Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutACSA201100102 Other 1997-05-01 */6q- vbt-Ze e-g.zetY 2 --rj /Lb -r) I-Lb .A(12e4_c ,-iZetE . ,„ 4475-: rart4 e,y) 62-71-0 jA6-1/4 /Liezc// /-l0 A'(66- J ADC ,�rne„Q' d-c�ua.ef 10e164-74Y;r4 ,>&W& OrEZZ adA7' d /416 1;111/4 rp,14a4Z3( ei0D- 4?.. -4. AgC4/ ),) Se- ALA e17(-e ze& 1/4 At-40A-7i AU_h 4;fry-, .Aid--4-an A- t ", 4,1-761 grui-" " /4 16-e& 97/Ye-ve d-2) e�c It, t ca,d- ---/a4 ,d ,60/ 0 H6 /V",r.&- CP,s #1,6&e ,N (Idedi-/ 46-zAA-( ILaL /-v-be&oza�-&„ — 3 ar , I ( i �e�eaf)� ag- ;br�p / U 3, 6)1,6T-4- a J- 4,, ;',/4,r)t,u0e. tiaz ntit 6a6de-/ZZ /ii&o - oaf D. a/9,64 41/1,67// aitta b. 573(QA9 ,b4 d - ij a ern-niti-X Xr&ze4 l� 2�euiG� G��'-��-uaZct�Zxt-b. i,t �Bz� :411-1-6/AL- , �;''�1»- �c-k/ Cdti,/Adzefzena, ,,t/4,(4 =ty0)-44fregb 7A-0-1 e0Ag-a ,gig 02) 4-44 cletlax-d=r/ta& ZeLea Or? A(26e44(9-i&a, ,e//ezi6 ____Lr4() 12)/ -/et-a# . rn 60 Oda �6 4a,c . � � ,u� �ia�� n.dde_o( , 2o,v-ems Q- (02. ae,eig-a- <34 ,ae-x.ta, eivet.6 otteia.-v) Aq--a.e-ectd /) -gm Le) RaiceP aIt — 2--44 oaf. a.,dt-6eJ Tad-Cy k.at. ,,,e-5/e,o_e.e.teA;yez-rpt,n4--aA_ef 71-62_4/kd ; vow . -Ggy kv\ elwC Sa-e4 14-6- 7.414 -747Th e-?? �ruC� 7A11/1 �fvv'�D' QscGCJ. /Ge C/t ,evc1��/�iL/�zti�.�c. �Q� .�-n� a7, USCG:J %/lc- /e0 -e'n) 9119 j,,;pLe 10 0 ' i)Gt/ Gk-Ce-K Ce- l0a zz.d-e7- c.�- (4 1 6,66)()" ,6(4a) `Zai6 6- 6-it4,5 /dee ' ado Z?/ hZt- cv. 61,4-/vli-mod ,u0/ 276 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby authorize the County Executive of Albemarle County to sign on behalf of the County of Albemarle, any necessary certifications and assur- ances relating to the application as may be required by the Commonwealth of Virginia, subject to the approval of the County Attorney. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Way and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Bowie and Mr. Fisher. Agenda Item No. 15. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Tucker advised the Board that Mr. Keith Mabe who was Chief of Community Development has taken a position in another city, and Ms. Imhoff has been appointed to take the position of Chief of Community Development. Mr. Tucker then introduced to the Board members Mr. James n. Donnelly, the recently-hired director of Planning and Community Development. Mr. Donnelly was most recently employed in Huntsville, Alabama, as a planning consultant. Prior to that he was a planning director for a regional planning commission for ten years in Northern Alabama. Prior to that he worked for the Rappahanock Planning District in Fredericksburg, Virginia. Mr. Donnelly has worked in North Carolina, New Britain, Connecticut and Norman, Oklahoma. He has an undergraduate degree in landscape architecture, and a graduate degree in urban and regional planning. Mr. Donnelly said he is glad to be back in Virginia and looks forward to working with the Board. Mr. Ken Erkenbrack came forward to speak. He said he has recently purchased Lot 2 in iH Terrell Subdivision located off of Georgetown Road. When the subdivision was approved, one C�1U of the conditions imposed was that there should be individual septic tanks. Lot 2 abuts the new public sewer line on Old Forge Road. Mr. Erkenbrack said he would like to hook into that sewer line instead of building a septic system. He noted that the sewer line abuts four or five properties in this subdivision of about 29 lots. He feels it would be beneficial to hook to the sewer line, since it would be one less subdivision contributing pollution to the watershed. Mr. Agnor noted that Mr. Erkenbrack is making this request because his property lies outside of the service boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Tucker about this request. Mr. Tucker said he had heard that Mr. Erkenbrack might appear this morning so he had looked at the map which shows that the property is outside of the project areas of the Albemarle County Service Authority and would require the Board to hold a public hearing to include a parcel in those service areas. It would take a resolution of intent to amend in order to begin the process. Mr. St. John asked if the Comprehensive Plan was detailed enough in this area to also require an amendment. Mr. Tucker said he did not believe it is. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Board should not also consider other lots in the same area which are in a similar position. Mr. Tucker said the Board might also consider the lots that drain toward the Old Forge sewer line. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that the Board might receive a staff report on the area in question before adopting a resolution. Mr. Tucker suggested the Board just include the lot being requested by Mr. Erkenbrack at this time. Mr. Lindstrom said the Board should look at all of the lots this may set a precedent for - lots which are contiguous to the existing sewer line. Mrs. Cooke said she would prefer obtaining a staff report on the request prior to making any kind of decision. Mr. St. John suggested the Board might receive the staff report simultaneously with the application. Mrs. Cooke agreed with the suggestion. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Way, to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend the project areas map of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include Parcel 70-A, Tax Map 60, Lot 2, consisting of 2.199 acres in Terrell Subdivision in the Service Authority's sewer utility system. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall be advertised for public hearing on August 8, 1984, at 10:00 A.M. The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Bowie and Mr. Fisher. Mr. Agnor noted that he had a renewal of the lease which the County has held for a number of years on land in Crozet for C&O Railroad property which is used by businesses across the railroad tracks from the Library for a parking lot. These businesses pay an annual fee of $150.00 and the property is then leased by the County from the Railroad for those persons to use as a parking lot. That lease needs to be renewed. Motion was then offered by Mr. Henley to authorize the staff to review the lease and sign same on behalf of the County. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Bowie and Mr. Fisher. ,1 820 , August 8, 1984 (Regular Day);Meeting) - Not Docketed. At 9:50 A.M., Mr. Lindstrom requested an executive session since the next scheduled public hearing was not scheduled until 10:00 A.M. The executive session is requested in order that court actions on August 7, 1984 concerning the Garlick Tract litigation can be reported by the County Attorney. He then offered motion to adjourn into executive session to discuss legal matters as referenced above. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. The Board reconvened into open session at 10:02 A.M. Agenda Item No. 9. Public Hearing: Amend Project Areas Map of Albemarle County Service Authority to include Parcel 70-A, Tax Map 60, Lot 2, consisting of 2.199 acres in Terrell Subdivision in the Service Authority sewer utility system. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 24 and July 31, 1984.) The Board at its meeting on July 11, 1984 adopted a resolution of intent to consider the verbal request of Mr. Ken Erkenbrack to amend the project areas map of the Service Authority to include his parcel of land (Parcel 70-A, Tax Map 60, Lot 2), consisting of 2.199 acres into the sewer utility system of the Albemarle County Service Authority. The Board also requested that a staff report indicating the implications of a decision to approve this request and the implications to include the five contiguous lots be presented at this public hearing. Mr. James Donnelly, Director of Planning and Community Development, was present and gave the following staff report. He noted that after investigation the staff determined that only four lots, specifically lots 3, 4, 5 and 7 are contiguous to the existing sewer line. He then presented the following staff report: "Zoning and Current Utility Service: Mr. ErkenBrack's lot is presently zoned RA (Rural Areas) as are lots 3, 4, 5 and 7 with lot size varying from 2.008 acres to 3.414 acres. All lots are presently located within the 'water only' service area of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Comprehensive Plan: Mr. ErkenBrack's lot and the others being considered are located outside of the urban growth area as a result of their location in the South Fork Rivanna River Watershed. It has been the Board of Supervisors policy in the past to limit utility service to those areas located outside of the County's designated growth areas and/or those areas located within the watershed of a drinking water impoundment. This policy is an effective device for discouraging intensive development in those areas not designated for future growth and development, as well as those areas of drinking water impoundments which are most sensitive to development impact. Mr. ErkenBrack's lot as well as lots 3, 4, 5, and 7 fall within the designated area for limiting utility service. Implications: The restriction of water and/or sewer service to an area would have limiting effects on the area's development potential, particularly if the area was undeveloped and rural in character. The fact that the area in question is already platted, in the process of being developed and is presently contiguous to existing sewer service would negate the policy of limiting utility service (and as a result intensive development) for the purpose of protecting drinking water impoundments and their watersheds. Future implications of approval include: - the setting of a precedent for future approvals of similarly situated parcels of land; - the impact of allowing development served with public water and sewer service and the effect this development will have in the environmentally sensitive watershed impoundment areas. Recommendations: It is recommended that the request be approved with the following conditions: 1. Allow sewer service to lots contiguous to the existing sewer line; 2. It is further recommended the Board adopt a written policy of Service Authority jurisdictional amendments governing: water only, water and sewer, -_ and water only to an existing structure." Mr. Fisher said the word "to" in the staff report regarding the Board's past policy to limit utility service to those areas. . . concerns him because the word "to" means the service cannot be provided anywhere else. Mr. Donnelly said the word "to" should be "in". Mr. Fisher said that clarified his concern. 321 August 8, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) The public hearing was opened. Mr. Ken ErkenBrack, applicant, was present and said his lot and the other three, lots 3, 4 and 5 lie along Old Forge Road. Recently a sewer line was constructed along Old Forge Road. Mr. ErkenBrack said his intention is to build on lot 2 and he would prefer to connect to the Authority's public sewer line. Further, since this area lies in the watershed, being allowed to hook to the sewer line would eliminate individual septic systems for the four lots and further reduce the impact on ' the reservoir. With no one else present to speak for or against the request, the public hearing was Lclosed.Wi Mr. Lindstrom stated concern about the staff recommendation because the Board has istruggled for a long time to maintain the integrity of the entire watershed area. He is ( concerned about the number of lots beyond this particular area that could possibly be connected to other existing sewer lines, using the same argument. Therefore, Mr. Lindstrom did not support the staff recommendation for approval because same would be a departure from the Board's well established policy to discourage any intrastructure improvements in the watershed area that could provide higher densities either now or in the future. Mr. L Lindstrom then offered motion to deny the request to amend the project areas map of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include Parcel 70-A, Tax Map 60, Lot 2, into the Authority's sewer utility system due to the location of said parcel being within the South Fork Rivanna River Watershed. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion. Mr. Bowie said he did not understand condition #2 in the staff report because he thought a written policy existed. Mr. Donnelly said he could not find a written policy and did feel one is needed. Mr. Tucker said the idea is basically outlined in the Comprehensi Plan but there is no specific policy set out. The Comprehensive Plan states that development and growth will be controlled outside of a designated growth area and the Board adopted the project area boundaries of the water and sewer intrastructure. Access to a public water line for existing structures is allowed only when located near a designated growth area. Mr. Tucker said with those items and if the Board so construes that to be policy, then there is a policy. Roll was then called on the motion to deny the request and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. Mr. Agnor asked if the Board desired the staff to draft a policy as recommended by Mr. Donnelly. Mr. Fisher felt a policy does exist with the project areas map and revisions to same. Mr. St. John said anything called a policy should either be in the Comprehensive Plan or in ordinance form. Mr. Fisher asked if the project areas map is part of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tucker said yes, in terms of showing water and sewer, but contains no specifics. Mr. Fisher recommended the staff and County Attorney discuss this further and if a decision is made that the map is not providing enough guidance in making recommendati•1s, then advise the Board�I of what to do in regards to this concern. *See., rnUro , comet-"A c54 Prpr�l to, I'M Mr. Henley said he understands the Board's action, but is concerned that the public will not. He elt the motion promotes the idea that the Board will not approve a sewer line extensi n anywhere and a sewer interceptor is being extended to Crozet. Mr. Lindstrom did not hav any problem with a written policy and noted that the Crozet situation is different. He then related the report done several years ago about small impoundments. The conclusion of the report was that many of the small impoundments would be difficult to maintain, as well as stating uncertainty about the performance of the impoundments. Therefore, a decision was made that same would not be feasible. Mr. Lindstrom said generally the policy has been to not extend sewer lines anywhere that would stimulate growth in the watershed. No further comments or suggestions were offered at this time. Agenda Item No. 10. Discussion: Piedmont Environment Council's proposal for historic preservation. Mr. Robert Dennis, President of the Piedmont Environmental Council, was present to discuss the Council's proposal for historic preservation. Even though specific details are not available at this time, Mr. Dennis said the Board's response on the proposal will help the Council develop the proposal into final details. The proposal has to be in final form within the next two weeks in order that same can be submitted to the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission within the necessary time frame to be eligible for consideration of a Federal grant that is available through the Commission for a planning project in the general area of historic preservation. Mr. Dennis said the intent of the Council is to work in two areas of the Council's service region; specifically, Loudoun/Fauquier County and Albemarle County. The bulk of the work will be done by consultants who will be selected by the Council under the terms of the Virginia Procurement Law. Mr. Dennis said for more than a decade the Council has been promoting historic protection, farm land preservation and rural conservation throughout nine counties in the northern Virginia Piedmont. He further noted that approximately thirteen percent of all the private land in the nine counties is dedicated in one way or another to rural protection which is mostly agricultural and forestal district protection. The Council works with county governments on local planning for and implementation of concepts and programs such as agricultural and forestal districts, and most recently on transfer of development rights. A continuing interest has been historic preservation, but the interest of the Council tends to embrace the historic aspects of 7Rndsca.pe and region rather than individual sites. The Council is also interested in the preservation of historic settings as well as historic places or structures. Last month the Council formally proposed to county governments in the service area to cooperatively work to create a regional rural conservation unit known as the Virginia Piedmont Reserve. The Council feels this may eventually embrace one million acres in the nine counties. The intent of the proposal is to enhance 405 September 12, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Henley said he was not present at the public hearing so did not understand the difference between the requested amounts for the southern swimming facility, and the Hardware Rapids Park. He asked if these are two different facilities. Mr. Fisher said that is correct. Mr. Henley asked if it had been decided to put a swimming pool at a school. Mr. Way said that is still undetermined. Mrs. Cooke asked about the $20,000 appropriation. Mr. Lindstrom said it is for a study of possible sites for a full-facility park. Mr. Fisher said Hardware Rapids is to be only a very small area to protect that area from development. Mr. Way asked if the study is completed in a short period, and there is only this small amount of money in the budget, if there would be any possibility of proceeding in this L fiscal year. Mr. Jones said the staff looked at this in light of how much funding would be needed from the General Fund in order to fund these requests. When the Director of Finance took into account all monies it was found that there is nearly $3,000,000 which could be transferred from the General Fund to the CIP Fund for these expenditures, however, if no expenditures are anticipated at this time, he would rather leave the money in the General Fund in order to increase the earnings on investments. Mr. Henley asked who will determine how to spend the $20,000 shown. Mr. Jones said that five staff members will select a number of sites and then a consultant will review those sites to develop cost estimates, etc. Mr. Henley said he feels someone on the staff should be able to select a site for this purpose without using a consultant. Mr. Tucker said that once a number of sites are selected, the consultant will study individually each site and make a recommendation as to what type of facilities can be placed on a particular site, and the cost of such facilities. Mr. Henley said he still feels that the staff can narrow the selection down to one site, and then a consultant recommend how the site can be used. Mr. Bowie questioned the amount of the appropriation. Mr. Tucker said these planning funds are included at this time because the Board had asked the staff to make a recommendation on a facility. If the Board would prefer to make the entire appropriation after the actual site is selected, that will be no problem. Mr. Bowie said he had no problem as long as no funds are spent until it is known what will actually be needed. At this point, Mr. Bowie offered motion to adopt the following resolution making appropri- ations as recommended by the staff. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Cooke and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $1,965,158 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the Capital Improvement Fund and coded to the following projects: 1-9000-00200-970200 School Refurbishment - Phase I $ 86,366 1-9000-01800-300404 Re-Roofing - Maintenance Shop 27,000 1-9000-05803-975803 Fire Service Training Center 25,000 1-9000-06000-400300 Phone System - Court Square 75,000 1-9000-06000-700200 Furniture & Equipment - Court Square 16,700 1-9000-12200-700100 Data Processing 4,600 1-9000-21050-701002 Juvenile and Domestic Court 6,500 1-9000-21060-700101 Circuit Court Equipment 84,000 1-9000-31010-700100 Radios and Tachometers - Police Dept. 190,400 1-9000-31040-700300 Joint Dispatch Center 58,800 1-9000-32010-700503 County Fire Engine 162,000 1-9000-32010-701006 Dry Hydrants 48,000 1-9000-33020-701007 Sprinkler System - Joint Security 24,938 1-9000-41020-703000 Hydraulic Road Improvements 97,253 1-9000-43000-700102 Microfilm Center 35,000 1-9000-43000-701003 Auditorium Renovation COB 102,140 1-9000-43000-701004 Gas Pump Canopy COB 5,500 1-9000-43000-701005 Re-roofing - Jailor's House 6,000 1-9000-43000-701008 Security System COB 12,225 1-9000-60100-300219 School Comprehensive Plan 35,000 1-9000-60622-300404 Re-roofing and Masonry - Brownsville 155,000 1-9000-60750-700100 Emergency Generator - WAHS 86,000 1-9000-71000-702002 Whitewood Road - Phase I 34,000 1-9000-71000-702003 Jouett Tennis Court 31,000 1-9000-71000-702004 Hollymead Little League - Fencing 6,000 1-9000-71000-702005 Stony Point Recreational Improvements 4,000 1-9000-71000-702006 Albemarle Tennis Courts - Resurfacing 10,000 1-9000-71000-702007 Hardware Rapids Park 31,000 1-9000-71001-999999 Southern Swimming Facility 20,000 1-9000-81010-700103 Equipment - Information Review System 13,800 1-9000-81010-300220 Aerial Topo Mapping 45,000 1-9100-41030-999999 Storm Sewers and Detention Basins 429,936 TOTAL $1,968,158 Agenda Item No. 11. Request to Connect to Albemarle County Service Authority Sewer System: Erkenbrack, Kerewich, Brugh. Mr. Bob Brugh was present and read the following statement: "I am present for the prupose of requesting permission to hook up to the sewer line in the Terrell Subdivision which now goes across additional lots and is located on three lots in this subdivision. I realize that this request for hook-up on Lot 2 has been before you prior to now, but all of us believe that there must be something that we have not conveyed as we do not understand how this request, or permission, could be denied when the following is taken into consideration: Once again, and let me point out to each of you, that the sewer , 4O6 , 1i September 12, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) line that we refer to is located on these lots of this project. I would also like to remind you that I live on Old Forge Road. In fact, my lot adjoins Lot 5 in the Terrell Subdivision. On Old Forge Road you have granted permission to hook up to this sewer line. We have been continously told, or led to believe, that all of this has been done for the purpose of protecting the reservoirs, so that the systems that are now failing on Old Forge Road may hook up. We are further led to believe that denial of this request is to discourage growth. Members of the Board, these lots have been approved and are going to be built on so that granting, or not granting this request, it is not going to contribute to growth. Now, let's discuss it from an environmental standpoint. I want to point out that I am just as concerned about the environment as you. In fact, I belong to two environmental groups. It would be keeping within your goal of protecting the Reservoir by granting us this hook-up. As you know, directly behind these lots, we have a stream that flows to the Reservoir. No septic system is 100 percent sound. There will be drainage into this stream area from these systems. Further- more, as you may know, these systems are going to fail as failure is high in this area as has been proven by the number of systems that have failed on Old Forge Road which is on the other side of the stream. Therefore, by granting us permis- sion now, you are assuring a safe proof system for these lots and protection for the reservoir, whereas denial will contribute to the problems of the reservoir. I would also like to point out that due to stream location on the rear of these properties it was necessary for you all to have a 100 foot septic line setback. The Planning Department in practically every locale including yours, stresses the fact of trying to preserve the natural habitat of the area. These are our objectives too, and our utmost desires. This is what we are faced with. If we are to put in these three septic fields, we will have to cut and clear approximately three-eighths of an acre of woodland and we might add, cutting some of the prettiest trees that you could find, as it is virgin timber there. Also, let me point out, due to the fact that you normally locate these systems to the rear of where you have to clear, for basement and rear yard use, in our case this area cannot be used for the septic system as a result of the 100 foot septic setback line. We, in turn, will have to cut trees for the sole purpose of putting in a system when we have a sewer line right on the property. Members of the Board, you have granted us water, and by not granting us sewer, it gives us the feeling that we are being teased. I would like to present a letter to you that I have received unsolicited from the City of Charlottesville (hands letter to Board). This letter from the City requests information concerning our needs for gas, and if we have that need, they are willing to place a gas line into the subdivision. We have one municipality which has no governmental authority willing to assist new property owners with their needs, and I am asking you, in fact begging you, to grant us permission to hook up to this sewer line so we do not have to cut down the trees on the side of each of our lots. I further think that each citizen, assuming similar conditions are deserving of equal opportunity to benefit from the utilities that the County furnishes. People on one side of the line can come in and attach to that line, but Albemarle County citizens on the other side of that line are being denied that privilege. It makes me wonder why they did not locate the sewer line on the other side of the lots that you are serving instead of putting it on the opposite side where you are not going to serve and denying use of it. I would also like to point out to the best of my knowledge, I have not found any reason, whereas the granting use of the sewer line to these three lots cannot create any impact on the system. As I understand it, the system is able to handle these three lots. I have heard that these requests are denied because they are setting a precedent and I want to point out to you that I have made an absolute, pure, logical request right in with your plans to protect the reservoir and to preserve nature. I have no paid attorney, and I have no lobbying organization to go to for help. As far as I am concerned, you are my lobbying organization. This has been considered a precedent, as I understand it, concerning certain legal suits which are pending. It appears to me that you may be forgetting that your responsibility to the needs of citizens when they come in with a justifiable, logical request. I don't think any judge is going to hold this against you in court as the granting of these three lots is nothing more than a ripple. I think a judge would say to you that you are acting in the course of fulfilling your citizens' needs, and is certainly not setting a precedent. I also think he does not want his court to be used to deny these things because of a case pending in court." Mrs. Cooke asked if the sewer line was already on the lot when Mr. Brugh bought the lot. Mr. Brugh said it was, but he was not aware at that time of how the 100 foot septic setback line was going to force him to put the septic system in the front yard and to the side of the house. Mr. Lindstrom said he was curious, and asked if Mr. Brugh was building the house to live in himself. Mr. Brugh said he is building for himself, and he feels it is the same for the other two people, that all are moving into these houses. Mr. Bowie said he was surprised at the estimate of cutting down three-eighths of an acre of trees, he felt it would be more. He asked if that is just the amount to be cut on Mr. Brugh's lot. Mr. Brugh said that is the amount for all three lots. Mr. Fisher said Mr. Brugh has made a very convincing case, and this is one reason why he sometimes wishes he were not on the Board, because it is a "no-win" situation. Whatever the Board decides will be a problem in some way. Mr. Lindstrom said this is a very convincing case. He has concern about the precedent the Board may set because of cases which are now being considered, and may be faced in the future. However, he said there seems to be some distinctions in this case; these distinctions were present when Mr. ErkenBrack presented the case previously. There is proximity of the line, the subdivision is already approved, and 407 September 12, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) there would need to be substantial clearing in the watershed. Mr. Lindstrom said he does not want to do anything to approve more development than is already approved in the watershed. He does not want to do anything to set a precedent for providing sewer lines that would stimulate development, but he feels hardput to explain why the Board would not provide service to lots that are crossed by the line, already approved and which will be developed at a density which is already approved. Mr. Lindstrom said he does not see this as stimulating growth, and may be less amenable to the watershed than alternatives the Board has discussed. Mr. Lindstrom said he is very uneasy and has been concerned about this for a long time, and the Board members might like to have a brief executive session to discuss the Stowe case implications before their consideration of this request. Mr. Lindstrom then moved for an executive session. Mr. Bowie said the Board already has an executive session scheduled during lunch break. Mrs. Cooke said what Mr. Brugh said is very logical, but by the same token she does not want to make a decision concerning the request until such time as the Board holds an executive session and receives legal counseling. Mr. Lindstrom said the Board's decisions are not always looked at by the people who make the ultimate decision about the validity of those decisions. That is Mr. Lindstrom's concern. Mr. Brugh said there is one thing he feels is important. He has found in his experience in court: The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court have both said that a majority, or a large amount, of material presented in cases is irrevelant. Mr. Brugh said he feels judges are concerned with waves and not ripples, and there are so many opinions going, he does not feel the Board should stop responding to the need. Mr. Fisher said he feels the only way to handle this request today is to discuss it in executive session. Dr. Kerewich said he is beginning to excavate for his house, foundation and a decision must be made in the next week as to putting in a septic system or hooking to the public sewer. If a decision is put off too long, it will be too late. Also, the contractor is beginning to run into rock. Dr. Kerewich said he understands that putting systems into this kind of area makes them less than what they should be. Mr. ErkenBrack said his contractor has also run into rock during excavation. Dr. Kerewich said this was not anticipated. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Health Department had given approval for these lots. Dr. Kerewich said yes; he is only 125 feet from the public sewer line on the back of his lot, and if his septic system should fail, it will affect the reservoir. Agenda Item No. 16. Executive Session: Legal Matters. At 12:50 P.M. , motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to adjourn into executive session for the following legal matters, and a discussion of personnel matters: 1) the request just heard concerning connection to the Albemarle County Service Authority's public sewage system; 2) David C. Carr, Trustee vs. Albemarle County; 3) Monticello Memory Gardens vs. Albemarle County; 4) Virginia Federal Savings and Loan vs. Albemarle County; 5) the potential litigation under the heading of Joseph Seagram and & Sons Board of Zoning Appeals hearing; 6) Hollymead Square II, an item on the agenda for this afternoon; and 7) Lickinghole Creek basin. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. The Board reconvened into open session at 2:10 P.M. and proceeded with the agenda. Agenda Item No. 17. Certificate of Appreciation. Mr. Fisher recognized Mr. L. A. "Bub" Lacy, who served on the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of Directors from February, 1972, until April, 1984, serving as Chairman from April, 1978 until April, 1984. Mr. Fisher listed the various projects, agreements and contracts that Mr. Lacy participated in as a member of the Service Authority Board of Directors: The Four-Party Agreement, 1972, which led to the development of the Moore's Creek Sewage Treatment Plant, the upgrading of the water systems, the planning for the Crozet Interceptor, and all of the projects for the City and County that were jointly done through the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority; the construc- tion of the Ivy waterline in 1973; the acquisition of the City-owned water and sewer lines in the County; construction of the Hessian Hills sanitary sewer system; the contract that was entered into with Morton Frozen Foods ensuring connection to the Crozet Interceptor-that was a very difficult problem for a long time; implemented financial incentives to encourage water and sewer mains; construction of the Old Forge Road sanitary sewer system; construction of the Westmoreland sewer system; upgrading of the northwest urban water system-the high pressure project; participation in the construction of the sanitary sewer system in Crozet to eliminate raw sewage discharge; development of the water and sewer master plan; and the joint resolution with the City/County/Rivanna Authority and the Albemarle County Service Authority for the Buck Mountain reservoir. Mr. Fisher said that is just a capsule summary of things that have been going on in the County concerning the utility business over this period of time. Mr. Fisher then presented Mr. Lacy with a certificate of appreciation. Mr. Lacy thanked the Board for the certificate, saying it went a little way toward the I long hours, and low pay. He said it has been a lot of fun and a lot of work and said that Ithe Service Authority has an excellent Board of Directors and staff; an organization of ! which the County can be proud. Mr. Lacy said he hopes he has contributed somewhat to this organization. Mr. Fisher said the Board appreciates Mr. Lacy's service. Agenda Item No. 12. Proposed Changes: Personnel Policies and Merit Evaluation Procedures - General Government Employees. Mr. Fisher said the Board did not have time to discuss this item during the morning session, so same will be rescheduled; date not known at this time. 14 413 September 12, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) is going through the public hearing process. Mr. St. John said Mr. Ashton has offered to furnish cases and samples from other localities, but he does not know whose opinion he would request. He does not believe the Board will get a better opinion than the materials offered. Mr. Fisher said Mr. St. John had done a good job of convincing him a few weeks ago that this is a serious problem, and he wants to know if Mr. St. John has now changed his mind. Mr. St. John said he has changed his mind. He does not think the question has been absolutely answered and he can still voice arguments contrary to the arguments made in support, and the arguments that have already been accepted by courts in friendly suits, but that does not mean L that the Board does not go with the best opinion that it can get. Mr. St. John said he ' thinks the Board has gotten from Mr. Ashton the best opinion available. He does not like the set-up which is the bottom line result of this because if these arguments are correct, then the only reason this is before the Board is the Federal requirement, and absent that requirement , Harrisonburg could come in and do this without any approval of the Board under State law. Mr. St. John said he questions whether the State ever intended that, but that is the way the law is written. Mr. St. John said he has changed his mind. He has been persuaded by Hunton & Williams to change his mind. Mr. Bowie asked if Exhibit "E" which is the subject of the motion on the floor is not different from the original resolution adopted in May. Mr. St. John said that is correct, the new resolution is totally unambiguous. Mr. Lindstrom said Mr. Henley was right in that this is a way to get a benefit for the County without getting the bureaucracy that goes with it. At this time, roll was called on the motion, and the resolution was adopted by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 11. Request to connect to Albemarle County Service Authority Sewer System (carried over from the morning session). \Die Mr. Lindstrom said this land lies in his district, so he would like to offer motion to set this request for a public hearing. Mr. Lindstrom said he is favorably inclined for a ,/j couple of reasons or he would not make the motion. The sewer line the applicants desire to � ����` /1 connect to crosses their lots. Also, the lots they desire to build upon are already approved, : and the density has been approved and set. Third, the Health Department has indicated, according to the applicants, approval of the septic fields that they have suggested. For these reasons, it seems virtually certain that the lots will be developed regardless of 4�p� whether this board approves the request or not. Construction of the septic fields is likely 'IWi�d� to result in removal of trees and vegetative cover that will contribute to erosion that would be harmful to the reservoir. For these reasons, and due to the peculiar circumstances of these particular lots, he is willing to make an exception to the general policy the Board has against expansion of the sewer service boundaries beyond the boundaries of the urban area (growth areas) in the Comprehensive Plan. He offered motion to amend the service areas to include the lots that have been suggested. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bowie. Mr. St. John said Just to clarify a point, these lots are adjacent to the delineation on the Comprehensive Plan so that no amendment of the Plan is needed. Mr. Tucker said that is correct since the area would be too small to detect on the Plan. Mr. Fisher asked if the motion was stated to advertise for a public hearing on this amendment for October 3. Mr. Henley said he would be willing to support that request. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 20. Library: Request re: State and Federal Aid. Mr. Tucker presented the following memorandum explaining the request: "TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Guy B. Agnor, Jr. , County Executive (by Robert W. Tucker, Jr. ) RE: Unanticipated State and Federal Aid to the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library DATE: September 6, 1984 The Jefferson-Madison Regional Library will receive $89,501 more in grant moneys this year than was anticipated when the Library's budget was submitted to the Board last spring. The additional grant funds reflect $77,641 of State Aid which resulted from the General Assembly, for the first time since its adoption in 1969, fully funding the formula by which grants-in-aid are allocated to public libraries. An unexpected Federal Aid grant of $11,860 was also received by the Library. Despite this windfall in unanticipated State and Federal Aid funds, the Virginia State Library (VSL) places ;:;t:! "f pcnaliet: on local governments who reduce or recapture previously budgeted library funds. Specifically, the VSL regulations state: / October 3, 1984 (Regular - Night Meeting) 4 5 3 Mr. Lindstrtom said this property lies in his district, and the plan is within the density range shown in the Comprehensive Plan. With the proffers offered, he thinks the concerns of the existing neighbors have been addressed. He does have some concerns about quadraplexes in that area. He asked the net density of the development when the buffer areas are deleted. Mr. Roudabush said he had not attempted to come up with any such figures. There are 17.4 acres in the buffer area, and 41.9 acres ouside of the buffer. (Mr. St. John returned at 11:26 p.m. ) Mr. Lindstrom said that puts 151 dwelling units in the remaining area, and he has some reservations about that density in that spot. It works out to about four or five dwellings an acre. At this time, Mr. Henley offered motion to approve ZMA-84-19 as recommended by the Planning Commission and with the eight proffers offered. Mr. Bowie seconded the motion, but suggested that #6 be changed (so as to be consistent in style of writing) so this development will be served with a single access. Mr. Fisher asked if the applicant objected to this suggestion. As written, #6 says "We propose to serve this development with a single access from Route 654", but that is not very binding. This would be changed to read: "This development will be served with a single access from Route 654." Mr. Roudabush said the applicants accept that change. Mr. Lindstrom said while he appreciates the direction the application has taken, he can't get over what appears to amount to five dwelling units per acre in the middle of the development, which is perplexing. He thinks this is pushing it a little. He is also concerned about how this pond is going to work. Mrs. Cooke said her only question was about the pond. If the dam should break, what kind of mechanism is there to assure that the dam would be put back into use. Mr. Roudabush said the problems referred to are examples of dams created before the advent of homeowners associations and binding maintenance agreements. One reason the lake is shown on this plan is that it was shown on the Hunters Village plan which has already been approved. It is binding on the adjacent property to build the lake, and that has been carried over to this property. He does not see any real problem with the lake. The county is requiring more and more detention basins, and although this won't be a detention basin, it will function as one. It will be an aesthetic feature as well. There can be a binding agreement on the owners to maintain the lake and dam, and although the plan shown tonight is not a site plan, when one is presented the documentation and homeowners agreements can be drawn and approved by the County at that time. At this time, roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Way. NAYS: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 9. Public Hearing: Amend the project areas map of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include lots 2, 3 and 4 in Terrell Subdivision located off of Georgetown Road in the Service Authority sewer utility system. (Advertised in the Daily Progess on September 18 and September 25, 1984. ) Mr. Donnelly noted that the staff report on this request was given at the July day I meeting. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Bob Brugh was present in support of the request. He said he had nothing to add other than they had just hit rock in the building of their dwelling. With no one else present to speak for or against this request, the public hearing was closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr.Bowie, to approved an amendment to the project areas map of the Albemarle County Service to include Lots 2, 3 and 4 in Terrell Subdivision in the Service Authority sewer utility system; same located off of Georgetown Road. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: II AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. II NAYS: None. II (Mr. Henley left the meeting at 11:37 p.m. ) Agenda Item No. 10. SP-84-37. Warren E. Andrews. Request to construct, in conjunction 1 with development of a private golf course, a water pump house and footbridge in the li floodplain of Ivy Creek on property zoned RA, Rural Areas, and consisting of 200.645 acres. Located on Routes 677 and 637, 0.5 mile southeast of Ivy. County Tax Map 58, Parcel 100. Samuel Miller District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on September 18 and September 25, 1984. ) Mr. Donnelly gave the staff's report as follows: Staff Report: SP-84-37 Warren E. Andrews, SLDC Architects (Joseph E. Seagrams and Sons, Inc.) Request: Water pumping station and two bridges in floodplain (30.3.5.2.1) Acreage: 200.645 acres Zoning: RA Rural Areas/FH Flood Hazard • `N„t( OF ALsz00 M '• V pF ALB BOARD OF SUPERVISORS F. R. BOWIE PATRICIA H. COOKE OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LETTIE E. NEHER GERALD E. FISHER 401 MCINTIRE ROAD CLERK J. T. HENLEY, JR. CHARLOTTESVILLE,VIRGINIA 22901-4596 C. TIMOTHY LINDSTROM LINDA W. LEAKE PETER T. WAY DEPUTY CLERK MEMO TO: William Brent, Executive Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority FROM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk DATE: October 4, 1984 SUBJECT: Board Action--October 3, 1984 Meeting The Board at its meeting on October 3, 1984 approved an amendment to the project service areas of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include Lots 2, 3 and 4 in Terrell Subdivision off of Georgetown Road into the Authority ' s sewer utility system. LEN: lwl CC: Maynard Elrod Ken Erkenbrack ugene L.Robert D. Brugh