Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-03-15 adjMarch 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 1) 339 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on March 15, 1989, at 1:30 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. The meeting was adjourned from March 8, 1989. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr., Mr. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke (arrived at 2:07 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 (arrived at 2:15 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. Mr. Way informed the Board that Mr. Agnor would be here momentarily, and Mrs. Cooke would be late. He said that the week of March 24 - 31, 1989, has been declared "Commun- ity Development Block Grant" week in recognition of the many achievements in the community through that program. Agenda Item No. 2. Work Session: Comprehensive Plan. The work session began with a discussion of the possible expansion of the proposed Scottsville Community. Mr. Wayne Cilimberg, Chief of Community Development, said staff had looked at three levels of development in this area. Regarding residential growth, staff feels that the area currently designated presents a good oppor- tunity for additional residential development on lots that are either undevel- oped or underdeveloped, especially if public water and/or sewer are provided. The second area staff considered was a community service designation. The combination of develOpment in the town of Sco/tsville and expansion of the present shopping center would service the population that would be located here if this growth area built out. The last?area staff considered was major employment opportunities. The key to employment is public water and sewer availability. Staff did not look at relocating any employment centers. Mr. Cilimberg said staff's recommendation is to leave the boundaries of Scottsville as proposed in the updated Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Cilimberg added that a key factor in not recommending eg. pansion of the Scottsville community boundaries is the nearby Totier Cre~k Watershed. Mr. Way said he concurs with staff's recommendation. Mr. Lindstrom pointed out that the publi~ address system in Room 7 is not adequate for the public to hear what the Boar~ is saying. He discovered that when he attended a meeting and sat in the audience and could not hear the speakers. He asked that staff get someone in!fro take care of that problem. (Mrs. Cooke arrived at 2:07 P.M.) Mr. Way said if any Board members had items they wished to bring up for discussion within the Comprehensive Plan, those could be discussed before going on to individual citizen requests. He Kent on to say that one thing which he feels should be in the Plan zs some Statement concerning the County s Affirmative Action Plan. He said the City ha~ a page related to that topic in its Plan, and he feels there should be a summ~ry in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Home said the City's Comprehensiv~ Plan deals with more social mssues than the County s, but staff could put?together a paragraph on affirma- tive action. Mr. Perkins suggested that a letter to all County employees from Mr. Agnor and Mr. Overstreet regarding the Affirmative Action Plan might be appropriate. Mr. Way asked staff to bring ba4~ some statement regarding affirmative action for the Board's review. 340 March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting (Page 2~ Mr. Bowie felt there should be a statement in the Comprehensive Plan on the County's position regarding businesses locating in this area. He felt a statement indicating that businesses should be willing to employ County residents as opposed to importing their own people, and that they would retrain people to move up the ladder from entry level positions, should be included. Mr. Horne said there is an Industrial Development Policy already in effect, but it was not included because there had been no background research on the policy. (Mr. Agnor arrived at 2:15 P.M.) Mrs. Cooke said she thought it was a good idea. However, there are jobs to be filled if people are willing to work. Right now there are not enough people to fill the jobs that are available. She said such a statement might be appropriate when there is a "glut" of people looking for jobs. Mr. Horne said staff did not object to putting a statement in the Compre- hensive Plan along those lines. However, he said he would like to have facts to back it up. He said staff would rather research the issue first. The consensus of the Board was to review the Industrial Development Policy to see what it includes. Mrs. Cooke said she had received a resolution from ihe Woodbrook Homeown- ers Association requesting that the road between Woodbrook and Carrsbrook not be opened. Mr. Horne said the Planning Commission's thinking was primarily in regard to eliminating the danger of school buses having tb come out onto Route 29 and cross over. The same holds true for other trafficl from this area on Route 29. He said he understands that the residents may hot want it, but from Staff's point of view, there is no good reason not to open that road. Mrs. Cooke said she wanted to go on record as havinglduly noted the objections of the residents of Woodbrook and Carrsbrook. i Mr. Bain pointed out that a statement regarding not allowing a connection to the sewer interceptor between Crozet and Charlottesville which was in the previous Comprehensive Plan is not in the proposed Plan. Mr. Home said staff would include that statement to make it perfectly clear that it is not the in~ent of the County to allow any connections to that interceptor line. Mr. Lindstrom said he had spoken with some people from the Milton area who are concerned about having any more development at Mi~ton than is there already. They are concerned that if a water line goes in~ it will encourage additional residential development. He wondered if the B6ard could take some steps to lay the foundation for preventing Milton from becoming a much larger area. Mr. Bowie said he has heard concerns about whetheriMilton will be called a village or a community. The Board then looked a~ the criteria for villages on Page 204. Mr. Bowie suggested that the thirdilcriteria which reads, "Contain a village core of mixed service and residential uses." should have the word, "may" inserted at the beginning Also thelicriteria which reads, "Contain public facilities supporting the village ~nd immediate sur- rounding County areas." should have the word, "May" inserted in the beginning. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that language at the introduction~to the section on Milton indicate that there is no intention now or in the Suture of expanding Milton out to Interstate 64. Mr. Lindstrom said there is still the question of exCending water service to the area and what size water line would be needed. Mr~i Brent said a 12 inch to 14 inch waterline would probably serve the vicinity. Mr. Lindstrom asked how many people could be served if the waterlines we~e used to the fullest capacity. Mr. Brent said he could get the figure i~asily and bring that information back to the Board. !i Mr. Lindstrom said the introduction to Milton in the i~omprehensive Plan should include an economic analysis of what is expected i~il terms of facili- ties, how much capability they would have, and the number tbf units likely to be served, as well as the potential development that woul~ be created. March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting)' (Page 3) 341 Mr. Bowie said a good part of the northeast quadrant of the proposed Milton area has been placed in an agricultural/forestal district. He asked staff if they could give him information on those boundaries for a meeting he will be having with the residents of the Milton area. Mr. Bowie went on to say the Keswick area is getting a disproportionate amount of growth along small gravel roads. Wherever there are two to five acres, he said a house goes up. He feels that designating Milton as a growth area would direct growth off the smaller roads onto the main roads, where people will be using public utilities instead of well water. He feels one of the dominant points in including Milton as a growth area is that right now, this area is growing "helter skelter", and this is one way of trying to control that growth. It is an alternative to just buying open acres. Mr. Lindstrom said he had called the Virginia Outdoors Foundation as a result of last week's discussions regarding perpetual easements. He was informed that VOF is not interested in holding any easements except those which are strictly voluntary. He said after looking at the State statute more closely, there is another way of keeping the easements out of the arena of political pressure. This comes under the Open Space Land Act which provides that these easements can be conveyed to and held by agencies of the State, cities, counties, towns, park authorities, and recreational facility authori- ties. The Board can, under state law, create both park authorities and recreational facility authorities. The easement could be conveyed as a con- dition of zoning to the authority, and the authority would make the determina- tion about release of the easement. The authority would have inherent, not delegated authority, which means the Board c~uld not just rescind their power. However, the Board would appoint the authority members. The park authority has a much more limited function under the S~ate Code than recreational facility authorities. He said his understanding is that the Board can assign to the created authority certain purposes that it will serve. For example, the Board could set up a recreational facility authority which would have the sole purpose of holding and administering op~a space easements. The statute appears to allow recreational facility autho~ities the kind of responsibili- ties the current County Parks and Recreations!Department has, so that there may be some future use for that facility. The s~atute also gives more flexibility in how the authority is set up, what their terms are, etc. than the park authority. Finally, once the recreational f~cility authority is set up it can only be dissolved through its own motion.i~ The statute does not really say how the park authority would be dissolved. Mr. Lindstrom said he had asked staff to review these possibilities. Mr. Agnor said he had not had time to st~udy this question. However, the recreational facility authority seems to len~ itself more closely to what the Board is talking about. On the other hand, that section of the Code talks about projects being assigned to the authori~, and those projects lean toward recreational facilities. Mr. Agnor said he ~lans to discuss with Mr. St. 3ohn the possibility of creating a board of trust~s whose function would be more in keeping with what the Board is talking aboi~t regarding agricultural open space. His concern is that an existing stat~! authority might be thought of as having a different connotation. Mr. Home s~,id the definitions listed under public recreation facility authorities in th~'! Code do not seem to be remotely connected with open space. Mr. Lindstrom sai~ the Open Space' Land Act specif- ically says public recreational facility autl~orities. He has no doubt they have the authority to hold the easements. He~,~ agreed there may be a negative impression given by the use of the word "authOrity". Mr. Lindstrom pointed out that there is another provision that says!~ a private organization which has been in the State for at least five years with a registered office, etc. can hold the easements. His sense is that the Board members would be less com- fortable with that assignment than one of theme others. He asked staff to look at these possibilities. Mr. Bowie said he does have a problem wi~h the term, "authority", but he feels there should be some way to hold the easements. He prefers the idea of trustees over creating an authority. He said~,iit should not be impossible for a future Board to allow withdrawal of the easements, but at the same time there needs to be some measure of control by ~he County over such land. Mr. Lindstrom said that all the creation of an authority would do is offset some of the economic pressure on the Board to develop the residue land because 342 March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 4) people who own the land will know they cannot get a quick change on the easements. Mr. Lindstrom said one other way is to create an authority, convey the easements to them, and delegate this Board's authority to them. The problem is that all it takes to revoke that delegated authority and to abolish what the Board created is one ordinance. On the other hand, an authority would have independent existence once created. That should not be a problem if its authority can be narrowly defined. Because the authority is recognized in the State Code, the easements would not come through this Board. Mr. Lindstrom said that's why the authority idea seems to be a better one. (Note: The Board recessed at 3:13 P.M. and reconvened at 3:30 P.M. Mr. Bowie was not present at that time.) Mr. Way said that as a result of the discussions last week on rural development, he wanted clarification on the matter of the maximum of twenty lots referred to in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Home said that the recommen- dation is that by-right clustering would allow that no more than twenty lots be developed, which is consistent with the rural subdivision standard proposed in the Comprehensive Plan and which is contained in the current Plan. If the owner wishes to exceed twenty lots, he would have to obtain a special use permit. There would be a relatively small number of parcels that would fall into that category. The breakpoint in acreage is about 325 acres if they cluster at two acre lot sizes. Mr. Home said this provision would limit the by-right development of large rural subdivisions which effectively become small villages in terms of the number of residences. Mr. Way said he did not have a problem with that. Mr. Way said the Board would be having a work session as requested by Mrs. Cooke on new State laws on conditional zoning. Mr..iLindstrom said Ms. Nancy O'Brien is trying to schedule a time within a month ~for someone from Northern Virginia to talk to the Thomas Jefferson Planning!: District Commission on the same subject. He had suggested to her that the Board coordinate its schedule to meet with them. Mr. Agnor asked if that wouldl be the same work session the Board had asked to have Mr. Skove come and speak about conditional zoning. Mr. Way said he did not foresee this taking place.iuntil the end of April since the Board would have to stop the Comprehensiv~Plan work sessions to work on the budget for a month. (Mr. Bowie returned at 3:40 P.M.) Mr. Lindstrom said he felt the people having special ~.~equests for the Board to consider in the Comprehensive Plan should be notified of the date the Board will be discussing those requests. Mr. Way agreed. !,~Mr. Bowie said he did not think the Board should do any rezoning changes in ~his update of the Plan. Mr. Lindstrom said he agreed except for the RA dist'~ict, due to the new clustering provisions. ~ . Mr. Lindstrom said he wants staff to think about how clustering should be administered by the County. If someone wants to cluster, Other than applying for a special use permit, how would the County assure that i the landowner does not come in at a later time to cluster another portion of his property. Mr. Horne said staff is aware of that problem and is thinking about how to accom- plish the clustering option. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Board had anything scheduled for March 29. Mr. Agnor said the budget work session for the school budget is scheduled Mr. Lindstrom said he would like to be here for that work ~ession, but would be out of town on that date. Mr. Way said he feels it is {!mportant for all'of the Board members to be present to discuss the school budget. Mr. Agnor said he would have the School Board session changed. March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 5) 343 Mr. Way said next week the Board would begin discussing Comprehensive Plan change requests from citizens. Mr. Agnor suggested that the people who are present today might have their requests discussed now. Mr. Horne said he wanted to remind the Board that in discussing these requests, the Planning Commission considered them as a part of the entire Comprehensive Plan and not on the merits of the specific requests. He said staff felt that would be the proper way for the Board to consider the requests as well. Mr. Lindstrom said his concern is how the Board should deal with requests that are tied to specific zoning changes if the Board does not deal with the requests in the abstract, which is a sort of blanket approval. Mr. Home said requests have to be looked at through the text of the Comprehensive Plan. If on any individual request where the Board would allow that request only under very specific circumstances, it might be best not to amend the Plan, but rather to accept individual amendments to the Plan along with the individual rezoning request upon formal application by the citizen. Mr. Bain said it makes more sense to do that. Mr. Horne said that normally these changes would be reviewed through individual amendment requests. For example, the Planning Commission looked at the University Real Estate Foundation's request for employment generating uses in light of what the Plan says about employment generation, not what makes sense on a particular parcel of land. Mr~ Cilimberg pointed out that five of the requests on the list have not been seen by the Planning Commission. Mr. Bowie said he did not think that mo~t of these requests should actually be Comprehensive Plan amendments. ~e said there is a process to go through for most of these requests, which is!not amending the Comprehensive Plan to suit a particular landowner's reques~ Mr. Lindstrom said he is not willing to iiiagree to adding 250 acres to a growth area for industrial use without an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. On the other hand, he said Mr. Bowie has a pQint. Some of these requests are fairly minimal, so maybe the Board should listen to each one and decide whether there should be an amendment now or d~.efer taking any action until a proposal can be seen. ~'? Mr. Cilimberg then gave a brief description of the location and the request for expansion of industrial service in the Hollymead growth area by the University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation for an additional 285 acres. He said the request started as an addition t~! the industrial service area and more recently had turned into one as a designation for office service to meet the needs of the kinds of uses planned for th~ area. Staff reviewed this request in conjunction with the request by G~at Eastern Management for a large office service designation. The Planning Commission considered the appropriateness of additions in general on the northern fringe of Hollymead. One factor they considered is whether there i~ already enough industrial land designated. He said there are over 500 acresliof developable industrial land outside of flood plains and twenty-five perceSt slopes in that area. The Planning Commission felt they wanted to see first what would happen in the areas already designated, and secondly they wanted to keep some flexibility in future years in terms of what the ultimate use might be in that area. Another consideration was that to serve the ultimate ~uild out of this area, the Camelot sewage treatment plant would have to ~e replaced by a pumping station and force main. That is not programmed to happen in the foreseeable future, and the Commission felt it was not the time t~ add to Hollymead. Also, traffic limitations on Route 29 North were considered by the Planning Commis- s ion. ~ Mr. Home emphasized that the Commmssmon~looked at this request and that of Great Eastern Management as the same issue, If one request is granted, then the Commission could see very little disl large, employment-generating uses. Mr. Lind~ do with all the people in Hollymead as a resu are there now. He felt the last thing needed ters. Mr. Lindstrom said he would like to lo~ industrial acreage instead of adding to it. inction in that they both wanted :trom said the problem is what to t of the employment centers that would be more employment cen- k seriously at reducing some Mr. Lindstrom said he would be willing t¢ Plan contingent upon review of the zoning proposal. consider the amendment of the He has stated before that 344 March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting (Page 6~ he does not have a problem expanding the area proposed for industrial, if the amount of industrial itself is not expanded, with staff verification of that fact. Also, since this is a twenty year Plan, he does not want to agree to a zoning designation that will not be needed in this next five year period. He said he is not willing to expand this area in the abstract. If a specific proposal is submitted, he is willing to look at an amendment to the Comprehen- sive Plan in tandem with a zoning request. His concern is that there be clear proof that the industrial area is not being expanded and that it is clearly controlled by County regulations to be phased in over the next twenty years. Mr. Bowie repeated his standing objection that these requests can be handled through a Comprehensive Plan amendment when the proposal for the actual use is made. Mr. Way said he does not necessarily want to send out a message that by not changing the Comprehensive Plan, he would be opposed'to the full develop- ment of this property in a more efficient way. He said he is very much caught in the dilemma described by Mr. Home earlier. He can see positive aspects to the specific request, but there is no such proposal. Mr2 Lindstrom said he feels it should be taken up as an individual request for an amendment at the same time as the zoning proposal is submitted. Mr. Bain said he concurs. The requests that have not been seen by the Planning Commission need to come through the normal process. Mr. Way said if the Board is going to proceed in that way, what is the point of discussing any of these requests. Mr. Horne said some requests might be obvious enough that the Board~could make a deci- sion now. Also, his staff told certain people to attend~he meeting today to hear the Board discuss these requests. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that the Board look at each ~,9ne on the list to see if there is a consensus as to things that can be considered now. If the people concerned with the item are present, let them kno~ If they are not, let them know the date it will be discussed. If there a~ other requests that the Board does not wish to take up without a specific proposal, let that be known. The consensus of the Board regarding Neighborhood Tl~ee - North Pantops Residential and South Pantops Commercial Designations from Mr. T. Eugene Worrell was to consider that request for a Comprehensive ~lan amendment next week. For the request from United Land Corporation for exPansion of Neighbor- hood Four, it was felt that a specific proposal is necessary before consider- ing an amendment to the Plan. The request from Great Eastern Management regarding ~oute 250 West Commercial Designation near Crozet seemed like a specific~zoning request. Mr. Perkins said in his opinion it should go to the Planning ~ommission for their review. The consensus was to deal with this one when a s~eclf~c proposal comes through. The next request was expansion along Route 240 northi~of the CSX railroad line in Crozet. Staff said their recommendation regardin~ this request is to consider this request when the exact location and construction design of the Lickinghole Creek Basin is determined. Mr. Home said th~ Basin is being designed now. Mr. Lindstrom said if the dam could be loc~ited so as to allow this request without a great deal of public expense, it w~ld be a reasonable request. Mr. Home said that was the opinion of the staf~ as well. The next two requests were related to expansion of t~ Hollymead commun- ity by the University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation ~d Great Eastern Management. The Board agreed these two should not be heam~ until there are specific zoning applications filed. The request from United Land Corporation involves a ~sidential designa- tion on the west side of Route 29 North near Hollymead. T~e Board agreed they would like to see the proposal before considering any amen~lment to the Plan. The request from F. Ronald Cutright to expand the com~'ercial area at Cross Roads was thought to be a specific proposal to be considered at the time a zoning request is received. March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 7) 345 For the request for commercial designation on Route 29 South at North Garden from Albemarle Charolais Farms, the Board agreed that a specific proposal should be submitted. The last request was for commercial designation for a portion of the Edge Hill Farm which is northwest of the Milton growth area. The area is north of the intersection of Route 22 and Route 250. Mr. Bowie said someday it might be appropriate to change the Comprehensive Plan for this request, but in his opinion, at this time, it is not necessary. He felt this request could be considered with a zoning proposal. Mr. Horne said one distinction about this request is that Milton is a new growth area. He said it might be logical to think about whether this would be a suitable area to provide commercial services to the Milton growth area, otherwise it is a simple rezoning request. Mr. Lindstrom said the problem is that something that starts out serving a village but is on a major road, turns out to be a regional service area. People at Milton are worried about this very thing. He said he does not want to invite people to spend the money to put a proposal together giving them the impression they can persuade the Board to agree to the change. Mr. Lindstrom said he will not be persuaded to allow strip development on Route 250. He said he does not need to see a proposal about this request, because he cannot see himself changing his mind about the Comprehensive Plan in the next year. Mr. Horne said he thinks the Milton reqdest is one the Board should decide on now since Milton is being designed !as a new growth area. Mr. Lindstrom said the Planning Commission heard ~this proposal and said no. He does not feel this designation is needed to serve that village. Mr. Home said staff's recommendation is that the Board make the decision on the request for commercial designation for a portion of Edge Hill Farm near Milton now. The Board then agreed to consider this requeS~ for an amendment to the Compre- hensive Plan today. :~ Mr. Cilimberg described, the request. He said it was before the Planning Commission and was nqt considered because Mi~ton was not included in the Comprehensive Plan at that time. Staff's pr~posal regarding Milton was that no specific area wit.~in Milton be designated ~as village service. In fact, the recommendation was tgat anything in Milton b~i small scale and be located internally within the Milton vicinity. Staf~.i's feeling is that the request is larger than necessary to serve the village aq~ is in a location that does not fit the Milton village area. It would be a s!~ep toward seeing the entire strip pressed for commercial development. Sfii~ff would rather see commercial within the defined boundaries of Milton. Mr. Bowie said he did not feel regional designation is suitable, but something more will be needed if the area grows, and the area requested may be the~best place for it. He feels it would be a mistake to have the commercial development before the people are there. Mr. Bain said he concurred with Mr. B~wie. Mr. Way asked if the applicant's representative would like to address the Board at this time. Mr. Michael Miller, landscape architect for the owner of Edge Hill, said there are 47 acres cut off by 1-64, bounded by Luck Stone, S. L. Williamson, the Highway Department, Route 250 and Route 2Z, across the road from the Shadwell Store where there is a very bad traffic problem. The owner's plan is to work within the Comprehensive Plan in orde~ to make this land suitable to its most appropriate use. He said they reali~e that any planning is for the future. They are asking that their request far commercial designation be considered if Milton is designated as a growt~ area. If the Board feels their request is inappropriate for this time, that ls fine. They want to go on record as wanting to cooperate in planning fo~ the future. The owner will then decide whether he wants to submit a proposal or not. For the Board's information, Mr. Miller said the owner has already turned down a considerable offer from a very large developer. What Edge'S!Hill Farm would propose would not be a strip development, but if the Board does not want to consider it as a Comprehensive Plan item, he said that is fine~i Mr. Bowie said he feels this is not the time to say that area should be commercial, but if future growth occurs, that may well be the best location. ~he consensus of the Board was not to include this request for commercial designation in the Comprehensive Plan. 346 March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting (Page 8) Mr. Way said next Wednesday the Board would discuss the request from Mr. Worrell. Mr. Horne said his staff would contact all of the individuals as a matter of courtesy. Mr. Home said it is his understanding that, outside of Mr. Worrell's request, the Board is not making any statement either favorably or negatively. Also, he understands that the Board feels that these requests are specific enough that there should be a plan of development if the reques- tor wants to proceed. Mr. Lindstrom said there is one request that he takes exception to giving that message. He feels it would be a mistake to tell Mr. Wendell Wood to bring a specific proposal for including fifty acres as light industrial with the balance of the land designated medium density residential along Route 20 South for the Board's review. A lot of money would be spent on preparing the proposal, and Mr. Wood probably would not ~ake it lightly should the Board deny his request. Mr. Lindstrom said there is nothing Mr. Wood could show him that would make sense unless the whole eastern side of Route 20 is reconsidered, which Mr. Lindstrom thinks would be a mistake. There is rough topography there, close proximity to an historic site, and no other boundaries that make sense. He said he would rather make the decision on this request today, rather than encourage the applicant to spend money trying to persuade the Board of something that is, by definition, bad planning. Mr. Agnor said Mr. Wood could be contacted and told .~the request would be discussed next Wednesday so he could be present for the discussion. Mr. Lindstrom said he would rather do that than have him bring in a specific proposal. Mr. Lindstrom suggested Mr. Wood be told that ~the consensus of the Board is not to make a change in the designation affecti~'g the requested parcel of land. Mr. Lindstrom felt the question is whet~{~r the Board's recommendation to the public should include a "special de~l'' for Mr. Wood, who, along with everybody else in the County, could come i~to the public hearing and say what he wanted. The Board could change the designation later, if it decided to do that. Mr. Home said in terms of Mr. Wood'~ request, the Board would be making a definite decision not to include this a~'ea in the growth area. Whereas, on Mr. Wood's request regarding a mobile ~ome park, the Board would be asking to see more information. Mr. Way said he!i!is not saying that. This is another situation where there is a dilemma betwee~ the specific proposal and generalities. Mr. Home said the distinctio~ he sees is that the Route 20 request could be looked at as a general policy d~cision, while some of the other requests would be a matter of deferring judg~nt until more information is received. The Board is not saying "no" to?i~Great Eastern and the University Real Estate Foundation and the others. The~! Board is saying it is willing to consider these requests whenever they are f~iled rather than waiting for the normal filing dates. Mr. Lindstrom said fihe other requests are for properties currently in growth areas. As a planning matter, this request is setting a precedent for all the land on that side of Route 20. He said that bothers him because it is almost like spot zoning. Mr. Bain said if the Board wants to look at Mr. Wood's property, then he isiwilling to rethink the whole east side of Route 20, regarding slopes, naturaii boundaries, etc. Mr. Lindstrom said he does not have an objection to reconSlkdering the whole question of the boundary to this growth area. He does feg~! uncomfortable considering Comprehensive Plan proposals property by property. Mr. Way said he agrees that it is a zoning matter. He does not really ~hink there would be anything new to discuss regarding expanding to the east s~e of Route 20. At the time the Board considered this area, there did not se~ to be any need for additional expansion of the boundaries, but he felt that i~ the future that area could be considered for expansion. Mr. Way said bas~ on that he does not see any real reason to discuss that 'side of the road a~ain. The consensus of the Board was that the request from Mr. Wood regarding ~oute 20 would not c be onsidered as a change to the Comprehensive Plan at th~!~ time. Mr. Way mentioned to Mr. Agnor that prior to his arrival there was some discussion regarding difficulty in the public's being able~tto hear the Board's discussions. He asked staff to look again into the possibility of getting a better sound system. He said the Board members would be w~lling to wear a clip-on microphone, if necessary. Mr. Lindstrom said the ~'ame system used in the media room should be obtained, since they do not have a problem hearing in there. Mr. Agnor said there is an old proposal in the fil~s which he will review again. March 15, 1989 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 9) 347 Agenda Item No. 3. Pay and Classification Plan Revision - Zoning Admin- istrator. The Board took no action due to the lateness of the hour. Agenda Item No. 4. Adjourn. At 4:25 P~M., motion was offered by Mr. Bowie and seconded by Mr. Bain to adjourn into executive session for 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. The Board reconvened into open session at 5:30 P.M. and immediately adjourned.