Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-06March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) 105 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on March 6, 1991, at 7:00 P.M., 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 Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Bowie. 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. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Way, to approve items 5.1 and 5.2 on the Consent Agenda, to hold item 5.3 for further discussion and to accept the remaining items 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. Memorandum dated February 25, 1991, from Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, entitled "Early Retirement Request" for retirement under the County's voluntary early retirement incentive plan (VERIP). By the above recorded vote, the Board approved a request from Mrs. Shirley Toms to use the County's voluntary early retirement incentive program, effective March 1, 1991. Item 5.2. Memorandum dated February 26, 1991, from Ms. Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner, entitled "Review of the Columbia Gas Pipeline Easement in the Blue Run Agricultural/Forestal District," received as follows: "Please be advised that Columbia Gas Corporation has submitted to me notice of their intent to acquire in excess of one acre from Foxport Farm within the Blue Run Agricultural District for the purpose of expanding their natural gas pipeline facilities. Their notice was received on February 5, 1991. The Board of Supervisors is required upon receipt of Such notice to review the proposed action in consul- tation with the Planning Commission and Advisory Committee (Agricul- tural Forestal District Act, Section 15.1-1512D). If the Board finds that such proposed action might have an unreasonably adverse effect upon either state or local policy, they shall issue an order within a thirty-day period directing the Corporation not to take the proposed action for an additional sixty days. During the sixty-day period, the Board shall hold a public hearing and make a decision as to whether such proposed action will have an adverse effect on such state and local policy and whether the action is necessary to provide service to the public in the most economical and practicable manner. The Advisory Committee met on February 20, 1991, and recommended denial of the proposal. Based on this action, staff recommends that the Board conduct a public hearing as outlined above. As a separate issue, a special use permit, SP-90-111, is also pending on the same project. March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) A H S FIRE DAMAGE JOINT SECURITY FUND JOINT SECURITY-CAPITAL JOINT DISPATCH FUND JOINT RECREATION FACILITY STORMWATER CONTROL FUND VISITOR CENTER FUND DEBT SERVICE FUND TOTAL 0 210,681 2,626,614 1,428,729 30,619 23,676 784,642 467,115 179,905 90,017 2,341,333 32,212 0 39,512 3~429~096 2~452~829 13,964,201 7,673,340 109 (210,681)- 0.00% 1,197,885 + 54.39% 6,943 + 77.32% 317,527 + 59.53% 89,888 + 50.04% 2,309,121 + 1.38% (39,512)- 0.00% 976,267 + 71.53% 6,290,861 + 54.95% Item 5.5. Supts. Memo No. 3, Mr. from Dr. Joseph A. Spagnolo, Jr., Superintendent of Public Instruction, dated February 27, 1991, entitled "1990-92 Appropriations Act Changes," received as information. Item 5.6. Copies of Planning Commission Minutes for February 5 and February 21, 1991, received as information. Item 5.7. Letter dated February 26, 1991, from Mr. H. W. Mills, Mainte- nance Manager, Virginia Department of Transportation, stating that a pipe culvert will be replaced on Route 600 approximately one mile east of Route 20 during the period between March 11 and March 15, 1991, received as informa- tion. Non-Agenda Item. Mr. Bowie welcomed Mr. Paul Smith who was present with his Government class from Murray High School. Agenda Item No. 6. Request to abandon certain roads in Rosemont and Ragged Mountain Subdivisions (deferred from February 20, 1991). (Mr. Bain said he represents the applicant in his business and will abstain from discussion-and voting on this item. At 7:10 p.m., he left the room.) The Chairman reopened the public hearing and Mr. Richard Carter, repre- senting Haley, Chisholm & Morris, Inc., said they have finally reached an agreement with the adjoining landowners in this matter. Mr. Carter referenced a map dated October 17, 1990, of Rosemont and a map dated October 18, 1990, of Ragged Mountain Farm displayed before the Board. Mr. Carter said there is no objection by the property owners to the Board abandoning those roads outlined in "blue" on the maps. They are not asking that the roads outlined in "red" on the maps be abandoned. This request has been discussed with the Ewald and the Smith families and it is his understanding that they are all in agreement with the request. Mr. Ewald and Mr. Smith are present tonight. He requests that the Board abandon those roads outlined in "blue" on maps of Rosemont and Ragged Mountain Farm. He does not think there is any public interest in retaining the roads as public roads. Mr. St. John asked where the roads that are to remain public roads connect with other public roads. Mr. Carter said the roads connect with Route 681. Mr. Steven W. Blaine, representing Rock Mill Land Trust and Verulnm Farm Limited Partnership, asked if it would be appropriate to record the plat for abandonment in the Clerk of the Circuit Court's office. Mr. St. John said no record in the Clerk's office is necessary to abandon a public road. The abandonment is occasioned by a resolution and set out in the minutes. Mr. Blaine said he thinks recording the plat in the Clerk's office would aid in clarifying this issue in the future. He would request that the plat be recorded. Mr. Hiram Ewald noted a letter (copy on file) he sent to the applicant supporting the request for abandonment. There being no other comments from the public, the public hearing was closed. March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) 110 Mr. Bowie suggested that Mr. Cilimberg initial and date the maps present- ed to the Board. Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to adopt a resolution to abandon certain roads in Rosemont and Ragged Mountain Subdivi- sions, as outlined on maps (on file) initialed by Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, dated March 6, 1991. (NOTE: THE ADOPTED RESOLUTION WILL BE SET OUT IN THE MINUTES WHENtT IS RECEIVED.) Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mr. Bain. (Mr. Bain returned to the meeting at 7:22 p.m.) Agenda Item No. 7. SP-90-118. Gemini Transit, Inc. Public Hearing on a request to expand existing truck terminal building on 3.93 acres zoned LI. Property on south side of Route 240 approximately 1.4 miles east of intersec- tion with Routes 810/788. Tax Map 56, Parcel 87. White Hall District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on February 19 and February 26, 1991.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the following staff report: "Character of the Area: The site is bounded by Route 240 to the north and by C&O railroad to the south. Although this property, and adja- cent east-west properties are zoned LI, Light Industrial, there is a single-family dwelling to the west and a mobile home to the east. Property on the other side of Route 240 is zoned RA, Rural Areas. There is an existing office trailer and maintenance garage located on this site. Most significant vegetation is located either near Route 240 or by the railroad. A use of this nature has been in existence at this site for approximately 25 to 30 years. Applicant's Proposal: Gemini Transit, Incorporated, is proposing to expand an existing truck terminal by constructing an addition to the existing maintenance building. The new structure shall be four feet taller than the existing building and will be approximately 24 feet wide by 60 feet long to be located approximately 320 feet away from Route 240. No removal of vegetation or grading is proposed to locate the structure. The applicant is not proposing additional employees or any type of intensification of use. Rather, he is proposing to provide a sheltered workplace. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan indicates this area as industrial service in the Community of Crozet (page 177). As a recommendation, the Comprehensive Plan states, 'Development plans along Route 250 West and Route 240 are to be sensitive to their status as entry corridors to the community'. Summary and Recommendations: This site is recommended as industrial service in the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal will not increase use or traffic, but will simply improve working conditions by provid- ing indoor working areas. Virginia Department of Transportation has stated that sight distance to the west is inadequate. The applicant has demonstrated clearing can be done to accomplish the necessary sight distance. Staff recom- mends this sight distance be platted and recorded as a sight easement. The site is located within the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. The applicant must obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness prior to final plan signature. Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes and intent of the Comprehen- sive Plan. Staff opinion is this request is in Compliance and recom- mends approval with the following conditions: March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) iii 1) Administrative approval of Site Development Plan; 2) Architectural Review Board issuance of a certificate of appropri- ateness prior to signature of final site development plan; 3) Planning and recording of sight easement to the west of the property; 4) There shall be no more than nine (9) shop personnel. This use shall be confined to Parcel 87. Any expansion shall require an amendment to this special use permit." Mr. Cilimberg said the Pianning Commission, at its meeting on February 5, 1991, unanimously recommended approval of SP,90-118 subject to the conditions recommended by the staff. The Chairman opened the public hearing. Mr. John Masselli, the appli- cant, said he had no comments to make and was present to answer any questions Board members may have. There being no other comments the public hearing was closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to approve SP-90-118 subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: 2. 3. 4. Administrative approval of site development plan; Architectural Review Board issuance of a certificate of appropri- ateness prior to signing of final site development plan; Planning and recording of sight easement to the west of the property; There shall be no more than nine shop personnel. This use shall be confined to Parcel 87. Any expansion shall require an amend- ment to this special use permit. 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 Item No. 8. Public Forum to take comments on the 1991 Voter (Magisterial District) Redistricting of the County. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 1, 1991.) The following memorandum dated March 1, 1991, was received from the Staff Work Committee on Redistricting: "The Staff Work Committee has begun analysis of 1990 census informa- tion and magisterial district and voter precinct boundaries. Two public meetings have also been held to receive public comment concern- ing the redistricting process. Attached is information that will be of interest to the Board concern- ing the Committee's efforts to date. Attachment #1 indicates popula- tion changes from 1980 to 1990 by magisterial district and voter precinct. Attachment #2 shows similar information, but also includes information on minority population. Attachments #3 and #4 are summa- ries of co~ents received at the two public meetings. Audio tapes and written transcripts of the two public meetings are available for review. To date, the Staff Committee's work has been based on the following guidelines previously discussed by the Board: Maintain six magisterial districts; Each district is to consist of both urban and rural segments of the County; Minimize changes to existing magisterial district boundaries. March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) 112 The work committee is also reviewing voter precincts to determine whether modifications need to be made to boundaries, and whether additional precincts may be appropriate. In the review of precinct boundaries, the Committee established tentative guidelines for voter precincts: Size (population) - 1500 to 2000 as ideal size; Travel Time - 15 to 20 minute maximum travel time; Boundary Line - Preference to streams, ridges, railroad, primary road, discourage use of secondary roads; Polling Locations - Handicapped accessible; central location within precinct (time, location), accessibility to public transit. Unless advised otherwise, the Staff Committee will continue to develop the redistricting plan based on all of the above guidelines. Any further directives or instructions concerning development of a new plan would be appreciated at this time. The Committee will be deve- loping draft plans in March. In order to ensure minority interest/concerns are considered during the development of the draft plan, it is also recommended that mino- rity representation be added to the Staff Working Committee." The Chairman opened the public hearing. Mr. Lynwood Coffman, a resident of Northfields Road, handed the Board a copy (on file) of Virginia Code Section 15.1-37.4. which refers to the elec- tion of governing bodies of counties, cities and towns, and number of members. He referred to the language which reads "Nothing in this section shall pre- clude the county-wide election of the governing body, combined with a geo- graphical residence requirement that members of the governing body be resi- dents of designated magisterial or election districts in accordance with the provisions of Section 15.1-527.2." It is his feeling that election of super- visors should be at-large. There are current supervisors whom he would like the opportunity to vote for but never has because he does not live in their district. There are also past Board members that he would like the opportuni- ty to vote against. He also thinks that School Board members should be elected. There are currently three School Board members he thinks the Board should not reappoint. If citizens were given an opportunity to vote on all Board members, then they would also have a vote on those School Board members appointed by the Board. Secondly, he is a proponent of rural permanence. Part of the time he is delighted to live in Albemarle County and he wants to see the rural permanence kept. He is against public housing and does not want to bring the elements of public housing into the County. If he can vote for only one supervisor, then he does not stand a chance on issues like public housing. He does not want to see Albemarle "Fairfaxed". People who want that lifestyle can go to Fairfax. He feels the citizens have a right to have a real voice in what happens in the County. He thinks that the Board should proceed with the process that allows citizens to vote for all supervisors. Ms. Sally Thomas, representing the League of Women Voters, said in an earlier statement, the League urged that during the redistricting process an opportunity be given for as much citizen participation as possible. The League has been pleased with the number of meetings that have been held and the Board's willingness to hold another public hearing. In August, the League asked the Board to consider the following four points: 1) There be an increase in the number of supervisors to an odd number, either by adding an additional magisterial district during redistricting or by adding one or more at-large members to increase accessibility and accountability to constituents, spread out the workload of supervisors, and avoid tie-votes and expedite decision-making; 2) Each magisterial district have a mix of urban and rural residents because supervisors need both an urban and a rural perspective so as to have a county-wide perspective; 3) As far as possible, natural geographic boundaries and communities should be taken into account; and 4) The number of precincts and polling places should be increased. Albemarle County is below average in its polling places per voter provisions and population growth will increase that problem. There are also awkward-to-reach and crowded polling places which discourage voter participation. The average Virginia precinct March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) 113 had 1466 voters. If the County were "average", it would have 22 precincts, as opposed to the current 16 precincts. Seven precincts today are over 2000 which is considered the top-end of an optimally sized precinct; Berkeley, Ivy and Jack Jouett precincts are over that amount by considerable amounts. Ms. Thomas then handed out (copy on file) a comparison of counties, precincts and number of voters. Next to address the Board, Mr. James Butler, asked the Board to consider the addition of a seventh member to the Board, whether at-large or the addi- tion of a seventh district. He favors an at-large member. There have been only one minority to serve on the Board of Supervisors in the County. He would like to see a minority citizen have a fair chance to be elected to the Board. He feels that an at-large member would have a better chance at elec- tion because he thinks that county-wide there would be a better selection of qualified candidates. It is almost impossible in the County to have a dis- trict where a minority candidate can be chosen. He asks that the Board strongly consider a seventh member. He thinks it would make for a better variety of people on the Board, and allow for a strong voice on minority positions in education, housing and other activities. Mr. Way said he was interested in Mr. Butler's position that a minority would have a better chance at being elected at-large, considering that he, Mr. Butler, was elected from a district. He personally does not think an at-large membership increases the chances for a minority to be elected. He thinks that a person would have as great a chance to be elected from a district as to simply make it an at-large position. At-large there would be approximately 85 percent non-blacks voting for this person. Mr. Butler said this is a personal feeling of his. He had an opportunity to work in Albemarle County as the Extension Agent for 27 years and then on the Board and then he worked with the black community in the Piedmont Baptist Association for almost the same time. He has found that a large percentage of the people in the County are fair-minded which is why he feels that qualified candidates would have a better chance at-large. Next to address the Board, Mr. Charles Tolbert, a resident of the Jack Jouett District, encouraged the Board to consider a seventh member, whether at-large or by creating a seventh district. Seven member boards can work. By having an increased number of supervisors, there is a somewhat broader spec- trum of individual opinions and expertise available in Board decisions and discussions. In general, that is wise for a diverse county. By having an odd number there is the avoidance of tie votes on critical issues. When tie votes occur, they occur on critical issues and while it may be that some people would prefer that a decision not be made, he thinks it is better when boards can make to a firm conclusion. He also thinks a seventh member would make the Board more approachable. It is more likely that the public will find someone on the Board closer to their background and views. He a~ks that the Board give serious consideration to a seventh member on the Board. There being no other comments, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Bain said he is in favor of looking at the number of precincts in the county. Mr. Perkins commented that there are people in the Free Union precinct who feel that it would be easier for them to vote in Crozet rather than go to Free Union. He thinks there is a need to look at the direction most people travel. For example, it is out of the way for a lot of people who live in Brown's Cove to vote in Free Union. He also thinks there is a need for more precincts. Mr. Way said the only comment he has received is that the people in the Porter's precinct have said to not change their precinct at all. There was no further discussion on this item at this time. Agenda Item No. 9. Public Hearing: Community Development Block Grant Application for the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on February 22, 1991.) March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 10) 114 Mr. David Benish, Chief of Community Development, provided the following project summary: "Project Description: Albemarle County in conjunction with Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP) proposes to rehabilitate thirty-six substandard homes in the County currently occupied by owners (single- family detached units). Ail rehabilitations will bring the units up to or will exceed Section 8 minimum standards. Thus, all conditions that qualify the units as substandard (lacking partial or complete plumbing and/or major exterior or interior structural problems) will be addressed. The County proposes to use CDBG funds for the following~activities: 1) construction - labor and building materials; and 2) administration. Grant funds would be leveraged with other funds to implement the project. Grant administration will be the responsibility of the Albemarle County Department of Planning and Community Development. Day to day administration of the rehabilitation project will be the responsibility of AHIP. Project Beneficiaries: Thirty-six low-moderate-income families will benefit from the housing rehabilitation project. There are a total of 98 project beneficiaries in the following project areas: Covesville, Esmont, Schuyler, Batesville and Keswick-Cismont. Income eligibility will be verified by AHIP which maintains a waiting list of such families who desire rehabilitation assistance. Amount of Request: Albemarle County will request $500,000 in CDBG funds for implementation of this project. These funds will be lever- aged with funds from the County ($317,820), the Charlottesville Housing Foundation, Farmers Home Administration, Virginia Housing Partnership Fund, and the Indoor Plumbing Program (totalling $205,9Sl). Total project cost will be $1,023,771." Mr. Benish presented a resolution for adoption by the Board. Mr. Perkins asked why the project is being limited to five areas and is not County-wide. Mr. Cilimberg said one of the problems communicated to the staff last year by VHDA was that the application was too broad and widespread, and points were deducted because the County did not concentrate on the service areas enough. In this application, they tried to focus on those areas where there are the most applicants and most identifiable substandard housing within a particular location. Mr. Benish said the scope of the project had to be lessened also because only $500,000 is available for rehabilitation whereas before they were able to apply for $700,000. The public hearing was opened. Mrs. Theresa Tapscott, Director of Albemarle Housing Improvement Program, said she was present to answer any questions Board members may have. Mr. Bowie said the staff report indicates that the $205,951 will be provided by various organizations and the proposed resolution states that the $205,951 will be secured in the form of low inte- rest loans on behalf of the client families from these various organizations. He asked which is correct. Mrs. Tapscott said in any AHIP rehabilitation, they ask the client to pay as much of the cost of the rehabilitation as possible and in order for the families to do that there are certain loan funds that are available to AHIP. The Virginia Housing Partnership Fund issues loans to families at an interest rate of four percent and they can tailor the loans to meet the applicant's payment ability. The $205,951 will come as loans directly to the client families, but would supplement the grant and County funds. In addition to the block grant program, AHIP will have avail- able to it Indoor Plumbing Program monies and those dollars can be spent anywhere in the County. There are certain areas where there is a higher demand of plumbing need. Mrs. Tapscott said she thinks this is a good application. AHIP worked hard to identify the clients and score high on the points that they did not do March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 11) 115 well on last year. They have made contact with the 36 families proposed to benefit from this grant and gotten income ownership information and have prepared preliminary deficiency lists. She thinks this application will receive a more favorable rating than the application filed last year. Mr. Lynwood Coffman asked if all the families will be contributing to the cost of the rehabilitation. Mrs. Tapscott said in the past AHIP has issued 100 percent grants to certain families. Some of the families in this proposal will not be required to pay anything immediately, but will be part of a deferred loan payment program, whereas if the beneficiary sells or transfers the property to an ineligible applicant, the money would be secured by a second deed of trust. Mr. Coffman said he thinks everyone should pay some- thing even if it is only ten cents. Mr. Tucker commented that some people do actual work in lieu of payment. There being no other public cox~ents, the public hearing was closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Way, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to adopt the following resolution for a Community Development Block Grant Application for the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, that pursuant to public hearings, the County of Albe- marle wishes to apply for $500,000 of Virginia Community Development Block Grant funds for a housing rehabilitation project at address thirty-six (36) dwelling units; AND WHEREAS, $317,820 will be secured from Albemarle County and $205,951 will be secured in the form of low interest loans on behalf of the client families from Charlottesville Housing Foundation loan fund, the Virginia Housing Partnership loan fund and Farmers Home Administration; AND WHEREAS, it is projected that ninety-eight (98) persons will benefit from the implementation of this project, all of which are low- and moderate-income persons; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit the appropriate documents for submittal of this Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. Roll was called and the foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 10. Authorize Chairman to Sign Deed of Easement for Water and Sewer Lines in Rivanna Park. Mr. Tucker said the Charlottesville City Attorney's office has prepared a deed of easement dedicating all water and sewer lines to the Albemarle County Service Authority. This deed also transfers the ownership and maintenance of these lines to the Authority. Mr. Tucker recommended that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign the deed of easement and letter of dedication. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to authorize the Chairman to sign the deed of easement and letter of dedication to dedicate all water and sewer lines to the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Bowie said last summer an amended agreement on the operation of the Rivanna Park came before the Board and some changes were recommended by this Board concerning night lighting. That agreement has not yet been signed by the City. The Board had authorized the Chairman to sign that agreement, and he so. He intends to encourage the City to proceed with signing that agree- ment. March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 12) 116 There being no other discussion, roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. None. (Set out below is the deed of easement:) THIS DEED OF EASEMENT made this 29th day of January , 1991, by and between THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA and THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, Grantors, and the ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY, Grantee, hereinafter "Authority", whose address is 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901. WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the receipt of all of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantors do hereby GRANT and CONVEY with SPECIAL WARRANTY OF TITLE unto the Albemarle County Service Authority perpetual easements and rights-of-way twenty feet (20) in width to lay, erect, construct, install, maintain, repair, replace and extend a sanitary sewer line and a water line, consisting of pipes and all equipment, accessories, and appurtenances necessary in connection therewith, including manholes, located within the rights-of-way, as shown on a two page plat made by B. Aubrey Huffman and Associates, Ltd., dated October 3, 1990, which plat is attached hereto and made a part of this deed. These easements and rights-of-way cross a portion of the property acquired by Grantors by deed dated February 19, 1986, of record in the Clerk,s Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia in Deed Book 872, page 1. Reference is made to the attached plat for the exact location and dimensions of the perpetual rights-of-way. Grantors agree that new trees, shrubs, fences, buildings, overhangs, or other improvements or obstructions shall not be placed within the perpetual rights-of-way conveyed herein. As part of these easements and rights-of-way, the Authority shall have the right to enter upon the above-described property within the easement areas for the purpose of installing, constructing, maintain- ing, repairing, replacing, and extending the sanitary sewer and water lines and appurtenances thereto, within such easements, and the right of ingress and egress thereto as reasonably necessary to construct, install, maintain, repair, replace, and extend such lines. Whenever it is necessary to excavate earth within the easements, the Authority agrees to backfill such excavation in a proper and workmanlike manner so as to restore surface conditions as nearly as practicable to the same condition as prior to excavation. The facilities constructed within the rights-of-way shall be the property of the Authority, which shall have the right to inspect, rebuild, remove, repair, improve, and make such changes, alterations, additions and connections to or extensions of its facilities within the boundaries of said rights-of-way as are consistent with the purposes expressed herein. The rights-of-way provided for herein shall include the right to cut any trees, brush, and shrubbery, remove obstructions, and take other similar action reasonably necessary to provide economical and safe sewer and water line installation, operation and maintenance. The Authority shall have no responsibility to the Grantors to replace or reimburse the cost of said trees, brush, shrubbery, or obstructions if cut, removed or otherwise damaged. This deed is exempt from state recordation tax pursuant to Virginia Code Section 58.1-811(A)(3) and exempt from grantor's tax pursuant to Virginia Code Section 58.1-811(C)(3). March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 13) 117 (Set out below is the Letter of Dedication:) The undersigned, City of Charlottesville & County of Albemarle, (Name of Owner(s)) doing business at City Hall and the County Office Building, hereby (Name of Organization and Address) dedicates unto the Albemarle County Service Authority certain Water and Sewer facilities in connection with the development of (water and/or sewer) Rivanna Park identified on certain plans and specifications described as follows and incorporated herein by reference: Rivanna Park - Phase I-A (Title of Plans & Specifications, if applicable) November~ 1987 (Date & Revision Dates of Plans & Specifications, if applicable) Sowers & Associates (Name of Consulting Engineering Firm) The undersigned certifies: (1) That all requirements of the Rules and Regulations and General Water and Sewer Construction specifications of the Albemarle County Service Authority have been met. (2) That the undersigned is the owner of the above-described facilities. (3) That payment of all lawful claims of contractors, sub- contractors, materialmen and laborers for all labor performed and material furnished in the completion of these facilities has been made. (4) That payment has been made by the undersigned for all fees relative to applications and inspections concerning the facilities. (5) That the undersigned, his heirs, assigns, or successor in interest shall be responsible for and obligated to correct any defi- ciencies in construction for a period of one year from the date of acceptance of these facilities by the Albemarle County service Autho- rity. (6) That one copy of a recorded plat showing the dedicated easements, a deed of easement and a copy of the Clerk's receipt for payment of the recording fees have been submitted to the Albemarle County Service Authority. (7) That as-built plans have been submitted to the Albemarle County Service Authority (two sets of blueline copies and one set of reproducible mylars). (8) That a cost estimate of the water and/or sewer facilities have been submitted to the Albemarle County Service Authority. Construction costs (labor and material only) Water $ 3~500.00 Sewer $57~000.00 (9) These facilities include feet of sanitary sewer line. 20 feet of water line and 830 Agenda Item No. 10a. Discussion: Procedures for 1991-92 Budget Hearing. Mr. Bowie said he requested that this item be added to the agenda. He has received a lot of telephone calls and there is a lot of interest in the public hearing on the budget on March 13. He is requesting the Board's consensus on a set of procedural rules for the public hearing. There have been a lot of comments concerning taxes and overall spending. In order to insure that everybody has a chance to speak, he would recommend that each individual speaker be allowed two minutes. He would recommend that organi- zations be allowed five minutes to make a presentation. Whatever the Board March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 14) 118 decides, he will notify all of the organizations and provide each Board member with a copy to hand out to people. Mr. Bain said he thinks three to four minutes is adequate time. Mrs. Humphris said she also thinks three minutes would be adequate. She also hopes that people will make specific suggestions which would help the Board in its deliberations. Mr. Way said he thinks a time limit is a good idea and that three minutes is adequate. To limit organizations is good and it should be made clear that if they have written material to give to the Board to read that they provide just a summary. Mrs. Humphris said that at every meeting in the auditorium for the last couple of years the heat has been a problem. Something needs to be done to cool the room. Mr. Way asked that the sound system be checked to make sure it is working properly. Mr. Bowie said he also would like to announce a format for the meeting. After the County Executive gives his budget overview, he will open the hearing for general comments for an hour, then he will ask for specific comments on items in the budget and then again take general comments. There was no further discussion on this item. Agenda 'Item No. 11. Approval of Minutes: January 2, January 9 and January 16, 1991. Mr. Way had read the minutes of January 2 and January 16, 1991,' Pages 14 (#10) end, and found them to be satisfactory with one typographical error in the January 16 minutes. Mr. Bain had read the minutes of January 9, 1991. and found them to be in order. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to approve the minutes as read. 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 Item No. 12. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from Board Members. Mr. Bain asked the bid schedule for the new Agnor-Hurt elementary school. Mr. T.ucker said bids are due early this month and the bid opening may be delayed somewhat, but is still on schedule. Construction is anticipated to take 12 to 14 months. There is also a 60 to 90 day grace period built in. Mr. Perkins said there is a group of bowlers who have proposed that the bowling alley at Greenwood be closed because the machines are old. He talked with Mr. Pat Mullaney, Director of Parks and Recreation, who commented that the alleys will be kept open as long as the equipment holds up. Mr. St. John requested an executive session to discuss legal matters, namely the Bargamin case~ At 8:20 p.m., motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adjourn into executive session under Code Section 2.1-344.A.7 for legal matters to discuss Bargamin vs. Board of Supervisors. 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. March 6, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 15) 119 At 8:45 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session and the following certification of executive session was adopted: MOTION: Mr. Bain SECOND: Mr. Bowerman MEETING DATE: March 6, 1991 CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. VOTE: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT DURING VOTE: None. ABSENT DURING MEETING: None. Mr. Bowie said since next week's agenda does not take up a full day, he would suggest that the Board begin the budget work sessions in the afternoon. The other Board members concurred with Mr. Bowie. Agenda Item No. 13. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. CHAIRMAN