Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 31 1993 PC Minutes8-31-93 1 AUGUST 31, 1993 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, August 31, 1993, Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were: Mr. Phil Grimm, Chairman; Mr. Walter Johnson, Vice Chairman; Mr. William Nitchmann; Mr. Tom Jenkins; Mr. Tom Blue; Ms. Ellen Andersen; and Ms. Babs Huckle. Other officials present were: Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development; Mr. Bill Fritz, Senior Planner; and Mr. George St. John, County Attorney. The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and established that a quorum was present. The minutes of July 20 were approved as amended. T -93-03 Worrell Land and Cattle Com an - Proposal to amend the CO, Commercial Office, C-1, Commercial and HC, Highway Commercial districts to permit helistops/heliports by special use permit. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval of the amendment. Mr. Fritz noted the following change in the staff report: On page 3, change the final paragraph to read: "Add to supplemental regulations Section 5.1.1: 7. Helistops/heliports in commercial and industrial districts should be supportive of a large development as opposed to a smaller stand-alone facility." Mr. Blue questioned the use of the reference to "longitudinal" distance in Attachment B. Mr. Fritz explained that was meant to mean "each end of the runway must be 1000 feet from the approach zones." Mr. Blue felt it should be stated more clearly. Mr. Blue also asked for a clarification of the term "airport imaginary surfaces" (Attachment B). Mr. Fritz explained the term was defined (in other portions of the Airport Overlay District) as such areas as the noise impact overlay district, approach zones, etc. Mr. St. John added that the term is also defined within the FAA regulations. Mr. Blue questioned the phrase (Attachment B - C4) "All facilities shall be located and designed so that the operation thereof will not seriously effect adjacent residential areas." He felt "seriously effect" was a subjective term and "didn't mean a thing." The applicant was represented by Mr. Andrew Dracopoli. He explained that the helistop would be used by Peter Jefferson Place. /9 8-31-93 2 In response to Ms. Huckle's question about the size of the helicopters, Mr. Dracopoli explained that they would be single-roter, 3-4 passenger, as used by corporate enterprises as opposed to military -type helicopters. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Blue moved, seconded by Ms. Huckle, that ZTA-93-03 for Worrell Land and Cattle Company be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval as presented by staff. Discussion: There was a brief discussion about a size limitation being a part of the amendment. Mr. St. John pointed out that the County will have control on size on a case -by -case basis. Mr. Nitchmann asked if the County would have the authority to deny a helistop which might be in very close proximity to a previously approved helistop, and, if so, on what grounds. (He could foresee this as a potential problem in the future.) Mr. Cilimberg stated the Commission would need to apply the criteria set forth to determine how the use would impact adjacent areas. Mr. St. John explained that allowing a use by special permit means that it is recognized that there are places for the use, but not every place is appropriate. Mr. Blue understood Mr. Nitchmann's concern, but pointed out that the approval of this amendment will only result in allowing heliports (by special permit) in commercial areas as they are already allowed in the RA, LI and HI. He didn't think this change would make much difference. Mr. St. John stated that if heliports should become too prolific, the zoning text amendment could be repealed. Mr. Blue pointed out that the Supplementary Regulations require that a finding be made that a heliport will not interfere or compete with the Charlottesville -Albemarle Airport. Mr. St. John felt this related more to economic competition and he felt "this business of economically protecting the airport from competition is highly questionable." The previously stated motion for approval passed unanimously. -93-18 Worrell Land & Cattle Compan - Petition to allow a helistop on 46.5 acres zoned PD-MC, Planned Development Mixed Commercial. Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcel /7V 8-31-93 3 20C is located on the south side of Route 250 between State Farm Blvd and I-64 in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is located in a designated growth area (Urban Neighborhood 3) recommended for Office Service. (This use is proposed by ZTA-93-03.) Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions. Mr. Blue questioned the applicant's plan for a concrete landing surface (as opposed to a grass surface as noted as being most likely in the staff report). Mr. Fritz explained that the applicant has changed plans since the staff report and will "most likely go with grass." In answer to Ms. Huckle's question about fencing, Mr. Fritz explained that the applicant plans to fence the landing surface "for their own purposes." In answer to Mr. Blue's question about a site development plan, Mr.`Fritz explained that the entire development (Peter Jefferson Place) will have to be submitted and approved. He stated staff will ensure that the surface is dust free and that there are no structures located so as to interfere with the operation of the helicopter. He also stated that the applicant has filed an application with the FAA which shows "this" as being their approach zone. Staff noted alternatives in the event of changes in wind conditions or emergencies. In answer to Ms. Huckle's question about landing in places other than on a landing pad, Mr. Fritz confirmed that helicopters can land on a variety of solid surfaces. The applicant was represented by Mr. Andrew Dracopoli. He explained the applicant views this as a "marketing plus" in attracting desirable tenants for Peter Jefferson Place. He explained how and why this particular site had been chosen. The site is ideal from a technical standpoint. Adjoining property owners were contacted and expressed no opposition. Night-time lights are not being requested. This will be a private -use helistop; however, if proliferation of helistops should become a problem in the future, the applicant is willing to make the helistop available for the area. Addressing Ms. Huckle's earlier question about the size of helicopters, Mr. Johnson explained that large helicopters, such as multi -passenger or cargo units, are not visualized in this use. He felt the economics of this type of transportation is, in itself, a limiting factor. There being no public comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. 141 8-31-93 4 MOTION: Mr. Johnson moved, seconded by Ms. Huckle, that SP-93-18 for Worrell Land & Cattle Company be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions: 1. No fuel storage or overnight helicopter storage shall be permitted. 2. No maintenance, except emergency maintenance, shall be permitted. 3. No lighting shall be permitted. Takeoff and landing shall be permitted during daylight hours only. 4. Approval and registration with both the FAA and Virginia Department of Aviation. 5. Landing surface shall be dust free. The motion passed unanimously. ZMA-93-09 C. Todd Shields - Proposal to rezone approximately five acres from R-6, Residential to HC, Highway Commercial on property described as Tax Map 45, Parcel 112 (part of) located on the west side of Rt. 29N, west of the Kegler Bowling Alley/Miniature Golf Course and approximately 0.7 miles north of the Rio Road/Rt. 29N intersection. The site is located in a designated growth area (Urban Neighborhood 1) recommended for Regional Service. AND SP-93-20 C.-Todd Shields - Proposal to locate a commercial recreation establishment (24.2.2(1)] on approximately five acres currently zoned R-6, Residential. (ZMA-93-09 C. Todd Shields is pending on this site). Property described as Tax Map 45, parcel 112 (part of) is located on the west side of Rt. 29N, west of the Kegler Bowling Alley/Miniature Golf Course and approximately 0.7 miles north of the Rio Road/Rt. 29N intersection. The site is in the Charlottesville Magisterial District and is located in a designated growth area (Urban Neighborhood 1) recommended for Regional Service. AND S -047 - Todd Shields Preliminary Site Plan - Approval of use of private septic system in accord with Section 32.7.5.1. Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff was recommending approval of all three proposals. l� 8-31-93 5 Mr. Blue pointed out that this is an opportunity to get a proffer for gravity sewer to this property, though none has been offered. He was concerned that not taking advantage of this opportunity was depriving the County of a possible source of funding. He asked staff to comment. Mr. Fritz explained that staff had reviewed the rezoning request "blind to any other use" because the applicant's financing could fall through and then there could be a much more intensive use on the property. He added, however: "Any site plan that is reviewed on any property within the Albemarle County Service Authority jurisdictional area must connect to public water and sewer if you deem it reasonably available and, if you do, he would have to extend those lines for that use. In this case, (that could mean) improving the pump station, providing a contribution to the gravity sewer, construction of the gravity sewer, or some alternative system. So you do have that control on any site plan regardless of the nature of the use." Mr. Blue stated that he had contacted ACSA and one of its engineers had been of the opinion that this particular use would generate such a little demand that it really is incidental to the whole developed area. He pointed out the same argument had been used on the miniature golf course in front of Keglers, but that had not been a rezoning. It was determined that the site has access across Keglers and is not dependent on access from Berkmar Drive. It was determined the Western Bypass would not effect this property. In answer to Mr. Johnson's question about noise regulations in the event the property is rezoned, Mr. Fritz explained that the property would be subject to all applicable regulations for HC property. However, he stated that Section 4.14 of the Zoning Ordinance does not apply to a commercial establishment. Mr. Cilimberg explained that noise concerns would have to be addressed through the special permit conditions. Mr. Johnson wondered if the Ordinance should be reviewed so as to make Section 4.14 applicable "across the board." Regarding the issue of adequate water and sewer, Mr. Cilimberg stressed that even if another use were to be proposed after the property is rezoned, that issue would have to be addressed as required by the Ordinance and does not have to be proffered or made a condition of a special permit. (He repeated this again later in the meeting, stating: "This parcel has to use public utilities unless you grant them the use of private septic or well.") Mr. Fritz added that the Commission may deny the use of private septic systems until such time as the pump station is upgraded or a gravity line is in place, etc. He confirmed this would also apply to a by -right use. 8-31-93 6 Mr. Grimm felt this offered good control of the use of the property. Mr. Blue pointed out, however, that only a rezoning offers the opportunity to improve the utility. Mr. Fritz interjected that the applicant could be required to contribute, at the time of site plan, an amount that would be needed to serve his own needs. Mr. Blue felt it was not aquestion of the protection of health, safety and welfare since that can be accomplished through the site plan, rather it is a financial question. Referring to a statement in the staff report that "lack of sewer capacity at this time is not sufficient justification for denial as several alternatives are available," Ms. Huckle asked staff to comment on those alternatives. Mr. Fritz replied: "Delay development until such time as the Service Authority installs gravity sewer; install gravity sewer at the cost of the developer; wait until the Service Authority upgrades the pump station; upgrade the pump station at the cost of the developer; or installation of a private septic field, to be approved by the Health Department and the Commission." In response to Mr. Johnson's question about ARB review, Mr. Cilimberg explained that neither of the criteria for EC overlay application apply in this case. In response to Ms. Huckle's question about tree removal, Mr. Fritz explained that the applicant would have to meet the tree canopy and landscaping provisions of the Ordinance and the plantings would have to be either installed or bonded. Mr. Fritz confirmed that the proposed rezoning would make the property more in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan than it is currently. The applicant, Mr. Todd Shields, addressed the Commission. He was accompanied by Mr. Tom Muncaster, engineer for the project. Answers to Commission questions included the following: --Connection to public sewer has been investigated and found to be cost -prohibitive for the applicant. --The applicant has offered a contribution (i.e. "has agreed in principle") at such time as the pumping station is upgraded. He explained that the pump station is controlled by several landowners and this applicant has no control. He confirmed this offer would be valid even though a private septic system will already be in place. --The applicant has agreed to contribute approximately 1 acre for improvements to Berkmar Drive. --Noise studies which have been performed indicated that noise will not be a factor at the nearest residential property line and the levels will be in conformance with the Ordinance. /*4 8-31-93 7 --The site will be graded significantly, but the applicant will preserve as many of the existing trees as possible. --The bumper -boat area will be approximately 3,500 to 4,000 square feet, with an average water depth of 18-24 inches. The water will be treated with a sand filter, backwash system. The Chairman invited public comment. Ms. Karen Strickland addressed the Commission. She questioned the proposal's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. She felt changing land that could potentially be for affordable housing to commercial was "short sighted." She felt this five -acre site did not fit into the 30-acre scheme for the property. In response to Mr. Blue's question, Mr. Fritz confirmed that staff feels the proposed rezoning is not in conflict with either the Comprehensive Plan or the HC district. There being no further public comment the matter was placed before the Commission. MOTION: Mr. Blue moved that ZMA-93-09 for C. Todd Shields be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Huckle felt the rezoning was premature. She noted that the Comp Plan recommends the use of public utilities in urban neighborhoods. She felt this could lead to further requests from commercial uses for private septic systems. She stated she would not support the motion. In response to Mr. Johnson's question, staff confirmed that the parcel does have access. Mr. Blue stated that though his question regarding the public sewer had been answered to his satisfaction, he felt there were a lot of other questions which would come up with the review of the special permit and site plan. He did not think there was any question about the rezoning because it was making the property more in conformance with the Comp Plan. Mr. St. John pointed out that the applicant's agreement to dedicate property for Berkmar Drive is unenforceable unless it is proffered. Staff felt the applicant had made a committment to the County Engineer. Mr. St. John asked what would happen if the ownership changed. Mr. Fritz interjected that the applicant had just offered to proffer f�1 8-31-93 8 to dedicate the necessary right-of-way for Berkmar Drive upon completion of the final road plans. He noted that the exact location could not be pinned down because the final road plans have not been done. Mr. St. John agreed that would take care of his concern. Mr. Cilimberg asked that the applicant submit the written proffer prior to the Board hearing. AMENDED MOTION: Mr. Blue moved that ZMA-93-09 for C. Todd Shields be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffer as previously described. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion which passed , 6:1 with Commissioner Huckle casting the dissenting vote. SP-93-20 C. Todd Shields - (See previous description) Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. Staff recommended approval. Mr. Johnson asked if the fact that this miniature golf course will be less than 200 feet from an existing one had been given any consideration. Mr. Fritz explained that staff felt that was not an appropriate issue for staff to consider. Staff had consulted with the Police Department to see if there were any concerns about having this concentration of recreational uses. The Police Department had expressed no concerns. Mr. Johnson expressed concern about the noise generated by a go-kart track and the fact that apparently the Ordinance does not address noise concerns on highway commercial property. Mr. Fritz explained that staff had compared the use, in terms of noise, to swimming pools, golf, and tennis facilities. (The applicant had objected to this comparison.) It was staff's determination, that the noise would not exceed the regulations for swim, golf and tennis uses. Ms. Huckle questioned how the go-kart use could be compared to those noted by Mr. Fritz. Mr. Blue indicated that he felt the noise probably would be "drowned out" by the traffic on Berkmar Drive and Rt. 29 which are on either side of the property. That being the case, Mr. Johnson did not see why there would be a problem with making the restrictions of Section 4.14.1 of the Zoning Ordinance applicable. Mr. Fritz confirmed the Commission and the Board had the right to make such a condition, but the Zoning Administrator feels that it is difficult to enforce. Mr. Fritz also confirmed that staff feels the noise levels will not be excessive for this type of setting and zoning. Mr. St. John questioned the source of the designation "commercial recreation center." Mr. Fritz explained that the definition was contained within the text of the use /1/4, 8-31-93 9 itself and is found within the HC district. In the Commercial District, it states, as a special use, "commercial recreation establishment, including, but not limited to, amusement centers, bowling alleys, pool halls and dance halls." He explained that amusement center is a defined use. Mr. Fritz then read the definition of amusement center. Mr. St. John asked if approval of a commercial recreation establishment automatically makes some of the recreation uses by -right, i.e. will a go-kart track then be by -right? Mr. Fritz responded that it was his feeling that the Commission could approve part of the application, and not approve other parts. He explained: "If you believe that miniature golf course and batting cages are O.K., ... but go-karts are not, I do believe (those could be denied)." Mr. St. John wanted the Commission's discretion to be clear. Ms. Huckle asked if this approval could allow dancehalls (as mentioned previously). Mr. Fritz replied negatively. He explained that that type of use had existed prior to the current ordinance. Ms. Huckle stated she would be opposed to approval of any request which could allow a dancehall. Ms. Andersen asked if it ws common practice to accept studies which are done by applicants. Mr. Cilimberg explained that because there is insufficient staff to perform a variety of studies, applicants' studies are accepted and then are submitted to the County Engineering Department for review. Mr. Cilimberg suggested that the Commission might wish to specify which uses are covered in the special permit approval. Mr. Johnson felt the only basis for a limitation would be concerns about noise. The Chairman invited public comment. Mr. Todd Shields addressed the Commission. Answers to Commission questions included the following: --Security should not be a problem because the site will be totally enclosed in 4-6 foot fences of a wrought -iron style. The go-kart area will be shielded by a 4-6 foot privacy fence. --The applicant feels the use is compatible with the area and there is a need for this type facility. --No alcohol will be served and the facility is intended to promote family activities. --A market study indicated there is sufficient market for at least one other miniature golf course. The proposed facility is significantly different from the golf course at the front of the property and the owners of both properties have a good relationship and are mutually interested in promoting a symbiotic relationship. 8-31-93 10 --Noise studies from other localities show that noise levels will not exceed those stated in the Ordinance. The uses have been sited so as to minimize their impact. --Bumper-boats and go-karts have been improved so as to reduce their noise levels. 12-16 go-karts will be used. The machines will have governors to control their speed. --Go-karts have height -requirements (thus small children cannot operate them). The attendant at the track will also be able to control each kart individually by a radio -controlled device. --Removal of the go-kart use would have a drastic economic impact on the facility. --There may be a need for some flexibility in the recreational uses within the park so that a use that proves to be unprofitable can be changed for another use (which meets the standards of the Zoning Ordinance). --Hours anticipated are Sunday through Thursday - 10 a.m. to 11 p.m.; Friday and Saturday - 10 a.m. to midnight. The use is a year-round operation. The Chairman invited public comment. Ms. Karen Strickland addressed the Commission. She expressed reservations and concerns about passive -type recreation, air pollution from go-karts, and noise. (Mr. Shields later explained that pollution on these vehicles is negligible.) She questioned the need for another miniature golf course on Rt. 29. She compared it to a beach community atmosphere. (Mr. Shields later assured Ms. Strickland that this would be an "upscale" project.) She expressed concern about the early hours of operation (during the school day) and the possibility that the facility may eventually be connected to Agnor-Hurt Elementary School by sidewalks. There being no further comment, the matter was placed before the Commission. Mr. Johnson indicated he could support the request with the addition of a fourth condition making the noise restrictions of Section 4.14.1 of the Performance Standards of the Zoning Ordinance applicable. (The applicant expressed no objection to this suggestion.) Mr. Fritz read the pertinent section of the Ordinance. Mr. Fritz felt the go-karts would be able to meet these requirements (based on a study done at the time of a previous proposal for this type of use by this same applicant.) Ms. Huckle recalled that there had been significant opposition to this use when it had been proposed for a site on Rio Road. Ms. Huckle was in favor of a fifth condition limiting the uses to those shown on the site plan and any proposed change would require County approval. 8-31-93 11 Mr. Nitchmann asked how other Commissioners felt about the facility's close proximity to the elementary school. Mr. Fritz stated that at the time of the previous request, he had spoken with a school principal on the subject of truancy. The principal felt that, based on the young age of the children, truancy would not be a problem. Ms. Huckle expressed concern about children who might go to the facility after school and spend their lunch money. Mr. Nitchmann felt that was a responsibility of the parents. Mr. Nitchmann felt there was a need for this type of facility. MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, seconded by Mr. Johnson, that SP-93-20 be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the following conditions. 1. No alcohol sales. 2. The bumper boat pool shall not be constructed until a method of handling the waste water has been approved by the Department of Environmental Quality. 3. Fencing shown on the site plan shall not be bonded and shall be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. Compliance with Section 4.14.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. 5. Uses shall be limited to those uses shown on the site plan (go kart races, batting cage, childrens play area, bumper boats, miniature golf course and fun center). (Mr. Shields, in response to Mr. Jenkins' question, described the childrens play area as being for kiddie rides and a soft play area. Entrance into the park will be free, with an individual charge for each activity.) The motion for approval passed unanimously. SDP-93-047 - Todd Shields Preliminary Site Plan - Mr. Fritz presented the staff report. He noted that staff's review "assumed the approval of ZMA-93-09 and SP-93-20." He explained that staff would approve the plan administratively if the Commission approves the use of a private septic system in accord with Section 32.7.5.1. Mr. Johnson asked if approval of a private septic system at this time means that it is approved forever, i.e. will the property be obligated to connect to public sewer if it becomes reasonably available? Mr. Fritz explained that the Commission could place a condition on the approval which would require that the site be connected to public sewer W1 8-31-93 12 when it becomes reasonably available. Mr. St. John added that the County does not have a "mandatory hook-up" requirement but a condition such as described by Mr. Fritz was acceptable. Mr. Fritz added that the Commission would have to define precisely the term "reasonably available" so as to make it enforceable by the Zoning Administrator. There was a brief discussion of a similar request (for Blue Ridge Garden Center (on Proffit Road). Staff explained that their recommendation was different on the current request because: (1) It is felt that "it is much less likely" that public sewer will become available to this site; and (2) Because of the action the Commission took on the Blue Ridge request, i.e. allowing a private system. Mr. St. John pointed out that if there are enough approvals of private systems, with no condition requiring hook-up at some future point, then there will be no incentive for public sewer to ever be extended. Mr. St. John pointed out that the term "reasonably available" takes into consideration not only distance, but also availability of easements, capacity, etc. Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that Kegler's is on public sewer but has used most of the available pump capacity. Therefore, essentially, there is sewer within 500 feet, but there is no more pump capacity available. Mr. Nitchmann questioned the public benefit of requiring this, or any other property, to connect to public sewer if their private system is functioning efficiently. Mr. St. John responded: "I think the courts would uphold you if you find that it is in the public interest not to allow a proliferation of septic fields and private wells in the jurisdictional area of the Service Authority, which overlaps the growth area of the County." Mr. Johnson felt the limit of a septic field is a controversial issue. Ms. Huckle expressed concern about septic fields being located under paved areas. Mr. Fritz pointed out that when both drainfields are located under paved areas it is required that both the primary and back-up fields be installed before the area is paved so that their usage can be switched back and forth if necessary. Mr. Fritz did not know if both fields were under the parking area in this case since only the location of the primary field is shown (which is under the parking area). Mr. Grimm was in favor of requiring that the site connect to public sewer when it is reasonably available. Commissioners Andersen, Huckle and Johnson agreed. 8-31-93 13 Mr. Nitchmann questioned how the Commission could determine what distance is appropriate. Mr. Muncaster, engineer for the project, expressed his opinion as to when public sewer may be extended and its probable location. He felt it would be within 200 feet of the building. Mr. Grimm felt 200 feet was a reasonable distance in this case. (Ms. Huckle was in favor of 500 feet.) Ms. Andersen asked if 200 feet would become a "standard" for other requests. Mr. St. John replied: "No. This is a case -by -case issue." It was determined the current sewer line at Kegler's is 560 feet from this property line (not from the building). Based on the Commission's discussion, Mr. Fritz recommended the following condition: "At such time as a sewer line with adequate capacity is in place within 200 feet of the building, the applicant shall connect to public sewer." Mr. Blue recalled that the applicant had previously stated his willingness to contribute his pro -rated share to extend sewer if an agreement can be reached among the adjacent property owners. (Mr. Shields later confirmed this was accurate. He noted that connection to public sewer would increase the value of the property.) It was Mr. Blue's feeling that the Service Authority will not extend public sewer to this area "on its own" without developer contributions to upgrade the pump station. The applicant, Mr. Shields, suggested that the time to require the upgrading of the public sewer is when the intensity of the site is increased. He did not see any public benefit to be gained by requiring connection to public sewer at this point. Ms. Huckle felt that allowing a private system would eliminate any incentive for the public sewer to be extended. Mr. Blue understood Ms. Huckle's position, but felt "it's unfair to penalize this applicant for not being able to get all the others together to come up with something." Ms. Andersen indicated she could support the request with a condition as read earlier by Mr. Fritz. MOTION: Mr. Nitchmann moved, seconded by Ms. Andersen, that the Todd Shields' request for use of a private septic system to serve a commercial recreation establishment on Tax Map 45, Parcel 112 / (Special Permit 93-20) be approved, with the requirement that at such time as a sewer line with 167 8-31-93 14 adequate capacity is in place within 200 feet of the building, the applicant shall connect to public sewer." Mr. Nitchmann noted that the applicant has already contributed a considerable amount to the County in the dedication of property for Berkmar Road. He felt he had "done his fair share" and the County could "meet him halfway on this distance." He concluded that he felt the condition was not actually necessary but he recognized that the request would not pass without the condition. The motion passed (6:1) with Commissioner Huckle casting the dissenting vote. WORK SESSION CIP Funding Overview - Mr. Baker introduced Ms. Roxanne White (County Executive's Office) and Mr. Melvin Breeden (Finance Department). They were present in response to the Commission's request for a presentation on the funding process. Ms. White presented a written explanation of the review process to the Commission and then went over that explanation in her presentation. Ms. White and staff answered questions about project review, revenue calculations, the bond process, revenue sharing, Board policy, the General Fund, Meadowcreek Parkway funding, school projects, and debt service. There was an extended discussion on the inclusion of projects in the CIP for which there is no known funding. (Some Commissioners expressed their opposition to this procedure.) Specifically discussed was the Meadowcreek Parkway. Staff explained that the County Attorney has interpreted State Code to require that a project must be included in the CIP in order for the county to get proffered developer contributions. Mr. Johnson disagreed with this interpretation and offered to meet with the County Attorney. Mr. Johnson interpreted the Code as meaning that a project must be in the CIP before the County can actually accept the contribution, but NOT before it can accept a proffer for the contribution. Ms. Huckle suggested that, at the very least, there should be some distinction made for these monies which show that they are "not real money." In relation to school projects, Mr. Johnson stated he could see no evidence of competitive evaluation of projects in terms of cost-effectiveness and necessity. Ms. White explained that figures are projected before projects go out to bid, but a competitive bidding process is always followed before contracts are awarded. Mr. Johnson concluded: "I ��a 8-31-93 15 just think we could get more done if we worked together as a team." Also referring to school projects, Ms. Huckle felt there must be "stock" school plans available without "reinventing the wheel" each time a new school is needed. Ms. Huckle felt that written minutes of CIP work sessions should be made available to the Board "rather than just handing them our list." Mr. Cilimberg confirmed that work sessions are recorded. Mr. Nitchmann suggested that any specific Commission recommendations and issues should be attached to the "list" so that the Board will be sure not to miss them. Mr. Cilimberg agreed that Mr. Nitchmann's suggestion was the best way to keep the Board informed of the Commission's desires in relation to CIP projects. Ms. Andersen agreed. It was noted that this has been done in the past. Ms. Huckle felt written minutes on CIP work sessions were important. (No other Commissioners expressed agreement with Ms. Huckle's suggestion.) Mr. Cilimberg assured Ms. Huckle that the Board receives copies of Commission minutes. (RECORDING SECRETARY'S NOTE: Any work session which is held during the time of the regularly scheduled public hearing--7:00 p.m. Tuesday nights --is transcribed. The Board receives copies of all minutes that are transcribed. Work sessions which are held at other times during the week are transcribed on a time -permitting basis. Recorded tapes of all work sessions are kept on file and are available to the public or the Board of Supervisors at any time.] Mr. Nitchmann expressed the feeling that the School Board runs the County government. He felt that parents must be willing to pay higher taxes if.they want all the programs and facilities which the Education Department seeks to provide. MISCELLANEOUS Discussing the next CIP work session, Mr. Nitchmann asked for an appropriate representative to be present to answer questions about the Assessment Package and the School Technology funding request. Mr. Nitchmann questioned the project to change 4,000 feet of counter space to comply with ADA requirements. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:35 p.m. Rem ded by: Janice Wills Transcribed by: Deloris Bradshe