Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-06-12 adjO52 June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on June 12, 1986, at 3:00 P.M., in Meeting Room 5/6, Second Floor, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia, this meeting was adjourned from June 11, 1986. PRESENT: Mr. F. R. Bowie (arrived at 3:09 P.M.), Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke (arrived at 3:51 P.M.), Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr. (arrived at 3:11 P.M.), C. Timothy Lindstrom (arrived at 3:14 P.M.) and Peter T. Way. ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; Deputy County Executive, Ray B. Jones; and Deputy County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. (arrived at 3:21 P.M.). Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Fisher. The meeting was called to order at 3:13 P.M. by the Chairman, Agenda Item No. 2. Work Session: 1986./87-1990./91 Capital Improvements Program. Mr. Fisher called the meeting to order and asked the staff to discuss the Capital Improvements Program with the Board. Mr. Horne stated that discussion of the Capital Improvements Program could be done in a number of ways, and he described them to the Board. Board members indicated that they would prefer to discuss the program by agency grouping. Mr. Horne then suggested that a good place to start would be Page Six of the Capital Improvements Program. He said that detailed explanations of the projects would follow, and if there were specific questions on specific projects, he would refer to these explanations. The discussion of the agencies are as follows: Administration and Courts. Automation of Court Services: Purchase of equipment needed to fully automate the functions. Possibility of a future joint venture to link with the Joint Security Complex and Commonwealth Attorney;s Office. Automation is necessary to make the Clerk's Office more efficient and to provide a quicker response time for the public. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary Priority FY 1987-88. Mr. Horne explained that there is a request for automation of the court services func- tion for $25,237. This money is for a computer terminal, and a work station which would link the Court Services Office with the Circuit Court Offices and would computerize the interac- tion of these two offices. It is requested for the upcoming year. The Planning Commission suggested that the request be postponed one year and suggested that it go through the committee that deals with computer requests. Mr. Horne stated that the requesting agency has agreed to go through that committee. Regional Jail Expansion-Joint Security Complex: Expand jail from present adjusted rated capacity of 105 to a new capacity of at least 167. Expansion will most likely involve converting existing multi-purpose room into dormitory housing and constructing new indoor recreation/multi-purpose hall, as well as adding a new wing on the jail. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary Priority FY 1988-89. Mr. Horne said that the Commission felt the request was somewhat preliminary at this point and was uncertain as to whether the actual participating jurisdictions were committed to a project of this scope at this time. The Commission felt that there might be a need for further discussion of whether it is necessary to spend $300,000 to expand the jail or whether other options exist. Albemarle County Office Building McIntire Road - Interior RenovatiOn: Renovation of Social Services (Band Area); Police Department, Registrar, Social Services Meeting Room, Housing, Data Center, Meeting Room 12, Engineering, Finance (Adminis- tration), Personnel, Development Information Office and Real Estate Offices. Necessary to provide adequate office space for County employees to effectively render administrative services to the citizens of Albemarle County. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent Priority FY 1986-87. Mr. Horne explained that the interior renovations will involve rearrangements and reconstruction of many of the interior offices, and the exterior renovations are for rear- rangement of the parking and access around the building, including some movements of the gas pumps in the back of the building. Mr. Horne then announced that Mr. Ray Jones was present and could talk about these renovations. Mr. Jones described these renovations by saying that on the first floor, the Social Services Department occupies the area from the first door on the left down to where the Payroll Office was first located. The plan is to move the Registrar's Office to this area. He went on to say that Data Processing will expand into the small office that is now occupied by the Payroll Office. The Payroll Office will move in with the Accounting Office, and expansion of the Finance Office will require moving into the office that the Registrar will be vacating. Mr. Jones explained that on the north end of the second floor there is a plan to partition and move Crime Prevention, Animal Control and the Victim/Witness offices there. He said that Room 12 is currently a large conference room, and a conference room will be placed on the first floor near the main entrance to offset that loss of space. He pointed out that the initial plans were to move the Finance Department to the second floor where the Parks and Recreation Office is located and then move Parks and Recreation into Room 12. He said that plan has now changed. The second floor renovations, according to Mr. Jones, will involve remodeling the practice room used by the Charlottesville Municipal Band, into offices for the Social June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) 2) Services Department. He reminded the Board that the original plan call for this office to be moved, from the first floor. Mr. Fisher asked if the Charlottesville Band officials are aware of this plan, and Mr. Agnor answered that they were told, when this building was first occupied, that their resi- dency would be temporary. Mr. Agnor said, however, that band officials have not been specif- ically notified at this time, because he wanted to have approval of the plans before such notification. Mr. Agnor explained that the band members will still be able to practice on the stage in the auditorium, but their main problem will be the storage of instruments. Mr. Jones then mentioned that a Development Information Office will be located on the second floor. Mr. Way asked if there would be direct access from the hallway to that office, and Mr. Agnor answered, "yes." The request on the third floor from the School Division is to build a six foot storage area out in the wide hallway across from the elevator, and also to put a secretary at that point to act as a receptionist for the floor. At the other end of the third floor there will not be direct access to the Superintendent's and Assistant Superintendents' Offices. Mr. Agnor reminded Board members that the County has now occupied this building for five years. The original plan had some reserve spaces, but some of those spaces have been used. Mr. Henley stated that he did not believe that it is necessary to spend a quarter of a million dollars to move offices around in the County Office Building. He believes that the jail expansion is a higher priority than the County Building renovations. He said that he does not think that it is a good idea to wait two years for the jail expansion. Mr. Agnor agreed. He said the Board may need to make some allocations in the 1986-87 fiscal year for planning for this project, with construction occurring the second year. He said that re- sources for this project would be discussed later. Mr. Jones commented that most of the money requested for the County Building is for renovation of the Band Room. Mr. Lindstrom inquired if the $225,000 in renovations of the County Building is sched- uled for this coming fiscal year, and if it will be two full years before the jail renova- tions are scheduled. Mr. Agnor replied that the renovation of the County Building is sched- uled for this coming fiscal year, but the request for the jail renovations is for 1987-88. Mr. Henley said that he could understand the jail renovations being put off for two years, because the Board has not received any information about this project. But, he pointed out again, that something will have to be done about the situation. Mr. Jones mentioned that the original plan calls for closing the main entrance off of McIntire Road and moving the entrance to the parking lot and up the ramp to Preston Avenue which will create a thoroughfare on the back side of the building. All of the existing parking that is along the railroad tracks will be moved into areas that will be somewhat secluded and not in the main flow of traffic. He also said that the plan includes moving the gas pumps. Also, it is planned to move the main entrance of the Police Department. He pointed out the new entrance location on the plans for the Board. Mr. Fisher asked if an office would be lost by moving this Police Department entrance. Mr. Jones stated that no space would be lost. Mr. Fisher then asked if these changes to the parking areas would mean that'grassy areas would be lost as well as some of the sidewalks. Mr. Jones replied that he was not sure about the sidewalks, but he believes there will be approximately the same amount of grassy areas. Even though some grassy areas may be taken out, others will be added. Mr. Fisher then questioned the security aspect of this new plan. He asked if someone was pumping gas into a vehicle, if he or she would be completely out of sight of others on the property. Mr. Jones answered that there will be "see-through" areas in the wall. Mr. Agnor explained that with parking the way it is now in the back of the building, when a vehicle backs from a parking space, it is in the line of traffic. He said that traffic representatives have told staff that when the McIntire entrance is closed and there is a different traffic flow, there can not be traffic backing out into the traffic that is passing through. At this time, Mr. Fisher inquired about the high curbing involved with this new traffic flow. He asked if the high curbing is primarily for water drainage or could it be cut down. Mr. Agnor said that he believed that the curbing could be cut down. Mr. Lindstrom asked for clarification as to which entrance is being closed. He asked if the new main entrance will be at the first gate. He wondered if all of this area would be parking so that visitors would be entering on McIntire, the one at the curve, in through the parking area. Mr. Agnor replied that the plan is to move the entrance to the first gate. He said that there is currently a roadway through this area, and vehicles do not have to back into the line of traffic. He said that visitors will not go into a parking area, but will be able to go through it on a "two-way" road. Mr. Agnor also stated that this is the plan if other improvements are approved. He said that what is really needed at this time is to relocate the gas pumps or at least get a canopy over them. Mr. Fisher commented that he thought it was a mistake to put anything over the gas pumps. He suggested moving them instead. Mr. Agnor then pointed out that there is some wording involved with the parking plan that says, "future parking structure." He said that when the building was first designed, it was decided that if ever there was not enough parking, it would be possible to build a structure over top of the parking that is already there. He said, however, that he hoped this would not ever have to be done. Mr. Lindstrom asked if something could be added to the first gate, when it becomes the main entrance, to make it more attractive. Mr. Agnor answered that the fence would be taken 054 June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Paqe 3) down.and a sign would also be put there to point out the main entrance. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Board would see further plans before anything is decided, and Mr. Agnor answered, "yes." Mr. Bowie inquired as to the location of the new Development Information Office. Mr. Agnor answered that the Zoning Office will be located on the second floor, next to the z~n~mg Adminstrator's Office. e County Office Building - Exterior Renovations: Relocation of gas pumps and im- provements to the drive which connects Preston Avenue entrance to the employee parking lot in anticipation of McIntire Road Improvements. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary Priority FY 1987-88. Education. Mr. Horne said he would go through the projects briefly and the representatives of the Education Department could elaborate on them if they so wished. He commented that the first project involved the new Ivy Area replacement school. Mr. Fisher wondered if the replacement school at Ivy could now be called the Meriwether Lewis Elementary School, since it will be located on the Meriwether Lewis property and the old school will be torn down. Mr. Overstreet stated that he has asked the principals, parents and others in the community to consider "Meriwether Lewis Elementary School" as the name for the new school and to bring back their reactions to him. He said this name seems logical to him. Mr. Lindstrom said he had attended a meeting with the architects for the Ivy replacement school, and no mention was made of how much it will cost to make the changes that are being considered. He has told some of the School Board members about this concern. He does not want these changes to cost more than the money that has been appropriated for this project. He believes that when the principal, teachers, and parents are asked what they want, the project will become costly, if there is not someone present to determine whether or not the changes can be handled within the budget appropriation. When projects exceed the money designated for them, it causes the citizens and supervisors to get upset. He would like to avoid this. He suggested that the people should be constantly reminded of this when meetings are held in the community. Mr. Overstreet replied that the people involved with this project already know about Mr. Lindstrom's concerns. He said that as changes are made, computations will be done. He also commented that the architects have been asked to make changes by people in .the community, and they have been challenged to respond to the requests and to still keep within the fiscal limitation. Mr. Lindstrom added that on the site plan, a certain entrance was shown, and someone had asked if the School Board owned or had plans to acquire this entrance. He said that no one had an answer, at that time. He stated that this problem was caught, but the little things like this are what can sometimes cause problems. Mr. Overstreet said that land acquisition is causing the most problem, because estimates had to be made as to how much it would cost before negotiations were done. Stone-Robinson Elementary School - Major Renovation: Renovate and update Stone-Robinson Elementary School to current standards in areas of building codes and parity of facilities. Provide for future and existing school population using an incremental design approach. School Board recommends that this school be enlarged to a 600-pupil school by adding six classrooms for a total of 26. It is further recommended that a gymnasium be added, the kitchen area remodeled, the administrative area improved and the entire school be air-conditioned. Staff Comment: Recommends urgent funding due to existing overcrowded condtions. The project is eligible for a Literary Fund Loan. Mr. Way pointed out that in the description of this project, there was a contradictory reference. He asked whether the project involves a four or a six classroom addition. Mr. Papenfuse answered that the Stone-Robinson Elementary School would be adding four additional classrooms. He said that the other two classrooms mentioned in the description of the project related to the recovering of two existing classrooms for the administrative area and the designing of the special education and ancillary areas. Mr. Papenfuse added that the four additional classrooms will bring the total classrooms at Stone-Robinson to 24 class- rooms. He said that the four trailers at the school would be replaced. Mr. Way asked if Stone-Robinson could accommodate 600 pupils, and Mr. Papenfuse answered that he was correct. Mr. Bowie inquired as to the current enrollment and growth potential at Stone-Robinson. Mr. Papenfuse replied that the school has approximately 500 students enrolled. He said that the School Board prefers to have no school larger than 600 pupils. Mr. Bowie mentioned that perhaps redistricting could be considered if the district grew beyond the 600 student mark at Stone-Robinson. Crozet Elementary School - Major Renovation: Renovate and update Crozet Elementary School to current standards in areas of building codes and parity of facilities. Since this building is in one of the County's three main growth areas, ~the design plan should be able to accommodate the future proposed growth in this area. School needs major electrical and mechanical renovation to meet current building codes and safety standards. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Mr. Horne said that this project was requested as a major renovation and expansion. However, the Planning Commission recognizes the severity for some improvement and expansion to that school. Because the school district of the Crozet Elementary School is only June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Pa_ge 4) 055 receiving a small portion of the projected growth currently, it felt that some additional discussion needed to be held in regard to whether or not this school needed to be expanded and redistricted or whether it is Brownsville Elementary School that needs the expansion. The Planning Commission is, therefore, recommending a figure of $200,000 for this coming year to make the safety improvements that are needed at the school, some minor renovations, and to provide adequate funding for planning of what ultimately needs to be done for the Crozet community. Mr. Tucker commented that he had studied, again, the School Facilities Plan. He said this data was generated by the County's planning staff and the school staff for enrollments, capacity numbers and projections for Crozet and Brownsville Schools. Mr. Tucker explained that the total school capacity for Brownsville is estimated at 391 pupils. As far as class- room space is concerned, there is 35 square feet per pupil for 396 students. The 1985-86 enrollment at Brownsville is 229, and the Planning staff's projected enrollment over the next five years puts Brownsville School at an additional 62 pupils for a total of 291. He pointed out that there are 100 growth spaces available over the next five years, according to the County's figures. His feeling is that, unless something changes in Crozet, there will not be any problem for quite some time, if ever. He added that the option is still open to redis- trict part of the growth area into the Crozet School district, if the school is upgraded to a 500 to 600 pupil school. Mr. Lindstrom indicated that he did not realize, when he was a member of the School Facilities Planning Committee, that the Crozet Elementary School was not physically within the growth area and that the Brownsville Elementary School was in the growth area. Secondly, he did not remember receiving information concerning the district boundaries. He asked Mr. Way, who was also on the Committee, if these things were pointed out to them. He believes that the Committee's reaction was that the renovations to the Crozet School were critical, and because the school was in a growth area the growth would also have to be handled. He said that a more relevant question now would be to see which of the two schools, Brownsville or Crozet, is the more amenable to being improved. Mr. Way agreed with Mr. Lindstrom that he had gotten the same impression when he was on the Committee. He said that the project will cost almost $3,000,000, and he fully under- stands the need to bring Crozet Elementary School up to parity and up to safety regulations. But, he has problems when it comes to large additions to Crozet or Brownsville when there apparently is no real reason for that. Mr. Henley asked the capacity for Crozet Elementary School. Mr. Tucker answered that the classroom capacity at Crozet Elementary School, at 35 square feet per pupil, is 279. The enrollment over the next five years is estimated to be 265. Mr. Bowie pointed out that the projected enrollment could be handled over the next five years, but the safety problems would still need to be resolved. Mr. Fisher said there could be a problem with the distribution of students in each classroom. Mr. Horne agreed that when the classroom capacities get as close as they are projected to be in five years at the Crozet School, there could be a distribution problem. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the $2,700,000 requested is for the renovations needed to make the Crozet School equal to other County schools and to make it safe. Mr. Way responded that the $2,700,000 was requested for the expansion to the Crozet School. Mr. Horne ex- plained that the Commission is not recommending an expansion for this coming year, but the recommendation is for the safety improvements to take place first and to also work out a plan as to what will be done at either or both of the two schools. Mr. Lindstrom then inquired if the $200,000 is just for safety improvements. Mr. Horne answered that the $200,000 is projected to be for the safety improvements and for planning and architectural fees. Mr. Papenfuse explained that the requested amount of $2,500,000 should be brought down to $2,300,000, which would bring the whole project to $2,500,000, when the $200,000 is included. This amount of money was requested to develop, design and implement an approximately 400 pupil school to take care of the current enrollment and potential growth at Crozet. Mr. Horne stated that the submitted request indicated a 500 to 600 pupil school. Mr. Papenfuse replied that he did not think that the school officials ever intended for the Crozet School to be a 600 pupil school. At this time Board members discussed the enrollments at Brownsville and Crozet Schools, and Mr. Lindstrom suggested that the Crozet School project needed to be considered more carefully. He said that $200,000 is a lot of money just for planning, but it is not enough for renovations, and $2,500,000 is a lot to spend, if it is not needed. Mr. Horne explained again that the Commission was just setting a figure that could take care of the safety problems and which would also furnish some money for planning. Mr. Agnor added that the Commission made the $200,000 recommendation based upon the request from the school system. Mr. Horne agreed that the Commission was reacting to the request and instructions from the submitting agency. Mr. Way said that it seems to him that it is necessary to know what the parity figure would be for Crozet. He also said that if there is proof that there is need for expansion, then that will have to be considered as another issue. Mr. Lindstrom wondered if parity is considered in the safety issue, and Mr. Way agreed that this needs to be made clearer. Mr. Horne replied that the $200,000 was never intended to contain parity improvements. It was intended to handle critical safety improvements and planning, and that is all. He said that this is the intention of the CommisSion, whether or not the numbers are correct. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Horne to have available for the Board, before tonight's meeting, the original figures that make up the request for the Crozet School. Mr. Papenfuse stated that the plan was to renovate the major core of the Crozet School and to provide for a larger school if the enrollment required it. He said that parity was not mentioned, because it would have been almost a new school when it was finished. Mr. Henley commented that he did not think any money needed to be included for planning, becaUse projections for the next five years indicate that the Crozet School will not reach its capacity. Mr. Lindstrom reminded Mr. Henley that there are serious safety problems there, and Mr. Henley responded that the safety problems needed to be resolved. Mr. Bowie O56 June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Pag~ agreed with Mr. Henley that the safety problems need to be taken care of right away. He does not approve of spending the $2,500,000, however, when it seems to be unclear as to what is needed for Brownsville or Crozet. Mr. Fisher commented that the Crozet School building is almost as old as the Meriwether Lewis Building. Mr. Henley suggested that possibly another classroom could be added to Crozet when the safety problems are being done there. Mr. Way reminded Board members that there needs to be parity at Crozet School. Mr. Fisher pointed out the fact that sometimes when renovations are done, classrooms are lost. Mr. Agnor stated that when the School Board's comments are read in the report, the $2,500,000 requested is to cover the addition of a gymnasium, air conditioning and the safety features. Then, there is a statement that the staff recommends that planning for a 500 to 600 pupil school begin. Mr. Agnor does not believe that the plans for expansion of the school at this time is for anything more than a gymnasium. He said that this would also take care of the parity issue. Mr. Way's concern is for the amount of money that is requested. He cannot see why these improvements should cost twice as much at Crozet as they do at other schools. He said that it will only cost approximately $1,000,000 at the other schools to do exactly the same thing. Mr. Agnor believes that the reason that the figure is so high for Crozet School is because the safety problems are extensive and the mechanical system is tremendously expensive. Mr. Papenfuse pointed out, that Crozet Elementary School is an older, two story building, with renovations being requested for the core of the building. The project at Stone-Robinson School, for example, is not for renovations to be done to the core of the building, but the request is for an addition to the existing structure. Mr. Lindstrom then inquired about Stone-Robinson Elementary School. He commented that the description and justification reads that what is being proposed is an addition of four classrooms, which will not bring the school up to a 500 to 600 student capacity, but that the support facilities will accommodate that student capacity. He asked for clarification as to whether or not the classrooms will accommodate a 500 to 600 student school. Mr. Papenfuse indicated that the addition to Stone-Robinson Elementary School would bring the school up to a 500 to 600 student school with a total of 24 classrooms. Mr. Lindstrom next pointed out that the staff comment for the Stone-Robinson Elementary School indicates that most of the school district is designated as rural area in the Compre- hensive Plan, except for a couple of areas, and it may be possible to reduce the ultimate capacity to less than the proposed 500 to 600 students. He asked Mr. Horne to elaborate on this comment. Mr. Horne replied that it is difficult to identify where the growth is coming from in the Stone-Robinson school district. He said that Ashcroft has had major building over the last few years. Once that levels off, the staff is wondering if there will be continued growth in that area. He said there could still be growth in the StOne-Robinson district, because there is no question that the County's rural areas are growing. He thinks, however, that it should be considered very carefully whether or not a 600 pupil school is needed there. Mr. Bowie commented that he lives in a subdivision that had eight houses and no children seven years ago, and he knows of another place that had 12 or 14 houses and two children. Six new homes have now been built in that area, and four homes have been resold. All of these homes have two or three children each, and all of them go to Stone-Robinson. There are also three new houses under construction. All of this growth is happening in an area where there were no children going to Stone-Robinson School five years ago. He mentioned, too, that houses are also under construction in Milton Hills and Auburn Hills. He said that people who have lived there have sold and moved, and younger families are moving in. (Mrs. Cooke arrived at 3:51 P.M.) Mr. Lindstrom inquired if some study of the Stone-Robinson growth would be done. Mr. Horne answered that a detailed study of the Stone-Robinson growth area is not proposed at this time. He said, that this will be done for the whole Comprehensive Plan to try to figure out the distribution of the growth. If, in fact, the construction for Stone-Robinson will take place this coming year, there will not be time for a detailed study. Mr. Lindstrom then asked how many students are now enrolled at Stone-Robinson Elementary School. Mr. Papenfuse answered that there are approximately 500 students currently enrolled at Stone-Robinson. Albemarle High School - Paving of road and parking: The present amount of paved parking spaces for the administrative, teaching and support staff in conjunction with approved student parking is inadequate for a school of this size. The funds requested would provide parallel parking, a designated walkway, an additional parking lot, and a new athletic field road. Planning Commission Recommendation: Paving of road only - Urgent priority - FY 1986-87; Paving of parking lot - Necessary Priority - FY 1987-88. Mr. Horne stated that the Commission is recommending funding of the road with the additional width to accommodate the roadside parking, but it is not recommending the funding of the new parking lot at this time. He said that the Commission feels that additional parking areas are less important than taking care of what is probably now an unsafe condition on the existing roadway. Mr. Way asked how the widening and paving of the existing road will help the parking. Mr. Papenfuse replied that widening the existing road will eliminate parking on the roadway and will also provide a walkway so that students walking to the driving range are not walking between cars. June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) _~ge 6 ) 057 Mr. Lindstrom asked if the road being discussed is the one in front of the school. Mr. Horne directed Mr. Lindstrom to a map he indicated was available to Board members, and said that the road is behind the tennis courts. Mr. Way asked if anything would be done about the road coming in by the old shop School Bus. Mr. Papenfuse answered that this area would have been included in the other $20,000 requested for the new parking lot. But, the Commission has asked that this be deferred for one year. Mr. Agnor asked Mr. Horne why the parking lot was deferred. Mr. Horne responded that the Commission had the perception that the road was an important safety matter now, and that because of other projects, there will not be enough money available to do the parking lot right away. The Commission felt that this was a reasonable way to spread the money over several projects. Mr. Way commented he thinks that a lot of the parking problems at Albemarle High School are due to the fact that the student parking is not enforced as far as stickers are con- cerned. He said that the only place that parking is enforced is in the student parking lot, and as long as a student does not park in the student parking lot, he or she does not have to have a sticker. He believes that this is the reason that cars are parked along the roadway. He thinks that if County policemen would ticket the cars that are illegally parked, it would take care of the parking problem. Mrs. Cooke agreed with Mr. Way. e Albemarle High School - Roof replacement: This roof is deteriorating and beginning to leak. It was not replaced during the Phase IV renovation when most of the roofing of the main building was replaced. Funds are requested for the installa- tion of a membrane roof with additional insulation of the science wing. This project is needed immediately to prevent further water damage. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent Priority FY 1986-87. Albemarle High School - Handicapped improvements: This project plans for the installation of an elevator to serve the second story, construction of access ramps where required and provides for handicap restroom facilities. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary Priority FY 1987-88. Albemarle High School - Electrical/mechanical: Renovate and replace electrical and mechanical systems that were not covered in earlier renovation projects. This project would best be phased with the handicap improvements project. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary Priority FY 1987-88. Mr. Horne said this project will require major renovations and replacement of the electrical and mechanical systems not covered in earlier projects. Mr. Horne noted that these two systems may be more cost effective if they are done together. He said, however, that the School Board staff will need to discuss this situation. Mr. Agnor pointed out that the electrical and mechanical improvements at Albemarle High-school were requested for 1989-90, and the Planning Commission reclassified this project as necessary and moved it forward. Mr. Horne said that Mr. Agnor is correct. He stated that the Commission felt that Albemarle High School needed to have improvements made to its electrical and mechanical systems. Mr. Lindstrom asked what the Planning Commission's recommendation was based on. He said it is unusual to have the Commission move a project earlier than the date that is set by the requesting agency. He then asked if Planning Commission members had gone out to Albemarle High School. Mr. Horne said he was not sure if individual Planning Commission members had visited the school, but there was a general perception by the Commission that the condition of Albemarle High School needed to be addressed sooner than the date given by the requesting agency· Mr. Bowie stated that he had a hard time putting other projects at Albemarle High School ahead of the air conditioning. He mentioned that it was 103 degrees at the school this afternoon. Burley Middle School - Roof replacement: Continued patching of the roof will no longer suffice as water is beginning to cause interior damage. Even if the schoOl were replaced eventually, a new roof would increase the value of the property. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent Priority FY 1986-87. Note: If the School division is unable to handle Ivy, Stone-Robinson and Burley in the same year, then the Commission recommends that the Burley improvements be delayed until FY 1987-88, especially considering that the possible replacement of Burley is still under discussion.) Mr. Horne said that the Commission felt that this was an urgent priority based on the discussions with the Education Department staff. He said that there is a severe situation with a leak at this time, and it needs to be taken care of quickly. Mrs. Cooke asked if the whole building is in jeopardy of structural damage if the roof is not replaced immediately. Mr. Horne responded that he does not believe that the whole building would be in jeopardy, but some portions of it could be damaged. Mr. Papenfuse commented that problems with the Burley roof occurred during the past winter, and he thinks that the major leak has been located. He said, however, that water was running down the wall and getting on some carpeting. He does not believe that there will be structural damage to the building, but the ceilings are blistering and breaking and then the water leaks through. Mrs. Cooke stated that she has been getting a lot of cards, letters, and comments about the Burley roof situation. She said that parents are extremely concerned about it. 058 June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Page 7) Burley Middle School - Energy improvements: At the division's only school without air conditioning, temperatures rose above 90 degees on the second floor of Burley. Very little instruction can take place under such conditions. An amount of 1.5 million dollars is requested to upgrade the mechanical system to provide efficient heating and cooling. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent Priority FY 1986-87. Mrs. Cooke asked if the energy improvements for Burley School involved the air condi- tioning. Mr. Horne responded that air conditioning is involved as well as insulation and generally improving the entire energy efficiency of the structure. Mrs. Cooke said that she wanted to be sure that the energy improvements did include air conditioning because she has been getting letters from parents who say they have had to go t¢ school to pick up their children because they are ill from heat. She then asked if there were figures available as to the number of children who have had heat exhaustion at Burley. She said that parents are extremely concerned about this problem. Mr. Overstreet answered that figures are probably available, but he does not know what they are at this time. Mr. Agnor commented that last year Burley was closed early in the day one time because of the heat. Mrs. Cooke stated that she had received one letter that said that Burley had been closed a number of times early in the day because of the heat. She asked if this is true. Mr. Overstreet commented that Burley School had only closed early in the day twice because of this problem. Burley Middle SchOol - General improvements: This school needs extensive modern- ization if it is to provide services that are equal to other middle schools in the County. An amount of 1.3 million dollars is requested to upgrade restroom facili- ties, administrative areas, and support areas (gym, music, fine arts). Planning Commission Recommendation: Desirable priority FY 1989-90. 10. Hollymead Elementary School - Roof replacement: The roof of Hollymead has been patched and should be adequate for the upcoming school year. The rook should be replaced with a membrane roof during the 1987-88 fiscal year before any interior damage begins. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary Priority FY 1987-88. Mr. Horne said that the request is also for a media center expansion at Hollymead as well as electrical and mechanical improvements. There was no discussion of the projects at Hollymead. 11. Hollymead Elementary School - Media Center Expansion: The current media center (library) is under.sized for a schoOl that is capable of serving 600 students. The media center needs to be expanded to serve the projected student population. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. 12. Hollymead Elementary School Electrical/mechanical: At the same time the media center is expanded, the school's electrical and mechanical systems should be upgraded for efficiency. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. 13. Red Hill Elementary School Roof replacement: The POD that was built in 1972 will require a new membrane roof during the 1987-88 fiscal year. This action will prevent the necessity of repairing an aging roof. Planning Commission Recommenda- tion: Necessary Priority FY 1987-88. Mr. Papenfuse clarified by saying that the roof replacement for Red Hill School is for the older part of the school. 14. Rose Hill Elementary School - Library, Air conditioning, Electrical/Mechanical: Because of inadequate land for expansion at the Rose Hill Elementary School site, no plans for major improvement are recommended until further examination is made of the need for a new community school in the Southern urban area. The School Board requests that if the Rose Hill School cannot be enlarged to accommodate an expanded enrollment that at least some short term relief be provided: the library expanded, the administrative area improved, and the school air conditioned. Planning Commis- sion Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. Mr. Horne said Rose Hill Elementary School's projects involve a library, air condition- ing and an electrical/mechanical project. Mr. Fisher asked if a decision had been made by the School Board to retain the Rose Hill School and use it for an indefinite period. Mr. Overstreet answered, "yes." He said that school officials believe that they will not be moving out of the Rose Hill School for at least the next decade. 15. Stony Point Elementary School - Major Renovations: To provide parity among our school facilities, Stony Point will require air conditioning, a gymnasium and remodeling of the original 1935 structure. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. 16. Woodbrook Elementary School - Electrical/mechanical: to update electrical and mechanical systems. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. Mrs. Cooke asked what the problems are at Woodbrook School. Mr. Papenfuse answered that Woodbrook School is cooled and heated by a heat pump, and that a more energy efficient heating system is needed. He also said that the current system has some age on it, and school officials have been informed that the system has already exceeded its estimated life, even with preventive maintenance. June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Page 8) O59 17. Yancey Elementary School - Major renovation: To provide parity with other County schools, Yancey will require air conditioning, a gymnasium and remodeling of the original 1960 structure. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. Mr. Fisher said that the renovations at Yancey are needed for parity with the other schools. He asked if these renovations could be done within the figures quoted. Mr. Papenfuse answered that these figures were the estimates from the consultant that was hired by the School Board. 18. Henley Middle School - Addition: To construct six classrooms in the 1989-90 fiscal year to prepare this school for its projected enrollment. Planning Commission Recommendation: Desirable priority FY 1989-90. Mr. Fisher commented that this situation with Henley School relates back to the Crozet School discussion. He said the $2,700,000 for the renovations for parity there versus well under a million dollars for similar changes requested at Rose Hill and Stony Point schools are questionable. He believes that this will start to raise questions, if these figures are done by the same people, as to whether or not the Crozet renovation figures are incorrect. Mr. Horne said that this is why the Commission did not want to fund the whole Crozet project this year. There needs to be more discussion on it. Mr. Way mentioned again that he thinks that the figures for Crozet are for considerable expansion of that building. Mr. Horne agreed that this was the understanding of the Planning Commission. 19. Henley Middle SchOol - Electrical/mechanical: Coupled with the expansion of Henley Elementary School should be an upgrade of the mechanical (heat pump) and electrical systems. Planning Commission Recommendation: Desirable priority FY 1989-90 20. Brownsville Elementary School - Electrical/mechanical: In addition to updating the mechanical and electrical systems, the exterior mortar joints should be evaluated for needed repairs. This school exhibits some of the same deterioration that was experienced and corrected at Jouett and Woodbrook. Planning Commission Recommenda- tion: Deferrable priority FY 1990-91. 21. 22. Greer Elementary School - Electrical/mechanical: The school was built in 1974/75. It is anticipated that some minor work will be required to update its electrical and mechanical systems during the 1990-91 fiscal year. Planning Commission Recom- mendation: Deferrable priority FY 1990-91. Jouett Middle School - Electrical/mechanical: Like many County schools build in the mid-sixties, this one uses a heap pump for cooling and heating. It is antici- pated that this system as well as telephone, intercom and other electrical systems may need attention. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deferrable priority FY 1990-91. 23. Walton Middle School - Electrical/mechanical: To update the electrical and mechan- ical systems. Planning Commission Recommendation: Deferrable priority FY 1990-91. 24. Western Albemarle High School Field Development: Because the sports teams at Western use the Henley fields for practice, each participant must cross Route 250 from Western to the Henley fields. The potential for a serious accident exists. It is requested that three practice fields be constructed on the western Albemarle High School side of Route 250 on land currently owned by the School Board. Plan- ning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Mr. Horne said the Western Albemarle High School field development project is a joint request by the Education Department and Parks and Recreation for development of some playing fields at Western Albemarle High School. He said that during practice, various athletic teams have to cross the roadway to go to fields at Henley. Mr. Horne said that the Parks and Recreation Department is the agency that largely represented this project before the Planning Commission, and the Parks and Recreation Department was of the opinion that this is a safety problem and needed to be addressed. The Planning Commission placed it in an urgent category because it accepted the Parks and Recreation Department's explanation. Mr. Horne mentioned, too, that the cost of the project would be split between the Education Department and the Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Papenfuse mentioned a $10,000 fund that can be used for the Western Albemarle High School field development project. Mr. Fisher asked if it was a matching fund, and Mr. Papenfuse explained that this money had come from fund raising that had been earmarked for additional fields. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Board would be given any more information on the Crozet Elementary School project. Mr. Papenfuse responded that school officials agree that planning needs to be done, but the expansion needs to be deferred until the population figures are more concrete. Mr. Lindstrom pointed out that safety problems at Crozet School need to be addressed. He is wondering if the Board of Supervisors could be given information as to the cost for the parity and safety improvements at that school, with the figures for the expansion excluded. Mr. Agnor asked Mr. Lindstrom when he wants these figures. Mr. Lindstrom said that he would June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Paqe 9) like to have the information as soon as he can get it, if it is available. Mr. Agnor asked Mr. Papenfuse if the numbers are available, and Mr. Papenfuse answered that he would have to look through the consultant's report. POLICE~ FIRE, RESCUE AND SAFETY Fire Service Training Center: To build a training center for area fire service organizations. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Volunteer Fire Departments Advance Allocation Program: To provide working capital for volunteer fire departments and equipment needs. No specific projects are being requested at this time. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. New Vehicle - 4x4 BLS Ambulance: Due to the terrain features of a large portion of the service areas, a 4-wheel drive ambulance is necessary. The new vehicle would replace two existing vehicles which.the squad plans to donate to other squads in the region. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority 1986-87. Mr. Horne stated that the finishing of the funding for the fire service training center is the first project he will discuss. He said the Commission was extremely hopeful that this would be the last funding that was needed to finish this project. The Advance Allocation Program for the Volunteer Fire Departments is the next project under this category. Mr. Horne said that there was considerable discussion of exactly what funding level was necessary or what the Board had or had not decided in the past as to what it wanted to do with this particular project. Mr. Fisher commented that the Board had already committed to five years at $200,000 a year for this project. He said that four years have already gone by, and that 1986-87 will be the last year. He stated that after that, the funding will go back to zero. He said there will be no new appropriations from the County for this program. The idea of this property is that there will be a pay back of the prior loans that will create a pool that will make funds available to the fire departments. He asked Mr. Agnor if something has to be shown as an appropriation. Mr. Agnor answered, "yes." He said that the $200,000 will not be shown each year, but instead a schedule of the pay back money will be shown as going back out to the departments. Mr. Bowie mentioned that the fire department personnel that he has met with can't cut their expenses, and they are raising all of the money that is possible to raise. He is concerned about what will happen if there is not enough money available for the fire departments. Mr. Fisher answered that the appropriation that is being discussed is for equipment and buildings and is not for operational expenses. Mr. Bowie said that the fire departments still have a need for these vehicles. Mr. Fisher answered that when the schedule was set up for the five year period, it was hoped that this would determine whether it would solve the kinds of crisis situations that the fire departments were having pertaining to fire engines and buildings. He said, however, the Board did not commit to do this forever. He thinks that this situation needs to be considered~again, because he feels that the County might buy more equipment and buildings than are really needed, if the funding is prepaid and handled on an interest free basis. Mr. Agnor said that the Jefferson Country Firefighter's Association could also be asked to give the Board a five year projection of its needs. Mr. Fisher pointed out that the County had anticipated a five year payback. He said that now it looks as though the payback is being allowed to stretch out into longer periods. He stated that the County has made it easy for the fire departments to borrow interest free money, but, the pool is not restored. Mr. Agnor said that he had indicated to the fire departments that the County was counting on the fund recycling itself out of the paybacks. By extending the paybacks, the pool is diminishing. Mr. Fisher suggested giving the fire departments information as to what money is avail- able and then see what their priorities are. Mr. Jones said that the fire departments are setting as their target that they will recover the first three year paybacks. He pointed out that they are not requesting an additional $200,000 a year. He said that the fire departments have 30 pieces of equipment. The departments have considered a replaCement cycle and think, based on today's costs, that they can recover the paybacks. Mr. Fisher stated that interest rates are not as high as they were when this project was first started, so there are other options available now. Mr. Horne informed the Board that the volunteer rescue squad at Scottsville is request- ing a 4 X 4 BLS ambulance. There was no discussion of the ambulance request. HIGh, WAYS AND TRANSPORTATION Hydraulic Road Pathway: Construction of an asphalt pathway along Whitewood Road and Greenbrier Drive to provide an unbroken pedestrian pathway from Hydraulic Road to Commonwealth Drive. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1987-88. Route 678 Relocation: Improve the intersection of Route 678 with RoUte 250 to provide a safer intersection with adequate sight distance. This intersection is currently unsafe for the school buses that use it. School bus traffic will in- crease when the new Ivy School is built. Planning Commission Recommendation: Include in CIP as priority in FY 1986-87 only if matching funds from Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation is guaranteed. A request for funding for a pathway along Hydraulic Road is listed, but Mr. Horne said that the actual design is for an asphalt pathway along Whitewood Road and Greenbrier Drive. June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986)~%~' ~:' ____~qe 10) 061 He said that the intent of the original $5,000 allocation last year was for planning. Mr. Horne stated that the Department of Planning and Community Development studied .the neighbor- hood and attempted to provide a pedestrian access from the Berkeley/Four Seasons area toward Albemarle High School. This recommended pathway is not only fundable, but it does not go across isolated wooded areas or private property. Mr. Lindstrom mentioned that he was the person who originally requested the Hydraulic Road pathway, but he has never heard of this proposal. He has been asking if the pathway could be considered along Hydraulic Road because that is where a lot of people walk who are going to schools. He is not sure that he understands this new proposal, and he would like to have an explanation later as to how all of this came about. He does not agree with this proposal, at least based upon the information that he has now, because he thinks there is a safety problem for people who are walking or bicycling to school from all of the residential areas that have grown up along Hydraulic Road. His idea was to get those people off the road as they go to school. He said there could also be a safety problem along Whitewood Road and Greenbrier, but he does not believe that the velocity and amount of traffic could be as much as that on Hydraulic Road. Mr. Horne said he believes the Board members are already familiar with the relocation of Route 678 project. He mentioned that the anticipated level of County funding, if some funding is received from the Department of Highways and Transportation, will be approximately $150,000. This County funding would be for engineering and right-of-way acquisition. The Highway Department would pay for the actual construction cost~. He reminded the Board that this project was placed as a priority item in the Six Year Plan in order to get the Highway Department funding, but he went on to say that this project is placed as a relatively high priority item in this program due to the fact that the Commission is attempting to time the relocation of Route 678 so it could be available at the time of the opening of the new Meriwether Lewis School. Mr. Fisher asked when the state funds would become available. Mr. Agnor explained that the state, on an annual basis, has to match local monies within the limits of its funding capabilities. The state asked if the County had any projects that require matching funds. The County has responded that it has this one project. The state has now asked for confirma- tion, by June 15, of whether or not this project is scheduled for next year. He said that the state is considering putting this request into next year's cycle, but all requests will have to be considered. Mr. Agnor added that County staff has told the state that the $150,000 local money would possibly be contingent upon the Federal Revenue Sharing law being extended beyond this current fiscal year. The state officials replied that localities' federal revenue sharing money does not have to be taken into this program, but that general fund money could be used, instead. He wanted the Board to be aware that if this project proceeds, and if federal revenue sharing is not extended, it will be the first time that the Board has taken General Fund money and put it into a significant road project. Mr. Fisher commented that it was decided when the Board looked at the Route 678 project in conjunction with the Meriwether Lewis School, that this improvement should be made. MISCELLANEOUS County Computer Upgrade: To purchase the computer equipment necessary to handle the increased work load of County administration. Planning Commission Recommenda- tion: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Only the payments on the purchase/lease agree- ment should be funded for all years. Other expenditures should be based on demon- strated need. Mr. Horne said there was a lengthy discussion concerning this request by Mr. Kruger at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Horne said the Planning Commission is recommending funding at this time of only the payment on the purchase/lease agreement for the equipment acquired during 1985-86. The Commission is not· recommending funding of additional project request, unless there is a demonstration that these pieces of equipment are, in fact, being generated by additional needs. He said that the Commission did not feel that the equipment was necessary at this point. (Mr. Fisher left at 4:30 P.M.) Mr. Agnor added that the Planning Commission did not have access to the Data Processing consultant's report. He said that the cast figures for the computer upgrade project came from the consultant's report that the Board approved last fall to cover the next five years. From Mr. Agnor's perspective, these have already been approved by the Board, and are being inserted for the first time in the CIP cycle. Mr. Bowie stated that the Audit Committee had recommended that the Board accept the consultant's report. But, he does not believe that it was their intent to say how everything in the report would be spent. It was, however, a basis for starting this CIP program. He said that items listed in the consultant's report will have to be prioritized, and he does not feel that the consultant's report needs to be followed 100 percent. He said that he had met twice with Data Processing staff some time ago, but there has not been another recent meeting. Mr. Agnor said this project is subject to an appropriation in the first year of the CIP and it matches what the consultant's Five Year Plan that is needed. He said that the consul- tant's recommendation has been diminished to a lower level, and this request is representa- tive of those numbers. He added that if a piece of equipment is not needed in two years, then it will not be purchased. (Mr. Fisher returned at 4:31 P.M.) Mr. Lindstrom asked if the expenses of $96,750 that are incurring in what was originally requested are things that necessitate future expenditures or are they self-contained. Mr. Agnor said it is possible for the County to buy into something in this current year that will obligate it for three years. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Agnor if he is speaking in terms of payments, and Mr. Agnor said he is speaking about the system, itself. Mr. Agnor suggested that consideration be given to what was needed when the consultant's report was finished and what was needed when the report was finalized for the Board. 062 June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Page 11) Mr. Bowie commented, that since the last Audit Committee meeting, he has not had a chance to get the data processing list prioritized, so he has no specific recommendations at this time. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Horne if he felt the Planning Commission's reaction was due to a frustration of not understanding all of the details, or was there some concrete suggestion of things that the Commission felt were not needed. Mr. Horne responded that the Commission's reaction was due to the frustration of not understanding all of the details. He said, however, that Mr. Kruger was at the meeting and there was a long discussion about the re- quest. Mr. Agnor suggested that the Board members read Pages 26, 27 and 28 of the CIP report for an explanation of the project, and then the Audit Committee could come back to the Board with recommendations. Mr. Lindstrom said that it helped him due to the fact that the $96,750 is in the top, right hand corner of the first page which indicates to him that the rest of it is a breakdown of this figure. Mr. Agnor agreed. Mr. Lindstrom read statements from Page 26, and mentioned the costs associated with each item. He said he did not know if these things are more important than air conditioning at Burley, but at least he could understand Burley's problem. Mr. Bowie commented that I. B. on Page 26 of the CIP Program assumes that the programs have to be stored, but he is not sure that the programs even need to be done. He is having trouble with this. Mr. Agnor pointed out that the program referred to on Page 26 of the CIP Program is the existing program. He said what Mr. Kruger is saying is that for the programs already on the computer, by the fourth quarter of 1986-87, will very likely run out of storage space. Rather than wait until 1987-88 to take care of this problem, Mr. Kruger is saying that the money needs to be reserved in case it is needed. Mr. Agnor also pointed out that this is not adding new programs. Mr. Lindstrom asked what happens if there is not enough storage capacity. Will that information be lost. Mr. Agnor answered that the storage and retrieval of the data would stop in terms of the storage capacity. He gave an example of the business license file which is getting bigger every year. Mr. Lindstrom said that he needs to study this situation some more. Mr. Melvin Breeden commented that he does not think that there is anything that Mr. Kruger is asking for in 1986-87 that will commit the Board to future expenditures. He said that these are mostly one time items. However, an additional unit of the same type may be required in the future, if storage needs to be expanded again. (Mr. Henley left at 4:38 P.M. Mr. Fisher left at 4:39 P.M. and Mrs. Cooke took over the Chair.) PARKS AND RECREATION City-County Urban Park - Route 1421, Elk's Drive near Pantops Mountain: To pur- chase and develop the "Mahanes Tract" on Elk's Drive by the City and County for an urban park. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Southern Regional Park: To purchase and develop a lake and park in southern Albemarle County with facilities similar to Chris Greene and Mint Springs Parks. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Greenwood Community Center - Outdoor Basketball Court: Funds to construct an 80-foot by 60-foot hardcourt area with two basketball goals for use during summer playground program. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. Mint springs Park - Handicapped Accessibility: Funds to provide handicapped accessibility for swimming and picnicking. Plan calls for hard-surface pathways from handicapped parking areas and includes modifications to beach area, bath house, picnic shelter comfort station, tot lot and parking area. Planning Commis- sion Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. Ivy Creek Natural Area - Tenant House Improvements: To install central heating system, insulation, and storm windows and doors (1986-87). To repair and paint roof, repair chimneys and replace guttering and downspouts (1987-88). Cost will be shared by City. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. e Crozet Park - Building and Grounds Improvements: Replace and relocate heating unit and hot water heater and replace windows and doors (1986-87); Repair roof, renovate restrooms and playground structure (1987-88); resurface basketball courts and install four goals (1988-89); add concrete floor to shelter (1989-90). Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1987-88. Red Hill - Baseball Field Improvements: Purchase and install backstop, skin infield, minor grading, rototill adding sand and clay. Planning Commission Recom- mendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. Scottsville Community Center - Roof repair: Repair roof over cafeteria, restrooms, halls and locker rooms; replace and repair existing canopies which are leaking and sagging badly. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Western Albemarle - Tennis Court Resurfacing: Resurface four tennis courts at Western Albemarle. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent Priority FY 1986-87. 10. Western Albemarle Field Development: Develop three multi-purpose fields each about 120 yards by 60 yards. Joint project with Education. Planning Commission Recom- mendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. 11. Beaver Creek Park - Handicapped accessibility: Funds to provide handicapped access to bank fishing and to comfort station. Plans call for hard surface paths from parking area to and along shoreline and to comfort station. Includes modifi- cations to comfort stations. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1988-89. June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) ____~qe 12) . 063 12. Greenwood Community Center - Wooden Playground Structure: The present outdoor facilities are limited for young children. Plan to build a wooden playground structure. Planning Commission Recommendation: Desirable priority FY 1989-.90. 13. Stony Point Tennis Courts: This is a request from the community to construct two tennis courts at Stony Point School. With the addition of the tennis courts at the Mahanes site and the relatively low population of this area, this project is not being recommended for funding at this time. Mr. Horne next discussed with the Board the projects under the Parks and Recreation Department. He said that the first project dealt with the committed payments and necessary allocations for the City/County urban park. There was no discussion of this item. Mr. Horne said that for the Southern Regional Park, which, at this time, is at an unspecified location, the Commission is recommending funding~for land acquisition and engi- neering. Mr. Way commented that he did not think that the funding that has been allocated for this land acquisition and engineering is sufficient. There was no further discussion. Mr. Horne stated that another project dealing with Parks and Recreation is a handicapped accessibility project at the Mint Springs Park. He said this is very similar to the ones that were implemented at other parks in previous years. Improvements to the tenant house at the Ivy Creek Natural Area is the next project. Mr. Lindstrom questioned the amount of $28,000 for repairing and painting the roof, repairing chimneys and replacing gutters and downspouts at the Ivy Creek Natural Area tenant house. Mr. Horne said that a similar discussion had taken place at the Planning Commission meeting. He said that it is a very expensive project, but Mr. Mullaney has detailed explanations as to why it is so expensive. After hearing Mr. Mullaney's explanations, the Commission felt that this amount is needed to make those improvements. Mr. Horne went on to say that Mr. Mullaney's explanation was that the original development of the Ivy Creek Natural Area and the Foundation involved is tied to this house, and Mr. Mullaney felt that it was more in keeping with the area. The Commission suggested something more~on the order of a modular or mobile home. Mrs. Cooke asked that the Board diScuss the improvements to the tenant house instead of considering a mobile or modular home. Mr. Lindstrom said that it will cost close to $45,000 to do the renovations at Ivy Creek. He mentioned again how expensive the work will be for the roof, gutters and downspouts. Mr. Horne explained that, from the pictures that were presented, the roof was essentially going to be replaced and the chimney will be entirely rebuilt. He commented that there is noi ~eat in the structure at this time, except for an inefficient wood stove. He said that there is wiring hanging from the ceiling, so rewiring of the entire house will be required. He added that the project amounts to almost renovating and rebuilding the entire house. Mrs. Cooke asked if anyone lives in the house at this time. Mr. Horne said that he is not sure. Mrs. Cooke wondered if AHIP could work on this project, and Mr. Agnor replied that he knew AHIP's schedule was backlogged, but it is the sort of work that AHIP does. Mrs. Cooke then pointed out that the City was sharing the costs. Mr. Horne stated that this is just one-half of the request. The total request is for $81,000. Mr. Way mentioned that the Vocational Technical School usually builds a house every year. Mrs. Cooke suggested that the staff lOok into some of the possibilities mentioned by the Board at this meeting. Mr. Lindstrom said he thought Mr. Way's suggestion that possibly this could be a Voca- tional Technical School project is a good one. He said that the Vocational Technical School did projects such as this one to make money, and he would rather pay them to do this work than a contractor. Mr. Tucker agreed. Next, Mr. Horne talked about the building and grounds improvements at Claudius Crozet Park. He said that these are a series of improvements that will take place over a number of years that deal with renovations of the restrooms, roof repairs, replacing windows and doors and a number of other improvements. There was no discussion of this item. Tennis court resurfacing at Western Albemarle High School was the next project discussed by Mr. Horne. He said the explanation for this project states that resurfacing is an urgent priority to the agency because the structure and foundation will begin to be damaged soon, if resurfacing does not take place. Mr. Horne stated that this is the Parks and Recreation portion of the Western Albemarle High School field development project which was already explained under the Education projects. Mr. Way wondered if there was a particular reason why the handicapped accessibility project at Beaver Creek Park was delayed a year. Mr. Horne answered that there was no reason except that funding was becoming very limited at that point. Mr. Horne mentioned the Stony Point tennis courts. He said that this was a request from the community of Stony Point that was forwarded to the Commission by the Parks and Recreation Department without its endorsement. The Commission suggests that the tennis courts not be included for funding. Utilities - County Projects Berkshire Road Channel: To provide adequate drainage facilities to accommodate future development approved prior to the passage of the County Stormwater Detention Ordinance. Improve alignment of existing channel and line with concrete or rip-rap. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1987-88. 064 June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) Woodbrook Channel: To relieve stream erosion problems adjacent to existing subdivision lots. Widen channel in vicinity of old Woodbrook sewage lagoons. Planning Commission Recommendation: Desirable priority FY 1989-90. Bennington Road Channel: Relocate existing channel and line with rip-rap and grass to stabilize the severe erosion in this area. Five sewer lines are exposed and are in danger of being washed out if a large storm should occur. Planning Commission Recommendation - Urgent priority FY 1986-87. There should be landowner participa- tion if only in token amounts. e King George Circle Storm Sewer: Existing channel has a severe erosion problem and limits the landowners' use of their property. Planning Commission Recommendation: Necessary priority FY 1987-88. Rio Heights Drainage Channel: The existing channel has a severe erosion problem that is a danger to existing sewer service lines and trees. One sewer service has washed out. Planning Commission Recommendation: Urgent priority FY 1986-87. Upgraded from necessary due to environmental problems similar to Bennington Road Channel. Mr. Horne stated that these are largely a series of channel or drainage improvements submitted by the Engineering Department. He said that many of these projects will be either putting the water in an existing drainage channel underground or rip-rapping and protecting the shore of the channel from further erosion. These projects will take place at Woodbrook, Bennington Road, King George Circle and Rio Heights. Mr. Horne said that maps and descrip- tions of the projects have been given to Board members. Mr. Horne then mentioned that in terms of the revenue projections and the financial information, that while the Commission made an attempt to try to project cash flow and understand what needed to be done with the revenues, it decided that it would not be very effective at that point. There was not sufficient information to make firm recommendations to the Board on how these projects needed to be funded in terms of cash flow. Mr. Horne said he believes that the financial information does need to be updated and addressed in more detail by Mr. Jones or Mr. Agnor before the Board can rely on what is available for certain years and how the cash will have to work for the projects to be funded. He pointed out that in some cases the totals appear to be more than what is available in certain years. Mr. Horne also mentioned that funding has been put into the beginning of the CIP cycle because there are some very expensive education projects that were noted as urgent projects and should not be deferred. He said that starting on Page Three of the CIP report there is a list that goes through the priorities that were set by the Commission. Mr. Agnor asked Mr. Jones to comment about the revenues that are shown on Page Five of the CIP report. Mr. Jones mentioned some of the changes in the revenues on Page Five of the CIP report and pointed out that the Literary Fund Loan column does not add horizontally, and should be $6,000,000. He also mentioned that the total funds available, going horizontally across the page, should be approximately $18,600,000. He stated that the staff would rework the entire page for the Board. Mr. Jones next talked about Page 10 of the CIP report. He asked the Board to look at the bottom line, "Grand Total Planning Commission Recommendation," for 1986-87. He said the total there is $8,600,000 and it should be $9,900,000. He said that for the 1987-88 column, instead of $4,300,000, the total should be $5,100,000. He said that the accrual could be carried all the way across the page, horizontally. Mr. Agnor stated that the grand total for revenues is $18,600,000 and the grand total of the Planning Commission's recommendations is approximately $19,100,000. He reminded the Board that the CIP is not balanced exactly and the projects' dollar figures will change as well as the revenues. Mr. Agnor then mentioned that the staff has some recommendations for shifting some of the funds. He suggested that the staff make the shifts and give the Board the information in a revised form later. Mr. Bowie said that many of the Board members may wish to shift priorities. He asked how they can get this accomplished. Mr. Lindstrom said that the Board needs all of the information that is missing, such as information on the Crozet project. He asked when the Public Hearing is scheduled. Mr. Agnor answered that the Public Hearing is proposed for July 2. He said he believes that all of the information can be provided to the Board by next Wednesday night's meeting. Mr. Way said he feels that the Board needs to talk again briefly about the Capital Improvements Program before the Public Hearing. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that a work session on the Capital Improvements Program be scheduled for 4:00 P.M. on June 18. Everyone present agreed. Agenda Item No. 3. Work Session: Business License Ordinance. The following memorandum dated June 6, 1986, was received from Mr. Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance: "The purpose of the Ordinance is to generate revenue as permitted under State law. The original intent was to place a tax on the privilege of doing business in the County of Albemarle for every business, profession and/or occupation regardless of the number of individuals engaged in that business. It is not used to regulate business for the public welfare. The Ordinance was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on March 15, 1973, and was subsequently amended June 13, 1973; May 15, 1975; April 21, 1976; November 14, 1979; September 10, 1980; March 10, 1982; and May 11, 1983. The March 10, 1982 amendment was a major revision. The Ordinance has been codified with related ordinances from the Code of 1967 as revised in 1969 and 1971 into Chapter 11 of the County Code. The Code of Virginia has authorized the levying of a license tax, subject to certain limitations, since 1962. June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) __~age 14) Attached is a summary of revenue generated by the Ordinance since inception. The percent of local source revenue has increased from 2.72 per cent in the fiscal year ended June 30, 1973, to 6.03 percent in the fiscal year ended June 30, 1985. Current legislative activity in Congress may require greater reliance on the License Tax in future years. The License Tax is administered by two full time employees and related supervisory and clerical support. They scrutinize Schedule C's and E's supplied by the Virginia Department of Taxation, as well as zoning applica- tions and newspapers to ensure compliance with the Ordinance provisions. License applications are mailed in March to over 3,000 taxpayers with an April 30th due date. Applications are processed, assessments made and tax bills mailed with a due date of June 1st. Staff is currently processing delinquent applications, tax bills and payments. At this time, there are 3,439 records on the License File. Additional records will be added as the current year licenses are processed. A direc- tory of licenses is available upon request. Presently, there are two (2) authors in Albemarle County who report royal- ties on Schedule E, Form 1040. They have been reporting since 1980 and 1983. The average license fee is $129. There are approximately ten (10) authors who report receipts on Schedule C, Form 1040. The average tax will be available when current year processing has been completed. The loss in total revenues from exempting authors would not be significant. However, staff recommends that authors not be exempted at this time. Persons with gross receipts under $5,000 are exempted from taxation. This exemption has been increased from an original amount of $500 to $2,500 to $5,000 to eliminate small taxpayers. A valid and convincing argument for exemption can be made by many individuals subject to the License Ordinance. In the aggregate, the revenue loss could be significant. The last major revision to the Ordinance was passed March 10, 1982. There are a considerable number of areas in the Ordinance that currently need revision. Some revisions are required by changes in the Code of Virginia while others are required for more efficient administration of the Ordinance. After the completion of the current year's processing, and a staff review of the License Ordinance, the Staff requests an extension of time in order to bring to the Board of Supervisors a full and comprehen- sive revision of the County's License Ordinance. Mr. Breeden summarized his memo by saying that the Business License Ordinance was originally established to generate revenue under the guidelines set up by the State Code. It was intended to apply to every business or profession operating within the County. It was not intended to be a regulatory type license, but purely a source of revenue. It was origi- nally adopted by the Board of Supervisors on March 15, 1973 and has been amended on a number of occasions since that time. Mr. Breeden mentioned a major revision in 1982 to bring the ordinance in conformance with a major revision in the State Code that eliminated a majority of state licenses on business activities. He said that a summary is attached to the report that shows the revenues that have been generated by the Business License Ordinance. He said that currently the Business Licence Ordinance produces $1,800,000 a year in revenue or six percent of the total County's revenues from local sources. Mr. Breeden said that currently the Business License Ordinance is administered primarily with two full-time employees and related supervisory and clerical support. He gave the duties of the employees. Mr. Breeden then mentioned that the original application for the license has to be filed by April 30 of each year. The bills are to be prepared and mailed out within a two week period after that, with payment being due on June 1. He said that this area is causing the staff some problem now because an amendment to the ordinance several years ago moved the filing date of the application from March 31 to April 30 in an attempt to get the filing date of the application after the date of the filing date of state and federal income tax returns. Mr. Breeden said that the application date is too close to the payment date for the office to comfortably get the bills out. He would like to discuss moving the application date back to April 15 or moving the payment date to June 15 or June 30. Mr. Breeden informed the Board that there are currently 3,439 business licenses which are currently being issued. He said that the discussion today is because of the request for exemption of the royalties received by authors within the County. He said there are two authors reporting revenues since 1980, and that their average license fee is $129. He said that these two authors report on Schedule E which is the normal place for filing royalties on the federal income tax return. There are approximately 10 other authors who are reporting receipts on Schedule C which is a normal business return. The amount for the license fees of these authors are not available at this time, but Mr. Breeden believes it will be less than the $129 fee for the other two authors. Mr. Breeden repOrted that from the federal income tax standpoint, there is not a definite requirement by IRS as to which form should be used. He said that the biggest difference between the two is that those reporting on Schedule E, because it is considered to be a passive income if they are not actively involved in a business, are not subject to self employment tax. The amounts reported on Schedule C are subject to self employment tax. Mrs. Cooke stated that if someone is an author, then he or she makes money that way, and she considers that person to be self-employed. Mr. Breeden agreed. He said that a lot depended, however, on the terminology of "income." The income that an author receives is June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Paqe 15) normally referred to as royalties that are paid to him by a publishing company. As a general rule, royalties are looked at as income from something where an investment has been made. It appears to Mr. Breeden that an income from an author could be better compared to a commission or other type of income. Mr. Lindstrom asked if there was a third way of reporting an author's income. Mr. Breeden replied,"yes." He said an author's income can be reported on the first page of Schedule 1040, which has a section entitled, "Miscellaneous or Other Income." He said that the person involved in the case that is in question today, had been reporting on this sched- ule for a number of years. He said the reason that it was not known to the Finance Depart- ment was because it was shown as other income on Schedule 1040 with no expenses. Mr. Lindstrom asked if there is a penalty for reporting it on the 1040 Form, and Mr. Breeden answered that there is no penalty. Mr. Bowie commented that if the Schedule A is used, minor deductions could be listed under "Miscellaneous Deductions." Mr. Breeden said that minor deductions could be reported under "Miscellaneous Deductions," but he would say that it is questionable as to whether or not they should be reported there. He said that neither the 1040 Forms nor the itemized deduction forms are returned to the Finance Department. The Finance Department only receives copies of Schedules E, C and F. Mr. Breeden stated that this concludes his review of the situation. He said that there are several items that are causing the office staff some problems that he would like to discuss with the Board whenever the Board is ready. Mr. Lindstrom said he has a problem with an ordinance that, despite diligent efforts by the County staff, cannot be fairly enforced. He understands that a lot of money comes from the business license fees, but he still has his reservations. He also thinks that it will be good to look at the enabling legislation as well as the ordinance and revenues. He told Mr. Breeden that he appreciates his work on the business license fees, because he knows that there have been a lot of complaints. Mr. Bowie commented that he has no desire to see a complete revision of the ordinance unless it is something that would make the job of administering it easier. Mr. Breeden said that the staff does not want a major revision to the Business License Ordinance, but he would like to clear up some things, from an administrative standpoint that are causing some diffi- culties. He mentioned again that there is only a 30 day period between the due date and the payment date for business licenses. He thinks this time is inadequate for the staff as well as the taxpayer. He would like to have at least 30 days for the staff to prepare the bills, and if at all possible, he would like for the taxpayer to have 30 days notice before the payment is due. Mr. Breeden stated that another problem is that when a business license is issued, the operation of the business should be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. He said that there have been a number of cases where the business was in operation, but for one reason or another, zoning requirements were not being met. He added that the staff has concerns about not issuing the license simply because the business is in violation of the Zoning Ordinance and then collecting revenue from business. He asked the Board to give this problem some thought, also. Mrs. Cooke asked Mr. Breeden if he is getting complaints from merchants who are con- cerned about the competition of people who have businesses within their homes. She mentioned that these merchants are paying for a business license and maintaining their places of business. Mr. Breeden replied that his office receives a number of complaints concerning home occupations. He said that the complaints are difficult to deal with because in many cases the person calling with the complaint will not give his or her name. He said that the staff tries to follow up on complaints, but if someone is operating a business from a base- ment or room in a house, the person will not give the County staff any indication that this is happening, except on an income tax return, He said that in many cases those businesses are doing less than the $5,000 minimum, anyway. Mrs. Cooke asked how the County can deal with a business that does not collect sales tax. Mr. Breeden replied that the sales tax issue is handled by the state. He said that there is a sales tax representative that works out of the Finance Department approximately three days a week, and this representative would look into any situation that the staff is aware of. He said, however, that identifying where violations are occurring is a problem. He also mentioned that several changes have been made in the minimum license requirement, and that the ordinance requires the person to report to the County what their receipts are even if it is less than the $5,000 minimum. The County will then issue an exemption certificate. He believes that even this type of administration for the minimum license requirement should have a fee attached, because of the time involved in following up on these cases. Mrs. Cooke said she believes there are a tremendous amount of people avoiding the sales tax. Mr. Breeden agreed with Mrs. Cooke, and he said that home occupations and home sales have grown in the last five to ten years. He believes that this will continue to bother the merchants. He said that to locate those people and identify them, will depend on the mer- chants reporting them to-the County. He said that the staff will get involved, if these people can be identified. Mr. Lindstrom asked what happens when people are in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Agnor answered that the County pursues enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance, but that it may take months to do so. In the meantime, the businesses are operating without a license. Mr. Bowie said that his business is technically not in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. This is because his sign did not come, so he could not get a sign permit. He said, however, he filed all of the papers, but he can see how it can be a problem when there is a violation of the ordinance. Mr. Breeden said that in situations such as Mr. Bowie described, the staff proceeds with the issuance of the license and revenues are collected, unless the Zoning Office indicates that there is a problem. June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Paqel__!~ 06? Agenda Item No. 4. Recess for Supper. Mrs. Cooke recessed the meeting at 5:25 P.M. until 7:30 P.M. at the Vocational Technical Center. Agenda Item No. 5. Reconvene at 7:30 P.M., Voc-Tech, Rio Road, for a joint meeting with the Albemarle County School Board. Present at the meeting were School Board members Messrs. Charles Tolbert, Charles Armstrong, Robert Taylor, and Walter Perkins and Superintendent Andrew Overstreet. Mr. Fisher announced that the County Attorney would not be present tonight so Agenda Item 11 will be deleted from the agenda. Agenda Item No. 6. End of School Year Summary. Mr. Overstreet said that he would like to give a preliminary projection on the school system's fiscal status. He stated that the revenues would be approximately $120,000 higher than had been projected, due to several factors. The most significant factor is that the average daily membership is higher and is at approximately 8,900. The figure had originally been projected at 8,850. He said, that there have been some savings on expenditures in a variety of accounts. Mr. Overstreet mentioned a significant savings because of the reduction of gasoline and oil prices. He believes .this will bring a savings of approximately $34,000. He Said that, overall, school system officials are projecting that the school budget will have an excess of approximately $220,000 at the end of this fiscal year. He said, however, that school officials have asked that some of this projected reserve be used for other things, which the Board of Supervisors has already approved. Mr. Overstreet reminded Board members that $153,000 has been projected to be carry-over funding in the fiscal year's 1986-87 operating budget, and $25,000 has been targeted for carryover funding for the Text- book Fund. School officials are hoping to get rid of this year's deficit in the Textbook Fund, which has been a combination of deficits for several years, of approximately $30,000. He said the deficit was larger than that at the beginning of the year, and a number of things have been done this year to control the deficit. Mr. Overstreet said that because of the contingencies placed against the reserve fund, the balance is projected to be in the $12,000 to $15,000 range. He said that sometimes late revenue is received from the state on special projects, and he believes that there will be other accounts that will not be depleted. Mr. Overstreet gave credit to Mr. David Papenfuse, who, Mr. Overstreet, said had worked closely with him all year in managing the budget and insuring that it was not overexpended. Mr. Overstreet said that when problem areas were projected, they were dealt with at the time, and planning was also done for the coming year. He said that the Board of Supervisors will be receiving a complete, itemized summary report at the end of the fiscal year. (Mrs. Cooke arrived at 7:38 P.M.) Mr. Taylor asked if there were any questions from the Board of Supervisors on Mr. Overstreet's report. Mr. Fisher thanked Mr. Overstreet and said that this was one of the best reports that the supervisors had received in a long time from the School Board. He thinks that all of the people involved deserve credit. Agenda Item No. 7. Discussion: Commonality of Personnel Policies. Mr. Agnor reported that he and Mr. OVerstreet periodically discuss commonality of personnel policies. He went on to say that Dr. Hastings, Mr. Overstreet and he had discussed the idea of presenting a draft to the two Boards of a broad-based policy that would address the matter of commonality. He said such a draft is attached to the agenda. Mr. Agnor said that the draft is a statement that says that the Boards agree with the principle of the policy and will charge the Superintendent of Schools and .the County Executive with the responsibility for administering the policies and making any recommendations, when appropriate, to bring them more closely in alignment with each other. He mentioned that he and Mr. Overstreet had discussed another document which they decided not to have the Boards approve. This document was a specific procedure for analyzing general increases for school classified employees and general government employees in anticipation of budget work. Mr. Agnor and Mr. Overstreet decided, that this procedure should be handled administratively, and the two of them should develop and follow it. If it worked as it should, it would not have to be a policy of the Board. Mr. Agnor recommended that, the two Boards consider the adoption of this policy at tonight's meeting. Mr. Fisher asked if this is a joint recommendation. Mr. Agnor answered, "yes." Mr. Overstreet commented that the School Board's policies usually require a second reading. Mr. Taylor added that he would have to have a motion to that effect if the policy is to be adopted at this meeting. Mr. Agnor said he was not suggesting that the School Board bypass its policy of two readings, but he believes that the process of getting this policy adopted needs to be started right away. Mr. Fisher asked if policies relating to teachers have to handled differently. Mr. Overstreet said that this has been a topic of discussion, and that some of the school system's employees are state employees and others are similar to state employees. He mentioned that the Superintendent of Schools is a state constitutional officer in that the localities are required to have one. He said, however, that he and Mr. Agnor felt that the part of the policy that states, "where appropriate and consistent with local policies-and State statutes" would take care of this problem. Mr. Bowie stated that he has no problem with the policy, because it seems to cover everyone, including teachers. Mr. Fisher commented that this draft sounds very good, and he agrees with the principle of trying to work toward common goals. He said that he had not seen this draft until tonight, but he believes that the two Boards should consider it very soon. Mr. Tolbert agreed with Mr. Fisher that he believes that the principle stated is good. He said he does have a problem with the statement, however, he would not mind working on a policy such as this to get it into a form that would be agreeable to him. He read the last June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) sentence of the draft to the Boards, and said that he assumes that the County Executive and the Superintendent of Schools are responsible for administering the policies of the Boards anyway, without making this statement. He said, that by making the statement, it implies to him that the Boards are holding the Superintendent and County Executive responsible for insuring that the policies are consistent, rather than having the two of them just being responsible for the policy. The difficulty is that the policies have to be set by the Boards, and to imply that the two officers have been given a charge for consistency of the policies causes him concern. He thinks that this draft implies that the Boards have turned the responsibility over to the two officers, when, he feels, that it is really the Boards' problem. Another concern of Mr. Tolbert's is that as long as the two Boards operate indepen- dently of each other, he does not know how this policy could be enforced. He mentioned that there could possibly be two Boards in the future that did not get along well together and might want different policies. Mr. Way commented that even though the policy may be hard to enforce, at least an attempt is being made to work towards the goal in a cooperative spirit. He believes, too, that there is some value in having the policy in writing. He hopes that something can be developed that will be agreeable to both Boards. Mr. Taylor believes that the wording can be worked out to the satisfaction of both Boards. He said he can appreciate the quality of the reader who can pick out these types of problems. He went on to say that the only time that the policy will have an impact is when the two Boards' policies don't agree. He said, though, that there are enough escape clauses in the statement, if this should happen. He added that he believes the School Board agrees with the Board of Supervisors, and he would like for the two Boards to work together. He suggested that, after the wording has been changed, the policy be put into a motion for adoption. Mr. Henley said he could support the whole draft, and especially the last sentence. He only wishes that the Boards could have adopted the policy four years ago because he does not feel that some problems would exist today, if this had been done at that time. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that one modification be made on the fourth line, to delete the words, "appropriate and," and on the fifth line, to delete the words, "with local policies." He then read the draft to the Board, with these words deleted. Mr. Taylor asked if the draft should be taken back to the individual boards for work on the rewording. Mr. Fisher answered that he thought that would be the best thing to do. Mr. Tolbert said one problem he has with the commonality of personnel policies is that the two Boards act independently of each other in all things. Because the Boards see the needs of their employees differently, occasions have come up where slightly different policies are used. He asked if there was any way that the two Boards could meet jointly when personnel issues are discussed. He then mentioned that perhaps a joint committee could be set up to resolve the issues. He believes that this is the kind of method that needs to be used, so that neither Board feels powerless. Mr. Lindstrom said if these types of meetings are not going to be policy-making meet- ings, then he thinks it is still profitable for the two Boards to get together and hear what the other has to say. But, he is not sure if a lot of policies can be worked out in joint meetings. Mr. Fisher mentioned that Dr. Hastings has to administer the Personnel Department for both systems even though there is not even a goal of consistency. He feels her task is difficult. Mr. Fisher added that if the two Boards cannot agree on a goal of consistency, even excluding teachers, then he thinks the staff and Boards are in trouble. He said that he still thinks this goal is important. Mrs. Cooke said she does not particularly like having to bring the matter back to the respective Boards for study, but she pointed out that this is a new concept, and she would hate to see this plan eliminated without any thought at all. She mentioned that this is the first time that the Boards haVe seen the plan. Mr. Fisher said he does not believe deferring action on this policy will stop the Boards from reaching a joint decision. He thinks that some substantive thought should be given to the policy in hopes that something jointly can be worked out. He said that he would like to put the item on the next day meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Agenda Item No. 8. Review of the County's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Robert Tucker, Jr., Deputy County Executive, stated that he had talked to Mr. Overstreet as to what the School Board was expecting from this review. He said Mr. Overstreet believes that the School Board is looking for a true status report of the County's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Tucker said he does not have much to report, because the comprehen- sive review is just getting started. He went on to say that the Board of Supervisors is responsible for the Comprehensive Plan, and state law requires that it be updated and re- viewed every five years. He said the primary goal of the Comprehensive Plan is to discourage development in rural areas and encourage development in areas defined as growth areas. He mentioned some of the growth areas. He added that the idea is to encourage this growth where most of the major road improvements would occur. He said it is done this way because it is economically efficient. He stated that when there is uncontrolled growth, road improvements have to be done and water and sewer lines have to be constructed. By compacting the growth, costs can be controlled and transportation costs reduced. Mr. Tucker explained that this is the general idea of the Comprehensive Plan. He added that there are a lot of other goals in the Comprehensive Plan, but this is the most significant one. He went on to say that he and Mr. Overstreet had talked earlier about whether the plan may change and what effect it will have on school districts. He said that, at this time, there are not any significant changes anticipated in the overall growth policy. He mentioned that there may be shifts or changes made in some of the boundary lines that are shown on the map at this meeting, but he does not June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (Pa_age 18) 069 nvision anything substantive. He noted that a plan similar to this has been in effect since he original plan. He said that the staff believes it is a good plan and it will probably maintain its ~eneral direction. He pointed out that the plan is followed very closely by the County, and there are tools for implementation. Some of the tools used are zoning, subdivi- sion regulatiqns and the Capital Improvements Program. He said that it is the Capital Improvements Program that implements community facilities, that the Comprehensive Plan calls for such things as new schools, roads and parks, etc., and the Capital Improvements Program is where the requests are funded over a five year period. He mentioned, also, that both educational and planning staffs are going to work together annually to update school enroll- ment projections to keep abreast of where enrollment increases and decreases are occurring so that projections can be made for five years beyond that point. Mr. Tolbert asked about an area on the map, and Mr. Tucker replied that this was the Cross Roads area at North Garden, which is a village area. Mr. Tolbert then asked if there had been much.development there. Mr. Tucker answered that there had been very little devel- opment at North~ Garden. He said that some of the villages that are not seeing much growth will be scrutinized this year. He then mentioned Crozet, and said that the sewer interceptor is supposed to open there early next week. Mr. Tucker went on to say that the staff does not expect to see a big growth in that area, but over a period of time, more growth is expected. He personally feels that there will not be a problem for the current facilities at Brownsville and Crozet to handle the growth for the next five years. He said, however, that these things will be considered. He mentioned that there will also be an attempt in this Comprehensive Plan cycle to develop road plans, so that when a developer wants to develop property, the County staff can tell the developer where the road should be, and the developer will then build his portion of the road. He said that these road plans will be detailed engineering plans. He believes that this will encourage growth in the areas where it is desired. Mr. Tolbert directed attention to the orange circle on the map that is drawn around Charlottesville. He understands that the circle depicts the heavily developed areas. He mentioned, though, that the northern and southern portions of the County are different than the way they are shown on the map. He pointed out that the Woodbrook School area is not vacant and reglly has a lot of people there. However, the southern portion is empty at this time. Mr. Tucker replied that the reason for the map being drawn in this manner is because when Route 29 was improved, development was encouraged, and that is where the water and sewer lines were originally placed. He said that the Moores Creek interceptor is basically where the corporate limits of Charlottesville are located. He said that this interceptor is an incentive for development to occur in the southern portion of the County, and that there are several develOpments that are currently proposed for that area. Mr. Agnor added that for eight years there was a moratorium on sewer connections on the southern side of the County. This situation occurred because of the capacity of the sewer plant before the Moores Creek interceptor was installed. On the northern side, sewage connections were allowed, so this pushed the development to the northern side of Albemarle County. Mr. Tolbert stated that, from the point of view of the school system in trying to anticipate where the needs are going to be as opposed to where the needs are, it would be helpful to be able to look at a map and have it imply the likelihood or potential for growth and not just the status as a dense or rural area. He said that it is the areas with the potentials for growth that will create the problems. Mr. Tucker mentioned that the southern plan for growth is nothing new. He said that there has been a plan, when the area begins to grow, for an elementary school to be built between Old Lynchburg Road and Route 20 South. He added, too, that the staff is going to be more definitive in this review process, so that the County will be prepared when a large development is started. Mr. Fisher pointed out that there is some land in the existing Comprehensive Plan for a future school and other governmental facilities. Mr. Tucker explained that this plan has been developing for approximately 15 years, and the staff is realizing that plans have to be more definitive. Mr. Fisher mentioned that since Mr. Tolbert had asked the question concerning the village at North Garden, he thinks that it is necessary to differentiate between the villages and the other growth areas. Mr. Fisher went on to say that most of the villages are not intended to have water and sewer facilities. The villages will be low density areas, but they are located where there is already an existing development. Mr. Tucker agreed with Mr. Fisher. He pointed out that areas such as Hollymead and Crozet, have self-sufficient type communities. Mr. Fisher pointed out, that the importance of the comprehensive plan (which is a 20 year plan) should not be underestimated. He said the School Board can make plans for a school in two years if there is money to build it but the Board of Supervisors cannot do that with a sewer interceptor, a major reservoir or a major highway. It takes ten to twenty years to get one of these projects completed. If the plan is changed every few years, then the result is that nothing gets done. Mr. Tucker said that the Planning Commission and staff are optimistic that the work on this plan should be completed by this time next year or in the fall. The plan will then be sent to the Board of Supervisors for adoption. Mr. Fisher then asked Mr. Tucker what role the School Board and school staff Will have in this review. Mr. Tucker answered that it would be appropriate for the two staffs to get together and look at the enrollment projections on an annual basis. He said that the five year plan will need to be continually monitored, because if there are changes in trends in particular areas, the school system will need to be informed. He added that the two staffs will have to work closely together. O'7O June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) Mr. Perkins mentioned that even though growth has been directed to certain areas, there is still a lot of growth on rural roads. He said he is not familiar with zoning, and does not know what is required to build a house, but there have certainly been a lot of houses built in those places in the last fifteen years. He asked what the zoning requirements are for those areas. Mr. Tucker replied that in 1980 a new Zoning Ordinance was adopted that, for the first time, followed more closely the Comprehensive Plan. The rural areas district took the place of the old agricultural district which required two acres per dwelling unit, but allowed as many parcels as was possible on a tract of land. The new rural areas district is more restrictive. There can only be five, two-acre lots on a particular tract, with the residue developed in 21 acre parcels. He said this has limited development to some extent. In 1980, the new Zoning Ordinance was adopted, but each time that a Public Hearing was held on the new ordinance, people would rush to try to subdivide their land because they knew that the rural area zoning was going to change. He said that because of this, there are lots throughout the County that were platted and are gradually being developed. He said that a considerable number of these lots are done in a way that the staff calls "road stripping," which means that people will cut off as many two acre lots as they can get within a minimal amount of frontage on a road. The person may have no intention of developing the property, but they were able to protect what they felt were their property rights and divide as many two acre lots as they could at that time. He said there were approximately 2,000 such lots throughout the County and although many are still vacant, some are being developed. Mr. Fisher commented that Fauquier County adopted a new ordinance which is much more restrictive than Albemarle's. He went on to explain its requirements, and he said that it is a strong ordinance and would require a change in legiSlation before development can occur in some parts of Fauquier County. He stated that it allows for approximately half as much development in rural areas as does the Albemarle Ordinance, and it has a sliding scale formula. Mr. Fisher then said that there were some cases in Albemarle where subdivisions might only have had some of their lots filled. Now, however, some of the other lots are being filled and better use is being made of the roads, water systems, etc. He basically feels that the plan is starting to work, but it may take 10 or 20 years more before there is an enormous shift into the growth area. Agenda Item No. 9. Discussion: Capital Improvement Program Priorities. Mr. Fisher explained that the Board discussed the 1986-87 Capital Improvement Program for the first time yesterday and set a Public Hearing for July 2, 1986. A work session was held this afternoon. Mr. Fisher went on to say that Mr. Overstreet and Mr. Papenfuse had also attended the work session. He said that no vote was taken on anything, but questions concerning planning were asked, particularly dealing with the Crozet Elementary School. He believes that the staff will put together information for the Board of Supervisors about what is proposed, because there was some confusion concerning what the school system really wanted to do in that area. Mr. Fisher then said that other supervisors would probably do better to speak to their concerns relating to the School Board's requests for capital improvements. Mr. Way commented that the question that was brought out concerning the Crozet School was whether or not the $2,700,000 was primarily for safety precautions, plus parity or whether an expansion was intended to be included in that amount of money. Mr. Bowie said his problem is that some of the priorities have changed since the Capital Improvement Program was sent to the Planning Commission. He cannot justify paving a parking lot before a school is air conditioned. He asked that consideration be given to improving the way that items are prioritized. He asked if the air conditioning is included in some of the schools' major renovations that won't be started until next year. Mr. Lindstrom said Burley was to have air conditioning included in its renovation project next year, but Rose Hill was not involved in renovations for next year. He mentioned that the improvements at Albemarle slated for next year took precedence over air conditioning at some of the schools. These improvements involved a parking lot and improvements to the road that goes to Jack Jouett and Greer. Mr. Fisher explained that the supervisors, in their work session, had looked at certain things such as the Stony Point Elementary School's major renovation program which will cost $870,000, Rose Hill Elementary School's electrical and mechanical, library and air condition- ing project at $560,000, and Yancey Elementary School's major renovation which would cost $750,000. He said that assuming that these are reasonably accurate estimates, when they are compared to the Crozet Elementary School's $2,700,000 for what is called a major renovation, it seems to be an expensive proposition to bring Crozet School up to standards. He said the supervisors are having trouble identifying if the $2,700,000 is for a major renovation or an expansion. He believes that part of the problem is that the supervisors do not know exactly what is proposed and what the cost will be for each part of the Crozet project. He does not think that, as it is presented in this plan, it is very cost effective in comparison to the other elementary schools. Mr. Agnor stated that when the total five year span of time is considered, it occurs to him that most of the major school projects are occurring in the first three years of the five year period. He said that because of the projects' importance, they are scheduled that way. But, he said that administering the new projects in two years may be an insurmountable task. He stated that some of the projects are spread to three years so that they can be adminis- tered. Mr. Taylor pointed out that the paving has to be done on an ongoing basis to keep the potholes out of the roads, and sometimes it takes priority over the air conditioning of the schools. He said that he does not think that there is a member on the School Board who would not want to see the schools air conditioned tomorrow, if it was possible. Mr. Bowie commented that he was happy with the school system's financial report, and thinks that it is greatly improved. He said that the school system is obviously going to be able to financially handle some things that the supervisors had not expected, and may even have some money left after taking care of these things. Mr. Bowie noted the way that the two June 12, 1986 (Adjourned from June 11, 1986) (PaHe 20 ) 071 Boards sit at these joint meetings. He said that he would not like to see the two Boards viewed as confrontational, and he mentioned that the sitting arrangements are much improved over what they were three or four years ago. Agenda Item No. 10. Presentation of CATEC Program and tour of facility. Mr. Taylor stated that CATEC is a joint facility with the City of Charlottesville. He said that there are three members appointed from each School Board to a Joint Control Board, and Charles Armstrong is Chairman of the Joint Board. He said that currently Mr. Overstreet is the Superintendent for that Board, but the superintendency changes every three years. As a result of Mr. Overstreet serving as Superintendent for the last two years, plus the Chair- man of the Board holding his position for two years, there has been a consistent pattern, and the people at the school have gotten the assistance that they needed. He believes that the school is gaining momentum, and there is an increase in enrollment of 50 more students than last year. This is the reversal of a trend. He mentioned that radio advertisement is being used to make people aware that this program is offered to the students. He then asked that Mr. Overstreet introduce the people at CATEC. Mr. Overstreet introduced Mr. Dick Comey, Principal of CATEC, and asked him to give a general overview of the programs and the facility. Mr. Comey read slogans that he is hoping will make the Technical Education Center better known in this community. He said that this type of advertising help the Center to grow from 338 day students to 378 students who are already registered for next year. He mentioned that adults are added at the end of the summer to programs if there are any vacancies. He said that the Center's goal is to reach 440 students during the day by the 1989-90 school year, but he believes that this will be the maximum number of students that the building can accommodate. He next mentioned that there is a very active adult education program at the Center, with an average of 500 adult students in the evening programs. He then welcomed the two Boards to CATEC, and said that this is the Center for successful vocational, technical education for high school students and adults in Albemarle County and Charlottesville. Mr. Comey added that through the Boards' support during the last 13 years, an excellent teaching staff has been maintained and "hands on" instruction has been offered with "state of the art" equipement. He said that the Center's graduates are prepared for employment in jobs directly related to their training. He men- tioned, also, that the Center enriches college bound students' backgrounds, by providing future engineers with drafting and electronic skills, hotel management and professionals wJ food preparation skills, and business men and women with computer programming skills, etc. He said that CATEC offers a pre-college program for students studying computer programming and design technology whereby they can earn community college credits while enrolled at the Center and gain the wage earning ability to support themselves while they are in college. He said that the brochures that have been given to Board members list additional areas of study. Next, Mr. Comey talked about the CATEC teachers communication skills and the context of their career interests in each technical program. For many high school students, vocational education provides an educational alternative that provides a better way to future success without denying future options. He said that annually approximately 20 percent of the students go on to college right after graduation. However, this percentage does not take into account those who go to college in later years. Labor analysts indicate that 80 percent of the job openings in this country do not require a four year college education. He added, though, that both programs at the Center deserve full consideration, for those who desire to enter a skilled occupation after high school, and those who plan to obtain further education. He said that vocational/technical programs have traditionally been responsible for keeping people employed in highly productive occupations. He mentioned that 80 percent of students who have completed programs have been placed in local jobs. Mr. Comey then stated that he was going to show the Boards a segment of a video tape, which the staff thought would be most interesting to Board members. He said that Mr. Bob Barrett, the electricity instructor, would then discuss the video tape with Board members. Mr. Way asked how many day students are from Albemarle County. approximately 70 percent of the day students are from the County. Mr. Comey answered that Mr. Barrett stated that the staff is proud of the school and the graduates. He said that one of his students who graduated in 1980 came back to see him, and told Mr. Barrett that he wanted to hire three of his graduates this year for an apprentice program. Mr. Barrett said that this graduate had served an apprenticeship as an electrician, and now he is a contractor. The graduate is in a partnership business with another person, and they have a tremendous business. He stated, also, that he was talking with a graduate from CATEC who is now a nurse. This graduate told Mr. Barrett that she does not know what she would have done, if she had not gone to the Center. He said that the video includes interviews with graduates who are successful and secure because they were taught a skill at CATEC. At this time, Mr. Barrett showed the video to the two Boards. He then explained that this tape is shown to all sophomore and middle school students in the County and City. He said that the tape is also shown at Lions Club meetings, etc., to try to inform the public as to what is being accom- plished at CATEC. Mr. Comey then introduced Mr. Clevester Logan, Assistant Principal and Director of Adult Education at CATEC. The tour of CATEC began at 8:49 P.M. Agenda Item No. 12. Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 P.M.