised by Mr. John Carter. He said Carole Hastings has admitted that there was inadequate information in the budget concerning salaries. However, there are legitimate answers to all questions raised. Mrs. Thomas said she appreciated all of the questions raised by the public. Several citizens had gone through the budget with a "fine-toothed comb". It was impossible for them to read it the way it was put together. Mrs. Humphris said she hopes that the staff working on the budget next year will take these comments into consideration. Mr. Marshall thanked Mr. Tucker for the good job he did in formulating a budget. He said that if it was not for the trust he had in Mr. Tucker and Mrs. Hastings, he would not have voted for approval of this budget. Agenda Item No. 16. Adjourn. At 10:35 p.m., with no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman