Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-04-20April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) OO0190 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on April 20, 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 and Mrs. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: Mr. Walter F. Perkins. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis, 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. Humphris. 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. Bowerman, to approve Items 5.1 and 5.2 and to accept the remaining items on the Consent Agenda as 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. Authorize Chairman to execute service agreement for Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. By the recorded vote shown above, the Chairman was authorized to execute the following agreement: THIS SERVICE AGREEMENT, made for the purpose of identifica- tion this 10th day of May 1994, by and between the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA "County") and the STONY POINT VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC. ("Stony Point"); W I T N E S S E T H: Background: (A) The County previously has entered into a service agreement with Stony Point, dated May 1, 1989, providing for the withholding of certain sums each year by the County from the County's annual grant to Stony Point, as set forth in said agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A (on file); and (B) As a result of said agreement, the outstanding indebted- ness now totals One Hundred Thirty-Four Thousand Dollars ($134,000.00); and (C) Stony Point now desires to receive from the County an additional One Hundred Sixty Thousand DQllars ($160,000.00) to be used for a new pumper; and (D) Stony Point also desires to enter into an agreement consolidating its annual withholdings of payment by the County; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the operation by Stony Point of a volunteer fire company which will fight fires and protect property and human life from loss or damage by fire during the term of this agreement, the County shall pay to Stony Point One Hundred Sixty Thousand Dollars ($160,000.00), which payment shall be made from the fire fund, $35,000.00 to be paid after execution of this agreement and $125,000.00 to be paid upon request after July 1, 1994. The sum of Twenty-Six Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($26,900.00) shall be withheld from the County's annual grant to Stony Point for fiscal year 1994/95, thereafter, the sum of Thirty-Three Thousand Three Hundred Eighty-Seven Dollars and Fifty Cents ($33,387.50) shall be withheld from the County's annual grant to Stony Point for a period of eight (8) years beginning with fiscal year 1995-96 and ending in fiscal year 2002-03. Thus, at the end of the ninth year, which is the term of this service agreement, a total of Two Hundred Ninety-Four Thousand Dollars ($294,000.00) will have been withheld. This withholding consoli- dates the balance of all prior advancements as a result of the prior service agreements with Stony Point dated October 10, 1986 and May 1, 1989. April 20, 1994 (Regular Night (Page 4) 000 93 family nurturing committee. Habitat is also in the process of setting up a liaison committee with the community in which some representatives of Habitat and the community would act as a clearing-house that would be the tool in which they would communicate with the community. Since this process began, Habitat has received 12 applications from the community for houses in this development. There has not been an opportunity to review all of the applica- tions to see if they qualify. Last Monday Habitat held a meeting specifically for housing applications in this development from Esmont residents. Habitat is placing an emphasis on families from that area to receive houses in this development. It is not Habitat's intent to import a group of people from another area and bring them to Esmont. Habitat wants to work with the community and make this development a part of that community. Mr. Marshall asked if Habitat would be willing to guarantee that the first people who would be living in this development would be from the Esmont community. Mr. Wardell said Habitat is making every effort to recruit people from the Esmont area. Habitat has national standards that it must follow. In addition, income, credit history, employment history and current housing conditions, are used to qualify a family as a partner family. Mr. Marshall asked if Mr. Wardell could guarantee five qualified applicants, from the 12 applications already received. Mr. Wardell said he cannot guarantee that five of the applicants would qualify, but he would be surprised if they did not qualify. Habitat operates on a first-come first-serve basis. The first people to qualify are the first people put on the waiting list. Currently there are three families on the waiting list. Habitat also provides each family with the option of rejecting a housing location twice. Mr. Martin said suppose Habitat had 30 people on a waiting list who qualified, of those people nine were from Esmont, would at least five people go into the housing or would it still be first-come first-served. Mr. Wardell said that situation does not exist. The situation which does exist is that none of the families on the list that are qualified are from Esmont. Habitat is in the process of reviewing the 12 applications from Esmont residents. Five of the applicants have already been reviewed, one does not qualify, but the other four applicants, from a preliminary review, look like they qualify. Habitat will work with the one applicant to help her qualify. Habitat still has to do home visits, employment and credit history. Their major recruitment for this project is the Esmont community, but with all of the publicity surrounding this project, other people are finding out about Habitat and requesting applications. The danger of guaranteeing a certain percentage is if Habitat guarantees that five Esmont residents would go into the houses, and only four qualify, then it could put the entire project on hold. Mr. Martin said he is not asking for a guarantee, but would like for residents from the community to be a priority. Mr. Wardell said that is Habitat's objective. He also does not think it would be fair to take the three families that have already been selected and move them to the bottom of the list. He cannot make a guarantee, Habitat is making every effort to insure that every family that qualifies from the Esmont area gets into the project. Mr. Marshall asked if the three families on the waiting list are from Albemarle County. Mr. Wardell said one of the families is from Albemarle County, one is from the City of Charlottesville and the other is from Greene County and actually works in Greene County. Mr. Wardell said Habitat has invited representatives of Esmont to their board meetings. If this project goes ahead, they have been discussing holding some board meetings in the Esmont area. This is a unique request and approval of this special permit would not set a precedent. These houses are built and sold for no profit. This project uses no government funds. The costs to build and develop this project is from fundraising and private sources. This seems like an ideal opportunity to provide a significant number of affordable housing. This issue here is to provide housing for families who are responsible but have would not otherwise be able to purchase a home. He urged the Board to approve this request. Mr. Wardell then provided Board members with a copy of a letter sent to the Esmont community outlining some of the ways Habitat wants to work together with the community. Mrs. Humphris asked if the road would be built to VDoT standards for acceptance into the state system. Mr. Wardell replied, "yes" Not only has Habitat raised funds through fundraising, but it also intends to make a grant application through the Federal Home Land Grant Program. That is a not a government program, but it is a program designed for developments of this type. Mrs. Humphris asked what is the time frame. Mr. Wardell said there is a contingency in the purchase contract relating to approval of the special use permit request. If this request is approved, Habitat would then raise the funds to purchase the property by mid summer. After that, they would begin to raise the funds for the development. He can foresee construction starting on the road next spring and then perhaps some houses built in the summer of 1995. Mr. Edward Brooks, a resident of Esmont, said a lot of speculative comments have been made about opposition to this project. The group of residents he represent wants to see Esmont residents be the major benefactors of this development. If the residents cannot get that guarantee, they see no reason to grant a special permit in an area designated rural, and then have to fight all the things that go along with the future development. It takes a lot of time to plan and do things right in a community. Habitat has a great opportunity here to use the residents' passion to see this project through, but it will take some caution. The ideals of Habitat are good and there is a April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) need for housing in the community. Anything could happen to make this project~ go awry. He was hoping to have a guarantee that 50 percent or more of those houses would go to people from Esmont. After this permit is granted, the residents cannot come back to the Board and say the project is not turning out the way they thought. He suggested that no one go into the houses until Habitat approve 50 percent of the residents from the Esmont area. A guaran- tee is not too much to ask. The debate is not about whether this project is good or if the community wants these people, it is about how it can be done where there is an opportunity for it to work out to the benefit of the community. He asked that the Board either help the community get a guarantee from Habitat or defer the request until they can work together and come up with an equitable position. Mr. Brooks asked how many persons present were in support of his position (12 people stood). Mrs. Thomas said a guarantee would short circuit the rest of Mr. Brook's request which is working through the process.' She asked which is more important. Mr. Brooks said a guarantee in writing would allow them to move forward on the rest of the process. He thinks the position of the Esmont residents should be sovereign over Habitat because these are the ones who are giving up the most. Mr. Martin said it seems to him there is no way to get a guarantee until the people apply and the applications are reviewed and approved. In addition if someone is approved now, in two years when the houses are built, that person in the meantime may lose his/her job and then would be unable to get the house. Mr. Brooks said the residents' position is that a percentage of the houses be reserved for Esmont residents until they qualified, however long it took. Mr. Bowerman said absent a guarantee of five Esmont residents occupying the houses, would he rather not have the project. Mr. Brooks said that is their position. The residents want a commitment that 50 percent of the homes will go to Esmont residents. They also want to discuss the eventual character of the development. At this time the residents are not involved in the selection process, the nurturing or anything. Mr. Martin said he thinks there are too many intangibles for the applicant to make a 100 percent guarantee and if he were the applicant, he would not accept the condition. Mr. Marshall said he has talked to a lot of the people from the communi- ty this week. These people are concerned about the type of people coming into the neighborhood. This community is the same as any other community. There are a lot of professionals moving back into the community and building nice homes. They are upgrading the community. The residents have a great deal of pride in their community and they want to know what is coming. Mr. Martin said he does not disagree with Mr. Marshall, but he is trying to be rationale in looking at what can and cannot be done. There are certain guarantees that cannot be made. He then asked if the applicant cannot give a 100 percent guarantee, then they do not want anything. Mr. Brooks said this is a differ- ent situation, the applicants go through a selection process. Mrs. Humphris then asked if Mr. Brooks wanted a deferral on the special permit. She also asked what use would be made of a deferral if a guarantee cannot be made. Mr. Brooks said a deferral would allow the applicants to work with Habitat in the approval of the applications. He wants those residents approved before the Board approves the special permit. Ms. Murial Wiggins, a member of the Habitat Board, asked the Board not to consider deferring this request. Habitat has wanted to build houses for a long time for people who need them. She has been a part of the selection process and has seen houses that have appalled her. She is appalled that realtors and landlords can rent to people at exorbitant prices something that is not fit for an animal. That is why she supports Habitat. She heard the previous speaker refer to a lot of fears and concerns. While those concerns are being raised and deferrals being asked, applications are coming in. Mr. Brooks should be telling the community to get applications in. The selection committee considers employment and ability to pay rent. Habitat sent out a letter on April 5 to all the residents inviting them to join one of Habitat committees. The residents can create their own guarantees by applying. If the applicants have the a stable income and ability to pay the loan, they 'do not get rejected. The integrity of Habitat's process is that they take the applications as they are received. It grieves her to hear somebody say that if they cannot have it all, they do not want anything. Mrs. Frances Ford, a resident of Esmont, asked why Esmont was chosen as the site to build those houses. She has been living in Esmont longer than anyone else in the room. Esmont is a low-income neighborhood but the people get along with each other. The people work together in christian love. There are several churches and a school that their forefathers built. The people built their own homes. She does not know why Esmont has to swallow this and she is concerned about the type of people who will be brought in. She wants everybody to have a home. A lot of senior citizens live in Esmont. She has not heard any police horns or anything because the people have lived reli- giously in the community. She hopes these families will get homes somewhere but she does not want this project shoved down their throats. It is fright- ening to bring in these people when they know nothing about them. She hopes that something can be worked out. Rev. Dr. Nan Brown, Pastor of Way of the Cross Baptist Church in Fluvanna County, said she does not live in Esmont, but she has an extended family in her church from Esmont. The bulk of the members of this church are April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) 00,0 95 from the Esmont area. She does not believe the people who stood tonight represent the feelings and the views of the members of this church. She supports this request. She asked how many of the people who stood have lived in substandard housing; housing where there was no water, where there was outdoor porticoes. She has lived in substandard housing and knows what it is like. If people need housing, they should get it. Since the land is avail- able it seems a likely place to build the houses. The applications will be reviewed and screened. It does not make sense to require a guarantee of a certain number of residents from the Esmont community. The houses are for all of Albemarle, not just Esmont. There is an application process and rules and regulations that have to be followed. She does not think the granting of the permit should be held up because of someone wanting a guarantee on a certain number of houses. If the residents put in their applications, there is no doubt in her mind that they would get the houses. She is in support of the request. Ms. Christine Thomas said she lives on the property directly located behind this property. The current road (Route 725) is a state road, but it has not been maintained. The state will not do anything to that road. She does not think another road should be built taking her away from the road that leads to her property. She wants to continue to use her road. She asked why Route 725 cannot be upgraded. The residents were told by representatives of Habitat that this was a community-oriented project. Habitat has not given them a commitment that residents of this community, which include Porter's Precinct, Esmont, Chestnut Grove, Keene, San Road and Howardsville, would get these houses. She believes that Habitat should be able to find five or more people who qualify from this area. She believes that five people from the community should live in these houses. She asked that the Board deny or defer this request until the community is given written, not verbal, commitment to these houses. Mrs. Felice Boling-Key said she supports Habitat, however, she has some concerns that need to be addressed in order for Habitat to be a positive addition to the Esmont community. She asked that the Board defer this request because this project will have a significant, long-term impact on the Esmont community. She believes everyone should have a home. She understands that Habitat cannot guarantee Esmont residents, but they have not even guaranteed residents from Albemarle County. There has been little communication between Habitat and the community. There has been an after-thought in working with people from the community. This project should be in its planning stage and the community brought in to help manage the system that Habitat already has in place. Habitat will not lose anything if it does not build houses in this community. Habitat can find land somewhere else. Habitat already has the right to build five homes. Regardless of what happens at this meeting tonight, when the people move into these homes, the community will support them. She thinks the project should be phased. This is a rural community, it was zoned as such and she does not think that zoning should change overnight. She is concerned that a lot of the people applying will not be able to pass Habitat's criteria and will be turned away. She would volunteer to work with Habitat to help build community relations. She asked if the family nurturing committee will remain in force for the duration of this project. She thinks Habitat needs to take the time to work with the community so that the communi- ty can work with the people who will be living in these homes. Ms. Nikki Finn said she and her husband have three children and are building a home in Albemarle County. They are building this home in partner- ship with Habitat. They struggled to find decent housing for their family within their financial limitations. For nine years they rented a house about the size of a trailer. The rent was affordable. Eventually the house was insulated and the kitchen floor replaced after her son's chair fell through it. The well water had bacteria and was progressively getting worst. Their landlord could not afford to make repairs without raising the rent so high they would have to move. They searched for other housing within their budget range and found that they did not have much of a choice. Hope came along through Habitat. Habitat offers a "hand up" and not a "hand out". They became volunteers for Habitat and worked on the first house, and soon found out they could also be eligible to become partners. Since they were selected, they waited for over 18 months. Habitat is in the process of securing a single lot for their family now. The Board's approval will not affect her family personally, but will certainly affect families who are waiting or yet to be selected. These families need the hope of a better quality of life in their own communities. On behalf of all of these families she ask for the Board's cooperation and approval of Habitat's application. Rev. Lloyd Feggans said he is a lifelong resident of the Esmont communi- ty. He has listened to the pros and cons on the issue. He likes the concept of Habitat in the way they are approaching this issue. Habitat has a self- help method and does not require a handout from anyone. People are helping people. This is an opportunity for home ownership. He has seen the community grow from something small to what it is today. He does not need a home, but there are a lot of people who have not had the opportunity to own their own homes. He hears a lot of fear from people but he cannot control who lives next door. He would like to see the Board vote in support of Habitat's request to show support for the less fortunate people. Ms. Deborah Feggans said she is a homeowner in the Esmont community and lives on Route 6. About five years ago she was looking for land in Esmont to build a home. Since she had an approved loan, she thought she would move back April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) 000196 to the community in which she was raised. Nobody wanted to sell her two acres to build a home. She eventually found two acres located on Route 6. If she was someone here tonight and was applying for a home through Habitat she would really consider living in the community because the residents do not seem to want anybody to move out there. She thinks the residents of the community are being selfish because there are a lot of people who need homes. She under- stands that Habitat cannot guarantee the homes for residents of Esmont. She thinks that if someone from some other part of county needs a home, then so be it. The people should go where the homes are. A lot of people have moved out of the community and then come back to settle down. There have been homes built in recent years, not by Esmont residents. She supports Habitat's request. Ms. Peggy Scott said she does not think anyone is in disagreement with Habitat building the homes. She thinks the residents would wholeheartedly want the homes in Esmont. The Board ha~ the ability to put stipulations on almost everything that is built in the county. The residents want the same rights for the community when it comes to Habitat. They want stipulations to insure that the individuals from the area will be the priority. In her opinion there does not have to be a 100 percent guarantee, but she wants it scraping 100 percent. She has lived in substandard housing. She does not want to see a child or an adult living in a substandard home. It is an economical issue as well. Esmont, whether everyone would like to admit it or not, is already considered low income, has a high poverty level by the standards of this Board and Albemarle County. When ten individuals that are also considered low income are moved there, that adds to the economical conditions. There are no recreational facilities in the community to support the children who already live there. When these people are put into these homes other accommodations have to made that are needed in the area. If Esmont starts to become a high crime area, then extra patrol cars will be required to protect the residents. She thinks that Habitat will do a good job but the residents cannot be guaranteed that. She thinks that an individual from the community needs to be on the committee to insure that Esmont's rights and needs are respected and assured before the families are placed in these houses. She asked that the Board stipulate in the approval that at least 100 percent commitment be made to putting Esmont residents in the housing and that they will not go below the 50 percent mark. In response to a comment made by Mr. Martin earlier about Forest Lakes, she said Forest Lakes is a totally different situation. The individuals who purchase homes in Forest Lakes are of a higher income level. She would love to have a Forest Lakes built in Esmont. Although her taxes are just as high, she does not get the same benefits. She wants people to have homes but she asks the Board members to consider how they would react if this development was being requested in their communities. Mr. Martin said it seems to him the way this program is set up is that the only people who will benefit are going to be people who are trying to help themselves. He asked Ms. Scott if that did not make her feel better about the quality of the persons who will be living in the homes. Ms. Scott said no. Five years ago she was considered low income. She still had high standards and high qualities for herself. She did not settle for anything less than the best; however, if an area is continually bombarded, it results in being a ghetto or slum. She thinks there needs to be some guidelines to insure that the community is represented. Ms. Lisa Glass, speaking for the Piedmont Environmental Council, (PEC) said the issuance of the special permit will essentially double the value of this parcel for residential development purposes by doubling the density permitted. It appears from the staff report that one of the primary reasons for taking this step is to provide affordable housing in the county. PEC has actively supported the provision of affordable housing in the past and supports this application, if approval contains a provision which insures that the value created by the issuance of this permit will be devoted both now and in the future to affordable housing. One thing that both assures long term affordability in housing stock and secures the public subsidy is the recorda- tion of a second deed of trust. Not only would such a provision insure that the value created by the permit be committed to affordable housing, it would serve to distinguish the issuance of this permit from other requests for additional density which may be made in the rural areas in the future. Mrs. Humphris asked if it is legal to add a condition that insures that any profit would always be devoted to affordable housing. Mr. Davis said such a condition could be problematic because this application was not applied for under the section of the Zoning Ordinance that deals with affordable housing. This is simply a development rights issue. He thinks the Board has to focus its conditions on those terms and conditions that would make the impact of this use compatible with the adjacent property. He thinks the Board would have to carefully construe such a condition. Ms. Harriett Eddy said she is a resident of Esmont and supports this housing project. With regard to a guarantee, the only thing we are guaranteed are death and taxes. Even products that are guaranteed do not make it. She is concerned that if this request is deferred whether Habitat would still be willing to move forward on this project in Esmont. Esmont needs housing. Not all of the details will be worked out in the beginning. If Habitat decides to go somewhere else and build these houses, the community may be sorry for losing out. She does not see how guarantees can be made. The houses are April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) 000197 needed in the community and the people need to find more positive things to say instead of the negatives. Mrs. Margurite Murray said she also grew up in the Esmont community. She has been a homeowner in the Esmont/San Roads area for the last ten years. She also grew up in substandard housing. She encouraged the Board to approve this request. She makes her living visiting people in their homes. There are many people in the Esmont area and throughout the County living in substandard housing. She encouraged the Board to think about those people who do not have housing. She feels strongly that the Esmont community can find many people currently in the Esmont area who could own those houses. The residents need to put their energy into that and let Habitat do what they need to do and support them. She supports Habitat's mission. She has read how Habitat proposes to involve the people. They have provided an open invitation. She is a mental health worker. It seems to her Habitat is saying it is trying to attract people who are willing to work and willing to improve their quality of life. She is not fearful of the type of people Habitat will attract. She feels Habitat will attract the people who have a need, have committed to and proven their quality of life. There are many people who are sleeping in cars, under bridges, etc. There are lots of families who have no housing; lots of families who have lived with no indoor plumbing. She has lived there and knows what it is like. She feels that the residents need to channel their energy to help out. The reason she has a house is through Farmers Home Administration. She has worked as a single parent of children, she has maintained her house and she feels that the people Habitat will attract are those who will work and who will have pride and a sense of commitment. She does not think the community needs to be fearful of the type of people this project will attract. She believes that Habitat operates an honest program, with an honest mission and goal. The community needs to stand up and pull together. She believes the community should go to those people who live in substandard housing and encourage them to apply through Habitat. Ms. Virginia Gardner said she is a resident of the county and agrees with the previous speaker. Affordable housing is a problem in the County. She is a board member for Habitat. She is chairperson of the fundraising committee. One of the reasons she got involved with Habitat is because it is a nongovernmental funded program and it suits the needs of these people. She also is a realtor. She wants to be a positive contribution to the community. After Habitat found this piece of land, she went into the Real Estate Depart- ment and looked at the assessed values of properties surrounding the proposed development. The values range in the neighborhood of $40,000. She thinks this project could make a positive contribution to the county. The house Habitat built in the City has an improved assessed value of $71,000. These houses are not poorly built. They have good builders involved. They have architects, realtors and professionals involved. This will be a quality project and a contribution to the community. With regard to PEC's request, Habitat's charter requires them to do just that. They have no problem stipulating how the monies are handled. Lastly Habitat has some stringent guidelines. The committee that screens the candidates do not take their job lightly. The default for Habitat loans nationwide is less than one percent. Mr. Wellford Tiller, a resident of Crozet and member of the board for Habitat and the immediate past chair of the Board, said obviously community is important to all those that work with Habitat. They are all volunteers. They are not here to make a profit, but to help the community. It is a little surprising for them to be viewed as adversaries in a community situation. Habitat volunteers have given their time and energy because they want to help. Habitat is open and desirous of input from the Esmont community, but they are also expected by the national guidelines by Habitat to involve people in the community in the process. He thinks the people in any community in which they work would be hard pressed to find any organization who wants to work more closely with their community and to help their community than Habitat. Habitat is here to build neighborhoods, not just houses. Their goal is to help, not hurt the community. He hopes the Board will approve the special use permit and move forward with the project and not delay it. Ms. Juanita Anderson, a resident of Esmont, asked what happens to the permit if Habitat decides to build only five houses after getting approval. She asked if the permit would still be valid. Mr. Davis said the special permit runs with the land and not the applicant and as long as a successor in interest could meet the conditions of the permit, they could develop the property. Mrs. Humphris said if the special permit runs with the land and not the applicant, then how is the second condition, recommended by the Planning Commission, enforceable. The recommended condition states: "Development shall be in accord with the statements of the applicant as contained in At- tachment C and the information packet entitled 'Greater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity Esmont Property Special Use Permit'...." Mr. Davis said he thinks the development has to be consistent with Habitat's application, but it does not necessarily have to be by Habitat. As he reviewed Attachment C and the brochure, basically the only requirement Habitat placed on themselves was that the residences to be built would be owner-occupied by the participant who participated in construction of the houses. That was the only absolute. They did define the purpose and intent of their program, but that was the only requirement he found that was absolutely imposed upon them. Mrs. Anderson said she thinks that is something that needs to be addressed. April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) 000t9 Mr. Donald Hanson, Chair of the Albemarle Housing Coalition, said the Coalition supports the community from the point of view of citizen participa- tion. They support this project because every means possible needs to be found to build affordable housing and with the ten units the size of the average acre would be two acres per unit. He thinks it is important to maintain the rural aspect of the county. Mr. Chip Chandler said he has been a resident of Esmont for four years. He does not think anyone objects to the goals of Habitat. He owns property adjacent to the proposed site. He personally has no objection to moderate income housing but he thinks Habitat should have gotten the community involved in the process from the beginning. He thinks the process that has taken place has been backwards. Habitat is a program that he thinks is a great idea and he plans to get involved in it. He does not think Habitat took time to look at the community. He also wonders if Habitat could take some of the money they have and put it towards refurbishing some of the houses in the community that are currently substandard. He has no objection to the ten houses, but feels that Habitat and the Esmont community need time to work out their concerns and get the community involved in the process. Mr. Bernard Curry said he moved to Esmont five years ago. His basic concern is that the houses will be built directly across from B. F. Yancey Elementary School and he is concerned about who will be living in the houses. He wants a guarantee that Habitat will do all it can to get Esmont residents in the houses. Mr. Ron Faus, Chair of the Family Selection Committee for Habitat, said he considers himself to be of some moral character, as well as being a minister of the gospel. They already have applicants from people of varied backgrounds, some of which will be excellent homeowners. He is committed to provide housing to residents of the Esmont community. They have received 12 requests for applications so far. All of the people they received applica- tions from were either from the Esmont area or have relatives there and want to live in the area. One of the applicants is from the Howardsville area. Of the five applications that he has in hand, four appear to meet Habitat's financial guidelines; a fifth one needs a little work and they have already met with that person and are trying to help them to meet the qualifications. He is committed to trying to provide as many houses as possible for people from the Esmont area. Me is also committed to people from other areas who are living in substandard housing because they also have a need. He will have a priority on people from the Esmont area. He is also ready to have people from the area on the committee so they can be in on the selection process. Mr. Kevin Cox said some of the comments made by the residents concerning potential homeowners in this development are ridiculous. He asked the Board to send a message that there is room in the County for Habitat and the people they serve. Mr. Wardell then again addressed the Board. Mr. Wardell said if for some reason Habitat is unable to develop this property and it is sold, Habitat has no problem with attaching the condition that any development on the property be sold for no profit and that no government funds be used. His understanding of the reference to the brochure implies all of the charter requirements of Habitat. Mrs. Humphris commented that the applicant is J. E. Simpson Estate. Mr. Wardell said they are the applicant only because the contract is contingent on Habitat getting the ten development rights. Mrs. Humphris asked if the only contingency to the contract is the securing of the five development rights. Mr. Wardell said the second contingency is the ability to raise the funds to purchase the property. Mr. Marshall asked why a contingency could not be included in the deed. Mrs. Humphris said Habitat might not get the deed if it does not raise the money. She is concerned that the Board would then be in the position of approving a special permit for five additional development rights to a piece of property that may not be used by Habitat, if the funds are not available for the purchase. Mr. Bowerman said the Board would have to amend the special permit for any use other than what was included in this request. Mrs. Humphris said if Habitat had the special permit, but could not raise the money to purchase the property, what limitations would exist to who could develop the property. Mr. Davis said anyone could development the property who could meet the general compliance with the statements of the applicant contained in Attachment C and in the brochure. Those documents state certain things and staff would have to assure that those general requirements are met. Those things would be difficult to do if they were not done by Habitat. The requirements are pretty specific to Habitat's organiza- tion. The documents are specific in stating that the homes will be owner- occupied by people who participate in the construction and that they will not be sold at any profit. Mr. Martin said the owner would have to develop the project as stated by Habitat or come back to this Board to amend the permit. Mr. Davis said that is correct. Mr. Wardell said he would agree to a condition that the development of this property for ten lots require that those houses be sold for no profit, that the development of this property does not use any government funds, and that the development of this property involves owner-participation in con- struction. The conditions can be as specific as the Board wants. April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 10) At 9:15 p.m., Mrs. Humphris closed the public hearing and the Board had a recess. The Board reconvened at 9:21 p.m. Mr. Marshall said this property is located in his district. He has always supported this community. He has listened tentatively to the discus- sion. He is distressed to see good friends and neighbors divided on an issue such as this one because he thinks it would be good for the community. He knows a lot about the speakers who are present tonight. He knows and under- stands a lot of the concerns that have been expressed. He thinks this issue is whether this will be good for the community. He thinks the residents are afraid of something that is not going to happen. He came into this meeting with an open mind. He tried to get a commitment from Habitat and he now understands their charter. He thinks that Habitat will act in good faith and do what they say. When he ran for election to the Board of Supervisors he ran on a platform that he would try to bring jobs and affordable housing to Albemarle County. He cannot change that philosophy. ~He thinks that the leaders in this community only want what is good for the community. He will support the request because he thinks it is the right thing to do for all the right reasons. He cannot believe that an individual who will be given the opportunity to own his/her own home would not be an asset to the community. Mr. Marshall then offered motion to approve SP-94-03 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Bowerman said he would second the motion. He wants the Board to be specific about the motion. If it is agreeable to Mr. Marshall, he would like to have this as part of the record in terms of the rationale for approval. What makes this request specific and special is that the application is for affordable housing by an organization that is nonprofit, there are no govern- ment funds involved and it is a private/public partnership. Those things make this request unique. The Board has a long history of denial of almost every special permit for additional lots in the rural areas. He does think this is an exception. He thinks this request does deserve support but only because of these unique features that are part of the application and are the only reason he would support this. If this same situation were to arise again with these same circumstances, he would also be favorable to that request. Mr. Martin said he agrees with everything the other two Board members have stated. In addition, he feels comfortable supporting this because this is not giving a handout. This is a way to help someone to obtain a home who otherwise would not be able to afford one. He does not think this development will end up with undesirables in it because he does not think they would be willing to work for anything. He can support the request and he does not think it will be a detriment to the community. Mrs. Thomas asked if it was appropriate to add a condition that the road be built to state standards. Mr. Cilimberg said Habitat would only be able to get a private road if a request was made to the Planning Commission and the Commission granted it. Mr. Marshall said he would be agreeable to that condition. Mr. Bowerman said he wants to make sure that the topography and vegetation are such that there is not some advantage that could be gained by having a private road. Mrs. Thomas said a private road can place a burden on the homeowners. Mrs. Humphris said she feels that is important. She thinks it would be a tremendous burden to have ten lower income homeowners responsi- ble for the upkeep of the road. Mrs. Thomas then suggested the following third condition: "The road serving these ten lots must be built to Virginia Department of Transportation standards for acceptance into the state system." Mr. Marshall, as motioner, accepted the additional condition. As seconder, Mr. Bowerman agreed to the third condition. Mrs. Thomas said she has been impressed with this public hearing. She has sat through many public hearings, but this was one public hearing in which people disagreed with each other greatly but did so in a civilized manner. There were no name calling and other things she has seen at previous hearings. She thinks this is a sign that the community will pull together on this project. She did some research and is totally convinced that land of this sort is so scarce in this county that there are so few places that this type of project could be done. She hopes that Habitat has learned a lesson that it must involve the community, early in and throughout the process. Mrs. Humphris said she will also support the motion. Ordinarily she would be in opposition to additional development rights in the rural areas. She has strong feelings about that. She has to echo Mr. Bowerman's comments. This is clearly a unique situation and one that everyone needs to get together to support for all the reasons stated by other Board members. There is no question in her mind that as this project moves forward, the residents will all be behind it. 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. (The conditions of approval read as follows:) April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 11) 000200 1. Staff approval of subdivision plat; Development shall be in accord with the statements of the appli- cant as contained in Attachment C and the information packet entitled "Greater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity Esmont Property Special Use Permit" (both copies on file). Revisions to the sketch of development contained in the applicant's information necessary to meet requirements of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordi- nances are not included in this condition; 3 o The road serving these ten lots must be built to state standards for acceptance into the state system. Agenda Item No. 8. Discussion: 1781 Productions, Inc. (SP-93-07) . Mr. Fred Payne, Attorney for Mr. and Mrs. McRaven, said the issue as the applicants see it has to do with the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals of March 29, 1994. At issue was the degree to which the submitted site plan is in conformity with the sketch which was made a condition of the special permit. As he understands, the Board had certain questions with respect to the sketch and the site plan. The applicants asked for the questions, were provided a list of questions and in return the applicants have responded to the questions. Mr. Martin asked if the Health Department required the applicants to locate the septic field in a particular location or simply said that was a good place or were there alternatives. Mr. Payne responded that the property had been tested for suitability for septic disposal. A number of sites were identified and graded in terms of acceptable, unacceptable and superior. It is his understanding that the Health Department wanted to use nothing but the best sites. The Health Department took the original study which was done in 1989, identified the best sites that were displayed on that study and then asked for more detailed close grid studies. The Health Department did not want any compromises as to the site location. Mr. Martin said most of the other questions he had were substantially answered. Mr. Bowerman said one of the responses to a question said no trees would be taken out in installing a drain field. He asked if that is above a certain caliper. Mr. Payne said "yes". He believes the standards staff has used is six inch caliper, six feet to the ground. Mr. McRaven has extensive experi- ence in installing these septic fields, and he informed the BZA that since the late 1940's he never lost a tree in the installation of a septic disposal system. The Health Department does not require a site to be cleared for the installation of drain fields. Mrs. Humphris asked if Board members had any other questions and desired to go into executive session to further discuss the issue. The consensus of the Board was "no". Mrs. Humphris said she has some questions that are not related specifi- cally to 1781 Productions, but in general because of what has happened. One of the concerns she had was with the sketch plan the Board originally received and based its decision, and the site plan that was appealed to the BZA which subsequently was approved. She found that the original sketch plan approved by the Board represented anywhere from 114.4 to 135.8 acres. She thought the Board was dealing with an outline of this property that was accurate. She later found that the actual area of this property was only a little more than 100 acres. She asked how the Board can make a meaningful judgement with conditions based on a sketch plan that in actuality is smaller than the actual piece of property. The Board was not dealing with 135 acres for everything to be placed on; it was only dealing with 103 acres. Procedurally in the future, she does not want to see this happen again. There can be a great deal of difference in what one can get on 103 acres versus 135 acres. She thought when the Board was dealing with the sketch plan, that it was a correct outline of the perimeters of the property. The sketch was what went in the middle of the property, but the Board gave general approval to what was in the sketch. She would feel uncomfortable now with any sketch plan that is brought before the Board. Mr. Tucker said there are no provisions that require there be a boundary survey in a sketch plan. If the Board wants to require that, the staff can do so. It can be a requirement that the boundaries be surveyed properly. Mr. Martin asked what would be the cost of doing that. Mr. Tucker did not know, but there would be an additional cost. He thinks the Board could still have the same problem with a sketch plan if it did not require that it could be general in nature. Mr. Bowerman said maybe for special use permits that come before the Board, the plans need to be a little more specific. He thinks it is important that the Commission and Board have a reliable way to gauge the impact a development could have on adjacent properties in terms of distances. Mr. Tucker said from his perspective a sketch plan is used simply as a guide. The staff knew this plan would still have to come back in the format of a final site plan. If the Board has concerns that when it is looking at a sketch plan, it wants to be assured that it is looking at a more accurate April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 12) 000 0 [ boundary of that plan, then he thinks that would have to be a requirement in the Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Humphris said she thinks there needs to be a change in the Ordi- nance. On the new site plan for 1781 the drain fields are in a totally different location than where the Board approved them. This situation could happen again. Mr. Tucker said it depends on how definitive the Board wants to make the sketch. He does not think the McRavens had any idea of where the Health Department was going to approve the drain fields. Maybe everyone needs to understand that a sketch plan is a general guide of where certain features will be. Mr. Bowerman referred to a request the Board heard the previous week for Putt-Putt. One of the concerns the residents had was the proximity of that use to their homes. The applicant had a plan that showed the use was approxi- mately 700 feet. He used that as a judgement on what'effect that would have on those residences as well as he knew that the proposed apartments would be approximately 100 to 150 feet from the property line. He thinks there are times when the Board reviews an application where metes and bounds, or at least the dimensions of where particular uses are on the property in relation- ship to adjoining properties, could be a key piece of information. He is not talking about spending a lot of money for a final detailed plan. Mrs. Humphris asked if an applicant could not come down to the real estate office and look at the tax map and sketch the boundaries of the property. Mr. Tucker said in this instance this property was not a specific tax map parcel. The applicant created a parcel out of a number of parcels. Mr. Cilimberg said the Board needs to also understand that the applicants are dealing with scales. If the applicant used the tax map as a base, the proposed developed area could still be off base by a number of feet. To require someone to do that up front is going to be costly. Mr. Bowerman said one possibility is when the Board has a request before it for a special use permit, and when there are certain issues raised by the public, applicant or the Board which are important in the Board's consider- ation, if an applicant says the distance is "x" from the closest property line, that could be made a condition and would be applicable to the final site plan. The locations of other aspects of the plan would then have to be worked out keeping in mind the approved distance. Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning staff could work more closely with applicants, in the future, on proposed improvement areas and approximate distances of lines to be established. There were property boundaries on the larger parcel that could have been used or other landmarks that could have been used as distance points from various parts of this site for 1781 Produc- tions. Board members concurred. Mr. Gary Rice, Senior Environmental Health Specialist for the Health Department, said he was a member of one of the evaluation teams that worked with a local private firm and checked the soil for suitability and perk rates. They determined, based on certain factors, that the areas shown on the formal site plan are the best areas for drain field purposes. Agenda Item No. 9. Approval of Minutes: March 25(A), June 17 and October 7, 1992; March 17(A) and December 1, 1993; and March 2 and March 16(A), 1994. Mr. Martin had read the minutes of October 7, 1992 (pages 22 at item 12 to page 35 at item 16), and found them to be in order. Mr. Marshall had read the minutes of March 25, 1992, and March 16(A), 1994, and found them to be in order. Mr. Bowerman had read the minutes of June 17, 1992 (pages 19 at Item 8 to the end), and March 17, 1993, and found them to be in order. Motion was then offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to approve the minutes which had been read. 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. Agenda Item No. 10. BOARD. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Mr. Martin announced that he would not be present on May 4, 1994. Mr. Marshall announced that he would not be present on May 4, 1994. Mrs. Thomas announced that she would not present on May 18, 1994. April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 13) 000202 Mrs. Thomas announced that on April 30, 1994, there will be a breakfast meeting between members of the planning district and representatives of the private sector to discuss economic development. Motion was offered by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Martin, to add a University of Virginia representative to the Housing Committee. 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. Mrs. Thomas mentioned letters received from Allen Dunbar and Kevin Cox concerning the fee charged Mr. Dunbar for his special use permit (SP-94-01) that was heard by the Board on April 14, 1994. The letters indicated Planning staff used the same staff report it had prepared for a previous request by Mr. Dunbar, and therefore requested a reduction in the fee. Mrs. Thomas said she does not think it is fair to judge what action went into one particular request. If the Board starts doing this it will have a horrendous situation with judgements on what each request costs in terms of manpower and the Board would not be in a position to have any of its fees remain in place. Mr. Davis said the Board has initiated an ordinance amendment that would deal with this issue generally. Mr. Bowerman commented that at this time the Board does not have the specific authority to do anything. The consensus of the Board was to not reduce the fee charged the Dunbars. Ms. Betty Newell, President, JAUNT Board of Directors, and a member of the CATS Advisory Committee, said she is present to answer any questions from Board members about a project approved by the JAUNT Board of Directors. The project is called "Odyssey". This Board's immediate support is needed to help persuade the Federal Transportation Administration to re-award a $1.0 million grant to JAUNT for this project. The two primary goals of this project are to improve the mobility of the folks in the rural areas and reduce traffic congestion in the urbanized area by reduction of single occupant vehicles on the roads. The reduction of single occupant vehicles on the roads has been designated by the MPO as their primary strategy to reduce traffic congestion in this community. On April 11, 1994, at JAUNT's Executive Committee meeting, the JAUNT Executive Director was ordered to withdraw the proposal for "Odyssey". The grant had been approved. Afterwards, because of her absolute conviction that this project offered an exceptional opportunity to this community, she called a gentleman at the Federal Highways Administration and asked him what are the chances of getting this money if we should ask for it back. She was told JAUNT had maybe a 50:50 chance to persuade them to return the money, if JAUNT could show significant immediate community support for the project. Since that time, JAIINT has received a resolution of support from the MPO pending JAUNT Board's approval, a resolution from City Council, a promise of support from Congressman L. F. Payne and Delegate Mitchell VanYahres, and other community representatives and organizations. The JAUNT Board approved "Odyssey" today with amendments she thinks are appropriate. The first amendment was to name an oversight committee that would have the responsibili- ty to insure that certain interests were well-known, protected, informed, etc. Mr. Marshall requested that Ms. Roxanne White serve on this advisory commit- tee. The other amendment was that there be enough flexibility built in that even though the projects says JAUNT will do certain things, the plan can be modified anywhere along the way. A resolution is needed in Washington, D. C. by Friday. Motion was offered by Mr. Marshall, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt the following resolution supporting JAUNT's request for Federal Highway Administration funds. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the follow- ing recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. W~EREAS, the United States is faced with a constantly worsening situation in which our highways and road systems are no longer able to accommodate the growing number of vehicles that depend on them, and W~EREAS, local, regional and national studies have shown that traditional mass-transit and ridesharing programs, aimed at providing transportation alternatives to reduce the number of single-occupant vehicles on our highways, are failing to attract the interest and participation of motorists, and WI{ER~AS, the overall costs related to single-occupant vehicle transportation and the operation of large transit systems is fast becoming a major budgetary concern of local, regional and national governments, and April 20, 1994 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 14) O00;B03 W~EREAS, environmental issues related to transportation have become a major concern throughout the United States, and in the greater Albemarle area, and W~EREAS, the County of Albemarle is faced with even greater challenges because of the extremely rural nature of the area, and the lack of any form of transportation other then the single- occupant vehicle outside of its area, and W~EREAS, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has identified the need to reduce the number of single-occupant vehicles on the road as the primary strategy to reduce traffic congestion, and W~EREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has made moneys available to conduct an operational test project to see if computer and communications technology can be utilized to create new transportation alternatives and enhance and coordinate those already in existence, and W~EREAS, JAUNT, Inc., through its regional ridesharing division has developed a proposal called "ODYSSEY" to conduct such an operational test project that has been targeted for funding by the Federal Highway Administration. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle fully supports conductin9 the operational test known heretofore as "ODYSSEY," and supports JAUNT, Inc. in applying for and accepting the available Federal Highway Adminis- tration funds. Agenda Item No. 11. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Chairman