Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-09-04 142 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on September 4, 1991, at 7:00 P.M., Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., David P. Bowerman, F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Mr. Peter T. Way. ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr.; County Attorney, George R. St. John; and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg. ' _':. Agenda ItemiNo~ 1. The.meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Bowie. Agenda Item No. 2; Pledge of Allegiance. AgendaItem No; 3; Moment of Silence., Agenda Item NO. 4. Public. There were none. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the AgendaItem Noo 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr..Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to approveItem 5.1, 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: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. Item 5.1. Resolution Supporting request of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission for a grant for the Thomas Jefferson Study to Preserve and Access theRegional Environment (TJSPARE). By the above recordedvote, the Board adopted the. following resolution: RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR PHASE:I OF THE THOMAS JEFFERSON:PLANNING DISTRICT STUDY TO-_ PRESERVE AND ASSESS THE. REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT: CAPACITY ANALYSES OF GREENE, ALBEMARLE, NELSON, LOUISA AND FLUVANNA COUNTIES AND THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE W~,.a high quality ~of air, land and water resources must be preserved to maintain the existing quality of life now found in the Planning District Ten; and . . ..~:, the knowledge.of the environmental limitations on. development is crucial to protect the health, welfare and safety of all the residents of the Planning District Ten; and Wt~RF~S, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Study to Preserve and Assess the RegionalEnvironment (TJSPARE)~will.assess ~thesigni- ficant environmental resources of the region to determine their limitations; and _ W~I~,~M, TJSPARE will-determine'the.quantity and quality of development which can be sustained without degradation of the environ- W~RBAS, the development of capacity analyses to predict the future land use of the region is necessary to project future resource demanR~iand~ -- W~AS~, the projectionof future demand is necessary to predict impact on existing resources; and September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 2) 143 WHEREAS, the information gained through TJSPARE will be passed to local governments to protect their natural resources. NOW, T~R~,EFORE, BE IT RESOL~q~D that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby supports the application of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to develop capacity analyses to provide information to localities so that they may wisely manage their natural resources. Item 5.2. Letters dated August 20, 1991, from Mr. James Christian Hill, National Register Assistant, Department of Historic Resources, stating that Matron Grange Farm and East Belmont Farm appear to meet criteria for listing on the~-VirginiaLandmarks~Register~'~and the National Register of Historic Places; however, the DHR staff will not be able to prepare the paperwork necessary for nomination because their work program is fully scheduled for the remainder ~f~!the~year, were recei~ed~.as information. - Item 5;3. ;.E~tter?dated AQgfi~:jZ2~;199.1, fromMr. Hugh C. Miller, Direc- tor, Department of' Historic Resources, stating that The Rectory has..been placed..on~.the Virginia Landmarks Register and endorsed to.the National Regis- ter of"Historic Places, was received as information~ . . Item 5.4. Copy. of letter dated August~22, 1991, fromMs. Amelia~M. PattersOn, Zoning Administrator, addressed to Mr. Nicholas E. Munger,,entitled ~Offici~taDeteminationlof::N"mhe~'~ofYParcels -.Section 10.3.1, TaX Mapi26,. Parcel 27C (Herbert and~.Ruby Sipe),'!wasreceived as information~ Item 5~5. i~Copy of'Letter dated August .26, 1991, from Ms. Amelia M. Patterson, Zoning Administrator, addressed to Mr. Edward G. Williams, entitled "Official Determination of N~er of Parcels - Section ~0.3.1, Tax Map 80, Parcel 8D,~!'waslCeaeived .a~.info~nation, Item.-5.6. Letter dated August-23, 1991, from Mr. J. A. Echols, Assistant Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation, entitled "1991-92 Revenue Sharing, Albemarle County," was received as follows: "At the meeting on. July 18, 1991, the commonwealth. Transportation '%>ff~iB~a~dl~,formattF,.adop~edi{a~;~ssol~tion.approving the projects~and amounts ~_. reqnested-by Albemarle C~unty for. revenue sharing infiscal year 1991-92. These were: 0660,002~187, C501, B644, C502 ~ $360,000 , BI 0692-5301 - $ 44,, 450 "L~ffJciBI 0~29'~5302, t:..~,,~': ,_ ~ ,:, .... ~',~,~: ..... ~.-~. $~30,750 These funds will be matched by state funds for the same amounts. The Department~ has begun the process of requesting the County to be billed for~.:their share of these three items'." Item 5.7. Copy of 1988 REVISED Statement of Assessed Values for Local Tax Purposes for Railroads, as prepared by the¥irginia Department of Taxa- t~0~,::was~r~cei~d,-~as:information,..~.:~.~ ,.~ Item 5.8. Copy of STATEMENT showing the EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE as of the beginning ofthe First. Day of~January,~1991, of the property of WATER CORPORATIONS in the Commonwealth of Virginia~and the State Taxes Extended for th~fYea~1991,,~madetby~the Sta~e-Corporation Commission of Virginia,~ was received as information. Item~.5.9. Copy of STATEMENT-showing the EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE as of the beginning of the First Day of January, 1991, of the property of GAS AND PIPELINE~ DISTRIBUTION CORPORATIONS in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the 144 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) State Taxes Extended for the Year 1991, made by the State Corporation COmmis- sion of Virginia, was received as information. Item 5.10. Copy of STATEMENT showing the EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE as of the beginning of the First Day of January, 1991, of the property of ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER CORPORATIONS in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State Taxes Extended for the Year 1991, made by the State Corporation Commission of Virginia, was received as information. Item 5.11. Copy of STATEMENT showing the EQUALIZED ASSESSED VALUE as of the beginning of the~.First Day.of January, 1991, of the property of TELECOM- MUNICATIONS COMPANIES (Local Exchange Telephone Services, Interexchange Services, Radio Common Carrier Systems, Cellular Mobile Radio Communications Systems~ and TelegraphServices)~inthe CommonweatthofVirginia?and~the:State Taxes Extended for~the Year 1991, made by. the State Corporation Commission of Virginia, was received as information. Item 5~12. COpies of Minutes of the Planning Commission for August 6and AUguSt 20, 1991, were received as information. Item 5.13. Memorandum dated August 26, 1991, from Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled "School Division Leave Experiment," with attached memorandum dated. August 23,'1991, fromDr. Carole A. Hastings, Director~ of Personnel/Human~ ResourCes, werereceived as information. Mr, Bowie requested that this item be discussed at the joint meeting.~with the. School~Board-on September 11, 1991. .~ Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing: An ordinance to vacate a portion of a certain plat of a portion of Phase 1, Section 1, Mill Creek P.U.D..; thiS property~is shown On a plat recorded in the'office of the Clerk of the~Circuit Court in Deed Book 944, page 695 (Deferred from August 21, 1991). Mr. Cilimberg summarized the request and said that all of the property owners in Phase 1' of:Mill Creek were notified~of this public hearing. Mr~ Cilimberg said staff supports the vacation request as being consistent with past-County_~actions ...... The public hearing was opened. Representing the applicant, Mr. George Gilliam of:~Paxson, Smith, Gilliam & Scott, came forward. Mr. Gilliamsaid,he met last-week with members,of the Mill Creek Board of Directors and the Mill Creek Homeowner's Association, He reviewed, this request with them and neither organization expressed objection. There being no one:else from,the public present on this request, the- public hearing was, closed, Motion was offered by Mr. Way, seconded by Mr. Bain, to adopt the follow- ing ordinance to vacate a portion of a certain plat of a portion of. Phase. i, Section 1, Mill Creek P.U~D.;~this property is shown on a plat recorded~in~the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in Deed Book 944~ page 695: AN ORDINANCE;TO VACATE A PORTION OFA CERTAIN PLAT OF A. PORTION, OF PHASE 1.,~ SECTION 1, MILL CREEK P.U.D.; THIS PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON A PLAT RECORDED IN THE~-OFFICE OF THE.CLERK 0F~THE CIRCUIT COURT IN DEED BOOK944, PAGE-695. WHEREAS, a certain tract or parcelof land lying in Albemarle County-has~beenheretofore subdivided under-the nameof Mill Creek P.U..D,, a plat:of.a portion of which is of record in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 944, page 695; and September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 4) WHEREAS, Craig Builders of Albemarle, Inc., ("Craig") is the owner of lots 36, 37, 38 and 39 shown on said plat; and 145 WHEREAS, said four lots have been joined with Parcel Gl, shown on a plat dated April 13, 1988, of record in aforesaid Clerk's office in Deed Book 1002, page 719, and the said Craig has petitioned the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the said plat of record in Deed Book 944, page 695, be vacated insofar as it affects the aforementioned lots 36, 37, 38 and 39; NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the subdivision of Phase 1, Section 1, Mill Creek P.U.D., shown on the plat recorded in the said Clerk's office in Deed Book 94~, page 695~ be,.and.--the same,..hereby.is, vacated,as to that portion of the.said~.subdiwision shown on the.saidplat as lots 36, 37, 38 and 39, of the said Phase 1, Section 1; 2. That',the vacation set forth in Section 1.of this ordinance shall in no way vacate any other street, road, right of way or, lot~ dUly:platted and recorded.on, theaforementioned plat; 3. That the Clerk.of the Board shall, cause a certified copy hereof to be recorded in the said Clerk's office to be indexed in the name of Craig.Builders of America, Inc.; and 4. That this ordinance shall be effective upon adoption. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain,~Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr~ Perkins and'Mr. Way. NAYS: None. Agenda ItemlNo. 7.. SP-91-29~ CBC Partners. Public Hearing on a.-request for a miniature golf-course on 1.4 acs zoned HC& EC. Property on Wside of Rt 29 adjacent to Kegler's Bowling. TM45, Pll2C1. Charlottesville Dist (De- ferred fromAugust 21,~ 1991), · Mr. Cilimberg presented the following staff report: "Characterof the Area~: ~The site is currently vacant and was graded during the development of Kegler's which is located adjacent to this site. The adjacent property to'the north is developed with, a furniv~ ture store. The general character of thearea is commercial~ Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing an 18-hole miniature golf course~ Access will be by the existing Kegler's entrance road and the miniature golf course will utilize excess parking provided on the~Kegler's~site, A.description of. the facilities andrea sketch showing the location of the golf course are providedas Attachments.C andD,(on file), The applicant's justification for the~request, is ~ prOvided as AttachmentE (on file). Comprehensive Plan: This area is recommended, for regional service in Neighborhood One. This use may be considered consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations in .regards to land use. Route..29 is.an.entrance corridor and the Comprehensive. Plan recommends that development be sensitive to this. The applicant has submitted infor- mation to the Architectural Review Board (ARB). The applicant has stated a willingness to work'with the ARB to address issues such as lighting, landscaping andgeneral issues of design.~ Based on the comments of the ARB, this use may be considered consistent with the Comprehensive Ptan!s recommendations for development plans on Route 29... summary and Recommendation: As stated previously, the-.applicant submitted information to the ARB and received comments. The ARB has recommended several changes to the site and requested additional September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) 146 information. In general, the ARB did not object to the applicant's proposal. The applicant is proposing to utilize existing restroom and parking facilities at Kegler's. The use of the existing restroom facilities at Kegler's is permitted by the Building Code provided that documen- tation is provided which indicates that the two parcels are under the same ownership, lease or control, therefore, staff will recommend that adequate documentation be approved by staff prior to final site plan approval. During the development of Kegler's, a total of 57 excess parking spaces were provided. The miniature golf course requires 36 parking spaces. Staff recommends that prior to final site plan appro- val, suitable easements are provided which grant adequate and reason- ably located parking spaces for the golf course. Staff opinion is that joint utilization of parking is reasonable in this case due to thesimilar recreational aspects of the~use and.the close relationship the two uses will have. Due to the joint use of parking and restroom facilities by Kegler's and the miniature golf course, staff antici- pates higher.than averagepedestrian~activity in-the parking area~ This will be reduced somewhat~by the location of parking directly~/ adjacent to the golf area, however, access, to Kegler~s will involve crossing the.main:traffic aisles in the parking area. It is'the- opinion of staff that safe and convenient pedestrian access canbe . provided through design featuressuch as raised,pedestrian walkways (this.technique is currently in use at,the Charlottesville'Albemarle Airport). Staff~will require sufficient measures to insure pedestrian safety at the time of. site plan approval. Staff has reviewed thisrequest for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and is Of the opinion that this~use will not be ofdetriment to adjacent-.,property, will!not,. change the character of the district and is in:harmony withthe purpose and intent of the.Ordinance. Staff has reviewed this request for-compliance with:Section 5.16and, in particular, Section 5.16(d) which states: 'The Board of Supervisors may, for the protection of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community, require such additional conditions as-it deems necessary, including, but not limited.to, provisions for additional fencing and/Or.planting or other-landscaping, additional setback from propertylines, . additional parking space,.location and arrangement of lighting, and other reasonable requirements,' The majoritY of these provisions areintended to protect residential property located adjacent torecreationaluses. Staff opinion is that items such as lighting, landscaping and.fencing will be. adequately addressed bythe ARB'during its. approval:,process..~ Staff is~concerned about the! relationship of the use to Route29. Staff. opinion is that the provisions proposed by theapplicant.are adequate to insure that this use will not impact Route 29. The applicant.has indicated a 60 foot setback from Route 29 and has shown a. four foot berm with. land~ scaping adjacent to Route 29. These provisions, together with land- scaping in the golfing area,~willreduce adverse visual~impact on Route 29. - The Virginia~Department of Transportation has provided comments regarding access to this site. The existing access to the site is adequate. The existing crossover on Route 29 may be closed causing U-turns. (It should be noted that the. crossover at Better Living is also scheduled to be closed.) This use should generate traffic at a rate. similar to other !by-right! HC development. N° exact figures on traffic generation,are available for this use ..... In summary, it is the opinion, of staff that, this request is-consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4..1 and, therefore, staff recom? mends approval subject-to the.following conditions: -~ . Recommended Conditions of.Approval: ....... 147 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) Hours of operation shall be between 9 a.m. and 12 a.m. weekdays and 9 a.m. and 1 a.m. weekends; Development shall be in general accord with plan stamped received June 10, 1991, and initialed WDF; and Administrative approval of site plan. Site plan shall not be signed-until the following conditions have been met: Staff approval of documents indicating that Parcel 112C1 and Parcel 112C are under the same ownership, lease or control. Use shall discontinue at such time as the two parcels are no 10ngerunder the: same~.ownership, lease or control; b. Staff approval of parking easements; Staff apprOval:'of ~pedestrian crossings in the parking area; and d. Architectural Review, Board issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness." Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on July 16, 1991, unanimously recommended approval of SP-91-29 subject t.o conditions- and ~2 recommended~ by the staff. · ~Mrs. Humphr~is'.sug.ges~ed that_.the.~ days considered as weekdays and the days considered as weekends be more specific in the first condition. Mrs. Humphris asked what.would hell'the view from Route 29 ~of. the ~site. Mr. Cilimberg said the site gradually slopes upward from Route_ 29. The applicant proposes to create a berm and prov:ide landscaping to screen the site fr~om Route~ 29..: It is his understanding, that the site will be developed in accord with the general topography;,. The use, on the property,will be at a higher elevation than' Route 29. The site wi'll:,atso, be lighted. '-Mrs~ Humphris asked.how the,lighting will be designed so as not to,..cause a safety problem for traffic on Route 29. Mr. Cilimberg said the Zoning-Ordinance requires that the lighting bedirected downward which means that it should, be directed to the course and not have an overflow tO.Route 29. ' Mr;.,Bowerma~.-asked if. the proposed four foot, berm is in addition to what is already on the site~ Mr. Cilimberg said that is his understanding. Looking,.at~,the proposed-:site plan,. Mr. Bowerman asked what ..is the height- of~. the vegetation, what ~type of vegetation is on the site and if.the green, oni the tees is,carpet or,, grass.. Mr. Cilimberg did not.know and suggested~.the appli- cant .respond to Mr. Bowerman ............. '- .... Mr... Bain asked, what is 'the length of the, left 'turn.lane into: the, site:. Mr; Cilimberg said.,the left turn.lane is inadequate. .The, Route 29 NorthT, Corridor Study recommended, that this .crossover be closed, . Kegler~ S was; 'developed'..with the understanding that the crossover would, be closed-and, therefore, ~the ~irginia: Department. of Transportation.- did: not, require .the turn lane,~to,.~be upgraded. He understands: that..more..recent plans for Route 2.9 No~rth show this. crossover remaining open and the crossover at Better Living being closed. If this crossover remains open, the turn lane will need to be upgrad- ed. to,-meet ~fDoT standards. Mr. Bain. asked., if the improvement Will be made,as part of. this development. Mr. Cilimberg replied "no".. Mr~ Bain thinks that will-be a mistake; ~.~ He,is concerned ,that the. crossover,will remain open,.~- continue to.:.be used.and, create a lot of traffic problems. Mr. Bain said he ~_ al.so does not want~the: County to'. be the one to ultimately pay' for the: improve- ments at this location.: The. Chairman:opened the public.hearing. Mr. Frank Stoner.,Managing~_. General Partner,.CBC.Partners, said he had no>specific~comments,~but: would answer, any:'quest~o~s~ ~ ~...: : .... Mr.,.,Bowerman~ asked if.the proposed berm is in~.~additionto what,~currentiy exists~on~-the s.ita~. M~, Stoner replied !'yas"~. ~fhe-re is~,a 30-inch~d~ainage_,. berm onthe front of the~property. He proposes to.~addlanadditional~lSr~.~o 20-:inch berm to.the 30finch berm. ~his additional berm would.eliminate the/ sensation,~of being_righton Route 29 .... 148 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) Mr. Bowerman asked what type of vegetation is proposed on top of the berm. Mr. Stoner said he intends to plant some type of evergreen; th~ specif- ic type has not been determined, but it would be something that would provide a buffer year-round. Mr. Bowerman asked if there would be continuous screening around the property. Mr. Stoner replied "yes". Mr. Bowerman asked what type of material the greens are made of. Mr. Stoner replied the greens are made out of carpet. Mr. Bowerman asked if there will be any decorative figures on the site such as dinosaurs, giraffes, windmills, etc. Mr. Stoner replied "no"; this is a course of skill and all decorations will be exclusively vegetation. This course is geared to an adult audience with the holes at various elevations to ~dd~:to!~he~chali~nge.~t~.,~Mr~, ]~owerman'~asked what other vegetation is proposed on the'~site. Mr. Stoner replied large deciduous trees and dogwood trees are proposed for the site. The areas around the greens are proposed to be similar to evergreen shrubs,~,?'~Either ro'cks~or wooden posts wil~!~:-he~planted ~t6 form a landscaPed Wall., Mr.~,Stoner said there are three 'major elevation, changes:,,' proposed ~on the site. - The elevation at the Clubhouse will be the- same,g.rade~:. asL~the~;parking~ lot~ The wall along the top of the gazebo on the proposed site plan indicates another change in elevation. The other change in elevation is approximately six feet below.,the parking lot.and .the clubhouse Mr~ ;Bowerman said. this property is extremely, visible to traffic traveling northbound'on Route 29,.~:, He .is concerned'that-this not be a carnivat~type atmosphere. Although there is a 'lot of development' on Route 29, there is nothing, like this. currently there,. He has seriOus.reservations about'~his type of. act~ivity on Route 29 ~ '~-,,~; <, Mrs. HUmphris ,repeated her,., earlier question about the~weekda,ys? and., weekends. Mr. Stoner said he, anticipate operational hours robe Monday .- through.. Thursday, from, 9:0'0, a..'m~ to:. t2:00 a.m,, Friday~ andl Saturday, a.m.i to. 1~O0 a.m. iand~ Sunday,_ from~ 11 :O0 ~a.m. ~to. li:00 p.m~ ',~'These.'hours~i. are compa~ahle~ to the .hours of ~egler's .......... -..'., ~ Mr.~' ~ Bowerman asked..if ,the golf~. course is,. envisioned ~to be an interim- use on, the property~ Mr Stone~r replied' , yes ~ As the~ B~ard is~, aware, VDoT plans to take this property a part of the construction of the Route 29 bypass.. Mr. Bowerman 'asked ,if the~applicant? intends this to still be an interim use, if~ plans~ fora bypass, on Route 29 change. Mr. Stoner said he.recognizes~ that this is not the~' best'~ use- of this property. He may consider, moving-~the golf possibly behind Kegler. s ~ ~,Mr. course to~ another .location on' the property, ' Stoner~ added that.the, firm building :the golf course is well-established ,in its field.~ .This site ~wilt not hage a carnival-type atmosphere. This development- will be,an asset~and~much more attractive than~what, is currently~on the site. Mr..- Bowerman asked' ,i{-, the .applicant ' s~ pr, oposal ,'is .less, in~ensiveJ~ than ~hat ean..be, developed byrright,, on the~ property.- Mr, Ciiimberg~,said, ~,it~ ~ould depends,on, the proposed.'use. ,Th~is~ is not the most intensive ,use ,~that .could go on the site. Mr. Bowerman asked:why does a.miniatUre golf,coUrse, require a speciat_~-~se permit, i Mr~. Cilimberg. responded ~that a golf course isa recreation..activity. Mr.. Bowerman asked- what'.' is' the. nuisance potential of. this., use, Mr,.~ Cilimberg .responded,the nuisance is--that this.., is an outdoor activity, noise, lighting, adjacent, .to residential:-areas; traffic and if alcohol.,is allowed.. _ ' Mr, lStoner said-.he proposes to indiv, idually .light each hole,.as-opposed~ to the.massive-lighting at. the .Colonial Auto Center.,_ This type of light:ing~.will substantially cut.. down on ;the amount of light, flowing~ into other areas'~ ~ · There~,being~ no one elsefromthe public.rising.to speak on-this-~.req~est, ~hepublic~ hearing, was c~osed. . :'~ ..... ,: : :~Mr~ Bain said he is concerned about the left turn lane and if it is not addressed'now, ~DoTwill eventuallyrequire it to b~,upgraded. He thinks it is a mistake to.not, require it,.~o~ benpgraded as acondition-of,~appro~at:-. Mr.; Bainsaid~his co~cer~is~no,t~,unique to this application'~ ~He~.w. ould~be.-con-:'-~ cernedregardless ofithe~use~-of the. site... He, does not, thinkthis~.use~is ~. necessar, ily,the highestltrafficgenerator-for~-this~site~, Mr:. Bainaskedlif this-use was byrr'ight, would it'require improvement of the lef~tturn lane as 149 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) part of site plan review. Mr. Cilimberg replied that he was not sure, but during site plan review, if the staff determines that a specific use will cause a safety problem at a particular location, improvements at that location can be required. Mr. Cilimberg said the issue then to consider is whether a median strip or turning lane is off-site or part of the site. Mr. St. John stated that the Board can require whatever features are necessary to alleviate a safety hazard, if it is determined that the need is generated by the devel- opment and not the general traveling public. Mr. Cilimberg suggested that the staff discuss with YDoT how best to handle the turn lane and address the issue during site plan review. Mr. Bowie asked Mr. Stoner if his comments regarding lighting, landscap- ing,_size of the berm, etc., were intended to be proffers. Mr. Stoner replied that his statements are what he plans to do on the site, and, if the ARB allows those things, then that is what he proposes. Mr.~Bowerman said the'problem.he has.with~this is that once the use is permitted the site~plan can go forward and witl be.approved. A part of his_ concern is that he ~does not know what the site will ultimately look like, He is not Willing to support~this request because the~final plan may not be suitable on Route29. He thinks this is a different type of recreational use audit could-set a precedent for other useson Route 29. This site will be visible, to the northbound lanes on Route 29 and he is not willing to support the request'not knowing the final plan. Mr. Bain said he understands Mr. Bowerman, but he would rather have this break in what has become a mass production on. Route29. ~Me thinks this plan is more faVorable.than some of the other developments.'~.-Mr. Way agreed with_.- Mr~ Bain. MotiOn waS then offered by Mr. Bain to approve SP-91-29, subject to the following conditions #1 (amended) and #2 recommended,by the Planning Commis- sion and a condition #3, as follows: 1. ~Hours of operation.shall be between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m., Monday through Thursday; 9:00 a.m~ and 1:00 p.m., Friday and~ Saturday; and. ti:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., Sunday;: Development shall be in general accord with plan stamped received June 10, 1991, and initialed WDF; and Planning staff and Planning Commission consider directly the issue of the extension of the turn lane in its.site plan~approval process. Mr. Way seconded the motion. There beingno further discussion., roll. was called and the motion failed by-the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bain and Mr~. Way. NAYS.: Mr. Bowerman, Mr.. Bowie, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Perkins. - Agenda Item No. 8. SP-91-39. Willie Mae Hoover. Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-88-86 in order to permit rental of a-single?wide mobile home on 5.0 acs zoned RA. Property on pvt rd on W side of Rt 20 approx 2.7 mi S of Rt 742. TM102,P1E. Scottsville Dist. (Advertised in the. Daily Progress on August 20 and August 27, 1991~) . Mr. Cilimberg presented the following memorandum dated August 20,. 1991, from Mr. William D. Fritz, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Communi- ty Development: -- "On December 21, 1988, the Board of Supervisors approved SP-88-86, a request for, a single-wide mobile home on 5.0 acres. Staff has includ- ed the original staff report for 'thismobite home as~Attachment B_(on file). The applicantis now requesting relief of conditions #6 and #8 which limits rhesus, of the mobile home to family members only and states that the mobile home cannot be rented. As ajustification for~, this~request the applicant has stated: September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) 150 'Since there was a complaint on my special use permit, I had to go before the Board of Supervisors. The condition was placed that only a relative could occupy the mobile home. On the special use permits that are approved administratively, the condition is not placed. I have spent more than $15,000 on site work. If my daughter vacates the home, it would be a hardship to have to vacate the property. I feel this condition is discrimi- natory. I feel this is discriminatory against me since the other special use permits that were approved administratively did not have this condition at the time of my approval.' Staff has researched past Board actions on mobile homes and offer the following comments. Since 1.981, the County has accepted 390 mobile · ~.:hOme requests of which 82 (21 percent) have been acted on by the Board of Supervisors and, of those, 69 have been approved. Since 1989, all mobile homesapproved by. the Board (17) exceptfor, one.~(a.double~wide mobile~homeon a permanent foundation with-a~peaked~roof)-havehad a condition restricting rental of the mobile home. Prior to.1989, the Board restricted the rental of the mobile homes in 16 cases and approved 30 with no conditions limiting rental. The Board~also ~ approved six.mobile homes on a temporary basis and acted to*deny 13 mobile home, requests. Double-wide mobile homes are no longer subject to special use permit due to changes in the Stare'Code." The Chairman opened the public hearing. The applicant, Ms. Willie Mae Hoover, said she owns the property where the mobile home is~situated~ Ms. Hoover~saidher. daughter currentlyresides~in: the mobile, home and she-does not anticipate that her daughter,will move out of the home, but shewants to protect her investment, She has spent $15,000 in. site development~and added a deck to'the mobile home. The site has been greatly improved~as compared, to when the mobile home. was first situated. Themobile homehas a peaked_roof. Ms. Hoover Said-there is another mobile home on the right side of. the road going into this'property. That mobile home was approved by the County, but there is no condition stating that it cannot be rented. She feels that the condition is a hardship to her shouldshe want to develop the site~in the future. Because of the Board's action, if her daughter.moves out of.the-home, it will have to be torn down. She does not feel she can invest any more money into the site, if this condition remains. Next. to address the Board, Mr. Kevin Cox, said he supports Ms. Hoover's and.Mr. Crawford's (Agenda Item #9) requests. He thinksthat~these are good decent people whoWill~take, care or. their properties even~if therecircum- stances change and they~rent their propertieS. Ms. Hoover~.and Mr,.,,Crawford want. to pr0tect~their investments. Mr. COX said~hebelieves it is in_the. spirit of conserVative government to~allow:_Mr. Crawford and~Ms. Hooverto rent their properties.. ~Also, he does not really:think'it is any of government's business.whether these people choose to rent theirproperties. He thinksthat it is government's business to see that all citizens have the same. amount~of control over their property. Conditions imposed by the BOard should~be the same~as those conditions imposed administratively by the staff. MS. Hoover again addressedtheBoard and said that all. of theadjoining~ property owners were notified in writing and to her knowledge no one voiced objection. There was only one objection on the original request and since that time that neighbor has changed his opinion .... Theadjoining property~ owners are~happy with what she has done to.the site~ ~The site isattractive. Mr. Christ0Pher Krum, who lives in arented, old gas station approximately one mile'north of.~Ms. Hoover's property, said he finds it.'odd~>that Ms. Hoover cannot rent her property when his landlord, who atsois a good person, canfix up an old gas station,~and~rent~ it. He supports~Ms. Hoover's request to~altow hereto rent her mobile home. There being no other .comments from the public on this request~ ~the public hearing was closed. Mr. Bowie said he feels that since Ms. Hoo~er's daughter is living in.the mobile home, there isno need to change the condition and allow rentalof the mobile home at this time. He stated that a study is currently underway.by the September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 10) 151 Planning Commission and the Housing Committee on mobile homes and housing needs in the County. He thinks the Board should wait until it gets informa- tion from these studies before taking action on this request. He also thinks that before the Board take action on this request, the request should go back to the Commission for review. Mrs. Humphris said she thinks the request should be deferred until the Board receives more information. Mrs. Humphris then offered motion to inde- finitely defer SP-91-39. Mr. Bain suggested that the request be deferred to a specific date rather than just leaving it indefinitely. Mr. Cilimberg com- mented that he did not think the studies would be finished until the end of the year. Mrs. Humphris then amended her motion to defer action on SP-91-39 until-January 8,11992, MrJ.~Bowerman. seconded the motion. There being no further discussion, roil was called and the motion carried bythefollowing recorded~vote:' -~ AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs.~ Humphris, Mr. Perkins.and Mr. Wa~. NAYS: None. - Agenda Item No..9. SP-91r41. Gifford & RachelCrawford. Public Hearing on a request to'amend SP,91-15 in order to permit rental of a single-wide mobile home on 2.0 ac zoned RA. Property on N side of Rt~776 approx 3/10 mi W of. Rt 664..TM18,PSJ. White Hall Dist. (Advertised in the Daily~Progress on August 20 and August 27, 1991). - Mr~ Cilimberg summarized the following memorandum dated August 21, 1991 from Mr. William D. Fritz, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Communi- ty DeVelopment: "On July 3, 1991, the Board of Supervisors approved SP-91-!5, a request to~iocate a singlerwide mobile home on 2,0 acres. Staff has included the original staff report as Attachment B (on file). The applicant is now requesting relief of condition #7 which limits the use of the mobile home to family members only. Staff,has researched past Board actionson mobile homes and. offer the following comments. Since'1981, the COunty has accepted 390~mobile home requests of which 82 (21 percent) have been.acted onby the Board of Supervisors and of those 69 have been approved. Since 1989, all mobile homes approved by the Board (17) except for one (one double- wide mobile homeon a permanent foundation with a peaked roof) have had a~condition'restricting rental of the mobile home. Prior to 1989, the Board restricted the rental of the mobile homes in 16 cases and approved~30 with no conditions limiting rental. The Board also approved six mobile homes on a temporary basis andacted to deny 13 mobilehome requests~ Doublerwide mobile homes are no longer sUbject to, special use permit due tochanges in state code." The public, hearing was opened. The applicant, Mr. Gifford Crawford.said he is currently preparing the site for the mobile home. He has spent $1000 to seed the lawn. His daughter is presently living in Dyke, Virginia, in a converted barn. Ifhis daughter decides to move out of the mobile home, he will not be able to keep up the property. It would put a burden on him, if the property is left vacant. He is~not buying this mobile home to make money. He wants to. to provide~a home for his daughter to live. His total investment in the property will be about $10,000. There being no one else. from the public tospeak on. this request, the public:hearing was closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Mr'. Bain, to defer SP-91~41 to January 8, 1992. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: -Messrs. Bain, BOwerman, Bowie~ Mrs~ HumphriS, Mr. Perkinsand Mr~iWay. NAYS: None. September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 11) 152 Agenda Item No. 10. 1991-1992 Medical Insurance Renewal. Mr. Tucker presented the following memorandum dated September 4, 1991: "Background: In the 1991-92 budget the employer's share of medical insurance was set at $1026 per employee in an effort to offset the anticipated increase of the mid-level Key Care III insurance plan set to go into effect October 1, 1991. Those choosing the more expensive Key Care I alternative were expecting to experience an increase in the employee share. Due to good experience and careful utilization, our renewal rate -~.~.increase recently~submitted by-Blue Cross/Blue Shield has been set at ~6.4 percent rather than the anticipated ten percent. An option to institute a preferred provider network for pharmacies just as we eurrently have for doctors and hospitalswouldfurther lower our increase to five percent. In an effort to take a proactive approach to containing future health.care costs, it. seems possible~to implement an employer encouraged wellness plan and still remain within budgeted funds.~ The.wellness plan presented as an option provides for health screen- ings to detect such conditions as highrisk heart and circulatory diseases, hypertension, elevated cholesterol and other health hazards, Additionally, high risk groups would be targeted for colon screenings for men and mammographies for women in an effort to address these conditions at an early stage-rather than treat them after the fact. Lastly, the plan.would provide small cash incentives to employees~who are found,.through the screening process, not-to have a high:health riski The~other alternative available to the Board is to forgo the wellness plan~and pick up only the increase in rates. This'savings is very, small per employee, yet has the potential of accomplishing a great deal if put into a proactive program of reducing potential health care risks, Recommendations: A joint committee made up of medical plan represen- tatives from general government, schools,-Albemarle County Service Authority and the Joint Security Complex reviewed thisissue and staff makesthe following recommendations: ~(1) Provide the. employer contribution for medical insurance at ~. the~1991-92, budgeted'.level of $1026 per employee; (2) Select the option to implement the wellness program, as described, to allow the inClusion off. health screenings,. mammographies~.colon screenings-and the. incentiveplan for employees who are determined to be low risk and medium, risk; (3) Continue to offer the dental program through Delta Dental Company, accepting their quote for no increase in employee- ontycoverage for1991-92. Additionally, survey.the employ- ees to determine the level of interest in employee-paid. dependent dental coverage; (4) Approve,the~implementation of a preferred provider network of pharmacies to provide prescription drugs thus saving 1.4 percent in the medical insurancerates; and (s) Accept the rate structure included as ,Attachment A (on file) for the 1991-92 renewal of the Biue CrosS/Blue Shield of Virginia:contract." Mr. Bain asked why there is a rate change in.Key Care I, but no rate change in Key Care III. Mr.. Tucker said the increase in rates for Key. Care III were anticipated and, therefore, budgeted for, butan increase was not- anticipated for Key Care I~ September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 12) 153 Mr. Bain asked how recommendation #4, the preferred provider network of pharmacies, will be implemented. Mr. Tucker said this program works the same way as the preferred provider program the County currently has with doctors. Pharmacies agree to charge a certain rate for prescription drugs. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to approve the following 1991-1992 medial insurance renewal proposals as recommended by the staff: - (1) Provide the employer contribution for medical insurance at the 1991-92 budgeted level of $1026 per employee; .(2~) Select'the optionto, implement the wellness program as described to allow the inclusion of health screenings, mammographies, colon screenings and the incentive plan for employees who are deter- minedto be low. risk and.~medium risk; (3) Continue~to offer~the dental programthrough Delta,Dental Com- pany, accepting their quote for no increase in.emPloyee-only coverage for 1991-92. Additionally, survey the employees to determine the level of interest in~employee-Paiddependent.dental coverage; (4) Approve the implementation of a preferred provider network of pharmacies~toprovide prescription drugs thus saving 1.4 percent in the medical insurance rates; and ,(5-) Accept the. rate. structure included as Attachment A (on file) for the 1991-92 renewal of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Virginia contract. Roll was called and the motion carried by thefollowing recorded vote: AYES:. Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and~Mr. Way. NAYS: None~ Agenda Item'No. 11. Meals Tax Ordinance, Draft of. Mr. Tucker presented draft language for theproposed Meals_Tax, Ordinance. He said Section 8-68.1.of the draft allows sellers three percent of the amount of the tax due for collecting the meals tax. At a previous meeting Mr. Bowerman asked whether.the sellers/restaurateurs would.be compensated fOr collecting the tax. ~Mr. Tucker said in response toga concern expressed by Mr. Bowie, Section 8-78 states: "The proceeds of this tax shall be used exclu- sively for capital improvements and/or service of debt incurred for public school~construction." This. seCtion states exactly how.the proceeds from.the meals tax will be used. Mr. Bowerman asked if the amount of compensation allowed sellers is set out in the State Code. Mr. St. John said such compensation is allowed by.the Code which states "... be imposed and collected under such terms as the governing body shall prescribe~" ~ Mrs. Humphrisasked what is the meaning of "Use of.Proceeds", in Section 8r78. Mr. St. John said he thinks the Board should express exactly what ,it~- wants this section to state. He thinks the draft language is ambiguous. He asked if the. Board intends for-.the proceeds.of this_tax, to be used-for,~any and all capital improvements, not just school improvements or construction; or does the Board mean for this tax to beused only for.capital school improve- ments.and service',of debts incurred for public school construction. Mr. Bowie Said he has always felt that the reason the Board has to borrow moneyto build schools is because of the failure of the previous meals tax referendum. He personally thinks the proceeds should be used to first'reduce the debt, then on school construction, and lastly for other capital programs. Mr. Bain said he thinks it will take a long time to reduce the debt relating to schools. He does not mind limiting the proceeds to retirement of the debt for~schoolconstruction and/or new scho01,construction~' September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 13) 154 Mrs. Humphris said it is her understanding that the intent was what Mr. Bowie said,~but she is not sure that is what the language is stating. She has a problem with the wording. Mr. Tucker said this draft is before the Board to set a public hearing. Mr. Bowie said he would prefer that the wording be corrected, brought back to the Board next week and then the Board can set a public hearing. Mr. St. John said in order to redraft the language the Board needs to give the staff some guidance as to what it intends the language to say. Mr. Way said he personally feels that it would help the passage of the meals tax if the proceeds were restricted to reducing the school debt and for cap~ital?improvemen~.-~of~future sch~ols~only. He thinks the proceeds should be limited to schoOls. Mr.; Bowerman commented that.."he~ants.-flexibilityin the'ordinance, so that~i£, at some p~int, the County does not. have school construction_needs~or,. debt, itcan continue,'to use the proceeds. Mr. Bowie said he will support the language clearly, stating that proceeds from the meals tax are for school construction and school debt reduction.-~ Mr. Perkins said~he thinks the proceeds should'also go .to capital improve- ment~ projects, t{e~ thinks that fu. ture Boards should have the right to look at what debt it wants the proceeds to go to. Mr. St. John commented that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution requesting that 'the proceeds of the meals tax be considered for.capital improvement projects. Mr. Tucker suggested rewording the sentence to read: "The proceeds of this tax shall be used exclusively for capital improvements or service of debt incurred f.or public school construction." Mr.~ Bain said ~the pr.oblem he has w~ith using the proceeds for capital,improvements is that the next thing is that the Board may want to consider using the proceeds to build roads. Mrs.~Humphris'suggested the following wording: "The proceeds of this%tax shall be used exclusively for service of debt incurred-for public school construction or improvements." Mr. St. John said that language would limit the Board~ to retirement of debt of schools,. The proceeds could not be used to build newschoolS. Mr, Way then.asked how the language could be written so that it says the proceedsare just for the debt incurred for schools or for the construction of newschools~ Mr. St. J~ohn said that is the correct language. Mr. Breeden suggested adding '!school improvements', instead of '!school construction". Mr. St, John said all "construction!' is "improvements", but all "improvements". are not."construction". Mr. Way said he thinks the proceeds should be limited to construction because, there, will be other money available-for improvements. Motion was then offered by Mr. Way, to set a public hearing for Octo- ber 16, 1991, on an Ordinance to amend Chapter. 8, of the Code of the County of Albemarle,~by adding an Article,XIII, in order to impose a tax on meals, with thefollowing change in'the proposed language: "The proceeds of this tax shall.be used exCtusivelyforservice of debt incurred for public school· construction~or~new.construction~ of public schools." Mrs. Humphris seconded the motion.. Mr. St. John Said the first sentence in-the draft ordinance reading: "BE IT ORDAINED by theBoar:d of the County .... "should read: "'BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors .... " As motioner, Mr. Way_agreed to the additional change and Mrs..Humphzis, as~seconder, agreed. ROi1 was called andthe_motion carried by the. following recorded ~ote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: -None. Mrs,. Humphris made a report from the Meals Tax Committee which .included thre~ requests from the, Committee. Mr.s. Humphris .said the Committee~ has been working hard, holdin~gweekly meetings and. with ~the help of staff has~ finalized a brochure to be used for public information between now and when the referen- dum is put on the ballot in November. The Committee intends to send a letter September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 14) 155 out to various organizations with a copy of the informational brochure and a speech outline for presentors. Mrs. Humphris said, first, the Committee requests that all of the members of the Board of Supervisors volunteer to serve as speakers, on request, to go to the organizations and make a three to five minute presentation. All of the necessary information will be provided to the speaker. The letter to the organizations ask them to call the Clerk to the Board of Supervisor's office to request a speaker, after which time the staff will coordinate the speaker. The Board members agreed to the request. Mrs. Humphris said the next request is for time on the next joint Board ~kf~,Smpervisors.andSchool'~BoardLmeeting on September 11, 1991, to go over the p~esentOrs' materials. Since School Board members and Supervisors will be making the presentations that will be a good opportunity to review the materi- aland allow the presentors a chance~o~ask questions~ There was~no objection from Board!members. Mrs. Humphris said, thirdly, the Con, nit,tee requests that~ thef Boa,rd: allow~ the Committee an,,,expenditure of up to $1000 for ~the printing_and mailing~,ofo~ the informational brochure,~, That' is., the Only way~the~Committee.:can get the~ information~out .toiall of the organizations~.~ The~ Committee will do the.. printing and mailing as a first major effort, offering ~to them the number of brochures they want for their memberships and for distribution through other channels~ ~Mrs, Humphris then offered motion to authorize the expenditure of up to $1000 for printing and mailing of the informational brochure. Mr. Bowerman seconded: the motion and added that this ,has all been reviewed by ~the County Attorney ·andL,is~ regarded as~ information rather, than promotional materi- als,:~ ,The .brochure, 0utlines facts abou,t the meats tax, for ~the public!s bene- .fit.. ~ - ~- Mr; Way, said he has a problem with the request. The people who are opposing the meals tax do not have the "arm of government's money" to carry on their,campaign, and he! does not think~:,it is fai~ for,,:,,the:~government ~to- spend ,~-~ money that~way ..... - ::.,-~... · ~ -.. . ~ · -. . : ., ...... ,, .-. ..::~: ...... ."-' :- ............... :,- · ..... , ..... '- '. ' .' ,Mrs. Humphris said the .Committee is -prese~t~.ng.~information on, the .ques- tion.that'~witl appear on. the November ballot. The'.~Committee,. has~.very careful- ly,followed' the law._ ,Everything has.been reviewed by; the County .Attorney,s...,, This,.iS.,legal and she feels that the Board-.owes it .to the public to' make~.this information available to them... If ..the Board does. not make it~. available~how will they,have the.facts, on which.to vote? Mr,~ · Way asked why, not .'-some other group pay for.~,this, brochure-~ instead of · government. That is his problem and .he cannot support the request. Mr~ Bain said he believes that~ a significant reason, the meals tax refer- endum did not pass when it was ~on.the. ballot in .1988 was because the.Board-did not' get"out~ and_ sell' it. ~ It was~ a, speciai election~ year and. he. was ~the only. Board.member running for, election at that time, He lived in the Ivy Precinct which,was'the only precinct in the County to pass the meals .tax. He-thinks the whole .issue was: explaining and~: getting:, the information~- to. the people-,. This is'~ information that the citizens do not have, but,~which is.~available to~ the' Board. He. thinks, the citizens<, need to know :this, information., . . Mr~ way said he agreed, with Mr'. ,Bain,~:bu~' he thinks~there are private,i~ sources of'.money,.to. digt-ribute, the~ information and this is taking advantage of the Board's.position. Mr~ Tucker commented that the funds would come from. the Board',s Contingen,¢y~Fund~... .._ _~ ·- ~ ,. ....~.~ . . .. ...... ~.. ...... Mr. Perkins asked what information is included in the brochure. Mrs. Humphris said the< brochure is entitled "Meals ~Tax, Fact, Sheet'-' .... I't, states~,';The people.0f Albemarle need to know ·..~..·" The queStion~,that~will be ~before~ the'~ voters,,is on. the~front. The brochure has growtk, information on the County, ,in the two inside sheets/and it~ has the facts, about how much money~c0uld, be raised~from the~ meals tax, on the~ backside. ~ The-information is .simple, straight forward~and ~there~ is, no selling in the information~ It, is ~in~ all. of their best interest that there-be no misinterpretation of~what~,~this~is.~meant. to, .be. She feels~strongly,that this Board owes it to~he ~vot,e~s to let,them know thel information. The brochure has been, done to. the best of the Committee,! s, ability:, and. they worked, hard~ on ,it... . ..... ~. 156 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 15) Roll was then called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Perkins. NAYS: Mr. Way. Mr. St. John said he has a copy of an Attorney General's opinion which sets out what kind of material the Board can lawfully expend public funds to distribute. He provided the Clerk with a copy of this opinion. He has seen the brochure and in his opinion the brochure is in compliance with this opinion of the Attorney General. ' ~Agenda Item No. 12. Appointment: School Board. MrS~ Mumphris said shehas gone through the selection process-for a School Board member twice since being on the Board. Again, the process has worked wonderfully well. Through the media coverage, advertisement and individ~ efforts., it was widely publicized thata School Board position was vacant and also just how the selection process would take place. Many people with exceptional and diverse abilities offered themselves for public service on the~School Board. tO representthe Jack JoUett District in 1989. and at the current time. .. ,Mrs.. HumphriS said her'~firsti-nomination to the School Board was-Mr. Richard Bagby. Mrs-Bagby was an outstanding member of the School Board. He was open/minded, pragmatic, innovative, energetic, independent and he was a great communicator. Mr. Bagby communicated well with her and she considers that communication extremelyimportant in maintaining and understanding a good working relationship between the Board and School Board. She thanked him for his dedicated service~... ~ ',.'. :. - Mrs, Humphris then offered the name of Ms..Karen L, Powell for the Jack Jouett DiStrictrepresentative on the School Board.: Ms. Powell.has along: record of'commitment to public, education in .theCoUnty; She has volunteered,, countless hours inmeaningful.ways~ to promotethebest in public education.~- She will_ bring strong analytical negotiation~and communication skills,~ time, energy andenthusiasm to seeking solutions to the many problems facing our School Board. Ms. Powell understands the complexity of those problems andshe will consider, the-needS of-the' students, she will consider input from the teachers and.administrators and,she~ will consider, the needs.of thewhole community-in her decision~m~king,, Ms. Powell-b~ in depth knowledgeof the history of~ the problems.and issues from-her attendance at School Board.meet- ings She, will be thorough in, her. research,on the issues.. Ms. Powell:has,an,~ understanding off:the economic restraints that are put On the School.budget bothbythe~:current recession and by long-standing State restrictions on the CountY's sources of income. Mrs.. Humphris believes thatMs. Powell's appoint- ment to?the~.SchoO1 Board will,~help tremendously in, the~Board,'s pursuit-of its continuing goal of improving-,thefinequality, of education_offered by' County schools, One of Ms. Powell's personal reasons-for wanting to serve~on ,the~ School. Board.was: "Toassure all students are educationally stimulated.to teach,their highest potential in orderlto lead productive lives and compete-in our global society;!' Ms. Humphris said ,she is pleased to, Offer a motion to appoint Ms.~Karen,L, Powell,-to the School Board.as the Jack Jouett DistriCt:. representative, .with said term to expire on, December~31~, 1993, to,replace Mr. Richard Bagby.. Mr~ Bowerman'seconded the motion. Roll, was called and the motion carried bythe,followingrecorded vote: - , .... AYES:Messrs. Bain,:Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs.~Humphris, Mr~Perkins and~Mr.~.Way~ NAYS:-~ None ...... ... ,-:.Ms~ Powell, who was present, said when she.started out.volunteering:.at: the school:~level: she~did not think shewould.become-a SchoolBoard member,'~but she found thatthe .more, she learned, the more she wanted to know~. She'hopes to do,the best job and.live up to the expectations that Ms. Humphris ~has.of here She. will certainly put in the time~ She looks forward to having,infor- mation available to her. that she was.:unable to get.when she'was !'just,~a,citi? zen"~. With the ~nformation and:with:the help of~all-thecitizens in the community, she hopes to make decisions based, on facts. Shethanked. the. Board for, its,support. 157 September 4, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 16) Agenda Item No. 13. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Mr. Tucker mentioned Item5.13 from the Consent Agenda on "School Divi- sion Leave Experiment" and asked if the Board wanted copies of the additional information provided from the Director of Personnel. The information contains about 15 pages. Mr. Bain said he would rather the information be available in the Clerk's office and it be summarized at the joint meeting. The other Board members agreed. Mrs. Humphris asked that when staff writes memoranda, they put it in paragraphs instead of one large block of type. Mr. Bowie said there will be a ceremony in the Town of Scottsville on September20, 1991, commemorating~the..200th anniversary: of~ the~signing of the Bilt:~of Rights. Mr. Way will represent the Board at the ceremony. He has a copy of a document reaffirming the Bill of Rights and was asked to get as many signaturesas possible.~ 'He suggested~thatthe document be passed-along~for signatures. Mrs.~ Humphris asked if the staff plans to comment on the proposed.recQm- mendations on specialized transportation recommendations to the Beyer Commis- sion. She said the Board received notification of public hearings that will be ongoing:.',:Mr.~Tucker~said hethinks'~that~JAUNT .intends to address the~ issue. Mr. Way commented~ that the~most recent issue of V, irginia. BusinesS<-:has an excellent articl~ on- Ms. Nancy O' Brien, ExecutiVe 'Director, of 'the Thomas Ieff~rson Planning District Commission. Ms. 0!Brien's picture is also on-the cover of the magazine. . Mr. Bowie commented that next week the Board has a short agenda and suggested that the meeting begin at 10:00 a.m. instead of 9:00 a.m. Agenda.Item No. 14. Adjourn; 'At 9:00 p.m., motion was.offered?by Mri Perkins,~ seconded, by Mr.; Bain, to-adjourn:to September...1t, 1991, at t0:00 a.m. Roll'was called .and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Bain, Bowermmn, Bowie, Mrs. }tumphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.