Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-01-25 adjJanuary 25, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 1) 201 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on January 25, 1989, at 1:30 P.M., Meeting Room #5/§, CountyOffice Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was adjourned from January 23, 1989. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., F. R. Bowie, C. Timothy Lindstrom (arrived at 2:03 P.M.), Walter F. Perkins and Peter T. Way. BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive, and Mr. John T. P. Horne, Director of Planning and Community Development. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 1:39 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way, who announced that Mrs. Cooke could not attend, Mr. Lindstrom would be late, and Mr. Agnor would have to leave to attend a University of Virginia Hospital Board Meeting. He said Mr. Agnor had several items to discuss before leaving. Agenda Item No. 3. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mr. Agnor said that as a result of the recent emergency services study, the Jefferson Country Firefighters Association (JCFFA) had reviewed and discussed the recommendations made by Dr. Perkins with both the fire and rescue divisions. These discussions were to, include members of the Planning staff, so David Benish attended. JCFFA had asked staff to give a status report to the Board, since the media would be making reports very shortly on the subject. JCFFA had met with all three rescue squads and are changing their by-laws to accommodate the incorporation of rescue squads. They are forming a committee to assimilate data on rescue squads that is needed to accommodate recommendations made by Dr. Perkins. Also, JCFFA has been asked by the Planning staff to help in developing ~he County Facilities Plan, and they are very happy to be involved in that p~oject. JCFFA is asking the Board to 1) set aside $21,500 remaining from the emergency services study appropriation for possible needs in the data collec- tion effort, 2) allocate funds in the 89-90 operations budget for one of the positions that Dr. Perkins' report recommended, and 3) equalize the annual contribution between fire and rescue service~ and increase each by $8,700 next year. ~ Mr. Agnor said the implementation of th~ recommendations of Dr. Perkins' report would not be in this budget cycle or This CIP cycle. Mr. Agnor said Mrs. Martha Hogshire, the County's legislative liaison at the General Assembly, was keeping him informed on a daily basis as to legis- lation having an affect on Albemarle County. Mr. Agnor elaborated on a bill being pr6posed by Governor Baliles which would permit localities the option of levying a one percent surcharge on State income tax by referendum with funds to be used specifically for road needs. He further stated that a modification of that, proposal by Senator Gartlan would permit localities to determine the nee~ and use of such funds by ordi- nance. The Board is being asked to support ~ resolution to this effect to be forwarded to the local representatives at the General Assembly. He said that for many years this County has been in favor of such a bill. Mr. Way said the Board should take some action on this request'before the day is over. Mr. Agnor said legislation was filed on ~!'development impact" fees. It is geared to a ten percent growth in population FY census data, is limited to road improvements only, and requires a servic~ area or district where a road improvement plan can be adopted through the p~blic hearing process. The plan and needs assessment would have to be updatedi'every two years. Mr. Agnor said the Dillon Rule is being ~xamined again, with the sugges- tion that it should be interpreted liberally ~ather than strictly in statutory construction. It applies to the powers and f~nctions of local government. 202 January 25, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 2) Other legislation the Board might be interested in regarding local government is the Grayson Commission, studying local government structures and trying to encourage cooperative agreements between adjacent localities. He said the Charlottesville/Albemarle County agreement was used as a model throughout the studies on this matter. The bill is to encourage State funding where cooperative agreements have been entered into so that localities could receive some additional State revenues. That report is being carried forward for another year. A new item in that is the proposal that the State assume the full cost of the operations of the local Health Departments, Mental Health Associations, and Social Service Departments over three biennial sessions. Other bills of interest include a draft bill calling for the State to pay one-half the capital expenditures for education; the Freedom of Information Act is being examined with regard to abuse of executive Sessions, which staff feels has very little bearing on this Board; a bill for access of local gov- ernment employees to a State health benefit plan; two lottery bills being ~ proposed for the distribution of funds--one based on the~total lottery sales in a locality, taking thirty percent of the State sales and reallocating them to the localities and a second bill distributing revenue~ to the localities on a school age population basis; and the Sunset provision qn the fire programs fund. ~ In answer to the Board's question as to whether staff had the capability to examine the present Crozet School site, Mr. Agnor sai~ staff does not have that capability because of the need to have detailed plans, and the amount of cooperation needed between engineers and architects for the County to rein- vent those detailed plans. This should be done by the agencies having those plans already such as VMDO. He said staff had taken a q~ick look at the existing site and determined both positives and negatives, to the question of using the site of the existing Crozet School for the new school. The posi- tives are: 1. Without the use of maps and simply by looking at the land, it appears the topography and contours of the existing site are very similar to the new site. ~ A scaled "footprint" of the building placed on a plat of the existing site indicated two locations that could be used to build a new school without interference while the old school is still being used. Staff found the negative side to using the existing Site to be: 1. There is the problem of safety and space for material storage for the contractor if the present site is used.~ me Using the existing site could delay the project~.by as much as four to six weeks, depending on the work load of the contractor selected. ~.~ Offsetting the cost of the new site would be the demolition cost for the old building and the cost of an overpas~ or underpass to move children across the road. 4. Would have to acquire additional land. :' (Mr. Lindstrom arrived at 2:03 P.M., and Mr. Agnor Summarized for Mr. Lindstrom the update he had just given the Board.) Mr. Perkins pointed out that if the existing school is torn down, the present value of that building would be lost. Mr. Agnor said staff had examined that and because of previous experience with old ischool buildings becoming liabilities, no assessment value was placed on t~e building. Mr. Way asked if Mr. Agnor would give the Board in w~itten form the information he had just shared regarding Crozet School. i Mr. Agnor called the Board's attention to a copy of the County's 1988 Annual Report which had been distributed to them for information. January 25, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 3) 203 Agenda Item No. 2. Work Session: Comprehensive Plan. The work session began with a discussion of the Community of Crczet on Page 233. Mr. Home briefly covered the location of boundaries; the existing residential, commercial and industrial land uses; the environmental character- istics; the land use map; water and sewer facilities; and secondary roads. He then discussed the recommendations for Crozet one by one. Mr. Perkins asked if there was any total count of existing vacant lots in the northern part of the area such as in Laurel Hills and Sunset Acres. Mr. Horne said there was none at this time, but staff could certainly get a count. Mr. Bain asked how realistic the recommendation is on Page 236 which states, "Strengthen the downtown area of Crozet as a shopping area. A commu- nity service area is designated to enable the central business area of down- town Crozet to function as the shopping center for Crozet. Unless such a downtown commercial function is encouraged, pressure will increase for a suburban type shopping center located somewhere outside of the community. New commercial development in the downtown area will be a combination of filling in between existing buildings, conversion of buildings from other uses to commercial, and development of new building complexes." Mr. Horne said the in-fill situation and the conversion of buildings is very realistic. Staff has already received requests over the last few months from people who want to do these. However, there is a limited amount of additional purely vacant acreage available in downtown Crozet. He sa~d staff had recommended to the Planning Commission during the analysis of C~ozet that the downtown acreage be expanded to the west for commercial use. After discussion by the Commission and comments from people in the area who oppdsed changing the land use desig- nation, the Commission decided not to do that. In terms of underdeveloped land that could be assembled into larger shopping areas, there are about 12 acres. Mr. Lindstrom said he assumes that staff feels the downtown area is sufficient to support the needs of the commu~ity. Mr. Home said given the time frame of this plan and the fact that anhual reviews will be done, he feels it is sufficient for that time frame. !iHe said ~his personal opinion is that this is not sufficient for the long ter~, If Crozet grows to the capa- city expected, it will be necessary to look for some additional acreage to strengthen the downtown area. He said he fe~ts now is the time to do that, but the Planning Commission did not recommend, that. Mr. Lindstrom asked staff to explain wh~t their thinking was as opposed to that of the Planning Commission. Mr. Home said in terms of a partially developed area, in many cases of community s~rvice designation staff has accumulated together areas that fall into a ~ertain character on the map. He said twenty acres of undeveloped land would ~ever be available in downtown Crozet, but it could be treated as a small tQ~wll environment using in-fill and conversion. Designating areas to the west of downtown he feels would make the proposal more viable. Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, dhief of Community Development, said the twelve acres referred to would be within the community service designation. He said there are several additional blocks which do have residential structures but are not completel~ filled on each lot with resi- dential use. He said staff's thinking was that the opportunity for shops and professional offices in existing structures ~ new structures on these couple of blocks would be a realistic and legitimatei!approach. There were concerns from residents of the area in terms of having!a mixture of commercial and residential use.. The Planning Commission wasl. more favorable to that in their thinking than was staff. He said staff did ~9t intend to go in and level and build a new shopping center there. Mr. Lindstrom said the question is whether the needs of the community can be met by the community service shown. He understands the Planning Commission to be saying that if Crozet grows as anticipated, then they can consider something in the future. Right now there does not seem to be an immediate need for extending community service. Mr. Home said that is the Planning Commission's basic position. The Board then discussed the road improvements in Crozet. Mr. Lindstrom said it appears there will be a small addition., to Route 240 and the State will 204 January 25, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 4) improve the bridge over Lickinghole Creek. Other than that, Mr. Lindstrom asked if there are any prospects of any other improvements being done. Mr. Horne said there is nothing else in the State's Six Year Plan for Crozet. He said he does not feel that the entire length of Rodte 240 being realigned or widened other than improvements to the bridge, is integral to access to the downtown areas. More critical to access are improvements to Park Road and the extension going up near the park, and Jarman's Gap Road improvements. For the foreseeable future, he would anticipate the north central portion would be the primary area to develop. Mr. Bain asked how staff's view compared to that of ithe Planning Commis- sion regarding the recommendation which states, "The success of strengthening the downtown necessitates limiting commercial development on Route 250 West to commercial functions that are currently zoned and solely oriented to the highway (and provide very localized convenience needs). There should be no additional commercial zoning on ROute 250 West2" Mr. Home said looking at the existing text and where the boundaries are drawn along Route 250, there has not been any intent to encourage additional zoning on Route 250 West since the ordinance was adopted. This recommendation is staff's attempt to make that patently clear. Mr. Perkins asked how the recommendation will be implemented which states, "Improve the amenity of the downtown area through landscaping, street furniture, sidewalk and pedestrian ways, and parking." He referred specifi- cally to sidewalks. Mr. Home said sidewalks could be done through CIP funding. If there were a road improvement in a commercially zoned area, and the sidewalks would be eligible for state maintenance, the County might have to participate in some of that cost. Mr. Bowie said he ~bought that projects such as this could qualify for Community Development BloCk Grant funds, and the possibility should be kept in mind. Mr. Bowie asked if land is available which is referehced in the last recommendation on Page 236 which states, "A streamside rg~reational area is designated along Powells Creek and adjacent to Orchard Acres. This area can provide passive recreation for a developing residential a~ea close to down- town." Mr. Home said it is not currently developed and i~oes not appear to be very developable. It is privately owned and would need ~6 be acquired by the County to implement this recommendation. "~ Mr. Bowie suggested that areas planned as passive r~"areational areas and shown in the Comprehensive Plan as such should be scattergd throughout the County. He said a continuing listing should be made to k~ep track of them. Mr. Horne then discussed the recommendations involvi~lg transportation improvements on Page 237. Mr. Bain asked what staff's thinking is concerning the Route 250 West commercial property in terms of neighborhood versus community service designa- tion about which the Board had already received several l~tters. Mr. Home said there are a number of factors involved. He said the~e was an anticipa- tion by the Commission and staff that the property would ~ot be subject to any downzoning. The existing highway commercial zoning o~ about six acres would remain. Given that, next was the policy to emphasize that the downtown area ms and should continue to be the primary commercial ~rea~ Those two factors generated a recommendation for service designatio~ which is the least intensive that can be provided and a secondary recommendation that there should be no additional acreage zoned. It was a combinat~0n of recognizing the existing zoning, while emphasizing that there is no b~sis for using that designation for any intensification beyond what~ is allowed' by existing zoning. Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that this particular property would not have been included in the growth area had it not already been ~oned highway commer- cial. The watershed boundary roughly follows Route 250. ?nder a "clean slate" approach, this property would have been shown as r~ral area. Mr. Home summarized by saying the way the issue stands is: 1) doe~! the Board want to continue the downtown emphasis? 2) does community designation damage that policy? He said the Planning Commission could not reconci~le any more inten- sive designation with the underlying emphasis on downtown ~rozet. January 25, 1989 (Afternoon~Adjourned Meeting) (Page 5) 205 Mr. Bain said Crozet has been planned to be one of the critical growth areas for a long time in the Comprehensive Plan. He does not think the growth will happen unless road improvements are made. Mr. Horne said as far as staff is concerned, when road improvements are shown in the Plan, staff's intention is to bring the Board a report in the near future showing the cost of those improvements. If for some reason the Board can tell in reviewing this Plan that it is not going to commit to particular improvements, staff does not want to show those improvements in the Plan. Staff and the Commission are con- vinced that what is shown here is feasible, so much so that these recommenda- tions have been made to support the whole land use plan for Crozet. Mr. Bain asked if staff would have opposition if a short segment of the new roadway south of Lickinghole Creek was built by a private developer who wanted medium density residential zoning. Mr. Home said the land use plan guides the densities. However, there are relatively extensive areas shown for low density because of their remoteness from utilities or roads which in the long run will have to be considered for higher densities. He said staff could not say there would be support for changing the density without some justifica- tion, but it would definitely be a factor to,be looked at in getting the growth going in Crozet. Mr. Bain said he understands staff's thinking, but the growth that was expected has not happened. In the growth areas, he feels there must be flexibility to accommodate certain things. Mr. Bowie said the only way to know thelprogress of the Comprehensive Plan over the twenty year period is to startikeeping track, year-by-year, of whether the stated goals are being accomplished. Not Docketed: Mr. Way said before beginning discussions on the Hollymead Community, he thought the Board should take up the request for a resolution regarding the one percent surcharge on State income tax. Mr. Lindstrom asked if staff had had time to determine what the one percent surcharge would bring to the County i~ terms of dollars. Mr. Agnor said it could mean about $7.5 million per year in Albemarle County. Mr. Bowie said the County must have some means of raising funds other than through property taxes, and the State r~fuses to give any way to do that. He feels that property taxes, while they are iPqual, are unfair. He said he would support this legislation because it is ~a way of raising money that is more equitably distributed. Mr. Lindstrom said the Board has adopted!'resolutions to this effect in the past. He wondered if it would be beneficial to indicate that this resolu- tion is not just in response to a piece of legislation that has come up, but that it has been a long standing position of this Board as evidenced by those resolutions. Mr. Bowie said he felt the resolution should specifically support Senator Gartlan's proposal, but refer to the other proposals. Mr. Perkins said he could not support Gogernor Baliles' proposed legisla- tion because he felt road costs should be borne by the people who use the' roads through user taxes. He would support t~e money coming back to the County for whatever it is needed for. Mr. Lindstrom said with adding a paragraph that refers to the Board's long standing position supporting this type o~ legislation and welcoming this particular proposal, he would offer a motion to adopt the proposed resolution as set out below. Mr. Bowie seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote~ AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Lindstrom, Perkin~ and Way. NAYS: None. ~ ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke. WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board~of Supervisors has main- tained a long-standing position over a number of years favoring local government access to income taxes;~and WHEREAS, this position has not changed as the membership of the Board of Supervisors has changed over the years; and 206 January 25, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 6) WHEREAS, Governor Baliles has proposed and the General Assembly is considering legislation that would permit localities the option to levy a one percent surcharge on the State income tax; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that the Board supports the concept of the proposal of Governor Baliles to permit localities to levy a surcharge on the State income tax; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board supports the legislation proposed by Senator Gartlan which permits local elected governing bodies to determine the need and use of these funds; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of the resolution be forwarded to The Honorable Thomas 3. Michie, Jr., The Honorable Mitchell Van Yahres and The Honorable George F. Allen. Mr. Way said elected officials of the County have been asked to attend the General Assembly on January 31, 1989, when this proposed legislation will come before Committee hearing. Mr. Way asked the Board to think about who could possibly go along with him. The Board recessed at 3:27 P. M. and reconvened 3:40 P.M., continuing with the work session on the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Horne summarized the Hollymead community and discussed the recommen- dations beginning on Page 240. Mr. Bowie asked that a listing of roads in rural areas which are sched- uled for improvement and shown in the Six Year Secondary Highway Plan be listed in priority order for the Board. Mr. Lindstrom said that the fourth recommendation on Page 241 which begins, "Avoid division of residential portions of the community by Route 29 North.", is a little hard to follow. Mr. Horne said it c~uld be reworded for clarification. Mr. Bain asked if the boundary of Hollymead Community at Route 649 on the north was set because of physical limitations. Mr. Cili~berg said there were some physical limitations because of drainage from the creek running close to Route 29. However, there were proposals to add that area~to the growth area, and the Commission decided not to at this point. Withouti~utilities or ser- vices that could support long term development, it was not felt to be feasible at this time. Mr. Lindstrom said he is concerned to what extent this amount of indus- trial designation is responsive to the projected populati6n. The industrial use is a generator of more people, and he wonders if there is too much indus- trial designation here. Mr. Lindstrom asked that an analMsis be done between the amount of industrial acreage shown for the Hollymead Community and the amount of residential acreage available in nearby areas, ~ssuming that all the industrial acreage is built out. Mr. Bowie said he thinks flexibility is important in ~his planning. He said he has a problem with saying a particular spot is where something has to be. If people do not want houses there, houses will not be put there no matter what the Comprehensive Plan says. He feels that as development is proposed, the County should not be locked into one spot o~ithe map. Mr. Lindstrom said all the talk about flexibility is ~onderful, but if it is taken to that extent, there would be no need for the C~prehensive Plan at all. If the Plan is going to mean anything, it means tha~ilsome flexibility is eliminated. He feels the industrial designation, for example, should be placed where it is needed and not take the attitude that i~ someone wants it some place else, that's fine too. The Plan has succeeded ~ver the past few years because it does mean something. The notion he seemsito be hearing more and more is to let the market do what it wants to do. He ~oes nOt think that is a signal that should be sent. Mr. Bain said his idea o~ flexibility was with regard to the residential density, particularly in a ~rowth area. Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission's idea of flexibility was, within the January 25, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 7) 207 boundaries and designated areas such as this one, conforming to the intent of the Plan and allowing some mixed uses. Mr. Horne said that Mr. Bill Brent, Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority, has recommended an additional sentence for the last recommendation on Page 243. The sentence reads, "Such an interconnection would be for emergency transport water from north to south." The next work session is scheduled for February 1, 1989, at 1:30 P.M., in Room 7, beginning with the Community of Scottsville on Page 245. Agenda Item No. 4. Adjourn to February 1, 1989, at 1:30 P.M. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Lindstrom to adjourn to February 1, 1989, at 1:30 P.M. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Lindstrom, Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke.