Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-02-15 adjFebruary 15, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 1) 261 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on February 15, 1989, at 1:30 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr. (arrived at 1:36 P.M.), Mr. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke (arrived at 2:.15 P.M.), Messrs. C. Timothy Lindstrom (arrived at 1:40 P.M.), Walter F. Perkins and Peter T. Way. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive; Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney (arrived at 4:35 P.M.); 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 1:45 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way. Agenda Item No. 2. Public Hearing: Community Development Block Grant Funding. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on February 6, 1989.) Mr. Horne said that staff had prepared a report (dated February 9, 1989, and on file in the Clerk's Office) outlining a variety of possible Virginia Community Development Block Grant projects that could be eligible for funding. He said that Wayne Cilimberg, Chief of Community Development, would summarize the report for the Board. Mr. Cilimberg said the VCDBG program includes three objectives: increas- ing business and employment opportunities, conserving and improving housing conditions, and improving the availability and adequacy of community facili- ties. He said there are thirty project types which could be considered for application. Two types will be funded on a Competitive basis under the 1987 VCDBG. One is a community improvement grant~ and the other is a planning grant. He said that this year for the first~itime, VCDBG allows eligible cox~unities to have up to two community improvement grants if at least one is a housing project and the total amount of CD~G funds for the two projects does not exceed $1 million. Since the County already has a $700,000 community improvement grant for housing rehabilitationS?it is eligible to apply for a second community improvement grant of no more than $300,000 for any project. The following listing of eligible projects have been identified by Planning Staff according to Mr. Cilimberg. Project 1: Project 2: Conversion of Scottsville School to Apartments - Jordan Development Corporation. Conversion of the Scottsville School to 34 units for rent to low income elderly. Housing Rehabilitation - Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP). Upgrade substandard owner occupied and/or rental units. Project 3: Project 4: Low and Moderate Income Housing Subdivision. Development of a single family detached housing subdivision to be made available for ownership to qualifying low to moderate income families and individuals. ~ Crozet Community Improvements. Multi-purpose grant for housing rehabilitation, sewer line and lateral extensions, amd flood and drainage facilities. ~ Project 5: Scottsville Community Improvements. Extend water and sewer utilities~north to the Scottsville Shopping Center, undeveloped property designated for i~dustrial service use, and/or existing low/~oderate income residential areas. ~ 262 Project 6: February 15, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 2) Southside Health Care Facility. Purchase land and develop site for the proposed relocation of the Southside Health Care Facility. Services provided include outpatient treatment of illness or injury for largely low/moderate income persons. Project 7: Emergency Medical Service In Scottsville. Land acquisition and site development for a new rescue squad facility in the Scottsville area. Project 8: Possible Project: Solid Waste Transfer Facility. Purchase and develop solid waste transfer facility to replace the landfill at Keene which is reaching capacity and will be closed in July, 1989. Project 9: Possible Project: Farmer's Market. Purchase and develop a facility to accommodate local farmers to market their goods to the ipublic. May also include the option of allowing farmers to sell wholesale to local r~tail businesses; and/or incorporating a p=oduce packing area for commercial distribution. Mr. Cilimberg summarized by saying it is not anticipated at this point that any of the projects listed would necessitate displacement of County residents. He explained that the grant process for VCDB~irequires that the Board of Supervisors receive comments from the public befbre making a decision on which project, if any, it wishes to pursue funding. H~ said that staff would provide its recommendations following the close of'!{he public hearing. The public hearing was opened at this time to receiv~ comments on the ¥CBDG. !~ Ms, Jane Saunier, Development Coordinator for the Jordan Development Corporation, said Jordan Development Corporation had sent~a letter dated February 6, 1989, to the Board requesting that CDBG funds~.~be applied for, to be used for the Old Scottsville School project. She added that she hopes the Board will look favorably on their request. · There being no other citizens present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Staff then made recommendation to the Board that Project 1: Conversion of Scottsville School to Apartments Jordan Development Corporation be selected for application for VCDBG funding. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom and seconded by ~r. Bowie to approve application for a $300,000 VCDBG funding for the Old Scotlsville School project as recox~ended by staff. 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. Agenda Item No. 3. Report: Southside Elementary School. Mr. 3ames A. Jensen, President of J. A. 3ensen & Ass6ciates, said he was happy to report that his firm's review of the Southside SchOol plans indicate that the architects had been very cost conscious throughout the project. He had been able to find only about $80,000 in possible cost,savings. Mr. 3ensen presented the following five areas of potential cost savings: 1. Use vinyl composition tile flooring in lieu of ~trip wood at the gym. February 15, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 3) 263 Investigate varying the height of the masonry bearing walls to achieve the required roof slope for storm water drainage in lieu of using tapered roof insulation. Delete the four "A" roof fingers and the shed roof at the stage area and install the roofing membrane over the existing roof insulation. The lobby ~larestory would remain as designed. Consider the use of a single-ply membrane, ballasted roof system in lieu of a built-up asphalt and felt system. Savings may be minimal but a better roof system can be obtained. Se If it is possible to eliminate theiexterior door in each classroom, considering the building is fully sprinkled, a 25 door reduction could produce a savings of $600 per opening for a potential savings of approximately $15,000. Mr. Jensen also presented detailed costiestimates for the Board's review. The total construction cost figure is $4,911j928, which does not include fixtures, furnishings and equipment. (Mrs. Cooke arrived at 2:15 P.M.) Mr. Way noted with regard to Item No. l'that the wood floor in the gym was requested by the Department of Parks and Recreation because of the multi- use purposes planned for that school. Mrs. Cooke said she found the discussion regarding Item No. 4 very interesting. She said she could remember when she came on the Board, there were a number of new schools which were experiencing major roof problems. At that time she said the Board discussed the roofs, and the decision was made that from that time forward as new schools were built a more sensible approach to roofing would take place. She said to find that the roofing that caused so much problem seven or eight years ago is being used all over again "blows" her mind. Mr. Jensen said when the single-ply r0~fs first came out, there were only one or two suppliers. What happened was the one manufacturer had a lock on the market. Now there are a number of different single-ply membranes that can be installed. With regard to Item No. 5, Mr. Jensen said unless there is an important reason for there to be an exterior door for every classroom, he would recom- mend giving serious consideration to elimina~iing those doors. Mr. Way said he did not think the doors were there primarily for fire exits. Mr. David Papenfuse, Assistant Superintendent for Business and Finance, said the doors were for getting children in and out to playgrounds. The idea was to make every classroom typical, with all the amenities needed in each one. He said this is an area that could be adjusted if it lis driving the cost. Mrs. Cooke said it has nothing then to do with education; it has to do ~ith bricks and mortar. Mr. 3ensen it would appear to him toibe a security problem because somebody would have to check to be sure they ~ere all secure. Mr. Bowie wondered what thought had been really given to security. Will there be panic bars on each door, or will anybody be able to'~walk in and out at any time? Mr. Papenfuse said this is a question on every school. The classroom teacher wants a door, and the principal worries aboutithe security problem. On some of the more recent school plans, the doors ha~e been placed in the elementary schools, especially kindergarten and first grade, because they are in and out a lot during the day using the outside as par~ of their program. It is a security problem in that the doors have to be checked, but at the same time it is a big convenience for that classroom teacher. Mr. Bowie asked if the doors automatically lock from the outside. Mr. Pap~nfuse said the doors could be keyed open, but they do lock from the outside~I It would be the teacher's responsibility at the end of each day to be sure the doors were secured. Mr. Jensen said he suspects that an exterior light is required on each door. Mrs. Cooke asked if exit lights were also required~~ Mr. Way said he knows no exterior lights are required. Mr. Jensen sai~ he did not consider either switches and exterior lights or exit lights i~ his estimate. If a switch and exterior light is required, the cost would be'ilabout $125 per door, depending on what type of light is installed. An exit sign at each door would be at least $150 per door. -Mr. Way said he is quit~' sure that neither an exit light nor an exterior light is required. ~ 264 February 15, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 4) Mr. Lindstrom asked if the roof proposed by the architect already has the slope in it. Mr. Jensen said the slope has been achieved by having beveled insulation. Mr. Jensen's suggestion is to drop the interior walls so that' the slope is built into the structural system, and all the insulation would then be the same thickness. Mr. Lindstrom asked if Mr. Jensen had any trouble getting the plans to work with. Mr. Sensen said he did not. Mr. Bain wondered if the original committee working on this school had any discussion regarding the roof fingers in Item No. 3.. Mr. Papenfuse said the original design had a false roof around the whole building to cover up the mechanical equipment. The architect had said if the design as currently shown results in a significant cost difference, they would be Willing to take that off as long as they can keep the mechanical equipment fairly hidden. Mr. Bowie said regarding Item No. 3, in his opinion iif the fake roofs are lowered, the lobby ~restory will look disproportionately high. He wondered if that could be dropped three or four feet as well. Mr. Jensen said it could be, and if it is lowered enough, another possibility is that sky lights could be installed in lieu of the ~clerestory. ~ Mr. Lindstrom said he thinks the point Mr. Jensen mahe about the roof is important to look at because $60,000 is not a small sum of money. Neverthe- less, what is left when the false roof is removed will be there for a long time. There is some value in having a building with some aesthetic appeal as well. Mr. Jensen said he wanted to point out that when his firm comes up with a cost savings amount, it is first dollar cost. This means it is pure construc- tion cost. Overhead, profit, contingencies, etc. have not been added to it to get a bottom line number. Therefore, when a savings of $60,000 is shown, the added mark-up would make that figure around $90,000 of savings. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the School Board has ~iven any thought to having the Southside and Crozet school sites checked for radon. ~.iMr. Agnor said he has been told by a contractor that radon can only be measured in a confined space. It could not be measured then until these buildings are built. Mr. Jensen said that is accurate. Agenda Item No. 4. Agreement: Southside Health Center. Mr. Agnor said he was submitting a proposed agreement, amended from a previous meeting of the Board, between the County, Southside Health Center, and Central Virginia Community Health Center. This agreement would transfer the delivery of health care services from the present property to a new site described in the agreement. It also releases both HealthlCenter groups from the lease they hold for the County-owned property and pro~ides for the current facility to continue should the proposed plan fail. Mr. Agnor said Mr. St. John had looked at the agreement and has no problem with it. He, therefore, recommended that it be authorized for execution. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mrs. Cooke to authorize the County Executive to execute the following agreement fOr the Southside Health Center as proposed and submitted by staff. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Lindstrom~ Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. ~' This Agreement, dated this 15th day of February,l 1989, by and among Albemarle County, Virginia, party of the first ~Dart, Southside Health Center, Inc., a Virginia Corporation, party o~the second part, and Central Virginia Community Health Center, ~nc., a Virginia Corporation, party of the third part, provides as follows: WHEREFORE, the party of the first part purchase~ and renovated partially with funds from a federal grant the current, facility on February 15, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 5) State Route 627 in Albemarle County, Virginia, being used by the parties of the second and third part as a health care delivery clinic; 265 WHEREFORE, one of the conditions of said grant was that the facility continue to be used as a facility for the delivery of health care services to residents of southern Albemarle County; WHEREFORE, the parties of the second and third part wish to construct a new facility for delivery of health care services in a different location from the current facility and have received a loan commitment to do so; WHEREFORE, the original federal Grantor of part of the money used for purchase and renovation of the current facility has indi- cated to the party of the first part that it will consider the grant conditions fulfilled if all parties agree that said new facility will be used for delivery of health care services to the residents of southern Albemarle County in the same manner the current facility is used. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, and otherigood and valuable consid- eration not specifically mentioned herein, the parties hereby cove- nant and agree as follows: 1. The parties of the second and third part will use best efforts to construct a facility for the.delivery of health care services to residents of southern Albemarle County on 15 acres known by present Tax Map numbering as Tax Mapi128, parcel 109A, and complete said facility as soon as possible. 2. At the point when said facility has been completed, the party of the first part will release the parties of the second and third part from any liability under any!lease agreements for contin- ued use of the current facility. 3. If the facility referred to in!Paragraph 1 is not complet- ed, and no other satisfactory substitute arrangements are made, all parties agree to continue to use the current facility as the site for the health care delivery clinic. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: The Board recessed at 2:53 P.M. and reconvened at 3:07 P.M. Agenda Item No. 5. Work Session: Comprehensive Plan. The work session on the Comprehensive P~an began with the Village of Earlysville on Page 260. Mr. Horne summarized the Planning Commission's discussions regarding Earlysville. He said the major point of discussion revolved around two matters. One was whether there were available areas to expand the village. To the south and west there is the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir watershed area and to the north and east, there is the Chris Greene watershed. The other point was whether public water or sewer could be extended into the area. Mr. Home went on to say that staff had ibased their recommendations for the Village of Earlysville on the assumption that public water would not be run into this area due to cost and that public sewer could not be extended because of drainage into either of the watersheds. Also, there is the fact that not much land is available for expansion because of the watershed ques- tion. Mr. Bain pointed out that the Jacobs Run Agricultural and Forestal District borders Earlysville and would need to be considered if any expansion of this village takes place. 266 February 15, 1989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 6)~ Mr. Horne said staff has discussed marketing possibilities in this area with the development community, and there seems to be a lack of land available for sale within the current boundaries. Mr. Lindstrom wondered if there could possibly be another area that could be considered to meet the desire for development away from the urban area at densities that will absorb the demand for rural land. Mr. Horne said that the Planning Commission did look at the Milton area as a possible village, but had rejected it based on two things. First of all, they thought there would be more happening with North Garden than is apparent- ly going to happen. Secondly, the Milton area would absolutely require public sewer and water. Mr. Brent gave staff a report of probable cost of water to the area at around $1 million. Total cost of sewer was based on two plants for a cost of over $2 million. Mr. Lindstrom said he is interested in the idea of Milton as a village because of the possibility of accommodating development in this area if proper planning is done. Mr. Horne said staff had looked quickly at Milton at this point. He suggested they take a more in-depth look into how it could be configured and bring a report back to the Board. He said one major immediate problem for this area would be at the intersection of Route 22 and Ro6te 250 East. Mr. Bowie said if there is an increase in~affic on !Route 250, then the improvements begun on Route 250 must continue/4~e-the 1-64 iinterchange. He also feels a fact that must be considered is whether the people who live in the area want a village designation. The consensus of the Board was that the Milton area ~e looked at by staff in terms of the amount of acreage, the density that could ~be accommodated with utilities, and what road improvements should be made. Mr? Lindstrom suggested that an overall analysis of the Board's review of villages be developed and brought back by staff. He said he hopes that will includel what can be done for Hollymead as well. He also felt that Stony Point should be considered again for possible expansion. Mr. Bowie said he had no objection to looking again at Stony Point, but he felt that growth would not happen without utili- ties or until the boundaries are changed to more developable land. Mr. Horne moved on to the next section, saying that W~ile certain inter- changes along the interstate are not shown within growth ~reas, the current policy of the plan is to recognize their geographical loca~ion and to provide some support to urban uses of those interchanges. Mr. Horne then summarized the goals, objectives and s?rategies under the "Rural Development" section beginning on Page 267. (Mr. St. John and Mr. James Bowling, IV arrived at 4:~5 P.M.) The next work session will continue with discussion o$ the "Rural Devel- opment" section. Agenda Item No. 6. Other Matters Not Listed on the A~enda. .There were no other matters to come before the Board St this time. Agenda Item No. 7. Executive Session: Personnel. ~ At 4:45 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom and~iseconded by Mr. Bowie to adjourn into executive session to discuss personnel matters. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Lindstrom, Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. February 15, I989 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 7) The Board reconvened into open session at 5:15 P.M. 267 Agenda Item No. 8. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was immediately adjourned.