Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-01-16January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) 299 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on January 16, 1991, at 7:30 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. BOARD MEMBERS 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. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENTs Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive; Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development. Agenda Item No. I. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 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. Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public. There were no other matters addressed. Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Way and seconded by Mrs. Humphris to approve Item 5.1 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 Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance, the Sheriff's Office, Commonwealth's Attorney and Regional Jail, for the month of December, 1990, were approved as presented by the vote shown above. Item 5.2. Letter dated January 4, 1991, 'to Dr. David L. Morris from Mr. H. C. Miller, Department of Historic Resources, re: notification that Cocke's Mill House and Mill Site has been entered in the National Register of Historic Pla~es effective December 6, 1990, was received as information. Item 5.3. Copy of Planning Commission Minutes for December 18, 1990, and January 10, 1991, received as information. Item 5.4. Tentative Schedule for Redistricting Plan Review/Adoption was received as information. Agenda Item No. 6. Public hearing on an ordinance to amend and reenact Section 2.1-4, Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, of the Code of Albemarle by creating the High Mowing Agricultural/Forestal District. Located on Rts 692, 693 & 694 just S of Batesville. The proposed district contains 622.440 ac in 6 parcels. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 1 and January 8, 1991.) Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows: "PURPOSE: The purpose of an agricultural/forestal district is 'to conserve and protect and to encourage the development and improvement of the Commonwealth's agricultural/forestal lands for the production of foods and other agricultural and forestal products .... ' and 'to conserve and protect agricultural and forestal lands as valued natural and ecological resources which provide essential open space for clean January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 2) 300 air shed, watershed protection, wildlife habitat, as well as for aesthetic purposes.' FACTORS TO CONSIDER: Numerous factors must be considered by the Advisory Committee and at any public hearing when a proposed district is being considered. HIGH MOWING DISTRICT: Location: High Mowing District is located on State Routes 692, 693 and 694 just south of Batesville. Acreage: The proposed district contains 622.440 acres in six parcels. Time Period: The proposed time period is ten years. Agricultural and Forestal Significance: Land in the proposed district is being used for forestry and hay. Significant Land Not in Agricultural/Forestal Production: The use value taxation program is a good indication of the actual use of the properties. All six parcels are enrolled in the program. Approxi- mately 421 acres are being used for forestry, and 199 acres are being used for agriculture. Two acres are nonqualifying because of dwell- ings. Land Use Other Than Agriculture and Forestry: There are two dwellings in the proposed district. Local Developmental Patterns and Needs: The proposed district is located in an area of farms and orchards with scattered dwellings. large lot subdivision, Miran Forest, is adjacent to the east. Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations: The proposed district is located in Rural Areas III and is zoned Rural Areas. The nearest Growth Area is North Garden, a distance of about four miles east. Environmental Benefits: The proposed district lies within the South Fork Rivanna River Watershed. Two tributaries of Mechums River traverse the district. Some critical slopes occur within the dis- trict. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Advisory Committee, at its meeting on December 3, 1990, unanimously recommended approval of the High Mowing District. The Committee also directed staff to contact the owner of Tax Map 85, Parcel 41, to see if they would consider joining the district, since that parcel would be a logical addition. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Commission, at its meeting on December 18, 1990, unanimously recommended approval of the High Mowing District." The public hearing was opened at this time. Ms. Sherry Buttrick, repre- sentative from Piedmont Environmental Council, said she was present to answer any questions the Board had. Mr. Bowie asked about Parcel 41 mentioned in the staff report. Ms. Buttrick said that she does not know the property owner and had no contact with him. Mr. Cilimberg said the County contacted the property owner and received no response. There were no other members of the public present to speak and the public hearing was closed. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) 301 Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mrs. Humphris to adopt an ordinance to amend and reenact Section 2.1-4, Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts of the Code of Albemarle to add the High Mowing Agricul- tural and Forestal District. Roll was called and th~ motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. (The ordinance is set out below:) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REEN~ CT SECTION 2.1-4, CHAPTER 2.1, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS, OF THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Section 2.1-4 of the Code of Albemarle be, and the same hereby is, amended to add subsection (t), the "~igh Mowing Agricul- tural and Forestal District", reading as follows: Sec. 2.1-4. Districts described. (t) The district known as the "High Mowing Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 85, parcels 33B, 39, 39A1, 39H, 4lA, 41Al. Agenda Item No. 7. Public hearing on an ordinan Section 2.1-4 (e), Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Fore Code of Albemarle by additions to the Keswick Agricul The proposed additions located on Rt 610 about 2 mi o in 2 parcels. Existing district contains 5922.12 ac. Daily Progress on January 1 and January 8, 1991~) Mr. Bain noted that he is the Trustee for a land trust participating in the Keswick Agricultural/Forestal District, but he has no ownership in the property. Therefore, he wilt participate in the discussion of this item. Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows: "LOCATION: The proposed addition is located in two areas: on State Route 610 about two miles off Route 20 North; and on a private ease- ment at the end of Route 610. ACREAGE: The proposed addition contains 263.000 acres in two parcels. The existing district contains 5922.12 acres. TIME PERIOD: The proposed time period is the sa ~e as for the original district, or eight years from September 3, 1986 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL SIGNIFICANCE: Land il the proposed district is being used for forestry and agriculture. SIGNIFICANT LAND NOT IN AGRICULTUHAL/FORESTAL P}DDUCTION: The use value taxation program is a good indication of the actual use of the property. About 242 acres are being used for forestry, 20 acres are being used for agriculture, and one acre is nonqmalifying because of a dwelling. ~e to amend and reenact stal Districts, of the tural/Forestal District. ff Rt 20 N contain 263 ac (Advertised in the LAND USE OTHER THAN AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY: There is one dwelling in the addition. LOCAL DEVELOPMENTAL PATTERNS AND NEEDS: Route 610 is undergoing transition to a residential area, with many new lots and houses under construction. However, the lots surrounding the 90 acre parcel were divided off prior to 1980, and the subject property retains all its development rights. Route 610 ends near the 90 acre parcel, and driveways continue past the property to the 173 acre parcel on Lone- some Mountain. The 90 acre parcel lies about one-half mile northwest January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 4) 302 of the existing Keswick Agricultural/Forestal District; the 173 acre parcel is surrounded by the Keswick District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING REGULATIONS: The proposed addition is located in Rural Areas II and is zoned Rural Areas. The nearest Growth Areas are the Urban Area and Hollymead, each a distance of about four miles southwest and west. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS: The 90 acre parcel is mostly wooded, with some critical slopes. It lies at the bale of the Southwestern Moun- tains which are noted for their prime hardwood soils. The 173 acre parcel is wooded and is situated in the Southwest Mountains. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recon~nends approval. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Advisory Committee at its meeting on December 3, 1990, unanimously recommended approval of the Addition II to Keswick District. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: The Albemarle County Planning Commission at its meeting on December 18, 1990, unanimously recommend- ed approval of the Addition II to Keswick District." The public hearing was opened and no one from the public was present to speak. The public hearing was closed and the matter placed before the Board. Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris and seconded by Mr. Perkins to adopt an ordinance to amend and reenact Section 2.1-4(e), Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts of the Code of Albemarle to add parcels to the Keswick Agricultural and Forestal District. 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. (The ordinance is set out below:) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT SECTION 2.1-4, CHAPTER 2.1, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS, OF THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Section 2.1-4 (e) of the Code of Albemarle be, and the same hereby is, amended and reenacted to add parcels to the "Keswick Agricultural and Forestal District", reading as follows: Sec. 2.1-4. Districts described. (e) The district known as the "Keswick Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 63, parcels 24, 39, 43; tax map 64, parcels 2, 5, 7, 7A, 8, SA, 9, 10A, 10B, 10C, 10D, 12, 13, 13A, 14; tax map 65, parcel 13; tax map 79, parcels 46, 46A; tax map 80, parcels 1, 2A, 3Al, 3G, 3I, 4, 61D, 88, 164, 169, 169A, 174, 176, 182, 182A, 183, 183A, 190, 192, 194; tax map 81, parcels 1, 63. Agenda Item No, 8. SP-90-83. Juanita L. Wilson. Public hearing on a request to allow a private dance school in the existing Maple Grove Christian Church. Property on S side of Rt 649 at inters with Rt 785. Zoned R-1. TM32,P29C&28. Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 1 and January 8, 1991.) Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows: "CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The property currently contains the Maple Grove church building which is proposed to remain. There are two January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) 303 points of access from this property onto Route 649. A stream is located between the church and Meadowfields and Forest Lakes Block O. Two dwellings are visible to the south, but are partially screened by existing vegetation. Topography is flat until reaching the stream. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to locate a dance school containing up to two studios within the existing Maple Grove church building with a possible addition to the building. One studio floor shall be constructed now in the church and another will be constructed later as a possible addition to the building. The church will also serve as a residence for the applicant and will require construction of an additional bathroom to serve the dance school. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan recommends this area for low density residential. Private schools are not directly identified in the Comprehensive Plan. As compared to the existing use, a church, this use should have no more impact on the surrounding area. Schools in general are not considered inappropriate for a residential area. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the ultimate alignment of the proposed Timberwood Parkway, a collector road to Meadow Creek Parkway, will be west of the property along an existing development road (Powell Creek Drive). As a recommendation, the comprehensive plan states 'development of the Meadow Creek Parkway and associated col- lector roads to provide more direct access to the urban areas and downtown Charlottesville. With final alignment determination, right-of-way should be reserved for these roads'. In addition, the Charlottesville Area Transportation Study indicates that the proposed Meadow Creek Parkway (McIntire Extension) is proposed to follow the same existing road alignment. If either Meadow Creek or Timberwood Parkways utilize the alignment, the location of the church building will interfere with sight distance onto Route 649 (Proffit Road) from Timberwood Parkway. However, this is a situation caused by the existing development, not the existing or proposed use of the prop- rty. No improvements to the building are proposed which would further this problem. According to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), this sight distance problem currently prohibits such an alignment and resulting intersection. The alternatives that would overcome this problem would be for the County to purchase this prop- erty or make arrangements to have the building relocated to ensure sight distance. SUMMARY AND RECOMMF2qDATION: Staff opinion is that certain uses such as churches, day care and schools contribute to the well being and moral fiber of the community. In this posture, staff review is generally limited to issues of physical development, while other considerations of appropriateness of the use to a given location is a matter of legislative discretion. Staff has received two letters and one petition recommending approval of this request. Based on information submitted by the applicant and the church, VDOT has indicated this use will mostly impact Route 649 during peak hours while the existing church impacts Route 649 during nonpeak hours. VDOT has also stated minimum sight distance can be obtained by relo- cating the existing entrance closer to the building and removing several trees, signs and a fence. Therefore, an easement may be needed off-site. The applicant has demonstrated this easement is obtainable. Should the easement be necessary, staff recommends it be platted and recorded prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the school. The applicant proposes to use an existing septic system. This site, however, is currently located within the jurisdictional area for public water and sewer. Therefore, Ms. Wilson requests a waiver from the Commission of Section 32.7.5 of the Zoning' ordinance which re- quires hook-up to public sewer where reasonably available. Ms. Wilson has based her justification on a 1200 foot distance'to the nearest available line which would cost approximately $36,000. Topographic constraints to the west of the church create difficulties in connect- ing to the sewer line in Forest Lakes. Furthermore, the 1200 foot January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) 304 distance is based on connection to an ultimate sewer line to be constructed in Jefferson Village. It is uncertain at this time when that line will be constructed. Staff recommends support for this request. SUMMARY: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval of SP-90-83 subject to the following conditions which include obtaining minimum sight dis- tance: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Virginia Department of Transportation approval of relocation of access to obtain adequate sight distance and issuance of a commercial entrance permit. There shall only be one access; Not more than a maximum of 35 students shall be instructed at any one time. There shall be no more than six class sessions held each day; No construction, including grading or clearing of vegetation, shall occur closer than 20 feet to any adjacent residential area; 4. Fire Official approval of occupancy loading of building. Health Department approval of septic system adequacy. Condition #2 notwithstanding, the total number of students shall not exceed septic field capabilities as determined by the Health Department; Administrative approval of site plan for addition not to exceed 50 percent of existing building floor area." Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on December 11, 1990, unanimously recommended approval of the petition subject to the staff's conditions. The public hearing was opened, and the applicant, Ms. Juanita L. Wilson, came forward to speak. She explained that she has a Bachelor of Arts degree with a major in dance from a reputable performing arts school. She taught on Broadway in New York City with some of the highest acclaimed dancers and teachers in the country. Ms. Wilson said she has had a school in Charlottes- ville for 14 years and would like to continue this full-time occupation. She said she offers high-quality dance instruction for children, teens, adults and senior citizens. She feels that art form should be accessible to everyone. It is her intent to provide a high caliber and reasqnably-priced school for the community. She realizes that the school wil~n~ located in a designated growth area. Ms. Wilson said it is hard to find space for a dance school because it requires a large open area. Most areas are too costly or in areas not suitable for women and children to attend. She feels that the proposed location will be a safe and healthy place for the school. She said the adjacent property owners are in support of this use and asked for the Board's support and approval. Mr. Bowie noted that a petition with 43 signatures in support of the request was a part of the staff report. Mr. Andrew Windham said he is an interested community member who would like to see the Wilson School of Dance continue to expand and prosper. He is one of the oldest students in the dance classes and one of the few men as well. He has been impressed by the high standards of teaching maintained in this school. He said Ms. Wilson and her staff members are true professionals and are motivated by a commitment to artistic discipline. He feels that this is not just a business, but that a nurturing and supportive environment is offered. Underlying this is the fact that the importance of dance as a means of artistic expression is communicated to students. He said there is a level of competition, not against others, but toward self-realization and fulfill- ment. He feels the Wilson School of Dance offers an important resource from the standpoint of the moral and character development of children. He said January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 7) 305 this is an appealing activity to children because they have a good time dancing while they are learning to be better people. He feels that that is a persuasive combination and asked the Board to approve the request. Ms. Christa Spaid, resident of Charlottesville and a graduate law stu- dent, said she has been taking classes at the Wilson School for one and one-half years. She said she thought she was a good dancer until she came to this school. The professionalism shown is of a high level, along with the promotion of the joy of movement. She enjoys dance as an outlet and an opportunity for expression. She feels that a dance school is an asset to any community and it is a value-maximizing choice for the Board because it encour- ages family support. She said approval of this request will mean larger space is available for more students to take dance in a better environment. She asked the Board to approve the petition. Mr. Robert Foster, representative of Maple Grove Christian Church, said the church is selling the building to Ms. Wilson and is in support of her request for several reasons. He said the church has been in existence over 100 years and had been in the current building for over 60 years. The church is moving one-quarter mile west on Route 649 because they need a larger space. He said Maple Grove Christian Church will continue to be a neighbor of this facility. For that reason, the majority of the 200 members who live in this community feel it is important to support this request. He said the church has been working with Ms. Wilson for eight months to make this sale, but the church has worked even longer trying to find a qualified occupant for this building. The church feels it has a significant vested interest in the community and is strongly in support of this use. He asked that other members present in support of the request stand. Mr. Bowie asked if anyone present is opposed to this request. There were no citizens present in opposition. He said he senses a ground swell of support and asked if there are others who feels compelled to speak in support of the request. Mr. F. T. Clark, resident of Earlysville, said his daughter has been in Ms. Wilson's program for three years. He said the Spring recital of the Wilson Dance School at Western Albemarle High School was heart-warming becaus~ of the involvement of family in support of the students. He said the parents feel confident about Ms. Wilson's professionalism. He feels that the good results of the education she is giving these children complements the educa- tion given in the County schools. Mr. Bowie said staff recommends approval, the Planning Commission recom- mends approval, the Virginia Department of Highways recommends approval and everyone present recommends approval. Mr. Bowie said he supports the recom- mendation with the conditions as well. There being no other members of the public present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Humphris offered a motion for approval of SP-90-83 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and set out below. Mr. Way seconded the motion. 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. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of relocation of access to obtain adequate sight distance and issuance of a com- mercial entrance permit. There shall only be one access; Not more than a maximum of 35 students shall be instructed at any one time. There shall be no more than six class sessions held. each day; No construction, including grading or clearing of vegetation, shall occur closer than 20 feet to any adjacent residential area; 4. Fire Official approval of occupancy loading of building; January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) 306 Se Health Department approval of septic system adequacy. Condition No. 2 notwithstanding, the total number of students shall not exceed septic field capabilities as determined by the Health Department; Administrative approval of site plan for addition to the school not to exceed 50 percent of existing building floor area. Agenda Item No. 9. SP-90-105. J. D. Catlett. Public hearing on a request for a public garage on 2 ac zoned RA on E side of Rt 795 in N corner of inters with Rt 622. TM131,P39A. Scottsville Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 1 and January 8, 1991.) Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows: "CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The property is currently developed with an abandoned garage building. The rear of the site is wooded and a substantial buffer of cedars exists adjacent to Route 622. The use would be visible from the state road. No dwellings are visible from the site. The property to the south of this site is currently vacant and zoned LI, Light Industry. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to operate a public garage. The applicant would restore the existing building and use it as the garage structure. One employee is proposed. A waste oil furnace will be used to dispose of waste materials. As of the writing of this report, staff has received no information regarding the waste oil furnace and is unable to provide comment on its use. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: June 15, 1990 Staff administratively approved subdivision creating parcel currently under review. This property has been used as a garage in the past, however, specific dates are unknown. Any nonconformity which may have existed has been abandoned. The existing building will require substantial repair prior to commencement of garage activities. The applicant has ob- tained a building permit for the replacement of the roof. To date the applicant has removed the roof entirely, but has stopped work pending the outcome of this request. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This parcel is located in the Com~nunity of Scottsville and is designated for low density residential use. This activity is not considered compatible with the residential uses intended for this area. A more appropriate site would be in a desig- nated Community Service area. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: In past reports for public garages, staff has stated that the commercial use of the property should be evaluated in terms of its appropriateness to the Rural Areas. That is to say, a determination should be made as to whether or not this garage would provide service to the area. The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors must determine if this area is adequately served. Staff opinion is that this area is adequately served for the following reason. This site is located within the designated Community of Scottsville. Similar services are currently provided in Scottsville or could be established within the Town of Scottsville or in areas of the County recommended for commercial use. Staff has identified three service centers all of which are located in the Town of Scottsville. The closest service center is 1.7 miles distant. Staff offers the following comments which are favorable to this request: Approval of this request would not involve the construction of a new building but rather the repair of an existing building; Visual impact on adjacent properties would be limited due to existing vegetation; January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) 307 3. Approval would constitute reestablishment of an abandoned use, which would not involve new construction. Staff offers the following comments which are unfavorable to this request: 1. This site is recommended in the Comprehensive Plan for low density residential use. Public garages are not appropriate in residential areas, nor are they permitted in any of the residen- tial zoning districts; 2. The area is adequately served and additional garages could be established in nearby areas recommended for commercial use; 3. The existing structure does not meet the minimum setback; 4. The existing structure has limited existing value as a public garage; 5. The property can be reasonably used for residential purposes. For the above stated reasons, staff recommends denial of SP-90-105, J. D. Catlett. Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors choose to approve this request staff recommends the following conditions of approval: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The public garage use shall be limited to the repairing and equipping of vehicles. No body work or spray-painting of vehicles shall be permitted. No gasoline sales or sale or rental of vehicles shall be permitted; 2. Ail work shall be conducted within the garage; 3. No outside storage of parts including junk parts and junk cars. Refuse awaiting disposal shall be stored in appropriate con- tainers; 4. Not more than four vehicles, awaiting repair, shall be parked on the property outdoors at any time; 5. Fire and Building Official approval; 6. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of commercial entrance; 7. No operation until site plan approval has been obtained and improvements completed or bonded. Site plan to include buffering/screening as deemed appropriate by staff; 8. Hours of operation shall be limited from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and no operation of the garage on Sunday; 9. Health Department approval of septic field location; 10. Not more than one employee shall be permitted in addition to the applicant; 11. Compliance with Section 4.14 of the Zoning Ordinance." Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 10~ 1991, unanimously recommended denial of the petition. The public hearing was opened and the applicant, Mr. Daniel R. Yanderploeg, came forward to speak. He said he is proposing to renovate the building to meet existing building codes. Regarding staff's report of the January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 10) 308 minimum setbacks, the applicant said he personally measured and the setback on the front is 53 feet and on the side adjacent to Route 622 is 27 feet, with an 18 to 20 foot bank almost straight down to the road. He said the existing setback is 75 feet, but since this is a pre-existing building use, he feels that the setback requirement should be waived. Mr. Vanderploeg said staff reported that the area was serviced by three service centers, the closest being 1.7 miles away. He said the Chevrolet dealership has closed down, the Exxon Station handles a minimal amount of automotive repair, and the Chevron Station handles state inspection and minimal automobile repair. Mr. Vanderploeg said there is no full service automotive repair shop in existence in Scottsville. He said the public tells him that they drive to Dillwyn, Charlottesville or other nearby towns to have automotive repairs done. Mr. Vanderploeg said staff reported that the property was used as a garage in the past but specific dates are unknown. Staff also said that any nonconformity in the past has been abandoned. Mr. Vanderploeg said to the best of his knowledge, the previous owner built the garage and operated it until 1966 when he went out of business. Mr. Vanderploeg said he has been told that Mr. Wood continued to repair the automobiles of family, friends and dedicated customers. He read from a letter from Mr. Donald L. Wood, son of the previous owner, stating that Mr. Wood repaired vehicles in this garage until his death in 1990. He read a letter dated January 16, 1991, from Ms. Beverly Butler, Manager of Jefferson National Bank, stating that she had purchased the contents of Mr. Wood's garage in June, 1990. The contents consisted of mechanical hand tools, jacks, welder, air compressor, lifts and other items normally found in an auto repair garage. Mr. Vanderploeg said he cannot get an answer to the question of what constitutes continued usa. ge. Even though the garage was not open to the public it was used as a garage. He asked the Board to keep that in mind in considering this petition. Regarding the Comprehensive Plan, Mr. Vanderploeg said his personal opinion is that the Plan sometimes has to be adjusted to meet the needs of the community. Adjacent to this property is 146 acres, part of which is zoned LI, Light Industry, and part is zoned RA, Rural Areas. He feels that the uses in LI are not that different from his request for a public garage use. He is not proposing a use that is in the center of a residential area. Mr. Vanderploeg said that those opposed to his request feel that his garage will cause an increase in traffic on Route 795. He said there will be one employee and himself working on automobiles, and they cannot repair more than an average of eight cars per day. He read a letter of support dated January 14, 1991, from Mr. and Mrs. E. A. Harris which was signed by five other residents of Route 795 as well. Mr. Vanderploeg said that his neighbor, Mr. Dennis Pleasants, can see the garage and supports the request. On the back side of the garage, the adjoining landowner, Mr. Newton, supports the request. Mr. Wood, an adjoining landowner, supports the request. Mr. Vanderploeg submitted a petition with 197 signatures in support of his request and stated that not all of the petitioners are Albemarle County residents, but they live in the Scottsville area. He submitted a letter from Mr. Gene Johnson, a resident of Route 795 in sight of the garage, who operates a small heating oil business and said that Mr. Johnson is in support of the garage. He pointed out that Mr. Johnson's oil business is allowed by special use permit and is in a residential area three-tenths of a mile from Mr. Vanderploeg's proposed garage. Mr. Vanderploeg continued that his opposition complained that the wel~ noise from the former operator of the garage kept the neighbors up at night. He pointed out that staff is recommending operating hours of 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. If the request is approved, Mr. Yanderploeg would like to have hours from 7:30 A.M. to 5:30 P.M. He feels that the neighbors would not be by these hours. The problem with the previous owner was interference on the television screen when the welder was in use. Mr. Vanderploeg said that he has been assured by Appalachian Power Company, who agreed to send a letter to Mr. Fritz in the Planning Department, that there will be no interference of power service to anyone in the Scottsville District from his garage operation Mr. Vanderploeg said a statement was made that there is opposition to heavy equipment. He said 95 percent of the repair to heavy equipment is done January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 11) 309 at the job site. He is not saying that there will be no repair to heavy equipment on site, however. He pointed out again that with only two mechanics working, the number of automobiles on site will be limited. Mr. Vanderploeg said he has a service truck which is fully equipped to go off site for repairs. In his present location he repairs heavy equipment and automobiles, but wants to lean more to automotive repair in the event that the construction industry stops. His opposition says that the garage will be an eyesore. He passed around pictures of the existing building and stated that anything he does to upgrade the building will be an improvement. He said the abandoned vehicles in the back will be removed because he does not want to run a junk yard. He wants an attractive business and he wants to get along with the community. Mr. Vanderploeg said the opposition is concerned about pollutants coming onto neighboring property when it rains. He feels that with the use of a waste oil stove, there will be no pollutants. He pointed out that the contour of the road and the land around the building causes the rain to run off the backside of the property onto Mr. Newton's property, and Mr. Newton is in support of the request. Mr. Vanderploeg concluded by saying that in light of the support from the community through letters and the petition, he feels it would be a harm to the community to deny this request. He asked the Board to listen to the public and to come to a conclusion that is fair and helpful to the community of Scottsville. He asked everyone present in support of his request to please stand. Mr. Jim Wilson, from Payne Paving Company, said he and his company would like to have the garage in the community because it would be a convenient service to him. He has known Mr. Vanderploeg since grade school, and he is a good and honest person. He feels the garage would be an asset to everyone in the community. Ms. Velma Gough, resident of the Scottsville area, said that last year the brake line on her automobile broke while driving through Scottsville. She stopped at the Exxon Station and they could not repair the car. The Chevron Station said it would take more than one hour and a half to repair it. She feels it would be convenient to have automobile repair in the community. She highly supports Mr. Vanderploeg's request. Mr. Francis Staton, owner of Scottsville Auto Parts on Route 20, said he supports Mr. Vanderploeg's request because of the deteriorating customer and service base occurring in Scottsville. He feels that something is desperately needed to serve the community and keep the businesses growing. Some busi- nesses are closing, and the current service stations are not able to handle the demand. He realizes that there are problems with the location. Unfor- tunately, in the Scottsville area, it is difficult to find a suitable location available for building or expanding. He feels the area and the residents of the area need this service. He feels that the garage would benefit more than it would ~nconvenience folks. He realizes that anytime there is growth, someone is going to be inconvenienced. He feels that some growth is necessary in order to reverse the decline in the customer base and to keep Scottsville "on the map". Mr. Victor Summers said he owns property almost directly across the road from the proposed garage. He said this is a small country road with a high volume of traffic. He said the garage is located on a bad curve and he has seen a number of accidents there. His five-year old daughter rides her pony on this road to a friend's house, and he is opposed to any increase in traf- fic. Mr. Summers feels there are locations which are better suited. He is not saying that the service is not needed in Scottsville, but he feels that the middle of a residential area is not the proper place. He is also con- cerned about the noise from pounding on metal and from air hammers in a repair shop and feels this type of work should stay in a commercial area. He is concerned about the incinerator, although it is approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. He feels it is not suitable for a residential area. Mr. Summers said he has lived in Scottsville most of his life and does not want this type of use in his neighborhood. He said the property is an eyesore, but it's not because the people in the area don't care. He and his wife tried to buy this parcel of land about three years ago and Mr. Wood was not interested January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 12) 310 in selling. He said as far as he can tell, Mr. Wood never used the building. The weeds were grown up along the building and the doors were always shut. He never saw Mr. Wood go in the building at all during the past couple of years. Mr. Summers pointed out that by the applicant's admission, names on the petition are residents of other counties. He feels the Board is not here to decide what is best for other counties, but what is best for Scottsville. Mr. Summers said he does not want to deny Mr. Vanderploeg a living. However, he really believes that this is not the right place for this garage. Mr. Dan Wilson said he is in favor of the applicant's request. He said that he has known Mr. Vanderploeg all his life. The applicant is a religious person and very family oriented. He feels there would be no work on Sunday and no irresponsible behavior such as "hot rodding" at this garage. He feels that the applicant will not do anything to harm the community and that the garage would be beneficial to the community. Mr. John Dezio said he is representing Herman and Nancy Lam who are property owners in the neighborhood. Mr. and Mrs. Lam own three residences which can be seen clearly from the location of the proposed garage. Mr. and Mrs. Lam have lived in the area for a number of years and have a great deal of knowledge of the history of this property. Mr. Dezio handed out pictures taken from the property in question and from the residences owned by the Lam's which clearly show the visibility of the garage. He does not deny that the people in Scottsville need a garage. He thinks it is curious that the people from Buckingham County, Fluvanna County and Nelson County who signed the petition have done nothing to have a garage located in their counties. He feels it is also curious that the petition was placed in the IGA store in Scottsville. He said it is easy for people not in the neighborhood of the garage to approve the garage in someone else's neighborhood. In this in- stance, the garage would be in a residential and agricultural area and an area that is targeted by the County for residential and agricultural use. He said it is also curious that there is no properly zoned property in any of these neighboring counties nor anywhere else in Scottsville that is available. Mr. Dezio feels that there are locations available which are not offensive to the neighbors nor to the Comprehensive Plan of Albemarle County. According to Mr. and Mrs. Lam, the last use of this property as a garage was in 1966. At that time the Lam's experienced noise problems and loss of electrical current when Mr. Wood ran his welding machine. He feels there is more to a public garage than driving four or eight cars onto the property and having them serviced in an hour or two and then driven off. That is not the experience of a garage or of anyone in this room at a garage. Cars sometimes remain at the garage because the parts have to be ordered or the job is not finished in the time allotted. In effect, the garage can become a parking that becomes an eyesore in addition to the problems of traffic. Mr. Dezio said there are drainage problems at this location. He said Mr. and Mrs. Lam state that run-off from the garage will go onto their property and onto the drainage areas of the road. He feels that drainage problems and increased traffic will contribute to the deterioration of the roads. Mr. Dezio pointed out that, although it does not happen everyday, Route 20 is closed every time there is an emergency in Scottsville. Mr. Dezio feels that the Board should first consider the Comprehensive Plan for this County, which does not permit this type of activity in a resi- dential area. The Planning Department and the Planning Commission have investigated this matter thoroughly and both recommend denial. Mr. Dezio asked that the Board support .the position of the Planning Commission and deny this request as well. Mr. Bowie asked the speakers to address the issue of land use and not personal reputation of the applicant. He said the applicant may do a great job, but the Board must decide whether a garage should be allowed in this location. Mr. Rip Thomsen, real estate agent for the Paulett family across Route 622 and Route 795 from this property, said his clients asked him to express their concerns about the introduction of a commercial operation into what is presently shown in the Comprehensive Plan as a low-density residential area. He asked the Board to consider that carefully. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 13) 311 Mr. Scott Woody, an employee of the Virginia Department of Transporta- tion, said he lives adjacent to the property in question. He is on 24-hour call and feels that such an operation would interfere with his rest. He said the property is an eyesore and asked the Board members to consider whether they would like this building in their front yard. There were no other members of the public present to speak and the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Humphris asked if all the information presented tonight was avail- able to the Planning Commission. Mr. Cilimberg said he believes that certain letters and the petition were received by the applicant since the Planning Commission meeting. She said she thought the Board's policy is that when new information is presented after the application is heard by the Planning Commission, the application must be returned to be considered by the Planning Commission. In light of the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial, she is not sure the Board should proceed with information which the Commission did not hear. Mr. Bain said the policy is related to new information and he does not feel that the pictures and letters represent substantively new information not heard by the Planning Commission. Regarding the pictures, Mr. Cilimberg said the ones presented by Mr. Dezio were available to the Planning Commission. The letters of support and the petition are items not seen by the Planning Commission. Mr. Way asked if the Zoning Administrator made a decision on the issue of prior use. Mr. Cilimberg said the Zoning Administrator's decision in accept- ing the application for the special use permit was that the prior nonconform- ing use had been abandoned. Mr. Bowie asked if for purposes of establishing legal use, it depends on whether the business is legitimately licensed. The fact that someone may have used the business without a license is not the issue. Mr. St. John said that is essentially correct. Mr. Way said if Mr. Vanderploeg has new information for the Zoning Administrator and she decides that the prior nonconforming use was not aban- doned, it does not matter what the Board does tonight, then the use would be permitted. Mr. Cilimberg said that is correct. Mr. Way said he was impressed with the applicant's presentation and it is obvious that he has done a tremendous amount of work. He also recognizes the fact that Mr. Vanderploeg~s reputation is impeccable and that he will do an excellent job wherever he is located. He feels there is no doubt about the tremendous need for this service in the Scottsville area as stated by the people who have spoken, especially in light of the fact that the one garage in Scottsville is now closed. Mr. Way said he cannot go along with many of the objections to the request, particularly with regard to traffic, because this area is going to have additional residential development. In the final analysis, he feels that the area is residential, and he does not think it is fair to the residents to have this type of facility there. He feels that way even though the garage will be well run and even though there is a need for it. Mr. Way said he knows that will upset a lot of people in the Scottsville area and he is sorry. However, he cannot support the petition. Mr. Bain agreed and said the issue is that this request is for property in a residential area. He hopes that the applicant can find some commercial area in Scottsville, perhaps one of the abandoned uses, and proceed even though he understands that these other locations may be expensive. Mr. Bowie said the area is designated for residential use and houses are being built. Therefore, the Board cannot allow a use that is not compatible. He feels that if 197 people want a garage in this area, there is sufficient business to support it at another location. Mr. Bowie said his statement has nothing to do with the individual applicant and he accepts his credentials and credibility. However, he does not intend to support this use. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 14) 312 Mrs. Humphris said she feels the situation has been thoroughly investi- gated by staff and the Planning Commission. She agreed with Mr. Way that the applicant's presentation was excellent. However, the fact is that the re- quested activity is not compatible with the residential use of that area. Maybe Mr. Vanderploeg will be able to find another site if this request is denied. Motion was then offered by Mrs. Humphris that SP-90-105 be denied. Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion. Mr. Perkins said he can support this request because it is essentially no different than 25 other locations in the County. However, it is probably a moot point at this time. 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. 10. SP-90-107. Unity Church in Charlottesville. Public hearing on a request for a church (sanctuary & offices only) on 5.5+ ac zoned RA. Property on S side of Rt 643 approx 1 1/2 mi E of inters with Rt 29. TM46, P22, Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 1 and January 8, 1991.) Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows: "CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The proposed church site is mostly open. The rear portion of the residue property is affected by the one hundred year flood plain of the Rivanna River. A special use permit has been issued for an 800 seat church adjacent to this site (SP 90-35). APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to construct a 300- seat church on a five-acre portion of a 71.9 acre site. The Church is to be located as shown on Attachment C (on file). No day care is proposed. The church will use a joint entrance which was approved with SP-90-35 for Covenant Church of God. The applicant has submitted a justification for this request. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan discourages development in the Rural Areas and recommends that service-oriented development be directed into the Growth Areas. This site is located in the 'buffer area' between the Urban Area and the Community of Hollymead. This area is intended to preserve the distinct identity of the Community of Hollymead from the Urban Area. The proposed Meadow Creek Parkway will likely affect this parcel. Final alignment for the Meadow Creek Parkway has not been determined and is subject to change. The current preliminary alignment's effect on this development is shown in Attachment E (on file). SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: During the review of SP-90-35, Covenant Church, staff commented on the suitability of this site for a church. A copy of the staff report from the previous request is included as Attachment F (on file). Previous comments regarding visibility and traffic generation characteristics are still valid. Other issues such as entrance location, have been addressed with the requirement of a single access from this parcel during the review of SP-90-35, Covenant Church. Health Department approval has not been obtained. Staff recommended denial of SP-90-35, Covenant Church, based largely on the size of the church. The Board of Supervisors did not agree with staff analysis and approved the church. The current proposal by Unity Church is for a significantly smaller church than Covenant Church, which is closer to the average seating capacity of churches in the Rural Areas approved by the County since 1980 (average seating capacity 245). Staff does note that approval of a second church on Route 643 may result in significant Sunday traffic. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 15) 313 Based on the scale of the development and the previous approval of SP-90-35, staff recommends approval subject to the following condi- tions: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Church is limited to 300 seats; Approval is for worship and church related activities only. Day care or other usage shall require amendment of this special use permit; Be Health Department approval shall be obtained prior to review of the site plan by the Planning Commission; Virginia Department of Transportation approval of commercial entrance prior to review of the site plan by the Planning Commis- sion; 5. Site plan to be reviewed by the Planning Commission; Property shall be limited to a joint entrance serving the church and residue acreage. A joint access easement shall be shown and reserved for dedication upon request of the County; Staff approval of maintenance agreement. The maintenance agree- ment shall require that the entire cost of maintenance for that portion of road used by this church and the previously approved church shall be borne by the churches only; No part of the structure including steeple shall be greater than 40 feet in height." Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 10 1991, unanimously recommended approval of the petition subject to the condi- tions recommended by staff. Mrs. Humphris referred to the staff report section under "Comprehensive Plan" which says that final alignment of the Meadow Creek Parkway will likely affect this parcel. Mr. Cilimberg said the actual alignment as determined now will go through the proposed site. He said the Covenant Church site will be indirectly affected as well. He said the same point was made to the Board at the time of the hearing on the Covenant Church petition. He pointed out that a final alignment is not determined and engineering analysis has not been begun, although the analysis was approved in the Capital Improvements Program for next year. Mrs. Humphris asked if the proposed alignment at this time goes directly through the middle of this site. Mr. Cilimberg said based on the current alignment, that is correct. Mrs. Humphris asked if the Planning Commission was aware of this fact at its hearing. Mr. Cilimberg said it was. Mr. Bowerman referred to Attachment E and asked what the dotted line alignment to the east represents. Mr. Cilimberg said that is the original alignment which would have gone through part of Bentivar Subdivision so it was moved to the north to avoid that. Mr. Cilimberg said the current alignment is shown in the Comprehensive Plan. Frankly, he feels that the road could go several hundred feet in either direction by the time the final alignment is settled. He said the County requested the consultant to consider an alignment that would miss as much as possible of Bentivar Subdivision. Mrs. Humphris said she is concerned about a proposal for development in the middle of a road that must be built. Mr. Cilimberg said that VDoT has not confirmed this alignment. It is only shown in the Comprehensive Plan based an initial engineering analysis which was very general. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 16) 314 Mr. Bowie said YDoT's position is that an environmental impact has not been done on the Meadow Creek Parkway, and they are not sure what will happen. Mr. Cilimberg said that VDoT has indicated that Meadow Creek Parkway will likely need a 50 mile per hour speed limit, and the present design is based on 45 miles per hour. Therefore, the current alignment is likely to change. He said that is why the final engineering study is included in the CIP. He noted that the Parkway could possibly go through the Covenant Church site as well. He said that was pointed out to the Board at the time of the hearing on the Covenant Church, and the alignment was no more definitive at that time than it is now. At this time, Mr. Bowie announced that the Board would recess to listen to the President's address to the nation regarding the war in the Persian Gulf. When that address is complete, the meeting will resume. The meeting recessed at 8:54 P.M. and reconvened at 9:21 P.M. The public hearing was opened, and the applicant came forward to speak. Reverend Tony Roebuck said he realizes that this seems like an insignificant matter compared to the world situation, but life needs to go. His church was founded in 1979 and has been meeting in rented facilities. Now the church has grown to the point that additional facilities are needed. He said the church has conducted a number of searches throughout the Charlottesville and Albemarle area looking for suitable buildings and locations. He said this piece of land is available, and the church desires to build its own facility. He said the majority of the members are located in central Albemarle, and a location fairly close to the City of Charlottesville is important to this congregation. The site in question will meet the church's needs for space and location as well as the natural setting which the church desires. He said the church understands that the Meadow Creek Parkway has been preliminarily drawn through this parcel. The church is also aware that the final alignment has not been set. He said the church is proceeding under the assumption that there are other possibilities for alignment. Reverend Roebuck said the traffic to the church will be primarily on Sunday and not during normal hours of heavy traffic flow. He said his church will have staggered hours with the nearby church to prevent excessive traffic The church is also considering the possibility of having two services on Sunday morning, which would further divide the traffic. He said the current church is not nearly at the proposed capacity, but it is anticipated that the church will reach that capacity within five years or more. Reverend Roebuck said there has been preliminary approval by the Department of Transportation for a joint commercial entrance with the Covenant Church. Reverend Roebuck said there is no opposition from adjacent landowners. He feels that a church will enhance the quality of the area. He said this facility will be a good move for this church and for the community as well. He asked that the Board approve the petition. There being no other members of the public present to speak, the public hearing was closed and the matter placed before the Board. Mr. Bowie said his concern is the Meadow Creek Parkway. However, he believes that legally a plan for construction of a road at some time in the future is not grounds for denial of the petition. He bases that opinion on prior statements of the County Attorney. Mr. St. John said that is not exactly correct. He said a by-right site plan or subdivision cannot be denied on the grounds that a road is planned in the future. However, this is a request for a special use permit, which is a legislative act and for this purpose is almost the same as a rezoning. He never said that a rezoning cannot be denied on these grounds, but he has said that a by-right development cannot be denied. Mr. Bowie asked if the alignment is any more definitive now than it was when the Board approved the Covenant Church in this same area. Mr. Cilimberg said it is not. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 17) 315 Mrs. Humphris said the information given for the Covenant Church was thal the Parkway will come near the site. On this plan, the road goes through the site, and she feels there is a great deal of difference. Mrs. Humphris asked how narrow the options for alignment become if this request is approved. Whal leeway is there if the engineers are trying to avoid a subdivision on one sid~ and a church on the other. Mr. Cilimberg said no set of alternatives was identified on the initial alignment study. There was one alignment drawn on a topographical map. However, an additional use will limit the route unless a structure is removed. He said that is why staff pointed out the affect of the Meadow Creek Parkway on the site. However, staff does not feel sure enough that this is the final alignment to say that the structure will definitely be taken by the road. Mr. St. John asked if the alignment currently planned by the County is shown in the CATS Plan. Mr. Cilimberg said the CATS Plan has never been amended to include the revised route, although it does include the alignment which takes a portion of the Bentivar Subdivision. The revised route is in the County's Comprehensive Plan and has been submitted to VDoT for its approv- al to ultimately amend the CATS Plan. He said the Board adopted the revised route based on an alignment study completed at the time of the last Comprehen- sive Plan review. At that time, the Board adopted this route with certain design characteristics. Currently, VDoT is indicating that those design standards may not be acceptable. He said when the Covenant Church made its presentation, staff indicated that while the route is not directly through the site, it will affect the site. Mr. Bain read from the minutes of the meeting at which Covenant Church was approved and noted that staff indicated that the alignment would affect the parcel, although it does not appear to impact the building site. He said that is not the language used in the staff report before the Board tonight. Mr. Cilimberg said the Covenant Church has a larger piece of property. Mrs. Hnmphris said this application gives her a problem because this Board is on record in support of the road alignment which will go through this property. The Board is trying to get the Virginia Department of Transporta- tion to build that road. If the Board then allows new structures to be built in the middle of the proposed alignment, VDoT will probably not want to build this road. Mr. Bowerman said the road would not directly affect the building of the first church approved. However, allowing this building would further limit the potential road alignment through that area, even though the exact align- ment is yet unknown. Mr. Bowie asked how much distance is available to work with possible options for alignments. Mr. Cilimberg said he is not sure of the distance, but there is the problem of topography and existing residences as well. He said the supported alignment will affect fewer residences and will give an alignment directly to Route 29 to serve the growth area traffic and allow for a 45-mile per hour design speed. Mr. Bowie said the road was his only concern in examining this p~tition, and he thanked the County Attorney for correcting his erroneous understanding. The applicant asked if he could speak again at this point. Mr. Bowie indicated that the public hearing is closed, but that the applicant could speak unless Board members object. There was no objection to the applicant making a statement. Reverend Roebuck asked that the Board make its decision based on the facts in hand. He said he understands there are other proposals in the works, but the decision must be based on this application. Mr. Bowie said the Board has gone on record in support of the Meadow Creek Parkway and is fighting to get that road built. If that is successful, then the property impacted by the road has to be purchased by the Department of Transportation. The question is how much expectation there can be that VDoT will build a road when this Board has allowed additional structures whic! will make building the road more prohibitive for VDoT. That is his personal January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 18) 316 dilemma. Me said he has never voted against a church, but this is a land use question. Mr. Bain said the road is the critical question of this application. Mrs. Humphris agreed and said the church wants the Board to deal with the facts, and the fact is that the Parkway will go through the proposed building. She feels that it will not look good for the Board to be on record in favor of a road alignment and then allow a building which will make it more difficult to have the road built. Mr. Bain pointed out that if this request is denied, it does not mean that circumstances will not change in the future. He said the final alignment study is included in the Capital Improvements Program for next year, and the alignment will be definite at that time. Mr. Bowie asked what time frame is involved in developing a plan for the final alignment. Mr. Tucker said the study was put on hold due to the Route 29 North study. He believes the alignment study will take about six to nine months because it is fairly definitive work. He is concerned, however, that an environmental impact statement may be required by VDoT and that could shift the alignment as well. Mr. Perkins asked the width of right-of-way for the Meadow Creek Parkway. Mr. Tucker said he believes it is around 150 feet. He said it is a Parkway and will take more right-of-way than is normally required for a standard roadbed. Mr. Way asked the possibility of deferring this request until the study is completed. Mr. Bowie said the Board does not normally defer requests indefinitely. He asked the applicant if there is a time constraint to which the church is tied. Reverend Roebuck said there is a contingent contract witt a closing date of the end of January. Mr. Bowie said the Board has a dilemma of being asked to approve a request opposing something it has already gone on record approving. He said the choices are to approve the request, deny the request, or defer it. He asked the applicant if he would prefer a deferral for a month so that the church can decide whether it wants to have the request deferred for a year or more. Reverend Roebuck consulted with his members present and indicated that they prefer that the Board act tonight. Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris and seconded by Mr. Bain to deny SP-90-107 based on the discussion regarding the right-of-way for the Meadow Creek Parkway and actions previously taken by the Board. Mr. Bowie said he will support the motion because he cannot vote two ways on the same project, and the Board has already expressed its views on the Meadow Creek Parkway. There was no further discussion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Hnmphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 11. SP-90-115. James & Sue Willis. Public hearing on request for a day care center on 2.5 ac zoned RA. Property on S side of Rt 738 approx 1/4 mi E of inters with Rt 676 near Ivy. TM58,P37C2, Samuel Mille Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 1 and January 8, 1991.) Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows: "CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The property to the east is the location of Murray School. An industrial user is located to the south of the site. Other properties in the area are vacant. The property cur- rently under review is vacant and wooded. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 19) 317 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant has submitted a description of this request as well as a justification. The applicant proposes to provide facilities for up to 30 children in a new structure. Half of the children will be present for the preschool program only. They will be dropped off between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and picked up between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. There will also be an after school program for younger elementary-aged children. The building is de- signed to appear as a single family structure. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section 31.2.4.I of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval of this request subject to conditions. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan discourages development in the Rural Areas except for that related to bona fide agricultural/ forestal uses. However this proposal is located within the former growth area of Ivy. Support services to the residential development that has taken place in this area may be warranted. There are cur- rently no other day care centers in the area and Murray School is located just to the east of this parcel. This use is consistent with a public school. STAFF COMMENT: Staff opinion is that certain uses such as churches, day care, and schools contribute to the well-being and moral fiber of the community. In this posture, staff review is confined to issues of physical development while other considerations of appropriateness of the use to a given location is a matter of legislative discretion. ISSUES OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT: This site will access Route 738 directly. Staff will recommend that the entrance be installed in accordance with the comments of the Virginia Department of Transporta- tion. In addition, staff will recommend that the entrance be located as far from the west of the parcel as is practical so as to avoid potential conflicts with the Murray School entrance. PAST REQUESTS FOR DAY CARE CENTERS IN THM RURAL AREAS: Staff has identified ten requests for day care centers in the Rural Areas since the adoption of the current Zoning Ordinance. Of these requests, nine were approved and one was deferred indefinitely. Two requests, one approved and one deferred, involved the use of a new structure for the day care center. Both of these requests were made by churches which were to be constructed and day care was to be provided within the new facilities. Of the remaining eight requests, all involved existing houses and only one request indicated that an expansion may occur in order to provide facilities. Past day care centers approved by the County in the Rural Areas have been for nine to 83 children. Requests by churches have ranged between 50 and 83 while service provided in homes have been significantly smaller, ranging from nine to 30 chil- dren. The applicant has made two former requests for a daycare center. These requests have not been included in the above analysis. Both of these requests involved a new structure and 30 children. The first request was located in another location of Ivy. This request was withdrawn prior to public hearing. The second request was in the Crozet area. This request was recommended for denial by the Planning Commission due to comments of an adjacent property owner, and was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the Board of Supervisors hearing. FACTORS FAVORABLE TO THIS REQUEST: Staff review of this request has included its relationship to adjacent uses. Staff opinion is that a day care center is appropriate adjacent to an existing school. In addition the presence of an industrial user adjacent to this site reduces the desirability of the property for residential use. By allowing consideration of special use permits for day care in the Rural Areas, the Zoning Ordinance anticipates the potential need for such uses in certain circumstances. A particular circumstance here is a location in a former growth area as well as surrounding land uses. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 20) 318 FACTORS UNFAVORABLE TO THIS REQUEST: Approval of this request would result in the construction of a new building in theRural Areas which would be solely devoted to a nonagricultural and nonresidential activity. This is inconsistent with the primary intent of the Compre- hensive Plan. Development could set a precedent encouraging similar petitions. Staff has identified one special use permit request involving a new structure for use as a 'gift, craft, and antique shop' (SP-85-09). This request was denied by the Board of Supervisors citing construction of a new building as an unwanted precedent. Existing commercial zoning in Ivy may provide area for a day care center. Approval of this request should not be viewed as a precedent for further special use permits, which would haVe to be reviewed based on their own merits. SUMMARY: The applicant made a similar request for a day care center on a less desirable site near Ivy. After discussions with staff, the applicant withdrew therequest and proceeded with a request near Crozet. The request in Crozet was withdrawn by the applicant prior to the Board of Supervisors' hearing. The applicant has pursued the comments of staff in selecting this site. In staff opinion, the favorable aspects of this proposal overcome potential negative fac- tors. This request is not detrimental to existing adjacent develop- ment. The use would provide support services to the Ivy area. The proposed development is of a scale similar to home day care and the structure has been designed in a manner to allow for conversion to a single family dwelling. Based on the above comments, staff recommends approval of SP'90-115, James and Sue Willis, subject to the following conditions: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Day care center shall be limited to 20 feet in height, and 2600 square feet; Access shall be established at a point as far on the west of the parcel as will be approved by the Virginia Depart- ment of Transportation; Virginia Department of Transportation approval of a commer- cial entrance permit; 4. Compliance with Section 5.16 of the Zoning Ordinance: No such use shall operate without licensure by the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the Zoning Administrator a copy of the original license and all renewals thereafter and to notify the Zoning Administrator of any license expira- tion, suspension, or revocation within three days of such event. Failure to do so shall be deemed willful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the Albemarle County Fire Official at his discretion. Failure to promptly admit the Fire Official for such inspection shall be deemed willful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local, state or federal agency; 5. Administrative approval of site plan; Building shall be constructed in accord with elevations provided in Attachments E and F; 7. Enrollment shall be limited to 30 students." January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 21) 319 Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 10, 1991, unanimously recommended approval of the petition subject to the condi- tions recommended by staff. The public hearing was opened. The applicant, Mr. Willis, said he has nothing to add to the staff report, but will be happy to answer any questions the Board may have. There were no other members of the public who wished to speak, and the public hearing was closed. Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Perkins to approve SP-90-115 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and set out below. Mr. Bain said he finds this request to be an appropriate use. There was no further discussion. 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. Day Care center shall be limited to 20 feet in height, and 2600 square feet; Access shall be established at a point as far on the west of the parcel as will be approved by the Virginia Department of Trans- portation; Virginia Department of Transportation approval of a commercial entrance permit; 4. Compliance with Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance: No such use shall operate without licensure by the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the Zoning Administrator a copy of the original license and all renewals thereafter and to notify the Zoning Administrator of any license expiration, suspension, or revocation within three days of such event. Failure to do so shall be deemed willful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the Albemarle County Fire Official at his discretion. Failure to promptly admit the Fire Official for such inspection shall be deemed willful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local, state or federal agency; 5. Administrative approval of site plan; Building shall be constructed in general accord with elevations provided in Building Sketch Attachments E and F (on file); 7. Enrollment shall be limited to 30 students. Agenda Item No. 12. Approval of Minutes: November 14, November 28, December 5(A) and December 5(N), 1990. Mr. Bowerman had read the minutes for November 14, 1990, Pages 30-38; the minutes for December 5(A), 1990, and found them to be in order. Mr. Bain had read the minutes for November 28, 1990, Pages 38 to the with the exception of Page 43 which was missing from the package, and found them to be in order. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) 320 (Page 22) Mr. Way had read the minutes for November 28, 1990, Pages 1 to 12, and found a minor typographical correction. Mr. Perkins had read the minutes for December 5 (N), 1990, Pages 1 to 16 and found one typographical error. Mrs. Humphris had read the minutes for November 28, 1990, Page 12 to the End and found one typographical error. Mr. Bowie had read the minutes for December 5 (N), 1990, Pages 17 to the End and found one typographical error. Motion was offered by Mr. Way and seconded by Mr. Bain 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. 13a. Appointments: Crozet Community Advisory Committee. Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins to appoint Dr. Emery Taylor, current President of the Crozet Community Association, Ms. Gloria Strickler and Mr. Mike Marshall to the Crozet Community Advisory Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bain. Mr. Bowie noted that the other members of that Committee include Mr. Tom Jenkins, the White Hall representative on the Planning Commission, and Mr. Perkins. 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. 13b. TJPDC Regional Housing Strategy Advisory Panel. Mr. Bain said he will have names available for appointment at the Febru- ary 6 meeting. Agenda Item No. 13c. BMP Manual Committee. The Board deferred action on this item until February 6, at which time a listing of agencies from which appointments will be made will be submitted for Board approval. Agenda Item 13d. Other. Mr. Bowie offered Mr. Robert Foster's name as the replacement for the Rivanna District representative who resigned from the Fiscal Resources Commit- tee. He said Mr. Foster is a senior partner in Hantzmon Wiebel, a Certified Public Accountant firm. Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins and seconded by Mrs. Humphris to appoint Mr. Robert Foster to the Fiscal Resources Committee as the Rivanna District representative. 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. Mr. Tucker recommended the appointment of Mr. Robert B. Brandenburger as the Assistant County Executive/Director of Development Administration for the County of Albemarle, effective February 11, 1991. He said Mr. Brandenburger is currently an assistant to Dr. Carole HaStings in charge of benefits and safety. He has a bachelor's degree in engineering and a masters degree in business administration. He has very strong management, organizational and January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 23) 321 interpersonal skills. Mr. Tucker feels he will make a fine Assistant and ultimate Director of the Department of Development and wholeheartedly recom- mends his appointment. Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mr. Bain to appoint Mr. Robert B. Brandenburger as recommended by the County Executive. 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. Mrs. Humphris said when she asked the Jack Jouett representative to the Fiscal Resources Committee about continuing in that position, he indicated that he would feel more comfortable on the Committee were he to know that the Board did more than receive their report. He would like to talk with the Board about the report they submitted and what the Board thought about imple- menting the report in the future. She feels he made a good point. Mr. Bowie said the Board met with the Fiscal Resources Committee, and virtually every recommendation made by them was not only accepted but most have been implemented. Mrs. Humphris said her appointee also wants to know the plan for the future and the purpose of continuing the committee. Mr. Bain said the Committee is to provide budget input through June 30. From his perspective, he is not interested in having any more budget meetings than are already scheduled. However, he would certainly like to hear any suggestions from the committee at the work sessions. He said a preliminary draft of the budget can be given to the Committee at the same time the Board receives it for its review. Mr. Way suggested that the Chairman of the Board write to the Chairman of the Fiscal Resources Committee and explain exactly the purpose outlined by the Board and assure them of the valuable input they have provided. Mr. Bowie agreed to do that. He said he will invite the Committee to participate in work sessions on the budget as observers. Regarding the reappointment of the Fiscal Resources Committee, Mr. Bowie asked the Clerk to contact the two at-large members to see if they desire reappointment. Agenda Item No. 14. Draft Statement for Rehearing on Route 29 North. Mr. Bowie said a draft letter has been prepared by the County Attorney to the Secretary of Transportation requesting a rehearing. There were no changes or corrections made by the Board to the draft letter. Mr. Bowie said he spent two days in Richmond at which time he had a chance to talk with Commissioner Ray Pethtel and Secretary of Transportation John Milliken. He made the point that the Board sent a letter on November 29 with a specific request which was never specifically answered. The second request the Board made was for a specific sequence of the proposed construc- tion. Mr. Bowie said there was an indication that the Board has a right to some kind of commitment. He said they agree that the Board has a right to make a presentation on February 21, and he assumes the draft prepared by the County Attorney will accomplish that. He believes that any request for specific additional information or clarification should be made at that meeting. Mr. Bowie said that staff will be preparing the presentation and the Board will have a chance to give input. He feels that possibly more than one person should make the presentation. Motion was offered by Mr. Way and seconded by Mr. Bain that the draft letter dated January 16, 1991, prepared by the County Attorney be sent to the Chairman of the Commonwealth Transportation Board, Mr. John G. Milliken. 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. January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 24) 322 Agenda Item No. 14a. Authorize Staff to Proceed with Acceptance of Bid for Hawkwood Court. Mr. Bain said he understands that the residents have agreed to partici- pate in funding the Hawkwood Court improvements. He feels that staff should proceed on the basis that the interest earned on the bond should go toward the road cost, with the residents paying one-half of the difference. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to authorize staff to proceed with acceptance of the bid for Hawkwood Court. 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. 14b. Authorize County Executive to Sign CDBG Contract for the Crozet Housing Project. Mr. Tucker said a contract for the Community Development Block Grant must be signed after the program is approved by the Board. The Board has approved the project, and authorization is requested for the County Executive to sign the contract. The contract is between the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development and Albemarle County. The grant will not exceed $300,000 for the Albemarle County Housing Site Development project which is to provide improved housing for 80 persons, all of whom are low and moderate income families, through acquisition and development of 30 housing sites on ten acres in Crozet and construction of 30 affordable single-family homes. The work is to be completed on or before December 16, 1992. Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris and seconded by Mr. Bain to authorize the County Executive to sign the agreement as requested and set out below. 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. AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT, entered into as of this 17th day of December, 1990, by and between the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Develop- ment hereinafter referred to as "DHCD" and Albemarle County herein- after referred to as "GRANTEE." W1TNESSETH WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia has been authorized to dis- tribute and administer Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, and WHEREAS, DHCD has been authorized by the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia to distribute and administer CDBG funds in the form of Community Improvement Grants (CIG) according to the CDBG Program Design, and WHEREAS, the PROJECT as described in the Community Improvement Grant Proposal as submitted by the GRANTEE has achieved a sufficiently high ranking through a competitive proposal selection system to qualify for Community Improvement Grant funding on the basis of the CDBG Program Design, Now, THEREFORE, the above mentioned parties hereto do mutually agree as follows: DHCD agrees to award the GRANTEE a Community Improvement Grant in an amount of the total allowable, eligible costs in carrying out the activities included in the scope of the work herein described not to exceed $300,000, (Three Hundred Thousand Dollars). January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 25) 323 DHCD agrees to provide the GRANTEE with technical assistance in setting up and carrying out the administration of its Community Improvement Grant. Be The GRANTEE will commence, carry out and complete the following scope of work (more thoroughly described in the GRANTEE'S CIG Proposal). Project Title: Albemarle County Housing Site Development. Activities: Provide improved housing for 80 persons, all of whom are low and moderate income through the following activities: 1) acquisition and development of 30 housing sites on ten acres in Crozet; 2) construction of 30 affordable single family homes. e The aforementioned PROJECT shall be carried out, and grant payments made in strict conformance with the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. e The Grantee will use the lesser of (1) the amount specified above, or (2) if, at total project completion, there are cost underruns or project savings, these costs shall revert to the Department of Housing and Community Development and other funding sources committed to the project in the grant proposal on a proportional basis, unless superseded by other federal program requirements. In no case will leveraged funds be returned beyond that amount which would have changed the project's ability to be funded initially. The GRANTEE will initiate the ACTIVITY(S) required by the CON- TRACT DOCUMENTS beginning December 17, 1990, unless grant special condition(s) require additional action on specified activity(s) before proceeding with that activity(s). In such instances the GRANTEE will initiate action relative to removal of the special condition(s) beginning with the execution of this agreement. Ye The GRANTEE shall complete the work as described in the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS within 24 months of the execution of this Agreement, or more specifically on or before December 16, 1992. If the ACTIVI- TIES are not completed by that date all CIG funding and this Agreement shall be terminated and the Grantee shall return all unexpended funds, unless an amendment to the CONTRACT DOCUMENT provides otherwise. DHCD agrees to make payment to the GRANTEE upon receipt of a properly completed and signed invoice. Request may be made allowing approximately 21 days to receive the funds. Funds are to be immediately disbursed by the GRANTEE and should not be deposited in an interest-bearing account. The term CONTRACT DOCUMENTS means the following documents which are a part of this Agreement, and are incorporated by reference herein as if set out in full. (A) GRANTEE'S CIG Proposal (including revisions) (B) AGREEMENT (C) General Conditions (D) Special Conditions (E) AMENDMENTS (F) CIG Management MANUAL (Those items specified as being required) (G) ASSURANCES Agenda Item No. 15. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from Board Members. Mr. Tucker said the State has a contract with General Motors for of police vehicles which is better than the County's existing contract. The County can save $1643 per vehicle by taking advantage of this contract by the January 16, 1991 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 26) 324 end of January. He said there is a need for 12 replacement vehicles for the Sheriff's Office and the Police Department for the next fiscal year. Mr. Tucker asked for authorization to purchase the 12 vehicles which would be replaced next year, thereby saving over $20,000. He said the cars will probably not arrive until July 1 but have to be paid for in this fiscal year. He said there will be sufficient funds in the General Fund by that time. Mr. Bain asked if this request is to replace the same weight, style, etc. of existing vehicles. Mr. Tucker said that is correct. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mrs. Humphris to give the County Executive authority to purchase the 12 vehicles as requested. 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. Mr. Bain suggested that the Board make sure the Legislative Liaison is told to let the Board know when financial and revenue-source matters are to be discussed. Board members may wish to go to Richmond in those instances. Mr. Bowie volunteered to send a letter to Mrs. Martha Hogshire to that effect if Board members did not object. There were no objections. Mr. Perkins said he has received calls from irate citizens who received letters from the U. S. Postal Service saying that the County of Albemarle has changed their address. He wants the media to know that the County has not changed any addresses. Apparently, the Postal Service used an old form letter to notify some citizens of route number changes. Mr. Bowie said there is a lot of interest at the General Assembly to help counties. He said there is interest in easing the requirement for double liners for landfills, educational mandates, etc. He said there may be suspen- sion of some of these mandates while the reduction in State funding lasts. He feels the Board will have to work hard in order to get some of these accom- plished. Mr. Bowie said that if a bill comes up where the testimony of the Board is warranted, he will go to Richmond. Any member of the Board who is available may go with him to support bills which affect Albemarle. He said the legislative representatives for Albemarle have asked for additional information, which Mr. Bowie said he will send to them. Mr. Way said he thought that Delegate George Allen specifically requested a list of mandates which the Board would like to have relaxed. Mr. Bowie said he gave Mr. Allen a list of mandates but did not indicate which ones the Board wanted to see lifted. Mr. Bowie said in the follow-up letter, he will note those mandates. Mr. Way said the Board received a letter quite some time ago from the Cove Garden Ruritan Club concerning the naming of the Southern Regional Park. He asked that this item be placed on the February 13 agenda. Mr. Bowie said an advertisement was placed and no names were suggested other than the one from the Cove Garden Ruritan Club. Agenda Item No. 16. Adjourn to February 6, 1991, at 3:00 P.M. At 10:18 P.M., there being no further business to come before the Board, motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Way to adjourn to February 6, 1991, at 3:00 P.M. 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. CHAIRMAN