Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-10-19 adjOctober 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 1) 635 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 19, 1988, at 3:30 P. M., Meeting Rooms #5/6, County Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was adjourned from October 12, 1988. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr., Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke (arrived at 3:40 P.M.), Messrs. C. Timothy Lindstrom, Walter F. Perkins and Peter T. Way. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. F. R. Bowie. OFFICER PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 3:35 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way. Agenda Item No. 2. Meet with Highway Department Officials concerning Millington Bridge. Mr. Gerald E. Fisher, Secondary Roads Engineer for VDoT, said the Mill- ington Bridge over the Moormans River (Route 671) was built over 60 years ago and is posted at seven tons. Mr. Fisher said the standards of VDoT call for a minimum posted weight of ten tons for any bridge used by a school bus. School buses do use the Millington Bridge. Mr. Fisher said the Millington Bridge has been in the County's Six Year Plan for ten years and the funds are now avail- able to move ahead with this project. He said the VDoT's structure and bridge engineers periodically inspect all bridges in the State. The last such inspection of the Millington Bridge was conducted in November, 1987, and the engineers concluded that this bridge had a sqfficiency rating of "16" To give members of the Board an idea of just ho~ low this rating is, Mr. Fisher said, federal funds to repair a bridge becom~ available when a bridge is rated "80", and federal funds to replace a bridge 5ecome available when a bridge falls below "50". ~ Mr. Fisher showed members of the Board a videotape of the bridge, its approaches and the effects of a truck traveling across the bridge. After showing a portion of the videotape, Mr. Fisher asked if any member of the Board believed that the Millington Bridge needed no improvement. Mr. Way said it is clear to him that something must be done about the bridge. Mr. Fisher introduced Mr. Fred Sutherland, the structure and bridge engi- neer for VDoT, and said he could answer any questions about the current bridge. There were no questions at this time-. Mr. Fisher moved on to the second part ~f his presentation. He said VDoT had prepared a preliminary plan for a new bridge and approaches that was designed for speed limits of 50 miles per hour. He said the Board and con- cerned citizens complained about this design, saying the new bridge was over-designed and would be intrusive. Mr. Fisher said Mr. Cochran, the head of the location and design division of VDoT, has considered some alternative designs based on a speed limit of 30 miles pep hour. Lowering the speed limit means that the pavement will be narrower, thei~curves tighter, the sight distance shorter and the grade steeper. Mr. Fisher said Mr. Cochran can tell the Board more about the location of the new Bridge and some of the possible approaches; Mr. Sutherland can describe some~'f the options for the bridge itself, designs that might be more in keepingiwith a scenic river. Mr. Cochran described six possible appro$ches and showed them on a map. He described Alternative 3 in detail, saying ~t consisted of a 20-foot pave- ment with a six-foot shoulder and is designed~for 30 miles per hour. There will be about 1900 feet of total project lane~ifor Alternative 3. Mr. Cochran said all the possible approaches, except Alternative 1, are designed for a speed limit of 30 miles per hour. He said VDoT estimates that 506 vehicles per day use this road and expects this number to increase to 600 within the year. Mr. Sutherland presented several possibilities for the design of the bridg~ itself. He said the rails could be aluminum or timber and showed a picture of a bridge VDoT built in Rappahannock County with a timber parapet. He said the 636 October 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 2) concrete portions of the bridge could be textured and tinted and showed pictures of the following concrete treatments: wire-faced brick, Manhattan brick; mason-cut stone, slumped block and exposed aggregate. Since Moormans River is a scenic river and often used by canoeists, Mr. Sutherland said, the piers for the bridge could be kept out of the river. Mr. Lindstrom said the piers on the current Millington Bridge are barely in the river. He asked if the new bridge would have the same pattern of piers or if there may be a need for a central pier. Mr. Sutherland said he is not sure, but the new bridge would probably have three spans, and would need two piers and two abutments. He does not think the new bridge will have a central pier. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the existing Millington Bridge could be repaired, or replaced without changing the approaches. Mr. Sutherland said VDoT did such repairs and replacements, if it is clear that the road will not have to be improved at some point in the future. According to the planning policy of the Board, Mr. Lindstrom said, Route 671 will never serve anything other than a rural area. He said there are agricultural/forestal districts on both sides of this road. Besides being a State scenic river,~Moormans River is also a County scenic river, a designation that restrictsdevelopment along the river. He said the bridge may need to be repaired, but he wants to know if it's necessary to change the approaches to the bridge. Mr. Fisher said he does not think it is possible toi~repair the bridge without changing the approaches. He said the approacheslare part of the bridge, and affect the safety of the bridge. Mr. Lindstrom said he is satisfied that the bridge needs to be replaced, but he has not seen the accident data or traffic data necessary to convince him that the approaches are dangerous, as well. He said those curves force people to drive slowly; straightening them will eliminate~this safety factor. If the approaches must be changed, he said, he favors the~iroute shown in green on the map. He said he also likes the idea of using exp0Aed aggregate for the bridge, if the aggregate could be river gravel. Mr. Forbes Reback addressed the Board and said there~may be a problem acquiring the right-of-way to change the approaches, because several property owners in the area have donated easements on land along the Moormans River to the Virginia Outdoors Foundation. ~ An unidentified official of YDoT said the Virginia Outdoors Foundation will not accept an easement which would prevent VDoT from~acquiring the right-of-way necessary to improve the bridge. Mr. Reback said the ¥irgina Outdoors Foundation has accepted and recorded three of these easements. He pointed to the location of these easements on the map. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Fisher when he needed the Board's decision on this bridge. Mr. Fisher said within a month. Mr. Way suggested that this item be put on the agenda for the day meeting in November. He thanked Mr. Fisher and the rest of the representatives of YDoT for th~ presentation. (Note: Mr. Lindstrom left the meeting at 4:35 P.M.) Agenda Item No. 3. Discussion of Recreation Use forinew Southside Elementary School. For some time now, Mr. Way said, it has been thought that members of the Parks and Recreation Department should be involved in planning the recrea- tional facilities for new schools. He said Mr. Mullaney ~as been attending planning meetings for the southside school and asked Mr. ~ullaney to provide a status report for the Board. ~ Mr. Mullaney said there is a great need for public r~creational facili- ties in the urban area. He said the Parks and Recreation iDepartment particu- larly has a problem finding space for indoor sports in th~ urban area during the period of November through March. He said the Department uses gyms at three schools, Albemarle High School, and Jack Jouett and lBurley Middle Schools, and the Auditorium of the County Office Building.~ He said it is October 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 3) 637 difficult for the Department to run regular athletic programs in schools, because of the schools' athletic programs and other groups need to use the County Office Building. Mr. Mullaney said there is a strong volleyball league in the City, with 150 teams. Half of these players are County residents, but the County has no space to provide for the program, so the County residents have to pay a non-resident fee to the City in order to play. As the urban area grows, the demand for programs is going to increase. He thinks it would make sense to have a large gym in the southside school to serve the residents as well as the students. Gyms in elementary schools are usually 5000 square feet, with a tile floor. He said the architects for the southside elementary school are investigating the utility of a full-size gym, 8900 square feet. He said such a gym would add $218,000 to the estimate for the school. He said a gym the size of the one at Jack Jouett Middle School!could probably serve the needs of residents and would add about $120,000. Mr. Bain asked how other localities handle the growing demand for recrea- tional facilities. In Henrico and Fairfax Counties, Mr. Mullaney said, school gyms also serve as community centers, with offices built in the school for a director of the community center. Mr. Perkins said he supported the idea Of using school gyms for community recreation. Mr. Bain asked if it is possible for th~ recreation programs to contrib- ute to the maintenance costs of the school, and perhaps the utility costs. Mr. Mullaney said it depends on the program.' He said fees charged for the basketball program cover nothing more than the direct costs, such as the costs of hiring referees and gym supervisors. Other programs, such as dancing and aerobics may generate enough revenue to offset some of the utility costs. Mr. Bain said he thinks Mr. Mullaney an~ the Schools staff should seri- ously consider the possibility of building alifull-size gym, the one estimated to cost $218,000, in the southside elementar~ school. Perhaps the full-size gym will best serve the long-term needs of th~ southern part of the County. Mr. Way said he thinks the playing fiel~ should be considered, too. If the site for the school is being graded, he Said, it would be sensible to go ahead and have areas graded for the use of the community. He said it is much less expensive for the County to plan its redlreational needs around the schools, than to have to build civic centers.~ Mr. Perkins noted that a hardwood gym floor is less expensive in the long run than tile or carpet. Mr. Way said the architects are beginning to put their plans on paper, and they need to know whether the Board wishes to consider a full-size gym. o$ , He said they can do two sets of plans, one wl~h a full-size gym and one without. He said he has asked the architectsi to attend the day meeting in November and show the Board their preliminary! plans for the southside elemen- tary school. Mr. Perkins suggested that funds for thei difference between an elementary school-sized gym and a full-size gym come from the Parks and Recreation Department budget. Mr. Mullaney said he hopes this can be the case. After some discussion, members of the Board decided to discuss this item with the School Board at the joint meeting on October 24, 1988, before taking formal action. 638 October 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting) (Page 4) Agenda Item No. 4. Executive Session: Land Acquisition. At 5:04 P.M., motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke and seconded by Mr. Perkins to adjourn into executive session to discuss land acquisition and legal matters. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bain, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Bowie and Mr. Lindstrom. The Board reconvened into open session at 7:29 P.M. Agenda Item No. 5. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was irmnediately adjourned.