Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-07-20July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting) July t3, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting) 297 Mr. Fisher noted that there is some urgency to filling the vacant position on the Jail Board. Agenda Item No. 2~o Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mr. Butler made a brief statement about a meeting he attended in Blacksburg last week with the State Extension Advisory Committee. He attended a lecture by Mr. Whitmere on ~agriculture, from the present time into the future. The presentation focused on the United States being the provider of approximately one-third of the world's food and the fact that about one million acres of agricultural land is being lost to development each year. Mr. Butler also noted that there is a big need for extension work and the fact that the Federal government is cutting back the amount of funds it has been providing for this purpose. Only two percent of the Congressional vote is now for agriculture, so a hard sell is needed to get any support of same. Mr. Butler said the Advisory Committee has been broken into two groups, and he has been put on the public relations side. Agenda Item No. 25. adjourned at 4:55 P.M. Adjourn. With no further business to conduct, the meeting was Ch~rman July 20, 19'U3 (Regular Night Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held.on July 20, 1983, at 7:30 P.M., in Meeting Room 7, Second Floor, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Mr. James R. Butler, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher and J. T. Henley, Jr. and Miss Ellen V. Nash. Absent: Mr. C. Timothy Lindstrom. Officers Present: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; County Attorney, George R. St. John; and County Planner, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Fisher. The meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M. by the Chairman, Agenda Item.No. la. Consent Agenda. The following three street light requests were presented from the County Engineer, Mr. Maynard Elrod, for Board approval: A street light request on State Route 715 in Esmont; A street light request on Buck Mountain Road (State Route 789) approximately 400 feet north of the intersection with St. George Avenue (State Route 1202); A street light request in Hessian Hills Subdivision on the north side of Angus Road to be installed on pole #X0-78-44. This request for installation of the light to be on a shared cost basis; specifically, Mr. James F. Nelms, a homeowner has agreed to incur one-half of the construction cost, or $111.50, if the County will incur a similar amount. Motion to approve the consent agenda as presented was offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Miss Nash, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 2. SP-83-43. Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Department/Charlottesville- Albemarle Rescue Squad, Inc. Request to amend SP-78-70 by deleting condition requiring emergency connector road between Berkmar and Commonwealth Drives and to require that alignment of this future road still be shown on the site plan. Located on 3.3 acres zoned C-l, 2/10 mile south of Route 631 and on west side of Berkmar Drive. County Tax Map 61-M-U, Parcels 12-1G and 12-1F. Charlottesville District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 5 and July 12, 1983.) Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning, was present and presented the following staff report: "Location: Property described as Tax Map 61-M-U, Parcels 12-1G and 12~lF, is located on the west side of Berkmar Drive, and is zoned C-l, Commercial. History: In prior special use permit and site plan approvals the applicants were required to make provisions for a new public road to connect Berkmar Drive and Commonwealth Drive and to provide emergency access from the site into Berkeley Subdivision. 298 July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting)' Request:_ At its meeting of June 8, 1983, the Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution of intent to delete condition 3 of SP-78-70 which presently reads 'Access from Berkmar Drive to Commonwealth Drive will be only for emergency use until such time that public.access is deemed necessary by the Board of Supervisors.' Additionally, the Board~emphasized in the motion that the road alignment indicated on the plan is~to'remain dedicated for future construction. ~ ' Staff recommends that the staff be permitted to administratively approve site plan amendments consistent with the following (this condition to replace Condition 3 'of SP-?8-?0): Dedication of right-of-way for futUre public road from~Berkmar Drive to Commonwealth Drive to be approved by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation." Mr. Tucker Said the Planning Commission at its meeting on July'7, 1983, unanimously recommended approval of SP-83-43 with the following two conditions: Substitute the following wording for condition #3 of SP-78-70: "Dedication of right-of-way for future public road from Berkmar Drive to Commonwealth Drive to be approved by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation." Adding the following condition as #6 to SP-78-70: "Fence to be constructed, said fence to be adequate to prohibit vehicular traffic from using the right-of-way." Mr. Tucker said he would suggest that the wording of substituted condition #3 be altered since the land is already publicly owned and did not see the need for the right- of-way to be dedicated. Therefore, he suggested the following wording: "Public access from Berkmar Drive to Commonwealth Drive shall be provided when deemed necessary by the Board of Supervisors." Mr. Fisher asked the meaning of the word "access" as used in the condition and if this meant that the fire department would have to build the road. Mr. Tucker said when the Board of Supervisors deems that public access is necessary then the County or "others" would have to provide the. access for development of Phase II of the site plan. The determination of "others" would have to be made by the Board at the appropriate time. Mr. Tucker said he would also suggest modifying condition #6 to read: "A fence shall be constructed at Commonwealth Drive adequate to prevent vehicular traffic from using the right-of-way." Mr. Fisher asked if pedestrian traffic would be permitted. Mr. Tucker said there was concern expressed at the Planning Commission meeting about pedestrian traffic. In particular, some comments were made by the volunteer firefighters who, in attempting to get to the fire station as quickly as possible, stop at Commonwealth Drive and run down the right-of-way. Mr. Tucker said the intent is only to prevent vehicular traffic from using the right-of-way at this time. The public hearing was then opened. Dr. F. Anthony Iachetta, President of the Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Department, was present. He noted that the-governing board oft~he~.Fire Department would like to be relieved of the~emergency road requirement. The governing boards of both the fire department and the rescue squad do not feel that the emergency road is needed because it would provide no real value in terms of response time for either organization. Dr. Iachetta said the personnel involved with the Charlottesville- Albemarle Rescue Squad has indicated that the emergency road would not be used if there was an automatic gate installed. Therefore, Dr. Iachetta did not feel there was any need to spend the funds to build same. Dr. Iachetta then requested that the condition regarding a fence not be imposed on the special permit. If a fence is desired, he would suggest that the fence be aligned with the fence already being built by Mr. George Nichols, the property owner at the rear of the fire department's property. Dr. Iachetta said that fence is about fifty feet from Commonwealth Drive and could serve to prevent vehicles from coming across the right-of-way, but still not disturb any vegetation. Mr. Fisher suggested that the words "at Commonwealth Drive" in the condition #6 suggested by Mr. Tucker be deleted. Mr. Tucker said that would not be a problem. Mrs. George Nichols was present and stated that she and her husband intend to continue installing the fence the entire length of their property. She had no problem with Dr. Iachetta's suggestion and the wording proposed by Mr. Tucker for condition #6. With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hearing was closed. Motion was then offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Butler, to approve SP-83-~3 with the incorporatiOn of Mr. Tucker's modified language for condition #3, and Mr. Tucker's modifying language for condition #6 and by further striking the words "at Commonwealth Drive" in condition #6. The conditions-being voted on read as follows: a--Substitute the following wording for condition #3 of SP-78-70: 3. Public access from Berkmar Drive to Commonwealth Drive shall, be provided when deemed necessary by the Board of Supervisors. b--Add the following as condition #6 to SP-78-70: 6. A fence shall be constructed adequate to prevent vehicular traffic from using the right-of-way. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Lindstrom. July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting) 299 Agenda I~em No. 3. SP-83-~3. Earlysville~Forest Land Trust. Mr. Tucker said that the applicant for this request was not present and he suggested that this petition be deferred to later in the meeting. The Board concurred in the request. Agenda Item No. 4. SP-83-41. Albemarle County Fair. Request to locate county fair on 9.1 acres zoned LI, Light Industrial. Located 0.4 mile east of Route 631, adjacent to Willoughby PUD, known as James River Supply property. County Tax Map 76M(1), Parcel 4A. Scottsville District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 5 and July 12, 1983.) Mr· Tucker presented the following staff report: "Request_:. County Fair ~ 9.1 acres Zoning: LI, Light Industry Location: Property described as Tax Map 76M(1), parcel 4A, is the former location of James River Supply with access to Fifth Street (Route 631). Character of the Area: This property is located about 0.4 mile east of Route 631 and is served~by an access road. The property is bordered by a creek and 1-64 on the south· Willoughby PUD surrounds the sit~ on the other sides with open space and commercial areas proposed. Staff Comment: The county fair operated at this Site last year without major incident or injury. Fair organizers performed a meritorious preparation and clean up of the site in a relatively short period prior to the fair. (Unfortunately, since that time illegal dumping has occurred along the entrance road.) Staff opinion is that no change of circumstance has occurred in the area which would warrant additional review. Staff recommends approval subject to substantially the same conditions as last year's petition: Provide physical and/or personnel traffic control measures on Fifth Street as deemed necessary by the City Police and County Sheriff's Department; Clearing of vegetation along shoulders of entrance road. Posting of signage along both sides of entrance road stating 'No Parking. Fire Lane.' Barriers and 'No Access' signs to prevent access to old Willoughby Road on the south and area on the north where recreational vehicle traffic has traveled over the slope. Health Department approval of temporary sanitary facilities; Cordon off concrete batching area. Provide cover over concrete drainage ditch. Cordon off depressed ramp on north side of building. In addition to other requirements of this condition, removal or correction to the reasonable satisfaction of the Fire Official of any hazard identified after site inspection; Fire Official and Director of Planning approval of location of individual uses, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, parking areas, and emergency vehicular access provisions; Hours open to the public limited to 4 p.m. to ll p.m. on Tuesday, August 30, through Friday, September 2; and l0 a.m. to ll p.m. on Saturday, September 3, 1983; Lighting to be directed away from 1-64; Public access to 1-64 side of building shall be permitted only upon provision of safety measures to the reasonable satisfaction of the Fire Official and the Director of Planning." Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission at its meeting on July 7, 1983, unanimously recommended approval of SP-83-41 with the above conditions. Mr. Fisher asked if these conditions were the same as those imposed last year. Mr. Tucker said yes, with one exception. The hours of operation last year were limited to l0 p.m. Tuesday through Friday, and have been changed to ll p.m. this year. The public hearing was then opened. Mr. James Crosby, President of the Albemarle Ceunty Fair, was present and agreed to the conditions recommended and urged approval of the request. Mr. Fisher said there had been a report in the news media that the fair might be held elsewhere. Mr. Crosby said options are being left open at this point. However, if everything goes as planned,~the fair will be held at the Claudius Crozet Park. Mr. Crosby noted that the Fair organizers felt it was best to have this permit approved in case some unforeseen incident occurred at the last minute. With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hearing was closed. Motion was then offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to approve SP-83-41 with the eight conditions recommended by the Planning Commission.. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 5. ZMA-83-8. Beechtree Associates. Mr. Tucker noted that the applicant was not present for this. agenda item and suggested .the Board continue to the next item. July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting) Agenda Item No. 6. SP-83-32. William H. and Virginia R. White, III. Request to locate a hog operation on l?l.5? acres zoned RA Rural Areas. Located west'of Yancey Mills, south of private right-of-way off Route 684 to the west, 1/2~mile north of its intersection with Route ?9?. County Tax Map 55, Parcel 21. White Hall District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 5 and July 12, 1983.) Mr. Tucker presented the following staff report: "Reques.t.:. Hog Farm Acreage.' 171.57 acres Zoning: RA Rural Areas Location: Property described as County Tax Map 55, Parcel 21, is located on a private right-of-way about one-half mile west of Route 684 near Yancey Mills. Character of the Area: The hog operation would be located centrally in the property, 250 feet or more from the closest property line. The closest dwelling is about 1,600 feet east of the site. Staff Comment: The applicant proposes a farrow to finishing hog operation. The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service would design the manure holding pond. Application has been made to the State Water Control Board for storage and land application of waste. Comments from the Watershed Management Official have been incorporated in the State Water Control Board review process. Staff has reviewed the proposed hog operation for consistency with Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends that with appropriate conditions of approval: The hog operation would not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property nor would the character of the district be changed; The use would be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and with other uses in the area; and The use would be in harmony with the public health, safety and general welfare. Since the hog operation is considered an agricultural use, no site plan would be required. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation should review the entrance to Route 684 for adequacy. Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: l) 3) State Water Control Board issuance of a No Discharge Certificate for storage and land application of waste. Hog operation to be located generally as described and not closer than 250 feet to any property not owned by the applicant nor closer than 1,500 feet to any occupied dwelling not owned by the applicant. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of entrance at Route 684. Approval is for hog operation with a 20 crate farrowing house. Expansion to 30 farrowing crates may be permitted upon approval of the State Water Control Board, Watershed Management Official, and Director of Planning with consideration to reservoir protection and the requirements of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Should concern arise in such review or should the applicant desire to expand to more than 30 farrowing crates, expansion shall require amendment of this special use permit." Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission at its meeting on July 12, 1983, recommended approval of SP-83-32 with the above conditions. Mr. Fisher said there may be no problem at this time with condition #2 allowing the hog operation to be no closer than 1,500 feet to any occupied dwelling not owned by the applicant, but what will happen if someone on an adjacent parcel of land builds within 1,500 feet; specifically, would Mr. White have to cease his hog operation. Mr. Tucker said condition #2, could be clarified by adding the word "existing" between "any" and "occupied~,. The public hearing was then opened. Mr. David Wood, attorney representing the applicant, was present and did not object to the suggestion of Mr. Tucker for condition #2. The one concern of the applicant is the condition regarding entrance approval by the Highway Depart- ment. Mr. Wood said there are two entrances into this property. One is an old right-of-way ~h.~ch~?.E~oes through this property on the west side and is rarely used. Mr. White hopes this condition applies to his existing farm entrance which entrance does comply with Highway Department requirements. In conclusion, Mr. Wood said the applicant hopes the condition regarding the entrance is for the entrance currently used and not the old right-of-way. Mr. Fisher asked how many hogs have ~to be in an operation before it is considered a hog farm. Mr. Tucker said the ordinance definition of a hog farm is "place where hogs are kept and raised primarily for sale." Mr. Fisher felt there should be a limitation set on the number of hogs that could be raised in this operation. Mr. Henley said the hogs will be confined in crates. Mr. Wood said any limit set would have to be on the number of sows kept because the number of pigs is an unknown factor. Mr. Butler felt the limitation on the number of farrowing crates is the controlling factor. Mr. Butler further explained that three stages are involved in a hog operation. First is the farrowing operation, the place where the pigs are born. The sow may stay in the house for a week or ten days and then be moved to a nursing pen. After that, the pigs are moved to a finishing house. The number of pigs depends on the number of times a sow is bred; breeding times range from every thirty days to the normal breeding period which is two months. Mr. Butler felt that with the information contained in the letter from Mr. White dated May 12, 1983, this will be a sound operation (Copy of the letter is on file in the Clerk's Office). July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting) With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hearing was closed. Miss Nash asked the location of the present entrance referred to by Mr. Wood. Mr. Tucker said the entrance is on Route 684 and has been improved. He felt the Highway Department had only looked at the map and saw the right-of-Way going into the property and assumed that to be the entrance in question. Mr. Henley said there is a good road into the property now and he did not feel condition #3 was needed. He said that even if the farm road (the old right-of-way) is used there should be no problems because there is very little traffic involved in such an operation. Mr. Fisher asked the recommendation of the Highway~Department regarding the entrance road. Mr. Tucker noted that in a letter dated June 27, 1983, the Highway Department commented that there should not be any problem provided an adequate entrance is constructed off of Route 684. Mr. Fisher felt that statement meant the existing entrance is not adequate. Mr. Henley did not feel the Highway Department had actually looked at the entrances, and restated his opinion that the condition regarding the entrance is not needed. Motion was then offered by Mr. Henley to approve SP-83-32 with conditions l, 2 and as recommended by the Planning Commission and deleting condition 3. Mr. Butler seconded the motion. Mr. Tucker asked if the Board desired to add the word "existing" as he had suggested in condition #2. Mr. Henley and Mr. Butler both accepted that amendment to the motion. Roll was called a~nd the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. (The conditions as approved are listed below:) me State Water Control Board issuance of No Discharge Certificate for storage and land application of waste. Hog operation to be located generally as described and not closer than 250 feet to any property not owned by the applicant nor closer than 1,500 feet to any existing occupied dwelling not owned by the applicant. Approval is for hog operation with a 20 crate farrowing house. Expansion to 30 farrowing crates may be permitted upon approval of the State Water Control Board, Watershed Management Official and Director of Planning with consideration to reservoir protection and the require- ments of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Should concern arise in such review or should the applicant desire to expand to more than 30 farrowing crates, expansion shall require amendment of this special use permit. Agenda Item No. 3. SP-83-33. Earlysville Forest Land Trust. Request for relief from condition B(1) of ZMA-81-11 which requires recordation of 100 residential lots prior to commercial development and for relief from Section 20.9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Located at intersection of Earlysville Forest Drive and Route 743, across from Earlysville Forest Drive from Earlysville Green. County Tax Map 3lB, Parcel C. Rivanna District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 5 and July 12, 1983.) Mr. Tucker presented the following staff report: "Request: Seek relief from condition B(1) of ZMA,Sl-ll and also seek relief from Section 20.9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff Comment: When Earlysville Forest was approved as a Planned Unit Development (PUD), the plan included a commercial area consisting of 3.77 acres. This commercial area is located at the intersection of Earlysville Forest Drive and Route 743 and"is further described as Tax Map 3lB, Parcel C. Condition B(1) of ZMA-81-11 stated that 'no commercial use shall be approved until one hundred (100) residential lots have been approved and recorded.' Section 20.9.4 of the current zoning ordinance regulations governing PUD development states that 'building permits for commercial/service uses shall not be issued prior to issuance of building permits for eighty (80) percent of the dwelling units approved on the application plan.' Section 8.5.4(d) permits the Commission and Board to modify regulations 'based on determination that such modifications are necessary or justified by demonstration that the public purposes of PD or general regulations as applied would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by such modifications.' Staff's intent in recommending Condition B(1) of ZMA-81-11 was to insure a substantial amount of residential development o~ccur within Earlysville Forest PUD prior to establishment of commercial uses. With eighty-six lots to record, staff opinion is that the applicant has substantially complied with this condition. Additionally, it should be noted that the commercial area .was originally reviewed by staff for service not only to Earlysville Forest but for service also to a larger surrounding area. This request for relief is made in order to establish a 1,400 square foot doctor's office. Staff opinion is that such a use would be of service to the area. July 20, 198~ (Regular Night Meeting) Staff recommends the following actions: l) Amend Condition B(1) of ZMA-Sl-ll to read: 'No commercial use Shall be approved until eighty-six residential lots have been approved and recorded;~' or simply delete the condition in entirety. Note: The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors find that the applicant's proposed modification is justified and would serve the public purpose and ~herefore grant modification of SeCtion 20,9,~4 in accordance with 8.5.4(d) of the Zoning Ordinance. This petition should have been taken as a rezoning as opposed to --a special use permit. The County Attorney's office has stated that, since the description of the proposal and other details of the legal advertisement would not vary, and since the petition was reviewed as a rezoning, no substantial infirmity exists which would warrant readvertisement." Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on July 7, 198B, unanimously recommended approval of sR-SB-BB with the .above two conditions. Mr. Tucker said he would now suggest that condition B(1) of ZMA-81-11 be deleted since there are provisions in the Zoning Ordinance to take care of the problem. Mr. Tucker said he understands there are surveys now underway for lots to be put to record, and this will exceed the one hundred residential lots requirement, but this work will not be completed in time to start the site plan process before September which is the time desired to open the doctor's office. Therefore, this amendment is being requested in order that plans for the doctor's office can go forward. Mr. Fisher asked the meaning of the action regarding modification of Section 20.9.4. Mr. Tucker said the staff was of the opinion that the Planning Commission and the Board could find this request as being in the public'ts interest since same does-not create any problem for the planned development. The Commission did not feel that approval of this request for the doctor's office would cause any detriment to the PUD even though there are only eighty-six lots of record at this time. Mr, Fisher expressed concern that there is no indication in the condition that this approval is for a doctor's office; therefore, any commercial activity could occur. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission aPproved the site plan for the doctor.'s office at the 'same time this request was presented.and he thinks that is the reason a doctor's office was not included in any of the wording for this amendment. Mr. Fisher asked how many.lots were originally proposed for Earlysville Forest PUD. Mr. Tucker said that more than 100 lots are proposed. Mr. Fisher said then there is already more than eighty percent of the required number of lots recorded. Mr.. Tucker said the condition that 100 lots be approved and recorded prior to commercial activity, was placed on this PUD Plan prior to the adoption of the existing Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Fisher said the 100 lots mentioned in the original condition is less than eighty percent of the total,· so that requirement is really less than the Zoning Ordinance presently requires. Mr. Smith, attorney for the developer, was present and said eighty percent-would be 1.55 lots. Mr. Fisher said then it appears that under existing Zoning Ordinance requirements, 155 lots would have to be recorded, and according to the special use permit-already approved only 100 lots have to be recorded, and the request tonight is to further reduce~that number. ~ The public hearing was opened. Mr. Chick Smith said he had no comments because Mr. Tucker had adequately explained the request. Mr~'Fisher said he questions why the applicant feels the Board should delete a condition which is already more favorable than the require- ments of the~existing Zoning Ordinance. Mr. smith said the request is being made now because plats are presently being prepared for the one hundred lots, and since the site plan process is lengthy,.the desire is to proceed with this request and save several months of the building season. Mr. Fisher said he'is concerned that approval of this request may create problems if the developer of another PUD makes a similar request in the future. Mr. Smith said there is a need for a doctor's office in this area'and there is community wide support for same. Mr. Fisher again stated his concern in setting precedents for waivers'of Zoning Ordinance requirements. With no one elsepresent~to speak for or against the petition, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Fisher said althOugh he does not disagree that a doctor's office is needed, he does have serious reservations about apProving a request which not'only violates the existing special use permit as well ~as ZOning Ordinance requirements, Mr. Tucker said this operation is different from other commercial activities such as a fast food restaurant, and he felt that could be justification for this'approval. Mr, Fisher suggested retaining condition B-1 (instead of deleting as mentioned by~Mr~ TUcker earlier) with the inclusion of the fact that approval would be for a dOctor's office only. Mr. Tucker said that woUld be no problem because no other site plan has been submitted, and cannot be until the one hundred lot limitation is met. Miss Nash asked the ~purpose of the one hundred unit'limitation. Mr. Tucker said the intent of the ordinance is~to limit commercial .a-c,tivities~ in a~planned 'unit~ development to a scale of a size to support residential uses within the~PUD, or to uses that can serve the needs of the area. This is not to be done untill a~certain amount of lots have been recorded. He further explained that developing commercial activities in the PUD first could delay the residential intent of the development. July 20, 198~ (Regular Night Meeting) 303 Miss Nash then offered motion to approve SP-8~-BB with condition B(1) of ZMA-81-11 amended to read as follows: "No commercial use shall be approved until 100 residential lots have been approved and recorded except for a doctors office to be located on a portion of Parcel C, Tax Map ~lB." Mr. Fisher asked if the second condition recommended by the Planning Commission was needed. Mr. St. John said that is a condition of the Zoning Ordinance and although Mr. Tucker has indicated that the Board has gone through that process by approving this request, he would still recommend that the condition be included. Miss Nash then amended her motion to include the condition #2 recommended by the Planning Commission which reads as follows: "The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors find that the applicant's proposed modification is justified and would serve the public purpose and therefore grant modification of Section 20.9.4 in accordance with Section 8.5.4(d) of the Zoning Ordinance." Mr. Butler seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 5. ZMA-83-8. Beechtree Associates. Request to rezone 1.1221 acres from CO Commercial Office to C-1. Located eastern side of Route 743 at its intersection with Route 657, County Tax Map 61, Parcel 25. Charlottesville District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 5 and July 12, 1983.) Mr. Tucker said he did not see anyone present to represent the petitioner and he had not received any communication that no one would be present. Mr. Fisher asked if anyone was present to speak on this request. With no one being present, Mr. Fisher recommended that ZMA-83-8 be deferred to another meeting in order that the applicant could be present. (Note: Applicant appeared later in the evening. See end of these minutes.) Mr. Butler offered motion to that effect. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 7a. Request for Appropriation: Metropolitan Planning Grant. Mr. Agnor said a request dated July 14, 1983, from Mr. Keith Mabe, Chief of Community Development, has been received requesting an appropriation of $11,610 from the Grant Fund for use by the County Planning Department in carrying out a continuing, comprehensive and cooperative transportation planning process required by the Metropolitan Planning Organization Mr. Agnor said the funds for this appropriation are from a State grant (through the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation) and will be reimbursed to the County on a quarterly basis. Mr. Agnor said the request tonight is for the Board to order advertisement of the appropriation for public hearing. Mr. Agnor said that in earlier discussions, about budget amendments he had indicated to the Board that advertising requirements for budget amendments had changed and such adVertisements would not. be required after July 1, 1983. However, the final bill adopted by the General Assembly still requires an advertisement and pub'lic hearing. The only difference is that this year the appropriation may be made immediately after the public hearing is held instead of delaying for seven days. Hmowever, iF the budget amendment should exceed one percent of the total revenue shown in the adopted budget, then the public hearing will be held and action delayed for seven days. Mr. Fisher asked if advertising of these amendments could not be done by the staff instead of having the Board schedule the public hearing. Mr. Agnor then read from the Code: "The notice shall state the local government's intent to amend the budget." Mr. Agnor said the staff has interpreted that to mean that the Board has to actuallystate its intent to amend the budget. Mr. Fisher suggesting adopting a resolution to authorize Mr. Agnor to advertise for public hearings on budget amendments without first requesting the Board's authority to do such. Mr. Fisher felt this would simplify the process unless the staff feels there is a problem with the request. Mr. St. John said that action would be permissible. Mrs. Cooke asked if information relative to such requests would be sent to the Board members prior to advertising, since members often receive questions from the public about advertisements. Mr. Fisher said the Board could request that such information be included in the Board's packet, but heldid not feel the Board needed to look at every request twice. Motion was then offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Butler, to ~authorize Mr. Agnor to advertise budget amendments for public hearings unless a request might be deemed to be a problem. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Butler~ Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Lindstrom~ Agenda Item No. 7b. Request for appropriation: TIPS Program. Mr. Agnor said the policy just adopted would apply to this request also. 304 July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting) Agenda Item No. ?c, Request for Appropriation: Transfer of Appropriations. Mr. Agnor said a packet of information dated July-~13, ~1983, from Mr. David Papenfuse, Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Administration, was distributed to the Board and lists a number of changes that have taken place since the School Budget was adopted~'~i~i~hese' changes necessitate transfers being made within the School Budget. Mr. Agnor said the four categories in which funds need tOm.be transferred are: Instruction, Transportation, Operation of School Plant, and Other Instructional Costs. He-then referred to the memorandum dated July 15, 1983 from Mr· Ray Jones, Director of Finance. He.noted that Mr. Jones recommends that the transfers be approved. (Copy of this memorandum is on file in the Clerk's Office.) Mr. Agnor then reviewed the following detail of account changes as provided by Mr. Papenfuse: "l. An administrative reorganization: Transfer of W. T. Lewis~from Instruction to Personnel (administration) and elimination of full-time director of elementary education. Upgrading of Community Services position and downgrading of art and music directorship. The allocation of alternative education funds from the miscellaneous category to salaries of leaders, fringe benefits and custodial services of McIntire Building. Transfer one month's Personnel Director's salary to cover moving expenses of same. - Transfer salary recovery realized Upon hiring replacement of elementary supervisor to Hollymead principalship (0. A. Pamplin) and Elementary Directorship (G. M. Canter/part-time)· Transfer salary recovery realized upon replacing Western Albemarle assistant principal to Elementary Directorship. Transfer salary recovery realized upon replacing Secondary Math super- visor to Elementary Directorship. Change elementary supervisor to 20 percent Federal, and transfer recovery to elementary directorship. Transfer all merit pool allocations to Administrative category for disbursement at a later date~ 10. Correct category designations." Mr. Agnor noted that the School Board on July ll, 1983, took official action to request~ these budget amendments which total $125,995. Mr. Fisher asked for an explanation of the item concerning moving expenses. Mr. Papenfuse said the newly hired personnel direct-or is ~moving from New Hampshire and this payment was part of the negotiations involved in the selection process. Mr. Fisher asked the normal procedure for paying moving expenses. Mr. Papenfuse ~said there is no set procedure Mr. Fisher asked if this is being paid as salary.' Mr. Pape~fuse said no, the amount is being transferred from the "salary" line item to "contracted services". Mr. Fisher asked 'ils' if the amount is the actual cost of moving expense. Mr. Papenfuse said yes and noted that the bill for the moving company has been submitted by the Personnel Director. ~ Mr. Fisher then asked if the transfer of merit pool allocations means that a merit system has been established for sChool administrative employees. Mr. Papenfuse said $60,000 was originally set aside for the merit pool and placed in the administrative account. When ~ the categorical budget was prepared, the amount was broken into a percentage basis to show the categorical distribution of same. The attempt now is to place this amount back into the administrative category until the personnel director begins work and the specifics for the merit system have been established. Therefore, the answer is no~ the merit system is not in place at this time and is not expected to be in effect until September. Mr. Papenfuse further explained that the Board does not speCifically have to approve the Educational categorical changes, but it is desired to keep the Board informed as much as possible in order that confidence can be developed regarding educational activities. Mr. Papenfuse asked when the TIPS Program appropriation would be scheduled for a public hearing. Mr. Agnor said the earliest pcssible date is August 3, 1983. Mr..Papenfuse said when this request was delivered to the Clerk's Office, it was indicated that there would be no problem with having the request on the agenda this-evening. He further noted that having to wait until August 3, 1983, for the public hearing creates a problem because the director of this program will not be able to receive a July paycheck. Mr. Agnor said it has just come to the attention of the staff that a public hearing is still required on the request. Mr. Fisher said the public hearing is required by State law and he did not feel people should be placed on the payroll if funds are not available. Mr. Papenfuse said these funds are carried over from a 1982-83 grant and Mrs. Lorelii Dameron, the director of the TIPS Program worked through the City and was paid by the City last year. This year the program has been transferred to the County and she will be on the County payroll. The funds will be received from the Federal government for this expenditure and the only thing necessary is an appropriation. Mr. ~isher said that although he could sympathize with the problem, the public hearing is a requirement of State law. ~July 20, 1983 (Regular Night Meeting) Mrs. Cooke then offered motion to approve the transfers as requested and listed below with same being coded per a journal voucher which is on file in the Clerk's office and aL1 transfers being within the School Fund. Miss Nash seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr, Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Lindstrom. FROM: Instruction Transportation Operation of School Plant Other Instructional Costs $ 80,566 23,286 6,939 15~204 $125,995 TO: Administration Health & Attendance Fixed Charges Adult Education $ 87,250 50 13,528 25~167 $125,995 Agenda Item No. 7d. Requests for Appropriation: Capital Improvements. Mr. Agnor presented the following memorandum dated July 15, 1983, from Mr. Ray Jones, Director of Finance: "There are several appropriations needed at this time for projects approved in the recent five year CIP budget. They are as follows: FROM 97000-999900 Capital Improvement Fund Unallocated Balance $247,000 TO 97000-975801 Jefferson Country Firefighters Advance - Volunteer Firemen 97000-975613 Ivy Creek Natural Area - Paving 97000-975614 Greenwood Community Center - Heating 97000-975615 Scottsville School Recreational Improvement $200,000 5,000 2,000 40~000 '$247,000'.-~ ~ Earlysville Volunteer Fire Company is in need of approximately $43,000 to meet a payment on an obligation made last year. Requests for several projects in Education will be made once the final balance for Fiscal Year 1982-83 is known. There may be a need to transfer funds earmarked for Capital improvements to the School Operating Fund to cover an operating deficit." Mr. Agnor noted that the public hearing required on the Capital Improvements budget was held at the same time as the public hearing on the update of the Capital Improvements Program, so action can be taken on this request tonight. Mr. Fisher asked if the Firefighter's Association has approved the request from the Earlysville Volunteer Fire Department. Mr. Agnor said he was not sure if the Association had specifically approved this or not, but noted that a list of projects had been given to Mr. Jones and that list is set up to be administratively approved by Mr, Jones. Mr. Fisher said he was concerned that the funds not be used for a project that has not been approved by the Association. Mr. J. B. Morris was present. He stated that the Association understands that this fund for the firefighter's will be a continuing fund over a five year period and administered by the Firefig,hters Association Finance Committee. He noted that East Rivanna and Stony Point Fire Companies had drawn advances the first year leaving a balance from last year of $56,500. Earlysville Volunteer Fire Department ordered a new engine and asked the Association for approval of funding in the amount of $100,000. Therefore, the $56,500 balance from last year was drawn and $43,500 will be needed from the 1983-84 appropriation. Mr. Morris said as for~other needs anticipated this year, the indications are that $50,000 or $60,000 will be needed. Mr. Agnor said there is a separate agreement drawn when each fire company receives funds. This agreement is reviewed by the County Attorney and then approved by the Board of Supervisors. Motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Miss Nash, to adopt the folloWing resolution for the appropriations from the Capital Improvements Fund as recommended by Mr. Ray Jones. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that 15247,000 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the Capital Improvement Fund Unallocated Balance--Code 97000-999900 and coded to the following: Code 97000-975801--Jefferson Country Firefighter's Advance-- Volunteer Firemen $200,000 Code 97000-975613--Ivy Creek Natural Area - Paving $ 5,000 Code 97000-975614--Greenwood Community Center - Heating $ 2,000 Code 97000-975615--Scottsville School Recreational Improvement $ 40,000 306 10 July 20, 198~ (Regular Night Meeting) ASe~nda Item No. 8. Approval of Minutes: March 2 and May 4, 1983. Mrs. Cooke had read the minutes of March 2, 198~, and found no errors. The minutes of May 4, 198~, were deferred since Mr. Lindstrom was absent. Motion was offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Mr. Henley, to approve the minutes of March 2, 198B. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 9. Appointments. There were no nominations received for any appointments. Mr. Fisher reported to the Board that letters for persons appointed, for persons who were interviewed but not appointed, and for those not reappointed were sent out last week and noted the good job done by the Clerks. Agenda Item No. 5. ZMA-8~-8. Beechtree Associates. The applicants were present at this time and Mr. Fisher noted that although action had been taken earlier-in the meeting to defer this petition, he would request that the Board consider the petition now that the applicants are present. Mr. Tucker presented the following staff report: "~eques~e.d .~oning: C-1 Commercial (Proffer) Acreag~L 1.1221 acres Existing .Zoning: CO Commercial Office Location: Property described as Tax Map 61, Parcel 25, is located on the southside of Whitewood Road at its intersection with Hydraulic Road. B~c~ground: A site plan was approved for commercial office development on this property. Building permits-were issued for shell structures to be completed as tenants were secured'. SuiSes A and B in the eastern end of the building were leased to and finished for a health spa. The Zoning Administrator ruled that''health:spa' was not a permitted use in the CO zone, however, issued a temporary certificate of occupancy limited to rehabilitative activities. A'simple error has occurred. The purpose of this rezoning petition is to correct this error', therefore, staff has not reviewed the petition under normal procedures. Staff opinion is that the applicant's proffer is adequate to protect the public interest." Mr. Tucker then presented the following proffer dated June 3, 198~: "Albemarle County Zoning Department 4Q1 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 Dear Sir: With regards to the attached zoning map amendment application for Block F, Lot l, Westfield (Tax Map Sheet 61, Parcel 25), Beechtree Associates hereby profers to limit the use of Suites A & B, as ShoWn on the attached plan, to a Health Spa/Health Club. In addition, Beechtree Associates proffers to limit the use of the remainder of Parcel 25 to Commercial Office uses as provided for in the Commercial Office district. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, (SIGNED BY) Robert M. Hauser Republic Homes, Inc., Partner" Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission at its meeting on July 7, 1983, recommended approval of ZMA-83-8 with the above proffer. Miss Nash asked that the error which has occurred be explained. Mr. Tucker said a building permit was requested in order to renovate the portion of the building to be used for a health spa. However, the inspections office staff neglected to check the zoning ordinance to determine if this use was permitted in the Commercial Office district. The renovations were made and when a permanent certificate of occupancy was applied for, the error was discovered and it was determined that a health spa was not permitted in the Commerical Office district. Therefore~ Mr. Tucker said this request was made as a form of correcting the error and in order to allow the tenant to use the portion of the building for a health spa but the remainder of the building will be limited to Commercial Office uses. July 20, 1983 (ReE~lar Night Meeting) 307 Mrs. Cooke asked what will happen in the future if the health spa ceases to operate;~ specifically, would the zoning revert back to Commerical Office. Mr. Tucker said if this zoning request is approved the zoning will be C-l, and the proffer will run with the land. As he understands it, if the spa ceases to operate in Suites A and B, then the permit is null and void. Mr. Fisher felt that was too restrictive and would cause another problem. Mr. Tucker said that does not mean that the space could not be used for anything but a spa. Mr. Fisher said that was not his understanding of the proffer. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Blake Hurt, president of Republic Homes, was Dresent and noted that Republic Homes is a partner of Beechtree Associates. Mr. Hurt said his organization did not check to determine if a spa was allowed but had asked the owner of the building to see if there was proper zoning for this use. The owner advised him that the zoning was appropriate because the operation was not exactly a spa. Therefore, a lease was signed and a building permit was obtained. As noted by Mr. Tucker, the error was not determined until application for a permanent certificate of occupancy. Mr. Hurt said the only interest of his partnership in this request is to have this health spa operation in the space indicated in the proffer, and if the health spa ceases to operate, the zoning would be as exists now, Commercial Office. Mr. Fisher said he did not feel the proffer indicates that intent. Mr. Tucker felt the Chairman is concerned that the remainder of Parcel 25 should be limited to Commercial Office uses. Mr. Fisher said that is not his only concern, but also the proffer states that it is limited to Suites A and B for a health spa/health club. Mr. Tucker said the greatest concern then is that the proffer should have included a provision that Suites A and B Would revert to Commercial Office use should the health spa/health club cease to exist. Mr. Hurt said he is empowered to make that change and would be happy to do so because that was the intent. Mr. Fisher again asked if that is the intent of the proffer. Mr. Hurt said yes. He further noted that parking for this operation will not be any problem because this operation will be during evening hours and the other businesses will be closed at that time. With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Fisher said the following wording added to the proffer at the end of the first sentence covers all his concerns: "and that at such time as the Health Spa/Health Club ceases to operate in Suites A & B, these suites shall convert to Conmmercial Office usage." Motion was then offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Miss Nash, to approve ZMA-83-8 with the proffer as amended and agreed to by Mr. Hurt. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 9. Appointments. Mr. Agnor said the staff was requested to communicate with Mrs. Marian Rabinowitz to see if she was willing to be reappointed as the joint appointee to the Jail Board. The inquiry has been made and she is willing to be reappointed. Mr. Fisher asked if communication had been received from the City regarding their interest in this appointment. Mr. Agnor said not at this time. City Council must concur in the appointment. Mr. Henley offered motion to reappoint Mrs. Marian Rabinowitz as the Joint appointee to the Jail Board said term to expire on April 30, 1987 pending concurrence by City Council. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. ~Cooke, Messrs. Fisher and Henley and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 10. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mr. Agnor noted invitation received from Mrs. Karen Hayden, Chairman of the Library Board, regarding a meeting with the Library Board Trustees on July 26, 1983, at 3:30 p.m. to inspect the C & 0 Railway Depot building in Crozet with the architects concerning the use of same as a branch library. This meeting is to be held at the Breadbasket Bakery in Crozet. Mr. Fisher reported on the NACo Annual Conference he recently attended in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Many steps have been taken to resolve the financial problems concerning the National Association of Counties new headquarter offices in Washington, D. C. NACO originally had 134 employees but that number has been reduced to 51. Mr. Fisher said most of the building has been rented, but some of the leases were broken in order that those willing to pay rent could move in. Mr. Fisher said many efforts have been made to solve the financial problems. One of the efforts has been affiliated national groups who have made direct contributions out of their treasuries. Further, Mr. Fisher said a decision will be made this year about what to do With this building. The Association has decided not to declare bankruptcy and $500,000 has been secured in short term loans which will alloW the Association to pay off all of their creditors. Mr. Fisher said there are three options for use of the building. One, the National Association of Counties can continue to own, operate and lease the building, or, two, assign the rights that NACo has in the building to some other purchaser or, three, fight the contract that was signed on the building in a legal proceeding in order to break the contract. Mr. Fisher said that decision has to be made by October 1. 308 July 20, 198B (Regular Night,Meeting) Mr. Fisher.said the NACO by-laws have been revised and the position of fiscal officer has been deleted. A meeting was held with the person acting as fiscal officer, and he related that all through this situation, the staff was informing him that everything was fine and the reports he was receiving indicated the same. Mr. Fisher said a three member audit committee has been established to review all expenditures, revenues and contracts quarterly with reports then being made to the Board of Directors. Mr. Fisher noted that he is a member of the audit committee. Mr. Fisher said another position that will eventually be deleted is that of fourth vice-president. Mr. Butler said he recently participated in an educational tour dealing with agricultur~I land preservation in southeastern Wisconsin. Mr. Butler said this tour ~as very educational', He noted that Wisconsin has a land use taxation program which is different from Virginia's in that a tax credit on state income tax forms is allowed. Mr. Butler concluded by stating~. that he had learned a great deal on this tour about how zoning and development is handled in Wisconsin. Agenda Item No. ll. At 9:25 P.M., with no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.