Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-03-06TEN T A TI V E MARCH6i2002 9i00AiM M EETINGROOM241 COUN~¥OFFICESUILDIN 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Moment of Silence. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Presentation: Certificates of Appreciation. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). Transportation Matters: a. Public hearing: Route 606 (Dickerson Road) abandonment. b. Transportation Matters not Listed on the Agenda. 9:45 a.m. - SP-2001-040. Crossroads Waldorf School (Sign #70), conditions of approval (Deferred from February 20, 2002). 10:00 a.m. - Presentation: Nick Evans, Chairman, Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District. 10:15 a.m. - Presentation: Department of Social Services Annual Report. 10:30 a.m. - Board to Board Presentation, School Board Chairman. 10:45 a.m. - Presentation: Lewis and Clark Exposition Plans, Lee Catlin. 11:00 a.m. - Discussion: Mountainside Senior Living (fka Windham) Facility Agreement. 11:15 a.m. - ZMA-2001-16. Bargamin Park (Sign #57) Proffers. 11:30 a.m. - Presentation: Groundwater Study. 11:45 a.m. - FY 02-03 County Executive's Budget Presentation. Approval of Minutes: September 27(A), October 3, and December 12, 2001; January 9, January 16 and February 13, 2002. Closed Session: Personnel Matters. Certify Closed Session. Appointments. From the Board: Matters not Listed on the Agenda. Adjourn. FOR APPROVAL: 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 Proclamation recognizing the Virginia Festival of the Book. Ordinance Approving the Virginia Energy Purchasing Governmental Association Joint Powers Association Agreement; and Providing for the Effective Date of This Ordinance. Update on Routes 22 and 231 Through Truck Restriction and Origin and Destination Study Request. Profflt Road Through Truck Restriction between Route 20 and Route 29. County participation in FY 2002-2003 Revenue Sharing Program. Resolution to accept Castleberry Court Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. Appropriation: Education, $134,435.27 (Form #2001055). Set public hearing for March 20, 2002 on Community Development Block Grant applications. FOR INFORMATION: 6.10 Letter dated February 21,2002 from Robert H. Connock, Jr., VDOT District Construction Engineer, to Ella W. Carey, Clerk, providing notice that the Commonwealth Transportation Board has approved the Route 250/bridge replacements as proposed and presented at the Design Hearing. ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of March 6, 2002 March 8 2002 AGENDA ITEM/ACTION Call to Order. Meeting was called to order 9:00 a.m., by the Chairman, Ms. Thomas. All BOS members were present. Also present were Bob Tucker, Larry Davis, Ella Carey and Wayne Cilimberg. ASSIGNMENT 4. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. · There were none. 5. Presentation: Certificates of Appreciation. · The Chairman presented Certificates of Appreciation to organizations that allow the County to use their buildings as polling places on Election Day. 6.1. Proclamation recognizing the Virginia Festival of the Book. Clerk: Forward to Nancy Damon. (Attachment 1) · ADOPTED. 6.2. Ordinance Approving the Virginia Energy Purchasing Governmental Association Joint Powers Association Agreement; and Providing for the Effective Date of This Ordinance. · ADOPTED the attached Ordinance and AUTHORIZED the County Executive to execute and deliver the agreement to VM L/VACO. 6.3. Update on Routes 22 and 231 Through Truck Restriction and Origin and Destination Study Request. · SUPPORTED staff's recommendation to send letters to trucking companies, request VDOT to reduce the speed limit and selective periodic speed enforcement by Albemarle County Police Department. Staff to work with Mr. Bryan and look at the 1999 study to see if that will be adequate. 6.4. Proffit Road Through Truck Restriction between Route 20 and Route 29. · DIRECTED staff to conduct the VDOT required analysis for the through truck restriction request on Proffit Road. 6.5. County participation in FY 2002-2003 Revenue Sharing Program. · SUPPORTED participation in the Revenue Sharing Program, requesting a total of $500,000 (to be matched with available County CIP funds) for the James River Road spot safety improvement project and AUTHORIZED Chairman to send letter notifying VDOT of the County's intent to participate in the program. 6.6. Resolution to accept Castleberry Court Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways, · ADOPTED. 6.7. Appropriation: Education, $134,435.27 (Form #2001055). · APPROVED Clerk: Forward adopted ordinance and signed agreement to County Attorney's office. (Attachment 2) Clerk: Forward letter under Chairman's signature to trucking companies. Juan Wade: Proceed as directed by the Board. John Miller: Proceed with periodic speed enforcement. Juan Wade: Proceed as directed. Clerk: Forward letter to VDOT after Chairman's signature. Clerk: Forward resolution and SR-5A form to Glenn Brooks. (Attachment 3) Clerk: Forward signed appropriation form to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate individuals. Acknowledge donations for Chairman's signature. -Page 1- 6.8. Set public hearing for March 20, 2002 on Community Development Block Grant applications. · APPROVED 7. SP-2001-040. Crossroads Waldorf School (Sign #70), conditions of approval (Deferred from February 20, 2002). · APPROVED SP-2001-040 subject to ten conditions. 8. ZMA-2001-16. Bargamin Park (Sign #57) Proffers (Deferred from February 20, 2002). · APPROVED ZMA-2001-16 subject to amended and signed proffers dated February 20, 2002. 9a. Public hearing: Route 606 (Dickerson Road) abandonment. · ADOPTED resolution. · Ms. Thomas asked about the status of the signal at the Airport entrance. Mr. Elliott commented that the Airport Authority supports installation of the signal. He added that the schedule for Route 649 improvements has been deferred, but they have urged VD©T to move forward with installation of the signal at the current location. So far VD©T has not been receptive. Ms. Thomas suggested that the Board discuss this with Jim Bryan at the April 3rd Board meeting. 9b. Transportation Matters not Listed on the Agenda. · Jim Bryan comments: · Introduced VDOT Area Superintendents - Yancey Mills, Lee Huff; Free Union - Harold Gentry; Boyd Tavern - Ken Staton; Keene - Gene Rush; Standardsville - Cecil Gibson; Bridge Crew - Jimmy Howe; and the Residency Maintenance Manager - John Shifflett. · In response to Wayne Cilimberg, the preallocation hearing will be held in April. Mr. Cilimberg said something will be coming to the Board in April for that hearing. · Lindsay Dottier comments: · Asked if VDOT saved money on chemicals because of lack of snow this year. Mr. Bryan replied that they should in the long run, and the maintenance budget is staying in tack. They should have a good handle on what the secondary road allocations will look like for the next Six Year Plan. Based on the new allocations, there may be some delays. VDOT will work closely with the County on that. · A constituent asked him if VDOT has any plans to three or four lane Route 250 East. Mr. Bryan responded there are no plans in the immediate future. Mr. Dottier asked if VDOT intends to install any more signals or signage for turning movements. Mr. Bryan responded VDOT can look at individual requests. · Charles Martin comments: · He noted the presence of some individuals from Proffit Road. · He noted an email Board members received from John Moore regarding a requested Origin-Destination (O-D) Study on Route 231/22. He asked if the State was just attempting to delay a decision on restricting truck traffic. Clerk: Advertise public hearing for March 20TM. Clerk: Set out conditions of approval. (Attachment 4) Clerk: Set out proffers. (Attachment 5) Clerk: Forward resolution to Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner and Jim Bryan, with copy to Juan Wade and Bryan Elliott. (Attachment 6) Clerk: Add to April 3rd Board agenda. Clerk: Forward comments to Jim Bryan. -Page 2- Mr. Bryan responded that O-D studies are very expensive, labor intensive, and he thinks unsafe. They require stopping trucks on the road and asking their destination which is also disruptive to traffic. VDOT found an old study from 1999 which also had some affect on doing a new study. In his opinion, this is a political decision because it is a regional issue, not just local. · Fred Gerke, representing the Coalition For A Safe Proffit Road, emphasized the benefits of restricting truck traffic on Proffit Road. He asked that the public hearing be held at an evening meeting so that more individuals can attend it. Regarding the underpass on Polo Grounds Road, the people fear that if it is widened and opened up, it will mean more traffic. They would like to see something done to improve safety of the existing underpass. Mr. Bryan said he will ask his traffic engineer to look at the situation and see what can be done in terms of safety improvements. · Walter Perkins comments: · Suggested that VDOT be involved in the Master Planning in Crozet. · Dennis Rooker comments: · Asked for a list of what has been done to Georgetown Road and what remains to be done in the overall plans for spot improvements. Mr. Bryan responded that he would provide that information. · This past Sunday he was going through the Rio Road/ Route 29 stop light, and after two cars go through from Rio, the light turns yellow regardless of the number of cars in line. · Some survey workers for the Route 29 Bypass in the Lambs Road area were talking with several of the residents. One of the residents asked why the Lambs Road bridge over the bypass was planned to be 300 feet in length, and the response was because they were acquiring enough right-of-way for the bypass to be six lanes. Mr. Bryan said he knows nothing about that, but will find out. · Sally Thomas comments: · Received a phone call from a lady regarding traffic on the east end of Morgantown Road. Mr. Bryan said the speed limit will be changed to 25 mph. They are waiting to receive this in writing. He added that on the west side, VDOT plans to reposition the stop sign in the one-way area. · Asked for comments on tree cutting on Route 250. Mr. Bryan said they are cutting a lot of trees down as a safety measure. Ms. Thomas asked what the trees will be replaced with. Mr. Bryan responded seeding. · Asked if Mr. Bryan thinks the maintenance funds will be cut. Mr. Bryan responded that he has been told the funds will be increased by four percent. -Page 3- 10. Presentation: Nick Evans, Chairman, Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District. · RECEIVED. 11. Presentation: Department of Social Services Annual Report. · RECEIVED. 12. Board to Board Presentation, School Board Chairman. · RECEIVED. 13. Presentation: Lewis and Clark Exposition Plans, Lee Catlin. · RECEIVED. 14. Discussion: Windham Assisted Living Facility Agreement. · AUTHORIZED County Executive to execute agreement. 15. Presentation: Groundwater Study. · RECEIVED. 16. FY 02-03 County Executive's Budget Presentation. · RECEIVED. 18. Closed Session: Personnel Matters. · At 12:20 p.m., the Board went into closed session. 19. Certify Closed Session. · 4:49 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session. 20. Appointments. · APPOINTED Stephen von Storch to the Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee (DISC)II. · APPOINTED Fred Hudson and David Schmidt to the Housing Committee, with terms to expire on December 31,2004. · APPOINTED Lloyd Wood, Dana Slater, Jewel Mason and Dwight Colley to the Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee (PDCAC). In addition the Board AMENDED the PDCAC bylaws to increase the citizen membership from three to four. · APPOINTED John A. Scrivani to the Acquisition of Conservation Easements Committee, to complete the term of Bettina K. Ring, to expire on August 1,2004. · APPOINTED Rodney Thomas, to replace C. Jared Loewenstein, as the Planning Commission representative on the Charlottesville-Albemarle Regional Transportation (CHART) Advisory Committee, with term to expire on April 3, 2003. · REAPPOINTED Sterling K. Robinson, II, to the Commission on Children and Familes, with term to expire on June 30, 2005. · REAPPOINTED Roxanne White to the Region Ten Community Services Board, with term to expire on June 30, 2005. · REAPPOINTED Karen L. Powell to the Board of Social Services with term to expire on December 31,2003. · REAPPOINTED W. Ivar Mawyar to the Equalization Board as Samuel Miller District representative, with term to expire on December 31,2002. · REQUESTED the Clerk advertise for applications for the County Attorney's Office: Forwarding agreement to appropriate individuals for signature. Provide Clerk with fully executed copy of agreement. Melvin Breeden: Provide appropriation for April 3rd Board meeting. Clerk: Include on April 3rd agenda. Clerk: Prepare appointment letters for Chairman's signature and advertise as directed. -Page 4- Jefferson Area Bicycle and Walking Advisory Committee, the Region Ten Community Services Board, the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Citizens Advisory Committee, the Rivanna District appointment on the Equalization Board and the Rio District appointment on the Board of Social Services. 21. From the Board: Matters not Listed on the Agenda. · Sally Thomas: · Mentioned the letter from the Department of Historic Resources regarding the Peters' Mountain tower. DHR found that the tower does impact the historic district, but the County did all the mitigation possible, and they (DHR) would recommend a fake tree. Mr. Davis said that is an issue the County may want to discuss with the DHR, because in order to make that requirement, it would require an amendment to the special use permit. · The Italians are coming. The public has raised $2,150 for this visit; the City is contributing a like amount. She asked the Board to contribute a like amount. CONSENSUS of Board to contribute $2,000 for the Italian visit, with funds to come from the Board's Reserve. · City Council will be discussing their transportation road plans on March 21st. Although not invited, it would be a good idea for one of the Board members to attend this meeting. · The Juvenile Detention Center may have to wait six months before it will be opened. The State is holding back on its funding. · The map of the month is a dot for every person in the County. 22. Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 5:01 p.m. /ewc Attachment 1 - Proclamation recognizing Virginia Festival of the Book Attachment 2 - Ordinance and Agreement - Electrical Power Service Attachment 3 - Resolution - Castleberry Court Subdivision Attachment 4 - Planning Conditions of Approval Attachment 5 - Proffers for ZMA-2001-16 - Bargamin Park Rezoning Attachment 6 - Route 606 (Dickerson Road) Resolution -Page 5- Attachment I VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK WHEREAS, Albemarle County is committed to promoting reading, writing, and storytelling within and outside its borders; and WHEREAS, our devotion to literacy and our support of literature has attracted over 1,000 writers and tens of thousands of readers to our VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK; and WHEREAS, the VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK celebrates the power of books and publishing; and WHEREAS, businesses, cultural and civic organizations, and individuals have contributed to the ongoing success of the VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Albemarle and Virginia, and the world, have made the VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK the best book festival in the country; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sally H. Thomas, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors, do hereby proclaim Wednesday, March 20, 2002 through Sunday, March 24, 2002 as the eighth annual VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK and encourage community members to participate fully in the wide range of available events and activities. Signed and sealed this 6th day of March, 2002. -Page 6- Attachment 2 ORDINANCE NO. 02-A(1) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE VIRGINIA ENERGY PURCHASING GOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION JOINT POWERS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT; and PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, the VML/VACo Virginia Power Steering Committee (the "Committee"), composed of representatives of the County of Albemarle and other political subdivisions and municipalities of the Commonwealth, has for over several decades negotiated on behalf of such governmental units a standard form contract for their purchase of electricity supply and delivery service from Virginia Power as a sole source provider; and WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1300, et seq. of the Virginia Code (the "Joint Powers Act") authorizes political subdivisions to exercise jointly powers they otherwise are authorized to exercise independently, under the terms and conditions set forth in the Joint Powers Act; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Electric Utility Restructuring Act (the "Restructuring Act") further authorizes counties and other political subdivisions in the Commonwealth to aggregate their electricity supply requirements for the purpose of their joint purchase of such requirements from licensed suppliers, and the Restructuring Act provides that such aggregation shall not require licensure; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Public Procurement Act (the "Procurement Act") exempts from its competitive sealed bidding and competitive negotiation requirements (the "Requirements") the joint procurement by public bodies, utilizing competitive principles, of electric utility services purchased through member associations under the conditions set forth in the Procurement Act; and WHEREAS, the Committee recommends that the aggregation and procurement of electric supply, electric delivery and other energy-related services ("Energy Services") be effectuated as provided in the Joint Powers Association Agreement, a copy of which is attached to and made part of this Ordinance (the "Joint Powers Agreement'), in accordance with applicable provisions of the Procurement Act, such as utilization of competitive principles pursuant to an exemption from the Requirements; and WHEREAS, the Committee further recommends that the other services provided by the Committee to its members be effectuated as provided in the Joint Powers Agreement, with such services consisting of (i) assistance in implementing standard form contracts for the purchase of services from incumbent electricity utilities; (ii)education of members regarding electricity procurement issues; (iii) monitoring of legal and regulatory developments affecting the provision of electricity service to local governments; and (iv) hiring of consultants and legal counsel to assist in its provision of the foregoing services ("Steering Committee Services"); and WHEREAS, it appearing to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle (the "County") that the joint procurement of the Energy Services and provision of Steering Committee Services pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement is in the best interests of the County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED that: (1) Competitive sealed bidding and competitive negotiation for the procurement of Energy Services are not fiscally advantageous to the public because the procurement process for Energy Services must be flexible enough to respond to quickly changing market conditions in which energy prices can fluctuate considerably on a daily or even hourly basis. -Page 7- (2) The aggregation and joint procurement of the Energy Services and the provision of Steering Committee Services pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement are hereby authorized and approved. (3) The County Executive is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Joint Powers Agreement on behalf of the County of Albemarle in substantially the form presented to this meeting. (4) The payment obligations of the County of Albemarle pursuant to the provisions hereof and the Joint Powers Agreement shall be subject to annual appropriation of requisite funds by the Board of Supervisors. (5) This Ordinance shall take effect immediately. -Page 8- VIRGINIA ENERGY PURCHASING GOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION JOINT POWERS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT Dated as of March 1,2002 THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), is made and entered into by and among the local governments and other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia which are signatories hereto (each a "Member" and, collectively, the "Members"), effective as of March 1, 2002, for certain signatories or such later effective date for other signatories as set forth on such signatories' execution page. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, each Member is authorized by law to acquire electricity supply, electricity delivery, and other energy-related services ("Energy Services") as necessary or appropriate for the operation of its respective public facilities; and WHEREAS, political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia are authorized under the Code of Virginia 1950, as amended (the "Code") to exercise jointly powers that they otherwise are authorized to exercise independently, and such authorization is currently set forth in sections 15.2-1300, et seq. of the Code, which provide that any power, privilege or authority exercised or capable of being exercised by a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia may be exercised and enjoyed jointly with any other political subdivision of the Commonwealth having a similar power, privilege or authority except where express statutory procedure is otherwise provided for the joint enterprise; and WHEREAS, Code sections 15.2-1300, et seq. authorize two or more political subdivisions to enter into agreements with one another for such joint action and to appropriate funds and sell, lease, give or otherwise supply such property, personnel or services therefor as may be within their legal power to furnish; and WHEREAS, the Members, pursuant to the authority granted in Code sections 15.2-1300, et seq. or such similar authority as may from time to time be authorized under the Code, desire to create a joint powers association and associate as members hereunder with the assistance of the Consultant and Counsel (identified below) for the purposes, among other things, of promoting the interest and welfare of the Members, and developing a closer relation among them, all as hereinafter more particularly set forth; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Public Procurement Act (the "Procurement Act") exempts from its competitive sealed bidding and competitive negotiation requirements (the "Requirements") the joint procurement by public bodies, utilizing competitive principles, of electric utility services purchased through member associations under the conditions set forth in the Procurement Act; WHEREAS, the Virginia Power Steering Committee of the Virginia Municipal League and the Virginia Association of Counties (the "Committee"), which is composed of representatives of local governments and other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth purchasing energy from Virginia Electric and Power Company, d/b/a Dominion Virginia Power ("Virginia Power"), has (i) for several decades assisted such governmental bodies in connection with the negotiation of standard form contracts with Virginia Power for the purchase of electric utility services, including electric supply, distribution and transmission, and ancillary services, (ii) provided assistance in implementing such contracts, (iii) helped educate its members regarding electricity procurement issues, (iv) monitored legal and regulatory developments affecting the provision of electricity service to local governments, and (v) has hired consultants and legal counsel to assist in its provisions of the foregoing services ("Steering Committee Services"). -Page 9- WHEREAS, the Committee recommends that the aggregation and procurement of Energy Services be effectuated in compliance with applicable provisions of the Procurement Act, such as the utilization of competitive principles pursuant to an exemption from the Requirements, and the Committee also recommends that the Steering Committee Services be undertaken by the same entity that arranges for the procurement of the Energy Services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the undertakings hereinafter stated, the Members agree as follows: 1. Name. The undertaking of the Members hereunder shall be named and designated as the Virginia Energy Purchasing Governmental Association (hereinafter "VEPGA"). 2. Term of the Aqreement. This Agreement shall be effective for the period commencing on the date set forth above (with each Member to adopt the Agreement on or after such commencement date) and shall terminate upon the earlier of (a) a unanimous vote of all the remaining Members or (b) when the membership has decreased to one Member. Upon such termination, any property owned by VEPGA (or the proceeds from the sale of such property) shall be distributed to each remaining Member in accordance with VEPGA's bylaws, as such bylaws may be amended from time to time by the board governing VEPGA (the "Bylaws"). 3. Purpose of the Aqreement. The Members enter into this Agreement for the purpose of acting jointly to promote their interests and welfare and to promote the interest and welfare of, and develop close relationships with, similar public bodies. This promotion and development shall consist of the purchase of one or more components of the Energy Services on an aggregated basis and also the provision of Steering Committee Services. VEPGA shall be the Members' agent regarding the purchase of Energy Services, which shall be done in the manner specified in the Bylaws. Each Member agrees, subject, however, to annual appropriation, (a) to purchase its respective share of the Energy Services for any of its accounts that have been selected by one or more supplier(s) chosen by VEPGA to service such accounts and to pay the rate for such accounts negotiated in the procurement process for the one or more components of the Energy Services, and (b)to pay its pro rata share of the budget or the membership fees as hereinafter set forth. 4. Governance. (a) The Board. VEPGA shall be governed by a Board (the "Board") that shall initially consist of the individuals listed on Schedule A of this Agreement and thereafter members of the Board shall be elected by the Members in accordance with the Bylaws. The size of the Board may be increased or decreased in accordance with the Bylaws. The Board shall have power to decide all matters relating to VEPGA's activities and operations. (b) Meetinqs of the Board. The Board shall meet at such times and places as shall be designated in the Bylaws. (c) Officers of the Board. Paul Proto is hereby designated as the initial Chair of the Board, Steve Sinclair is hereby designated as its initial Vice-Chair and Steve Craig is hereby designated as its initial Secretary/Treasurer. These officers and any other officers elected in accordance with the Bylaws shall serve until the earlier of the submission of such officer's resignation or such officer's removal and the election of a successor by the Board. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Board, except that in the absence of the Chair, the Vice-Chair or another Member of the Board shall preside. Vacancies in such offices may be filled by the Board at any meeting. -Page10- (d) for any Board meeting. Bylaws. Quorum for the Board. A majority of board members shall constitute a quorum The size of a quorum may be increased or decreased in accordance with the (e) Actions by the Board. All matters for action by the Board may be adopted upon the affirmative vote of Board members voting at a meeting where a quorum is present, or otherwise as may be specified in this Agreement or in the Bylaws. (f) Quorum for Members. The lesser of (i) a simple majority of the Members or (ii) eight Members shall constitute a quorum for any meeting of the Members. The size of a quorum may be increased or decreased in accordance with the Bylaws. (g) Bylaws. The initial Bylaws are set forth in Schedule B to this Agreement. The Bylaws may be amended upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the Board members or upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the Members. 5. Budqet of the Association. (a) The Board shall establish a budget for VEPGA with funding by the Members based upon a pro rata share of the budget or, if applicable and approved by the Board, a minimum membership fee. Such pro rata shares and minimum fees shall be assessed on an annual basis except that, under extraordinary and unanticipated circumstances, the Board may assess a pro rata share and minimum fee more than once a year. The pro rata share will be based upon each Member's energy consumption or upon such other equitable method of funding as may be determined from time to time by the Board. (b) VEPGA shall not create or incur any liability for the Members, jointly or severally, other than and subject to annual appropriation, (i) the costs incurred by any Member in paying its portion of the Energy Services in accordance with contracts signed by the Chair or Vice-Chair on behalf of VEPGA as the Member's agent or (ii)the pro rata share of the budget or the membership fees imposed for a Member's participation in VEPGA. No Member shall be liable or responsible for any payments owed under any contracts for any portion of the Energy Services purchased by any other Member. 6. Withdrawal of Members. A Member may withdraw from VEPGA effective July 1 of any calendar year if written notice has been given to VEPGA by March 1 of that calendar year; provided, however, that any accounts of a withdrawing Member that are participating in any contract awarded by VEPGA shall continue to participate in such contract until such contract has expired or has been terminated in accordance with the terms of such contract. Any other methods of withdrawing from VEPGA shall be set forth in the Bylaws. 7. Execution of Multiple Ori.qinals. This Agreement may be executed by the Members in multiple original counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument. WITNESS the following signatures, effective as of the date set forth underneath each signature. -Page 11- Attachment 3 The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 20th day of February 2002, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street in Castleberry Court Subdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated March 6, 2002, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road in Castleberry Court as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated March 6, 2002, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, exclusive of any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. The roads described on Additions Form SR-5(A) are: 1) Castleberry Court (State Route 1032) from the intersection of Route 689 to the cul-de- sac, as shown on plat recorded 4/24/91 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 1151, page 103 and Deed Book 1519, page 220, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.09 mile. Total Mileage - 0.09 mile. -Page 12- Attachment 4 Agenda Item No. 7. SP-2001-040. Crossroads Waldorf School (Sign #70). Maximum enrollment shall be three hundred fifty (350) students, with a maximum of sixty-five (65) staff. Any increase to enrollment or staffing shall require amendment of this special permit; Normal hours of operation for the school shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekdays, with occasional uses in the evenings and weekend; The approved final site plan shall be in substantial accord with the Conceptual Master Plan (submitted November 12, 2001 and revised December 14, 2001), with the northern wing building orientation also in substantial accord with Diagram 'A' (dated February 5, 2002 and prepared by Bruce Wardell Architects) provided, however, the orientation of the northern wing building may be rotated up to 7.5 degrees in either direction to provide up to fifteen (15) degrees of flexibility in the final siting of the northern wing building, and shall reflect all required pedestrian and road connections to adjacent properties and a sidewalk along at least one side of the entrance road, as described below; A building setback and tree buffer shall be maintained adjacent to the Village Square residential development along the south property line for a distance of 1006.39 linear feet, as shown on the Conceptual Master Plan; The school shall be operated in accord with the Special Use Permit Application and Justification submitted August 27, 2001 and the Site Development Strategy Narrative submitted via facsimile December 18, 2001; The permittee shall reserve for dedication for public use a public vehicular connection to the parcel or parcels located to the north of the school property; this public vehicular connection shall consist of a forty (40) foot wide strip centered on the entrance road and a forty (40) foot wide strip extending along the rear of Parcel 174 from its intersection with the entrance road to the shared boundary with Parcel 172A. The public road connection along the rear of Parcel 174 between the entrance road and the adjacent property to the north shall be constructed by others. If it is determined to be necessary by the County to provide for inter-parcel access, the owner shall make the reserved vehicular connection available for such use; If it is determined by the County to be necessary to provide for inter-parcel vehicular connections between the property and Parcels 173A and 174, the final site plan shall show possible future connections between the property and Parcels 173 and 174. These connections shall be along the rear boundary of each parcel, and shall be coordinated with access to the school. The specific locations and design of the connections shall be subject to approval by Engineering. This condition does not require the owner to construct any inter-parcel vehicular connection. An easement shall be created to allow public use of a pedestrian connection to the parcel or parcels located to the south of the school property; this connection shall be made in a location between Rio Road East and the school buildings, in such a fashion that it shall connect to the sidewalk to be constructed along the school entrance road and, if and when constructed, to the connecting road along the rear portion of Parcel 174, the exact location of this connection to be determined at the time of final site plan approval; -Page 13- 10. 11. If an asphalt path is to be used, it shall be five (5) feet wide and consist of four (4) inches of 21B stone base material and two (2) inches of SMA-2 asphalt. If a concrete sidewalk is to be used, it shall meet standards established by the County Engineer. The path shall be shown on the final site plan for the school and shall be constructed upon request of the County at such time as the County determines that the path is appropriate to coordinate access to pedestrian facilities ready for construction or constructed on the contiguous properties; Portions of the property shall be dedicated, reserved, or restricted as follows: A fifty (50) foot greenway along Meadow Creek at the western boundary of Parcel 170 shall be dedicated to Albemarle County at the time of final site plan approval; A thirty (30) foot greenway easement along the northwestern side of the centerline of the intermittent stream shown on the Conceptual Master Plan shall be granted to Albemarle County at the time of final site plan approval. The greenway easement shall authorize Albemarle County to install and maintain a Class B trail and associated improvements within the easement, allow public access to the trail, and prohibit improvements by the owner. The greenway easement shall be subject to review and approval by the County Attorney; and The area of Parcel 170 between the dedicated greenway and the greenway easement, containing approximately 1.56 acres, shall be reserved for use as part of the County's and the City of Charlottesville's park and trail system. The owner shall preserve the reserved area in its natural condition and shall make no improvements on this reserved area without the written authorization of the County. The reserved area shall be shown on the final site plan. At such time as a linear park is established on the contiguous properties to the north and south of the reserved area, the owner shall dedicate to the County a public access easement over the reserved area to provide for the use of the property as a natural area for park, open space and greenway purposes. At the option of the owner, the easement may restrict or prohibit the placement of any building or structure in this area and provide for the continued use of the property by the owner so long as the use does not conflict with the stated purposes of the easement. The deed of dedication shall be subject to review and approval by the County Attorney; No disturbance of the critical slopes located at the western portion of the site or other undisturbed areas identified on the Conceptual Master Plan shall occur as a result of site development other than development of a pedestrian access to the greenway. Prior to final site plan approval, a tree preservation plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator, addressing in detail the limits of all disturbed areas, diameter and location of trees to be preserved, clearing and limbing policy for trees to be preserved, and supplemental trees and shrubs (if any), and related issues. -Page 14- PROFFER FORM Attachment 5 Date: February 20, 2002 ZMA #ZMA-01-06 Tax Map and Parcel Number(s) 55-67 9.59 Acres to be rezoned from R-2 to PRD Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning request. Development shall be in general accord with the Application Plan, entitled "Preliminary Subdivision Plans for Bargamin Park Subdivision," dated February 7, 2002, including building elevations, entitled "Conceptual Drawings for Bargamin Park Subdivision," dated January, 2002, (with notes to site plan contained therein, initialed and dated January 29, 2002 by Kathleen M. Galvin, Architect) as reasonably determined by the Agent. (2) All street sections shall include: curb and gutter; a 5-foot planting strip for street trees and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks on both sides of Bargamin House Road, Powells Creek Lane, and the private road between Lots 34 and 35, as shown on the Application Plan, entitled "Preliminary Subdivision Plans for Bargamin Park Subdivision," dated February 7, 2002. Prior to Final Plat approval, the Planning Director shall determine, if necessary, where underground utilities necessitate relocating or eliminating street trees in order to accommodate utilities. (3) Upon demand of the County, the Applicant shall dedicate to the County, that portion of the subject property which is 34 (thirty-four) feet from the centerline of Jarman's Gap Road along it's frontage, except where there shall be a right-turn lane into the site, which shall require the dedication of up to forty feet (40') from the centerline of Jarman's Gap Road along the subject property's frontage. (4) The existing house, known as the Bain House, shall be renovated in accordance with plans approved by the Albemarle County Design Planner. Changes to the exterior of the house shall be limited to those that do not compromise its architectural integrity, as determined by the Albemarle County Design Planner, prior to the issuance of any building permits for exterior alterations. (5) The land identified on the Application Plan, entitled "Preliminary Subdivision Plans for Bargamin Park Subdivision," dated February 7, 2002, as "Future public r/w to be dedicated upon demand of the County" shah be reserved for future dedication as public right-of-way. In the event that the connections to adjacent properties are not made, this land shall revert to single-family detached dwelling units or open space. The Final Plat shall include the dedication of construction easements for the benefit of the respective adjacent property owners. (6) The Applicant shall participate in public improvements related to the Crozet community by paying to the County a sum calculated at the rate of $400.00 per townhouse lot and $500.00 per single- family residential building lot platted within the Property. Payments shall be made at the time that a building permit is issued for any dwelling unit on a lot, and payment of the $400.00 or $500.00 -Page 15- fee, as applicable, shall be a condition for issuing such building permit. If the cash proffer or any portion thereof, is not used for the stated purpose within 20 years of the date hereof, then the contributions may be used by the County for any other community improvements serving the Crozet area, deemed by the Board as at least in part being necessary by the proposed development on the property. (Signed) Roger R. Katcham Signatures of All Owners Roger R. Katcham Printed Names of All Owners 2-27-02 Date Thornbirck Development, LLC, A Virginia Limited Liability Company By (Signed) Roger R. Katcham Roger R. Katcham, Manager 3618 Free Union Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 February 20, 2002 -Page 16- Attachment 6 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a public hearing was posted as prescribed under § 33.1-151, Code of Virginia, announcing a public hearing to receive comments concerning abandoning the road described below from the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Transportation was provided the prescribed notice of this Board's intent to abandon the subject road; and WHEREAS, after considering all evidence available, this Board is satisfied that no public necessity exists for the continuance of Secondary Route 606, Dickinson Road, beginning 1,000 feet south of the original intersection of Route 606 and Route 649, and continuing 2,300 feet north of the intersection, and hereby deems that road is no longer necessary as part of the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the replacement to the abandoned Route 606 would be 1,100 feet southwest of the new intersection of Route 606 and Route 649 to the new intersection, and approximately 2,400 feet northeast of the new intersection; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board abandons the above described road and removes it from the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to § 33.1-151, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation. -Page 17- David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dottier, ,Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Free Union Baptist Church Attn: Rev. Dumaresq PO Box 210 Free Union, VA 22940 Dear Rev. Dumaresq: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend its appreciation to Free Union Baptist Church for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board Of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. if you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc CC: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, Printed on recpcled paper David R Bowerman Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsvil~e Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Ja~ Jouetl SalIy H. Thomas Samuel Miller The Senior Center Attn: Peter Thompson 1180 Pepsi Place Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mr. Thompson: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend its appreciation to' The Senior Center for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. Sincerely, /ewc CC: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Printed on recycled paper David P Bowerman Rio Lindsa~ G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivarma COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (4341 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hal~ Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouetl Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Elks Lodge No. 389 Attn: John B. Geer PO 'Box 528 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Geer: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend their appreciation to Elks Lodge No. 389 for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc cc: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, Ella ~. 'Carey, Clerk~'~ Printed on recycled paper David P. Bawerraan Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scoi~sville Charles $. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434} 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hal~ Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouetf Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Union Grove Baptist Church Attn: Rev. Kendrick Edwards 917 Sixth Street, SE Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Rev. Edwards: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend their appreciation to Union Grove Baptist Church for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc CC: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC_..~- Printed on recpcled paper David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dottier, Scottsville Charles S. Martin ~vanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hail Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Kappa Sigma Attn: Chad Gebhardt PO Box 5066 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Dear Mr. Gebhardt: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend its appreciation to Kappa Sigma for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc CC.' Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, ~ ~arey, Clerk, C(~~ Printed on recycled paper David P Bowerman Rio Lindsag G. Dorrier, ~Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin [{ivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Ha~ Dennis S. Rooker Jack doueli Sall~ H. Thomas Samuel Mill~ UVA Facilities Coordinator- University Hall Attn: Jason Baughman PO Box 400822 Charlottesville, VA 22904 Dear Mr. Baughman: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend their appreciation to the University of Virginia Facilities Coordinator, University Hall, for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. if you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc cc: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, Ella W. Carey, Printed on recycled paper David P. Bowerman Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. ScoUsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jac~ Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Berean Baptist Church- Attn: Rev. Tuttle 1284 Sunset Avenue Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Rev. Tuttle: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend its appreciation to Berean Baptist Church for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, please contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc Sincerely, a . Carey, Clerk, CI~ / cc: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Printed on recycled paper David P Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville Charles $. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Northside Community Fellowship Attn: Rev. Ray Stark 1410 Old Brook Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Rev. Stark: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend its appreciation to Northside Community Fellowship Church for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, ple. ase contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward to seeing you on March 6th. /ewc CC: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, a W. Carey, Clerk, CMC~ Printed on recycled paper David P. Bowerman Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 February 25, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller Bethel Baptist Church Attn: Rev. Lamb 5401 Watts Passage Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Rev. Lamb: The Albemarle County Electoral Board and the Board of Supervisors would like to extend its appreciation to Bethel Baptist Church for use of its facility to host Albemarle County's polling place on Election Day. You are invited to attend the Board of Supervisors' meeting on March 6, 2002 to receive a Certificate of Appreciation from the Board. The Board meeting begins at 9'.'00 a.m., and the presentation will be made at that time. If you are unable to extend, pl.e.~se contact the Clerk's office and the Certificate will be forwarded. We looking forward tb seeing you on March 6th. /ewc CC: Sally H. Thomas, Chairman Sincerely, a W. Carey, Clerk, C. MC) Printed on recycled paper VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK WHEREAS, Albemarle County is committed to promoting reading, writing, and storytelling within and outside its borders; and WHEREAS, our devotion to literacy and our support of literature has attracted over 1,000 writers and tens of thousands of readers to our VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK; and WHEREAS, the VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK celebrates the power of books and publishing; and WHEREAS, businesses, cultural and civic organizations, and individuals have contributed to the ongoing success of the VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Albemarle and Virginia, and the world, have made the VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK the best book festival in the country; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sally H. Thomas, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors, do hereby proclaim Wednesday, March 20, 2002 through Sunday, March 24, 2002 as the eighth annual VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK and encourage community members to participate fully in the wide range of available events and activities. Signed and sealed this 6th day of March, 2002. CHAIRMAN ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Approval of Ordinance and Agreement authorizing participation on the Virginia Energy Purchasing Governmental Association for the negotiation and procurement of electric power generation services. SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: BOS authorization to approve an ordinance and agreement necessary to include the County in the group of localities participating in a joint effort for the negotiation and procurement of electric power generation services through VML and VACo. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, White, Davis, Breeden, Trank AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: Ordinance, Agreement and Memorandum Go to Recommendation DISCUSSION: The County has been participating in a pilot program involving the competitive procurement of electrical energy developed by a steering committee composed of representatives from the Virginia Municipal League, Virginia Association of Counties and Virginia Power. The steering committee has proposed significant changes in the structure of its operations in response to energy deregulation in Virginia. One of those changes is that the "Virginia Energy Purchasing Governmental Association" ("VEPGA")is forming effective March 1,2002 and will be assuming the functions historically provided by the Steering Committee, including negotiations with Virginia Power for distribution rates and terms and conditions of service and other functions. The new Agreement would effectuate the joint purchase of electrical power generation services through a joint powers association consisting of local governmental entities. The goal of the program is to obtain the greatest savings for the participating localities. VMLNACo recommends participation for two principal reasons: (1) should deregulation result in the opportunity for savings, large volume consumers are likely to realize the greatest cost savings; and (2) as deregulation evolves, local governments will be required to competitively procure electric generation, and participation in a joint procurement may be much more economical. Va. Code § 15.2-1300 requires that the County shall approve a joint powers agreement by ordinance. VML/VACo has developed both the agreement and ordinance attached hereto. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance and agreement and authorization of the County Executive to execute and deliver the agreement to VMLNACo. Review Memo from VML Review Ordinance Review Agreement Return to Consent Agenda Return to Regular Agenda ORDINANCE NO. 02-A(1) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE VIRGINIA ENERGY PURCHASING GOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION JOINT POWERS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT; and PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, the VML/VACo Virginia Power Steering Committee (the "Committee"), composed of representatives of the County of Albemarle and other political subdivisions and municipalities of the Commonwealth, has for over several decades negotiated on behalf of such governmental units a standard form contract for their purchase of electricity supply and delivery service from Virginia Power as a sole source provider; and WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1300, et seq. of the Virginia Code (the "Joint Powers Act") authorizes political subdivisions to exercise jointly powers they otherwise are authorized to exercise independently, under the terms and conditions set forth in the Joint Powers Act; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Electric Utility Restructuring Act (the "Restructuring Act") further authorizes counties and other political subdivisions in the Commonwealth to aggregate their electricity supply requirements for the purpose of their joint purchase of such requirements from licensed suppliers, and the Restructuring Act provides that such aggregation shall not require licensure; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Public Procurement Act (the "Procurement Act") exempts from its competitive sealed bidding and competitive negotiation requirements (the "Requirements") the joint procurement by public bodies, utilizing competitive principles, of electric utility services purchased through member associations under the conditions set forth in the Procurement Act; and WHEREAS, the Committee recommends that the aggregation and procurement of electric supply, electric delivery and other energy-related services ("Energy Services") be effectuated as provided in the Joint Powers Association Agreement, a copy of which is attached to and made part of this Ordinance (the "Joint Powers Agreement'), in accordance with applicable provisions of the Procurement Act, such as utilization of competitive principles pursuant to an exemption from the Requirements; and WHEREAS, the Committee further recommends that the other services provided by the Committee to its members be effectuated as provided in the Joint Powers Agreement, with such services consisting of (i) assistance in implementing standard form contracts for the purchase of services from incumbent electricity utilities; (ii)education of members regarding electricity procurement issues; (iii) monitoring of legal and regulatory developments affecting the provision of electricity service to local governments; and (iv)hiring of consultants and legal counsel to assist in its provision of the foregoing services ("Steering Committee Services"); and WHEREAS, it appearing to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle (the "County") that the joint procurement of the Energy Services and provision of Steering Committee Services pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement is in the best interests of the County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED that: (1) Competitive sealed bidding and competitive negotiation for the procurement of Energy Services are not fiscally advantageous to the public because the procurement process for Energy Services must be flexible enough to respond to quickly changing market conditions in which energy prices can fluctuate considerably on a daily or even hourly basis. (2) The aggregation and joint procurement of the Energy Services and the provision of Steering Committee Services pursuant to the Joint Powers Agreement are hereby authorized and approved. (3) The County Executive is hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Joint Powers Agreement on behalf of the County of Albemarle in substantially the form presented to this meeting. (4) The payment obligations of the County of Albemarle pursuant to the provisions hereof and the Joint Powers Agreement shall be subject to annual appropriation of requisite funds by the Board of Supervisors. (5) This Ordinance shall take effect immediately. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of six to zero, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on March 6, 2002. Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye Mr. Bowerman X Mr. Dorrier X Mr. Martin X Mr. Perkins X Mr. Rooker X Ms. Thomas X Nay VIRGINIA ENERGY PURCHASING GOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION JOINT POWERS ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT Dated as of March 1, 2002 THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement"), is made and entered into by and among the local governments and other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia which are signatories hereto (each a "Member" and, collectively, the "Members"), effective as of March 1, 2002, for certain signatories or such later effective date for other signatories as set forth on such signatories' execution page. WlTNESSETH: WHEREAS, each Member is authorized by law to acquire electricity supply, electricity delivery, and other energy-related services ("Energy Services") as necessary or appropriate for the operation of its respective public facilities; and WHEREAS, political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia are authorized under the Code of Virginia 1950, as amended (the "Code") to exercise jointly powers that they otherwise are authorized to exercise independently, and such authorization is currently set forth in sections 15.2-1300, et seq. of the Code, which provide that any power, privilege or authority exercised or capable of being exercised by a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia may be exercised and enjoyed jointly with any other political subdivision of the Commonwealth having a similar power, privilege or authority except where express statutory procedure is otherwise provided for the joint enterprise; and WHEREAS, Code sections 15.2-1300, et seq. authorize two or more political subdivisions to enter into agreements with one another for such joint action and to appropriate funds and sell, lease, give or otherwise supply such property, personnel or services therefor as may be within their legal power to furnish; and WHEREAS, the Members, pursuant to the authority granted in Code sections 15.2-1300, et seq. or such similar authority as may from time to time be authorized under the Code, desire to create a joint powers association and associate as members hereunder with the assistance of the Consultant and Counsel (identified below) for the purposes, among other things, of promoting the interest and welfare of the Members, and developing a closer relation among them, all as hereinafter more particularly set forth; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Public Procurement Act (the "Procurement Act") exempts from its competitive sealed bidding and competitive negotiation requirements (the "Requirements") the joint procurement by public bodies, utilizing competitive principles, of electric utility services purchased through member associations under the conditions set forth in the Procurement Act; WHEREAS, the Virginia Power Steering Committee of the Virginia Municipal League and the Virginia Association of Counties (the "Committee"), which is composed of representatives of local governments and other political subdivisions of the Commonwealth purchasing energy from Virginia Electric and Power Company, d/b/a Dominion Virginia Power ("Virginia Power"), has (i) for several decades assisted such governmental bodies in connection with the negotiation of standard form contracts with Virginia Power for the purchase of electric utility services, including electric supply, distribution and transmission, and ancillary services, (ii) provided assistance in implementing regarding electricity procurement issues, such contracts, (iii) helped educate its members (iv) monitored legal and regulatory developments affecting the provision of electricity service to local governments, and (v) has hired consultants and legal counsel to assist in its provisions of the foregoing services ("Steering Committee Services"). WHEREAS, the Committee recommends that the aggregation and procurement of Energy Services be effectuated in compliance with applicable provisions of the Procurement Act, such as the utilization of competitive principles pursuant to an exemption from the Requirements, and the Committee also recommends that the Steering Committee Services be undertaken by the same entity that arranges for the procurement of the Energy Services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the undertakings hereinafter stated, the Members agree as follows: 1. Name. The undertaking of the Members hereunder shall be named and designated as the Virginia Energy Purchasing Governmental Association (hereinafter "VEPGA"). 2. Term of the Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective for the period commencing on the date set forth above (with each Member to adopt the Agreement on or after such commencement date) and shall terminate upon the earlier of (a) a unanimous vote of all the remaining Members or (b) when the membership has decreased to one Member. Upon such termination, any property owned by VEPGA (or the proceeds from the sale of such property) shall be distributed to each remaining Member in accordance with VEPGA's bylaws, as such bylaws may be amended from time to time by the board governing VEPGA (the "Bylaws"). 3. Purpose of the Agreement. The Members enter into this Agreement for the purpose of acting jointly to promote their interests and welfare and to promote the interest and welfare of, and develop close relationships with, similar public bodies. This promotion and development shall consist of the purchase of one or more components of the Energy Services on an aggregated basis and also the provision of Steering Committee Services. VEPGA shall be the Members' agent regarding the purchase of Energy Services, which shall be done in the manner specified in the Bylaws. Each Member agrees, subject, however, to annual appropriation, (a) to purchase its respective share of the Energy Services for any of its accounts that have been selected by one or more supplier(s) chosen by VEPGA to service such accounts and to pay the rate for such accounts negotiated in the procurement process for the one or more components of the Energy Services, and (b) to pay its pro rata share of the budget or the membership fees as hereinafter set forth. 4. Governance. (a) The Board. VEPGA shall be governed by a Board (the "Board") that shall initially consist of the individuals listed on Schedule A of this Agreement and thereafter members of the Board shall be elected by the Members in accordance with the Bylaws. The size of the Board may be increased or decreased in accordance with the Bylaws. The Board shall have power to decide all matters relating to VEPGA's activities and operations. (b) Meetings of the Board. The Board shall meet at such times and places as shall be designated in the Bylaws. (c) Officers of the Board. Paul Proto is hereby designated as the initial Chair of the Board, Steve Sinclair is hereby designated as its initial Vice-Chair and Steve Craig is hereby designated as its initial Secretary/Treasurer. These officers and any other officers elected in accordance with the Bylaws shall serve until the earlier of the submission of such officer's resignation or such officer's removal and the election of a successor by the Board. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Board, except that in the absence of the Chair, the Vice-Chair or another Member of the Board shall preside. Vacancies in such offices may be filled by the Board at any meeting. (d) Quorum for the Board. A majority of board members shall constitute a quorum for any Board meeting. The size of a quorum may be increased or decreased in accordance with the Bylaws. (e) Actions by the Board. All matters for action by the Board may be adopted upon the affirmative vote of Board members voting at a meeting where a quorum is present, or otherwise as may be specified in this Agreement or in the Bylaws. (f) Quorum for Members. The lesser of(i) a simple majority of the Members or (ii) eight Members shall constitute a quorum for any meeting of the Members. The size of a quorum may be increased or decreased in accordance with the Bylaws. (g) Bylaws. The initial Bylaws are set forth in Schedule B to this Agreement. The Bylaws may be amended upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the Board members or upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the Members. 5. Budget of the Association. (a) The Board shall establish a budget for VEPGA with funding by the Members based upon a pro rata share of the budget or, if applicable and approved by the Board, a minimum membership fee. Such pro rata shares and minimum fees shall be assessed on an annual basis except that, under extraordinary and unanticipated circumstances, the Board may assess a pro rata share and minimum fee more than once a year. The pro rata share will be based upon each Member's energy consumption or upon such other equitable method of funding as may be determined from time to time by the Board. (b) VEPGA shall not create or incur any liability for the Members, jointly or severally, other than and subject to annual appropriation, (i) the costs incurred by any Member in paying its portion of the Energy Services in accordance with contracts signed by the Chair or Vice-Chair on behalf of VEPGA as the Member's agent or (ii) the pro rata share of the budget or the membership fees imposed for a Member's participation in VEPGA. No Member shall be liable or responsible for any payments owed under any-contracts for any portion of the Energy Services purchased by any other Member. 6. Withdrawal of Members. A Member may withdraw from VEPGA effective July 1 of any calendar year if written not£ce has been given to VEPGA by March 1 of that calendar year; provided, however, that any accounts of a withdrawing Member that are participating in any contract awarded by VEPGA shall continue to participate in such contract until such contract has expired_ or has been terminated in accordance with the terms of such contract. Any other methods of withdrawing from VEPGA shall be set forth in the Bylaws. T Execution of Multiple Ori~nai.q, This Agreement may be executed by the Members in multiple original counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an orig~ and~ all of which together shall be deemed to beone and the same instrument. WITNESS the following signatures, effective as of the date set forth underneath each signature. COUNTY~C~ALBEMARI/E, VIRGINIA Title:__ County Exoeut±ve Effective D ~: ~Iarch 6, 2002 SCHEDULE A LIST OF INITIAL BOARD MEMBERS 3-Year Term (2002-2005) Len Ringler, Paul Proto, Jerry Spivey, Ricky Bowers, Steve Sinclair 2-Year Term (2002-2004) Matt Groff, Penny Newquist, Dave Gilman, Rick Raike, Bob Jennings 1-Year Term (2002-2003) Roger Neve, Tom Colbert, Phil Norris, Mac Corwine, Jack Pitzer 4. · ~[,n-ia. As:~Ocia.'fl~n i:,1: ,~ ~: ...... '" R; Mielm,e,i~yx, Ex~afive'Dir¢¢~or? V'tr~ni~tMunioip.al..LP~m.o .... '" I~rnas.D..C~Pbdl,-Ex~ff~ D~r, vh'~nla A~on oe.~unfi~. '. · · : .. "...R~i ".V~A~ ~i.~'Pow~.St~mg ~m.i~ 2'~2-20~ ~f~afinn . .".' "For ~'~m 't~o dec'~s,.~ ~ vA~ ~ join~y ~n,~ n~ff~, f~ et~'e '"'..." ~.~o ~e Work bg~ ~A~ V~a row~ Stag cmq,mi~.h=' ~ ~.mill~ of" · &liars ~ ' ' ~o~ss. md'~='~s~.'~o · '. ~~ ~a: lie ~. '~e. si~ifi~t ~m~ b~at !0~ gouda ~1. ~~vdY.'. · pilot ~g~.~ 2001 to p~ poW~g~on on a timi~ b~a. ;!t.w~.a ~y ~od " le~ ~~ ~d ~~ m~y.~ilabl.e l~so~, .'. "' 'We.~ ~~ that j~ntly ~c~g elsie pow~.g~=ati~ se~ ia ~a 'mOsS'cost ' eff~efi~ Way fox 1~ ~v~mts to ~Neve ~.e b~t ~sS~]e ~ md ~erms. and ~om .. .... I,' N' .e:,v {nomber eamaltmont {nsim~OnsL .' effo~ve ~r .m~.y y~rs !iy joining. VEPOA. · T~. er~'ate.'marty i~C~rrtaintje~ gtiirounding ..". deregulation.' You can take Comfia~'t in Imox~ing Rta~ yo~ VEPGA l~ontd, of directr~ra i~ ~elt_ work eltbetively oa ~oot behalf, COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Status of Through Truck Restriction on Route 22 and Route 231 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Update on truck traffic issues on Route 22/231 and Origin and Destination Study Request STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Wade AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: On April 4, 2001, staff presented information to the Board of Supervisors on the Route 22/231 Through Truck Restriction (Attachment A). The County has been working with VDOT for the past several years in an effort to address truck traffic on Route 22/231. The citizens along the Rt. 22/231 originally requested to restrict through trucks and have been actively working with staff for a successful resolution. DISCUSSION: On April 4, 2001, the Board of Supervisors formally requested VDOT to conduct a thorough Origin-Destination study of truck traffic along the route. VDOT responded to the County's request for an Origin-Destination with a statewide Origin- Destination study conducted in 1999. A copy of this report and supporting information is available from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Staff does not find this report acceptable because it did not include a 24-hour truck observation and does not contain sufficient data to determine whether trucks are using Rt. 22 or Rt. 231. The study conducted by VDOT and forwarded to the County was general and not specific to the 22/231 Corridor. Staff believes a thorough Origin-Destination Study by VDOT is needed to consider restricting through trucks on Routes 22/231. Staffwas informed by the local Resident Engineer that on December 10, 2001 the Gordonsville Town Council adopted a resolution to remove through truck traffic from Main Street (Rt. 15/33) and make High Street the through truck route. The Town Council also requested that VDOT conduct a study to determine the feasibility of removing all through trucks from Main Street and High Street and make Route 231 South to Klockner Road, (Route 860) and backto Route 15/33 south of Gordonsville the through truck route. Staff continues to recommend that VDOT conduct a thorough Origin-Destination study that will focus on the 22/231 Corridor. In the interim, staff has identified several immediate steps that could improve the safety for all vehicles that travel along Route 22/231. These steps include: periodic selective speed enforcement by Albemarle County Police Department, letters to trucking companies signed by the Board of Supervisors Chair requesting them to voluntary restrict the use of Route 22/231, and VDOT reduction of the speed limit. These are similar measures the County has taken in other areas with truck traffic concerns, particularly in the Earlysville area (Rt. 743). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors send letters to trucking companies, request that VDOT reduce the speed limit, request that VDOT conduct a thorough O-D study, and selective periodic speed enforcement by Albemarle County Police Department. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Truck Restriction on Rt.22/231 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review of VDOT information and truck restriction and staff's recommendation STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker,Foley,Cilimberg,Benish,Wade AGENDA DATE: April 4, 2001 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: The County has been working with VDOT and the residents along the Route 22/231 corridor for manyyears to improve the safety for all vehicles. VDOT has compiled a "Briefing- Through Tractor Trailer Traffic Issues" (Attachment A). In this short briefing, VDOT offers an historical account of all past actions taken by VDOT, business along the corridor, and action taken by local governments to improve the safety of trucks traveling along the corridor. DISCUSSION: In an effort to address continued community pressure to restrict tractor-trailers on Routes 22/231, VDOT offered three Alternate routes in the Briefing. Alternate Route A Alternate Route B Alternate Route C Route 250 From: Route 22 (Shadwell) To: Route 29 (Charlottesville) City of Charlottesville/Albemarle Co. Length 6.73 Route 29 From: Route 250 (Charlottesville) To: Route 33 (Ruckersville) Albemarle/Greene County Length: 14.09 Route 33 From: Route 29 (Ruckersville) To: Town of Gordonsville WCL Albemarle/Orange County Length: 12.41 Total Lenqth Alternate A: 33.23 miles Route 250 (or 1-64) From: Route 22 (Shadwell) To: Route 15 Albemarle/Fluvanna/Louisa Co. Length: 10.40 Route 15 From: Route 250 To: Town of Gordonsville SCL Fluvanna/Louisa/Orange County Length: 11.45 Route 20 From: Route 250 To: Route 33 Albemarle/Orange County Length: 15.07 Route 33 From: Route 20 To: Town of Gordonsville WCL Orange County Length: 5.60 Total Lenqth Alternate B: 21.85 miles Total Lenqth Alternate C: 20.67 miles Total Lenqth of Route 22/231 Corridor: 14.89 It is staff's position that VDOT's alternate routes do not acknowledge that much of the truck traffic on Routes 22/231 does not seem to originate in the Gordonsville area. Staff believes that many of the trucks originate from the northern Virginia area and out of state. The 22/231 corridor seems to serve as a short cut between several state STAA (Surface Transportation Assistance Act) routes - see Attachment B. AGENDA TITLE: Truck Restriction on Rt.22/231 April 4, 2001 Page 2 Because there is no comprehensive origin-destination study, it is difficult to map an alternate route more indicative of the through truck traffic movements occurring. A thorough origin-destination study is necessary before the County can offer a recommendation to VDOT on an alternate route. The County has also requested information from VDOT on the possible implications of transferring a primary road to the secondary system (Attachment C) to determine if it would improve the chances of getting an approval for a truck restriction. VDOT has ultimate approval for restrictions on primary and secondary roads. VDOT responded to the County's request for information (Attachment D) by indicating that the County would have to consider that, "the costs for improvements to, and maintenance of, these roads would have to come from the County's Secondary Road allocations, rather than the Culpeper District-wide allocations for Primaries. This could have direct impact on improvement and maintenance needs for other Secondary Routes within the County." Again, the County has not requested a transfer from VDOT, but it is an option. There are several steps that staff can take to improve truck safety on Rt. 22/231 while VDOT is considering conducting an origin-destination study. These include speed enforcement and advisory signs along the corridor. The advisory signs would be similar to those the County is requesting on Earlysville Road. The signs would indicate that Rt. 22/231 is not recommended as a route for large trucks. RECOMMNEDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors request VDOT to conduct an origin-destination study of trucks using the Route 22/231 corridor. Based on this study, staffwill offer an alternate truck route for the corridor to VDOT. In the meantime, the Board may want to consider more speed enforcement and advisory signs on Routes 22/231. Return to Executive Summary 2 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Proffit Road Through Truck Restriction between Rt. 20 and Rt. 29 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request the Board of Supervisors determine if staff should evaluate the request to restrict through trucks STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker,Foley,Cilimberg,Benish,Wade AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: Yes ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: The Jefferson Village Homeowners Association, Landford Hills Homeowners Association, Meadowfields Homeowners Association, Pritchett Lane Homeowners Association, Proffit Community Association, and residents of Chesterfield, Forest Ridge, and Terrybrook subdivisions have requested that the Board of Supervisors restrict through trucks on Profflt Road between Route 20 and Route 29 (see Attachment A). DISCUSSION: The Board of Supervisors endorsed proceeding with an internal through truck restriction process in 2001 (Attachments B & C). This request meets the criteria set forth in the process. Based on the County's internal review process, area residents are requested to provide the following information: A. A petition(s), which has been signed by a majority of those persons currently residing along the proposed route, requesting through truck restriction. B. Identify the reason the restriction is being requested (speed, noise, volume, accident data, etc.). C. Identify the terminus points of proposed restricted area. The residents have submitted a petition (Attachment D) in support of a through truck restriction. The petition has 348 signatures. This represents a majority of the persons currently residing along the proposed route. The residents have requested the restriction because they believe the road was not designed to handle the current traffic and is very unsafe. The residents stated in their submission information that Profflt Road has blind curves, poor banking, narrow traffic lanes, and shallow building setbacks. The residents propose Route 649 between Rt. 20 to Rt. 29 as terminus points. If directed bythe Board, staffwill conduct an analysis of VDOT's criteria, the results of which will be presented ata future Board of Supervisors meeting. The Board can determine if a public hearing should be held at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors direct staffto conduct the VDOT required analysis of this through truck restriction request. Attachments: A. View - Area residents request letter B. View - County letter outlining internal review process C. View - Flow chart of internal review process D. View - Petition AT'£ACI-FM IgNTF A - D<~x~'~tnbc~ ~_001' . Dear Me'ribes o£ ~Llbe~mr~ We.wish to req~ue.,t the.banning of through tracks having mo~:~ t]~ two 'axles. · Road 5ec~e~.n Route 29 North md'Route 20 North (Swny. Point Rea'd), t~or the t~otl, oWing.: ]'), 5'~tf~iy of our residenta; commute, rs. ~ who w//l u,~e.~he Co~m~.',~.n~ ~r- · ' Butler El~an~ Sc~J on ProJfit R~ 'It is ~ffi~ md' d~oug : 'gm ~ ~d om 6fthe are'ms ~d ~iv~ys ~ ~t Ro~.. With.'t~o'~ ' ' Park; 'NGIC, ~~. Town C~r, ~,)~ ~[ .wil} nor get my'b~.. ~t' s). 4). 'Road predate~ 5rDOT, zoning regulations, and'modm-n'e, agin~ng and.d..e~ig~. " m~ds. Sp~t ~ov~t.s'c.~ ~p ~ ~ at m~ probi~s md ~e'su~ ~,d.. The ~e ofm~ md ~h6ol bus traffic, is not' d~ie und~iCrma!. · ~c:'~ b~ '~e n~ School ~pens.'is ~h~ mo~ ~¢~]e and easi~.~p0t imp~o~ t~ ~ be. made for the ~a~W. of~t ranched,. . . .~v~o~nt~ :'m~m · .La~e di~M ~u¢~ ~e noi.heId to the ~e n~ ~d · ~~ me~ w~"~me a~qeulmr~ u~s as w~. ~ [ ' ..~ pr~t..m~Br~le ones. ~.e~et; we wo~d be b~ ~at' ]s'~y the d~op~ of~o~ Ro~. We of~e.~sponafion ink, tmon, ofo~ m~. We do ~t '~k a r~m tb'~ '. ,. ,,I · .Boaxd of Supervisors .Alb~arte C~nty · 'Deg~mb~r 2001 page 2 'gn0d aid days' b~ we .are unequivocally' opposed to the. fimhea' development ~ ~offi~.Road b~ond ~t~ ~e~t ~efio~ ~s~mtion.: We .oppo~ ~o~. '~ck~ ~fi-~g, ~ei~ dev~~8, aod Otk~'devel0pm~u ~ropfa~ ~.u~y to put com~nity, We ~ppo~ p~an and ~cle'.e~cm~..bea~ p~ ~d ~ ~Wes..~e..solufioa.tq our ~affie W~bl~s do~ not lie i'n.:the .~r00~on of out ~mU~ty ~ ~e' ~ of ou~ ~M~n s~et" but i'a.be~' p~ .~d ~e~ id~s.' We consider this to be a reamuable, and .t~. 'c-&[ rerfuest. R does not r~msent a radical' ' 'dm_age ~?om the present ~.mali0n. Th.e only togieal r~tso~ for denyi~g.'our'requeat is beeaus~ of . · ,'m .intent to op~ Pmffit l~oad 'and our.neighborhoods to tmayy true,& frmffie iit'tlie fotura, to W~C~ v~i are veheniea~y opposed. Thank. you.f0r your careful eormideration of.our petition.. The Coalition for a Safe Proffit Road spoasored by · Jefferson Vitta~e ~sid~ts of C~erfieI~ .For~t Rid~, ~ Terryb~& ~b~.via~'. · COUNTY' O.F ALBEM)~ttl ~'E Oe~rnn~t of P l aaning & O~m~t~[ly Dev~l~lt ~} McI~;i;~ Raad, Romn 21 ~ ~ari~le, Vit'gh~[a ~902-4,596 Fax (434) 972 - 4~f 2 ATTACH MENT It Dear'Coun~ Rcsidmt: .. You have iuqttiI~d, abou¢ h~z'7~g tru~k traf_5o r~rigtcd in your ne/ghbodiood. IJnd~ o2rretl'~ State the (Sn'unty can only reslri,t "tl'n-0Ltgl'~ ~l"~z'~ic'', Ifa ~uuk hegs a lcgit[mat~ dszst.iaaI/oh within thc propoaexI resthctcd areas, the restriotion Would ~ot apr>ly. In order for th/s reqt~t to be placext tm ltfc.kloard.of 8 ulnc~rvisfrrs age_~h; for discu.ssq m, you will no,d ~ 'furnish the'ibllowing 1. A pe6tion(s); Which has bee~l' sig~ed by a majonty'of~o~ pea'sons currentTy rc.~'idiag along th~ propo.,~ mat¢,.reques6ng ffrrough truck regriction. 2. · I.dcaafify the re~son thc ms~¢fion ia being reqctested (~pex~, noise,"c01umd, t3mide-at data, crc.). 3. Idemtffy the Wn-nmus podnts of propom'd restticf~, area. This 'information flaotdd be 'forwarded to *~, Clerk o£ the Board ~ Strperviaora, Albemarle County. 401' Mcln~e 1;koad, Cl~d~ Ltc.~lle VA 22902-45 96. of k}~ Board. tbr discussion. ~.~he Board s,,ppotgs flue request, thcy will request staff t~m thc Departmc~nt of Plmming and C~mqmataity D~e]olm~cnt io further amqlyze tl~ req,te~t against VDOT gt~deHnes. Stuffy,411 prt;-pare 'a ~aft' repo44 ~5~ 'a. reeomnx_mdatior~ to file Boar.d of' Sttp~vis~s. Jkt that hmv, the Board gupe4wi'.s~o'rs'may sekedu-le ~- pubhe hcari~ to ~ co~m-s~ts fi-mn anyone wirda_ing k* ;'pcak~ either in or in'oppbsiticct; to your req,tcst: It is'euammary for the County t~ kontact ~hc major .truckiag c~mpani~.~ in the county for all thmltgh lruok reatrietior3 requcsts. lqfl.loaving the Du.'bli¢ hca~ing, ~t' at a- ~tm-e meeting, the Bo~d will dccicle to Sul~Pat¢ or deny thg reqt~¢st for khrotzgh -knack re, trio[ion, l_f the reqttes[ 5s s,q:rpol~ed, it will bc forwarded to the YDOT~ State l~tgineer' for a~tion, It' ¢c Boaxd does ~_ot suppm-£ am roCllle81L fl:re)r will dh-c~t stagl' to work wifl~ you and ~rucldng compan.te.s in ~¢ area to minimJT~ thc iml~aCt of track · You may also wish ;o infoi'm, your retm~0nkali¥¢ o-a thc ~ of Sttpe. rf4sc~s ~ yt>tt are eontem'pla~ng this 0q).2.47A. AT'~ACI4 MENT C · Al .'Be-NtARLE COUN'FY THROUGH TRUCK RESTRICTION PROCESS t. Request to County to Restrict Through Truck Frem.a Reside~(s) Or Neighborhoad'Assodafi~n 2. CouCy Planning Department mails letter that outlines process 3. Resident(s) or Neigl~borhood A~,oc. ~ubmit petition with reason(s) for restrictio.n re~.u'eSt.. (speed. nois'e.-volume, etc.) and terminus points of proposed restricted area to'Ooun:ty. :. : i 4, County staff reviews submitted informatbn and places on next available agenda of th.e' : BO~ ~or dis~ssion. " 5, ]f ti'ia Beard suppeJts request, they'wi[i request staff to further analyze ~he request a~q~inSt VDO¥ g~iidetinee. 6. St~ff will prepare a report with a recommendation t~ the Board of Superv~$orsl 7. The Board of Superv sers may schedule a public hearing to ~ake comment~ from th."e'~ub[Ic i e[the~ [.n fa¥or of or tn Oppostt ~n to request Major.trucking oDmpanies will bo notJr[a~{ :'ii'.:: .: S. Fo.'llowing th, public hearing', ora( a future meeting, me Board'of SL~perv[som will ~.,;iUe to support or d~y'th e r~q'ue0t for through' rosfriction,.. :..~' ;:" ·:·2 9, ~-I~ the request is supported, i~ will be for~varcIed to thb VDOT'Sf~.~'Engineerfor aoti~i'~ii If tKe B ea rd of Su pe rvis0 rs does not su ppor~ th e requa,s:t, th ey will cllrect staff to work W.[ti i ~h e n~hborhood ond t~u~kin§ corn ,panie~ In ~hO ara to minimize the ir~pact of truck tr~f~ifi.:: '~ L,- :: .: : · .ii: :i. : w.e, the taidersigned r~s!dents of Profflt Road and a~o. inlng streets an_d roads, ~quest t~t Mbe~Ie Coun~ and ~ · imasa ~ ban.on t~ou~ trucks 'hav~ more thaa t~ ~es:'~o~" USing..~offit Road be~een Stony Point '~ad (Route 20 .North) and." , 5e~ole ~a~. (Route 2~ N0~h)~ ~r reasons ~e.contained:[n an accom~ny~g 'letter. '.. .: .' .~,,,~, (,~' g.L,,~,.,~...._~_~ ?~ . ~.:. ~ d~ W:~: .~ ..... ~ .... ..~~~,~~(~' _ · ...:: . . :. · ~ 7~ ,. ~ · · ~ · . . .: · t ~.. .' .~ ~ ~ · '~ ~ .~::..:. / _ ' _~ ,~., ..... ~ 1~~ ~~ ~ ~ . z,~.' '~ .- . ...~ ..~ ~ '. ~ :. '::':.~ s ~. ' :~'~ "' ~ "~ ~ -,~ ~ /~ " rr~ I ~~ ~~ : ":' . ~ "~ _. ' ] ' ~j --/~./.1~ 7~'~l:~*.'J~-~v;<~' . . ., · .~. ~ ~' ~ n -'~o~*¢1~- x v~'/'~C".' . ..:.'. . ~.~ · ' ¢ '- ' , ,.' ? · ~ I ~}~'~"N, .%'~ ......... . · : " t "' ~'o~ ~ ~~ ~ ~- ': .... . .'... . L .' ~ . . ~'. / : ~:' ~ · .. · , ,~4 . .'. ~.. ..... : ~~~ ..2 ............ ~~~, 5_.Z .......... 'W~, th~ undersigned residents of Proffit Road a~.d adjoi~g s~reets and roads, r~quest that Albemarle .County ~d VDOT. imoose .a ban on through trucks having more than two axles from . · using proffit Road bet~.een Stony Po~t Road (Route 20 No~ ~d . Se~ole Trail (R0ut~ 29. No~h);, Our reasons ~e cont~ned.in an aecompan~g letter.· ~ . , ADDRESS · " , . .. /' L.: . --,'.Cf , ' ,;'~ ,~. , / # .~ .~ ~ n.,/,.., ..., l h '~,,~,~.. ,,:: ~' ..~,.,4:,.,~_,...~. ~::'~:/~'~~' ~/ _ . . . ' J~ Y ¢ ~-~ "' ~.~//d - ~ ' ~", . ' · ,. · '~: ~', · .~. . . .~~~ ~.. .. ,. .,. ~.~,....~~ , . _ ,... , ,. · , ~ .~ &/. ~'~ ~',~'~ ~ .... ~ .~ {~'~ ~..r~ . · . ~.. ~ · ~ .. '- , ~ · . ~[l~¢t~~ '. . . ~t_ ~ -~/ / ~ ] .... '""~' ' · · ' ' "...: .., 'v=x . ,', , ¢ ~ .-': ~/~~ 6~' · .. · ' · ..~.:~ :V ,"t /~/%* · '"~--' ~ . . ' - . . 'We; the tmdets~g~ed'restdems of Ptoffit-Road _~_.d a~oio/eg streets and r~ds, ~quest t~t. ~~de Co~y ~ ~0T' · impose a ~ .on th~ug~ t~c~. ~v~g more .t~n ~o ~es from us~ ~o~t Road be~een Stony Po~t ~ad ~oute 20 No~h).~ S~!.~ole T~fl ~oute 29 ~o~. O~.teaso~ are ~la~'ed ~ ~ accom~y~g letter. .we, the undersigned residentz of Proffit Road and adjoirii~g. streets and roads, request that 'Albemarle Cou~lty' and VDOT impose a 5an'on. througl~..truclts havlnll more ~han two axt~s from· .ustn~ Pro[fit Road b~tween Stony Point Road (Route' 20 North) and" 5emi~al.e Trail (Route 29 North), Our .reasons are contaJ.~ed in a_n_'" accompanying le~er,. · ..wel the. umlersi~nec[ residents of Proffit Road a~d adjoining.. streets and r~ ~quest t~ ~be~rle Coun~ and V~. ~_poSe a b~ O~ ·through t~s havtn~ ~e ~ two ~es ~m '~jng ~o~flt Road between Stony Point ~ad (Route 20 'No~h)and ' seminole T~ (Route 29 No~.. ~ reaso~ are contorted ~ a~ accompany~ leper. NAMr. · . ' _ _ADDBESS We, the Undersigned residents of ProfOOt Ro~d and adjoining streets and roa'ds, request that Albemarle .Coumy'an'd. VDOT impose a ban on through trucks having more than two axles from· · using Praffit Road.between StOny Pof. nt Road (Rout'e 20 North) anti SemiRole Trail.-(Rottt~ 29 North). Our reasons axe contained in an accompanying letter. We, the Undersigned residents of Proffit Road and' stree4s and' roads, request that Albemarle County and VDOT impos~.a ban on ritrough trucks haying, more 'than two axles from using. Proffit Road between Stony Point Road (Route 20 North) and 'Seminole Trail' CRoute 29 North). Our reasons are ~:o'nta~ed..in an' accompanying letter. NAME W.e,. the undersigoed residents 0f Proffit Road' and adjoining streets and roads, request .t.~ ~b~rie County and ~OT imp0at a ban 'on t~o~h t~c~ hav~ mor~ ~ two a~ from us~g ~offlt. Road between Stony'. Point. Road tRoute 20 Non~ a~ S~note .Tra~ (Route 29.N0rth), .Our'~o~ are contained. ~ an accomp~y~g letter~ NAME ~~ ~ m m m m. ' m ~m~ m ~m /m m~ mmmmm mm j mm [~km~ ~m~ m~m~ m m m m m ~m mm~ m m ~ m ~mm~)~~ ~ J ~ ~m m~m · '¢'m'm. ''mi .'m. '.' ._.:.. ;P', We, theuade~si~ned resi.'dents of Proffit Road and adjof. Ln_g streets and ·roads, request t]~at AZbematle Couaty amd VDOT impose a bah'On tb~ougb, t]Riek$ .bavJag more tha~ two aJdes ·from us~g Pr0ffit. Road ..between Store/Potat ~b~ad (Route. 20'North) and. Semtqo]e Tra~ (l~0ute '29 :North).- O~ reasom~ are contained fa a~ · accompanldu~g letter, We, .~e u~dersigned residents of Proffit Road and ad:ioining s~ee~s and roads, request, that Albemarle County and V-DOT iml~se a ban on' through, trucks having more than mo a~les from using Proffit Road between Stony Point Road (Route 20 North) and Seminole Trail (ROute:29 North). Our reasoas a~e ennt~iaed in a~.accompanying letter. W~ th~ tmde'rsigned residents of Proffit Road and adjoining 's~e~ts and roa~s, request'that Albemarle County and .VDOT impose a ban on through trucks having more than two axl~ from., using Pro~fit Road.. l~eo~reen' 'Stony Point Road .(Route 20 Not-th) and Seminole Trail (Route'.29 North). Our reasons.are contained .in. an. accompanying letter. · We, the undersisned residents of Proffit Road and adjoining' streets and r~ds',, request t~t ~e~rie Ceanty ~d VDOT impose"a ban on thr0~h ~rucks havi~ m0~ ~ha_n ~o a~es from · us~g Proffit:Road be~een Stony Po~t R~ (gou/te 20 No~ ~d' ' Se~nole Trail (Route 29 No~h). O~ reaso~ ~e co'~a~d ~ an · ' accompanying letter.· Nmv ..................... A OBR SS · We, the undersigned residents of Prafftt Road and adjoining streets' ~d roads, reques~ that-Albemarle County Md YDOT !...m_.pose'.a ban' on through trticks haviilg .more tha~ two axles from.' usi~'li Proffit Road between Stony Point Road (Route 20. Nar~h) .and · S~_m_~_u0'Ie TraiI.(Route 29 North). Our reasons'are ¢oa~ai~ad"i~ 'aix. accompanying letter. " We,' tl~e undersigned residents of P~offit Road and a~oi.ni~g streets and roads~ request that Alb~.marte County and VDOT impose a ban on tbx~rugh, trucks, ha,~i~g more than two axles, from usil~ Proffit Ro~d between. Storry. Point Road (Route 20 lqo~h) and Se_m...!no~e..Trail (Rout~ 29 North). Our reasons are co~tal~ed'i~, z~ accompanying, letter. We, the undersigned residents of Pr0ffit Road and ad~ot~ng "streets.and'roads,'request'that Albemarle Coum~,..and'VDOT' · i_~_pose .a ba~. on. throullh trucks having more .~han two axles' from' Using P.roffit Road between Stony point Road :(Rout'e 2'0 North) a~d $e_m__!n_'.01b Trail(Route. 29 North). Our reasons are contained tn'ali accompanying letter. We, the undersigned residents of Proffit. Road and. adjoining street~' and roads, request that Albemarle .County and .VDOT- impose.a.ba~ on..throul~h.trucks having more th~ two a~ez from · using ~offit .R~d b~n Stony ~int Road (Rou~e 20 North) and Se~n01e Tra~ (~ute. 29.North.. O~ reasons are ~nta~ed '~ an a~ompany~g letter, We~ the'undersigned residen(s of'Proffi~ Road and ~djoinJng s~reets and roads, request that Albemarle County a~nd VDOT impose .a ban on thto~ t~cks hav~g more than ~o ~ 'from Us~g ~offl~ R~d between Stony Po~t Road (Route 20 No~' ~d Se~note Trail (ROUte 29 No~h). ~ reasons ~e cont~ned i.n an acco~nyi~ letter. NAME ., AO~RESS W~ the. undersigned residents of Proffit Road an/adjoin/nl~ · streets a.~/i, roads, request t.hat Albe~rle County and VDOT i'impo~e a ban on.t.hrough trucks having more tham. two axles 'from 'us/ng..~roffit Road b~.ween Stony Point' Road (Route 20 Nozih) and -Seminole Trail {Route 29 North). Our reasons are cOntained .in an.. accompnnyin~ lett~. ' We, the u.~dersigned residents 'of Proff{t Road and ad, o/ri'lng atreet, s and r~s, request t~t Mbe~le County and ~DOT'. ~se a. ban on ~rough ~.~v~ more t~n two ~es from Using.P~ffit' ho~'~een. Stony Point Roa~ (Route 20 North) an'd. ~nole' ~fl..(R0ute. 29 North). O~ r~a~onz ~e ~a~ed. accompan~i~ letter. '~AC_DDRESTS "--"---"~ ' We, .the :undersigned residents, of Proft~it Road and.adjoining streets ~ ~oads, r~luest that Albemarle County ~d. ~ ~se a ~ on: t~ou~' t~cks 'havi~.~re t~ two a~es f~.' ~mg 'P~t. R~ be~wee~ Sto~ .~t ~ (Route 20 No~h)'~d Semfnole' .Trail (Route 29 North). Our re.sons ~re .contained in an accompanying tatter. We, the undersized residents 0f. Prof£it Ro.~d and a.djoinin4g · streets· a~d r0~4s, reques~ that. ~be~ Co~t~ ~ VDOT im~se, a ban on through' trucks having· more t~n ~wo ~es from using Proffit R~d.~tween Stony Point. R~d .(Ro~e 20.No~h) ~d Seminole T~fl (R0~te 29 No~h),..~r reasons .~e cont~n~d in an :' accom~iB8 Ietter, COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Revenue Sharing Program SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request by the County to participate in the 2002-2003 VDOT Revenue Sharing Program STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Wade AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: VDOT's Revenue Sharing Program provides an opportunity for the County to receive up to an additional $500,000 for road improvements. The program requires a dollar-for-dollar match by the county. The result is a total commitment of up to $1,000,000 toward improvements to the local road system. The County's match is allocated in its Capital Improvements Program (CIP). The Revenue Sharing Program enables the County to better implement the Priority List of Road Improvements approved by the Board by providing an additional infusion of funds which can accelerate the planning and construction of roads projects on the list. The County has participated in this program since 1955. DISCUSSION: The County must formally request participation in the FY 2002-03 program by March 30, 2002. Attached is a draft letter of intent to participate in the program. VDOT has identified in the Six Year Secondary Road Plan the James River Road spot safety improvement project (from Rt. 795 to Rt. 1302) for FY 2002-03 Revenue Sharing funds. It should be noted that while specific projects are listed in the Six Year Plan to receive these funds, the Revenue Sharing Program is flexible and funds can be shifted to other transportation projects in the future as agreed to by VDOT. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the County participate in the Revenue Sharing Program, requesting a total of $500,000 (to be matched with available County CIP funds) for the James River Road spot safety improvement project and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached letter notifying VDOT of our intent to participate in the program. Review Draft Letter Return to Consent Agenda Return to Regular Agenda 02.025 County Primary and Secondary Road Fund (Revenue Sharing Program) Code of Virginia, Section 33.1-75.1 Fiscal Year 2002-03 County of Albemarle March 6, 2002 Mr. James S. Givens State Secondary Roads Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 DRAFT Dear Mr. Givens: The County of Albemarle, Virginia, indicates by this letter its official intent to participate in the "Revenue Sharing Program" for Fiscal Year 2002-03. The County will provide up to $500,000 for this program, to be matched on a dollar- for-dollar basis from funds of the State of Virginia. The County has worked with its Resident Engineer and developed the attached eligible project (James River Road, spot improvements) to be undertaken with these funds. The County also understands that the program will be reduced on a pro rata basis if requests exceed available funds. Sincerely, Sally Thomas Chairman, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Return to Executive Summary Recommendation Return to Consent Agenda Return to Regular Agenda March 8, 2002 Mr. James S. Givens State Secondary Roads Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Re: County Primary and Secondary Road Fund (Revenue Sharing Program) Code of Virginia, Section 33.1-75.1, Fiscal Year 2002-03, County of Albemarle Dear Mr. Givens: The County of Albemarle, Virginia, indicates by this letter its official intent to participate in the "Revenue Sharing Program" for Fiscal Year 2002-03. The County will provide up to $500,000 for this program, to be matched on a dollar-for-dollar basis from funds of the State of Virginia. The County has worked with its Resident Engineer and developed the attached eligible project (James River Road, spot improvements) to be undertaken with these funds. The County also understands that the program will be reduced on a pro rata basis if requests exceed available funds. Sincerely, SHT/ec Sally H. Thomas Chairman Attachment The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 20th day of February 2002, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street in Castleberry Court Subdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated March 6, 2002, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road in Castleberry Court as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated March 6, 2002, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, exclusive of any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded vote: Moved by: Mr. Rooker. Seconded by: Mr. Martin. Yeas: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas. Nays: None. A Copy Teste: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC Board of County Supervisors The roads described on Additions Form SR-5(A) are: 1) Castleberqf Court (State Route 1032) from the intersection of Route 689 to the cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded 4/24/91 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 1151, page 103 and Deed Book 1519, page 220, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.09 mile. Total Mileage - 0.09 mile. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #2001055, in the amount of $134,435.27, for various Education donations and Charter School Startup Program Sub-Grant STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, White, Hildebeidel, Breeden AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: No REVIEWED BY: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: The Code of Virginia §15.2-2507 stipulates that any locality may amend its budget to adjust the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the current fiscal year as shown in the currently adopted budget. However, any such amendment which exceeds one percent of the total expenditures shown in the currently adopted budget or the sum of $500,000, whichever is lesser, must be accomplished by publishing a notice of a meeting and a public hearing before amending the budget. The following appropriation provides additional funds to the FY 2001/02 budget; and therefore will need to be included in a future budget amendment, when the statutory threshold is reached. DISCUSSION: · Murray Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $500.00 from John Carew and a donation in the amount of $75.00 from Sarah and Charles DuBose. These donations will assist in the purchase of laptop computers for use by teachers and staff. Monticello High School received donations in the amount of $3,860.27. Blaine and Jean Norum donated $690.00 to be used to fund the gifted program at the school. The Monticello High School Athletic Boosters Club donated $3,170.27 to be used to purchase supplies for the wrestling and football activities at the school. The Virginia Department of Education awarded the Charter School Startup Program Sub Grant in the amount of $130,000.00 to Murray High School. This two-year program will help to facilitate intensive, experiential learning opportunities in order to provide academic and personal success for students who are at-risk to leave school or graduate below potential. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #2001055, purposes. in the amount of $134,435.27, for above-mentioned Return to Consent Agenda Return to Regular Agenda APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 01/02 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X 2001055 ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO FUND: SCHOOL/PROGRAMS PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: USE OF DONATIONS AND CHARTER SCHOOL STARTUP PROGRAM SUB GRANT. EXPENDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 2215 61101 800700 ADP Equipment $ 575.00 1 2304 61101 601300 Ed/Re¢Supplies 690.00 1 2304 61105 580000 Misc. Expenses 561.00 1 2304 61105 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies 2,609.27 1 3149 61311 132100 PTWages-Teacher 14,000.00 160300 Stipend-Staff Cur Dev 22,000.00 210000 FICA 2,755.00 312700 Prof Svc Consultants 6,000.00 580000 Misc. Expenses 3,000.00 580500 Staff Dev 5,000.00 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies 34,745.00 800100 Mach/Equip 37,500.00 800200 Furniture/Fixtures 5,000.00 TOTAL $ 134,435.27 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 2000 18100 181109Donation $ 4,435.27 2 3149 33000 3301.17CharterSchPgm 130000.00 TOTAL $ 134,435.27 TRANSFERS REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE DATE FEB 21, 2002 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Request to Set Public Hearing SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Community Development Block Grant STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Roxanne White, Ron White AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: No REVIEWED BY: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: Prior to development of proposals for Community Improvement Grants available through the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development's Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG), a locality must hold two public hearings. The first hearing held on February 20, 2002 provided information on the availability and amount of program funds available, the Iocality's housing and community development needs, and past performance of CDBG funding during the previous five years. The second hearing will provide an overview of proposed applications for Community Improvement Grants and must be advertised at least 7 days prior to the public hearing in a non-legal newspaper ad and one other form of ad including advertising on local radio or television or distribution of information in proposed service areas. DISCUSSION: CDBG Community Improvement Grants (CIG) are available for Comprehensive Community Development, Economic Development, Housing, Community Facilities, and Community Service Facilities. The activities must meet at least one of the CDBG National Objectives- benefit to Iow-and moderate-income persons; aid in prevention or elimination of slums and blight; or meet urgent community needs that pose serious and immediate threat to health or welfare of the community. Generally, CIG applications are limited to a $1,000,000 maximum. However, localities may have multiple grants as long asthe total outstanding does not exceed $2.5 million. County staff are reviewing the feasibility of two potential applications - one to support the acquisition and rehab affordable rental property (Whitewood Village Apartments) and the second for water needs in a private subdivision (Corville Farms, Greenwood). Any proposals will be reviewed by the Housing Committee on March 13, 2002. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends setting a public hearing for March 20, 2002 to provide information on the proposed applications and to receive input from the public on the proposal(s). Return to Consent Agenda Return to Regular Agenda RAY D.' PETHTEL IRTEP-,I M COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION GULPEPER+ VA 22'T6'1 VIRGiN. IA ROBERT H. CON~IO~, J~, P.E., · · .ACTING D.l~o'o'o'o'o'o'o'o'o~TR.ICT ADMINIS'TRA.TOR ' Fcb~ar~ 21, 2002 Route 250 Proj: 0250-002-114, P£101, AW'gOt; C501 Fr: 0.038 Mi/es We~t of Limestone Creek To: 0.028 M~es. F_~st of Limestone Cre~ . & Proj: 0250-002-115, PIE10], RW2DI., C501 Er: 0,066 Miles' West .of Carroll Alberr~'le' County Ms, Elhi Carny 'Clerk: 0fttm Court 401 Mchfire Road . 'C "~lot~dvitle;' VA"2.29D2 D'¢a~'Mzl Carcy: TLie ~011'Il12*31]W~L~'l Transportation l~arfl on January 17, 2002, approved, the propos~ project. Attached is the re,mlution that was approv~xt, by ~¢ C2~ for Rou~ 250/Bfidg~ Repl,xcem .ents{ in A-Ibem~ rio Cotmty. The pmjec",t: wa~ appmv,d a, pmpo~eA ~md pre~ntcd at the Dmiga Hoar/ag. The objective of thi~ project is to rer, la~ the e×isfing bridge 0ad approaches over Lin~tonc ~ an'd Can-oil Ch, ee.k, due Io their poor con~2on and. subslartda~d..deaigns..The apl~ovect desi~ will provide ~wo twe. tve f-~t lanes with eight foot s_hould~-s .mM six foot d_waimlg~ ditctms. The p~po~ impmueme"ts wi'Il be · consttuct~ oa the existing alignment. : Robc~ I-L. Co~ck, Jr., P.E. DJ.strict COlmlractio~_ gngiaeer Rl-tQr:wlr p.e.I..Mr. J.~L. Brym Ur,' M, .w.. coff, y 02-25-02 P t 2: 4.B- TRANS~'ORTATtON FOR THE 21 ST CENTUF~Y W~ITTINGTON W.:,G EEMENT RESOLUTION ' OF THE COMMONWEA~LTli TRAI~SPORTATION BOARD' January 17, 2002 " MOTI ON : Made By: '. Seconded By: Action; Title: I~i~i Appr.a_yal Rou ~ 25.0fBri d~e. Reolacemcn~s' Albemarle Cou.'t¥.. 'WHEREAS, a Design PabIic Heating was hem at.Lbo Virgin.ia. Depa~'ncnt of' .' .Tih'ansp0rtation Charloltesville Residency Ol~fice on Wednesday, O~tober 9_A; 2001~ £o~' the pu~ze of.~idefing .~e pt~o~ ~si.~ of tee bridge ~l~t~ over Mm'~oa~.'C~ck ' · ~m 0.038 mi!e'West 0f ~m~qe Creek to 0~02'8 mile ¢a~i.~fL~ne C~k.~d ova. 'C~o}l Creek from 0.06'6 mil~ west of C~oU Creek .to 0.014 mi.le ~t orC~8 O~k (in' Atb~m~le cmmty), State P~j~ts.0250-002, i 1~, PE-'[01.~ RW-201, ~501' .md ~5~22 ". WHEREAS/~ noti~ W~. given in adv~c~ ~d all ~ose p.~'~t w~ ~.a · ~Il ~ponu~ty to ~pt~s ~r opinions and.~n~e~afio~ ~or. or agMmt ~'pm~a~ ' proj<t ~' p~ehtgd. 'md ~fir statements being ·duly r<or~d;.<d : .." have be~ ~'~M~' and ~ve proper mnsM~ation, ~d thi~ evid~ee,.'along ~ ail ~he?; bm' ~cn c~efully ~viewed, NOW, THE~F0~, BE IT ~SOLV'ED that. thc pmj~t be 'appmge'd'in ~wb'er 24, 2001"~ by the D~aamenl's Engdneem. "' tINE KEEP WRGINIA ~O~'[NG Z ell .0 J hO0$O 000~0 ~00~0 ~00~0 ~0000 ~0000 ~OOBO ~00~0 ~000~ ~00000 ~OONNO ~0 ~000~ ~00000 ~00~0 ~0 ~0oo~ ~000oo do0~o ~ooo~ ~ooooo ~oo~o m M ~ 000~ ~O00N ~0 ~oo~o ~ ~oo ~ooooo ~oo~o ~u~ 0~ ~0 E E E E E ~ RAY D. PETHTEL INTERIM COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH OF DF:PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 ORANGE ROAD CULPEPER, VA 22701 March 1, 2002 VIRGINIA ROBERT H. CONNOCK, JR., P.E. ACTING DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR Ms. Ella Carey Clerk 401 Mcinfire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Route 29 Bypass Pro. j: 6029-002-F22, PE101, RW201, C501 From: 0.7 mile (1.1 km) north of the Rte. 29/250 Interchange To: 0.5 mile (0.8 km) north of the South Fork of Rivanna River Albemarle County Dear Ms. Carey: I recently sent a letter, dated February 14, 2002, notifying you of the upcoming Hearing on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to be held on March 14, 2002. Since that time, the date to submit written comments has been extended to April 16, 2002. Robert H. Connock, Jr., P.E. District Construction Engineer RHCjr:wlr Pc: Mr. J. L. Bryan Mr. M. W. Coffey 03-04-02A17: 18 RCVD TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: SP-2001-040 Crossroads Waldorf School SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Approval of Special Use Permit and Its Conditions STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg, Davis AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: ~nFebrua~2~2~2~theB~ard~fSupe~is~rsde~rredacti~n~nthisspecia~usepermitt~a~Wrevisi~n~fc~nditi~ns#3~8~ andntoreflecttheBoard'sintent. DISCUSSION: Attached are the revised conditions as developed by staffto reflect the Board's intent. (Attachment A) The applicant has taken issue with revised condition #3 as regards the rotation allowance for up to 15 degrees of flexibility in the orientation of the northern wing building to accommodate solar orientation. The applicant believes the allowance intended by the Board was 30 degrees, significantly more than staff has offered. Staff believes the condition as provided in the attached is as the Board intended. As always, it is the Board's discretion as to whether this condition should be changed in response to the applicant's concern. RECOMMENDATION: Assuming the revised conditions as provided in the attached reflect the Board's intent, staff recommends approval of SP-2001- 040 with these revised conditions. View Recommended Conditions Return to Regular Agenda RE: SP-2001-040 Crossroads Waldorf School, Tax Map 61, Parcels 170, 173 and 179A 1. Maximum enrollment shall be 350 students, with a maximum of 65 staff. Any increase to enrollment or staffing shall require amendment of this special permit. 2. Normal hours of operation for the school shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekdays, with occasional uses in the evenings and weekend. 3. The approved final site plan shall be in substantial accord with the Conceptual Master Plan (submitted November 12, 2001 and revised December 14, 2001), with the northern wing building ~'-'-*'--~"*,vv.~,,,,. ~,,~ orientation also in substantial accord with Diagram 'A' (dated February 5, 2002 and prepared by Bruce Wardell Architects) provided, however, the orientation of the northern wing building may be rotated up to 7.5 de.qrees in either direction to provide up to 15 degrees of flexibility in the final sitin.q of the northern wing building, and shall reflect all required pedestrian and road connections to adjacent properties and a sidewalk along at least one side of the entrance road, as described below. 4. A building setback and tree buffer shall be maintained adjacent to the Village Square residential development along the south property line for a distance of 1006.39 linear feet, as shown on the Conceptual Master Plan. 5. The school shall be operated in accord with the Special Use Permit Application and Justification submitted August 27, 2001 and the Site Development Strategy Narrative submitted via facsimile December 18, 2001. 6. The permittee shall reserve for dedication for public use a public vehicular connection to the parcel or parcels located to the north of the school property; this public vehicular connection shall consist of a 40 foot wide strip centered on the entrance road and a 40 foot wide strip extending along the rear of Parcel 174 from its intersection with the entrance road to the shared boundary with Parcel 172A. The public road connection along the rear of Parcel 174 between the entrance road and the adjacent property to the north shall be constructed by others. If it is determined to be necessary by the County to provide for interparcel access, the owner shall make the reserved vehicular connection available for such use. 7. If it is determined by the County to be necessary to provide for interparcel vehicular connections between the property and Parcels 173A and 174, the final site plan shall show possible future connections between the property and Parcels 173 and 174. These connections shall be along the rear boundary of each parcel, and shall be coordinated with access to the school. The specific locations and design of the connections shall be subject to approval by Engineering. This condition does not require the owner to construct any interparcel vehicular connection. 8. An easement shall be created to allow public use of a pedestrian connection to the parcel or parcels located to the south of the school property; this connection shall be made in a location between Rio Road East and the school buildings, in such a fashion that it shall connect to the sidewalk to be constructed along the school entrance road and, if and when constructed, to the connecting road along the rear portion of Parcel 174, the exact location of this connection to be determined at the time of final site plan approval. If an asphalt path is to be used, it shall be 5 feet wide and consist of 4 inches of 21B stone base material and 2 inches of SMA-2 asphalt. If a concrete sidewalk is to be used, it shall meet standards established by the County Engineer. The path shall be shown on the final site plan for the school and shall be ~''~'-'~"" .... prior to ,~,,, ~ ......... ~ .... ~,,,, ,., ....... ~ ....... ~*~'" bui!ding ..... ~,,,,,, constructed upon request of the County at such time as the County determines that the path is appropriate to coordinate access to pedestrian facilities ready for construction or constructed on the contiguous properties. 9. Portions of the property shall be dedicated, reserved, or restricted as follows: a. A fifty (50) foot greenway along Meadow Creek at the western boundary of ~ Parcel 170 shall be dedicated to Albemarle County at the time of final site plan approval. b. A thirty (30) foot greenway easement along the northwestern side of the centerline of the intermittent stream shown on the Conceptual Master Plan shall be granted to Albemarle County at the time of final site plan approval. The greenway easement shall authorize Albemarle County to install and maintain a Class B trail and associated improvements within the easement, allow public access to the trail, and prohibit improvements by the owner. The greenway easement shall be subject to review and approval by the County Attorney. c. The area of the-I~Parce1170 between the dedicated greenway and the greenway easement, containing approximately ! .2! 1.56 acres, shall be reserved for dedication and shall be dedicated nnrfh ,"~n~l ~.nllfh nffh~ r~.~nl~l -'~r~,"~ J/~lh~n ~l~lln,"~f~l fh~ r~.~nl~l -'~r~,"~ ~.h,"~ll h~nnm~ use as part of the County's and the Oily of CharlottesvJlle's park and trail system. The owner shall preserve the reserved area in its natural condition and shall make no improvements on this reserved area without the written authorization of the Count/b~t~!! .qo bui!~b,~ or ~tr'dot'dre~ b the ~ The reserved area shall be shown on the final site plan. At such time as a linear park is established on the contJ.quous properties to the north and south of the reserved area, the owner shall dedicate to the Count/a public access easement over the reserved area to provide for the use of the property as a natural area for park, open space and .qreenwav purposes. At the option of the owner?l:the easement may restrict or prohibit the placement of anv buJldJn.q or structure in this area and provide for the continued use of the property bv the owner so Ion.q as the use does not conflict with the stated purposes of the easement. The deed of dedication shall be subiect to review and approval by the County Attorney o~'~ m~' 10. No disturbance of the critical slopes located at the western portion of the site or other undisturbed areas identified on the Conceptual Master Plan shall occur as a result of site development other than development of a pedestrian access to the greenway. Prior to final site plan approval, a tree preservation plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator, addressing in detail the limits of all disturbed areas, diameter and location of trees to be preserved, clearing and limbing policy for trees to be preserved, and supplemental trees and shrubs (if any), and related issues. Return to Executive Summary Return to Regular Agenda COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA-2001-016, Bargamin Park Rezoning. SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST Request to rezone 9.59 acres from R-2, Residential to PRD, Planned Residential Development to create 19 single family detached dwelling units and 23 townhouse units. STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Doherty AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Go to Recommendation DISCUSSION: The Board of Supervisors heard this item on February 20, 2002. At that hearing, the applicant offered an additional proffer of cash towards public improvements related to the Crozet community. The Board asked the applicant to draft the proffer for their review and approval. The original proffer form has been amended to include the additional proffer, see Attachment A. It states, that the applicant shall participate in public improvements related to the Crozet community by paying to the County a sum calculated at the rate of $400.00 per townhouse lot and $500.00 per single-family residential building lot. Payments shall be made at the time that a building permit is issued for any dwelling unit on a lot, and shall be a condition for issuing a building permit. If the cash proffer or any portion thereof, is not used for the stated purpose within 20 years, then the contributions may be used by the County for any other community improvements serving the Crozet area, deemed by the Board as at least in part being necessary by the proposed development on the Property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of ZMA-01-06, Bargamin Park Subdivision, with proffers. Attachments: View: A - Amended and signed Proffers, dated February 20, 2002 Return to Regular Agenda · ZMA ~, ZMA-0t:06 Tax Map .altd Purcell Nt~mb¢c(s} 55-fl~7 O~igi'n~l Prog~ · .959 Acresto'b='re..zo. ncdfi'orn .... R2 to PRD~ Pm-~tta~t to ~;actior~ 33,3 off ac Albem~l~ Co~ ~ning ~din~ ~ owns, ~ i~ duly au~o~ vnl~ily ~6~r~ the ~adi~ona ~sted bsftqw ~hich sfiMI I~'a~ to ~e pro~y.,'ifTc~n~ .p~er~ ~ Z pa~ ~ thc ~q~l~ r~aing and f~ 3s a~'that: (l) the ~ing ?;~elf" ~jiw~ rise (2.) I-~v~loixncnt shall ~ iii general, aocgrd wigh Ibc At~pticatiott Ha_~ entifl~ "Pi~mintvy Snail,on Plans for B~g~Jn Park ,~u~vJs[on," ~ .Tantl~, ~ (w~th nOtO~ ~ ~t~ plan con~ill~ lh~. itl~'anOda~ l~m~ 29, 2002 by '~athl~ M. ~tvin, AmhiLeu0 as-~asoaahly d~ned by thg A~ni. All sn'e. em sex;lions'shall inclal,~ curb mtd grot=; ~ 5-~bot p[anting s~i~ tut meet ~< .zn4l. fi-fo~.wide cov~%~o · ~dcw~k~ oa ~>~ ~d~ oe'B~ga,~a L~ou~ Road, Pow, l~ C~k ~ne, a~¢ ~c privat~ r~ ~lw'~cn ~m 34 i~ ~ Penury 7, .~2, 7'rio~ ~ H~ Plat apterat .~ Planlting Dk~or aha!~ ~e~'nh~ ff ~e~s~ary, w~c~ ~4 (t~kty-tbur} foot from ~be oemmlino' of I~vtnaxt's Gap Road al~')ng it's ffomage, gs:ro~pt whore ch~rg~ shalfb¢ a righ£-turn lan~'ir, l<, the silo, which shall require &e dedicAtign of up io forty [~ct f40').f~rn ~: cgntc-rlilm of · Jarman's O.klp Road along rhg'g,b~ect p~ope~y'& konfag~. ' · .(4) .. (6} The e~ i.qdCg house, know,' ~ · ~b~arleCo~a~ Dusi~'Pla~a~] Ciang~ ~ tko ca,or of the tteus~ shall ~liilli~d lo Ihosc ~at ol'.~ny ~mld}ag p~its for e~or The ]and i&~fifi~ on.~e Appfi~on.~an, entitled '~{mh~ Su~iv~on Pl~s for 6a~g~n l~k ~ Applicant ah~l ~ipa~ in pubt{~ kmp~v~ta r&~a~ ~' ~c~t ~mu~ by pa}Jn$.~ wit~ia ~¢~y. 1%~N ~al] be ma~a~e ~ th'a~ a b,ildbg permit is ~-su~ f~r any. dwelling lo; sad paym~at of the ~.~ · . t~:~,, c~ h prefer, is not. UB,xJ. tbr the stmbc, d purpose '~m 20 years Ot (he date h e¢~t', th~.ttt~ ~on~~y~d by~~y for ~y ~ .(Th~]oE~vil[e, Virginia ~9~1 .. BARGAM.~ PARK SU.BD]VISION Ow'n~,r: THORNEflRCK OEVELOPMENT,. I~C Deaign Consultant KAYHLEEN'M..GALV!N, Date: Janua~, 2002 dl~m~'~llcij~Yler~m.iDlinCllc3~ outliner r~ · Nehg:fl~r~ Moeer ~ addremna ~Drne ~.. CemmL~i[y durhqg tw~ public mee~ m~ nei~hi~q9 W~y~and'sl~m..,4~'t ~m~ ~ ~'m e.]' ~e ~e hl.s~oric butkd[ng'and vTew ~n~or ~1 ~r ~ I..I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Route 606 - Dickerson Road Abandonment SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Public hearing to abandonment the section of Rt. 606 in front of the Airport. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Wade AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: Yes ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: The Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport has rebuilt Route 606 on the east side of the Airport. The road is complete and in use. The Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Authority has requested the abandonment of Old Route 606 and dedication of the new Rout 606 (see Attachment A). DISCUSSION: The old Route 606 is 60' in width, and would be abandoned beginning 1,000' south of the original intersection of Route 606 and Route 649 and continuing 2,300' north of the intersection. The new Route 606 R-O-W is approximately 80' in width, from 1,100' southwest of the new intersection of Route 606 and Route 649 to the new intersection, and approximately 90' in width from the new intersection to 2,400' northeast of the new intersection (see Attachment B). The applicant's justification is to provide safer and more convenient access to the Airport, as well as to consolidate lands owned by the Airport Authority on one side of Route 606. The relocation of Route 606 is identified as an improvement in the Airport's Master Plan. The Master Plan has been identified in the County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance asthe guiding plan for improvements for the airport. The Planning Commission found the proposed abandonment in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan at their February 19, 2002 meeting (see Staff report-Attachment C). RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that this section of secondary roads is no longer necessary for use in the Secondary system since an alternate route has been established. Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors support the abandonment of Route 606 as noted in the Discussion section above and adopt the attached resolution (Attachment D). pc: Mr. James L. Bryan, VDOT Attachments: A. View - Letter Requesting Abandonment and Dedication of Route 606 B. View - Map showing Abandonment and Dedication of Route 606 C. view - staff report from February 19, 2002 Planning Commission meeting D. View - Route 606 Resolution Return to Regular Agenda David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr, Sco~sville Charles S~ Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 March 19, 2002 Walter E Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sall~ H. Thomas Samuel MiIter Mr. Ray D. Pethtel Interim Commissioner Commonwealth Transportation Board 1401 E Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219 Dear Mr. Pethtel: At its meeting on March 6, 2002, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors adopted aresolution to abandon Route 606, Dickinson Road, from the Secondary System of State Highways. Attached is a copy of the adopted resolution. If you require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. /EWC Sincerely, mW. Carey,~MC Attachment CC: Mr. James L Bryan, Resident Engineer Mr. Bryan Elliott, Director, Charlottesville-A!,hemarle Airport Mr. Juandiego Wade, Department of Plannin~ Printed on recycled paper RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a public hearing was posted as prescribed under § 33.1-151, Code of Virginia, announcing a public hearing to receive comments concerning abandoning the road described below from the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Transportation was provided the prescribed notice of this Board's intent to abandon the subject road; and WHEREAS, after considering all evidence available, this Board is satisfied that no public necessity exists for the continuance of Secondary Route 606, Dickinson Road, beginning 1,000 feet south of the original intersection of Route 606 and Route 649, and continuing 2,300 feet north of the intersection, and hereby deems that road is no longer necessary as part of the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the replacement to the abandoned Route 606 would be 1,100 feet southwest of the new intersection of Route 606 and Route 649 to the new intersection, and approximately 2,400 feet northeast of the new intersection; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board abandons the above described road and removes it from the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to § 33.1-151, Code of Virginia; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of six to zero, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on March 6, 2002. Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye Mr. Bowerman X Mr. Dorrier X Mr. Martin X Mr. Perkins X Mr. Rooker X Ms. Thomas X Nay CHARL MAR. LF.;.: "- Close · Convenient ."Coanectod January 16, 2002 M:--irnalidicgo Wilde :-,". Cmmty of Albemarle Du):mrtment. of Plm-mlng and .Gommull{ty Development. .,. Clxarfet~¢sville, ¥ir~nia 229(}2-4596 Right-of-Wuy .hBando nmerit- Dec Mr. Wade, The Chzclottc~'vi.kl.e-Albemarle AZ~ort. Attthork-y :vxtuc~ tb.e '¢on'sidera'lkon 'Alb~.marle fei' tl~e' abandonnm~r[ of roadway fight-of-way lbr tha~[ porfien of',.,qtatc depk~'d .~n the.R.igh~£ Way Dedication aa4 Abandonment .Pta't' su'bcn~tt'e:d to ?le~t~ning Depa_m-ne~f-in November 200t~ The 'Au'thorJ. ty's z'cytue~ !s b~se~t upon .file. recenf." ¢mnpleCfon o~' [be mlocatica~ el' kb,at portion' of I-hmfe 606 delficted on thc r~ghtrgf-way'p~g[, Th~ rel.6c~CJon, o_{'Route 606~ and i~ ~soe~at~ ri~-of,~y d~i.catJon .and abmdd~t, ha~ ".~ ~~ ~. t~ ~st' p~c of the Ilp~e.or St~le. Rsm~ 649 .~:ti ef:K0~f."~'0.6 and ·649, ting ~s ¢'onsiste~t wi~ o~.m.m~mt. Ai~..~ut .,~n.. Ma~':~I~, " should have' m:y quesdo:¢ regarrli~g this maaCr, please do not 15esitate to con't~tct me 975-8342 (ext. 105), P,~ ~tMive' DirecD.~r ' Gary 8hip£ey, p.E., Delta A_irI~rt Conmttants, Inc. 1gO Bowen Leo'p, Suite 200 ~' Charlo~svill~., VA 22911 ~' 434-97343.342 * Fa× 434-974-7476 * www. goeho,com : .'..'~RO~A]JC~, " ' . '. ' .' .. ,::. '.' ' : . ''.:" ' " -.. · .1~1~ ]~i,~, ~l~, ~ ~ 6F~ ~ ~ pu~Me~a ~.~eh f~:i~'"'. ' ". . . . [ ..: · .~y~.~~' · . . ...... ,~ .'..... ~, · ..: . .. " . · · . . . ' · ' · . · . ', .' f.~l... · .. · . :. ' . . · ... · ] . . '.:~".'.%..':'r. i '. . : '..... .~..~a~ i~.ll~..e~o~ b']~bl.i (iP~ pubMot~~.j~?' '.].~ ] '[.-ri "." ..: · .' . "'~:~l~mm:~'~'~:~:~. · · . . ... .... .,.~.~ ~,. ... ,.. [} · . . ..' ':... · . . · . . . .. .. · :.~: r.-.....~':~ ,.~ · · '~pl~l:' . ' ' ' ' . . · ::.,'.' ' ,": .'"' . · : ..~ .. · : .:: ~.. . .. ' ' -~ ~ ~'o. i~.~i ~ ~ ~ a~dlm~'~ l~0~O'.~'ou~ :~r &~ a~.} ::~¢.'/:.:; ..' .' ' · · . . '. :.,..m%~(..~. ~;~'~,~oJm:~.~ :~-~(~X~,~:~., .' .... .' ~,.(~. :.' '~[:.[ :' ..:.. - ...: ' .., ' .' " - . " " , · ' '.' · : "'. ] .~: 'i~b'.7 . " ~..' . .. .....,~~.~ ..... . .. ... . ....}~}~:.- ~.:..' ..., , . _ .': ... · .. ....., .......: ~...:......... .... .~.~'.~-:~"?.:,..' . '.:~ .. : : '. ~.~e~e ~: · · -. ' . L: ~¢ ~ ..':'.. ::'[[Iz' ...:. "· . ... .. '~ald:..~:'~(~b~. ... : ' ' ~ ':'. ~]:.: · .:. . . ... . .. ..?:~., ,,,' . . · .' . .'~ "' "'. ' '.'. .... :~].L~::::.''"": "~ . ·..: .; ...~Xl~.~:~.l~:~m~m~.. . . ..... . . .....'......::'~(-... ~]..~......':.? . .:..'~ ~ · - - . . ..::.? . .. . .:. ...... . '.- "'. .... ':-'. ' ...... '-"'..{[j~-:,:' "~t.'".'. i -. : ... · .. ~: .l~,~.~m~t~D~.~m~. · ""." :.~ .' ?7' '" '..: · · .' '~- '~i~a~p~L~d D~i~ 0~6 '.. ' . :: ~'i".:['.~'"' ' ' " .. ".:-.:........-...-.......,................:..:........-.,......:.:........ ..,.. ._ · ........~.... . .. ....."' . : ..:.... :....~:[:[....~,~...... Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District 2134 Berkmar Drive, Charlottesville, VA 22901 Budget Request of Albemarle County for FY 2002-2003:$64,103 Percent change over FY 2001-2002: + 6% Historically, the four member localities that compdse TJSWCD (Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa, Nelson) have made "contributions' based on ability to pay, and our DistriCt's needs. We are transitioning to a more equitable system based on services rendered, in each locality, and our costs of providing those services. This year, our budget requests of each member locality include a 3 percent increase to cover inflation and cost-of-living adjustments to staff salaries. From Albemarle, we are requesting an additional 3 percent increase to cover expansion of our riparian buffer and open-space/riparian easement program. We anticipate dedicating at least an additional 0.5 FTE to this program in Albemarle dudng 2002-2003. SUMMARY OF PROGRAMS AND SERVICES PROVIDED IN ALBEMARLE COUNTY (FY 2000-200f and FY 2001-2002 to present): Urban Conservation · Published manual on rooftop runoff collection systems, to promote this approach to managing stormwater runoff, while providing altemative water source for home uses or for livestock · Provided 64 staff hours to Albemarle County Department of Engineering and Public Works for Stream Assessment project Provided 86 assists to the Albemarle County Planning Department regarding soils information for site plan reviews Agricultural Conservation · Provided $108,281 to private landowners to share cost of installing conservation practices (Agricultural BMP Cost-Share Program) o 44,080 linear feet stream fencing installed to exclude livestock from streams o 16 alternative water systems installed for livestock · Certified $7,044 in tax credits to landowners for installation of conservation practices · Responded to 2 complaints filed under the Agricultural Stewardship Act · Updated 8 farm conservation plans in support of Albemarle County's Water Protection Ordinance Conservation Leadership & Education · Coordinated the Water Resources Advisory Committee with the TJPDC: o developed a proposal to evaluate sources of sediment in South Fork Rivanna Reservoir, and test-bed alternative sediment mitigation strategies o evaluated implications for water resources of planning scenarios in the context of TJPDC's Eastem Planning Initiative · Provided 72 conservation-related technical assists to Albemarle County citizens · Provided educational programming in the form of lectures, workshops and field tdps to hundreds of Albemarle citizens (youth and adult) · Supported three Envirothon teams from Albemarle County to compete at Area level. One of those teams went on to State level competition. · Sent one student from Albemarle County (full scholarship) to week-long Youth Conservation Camp at Va Tech Riparian Buffers & Easements · Initiated the Thomas Jefferson Water Resources Protection Foundation to administer, in cooperation with local governments, the District's open-space/riparian easement program, and to fulfill the long-term responsibilities associated with holding such easements · Established (co-holding with Albemarle County) open-space easement on riparian lands adjacent to the South Fork Rivanna River (2,460 linear feet, 3.5 acres at the Polo Grounds Road Soccer Park) · Installed 184.2 acres of dpadan buffer · Installed 12 acres of wildlife planting TJSWCD contacts: Nick Evans, District Chairman 953-6345 neva ns@geology, state .va. us Alyson Sappington, District Manager 975-0224 alyson-sappington@va.nacdnet, org 'REVLriW' DOR COMPLIBNG $ .wglq TI~t5 cOM~'~WS~ P~ ~A, COD g $~,'J~'ON." ..... · . ] 5,~2232): '~ATtON' OF 'RO~' 6~ AND-.A~DO~ OE mGHTd)F;'WAY. FOR OLD ' ' ' · ' ' ' M~y ~o~ 0n ~= ~q ~r-phn, . · .'. ·' .... ' .... . ' . . '. ..' ''.2..'~ .::' '":.9' .." ..:... .--',.{:: . · , . ...' . . · ~ to ~ ~dme lind s om~ ~y lhe Ai~ At~o~ on one ~i~ of Rqmc 606. Th~ ~c~o · . for ~proo~t'~ ~ ~'ai¢~n.. ' . ..' ' ' . ..... ' :' ". ' ' .. ..-:::"i}'. '. 7" . ' .. : ' ' ' ' · ' ' ' ' ' :' ' '" ' '" ' "''i "-' ' · . C~mre~sive.P~: -. :~ -'" ,start com~/a: .. . .~: ~ ...... ... .. s~ finds ~. mlo.mfiou of gom~ 6~6 add ~'abmdonntem hr'the Old '~a~ 6~8. c~i~i Wifl~" · '.. .. · :. . . '..::..'. . . '.. ''. ' " '2.. '. ..: ..... . .. .. . · . ... .' .'. . ..... i . "2.. · .,..i.. ATTA~.HME NT 'C .¢~.mmuniIy hat, gar ~d no!ih of Lh¢ propos'Cd '~mmft, ~p~o~...~ ~c¢~. · H-i~ ~m0I~h NAVCOM Hangar -.~e demoli~i.on o.(~he. NAVCOM:. .C~ TermiaM comply. %¢ u~l Ii~¢ ~f this s~et~r~'.h'as expi.r'ed. ~ '~ ~emfom.r~omm~ For demotion. ' ~-i3 Co~me~' 100 Rental Cay Spa&~. - be l~at~ ~n the ~ke of'~e NAVCOM"Hang~., '. :~equi~qiort ·will· complete th¢ land aeees.sary' ?o' cOnStr~ct' a ~¢w' i~mi.n~l · ' iccisi. ~way.. · · H-~ 6 'Co~'ru~t Te~inal Acce~.R0ad and Ro~fe'606 Improvements .A ~w ~d upgr~-E~ a~e~s ~dway is.~d~ed.fmm'u.~',s. 29, ~ong Route ~9 :<d ~nnecting wi.~ the Air. C~e~ 'Te)minai Ca'mp'~¢x md Rou~ ~6. ' ~e' tomI order of m~nitu~e eost for ail Phase- It ~r$ i.mprovemem pmj~k is.to/be '$i4;757,~0..The p~t~ in Table'7-2i Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District: Albemarle Update Nick Evans, Chairman March 6, 2002 I believe you've all received a summary of the Soil & Water Conservation District's budget ~equest for the coming year. Let me take just a few minutes to highlight some of our programs where I see the District Continuing, in the coming year, to partner with the County in areas of water resources protection. Then rd be happy to answer any questions you might have.' Over the past twenty years we've all watched the County undergo dramatic shifts in land use. As we move from agriculture and forestry to urban and suburban landscapes, the impacts on water resources change. We continue to work with the agricultural community of Albemarle, providing cost-share assistance and technical guidance for installing Best Management Practices that protect water quality. But the cumulative impact on water quality, of poor land stewardship on the part of 2-arce to 20-acre landowners, may be far greater than any negative impacts on water quality of hundreds of acres of well-managed farm land. The Soil & Water Conservation District is shifting focus accordingly. Rivers and streams flow through suburban residential developments just as they flow through farms. Suburban landowners can establish wooded riparian buffers as can farmers, and this remains one of the best tools we know of to keep sediment and pollutants out of streams. The District has been targeting non-agricultural landowners with educational outreach in the form of workshops and field days ...... the result has been a mushrooming of interest in riparian buffers and our riparian conservation easement program. Over the past year ,the number of inquiries having to do with Setting up permanent easements on nparian lands has ballooned. The District recognizes the need for Close coordination with the County when it comes to placing lands under permanent easement. In order to ensure that the County ~s an active partner in our easement program, and to ensure that monitoring and enforcement responsibilities of deeded easements are carried out over the long-term, the District is setting up a supporting tax-exempt Foundation to administer the program. The County will have two appointed representatives on the Foundation's Board of Directors. This is currently under review by the County Attorney and the County Executive, you will be hearing more in the coming weeks. We've all heard about the sediment' problem in the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir ..... this problem has implications not only for our water supply, but for the health of the Chesapeake Bay as well. The Water Resources Advisory Committee, which the District cosponsors along with the Planning District, spent several months last year examining the sedimentation issue, and developed a draft proposal for researching the sources of sediment, and test-bedding alternative mitigation schemes. The District stands ready to panner with the County, City and RWSA in seeking funding so that we can get on with this needed program. The District has been developing GIS capabilities in recent years in order to manage spatial data having to do with water resources on a computer. In addition to mapping stream buffers, easements and conservation BMP's, we are positioned to serve as clearing house for technical data such as surface water flow, groundwater levels, and water quality as such data become available. We anticipate playing an increasing role in technical data management as we work with the County, the Planning District, and RWSA in implementing a holistic approach to managing our community's water resources. One last item, this year we published a manual on rooftop runoff collection systems. This is an exciting, innovative approach to managing stormwater runoff that has generated a lot of interest among County residents. Rooftop runoff is a largely untapped alternative source for water that could be used for a variety of purposes around the home and on the farm. Thank you, if you have any questions on our budget request or programs, rd be happy to try and answer them. RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING Agenda Item #: '/~ Clerk's Initials:. ~ Return to Regular Agenda Report to the County of Albemarle Board of Supervisors for Fiscal Year 2001 By the Advisory Board and Staff of the Albemarle County Department of Social Services Albemarle County Department of Social Services Report to the Board of Supervisors for Fiscal Year 2001 (ending June 30, 2001) Service Mission The mission of Albemarle Social Services is to provide services that promote responsibility, individual worth, family integrity, and commitment to community. In Albemarle County, social services are provided through six broad program areas. They are: Benefit Programs - provide medical, financial and food stamp assistance to the citizens of Albemarle, paid from Federal, State, and local funds. Food Stamps - This program provides coupons to income-eligible persons for the purchase of vital foodstuffs. General Relief- This program provides temporary maintenance payments for disabled persons, as well as payments for care of children not living with blood relatives. It also provides burial assistance for those who have no family and no means to pay burial expenses. Auxiliary Grants: Aged and Disabled - These programs pay Homes for Adults for shelter, food and some personal care for income-eligible clients. TANF - Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - Provides temporary financial assistance to income-eligible families. State/Local Hospitalization -This program uses local funds to match State funds to reimburse hospitals for care given to indigent residents. Refugee Resettlement - Provides temporary financial assistance to refugees. Energy Assistance - Provides assistance to Iow-income households for wood, coal, gas, oil, or electricity, and is administered by Social Services from October through February. Medicaid - Determination of eligibility for Federal medical assistance. 2. Service Programs provide the following services directly, or through purchase of services. ® Adult Services - Program enabling adults to remain in the least restrictive setting and to function independently. ® Adult Protective Services - The investigation of complaints and the provision of services for adults who are abused, neglected, or exploited. ® Child Protective Services - Program investigating complaints and providing services both to children who are abused or neglected, and to their families. This program also performs court-ordered custody investigations. ® Foster Care and Adoption - Services provided on behalf of children in the custody of the Department and assistance for families who adopt children. ® Prevention and Support Services - Services designed to prevent family violence and break-up by strengthening family functioning. ® Tri-Area Foster Families - (TAFF) - This program recruits and trains foster parents. It includes an Independent Living Program for older foster care children whose goal is to live independently. TAFF is a joint initiative of the Charlottesville Department of Social Services, the Greene County Department of Social Services, and the Albemarle Department of Social Services. Annual Report FY 2001 Page 1 Pro,qram Areas Continued 3. Employment and Day Care Services - provide employment education and training, child care, transportation, and other support services to Iow income working families and families receiving public assistance. Day Care services assist families where parents are working and/or are attending school and whose children have day care needs. It also provides services to families who are receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) and are working towards self-sufficiency. 4. Bright Stars Program - The purpose of the program is to reduce disparities among four- year-old children who are just starting school and to reduce or eliminate those risk factors that lead to early academic failure. The program is a collaborative effort among the Department of Social Services, County schools, and community agencies to provide supportive services to at-risk children. Five of the County's fifteen elementary schools have Bright Stars programs: Stone Robinson, Agnor-Hurt, Greet, Cale and Scottsville. 5. Family Support Program - The Family Support Program is a collaborative venture among the Albemarle County Department of Social Services, the Albemarle County School Division and community agencies supporting early intervention and prevention services. The program employs ten Social Workers who cover all fifteen County elementary schools. The program is based on the premises that earlier and longer interventions are more effective with at-risk populations and that children whose parents actively participate in their education show the greatest progress. UVA Medicaid Program - The UVA Hospital Medicaid program is the result of a contractual agreement between the State Medical Assistance Program, the State Department of Social Services, The University of Virginia Medical Center, and the Albemarle County Department of Social Services. The program provides Medicaid benefits to medically indigent inpatients and indigent clients treated in specified outpatient clinics at UVA. Applications are processed and sent to the client's local agency of residence. Advisory Board and Departmental Hiqhli,qhts At a facilitated retreat on May 29,2001, the Department's Advisory Board met to discuss its mission within the limits established by the County and the State. The Board decided that it has four primary roles: to act as an advocate regarding issues affecting the community; to act as a liaison between the Department and the BOS and community; to educate itself about the Department and the community; and to assist with developing Departmental policy when there are appropriate opportunities to do so. In its initial action as an advocate, the Board wrote an editorial about how state budget cuts could adversely affect social services. Completion of a goal to develop Quality Caseload Standards (QCS) and equal distribution of cases within the department. Completion of a self-assessment by all staff utilizing a standard self-evaluation tool whereby each unit within the department rated the QCS against a set of specified indicators. Using the evidences provided by each unit, the Management Team concluded that agency-wide there is the beginning of a systematic approach in place for all indicators. The primary focus of the tool is on performance and customer service. Completion of a Continuous Quality Improvement Plan (CQI) based on the self-assessment process mentioned above that includes ninety-five strategies that have been assigned to teams for implementation. Implementation of four Management Functional Teams that replaced the one primary Management Team. This was done in an effort to improve efficiency and effectiveness of the management operations of the department. The four teams are: 1) Personnel/Staff, 2) Facilities, 3)Information Management and Technology and 4) Budget/Legislative. Reorganized the direct services of the department into two primary divisions: 1) Adult Division and 2) Family & Children's (F&C) Division. The Adult Division, comprised of social work and benefit program staff has been chartered and developed a long term plan for improved service to the population of elderly, disabled and those adults without children who need our services. The F&C Division is still in the workgroup stage of development and not fully formed. Developed a Career Center in the department that houses up to date information and provides access for employment opportunities for any citizen. Relocation of the majority of the department to the current Millmont site with little disruption to service. Annual Repo~ FY 2001 Page 2 Benefits Division Auxiliary Grants: Aged and Disabled - These grants assist individuals who receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) as well as certain other aged, blind, or disabled persons residing in licensed assisted living facilities or approved adult foster care homes. The grants are designed to ensure that recipients are able to maintain a standard of living that meets a basic level of need. These programs pay Homes for Adults to provide shelter, food and some personal care to income eligible clients. Food Stamps - This program provides coupons to income-eligible persons for the purchase of vital foodstuffs. It is important to note that Food Stamp Coupons will be converted to an Electronic Benefit Transfer System in FY 2002. General Relief - This program provides temporary maintenance payments for disabled persons, as well as payments for care of children not living with blood relatives. It also provides burial assistance for those who have no family and no means to pay burial expenses. This is a locally optional program designed to provide maintenance or emergency assistance that cannot be provided through other means. It is financed through state and local funding. 50 Annual Report FY 2001 Page 3 Benefits Division - Continued TANF Temporary Assistance to Needy Families - Provides temporary financial assistance to income-eligible families. The TANF program was designed to dramatically reform the nation's welfare system by helping recipients become self- sufficient, and turning welfare into a program of temporary assistance. A monthly cash payment is distributed to eligible families to meet their basic needs. The program is based upon the principles of personal responsibility, time-limited assistance, and work in exchange for benefits. TANF is the cash assistance component of the Virginia Independence Program (VIP) that helps families work toward their goal of total independence. 3158 Medicaid - This program provides medical care for public assistance recipients and other Iow- income individuals who cannot afford it. The state and federal governments fund this program. UVA Medicaid - The UVA Hospital Medicaid program is the result of a contractual agreement among the State Medical Assistance Program, the State Department of Social Services, the University of Virginia Medical Center, and the Albemarle County Department of Social Services. The program provides Medicaid benefits to medically indigent inpatients and indigent clients treated in specified outpatient clinics at UVA. Applications are processed and sent to the client's local agency of residence. "Referrals" are defined as individuals who are screened for potential eligibility of benefits. The department is working to improve its ability to collect data on application made and approved. Annual Report FY 2001 Page 4 Services Division Adult Services is a program that enables an adult to remain in the least restrictive setting and to function independently. This program provides long-term care and prevention services through management oversight. Adult Protective Services investigates reports of abuse, neglect, and exploitation of adults over 60 years of age and of incapacitated adults over 18 years of age. This program provides assistance to persons found to be in need of protective services. 47 31 The Companion Services Program assists elderly and/or disabled adults who are unable to care for themselves without assistance. Companion Services are provided at no cost to the person requesting service. The State and Local governments fund the program. The goal of Child Protective Services is to identify, assess, and provide services to children and families. It is designed to preserve families whenever possible, yet protect children and prevent further maltreatment. The program is non-punitive in its approach and attempts to enable families to provide adequate care for their children. Differential Response System provides for a differential response to reports of child abuse and neglect and it offers two tracks: Investigation Response and Assessment Response. Annual Report FY 2001 Page 5 Services Division - Continued 41 The Foster Care Program provides services to help families stay together and allow children to remain in their own homes. Assistance is given to children and families in an effort to prevent removal of a child from his or her dwelling. When parents are unsuccessful in changing conditions in the home, it may be necessary to place the child in foster care. The goal of the Foster Care Program is to provide services to enable the child to return to his or her family home or to find another permanent home. Foster Care is intended to be temporary response to a difficult family situation, not a long- term solution for the family. The Department's primary goal is to return children in Foster Care to their birth parents. If this cannot be done, the Department tries to place such children with relatives. If that cannot be done, the Department tries to find adoptive parents. The purpose of Adoption Services is to help children who have been permanently and legally separated from their birth parents to become permanent members of a new family. Day Care Services - This program provides Iow- income families with funding to enhance the quality, affordability, and supply of child care. Day Care services assist Iow-income parents who are either working and/or are attending school and whose children have day care needs. Day care services are also provided to families who are receiving TANF and are working towards economic self- sufficiency. Annual Report FY 2001 Page 6 Services Division - Continued Employment Services provides employment education and training, childcare, transportation, and other support services to Iow income working families and families receiving public assistance. This unit manages all of the employment training and child care services for the agency. Albemarle County is compared to other agencies in the Economic Development District 8 (EDD 8). The Virginia Initiative for Employment not Welfare (VIEW) is a grant program designed to encourage self-sufficiency through employment. VIEW is mandatory for parents who are on welfare, are not disabled, and do not have any children under 18 months old. VIEW participants can also participate in optional transitional services such as Day Care and Medicaid. VIEW is the work component of the Virginia Independence Program (VIP) that requires recipients to work in exchange for their public temporary assistance check. Albemarle County is compared to other agencies in the Economic Development District 8 (EDD 8). Annual Report FY 2001 Page 7 FY 2001 Spotlight: Bright Stars and Family Support Division The school year opened with five fully staffed Bright Stars classrooms located in designated County schools. Enrollment came in just below our maximum of $0 children so recruitment efforts continued to fill the few openings that remained. The newest Bright Stars site is located in Scottsville and serves that community and the Red Hill district. State funding increased to $450,000 with the addition of the fifth program. The Virginia Preschool Initiative Grant increased to $154,000, the school and local government contributed $291,000 and Martha Jefferson Hospital renewed their $5,000 community grant for dental services. New program initiatives included a Spanish translation of our program materials and a contract with a Spanish-language translator to assist parents during meetings and with completing necessary forms. Two Bright Stars Family Coordinators attended the University of Georgia School of Social Work program at the University of Mexico in Vera Cruz where they lived with an Hispanic family, attended rigorous daily language and culture classes and visited schools and social service agencies in the region. On-going initiatives included assessing the progress of the students using the High/Scope Child Observation Record and the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening. Encouraging parental involvement through classroom participation, attendance at field trips, sharing cultural and ethnic traditions and coming to the school to conference with teachers and staff specialists remains a high priority for our program. Annual Report FY 2001 Page 8 FY 2001 Spotlight Continued' Bright Stars and Family Support The Family Support program experienced no staff turnover in 2000-2001. All workers returned to the schools assigned to them the previous year. This helped in integrating the program into the individual school cultures and allowed stronger relationships to develop between children, families and family support workers. Our staff served on school committees, met frequently with teaching staff and administrators, made referrals to community agencies and met with parents/caretakers in their homes on a regular basis. Of the services provided by Family Support Workers in the schools, 25% were with the child (often about behavior issues), 33% were with school personnel (assisting in understanding family dynamics that impact on school performance and behavior), and 42% were with the family (helping with paperwork and homework compliance). During the year, the program served 173 families with 279 elementary school children. Staff geared up for Phase III of the program evaluation that is being conducted by the Curry School of Education at UVA and the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service. This phase will require the full implementation of a new database, data collection in 3 critical areas of family functioning and surveying our internal and external customers. The program was able to generate approximately one million federal dollars for Albemarle County for early intervention and prevention services. These dollars were used in the Family Support program and also benefited community partners such as Children, Youth and Family Services, the Commission on Children and Families, the Juvenile Court Assessment Center and Albemarle County Schools. * FY 2000 Elementary School Children include services provided to school children ages 0-18. FY 1999 and FY 2001 include services provided to Elementary School Children only. Annual Report FY 2001 Page 9 Budget and Finance Division Albemarle County Department of Social Services Cost Center Breakdown 4% 0.1% 7% 13% 16% 60% [] Management [] Benefit Programs 53011 53012 [] Em ployment Services [] Medicaid -UVA 53014 53015 [] Service Programs 53013 [] Energy Assistance 53016 (0.1%) Albemarle DSS Federal, State, and Local Funds, including Assistance for Albemarle Citizens 4% [] Fede ral/State [] Local mFederal/State Funds Federal State Food Stamps Medicaid TANF TOTAL $3,210,681 $1,485,734 $1,303,741 $18,006,065 $1,283,863 $25,290,084 96% BLocalFunds $'1,'183,057 Annual RepoA FY 2001 Page 10 BOARD -TO -BOARD March 6, 2002 - 10:30 a.m. A Monthly Communications Report of activities from the Albemarle County School Board to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Highlights: School Board Briefs February 14 and February 28, 2002 were provided via e-mail. RECENT HOUSE VERSUS SENATE BUDGETS for FY 2002-2003: As you know the House and Senate conferees are trying to finalize a State budget. The final budget will have significant impact on the School Division as it will on your pending budget deliberations. CURRENT YEAR (FY2001-02) BUDGET: As the Supervisors are aware, the Division has had to hold back 12.5% of school and department budgets this year to make up $800,000 primarily due to a state revenue shortfall. It is possible, however, that this situation might be relieved because both the House and Senate budgets have incorporated a reduction in VRS rates in the current year. If adopted, it would reduce our expenses by approximately $700,000. MIDDLE SCHOOL REDISTRICTING: On February 20, 2002, the Middle School Redistricting Committee held its first meeting. It is the hope of the Committee to have a proposal to the Board by the beginning of May. Information regarding the redistricting process is located on the School Division Web Page at http://kl2.albemarle.org. FAMILY LIFE EDUCATION MATERIALS: The Board approved the Family Life Education presentation, VIVA Responds: Sexual Harassment Program for Middle School, at its February 28 meeting. RECEIV, V~D AT BOS MEETING O. ate:.,,////~e,* Agenda Item #: /02 Clerk's Initials:. BAKER-BUTLER ELEMENTARY AND BURLEY MIDDLE SCHOOLS CONSTRUCTION UPDATE: At its February 28 meeting, the Board received an update from Mr. A1 Reaser on the progress of the construction at Baker-Butler Elementary and Burley Middle Schools. Both projects are on schedule and on budget. FUTURE ITEMS OF INTEREST AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC PROGRAM: Monticello High School has been offered the opportunity to have an Air Force Junior ROTC Program. The Board will receive information on the program and curriculum at its March 14 meeting. In the meantime, the curriculum is available for public review through the Department of Instruction. JOINT MEETING: We are looking forward to meeting with you on March 20 to present the School Board's Funding Request and to discuss compensation and benefits. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Office of the School Board 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 http://kl 2.albemarte.org February 26, 2002 Ms. Sally Thomas, Chair Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Dear Ms. Thomas and Members of the Board of Supervisors: With this document, I presem the Albemarle County School Board's FY 2002-03 Funding Request. The request totals $110,929,406, including $99,960,020 in the School Fund Budget and $10,969,386 in the Self-Sustaining Budget. Within the request, we are asking the Board of Supervisors to provide one-time funding to support non-recurring needs related to the opening of Baker-Butler Elementary School. The School Board approved this Funding Request by unanimous vote on February 19, 2002. On behalf of the School Board, I must emphasize our commitment to meeting our competitive market in employee compensation. It is both just and reasonable to do so in recognition of the high performance of our employees who face a time of increasingly high stakes accountability. A Board Reserve of $911,002 is included to address this most critical area. Note our request includes the 2% increase agreed to by the Joint Boards in November. We see this as a matter of good faith in working with you. However, the School Board, after careful consideration, voted unanimously on February 14 for market-level compensation. We look forward to discussing this issue with the Board of Supervisors when we meet on March 20. The School Board's Funding Request is significantly shaped by the current economic situation at the state and national levels. I regret to say that our request does not maintain our current level of effort. Department and school budgets are not increased even to address inflation. Initiatives that would markedly improve the education of all students in the areas of literacy, gifted education, and middle school education are not included. The state, as clearly shown in the recently released JLARC study, is not meeting its legal and moral commitment to support public education. Unfortunately, this places a great deal of stress on the County budget. In closing, I also want you and all the Supervisors to know how much the School Board values your strong support for our schools and our students. We look forward to working in partnership with you during the remainder of the budget process as we plan for the future of our community. Sincerely, Stephen H. Koleszar, Chairman Albemarle County School Board "We Expef~_~uccess" COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Lewis and Clark Exposition Plans SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: An update on planned activities in connection with the Lewis and Clark Expedition Bicentennial Celebration. STAFF CONTACT(S): Mr. Tucker, Ms. Catlin AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: No REVIEWED BY: INFORMATION: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: In January, 2003, the national celebration marking the Bicentennial of the Lewis and Clark Corps of Discovery Expedition will kick off with a six-day long exposition in our community, culminating in a commencement event at Monticello on January 18 which will be first in a series of 10 "Signature Events" designated by the National Council of the Lewis & Clark Bicentennial that will be held across the country through 2006. The exposition will feature a variety of activities held at sites around the University of Virginia and the Charlottesville/Albemarle County community. Some of these activities, including the Corps of Discovery II, which is a multimedia recreation of the expedition, will continue on well beyond the end of the actual exposition. Organizers anticipate that more than 5000 people will attend the exposition itself, with many more being drawn to our community for the next several years based on the national exposure and attention being focused on the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial. DISCUSSION: County staff have been meeting among themselves and with representatives from Monticello to make sure that we are anticipating the needs of this very major, long term event, and that we are prepared to respond appropriately. The County will play a hosting role as the venue for much of this activity, with responsibilities for public safety, traffic management, signage, permitting, protection of private property, etc. We also are anxious to take advantage of the exposure that will be created by this event to highlight our community in the most positive light possible to visitors and residents alike. In addition, we are focusing on needs associated with the longer term impact of being a popular "Lewis and Clark destination" for the duration of the Bicentennial, which will conclude in 2006. RECOMMENDATION: No action is required by the Board. Return to Regular Agenda (SCHEDULE 2 - INTERNAL VERSION) JEFFERSON'S WEST: A LEWIS AND CLARK EXPOSITION CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA JANUARY 14-19, 2003 TUESDAY~ JANUARY 14, 2003 · 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Alderman Library (UVa): Special map exhibit "Exploring the West from Monticello" · 2 p.m.: Welcome and flag raising (States, Tribes, and American flags) · 2:30 p.m.: "Corps of Discovery II: 200 Hundred Years to the Future" opens at the Monticello Visitor Center · 6 p.m., Monticello: (By invitation only) VIP evening tour for National Council YVEDNESDAY~ JANUARY 15~ 2003 9 a.m. to 7 p.m., Newcomb Hall (UVa): Pre-registration 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Newcomb Hall Ballroom (UVa): "Base Camp for Discovery" vendor and display set-up (sponsored by Home Front Chapter and Charlottesville/Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau) 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., TBA: "Corps of Discovery II: 200 Hundred Years to the Future" 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Special Exhibit "Charlottesville at the Time of Lewis and Clark" 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Alderman Library (UVa): Special map exhibit "Exploring the West from Monticello: A Prospective in Maps from Columbus to Lewis and Clark" 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monticello: Open to public 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., area schools: Activities and programs 10 a.m. to Noon, location TBD: Sessions featuring professors and talks on Jefferson and Lewis & Clark (hosted by U-Va) -"Jefferson's Empire" opening lecture by Peter Onuf; "Indian Histories and Culture" lecture by Jeff Hantman 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., Newcomb Hall (UVa): Meetings of the National Council of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Board of Directors, Circle of State Advisers, Circle of Tribal Advisers 1 p.m. to 3 p.m., location TBD: Sessions featuring professors and talks on Sefferson and Lewis & Clark (hosted by UVa) · 1 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Historic walking tour of Charlottesville. at the time of Lewis and Clark · 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Old CabeH Hall (UVa): Practice for opera · 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., UVa Art Musetlm, Virginia Discovery Museum, Virginia Museum of Natural History - UVa, and other sites: Exhibitions open to public · 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monticello: Media preview of ekhibition "Framing the West at Monticello: Thomas Jefferson and the Lewis and Clark Expedition" · 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Omni Hotel: Cocktail party and mixer (sponsored by Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce) · 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monticello: (By invitation only) Preview of"Framing the West at Monticello: Thomas Jefferson and the Lewis and Clark Expedition" and reception 2/15/02 Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. 1 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., Monticello High School: Cultural Performance (sponsored by Lewis an~i Clark Trail Heritage Foundation, Home Front Chapter and Carolina Chapter) 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., Culbreth Theater (UVa): (By invitation only) PBS Mini Series film program (sPOnSOred by Virginia Film Festival) THURSDAY~ JANUARY 16, 2003 9 a.m., Monticello: "Framing the West at Monticello: Thomas Jefferson and the Lewis & Clark Expedition" exhibition opens 9 a.m. to 7 p.m., Newcomb Hall (UVa): Registration 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Newcomb Hall Ballroom (UVa): "Base Camp for Discovery" vendors and displays (sponsored by Home Front Chapter and Charlottesville/Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau) 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., TBA: "Corps of Discovery II: 200 Hundred Years to the Future" 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Special Exhibit "Charlottesville at the Time of Lewis and C lark" 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Alderman Library (UVa): Special map exhibit "Exploring the West from Monticello: A Prospective in Maps from Columbus to Lewis and Clark" 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monticello: Open to public 9 a.m. to 3 p,m., area schools: Activities and programs 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., Old Cabell Hall (UVa): Author panels (sponsored by National Council of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial & Lewis and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation) 1 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Historic walking tour of Charlottesville at the time of Lewis and Clark 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., various sites: Tours (Monticello, Universityx)f Virginia, Ash Lawn-Highland, Downto~vn Charlottesville). 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., TBA: Local tours of Lewis and Clark sites 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., UVa Art Museum, Virginia Discovery Museum, Virginia Museum of Natural History - UVa, and other sites: Exhibitions 3 p.m. to 5 p.m., UVa Bookstore, New Dominion Book Shop, other sites: Signings by Jefferson and Le~vis and Clark authors 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Virginia Discovery Museum: Reception (sponsored by Virginia Discovery Museum) 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monticello: (By invitation only) Lewis and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation VD reception 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. TBD: (By invitation only) "Jefferson Club," University of Missouri-Columbia Recepuon 8 p.m. to 9:30 p.m., Old Cabell Hall (UVa): Corps of Discovery, A Musical Journey by the Show-Me Opera, University of Missouri- Columbia 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., Piedmont Virginia Community College Theatre: Clay Jenkinson lecture (sponsored by Monticello) 2 2/15/02 Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. FRIDAY, JANUARY 17. 2003 9. a.m. to 7 p.m., Nesvcomb Hall (UVa):~.; Registration · 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Newcomb Hall Ballroom (UVa): "Base Camp for Discovery" vendors and displays (sponsored by Home Front Chapter and Charlottesville/Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau) · 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., TBA: "Corps of Discovery II: 200 H .Undred Years to the Future" · 9 a.m. to 5 P.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Special Exhibit "Charlottesville at the Time of Lewis and Clark" · 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Alderman Library (UVa): Special map exhibit "Exploring the West from Monticello: A Prospective in Maps from Columbus to Lewis and Clark" · 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monticello: Open to public · 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., area schools: Activities and programs · 9 a.m. to noon, Old Cabell Hall (UVa): "Telling the Story" lectures and panel discussions (sponsored by National Council of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial) · 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Old Cabell Hall (UVa): "Telling the Story" lectures and panel discussions (sponsored by National Council of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial) · 1 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Historic walking tour of Charlottesville at the time of Lewis and Clark · 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., UVa Art Museum, Virginia Discovery Museum, Virginia Natural ltistory Museum - UVa, and other sites: Exhibitions · 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., various sites: Tours (Monticello, University of Virginia, Ash Lawn-Highland, Downto~vn Charlottesville) · 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., TBA: Local tours if Lewis and Clark sites · 3 p.m. to 5 p.m., UVa Bookstore, New Dominion Book Shop, other sites: Sighings by Jefferson and Lewis and Clark authors · 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., Rotunda (LrVa): (By invitation only) Reception (sponsored by West Virginia) · 8 p.m. to 10 p.m., Old Cabell Hall (UVa): Evening event with dancing, singing, and story teliing (sponsored by National Council of the Lc;vis and Clark Bicentennial) 2/15/02 Thomas Jefferson Foundation. Inc. 3 SATURDAY, JANUARY 18~ 2003 7 a.m. t~ 8:30 a.m., location TBA: Buffet breakfast 8:30 a.m. to 10 a.m., location TBA: Welcome session with keynote speakers 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monticello: Open to the public 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., TBA: "Corps of Discovery II: 200 Hundred Years to the Future" 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Alderman Library (UVa): Special map exhibit "Exploring the West from Monticello: A Prospective in Maps from Columbus to Lewis and Clark" 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Specia~l Exhibit ,Charlottesville at the Time of Lewis and Clark" 10:15 a.m., TBA: Buses begin departing for Monticello 11:30 a.m. to noon, Monticello West Lawn: Parade, music Noon, Monticello West Lmvn: Commencement of National Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Commemoration 1:30 p.m., Monticello: Buses begin departing from Monticello 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m., Monticello President's House Lawn: (By invitation only) Luncheon · 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., Old Cabell Hall (UVa): Music panel with Joe Musselman, Daniel Slosberg, and Nancy Cooper (sponsored by Lewis . and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation) · 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., various sites: Tours (Monticello, University of Virginia, Ash Lawn-Highland, Downtown Charlottesville) · 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., TBA: Local tours of Lewis and Clark sites · 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., Albemarle County Historical Society: Special Exhibit "Charlottesville at the Time of Lewis and Clark." · 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., Newcomb Hall Ballroom O3Va): "Base Camp for Discovery" vendors and displays (sponsored by Home Front Chapter and Charlottesville/Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau) · 3 p.m. to 5 p.m., UVa Bookstore, New Dominion Book Shop, other sites: Signings by JefferSon and Lewis and Clark authors · 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., Rotunda (UVa): (By invitation only) Reception (hold for Monticello) · 8 p m. to 10 p.m., Old Cabell Hall (UVa): Music performances (sponsored by the Lewis and Clark Trail Heritage Foundation) SUNDAY, JANUARY 19, 2003 · 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monticello: Open to public · 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., TBA: "Corps of Discovery II: 200 Hundred Years to the Future" · 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,Montpelier: "James Madison: Secretary of State in the Age of Expansion and Exploration" exhibition opens 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., various sites: Tour I (Monticello, Michie Tavern with lunch, Ash La~vn-Highland) 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., various sites: Tour II (Montpelier, Barboursville with lunch, Lewis and Clark sites) 2/15/02 Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc. 4 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Discussion: Windham Agreement SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Agreement with JABA, Inc. for operation of Windham Assisted Living Facility and appropriation of funds as subsidy to support County auxiliary grant clients. STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Davis, White AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Windham Agreement; January 9, 2002 staff report as background. Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: On January 9, 2002, staff presented a plan in which Jefferson Board on Aging (JABA) and Stonehaus Development Corporation would purchase Windham, in Crozet, Virginia, in order to continue its operation as an assisted living facility serving 30 County and 25 City auxiliary grant recipients out of approximately 150 licensed beds. Stonehaus Development Corporation and JABA, Inc. proposed formation of a limited liability corporation, Crozet Partners LLC, and sought assistance from the City and County in the form of grants to subsidize the costs of supporting current and future auxiliary grant clients residing at Windham. At the same meeting, the Board authorized staff to develop an agreement among the parties that would provide the requested support and would also provide a mechanism for sharing in any gains that might accrue if a surplus is generated. DISCUSSION: The attached agreement contains the following stipulations and authorizes a City grant of $148,014 and a County grant of $177,617 to JABA, Inc.: · At least 25 auxiliary grant beds will be guaranteed for use by City residents and at least 30 auxiliary grant beds will be guaranteed for use by County residents. · The funds will be used solely for the maintenance and/or operation of Windham as an assisted living facility. Windham shall remain an assisted living facility for a period of at least ten years. If Crozet Partners LLC determines during this period that Windham is no longer economically viable as an assisted living facility, then it will be converted to affordable housing for a period of 15 years following purchase of the facility. If, during this 15 year period, Windham ceases to operate as either an assisted living facility or as affordable housing, then JABA, Inc. will refund to the City and County all funds remaining from the original grants that were not used to subsidize the respective auxiliary grant residents. After accumulation of a reserve equal to one-month's operating expenses, and if there are operating profits, the City and County will begin to share in the operating profits of Windham. Two-thirds of the profits above the required reserve will be returned to the City and the County, in amounts proportionate to the respective grants, until the grants have been repaid in full. After the original grants are repaid, Crozet Partners LLC will retain any profits. JABA, Inc. will provide quarterly reports to the City and County detailing the financial operations of Windham. The reports will include an assessment of the continuing economic viability of Windham as an assisted living facility. Once the original grants have been repaid, the quarterly reporting obligation will cease. AGENDA TITLE: Discussion: Windham Agreement March 6, 2002 Page 2 · The City and County grants will be funded on or before March 25, 2002. Budgetary Impact: In its proposal, JABA estimated that it would take ~39 months to transition to more private pay patients and to begin realizing an operating profit. In more recent information, JABA estimated the actual monthly cost at Windham to be $1,196 per resident during the first 12 months, increasing to $1,312 by the 39th month. If the auxiliary grant reimbursement remained at $833/month through the first 39 months, and if the City and County chose to subsidize the difference between the actual cost of care and the auxiliary grant rate ($363 in the first 12 months, increasing to $479 by month 39), then actual costs to the City and County, if they chose to provide these services, would be $393,496 and $472,196 respectively. By providing the subsidies to JABA, the City and County realize savings of $245,482 and $294,579 over the first 39 months. Thereafter, the City and County retain the use of the 55 auxiliary grant beds at no additional cost indefinitely (see attached excerpt from JABA business plan). Staff proposes that the $177,617 County subsidy will ultimately be funded with one-time revenues derived from the closure and sale of the former District Home in Waynesboro, Virginia. $66,400 will be available from the sale of the County's share of assets in the former District Home and $111,217 is anticipated to be reimbursed late this spring from unexpended contributions made to the Virginia Retirement System. The amount of the VRS refund and payment date are still being negotiated. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize County Executive to sign the Windham agreement. An appropriation of $177,617 to JABA, Inc. will be forwarded to you for approval within the next two weeks. View Windham Agreement View January 9, 2002 staff report as background Return to Regular Agenda THE WINDHAM AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made this __ day of ,2002 by and between the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "County"); the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, a municipal corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the "City"); and the JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING, INC. ("JABA"), and CROZET PARTNERS LLC, a limited liability corporation of the Commonwealth of Virginia. WHEREAS, The Windham is an assisted-living facility in Crozet, located at 1220 Crozet Avenue, Crozet, Virginia, currently serving 30 auxiliary grant County residents and 25 auxiliary grant City residents; WHEREAS, The Windham's current owner, Genesis ElderCare National Centers, Inc., intends to close this facility and has offered the facility for sale; WHEREAS, Crozet Partners LLC currently has a contract to purchase the property; WHEREAS, Crozet Partners LLC wishes to maintain the property as an assisted living facility, if local assistance can be provided to meet the cash flow necessary to cover certain initial expenses; WHEREAS, the City and County wish to provide certain financial assistance to ensure the long-term viability of The Windham as an assisted-living facility; THEREFORE, the County does hereby grant $177,617 and the City does hereby grant $148,014 to JABA, both grants being subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. Disbursement of Funds. Disbursement of the grants hereunder shall be subject to appropriation by the County Board of Supervisors and the City Council, respectively. Upon final appropriation of the grant(s) by the governing bodies of the City and County, respectively, said grant(s) shall be deposited into a separate designated JABA account on or before March 25, 2002. 2. Use of Funds. All funds granted hereunder shall be used solely for the maintenance and/or operation of The Windham as an assisted-living facility for the elderly. 3. Use Requirement. The Windham facility shall remain an assisted-living facility for the elderly for a period of at least ten years. However, if Crozet Partners LLC determines during this initial ten-year period that the facility is no longer economically viable as an assisted-living facility, the Windham facility shall be converted to affordable housing for a period of at least 15 years following the purchase of the facility by Crozet Partners LLC, unless after using due diligence to obtain all necessary approvals such use is not approved by Albemarle County. In the event of such a conversion, Crozet Partners LLC shall take all reasonable efforts to establish and maintain eligibility for federal tax credits for affordable housing under Internal Revenue Code § 42. If, during the first 15 years of this agreement, the facility ceases to be operated either as an assisted living facility for the elderly or as affordable housing, JABA will refund to the City and the County all remaining funds that originated from the City's and County's grants and that have not been used to subsidize either City or County auxiliary grant residents. 4. Residency Requirement. At least 30 auxiliary grant spaces shall be guaranteed for use by assisted County residents, unless the County consents otherwise. At least 25 auxiliary grant spaces shall be guaranteed for use by assisted City residents, unless the City consents otherwise. Any consent must be executed in writing. Before being considered a County resident or a City resident for purposes of this requirement, a resident shall have established residency in the County or City, respectively, prior to requesting an auxiliary grant subsidy. 5. Lease Approval. In the event that Crozet Partners LLC wishes to lease the property for management by a third-party, any proposed lease or managing tenant for the facility shall be subject to approval by the County and the City. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 6. Gain-Sharing. After an initial reserve equal to one month's operating expenses is accumulated, Operating Profits (defined as revenue in excess of operating expenses) shall be returned to the County and the City. Specifically, any Operating Profits realized from this facility shall be distributed in the following priority order: (a) Crozet Partners LLC shall be required to keep a reserve equal to one month's expenses. (b) Once said reserve is achieved or exceeded, two-thirds (2/3) of subsequent Operating Profits shall be returned to the County and the City, in amounts proportionate to their respective grants herein. Said repayment of Operating Profits shall continue without interest until the respective grants of the City and County herein are repaid in full. (c) Crozet Partners LLC may retain any Operating Profits remaining after the above obligations are met. 7. Quarterly Reporting. At least once every three months until the grants of the County and City have been repaid in full pursuant to the above gain-sharing provisions, JABA shall provide a report to the County and the City detailing the financial operations of the Windham facility during the preceding quarter. Such report shall include JABA' s assessment regarding the continuing economic viability of The Windham as an assisted-living facility. If JABA believes that The Windham is no longer economically viable as an assisted-living facility, the quarterly report shall so state. Once the grants of the County and City have been repaid in full pursuant to the above gain-sharing provisions, these quarterly reporting obligations may cease. If the facility is being operated as affordable housing, JABA shall provide to the County or the City, upon demand, documentation that the facility is in compliance with this Agreement. The County and/or the City shall be allowed to inspect all relevant records upon request. 2 8. Default. A violation of any of the terms contained herein shall be considered a default. In the event of default not cured within forty-five (45) days, the County and the City reserve the right to recall their respective grant(s) in part or in full. Return to Executive Summary Recommendation Return to Agenda Return to Top of Agreement COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Approved as to Form: By County Executive Albemarle County Attorney CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE By City Manager Approved as to Form: Funds are available: Charlottesville City Attorney City Director of Finance JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING, INC. By_ Gordon Walker, Chief Executive Officer CROZET PARTNERS LLC By 3 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Windham Assisted Living Facility Proposal SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Proposal to invest County funds in maintaining auxiliary grant assisted living beds at Windham and to move forward in developing an agreement with JABA (Jefferson ElderCare). STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White AGENDA DATE: January 9, 2002 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: Windham is an assisted living facility in Crozet, which was initially renovated by Jordan Development Company. The facility is currently owned by Genesis ElderCare National Centers, Inc., which is going out of business and has offered the facility for sale. The assessed value of the building and the land is $3.9 million. Stonehaus, Inc. currently has an option to purchase the building for $850,000. DISCUSSION: Stonehaus Development Corporation can either purchase the building with or without residents. They have approached the County and the City and the Jefferson Area Board on Aging (JABA) in an attempt to develop a viable solution to maintain the facility for assisted living residents. The option closes the second week of January with an anticipated closing in March. After several lengthy meetings and discussions, County and City staff, JABA and Stonehaus have agreed to bring the following plan forward to the Board of Supervisors and City Council. Stonehaus would buy the property and commit to retaining the building as an assisted living facility for a period often years or at least as long as we would want it to continue. If the assisted living facility was not successful, Stonehaus would convert the property to rental housing for Iow/moderate income elderly; JABA, our community agency responsible for care and services for the elderly, has agreed to manage the facility. To make the project financially feasible, JABA will need to change the mix of residents from a majority of auxiliary bed residents to more private pay residents, as well as reduce the number of mentally ill residents current residing at Windham. The primary reason for Genesis' closing was allowing the number of auxiliary grant residents, including a large number of mentally ill residents from outside the area, to far outweigh the private pay residents, thereby reducing their net profit. State funding for the auxiliary beds does not fully offset the cost of care. Over the first 60 - 90 days, JABA recommends reducing the maximum capacity to 115 instead of 142 to eliminate the triple rooms, which would mean relocating 27 individuals to other facilities around the state. Albemarle and Charlottesville residents would not be affected by the capacity reduction. The facility would offer a total of 33 private rooms and 44 double rooms. The County and City would continue to have 55 auxiliary beds (currently 25 city and 30 county), which would require a subsidy until the private pay residents began to offset the costs. JABA estimates the monthly cost per person is $1200; the state reimbursement rate for the auxiliary beds is $815. JABA believes there is a market for assisted living services at $1600 - $1700 per month and that Windham could attract private pay citizens if the mix is changed. (See attached sheet for statistical information and pros and cons associated with this plan). Budgetary Impact During a 39-month transition phase to more private pay residents, JABA would require the following subsidies from the County and the City: AGENDA TITLE: Windham Assisted Living Facility Proposal January 9, 2002 Page 2 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total Albemarle 80,885 63,224 33,508 177,617 Charlottesville 67,404 52,686 27,924 148,014 An anticipated VRS refund from the closed District Home could serve as a source of one-time revenues for Windham. It is anticipated that the City will receive $256,500 and the County will receive $238,000 in VRS reimbursement funds, which are due back to the localities with no restrictions, i.e. these funds could also be used for other general government needs. A January 10th District Home meeting has been called to discuss the final disbursement of any revenues realized from the sale of the District Home property, although it is anticipated that the localities who bore most of the management burden will recoup any net profits. The VRS reimbursement amounts have already been determined by locality and are not linked to the sale profits. Prior to its closing, the County funded the District Home operations at an annual subsidy of $30,000 - $40,000, which made up the difference between the actual operating costs and the state auxiliary grant. A one-time County investment of $177,617 to Windham nets out to a $17,600 annual subsidy over the 10-year period. If the County and the City decided they needed to recoup the initial cash investment at some point during the ten-year period, they could by mutual agreement with JABA, further reduce the number of auxiliary beds and/or raise the private pay rate to increase the project's net cash flow. To return any excess cash flow to the localities would require reducing the auxiliary beds to 50 instead of 55 and raising the private pay by 7% a year. However, these numbers are highly speculative at this point without knowing the final interest rate, operating cost experience, state auxiliary grant increases, the market demand for affordable assisted living, etc. If the facility does not break even after the first three years and is forced to close, Stonehaus has stated that they would commit to maintaining the facility as rental housing for Iow to moderate income elderly. A second alternative proposed by Stonehaus would be to convert it to condominiums or some other private venture. In that scenario, Stonehaus has stated they would return the County and City's initial investment without interest. Although auxiliary beds were previously subsidized at the District Home up until 1998, entering into a public/private partnership with JABA to assure assisted living beds for indigent County residents would be a new direction for the County. If this project succeeds, a $17,000 annual subsidy for 30 residents ($566/year) should be considered well spent and a successful investment in keeping Albemarle senior citizens in their community and out of nursing homes. However, with the possibility that this project might not succeed, there are a number of details that must be worked out in the initial agreement to assure that the County's investment will be returned. A detailed agreement will be developed by County, City and JABA staff and legal counsel in the next several weeks and brought back to the Board for final approval. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends support for the proposal to invest one-time County resources into maintaining Windham as an assisted living facility in Crozet and requests approval to proceed with developing a formal agreement with Jefferson ElderCare and/or Stonehaus Development. This agreement would be subject to the satisfactory resolution of all conditions imposed bythe Board of Supervisors and would be brought back to the Board for final approval in February. Go to Attachment Return to Agenda 2 Wk~d~am A~is~ed Uvin9 Faci[ll~ outside ~he C~¢niy Return to Agenda Return to Recommendation The Ethics Committee Jefferson Area Board for Aging 674 Hillsdale Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 (434) 817-5222 February 27, 2002 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Attention: Sally Thomas, Chair 402 Mc'Intire Road 22902 889 Leigh Way Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Ms. Thomas and Members of the Board of Supervisors: The Ethics Committee of the Jefferson Area Board for Aging exists and functions independently with the approval of the JABA Board. The Committee's three-fold purpose is to: provide education for staff andthe community, on .ethical issues; to act as ethics consultants for staff; and to review JABA policies to insure equity for, and the preservation of the autonomy and dignity of, the elderly in our area. In short, we are encouraged to comment on issues of ethical importance without direction or control from the JABA Board. Faithful to our mission, we, the members of the Committee presem at our regular monthly meeting on Tuesday, 26 February 2002, voted unanimously to voice our concern regarding the importance of protecting the elderly citizens residing at Windham in Crozet with Auxiliary Grants, without which they could not afford to live secure and dignified lives. The care and protection of these residents, including many from our area--Charlottesville and Albemarle County--must be the primary concern and focus of any negotiations regarding the future of Windham. Thus, to our minds, it is imperative 'to keep this facility functioning to assure living space for those elderly who lack financial means to provide for themselves. We are well aware that within a few years our area will contain an unprecedented number of older persons and that this' willlikely place demands on our ability to keep pace with anticipated housing needs. Surely Windhamrepresents an excellent opportunity to show that we are already anticipating this need, and by doing so, are helping to insure a brighter future for our growing, elderly population. Thank you for doing what is necessary to assure the success of this wonderful cooperative effort. (The Rev. Canon) Henry N. F. Minich Chair, JABA Ethics Committee Faye W. Arnold, PhD Elizabeth S. Carpenter, PhD Reverend Michael K. Cheuk, MDiv Anne Evick ,.' ~ '~ Enid Krieger Richard Lindsay,~ ~IVi~. -. George T.-Rod~ti~a{;er, phD Dell'Smith' z-~ :2~;~_::_' CC: Gordon Walker and Peg Franklin 0~'-05-02f~I'~:00 RC~'D The Ethics Committee Jefferson Area Board for Aging 674 Hillsdale Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 (434) 817-5222 February 27, 2002 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Attention: Sally Thomas, Chair 402 Mdlntire Road 22902' 889 Leigh Way Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Ms. Thomas and Members of the Board of Supervisors: The Ethics Committee of the Jefferson Area Board for Aging exists and functions independently with the approval of the JABA Board. The Committee's three-fold purpose is to: provide education for staff and the community on ethical issues; to act as ethics consultants for. staff; and to review JABA policies to insure equity for, and the preservation of the autonomy and dignity of, the elderly in our area. In short, we are encouraged to comment on issues of ethical importance without direction or control from the JABA Board. Faithful to our mission, we, the members of the Committee present at our regular monthly meeting on Tuesday, 26 February 2002, voted unanimously to voice our concern regarding the importance of protecting the elderly citizens residing at Windham in Crozet with Auxiliary Grants, without which they could not afford to live secure and dignified lives. The care and protection of these residents, including many from our area--Charlottesville and Albemarle County-must be the primary concern and focus of any negotiations regarding the future of Windham. Thus, to our minds, it is imperative to keep this facility functioning to assure living space for those elderly who lack financial means to provide for themselves. We are well aware that within a few years our area will contain an unprecedented number of older persons and that this will likely place.demands on our ability to keep pace with anticipated housing needs. Surely Windham represents an excellent opportunity to show that we are already anticipating this need, and by doing so, are helping to insure a brighter future for our growing, elderly population. Thank you for doing what is necessary to assure the success of this wonderful cooperative effort. (The Rev. Canon) Henry N. F. Minich Chair, JABA Ethics Committee Faye W. Arnold, PhD Elizabeth S. Carpenter, PhD Reverend Michael K. Cheuk, MDiv Anne Evick Enid Krieger Richard Lindsay, MD George T. Rodehcaver, PhD Dell Smith CC: Gordon Walker and Peg Franklin c'vi].te cit M§rs Dfc Fax:80~-970-$890 Mar 1 '02 19:I~ P. O1 Significant Benefit~ and ~aving~ to Albemarle County and City of Charlottesville Based on recent residentia! paffems, it is assumed there exists a true ~ for 30 Auxiliary Grant Beds for County residenls and 25 for City residents. JABA estimates the actual cost per month for a resident to reside at Windham is $1,196 during first 12 months and increases to $1,312 by the 39th month. JABA also assumes that the AG rate will remain at ~ through the first 39 months. If it is assumed that the County and City would subsidize the difference between the actual cost of a rasident'8 cere and the AUXiliary Grant rate, then the County and City respectively would expend $472,196 and $3t]3,4116 during the first 39 months. If the County aM City provided JABA with the subsidy of $177,617 and $148,014 respectively, the savings to the County and City over the first 39 months is $294,579 and $248,483 respectively. Beginning in the 40th month, the County and City would retain use of the AG beds at no cost indefinitely for savings that would he in the millions. ~upport Needed for Auxiliary Grant Re~iderds at Wlndham With Primary Rea~is AJbemarle County or City M Charlottesville ,NbMnm~'Ceun~ Nu~l;xl' cf /iT] Tobl Auxira~/ SlmdaOe (~ Funds Cummuiadve AGEhK~, _~"~.Po~ GlsmtPmt AGRMeto Needed NTKx.'flt Needed Rasidm~ Rate Actual ~ OVer AG ~ 30 $1,t98 30 $t 196 30 $t,198 30 $1,196 30 $1,196 30 $1,t96 3O $1,1~ S1.1~ ~1,1~ S1,1~ ~ $1,2~ ~ ~1,232 ~ $1~32 ~ S1,233 30 $1 ~ $t ,232 3O Sl,2~ $1,2~ $t,232 $1,232 $t.273 $1,273 $t.273 $1~73 $1,273 $t,213 $1,312 $833 $363 $10,875 St0,878 $833 $363 $10,87§ $21,752 ~ $363 810,876 $.I,2,628 $833 S363 $10,876 $43,505 $833 $363 $10,876 $84,3~1 $633 $363 $10,876 $833 $363 $t0,e76 $76,133 8;833 $363 $10,876 . $87,080 $833 $...'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'~3 St0.876 $87.685 $~-..'~3 $.163 $10.876 $108,762 $633 ~ $t0,876 $1t9.638 f~ $.',',',',',',',','~ $t0,876 $t30,B14 $833 $_'~_ ~ $10.876 $141,398 ~ $398 $11,976 $153,366 $8.'33 $399 $1t,976 $165,342 $8,33 S309 $11,078 $1Tf.318 ~633 $,399 $11,976 ..$t69,295 $833 ~ $11,976 $20t,271 ~ $399 $11,970 $213,247 $833 $399 $11,976 $225,223 ~ $399 $11,976 $,933 ~ 3111,079 S349,17§ $833 $.399 $11,076 $261,151 $833 $399 $!1,g"[6 $273, t26 $833 $440 $13,198 S298,302 ~33 $440 $13,198 $311,500 9833 S440. $13,198 S324~$97 ~ .10440 $13,198 S3.T/,866 $833 $440 $13.198 $351,093 $833 $440 $13,19~ $364,291 ~ ~ $13,198 $390,687 $833 $440 $13,198 $403,B85 $833 $440 $t3,198 $417,083 ~133 $440 $13,198 $430.280 $833 $440 $t3.t98 1443.475 ~833 ~479 $14.359 $467.837 ~833 $479 $14,359. Total 8uppert .ne~,~d from bocal ~ w~t ~ TMM ~upport .__r~e~___ from Gev'IS thru JABA*s I)uMta~ ptart ~m:~c~ To&gl ~avings to Gov~ ~ JABA's buainess piam approach $472 ,t 96 $177.617 (:my M Chark~kwvll Fundt, Rafluired te Ma~Cu~ AG Beda Re~aimme~ Nl, lmberof AvgTohal Amo~ia~ ,~ttmla0e~ AGleam, ComPar C~antPmt AGRatoto NMded Resident RMe ACtual C~ O~er AG 25 $1,198 $833 $3~3 ~,0~ 25 $1.166 ~ $363 $9,063 25 $1,198 $833 _e~-. 3 S9,083 25 $1,1~ ~ ~ ~,~ 26 $t,1~ ~ $~ ~,~ 25 $1,1~ ~ ~ ~,~ 26 51,1~ ~3 ~ ~,~3 ~ ~1,1~ ~ ~ ~,~3 ~5 $1,1~ ~ ~ ~,~3 ~ $1,1~ ~ f~ ~,~3 25 6~,2~ ~ ~ ~.~ 25 ~1,2~ 25 Sl,2~ ~ ~ ~,~ 25 ~,2~ ~ ~ ~,~ 25 $1,232 25 $1,262 ~ ~ ~,~ 25 $I,273 $t.273 ~1,273 ~ ~ ttO,~ $1,273 $1,273 ~ ~ $10,~ 25 $1 ,~73 25 $1~73 ~3 ~ $10,~ 26 $t.312 ~3 ~ 511,~ 25 ~t.3t2 $18.127 ~1127.190 $45,317 $81.5?1 $t08,762 $117,8,?.5 $137,785 $147,765 $157,745 $187,988 $197,698 ~217,826 5270.561 $28t ,5/0 $292,61'8 ~314,574 $347.590 S356,567 ~ ,565 $393,498 $146.014 r~.45,463 Mountainside Senior Living Business Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary History of the Windham Building Statement of Purpose Management and Ownership Service Offerings Marketing Plan · Three year marketing goals · Situational review · Mountainside's strengths and weaknesses · Marketing opportunities: strategies and tactics · Marketing budget · Activities time frame ~ Cash Flow Analysis Appendix: Cash Plan Statement Page 2 2 6 6 11 16 32 35 38 EXecutive Summary Windham was a 153 bed licensed assisted living facility. The building is a highly visible landmark in Crozet, Virginia. Previous owners have a checkered history of providing residential care, as well as health and social services, to a broad spectrum of both the elderly and to younger persons requiring supervised care. Initially, Windham was intended to provide housing for between 112 and 115 persons. Subsequent owners, both national corporations, expanded the capacity to 153 by converting two person rooms to "accommodate" three persons. This practice, which affected the quality of care, coupled with the admission of persons incompatible with existing residents, significantly compromised the facility's attractiveness and ability to compete in the private market. Windham became overcrowded and imprudently dependent on auxiliary grants. These payments meet only approximately sixty-six percent of the actual costs per resident. The resulting financial imbalance has caused Genesis Elder Care to sell Windham. Stonehaus Development and JABA, Inc. have agreed to form a limited liability company to purchase Windham. This entity will have the responsibility of preserving the facility as a home for low to moderate-income persons. If Windham were to close, it would cause the traumatic relocation of current residents. It would also reduce by almost one-half the number of auxiliary grant beds available in the region. The new owners fully recognize the risk and complexity of putting the facility back on sound footing. Our success depends upon a variety of intertwined factors: marketing, admission limitations, renovations, staffing, service enhancement and public opinion. We are optimistic that we can mm the tide and reinvigorate the facility's image and create the wherewithal to succeed financially. A primary goal is to provide quality and affordable care for 113 to 119 persons. Another goal is to reach, at a minimum, a breakeven point within the first 39 months of operation. This will be accomplished by increasing the private pay population to at least parity level with the number of auxiliary grant residents. Even so, subsidies from the City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County and private sources are necessary to carry operations during this transition period While we cannot underestimate the degree of difficulty, JABA and Stonehaus are optimistic that proper attention, resource allocation and community support will revive the facility and keep it afloat as a credible residential opportunity. A new name has been chosen: Mountainside Senior Living (hereafter "Mountainside"), in keeping with the mountain views from the facility and the recommendations of JABA's marketing department. With the inevitable growth and aging of our older population and their need for housing with services, enabling Mountainside to continue would preserve a most imPortant a community asset. The History of the Building The Mountainside building was constructed at the height of the growth of Crozet to provide cold storage for the booming apple and peach orchards nearby until the fresh fruit could be shipped. A fruit growers association was formed to construct a cement block cold storage plant. Construction began in 1912. Later, William Fitzhugh Carter took over the project. The six-story building was finished in 1919 with the capability to store 40,000 barrels of fruit. Ice was also manufactured there and electricity and water were supplied through the building to the residents of Crozet. The plant was a major employer for residents of Western Albemarle County. In 1936, a hardware store was added that was later converted to a movie house that operated until 1961. The space was converted back to a hardware store that specialized in boat sales in 1968. The final renovation of the warehouse took place in 1979 when Stanley Wilcox conve.rted the building into an assisted living facility. Renovation was completed and Windham, as it was named, opened its doors in 1981 as a residence for adult care for 100 persons. The movie house/hardware store was tom down in the renovation process. National Healthcare Affiliates (NHCA) of Buffalo purchased Windham in 1985. In 1996, Genesis Health Ventures purchased the facility from NHCA. The facility housing Windham was a center of the Crozet community. Present plans for the future of Windham call for its restoration to the once prominent position it held. Under its new name and new management, it can and will be an asset to Crozet, to the to the City of Charlottesville, and to Albemarle County. Statement of Purpose According to the Assisted Living Facilities Association of America, the definition of assisted living is a special combination of housing and personalized health care designed to respond to the individual needs of those who need help with activities of daily living. Personal care is provided in a professionally managed group living environment, which is not licensed as a nursing home, in a way that promotes maximum independence and dignity. The owners and staff of Mountainside are committed to ensuring that its services fulfill this purpose while also providing adequate consumer satisfaction and protection. The plan for Mountainside is to create a form of residential living that provides a significant and appealing alternative to a nursing home at a lower cost. There would be offered a secure environment for persons who can no longer live safely at home. Our goal is.to deliver reliable, timely, and affordable amenities to persons of low and moderate income receiving auxiliary grants as well as to those able to pay. Virginia's Department of Social Services ("DSS") licenses assisted living facilities, also referred to as adult care homes. DSS assumes responsibility to ensure that licensed facilities such as Mountainside provide a quality level of care in accordance with State standards. The Department also has the responsibility to investigate allegations of improper behavior. The current and future employees of the facility will have the responsibility to cooperate and collaborate with the staff of the Department of Social Services to advance the best interests of the residents. Management and Ownership Mountainside's building, land and furnishings will be owned by a limited liability company ("LLC"). The members of LLC will be Stonehaus Development and JABA, Inc. The former will own seventy-five percent and the latter twenty-five percent of the LLC. Jefferson Elder Care, Inc. ("JEC"), a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization and an affiliate of JABA, will operate Mountainside. JEC will lease the Mountainside facility from LLC. JABA will receive a management fee to oversee JEC's administration of the assisted living services. There will be, on site, a full time administrator responsible for supervising day-to-day operations. The administrator will report to JABA's director of community development, who, in turn, will report to JABA's chief financial officer. JEC will have a board of directors that will include appointees from the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. JABA's board of directors will also make appointments to JEC's board of directors. JEC's board will assist management with advocacy, and in the development of policy. It will also establish short and long term goals, evaluate operations, approve budgets, review financial reports, and assure the compliance with all laws, regulations and requirements governing the operation of an assisted living facility. Mountainside's Service Offerings There are various and numerous services that are planned to be provided to and for the residents of Windham. The assisted living services will provide a supportive residential setting in which activities of daily living and other services are available to those who cannot or choose not to live alone but do not need the 24 hour medical care of a nursing home. Assistance will be provided in response to each resident's individual needs in order to maintain and improve his or her quality of life'. It is intended that the facility and its professional staff will provide all the amenities and services necessary to ensure a home-like setting in a clean and safe environment at an exceptional value. A list of these services and amenities is provided below. Standard Services: All rooms will come furnished with necessary furniture: including a bed, a nightstand, a chest of drawers, a comfortable chair, and shower and window curtains. All residents will be encouraged to bring anything they feel will make their room more homelike. Bedspreads, linens and towels will be furnished. The residents will be able to bring their own personal items (pictures, souvenirs, television, small refrigerator, etc). b) Each room has a private bath and a private balcony with a sliding glass door so the natural beauty of the Blue Ride Mountains may be observed as the season's change. There are individual heat and air conditioning controls for personal regulation of temperature comfort. c) There is a day room at the end of each hallway equipped with a sofa, comfortable chairs and a television set with cable network hookup. d) Full service housekeeping services will be administered daily. These will include room cleaning, making of beds and other housekeeping services which may be requested throughout the day. e) Transportation will be provided to medical appointments, social events, shopping and outings to the surrounding areas. There is also a coin operated washer and dryer for personal use available on the third floor if residents would prefer to do their own laundry. f) Trained staff will provide 24-hour personal service, supervision 'and medication administration assistance. g) Utilities will be included as well as grounds maintenance and the maintenance of all facility- provided amenities. All rooms are wired for telephone and cable television. Three restaurant-quality meals will be provided daily. There also will be also at least two special dietary events weekly, which may include a breakfast buffet, lunch buffet, and/or resident meal of the month. Snacks and special diets will be available upon request. i) There will be a full calendar of activities daily, including weekend and evening programs. The programs being offered at JABA's Day Care facilities will be a model. Volunteer groups will be recruited and encouraged to actively and regularly provide services, including all denomination religious services. j) There are plans for a resident exercise room that will be used in conjunction with physical therapy services. Additional Services: Additional services will also be available that will not included as part of the standard room rates. They will be additional charges to the regular rates paid for by the resident or responsible party or by other available resources. These services will include: TV/Cable: Each room is pre-wired for telephone and cable service and these services are available and billed monthly by Sprint and Ntelos respectively. Mountainside also has a house cable service that has access to local networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, etc.). b) Beauty/barber shop services. c) Room service (if not a medical necessity). d) Personal care supplies such as shampoo, toothpaste, etc. e) Medical services by resident's physician and therapies per physician's order (physical therapy, occupation therapy and speech therapy). f) Full service pharmacy services and medical supplies. g) Assistance with bathing, dressing and other major activities of daily living. Marketing Plan for Mountainside Introduction: At the request of the invested stakeholders, this marketing plan has been developed by JABA, with input and assistance from current Windham management. Its purpose is to delineate clearly marketing objectives and to present strategies that will help Mountainside's management achieve its objectives. This document includes both immediate and longer-term strategies to ensure a consistently high census at Mountainside. To gain the required target mix of private/self-pay and auxiliary grant residents will require: 1) determining the needs and wants of the target market; 2) convincing the target audience that Mountainside can meet these; and 3) the delivery of a high- quality product which will result in resident satisfaction. Mountainside is an assisted living thcility located in the heart of downtown Crozet. 'Assisted living' is a service that provides housing and three meals per day, along with assistance with activities of daily living, such as dressing, eating, and toileting. The question that has to be eventually answered is whether Mountainside can become a rare hybrid animal - essentially half public-supported indigent care, and half for-fee private pay. The central challenge is how to attract and hold private pay residents while staying within the revenue confines of a semi-public facility. Success hinges on the existence of an assisted living market that can pay private rates, but that cannot or will not pay the expensive luxury rates of most facilities. This needs to be coupled with effective marketing activities that inform and convince this audience of Mountainside's unique positive attributes. JABA believes that the market exists, that Mountainside can provide a high quality, desired service, and that the strategies contained in this plan will effectively bring the message to its target market. The marketing plan includes: 1) Three year marketing goals; 2) Situational review; 3) Mountainside's strengths and weaknesses; 4) Marketing opportunities - strategies and tactics; 5) Marketing budget; 6) Activities time frame. A marketing plan is always a work in progress. It should be reviewed frequently, with adjustments made as needed. This document is a starting point for the successful long-term marketing of a new facility like Mountainside. Three Year Marketing Goals The overall goal is to reduce the total number of clients and to increase the number of private paying clients. This requires reducing the number of Medicaid residents while at the same time making Mountainside more attractive to private pay prospects, most of whom tend to be older and without history of mental illness. Specific goals include: 1. Maintain a census of between 113 and 119 residents per month. 2. Increase the number of full private pay residents from 10 to 64 by January 1, 2005. 3. Maintain occupancy of 55 auxiliary grant beds. Situational Review Summary Finances: Windham is under a contract of sale from Genesis Eldercare, Inc., a for-profit national health care company, to a limited liability corporation (LLC) owned by Stonehaus Development Corporation and JABA Inc. At the time of contract, Windham was operating at a loss due to its large percentage of auxiliary grant clients. About 84% of residents relied on auxiliary grants to pay for their housing. In Virginia, the maximum grant payment is $833 per month, while direct Costs per resident at Windham amount to about $1,200 per month. The City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County have agreed to contribute $148,000 and $177,000, respectively, to subsidize auxiliary grant residents from each locality over the next three years. Census: Though licensed for 153 beds, the facility's size and staffing level are better suited for 119 beds. At 119 beds, all triple-occupancy rooms could be eliminated. When another local Genesis facility, Jefferson Park, closed, many of the residents were moved to Windham, contributing to overcrowding that needed correcting. As of February 14, 2002, Windham's census was 122. Windham also has a challenging client mix of older residents and mentally ill residents. Some of the latter are younger and sometimes exhibit behavioral and hygienic eccentricities that can be discomforting to some older residents. These negatively impact Windham's image. About one-half of current residents are from outside Planning District 10, largely a result of placement by social service agencies from Northern Virginia. Of the 55 beds targeted for auxiliary grant (AG) recipients at the new facility (Mountainside), 30 will be reserved for the County's use, and 25 for the City. It is anticipated that, given the low supply of AG beds relative to the demand, little if any marketing expense will need to be allocated to fill these beds. Facility: It is very apparently that, for at least the last ten years, there has been inadequate investment in facility upkeep: The furnishings in Windham are from the early 1980's and are worn. In many places the wallpaper and flooring require repair. In addition, there are several areas, including the dining room, entranceway, main floor, immediate grounds, and the balconies, that are in need of redecoration if they are to attract paying clientele who are comparison shopping. The physical plant is structurally sound, with roof replacement in 1997. The electrical and sprinkler systems are state of the art. The building is completely run on electricity and electrical rates have been very reasonable. Windham's maintenance crew consists of a director and assistant who are in charge of minor paint, minor electrical and plumbing, and the air conditioning. Windham also lacks sufficient common space for group activities. Designs are being done to remedy this situation. A full list of proposed renovations is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Current Marketing Activities: The marketing budget under Genesis' operation was less than $900 per year with minimal outreach activities being undertaken. Marketing essentially consisted of the admissions manager responding to calls from discharge planners looking for a facility to place their clients. The generic promotional materials used were from Genesis headquarters. There were no 7 proactive outreach activities. They were not needed at the time, since older AG residents and psychiatric patients kept the facility at full capacity. The new Mountainside management will be actively marketing to achieve the goals as articulated above, utilizing a variety of available resources as well as the $12,900 per year budgeted for marketing. Regional Situation: The primary target area will be Planning District Ten ("PD10"). According to American Demographics, this area ranks ninth in the country as a desirable place for retirees to live. Following the national trend, this region's senior population should double in the next 25 years. In addition, seniors will be living longer lives with relatively fewer disabilities than earlier generations. As a result of these trends, the local market for assisted living should grow significantly over the next several decades. According to JABA's database, there are 882 assisted living beds iff 24 adult care homes located in PD10. Several more assisted living facilities are located in the valley and surrounding areas, bringing the total number of beds in the region to over 1,000. Almost all of these beds are occupied, with waiting lists at most facilities. There are three facilities with private pay rates that are competitive with those proposed for Windham. These are Aloha and Comyn Hall in Charlottesville, and Countryside II, Inc. in Gordonsville. They have a total of 70 beds among them. Targeting the Market: The marketing plan targets three primary populations: 1) Marketing activities will be directed particularly toward persons requiring minimal to moderate assistance, who are over the age of 75, long term residents of Planning District 10 and surrounding vicinity, and with varied careers that have enabled them to have access to decent financial resources for retirement. A typical prospect will be: 75+; female; living alone; $25,000+ annual income; homeowner; needs assistance with at least two activities of assisted living but does not require skilled care; lives near the facilitv or has family who does; concerned with running out of funds; concerned with security and health care, and desires companionship. (Sharon Brooks and Associates). Population statistics for the primary target audience are included below. 2) Adults in the area who have parents that live here or elsewhere represent a strong secondary market. Research indicates that in almost nine out of 10 cases, the adult child is involved directly in the assisted living decision. 3) A typical secondary market adult child will be 45-64 years old; predominantly female; living in the area; married; $36,000+ household income; working; has children; and is sandwiched between demands of two generations. She is somewhat guilty-feeling about assisted living, placement, and concerned about preserving the estate and personal funds of her parent. (Sharon Brooks and Associates). A third target focus will be the key advisors to the elderly. These third party influencers are the people to whom the aged and their families look for help, support and decision- making. Indications are that referrals from these people will probably be the single largest source of prospects. Referral sources include: doctors, attorneys, clergy, discharge planners, support groups, home health agencies, trust officers, civic groups, families, friends and neighbors of residents and staff, and corporate employee assistance programs. Statistics for Target Audiences: Mountainside should attract people from PD10 and the surrounding vicinity, including Augusta, Orange, Madison, and Buckingham counties. The table below shows the overall size of the target populations under consideration. 2000 Census Men and Men and Men and * 1990 Census *Mobility Women Women Women *65 and older and/or self-care limitation Aged 45-64 65 or older 75 or older living alone 65 years or over Albemarle County 19,388 9,920 4,572 2,556 1,011 Fluvanna County 4,892 2,800 958 517 283 Greene County 3,509 1,485 658 298 299 Louisa County 6,710 3,315 1,383 896 687 Nelson County 4,280 2,420 1,010 605 460 Charlottesville City 6,853 4,548 2,241 1,386 846 :Sub Total 45,632 24,488 10,822 6,258 3,586 Augusta County 17,544 8,429 3,561 2,007 1,271 Buckingham County 3,848 2,118 959 605 948 Madison County 3,307 1,883 854 450 383 Orange County 6,620 4,444 1,880 1,028 545 TOTAL 76,951 41,362 18,076 10,348 6,?33 *2000 Census figures by county not yet available for "living alone" [nd "mobility or self-care limitation." Seniors: There.are almost 41,400 people of retirement age in the target area. The 17,081 people who reported a mobility or self-care limitation, or who lived alone in 1990, could find the support provided by assisted living especially beneficial as they age. About 25% of people over 65 live alone, and almost 40% of those between 75 and 84. Older, frailer seniors are also more likely to be interested in the advantages of assisted living. Nationally, 58% of people over 65 are women, and about 70% of people over 85 are women. Percent of elderly requiring assistance with 2+ activities of daily living: 60-69 7.9% 70-74 11.0% 75-79 13.3% 80-84 22.4% 85+ 36.1% Baby Boomers: The secondary target is the baby boomer population, especially those in the 45 to 64 year old age groups who have older living parents. Their numbers are about equal to the over-65 target market in the region. It is important to note that PD10 has over double the number of people 65 or older compared to the surrounding counties, while the surrounding counties have about double the number of people in the 45 to 64 age range. This could have implications for the marketing approach for these areas. Income: The primary target population of most importance for marketing is actually a subset of the retirement community - those with the income to be able to afford private pay assisted living. At about $1,700 per month, Mountainside will cost private pay residents about $20,400 per year. The generally accepted definition of affordable housing is housing that costs up to 30% of household income. Assisted living developers posit that seniors can afford to pay more of their income for assisted living, since they will not have a lot of other expenses, including food and transportation costs. They believe the affordability limit could be as high as 75-85% of adjusted gross income plus a percentage of their equity, based on life expectancy. Using this calculation and national income figures, about 44% of people over 65, and about 35% of people over 75 eam $25,000 or more per year and therefore can afford Windham (Brecht Associates Inc., and Sunrise Assisted Living Foundation). Income varies markedly between the sexes and among different ethnic groups. Local income data for people over 65 is not available. Nationally, the median income for households headed by someone 65 or older was $33,148 in 1999. The median income for people over 65 in 1999 was $19,079 for men, and $10,943 for women. (DHHS web site, 2000). Net worth (the value of real estate, stocks, bonds and other assets minus outstanding debts) is an important indicator of economic securiw and well being. Some seniors with low annual incomes actually have significant wealth that can be liquidated if needed. Between 1984 and 1999, the median net worth among households headed by persons age 65 or older increased by 69 percent, while the median net worth for households headed by persons ages 45 to 54 10 declined by 23 percent over the same period. Most striking is the disparity in net worth between black and white households headed by older Americans. In 1999, median net worth among older black households was estimated to be about $13,000, compared with $181,000 among older white households (Administration on Aging, web site, 2000). The size of the target populations and their income and asset levels will play key roles in both shaping the marketing campaign, and influencing the response to it. Clearly, Mountainside, even with its lower rate, will have to target the above-average income senior population to fill its private pay beds. Considerations of diversity and equal access should therefore come into play in allocating the 55 AG beds. Medicaid Auxiliary Grant (AG) Beds: There are 240 AG beds in PD10. Windham has been the single largest provider of AG beds in the district with 102 AG residents as of January 7, 2002. Without Windham, only 138 AG beds would exist locally to serve all Medicaid eligible people in need of assisted living. JABA and the two local governments have intervened to try to keep Windham open in order to maintain a decent supply of beds. The goal is to maintain a census of 55 Medicaid beds at Mountainside, which is less than its historic number but still about 30% of this region's total. The turnover rate at Windham has been about 6 clients per month, or 5%, of the 119-bed goal. This translates to 72 clients, or 60% per year. Though this rate should decrease somewhat in the future, it could still average between 25-50% per year. This factor underscores the importance of maintaining marketing efforts over the long term. Mountainside's Strengths and Weaknesses Primary Strengths of Mountainside: The strengths and weaknesses set forth below were identified through several meetings with facility management, and through a focus group consisting of ten private-pay residents, conducted on January 17, 2002. Excellent staffi One of the facility's greatest assets is its staff. In the words of a resident, "I think the staff are excellent. I get individual attention." Residents also reported that the facility has an excellent housekeeping staff that keeps the building clean and odor- free. Staff turnover has been low, between 55%-65%, relative to other facilities that typically experience turnovers of 100% or more. Factors contributing to this lower turnover rate include strong management and a limited number of Crozet area employment opportunities for local residents. 2. Very good food service: The food quality is high: preparation is good; and diversity through barbecues and other special meal events is provided regularly. 11 Exceptional value: Mountainside will provide below-market rates for private pay assisted living. The proposed cost for a semi-private room will be $1,615 per month, with a private room rate of $1,750 per month. There will be some additional fees - primarily for people requiring special care. Private pay rates at most competitors vary from $2,100 to $3,200. Mountainside's market niche will be people who can not or will not pay top dollar for "luxury" assisted lix~ing. These people will respond well to a campaign that emphasizes high service quality, small town living, and excellent value for the dollar. Good small town location: Crozet provides a small town ambience, low crime rate, and walking access to local amenities, including the library, bank, post office, pharmacy, physician offices, churches, dry cleaners, dentist, rehab office, and restaurants. Mint Springs Park is two miles away. The City of Crozet is planning a renovation of its downtown. Crozet is growing very quickly, which will add to Mountainside's natural marketing base. Windham's switch to local ownership and management could mark the beginning of a much closer relationship between the facility and the town. Windham has recently become a member of the Crozet Community Association, Since the facility is by far the largest building in the heart of downtown Crozet, improvements to one will directly impact the other, so building a good working relationship is of mutual interest and could lead to creative joint projects. Fine views: Mountainside's location allows for excellent window views of the mountains from many of the rooms and public spaces. 6. Good building: The facility is structurally sound and does not require major renovation. Landmark: The facility's size and prominence makes it a natural landmark. There is no other structure nearly as tall in the area, which increases the options for publicity opportunities. Largest provider of auxiliary grant beds: This factor will attract and enable leveraging of public community resources, as witnessed by the current involvement of JABA, the City of Charlottesville, and the County of Albemarle. While Mountainside needs to become completely self-sufficient to continue in operation, its public service component, in the form of auxiliary grant beds, will provide ongoing public relations opportunities and an incentive for reciprocal collaborations with goodwill organizations from the public, private, and religious sectors. 9. Overnight respite: Assuming beds are available, there is a potential to provide cost- effective overnight respite with direct links to JABA's clients in Adult Day Health Care. 10. JABA involvement: JABA's integrated service delivery system and infrastructure, which includes field offices and outreach workers in every jurisdiction of PD10, as well as partial ownership in Care Advantage Plus, a home health agency, and Woods Edge and Ryan School independent living apartments, will greatly facilitate the marketing of Windham. As Mountainside will be a non-profit facility associated with JABA, the 12 11. 12. 13. 14. general public distrust of the health care system, particularly for-profit entities, will be ameliorated. JABA is a name people trust. Increased access to services: Association with JABA will also facilitate and enhance access to community social and health services, increasing the value and attractiveness of Mountainside, and potentially reducing overall service costs for Mountainside. Better resident mix: Much progress has been made in finding new homes for residents whose behaviors or care needs were not appropriate for Windham. The presence of younger people who do not exhibit aberrant behaviors could attract some older prospects that would welcome the opportunity to mix with peoPle of different ages. On site medical services: A joint UVA-Martha Jefferson health clinic operating one day per week will be located at Mountainside in the near future. Continuation possibilities: The existence of a large number of AG beds makes it more likely that a private pay resident that runs 'out of money will be able to continue at Mountainside through an auxiliary grant. Though this cannot be guaranteed, this realistic potential can be used as a selling point. Strengths/Advantages of Marketing Assisted Living: 1. The number of people over 65 will double within 25 years. The oldest old, those over 85, are the fastest growing age group in the country, and will double by 2020. 2. Seniors as a whole possess more wealth than any other group. 3. Assisted living is often need-driven, shortening the conversion time from lead to sale, compared to independent living. 4. As a need-driven product, professional referrals play a major role, thus decreasing marketing costs. 5. Key selling points/words are choice, dignity, and maximizing independence. 6. Assisted living provides freedom from worry for parent and child and enables a sense of security and peace of mind. 7. Assisted living offers a product closer to what the public wants as compared to a nursing home. 8. Assisted living is often more medically and socially appropriate than a nursing home. 9. Enrolling in assisted living creates less guilt than that which may be associated with choosing a nursing home. 13 10. The average cost of assisted living is 60-65% of the average nursing home cost. Weaknesses, Threats, and Challenges: 1. Some private pay residents pay less than the rate for new residents. If this practice were to continue, it could impact management's ability to reach revenue goals. The presence of a significant number of young residents with mental illness lends a negative impression to some older prospects. There is the perception that Windham will take anyone, which, historically, has been the case. Combining private pay and auxiliary grant recipients in one location has presented marketing challenges for JABA at its adult day healthcare center in Charlottesville. Similar issues will emerge at Mountainside. The specific challenge is to overcome the image that Mountainside is "just for poor people." 4. Marketing with a limited budget is always a challenge - particularly in a new area. 5. The facility is at least a 20-minute drive from Charlottesville, where many residents' families are located. 10. The facility lacks face-appeal, and wilt require significant renovations to its d6cor and landscaping to improve its marketability to prospects. Areas in need of improvement include: new bedroom furniture and carpeting, dining area, fagade of building, balconies, back patio, recreational space, and landscaping around the building. Current residents actually had no complaints with the facility's upkeep and d6cor. However, new private- pay, older prospects comparison shopping with other facilities will discern a more institutional, less luxurious environment at Mountainside relative to its competitors. Additional community activity spaces are needed (and planned). Windham has a poor image in some quarters based largely on its appearance, and the prominence of younger psychiatric residents. There is no current marketing effort or budget for Windham. New prospects come entirely by referral from hospital social workers. Marketing materials come from Genesis Eldercare, the parent company. There are already a large number of established assisted living facilities with well- funded, in-place marketing campaigns vying for people's attention. Weaknesses/Challenges of Marketing Assisted Living: 1. There is a lack of general public understanding of exactly what the term "assisted living" means. 14 Reimbursement and/or subsidies for assisted living for a person with low income is limited. 3. Turnover due to resident age and illness is relatively high, requiring constant marketing. Management Strategies for Achieving Goals: Marketing is just one part of management's plan for reaching the desired census goals. Others include: Enforce zero tolerance policy for inappropriate behaviors. If unacceptable behavior persists, residents will be placed in other homes according to the regulatory standards of DSS and Region 10. Tighten admission policy to ensure facility is able to meet the needs of those who are admitted, and to ensure that private pay prospects are not deterred by the presence of younger people displaying inappropriate behavior or appearance. Redecorate and refurbish the facility, and improve landscaping to improve d6cor and ambience. Increase annual maintenance and landscaping budget to maintain improvements. 4. Introduce and pilot-test innovative management and training techniques from the Nursing Assistant Institute for reducing staff turnover and improving quality of care. 5. Increase the number and variety of activities for residents, using JABA's Day Care as a model. Referenced below are marketing activities that can be mobilized immediately to spread the word that Mountainside is alive and well and open for business. Implementing a coordinated, on-going and systematic marketing program will ensure Mountainside's success for many years to come. Generally, it requires 25 to 30 new leads to produce one move-in. In JABA's experience, and according to the experts, late spring through early fall are the best times for focused marketing efforts. 15 Marketing Opportunities: Strategies and Tactics Positioning Strategy: Identify, Evaluate and Compare Mountainside's Services: In order to position Mountainside as an affordable and quality faciliW, there is a need to communicate the desired image of Mountainside that will appeal to a specific target market niche. This requires working with staff, consumers and referral sources to identify key selling points that can be communicated effectively and consistently. It is extremely important to know what services existing and potential - future Mountainside residents may want and need. In order to do this, Mountainside must make certain that the proposed services to be provided fit prospective customers' understanding of their needs and wants. It is vital that Mountainside be able to identify and promote what is unique about its product so that it will be perceived as the best choice. Consumers buy benefits, solutions to problems, satisfaction of needs, reliability, security and trust. Dependability, price, quality, value and customization also motivate them. Tactic: Position Mountainside as the best choice for affordable, high quality care, in a beautiful, convenient, small town setting. "Positioning" Mountainside means communicating to the target audience the benefits of Mountainside while favorably differentiating it from its competitors. It requires the clear delineation and communication of Mountainside's strengths - the selling points. The selling points will probably include the "strengths" described above. All materials and all activities should reinforce and center on the selling points. The selling points should be prioritized so that the most important ones are presented first and are most frequently communicated. Management should identify and then verify the key selling points through communication with residents and prospects from the target populations. Each of the primary target groups might have slightly different top selling points, and materials and messages should be adjusted accordingly. Tactic: Semi-annually review competitors' services and policies. This competitive analysis will help determine Mountainside's competitive edge and identify any new businesses that might tap into its market share. By staying on top of the current market for similar organizations, Mountainside can determine if it is offering the right mix of services, at a competitive price, and is offering what the customer wants. Changes based on the analysis should be made accompanied by input from residents, as warranted. All changes should be publicized in the newsletter and other mailings. The analysis should be based on visits to competitor's facilities, review of their promotional materials, and information provided by key informants, if possible. Tactic: Create an advisory council of key stakeholders to provide advice and guidance on management, marketing, and service delivery issues. This group would have no formal decision-making power, but would serve as a sounding board for the many new ideas and initiatives underway at Mountainside. The council would t6 consist of staff members, residents, management, long-term care professionals, including key referral sources, and members of the target market audience. They would be a ready source of feedback for management, and serve as ambassadors for Mountainside in the community. Tactic: Explore changing the name of Windham. Given Windham's current reputation and the change that will occur in management, it was determined that a new name was both desirable and necessary. The name highlights one or more of the facility's strengths, including the mountain views and the relation to other area famous names like Monticello and Montpelier. As there are so few collateral materials in existence, the total cost of the name change will not be exorbitant. Tactic: If there is a name change, generate a new logo for Mountainside. A new logo has been created and is attached hereto. Tactic: Create a slogan or positioning statement for Mountainside. Once all the selling points have been identified, it will be helpful to condense them into a single marketable image. This could be called the slogan or the positioning statement for Mountainside. It should be literally, or at least figuratively, present on all Mountainside materials and ads. Given the main selling points, some suggestions include: Mountainside - "It feels good to live here." "Living here makes sense." "Where it feels good to come home." "Sensible living." "A place where people care." "You'll like living here." "A decent life." The logo and slogan/positioning statement also should be reviewed by current residents, prospects, and the advisory council to help management make the final decision. Marketing Elements: The major elements of this comprehensive marketing campaign consist of: public relations; paid media; promotional materials; direct mail; personal selling and group outreach; staff participation; resident participation; facility-based promotion: and prospective customer service. This plan describes each .of these elements. As is detailed below, JABA is uniquely situated, given its staffing, resources, standing in the community, and existing contacts, to implement a marketing campaign with Mountainside management that is more than competitive with other local assisted living facilities, even in the absence of comparable marketing dollars. 17 Public Relations Strategy: Maximize opportunities for free, positive publicity: Tactic: Management should take advantage of the media's interest in Mountainside's public service component (its large number of AG beds and public subsidization). Press releases should be issued to publicize improvements in Mountainside's facility and services as they occur, and to announce the achievement of major milestones towards self- sufficiency. JABA has a part-time publicist who can assist with the production and distribution of these releases. Tactic: Mountainside should maximize the use of public service announcements (PSAs). PSAs are relatively easy to prepare and can be accumulated to represent different times of the year in advertising, different promotional efforts and announcements of promotions (e.g., open houses). The media is required to run PSAs and is often hungry for them. In fact, a local radio station will even tape PSAs and make copies for distribution to other stations. Most PSAs in this area are slotted for 60 seconds and can be in written, oral or visual format. The visuals will incur some costs, but certainly have a more immediate impact on the community, particularly when you consider that older adults have a better retention of pictures and visuals than they do for other means of advertising. A PSA should also be developed that can air on the local cable channel. Tactic: Promote Mountainside in targeted newsletters and news magazines. JABA produces Silver Linings, a bimonthly news magazine that reaches over 12,000 people. Other magazines and newsletters that could be receptive to publishing articles on Mountainside include More Monthly Magazine, The Observer, Echo, and the Senior Center, Inc. newsletter. Tactic: Enlist City and County employees in the marketing effort. Include the rack card in the pay checks of these employees, and promote in staff newsletters. Paid Media Strategy: Mountainside should develop and implement a targeted and economical media plan. Although paid advertising is the quickest way to expose the largest number of people on a regular basis to the marketing message, the cost requirement for taking full advantage of this avenue is prohibitive, at least for the immediate future. Instead, a more time-limited, tightly targeted "media blitz" approach is recommended. Rather than costly ongoing campaigns, brief, intensive exposures on multiple media simultaneously can create the required energy around special promotions and events, such as open houses. In any case, paid advertising is secondary in importance to personal selling and referrals. About two-thirds of private pay customers at JABA's Adult Day Healthcare Center were referred 18 to JABA through word of mouth, either by professional service providers or by friends, neighbors and family. This underscores the importance of "personal selling" activities for marketing Mountainside. Tactic: Attempt to recruit a corporate underwriter for paid television ads. Channel 29 is the single most-watched local television station in the region. This has been established through the Nielson system, and corroborated by a media usage survey conducted by JABA in 2000 of a convenience sample of Albemarle County residents. "Best available time" ads are surprisingly economical, averaging $45 per ad, and typically result in exposure that is greater in value than the rate paid. JABA has utilized all forms of paid media, including radio and newspaper, and by far the single greatest media source for referrals, according to client surveys, is television. The cost of these ads is such that this avenue is only practical if corporate underwriting is secured. It is possible that local Crozet businesses, developers, and/or real estate companies might be interested in being associated with and promoting the new Mountainside. Tactic: Corresponding to the major kick-off of thc marketing campaign, initiate a short- term radio ad campaign. The single best radio program for the target market is National Public Radio, and the single best overall station is WINA. Advertising with a National Public Radio station actually markets to the greater part of Virginia, thus expanding opportunities for the costs of local advertising. Radio advertising is most cost-effective when it is focused on a limited-time special promotional event or offer, and when it is accompanied by other complimentary activities surrounding the promotion. Close monitoring of radio campaign results should be performed to determine cost-effectiveness and aid decision-making in the use of radio for future years. Tactic: Advertise in local and regional newspapers. Advertising in weekly regional papers is very affordable and, depending on circulation, might yield greater returns on the expense. Advertising in JABA's Silver Linings is advised, as are ads in the Senior Center newsletter (circulation approximately 3,000), and other special interest newsletters that reach the target' audience. It is important to note that consistent advertising in print media is required to be effective. The Daily Progress (DP) is the single most- read regional paper, but its ad rates are relatively expensive. The limited budget available forces us to pursue a strategy of concentrated, short-lived promotions rather than ongoing campaigns. DP ads, like radio ads, should be purchased in conjunction with a special promotional effort, so that media exposure can be mutually reinforcing and break through the advertising drone. JABA has had some success with letter page size inserts, which can be printed front and back on colored sheets. Although this is one of the most expensive forms of advertising in the DP, it is one of the most effective. Advertising Mountainside through coupons and/or discount promotions might be particularly effective with seniors. The elderly look for value and discounts. It is important to 19 make the ads attention getting, to give the reader a strong benefit promise, and to encourage the reader to act. Tactic: Have a listing and a display ad in the yellow pages of the phone book. JABA receives a large number of calls every year as a result of its telephone listing. JABA will also list Mountainside within its services in the white pages. Tactic: Develop a web site. The web site should include a virtual tour of the facility, interviews with residents, and an opportunity to register and request additional information. The web site should be simple, to reduce cost, but attractive. JABA will investigate the feasibility of dedicating some pages of its web site to Mountainside, should a separate site prove to be too costly. At a minimum, JABA's web site will link to that of Mountainside. Tactic: If funding permits, advertise in the publications of local organizations and associations. These should include publications of civic organizations, garden clubs, religious organizations, university alumni associations, performing arts and other community event programs. Although these ads may not usually lead to new prospects, they should raise general awareness and familiarity within the target markets. Promotional Materials Strategy: Mountainside should develop new and improved promotional materials and a strategy for their distribution. Windham currently uses generic marketing materials from the Genesis corporate office. New materials should be produced that picture the Mountainside facility, include testimonials from current residents, and focus on key Mountainside-specific selling points. A brochure and other supplementary collateral materials that can provide additional information will be necessary. These materials will be used for personal and group selling, direct mail, and display purposes. Tactic: Develop a beautiful color brochure. The brochure should be fairly general. Its purpose is to convey the key selling points, such as personalized services, and Mountainside's affiliation with JABA. Tactic: A less expensive rack card or insert should be developed that can be used for large groups and tabling opportunities where the percentage of serious prospects is not high. A "rack card" is pamphlet shaped card on card stock, printed front and back, It is envisioned that this rack card will be available (and restocked as necessary) at strategic areas throughout Planning District Ten. 20 Tactic: Develop a pocketed folder with inserts. The inserts will contain more detail, including services and amenities; pricing information including a comparison with competitors and an affordability worksheet; floor plans; and management philosophy. Tactic: Develop a PowerPoint show and parallel scrapbooks. Visual-based presentations have the ability to connect psychologically and emotionally with prospects, providing a powerful supplement to written materials and oral communication. In many instances it will not be feasible to present a laptop PowerPoint show, including those cases when time is very limited, or if the meeting room is not dark enough or lacks a screen or blank wall. For these occasions, one or more scrap-books should be created that contain compelling photos, testimonials, and other statements paralleling the PowerPoint show. Tactic: Develop low-cost promotional items for giveaways. JABA distributes magnets and pens printed with the JABA logo, phone, and web site. For referral sources, JABA has also distributed Rolodex cards and memo pads. These items have been well-received and used and should be tried at Mountainside. Tactic: Make sure every company form conveys the company message. Include the logo and slogan on invoices, order forms, fax sheets, time sheets, etc. Tactic: Give every employee a business card. ~This builds both staff pride and distributes the Mountainside name throughout the community. Tactic: Create and distribute door hangers. Door hangers are inexpensive, high visibility items that can target an audience house by house. (The last 2 tactics were obtained from Naked Marketing, by Robert Grede, Prentice Hall, 1997.) Direct Mail Strategy: Mountainside must continually identify and track new prospects and referral sources, and seek to put the Mountainside name in front of these sources on a regular basis. Direct mail can serve this purpose, and is particularly effective in allowing the marketer to target the audience and then tailor the message to touch upon more sensitive issues than is possible or appropriate for mass media. Depending on the focus, direct mail pieces should include a sales letter, the brochure or rack card, coupon or reply card, and return envelop. Some marketers report having the strongest sales results with direct mailing to the adult child rather than to the senior (Sharon Brooks and Associates). 21 Direct mail is a relatively expensive strategy if done on a large scale. Mailing to a purchased list of 10,000 names would cost over $8,500. For this reason, k will probably not be feasible in the first few years when other less expensive marketing devices will take precedence (e.g. folder system). Until more can be afforded, marketing should focus direct mail on the smaller, existing database that Mountainside has compiled. Tactic: Develop and maintain a mailing list of prospects and potential referral sources. The new management has already developed a comprehensive list of referral sources. Whenever possible, names will be added from: member lists of organizations to which Mountainside residents and family members belong, including civic organizations, religious institutions and clubs; other local groups; professionals such as trust officers, bankers, lawyers, estate planners, physicians and hospital staff; the UVA staff directory; existing referral sources; names collected during open houses, special events and tabling; phone inquiries and visitors; purchased lists, and lists of residents of retirement community areas such as Lake Monticello. Tactic: Create and implement an annual calendar of direct mailings. A twice-annual newsletter should be developed. Mailings should also be conducted for special events, and holiday greetings. For particularly large events, a follow-up phone call and other personalized efforts should be expended to encourage attendance. Tactic: JABA advertising Mountainside through its client and donor mailings. As mentioned above, JABA could include information on Mountainside in Silver Linings, its newsmagazine, and, when feasible, in the other direct mailings it conducts, including the development newsletter. Tactic: Given the City of Charlottesville's investment in Mountainside, it might be possible to include information on Mountainside in the bulletin that accompanies the utility bill for city residents. Personal Selling and Group Outreach Strategy: Tactic: Mountainside and JABA management should dedicate human resources to personal selling and group outreach activities. Mountainside's administrator has agreed to devote up to two days per week for sales calls and other selling activities. His time will be supplemented by an expanded role for Mountainside's current admissions/marketer staff person. In addition, JABA's community relations specialist will become familiar enough with Mountainside to be able to promote it at her sales meetings. 22 Tactic: Strengthen relationships with current and potential referral sources through regular, individual visits. Mountainside marketers should conduct regular on-site visits to referral sources to build trusting relationships, to provide education about Mountainside, and to distribute materials. Relationships should be strengthened with social workers at the hospitals and at Charlottesville and Albemarle DSS. Similar work can be done at UVA's Employee Assistance Program staff, at physician offices, and with church leaders, real estate agents, and estate planners, among others. JABA will review and share relevant information from its referral lists to ensure complete coverage. Prior to the change in ownership, marketing activities were limited to responding to requests from hospital social workers for placement of their clients. Current management will be charged with the task of maintaining good working relationships with these referral sources as the admissions and discharge policies are tightened. Social workers will be forced to look elsewhere for beds for Medicaid clients if Windham's reduced number of AG beds are filled, and for clients with certain aberrant behaviors who do not fit Mountainside's new admission requirements. The marketing effort must include educational outreach to this important group to inform them of the necessity of these changes for Mountainside's survival. Tactic: Mountainside should host luncheons for ministers, social workers, targeted local organizations, and others to cultivate referral sources and acquaint them with the facility. Tactic: Residents and staff of Mountainside should be encouraged to volunteer individually and in groups to work with local organizations. If this is not done already, Mountainside's activity director should brainstorm with Mountainside's residents ideas regarding how they could contribute to their community as a group. In addition to enhancing quality of life for residents and the beneficiaries of their volunteerism, it will produce publicity opportunities, increase awareness of the Mountainside name, and strengthen networking relationships. At JABA's adult day healthcare center, clients have baked cookies for referral sources and produced quilts for local non-profits, generating much goodwill along with television coverage. As these kinds of activities are conducted, the crucial next step would be to invite the media whenever possible. Tactic: Mountainside marketers should volunteer to speak at the meetings of local community groups. There are many organizations eager to have speakers at their meetings. Marketers should be prepared to incorporate into their talks topics of general interest, such as: "what is assisted living?"; the challenges of aging; paying for eldercare; etc. A few carefully chosen residems might also be imerested in helping to give presentations. Groups could include large employers, local Rotaries, church groups, etc. The marketer should survey Mountainside residents to assess linkages with local organizations that will facilitate entree. 23 Tactic: Conduct open houses. Mountainside should have periodic open houses to bring prospects into the building. These could be timed with the Crozet Crafts Fair and with other community events. Tactic: Plan special events to bring people into the building and create PR. As JABA has learned through its Third Monthly Lecture Series at its Charlottesville Adult Day Healthcare Center, educational seminars bring people into the building, can produce free media exposure, enhance quality of life for clients of the facility, and are relatively low-cost. Mountainside could co-host seminars around issues of retirement living, geriatric services and general aging issues. These could be done in collaboration with JABA and other highly visible aging organizations. Mountainside will conduct CPR and other educational programs for its staff. Some of these programs could be opened to the general public. Mountainside should explore how to take best advantage of its great food and kitchen capacity, and its high profile facility in considering other special events that could be sponsored or co-sponsored (cookouts, fundraisers for local charities, birthdays for its oldest residents, etc.). In addition, working around the meal schedule, Mountainside's dining room could provide a large, central location for regular meetings for various community groups. JABA has been very successful in attracting community groups into the building for their meetings. At every open house and for other events, tours should be conducted, promotional materials should be distributed or at least displayed, and, ideally, a brief questionnaire administered, possibly connected to a raffle prize, to assess the prospect status of participants and collect contact information for the database. Tactic: Research and participate in promising tabling opportunities. Annual health fairs, walkathon fundraisers such as the Alzheimer's Walk, and county fairs provide numerous tabling opportunities. Each such event should be evaluated for effectiveness since they can be time consuming. These are the kind of activities that volunteers and staff from other JABA programs could team together to share the time. Tactic: Install a computerized Contact Management System, such as Paradigm, ACT!, or Goldmine. These systems allow management to better manage leads, prospect contacts, and provide information for planning. They can also be used for event planning and to track the effectiveness of marketing activities. With better storage of contact information, future contacts can be better tailored and well-timed. 24 Tactic: Conduct follow-up sales cabs using a contact management system that enables caller to prioritize prospects. Prospects should be labeled according to their potential and prioritized along the following lines: 1) those that are the most recent inquiries; 2) those with high potential; 3) those whose needs or issues match upcoming events, new information, or service improvements; 4) those based on location, then by last contact. The Paradigm system is currently used by JABA. Mountainside Staff Marketing Participation Strategy: Enlist all Mountainside staff in the marketing effort. Tactic: Work to ensure and sustain staff job satisfaction. The lower than average staff turnover which currently exists at Windham is evidence that this situation may already exist. Satisfied staff is crucial to a successful marketing effort. They market directly through word of mouth, during facility visits, and indirectly by impacting the quality of care and resident satisfaction. Tactic: Train staff in 1) customer service: and 2) importance and awareness of marketing. Staff should be provided the skills they need to become effective marketers for Mountainside. This can be accomplished at staff recognition events, and one-on-one training with management. When staff assist with marketing, they should be recognized and rewarded for doing so. Staff can be enlisted in making referrals, brainstorming marketing ideas, identifying groups for speaking engagements, and providing feedback on new marketing materials. Tactic: Keep employees up-to-date on marketing activities and progress. Mountainside Resident Participation Strategy: Enlist residents in marketing effort. Discuss strengths and weaknesses, get referral ideas, see what each individual may be willing to do, etc. Create a sense of "ownership" of the facility by the residents. 25 Tactic: Work to ensure satisfied residents. This marketing plan will not make recommendations as to how to ensure resident and staff satisfaction, both of which are clearly valuable goals independent of marketing, with one exception: it is very important to have a structured, non-threatening system for obtaining feedback from residents and staff on a regular basis. Satisfied residents are the bedrock of any marketing campaign. Poor resident satisfaction will eventually undermine even the best-financed marketing effort. The residents who participated in the focus group were quite satisfied about the quality of care and the facility. However, we must understand that the new clients that the marketing campaign hopes to attract might have different - higher - standards. Tactic: Encourage residents to invite guests to Mountainside. Guests should be encouraged, particularly when there are special events. As meal quality is high, inviting guests to a meal could be a nice experience. Currently, there is no charge for guest meals. Tactic: Sponsor housewarming parties for new residents. Invite resident's friends and family, according to their wishes and provide special spaces. Tactic: Offer to cater parties for other residents at reduced cost. Parties could be held in the dining room or in private spaces being considered as well as outdoors. Tactic: Increase activities and programs for residents. JABA staff is already reviewing current activity programming and making recommendations for increased and different activities. Among these are: holding adult education classes, inviting local entertainers to perform, a variety of physical activities, and special field trips. Tactic: Develop a resident ambassador program. Residents can be identified and trained to act as spokespeople for Windham. These people could assist during tours, group presentations, tabling and special events, and media opportunities. They could also provide feedback on marketing materials. Tactic: Provide rewards for residents for each succeSsful referral. 26 Tactic: Educate residents on the importance of a full house, and keep them informed of marketing activities and progress. Educate residents through the resident newsletter or other regular events, so that they can see the importance of marketing. Remind them, at the same time, of the key roll they play in marketing. Tactic: Provide residents with post cards and note cards they can use with family and friends. Facility-Based Promotional Strategy: Tactic: Renovate/Redecorate the most visible and highly trafficked areas to improve first- impressions. Management has a long wish list of renovations, starting with the exterior appearance and the entranceway and lobby areas. New management is dedicating substantial funds to renovate Windham's public areas. An additional $30,000 per year is budgeted for other improvements. The external marketing campaign should ideally begin after the major renovations are complete. Renovations are planned to take place soon after JABA assumes management responsibilities. During the renovations, the internal capacity or infrastructure for successful marketing can be solidified so that new external marketing activities can begin promptly once the building is ready. Tactic: Improve landscaping on the property. There are a variety of landscaping opportunities that can increase Mountainside's attractiveness, enhance walking opportunities, and contribute positively to the ambience of downtown Crozet. They could also involve area residents with the facility and its occupants and create a sense of ownership and pride. Tactic: Increase the recreational and common areas. Plans are being considered to renovate the first floor area to provide more and better space for resident activities as well as to increase the overall attractiveness of the public areas. Tactic: Take advantage of the large size and central location of the facility. Some ideas include: 1) Place a large "season's greetings" sign on the roof during the holidays. This could be complimented with an impressive light display utilizing the balconies. 2) Offer outside wall space for attractive banners publicizing community events. 3) Explore the feasibility of having an attractive mural painted on the wall. 27 4) Increase the security and safety of the roof to enable more people to safely visit for sightseeing and during building events. 5) Explore the possibility of a large "Mountainside" sign on the building. Prospective Customer Service Strategy: Using the contact management computer program, establish a tracking and quality assurance system for new prospects to ensure that inquiries, tours, follow-up, as well as the admissions, contract purchase, and move-in experience is as timely, seamless, helpful, pleasant and trouble-free as possible. Many prospects have an urgent need and are under time constraints. They should not be left waiting. In addition, there are often emotional and psychological tensions to attend to for the prospect and among family members. Windham currently has a director of admissions/marketing. She should be the single person in charge and responsible for ensuring a good experience for prospects and move-ins. Tactic: Ensure admissions guidelines are appropriate and clear. The admissions process must include a rigorous evaluation of a prospective resident's needs, as well as his/her financial situation, which will help ensure that her/his stay at Mountainside will be a successful, long-term experience. Tactic: Ensure all forms and pricing are as clear and jargon-free as possible. Tactic: Establish a rapid client response procedure for all questions and inquiries. Tactic: Create a checklist for all transactions, applications, and move-ins. Tactic: Explore contracting with a local moving company to provide a reduced rate, smooth move-in experience. Tactic: Actively ensure the new resident has the social support he or she needs. Senior staff should be present at move-in to welcome, answer questions, meet family, etc. Identify a "buddy" to show the person around. Tactic: Survey all new residents within one week. New residents should be asked why they chose Mountainside. Their initial positive and negative impressions should be discussed and feedback asked about the stewardship and move-in process (quality and clarity of forms, staff helpfulness, etc.). 28 Pricing Strategy: Tactic: Charge significantly lower rates than competitors. Mountainside's private rates will be at least $350 less per month than most of its competitors. This is one of Mountainside's main selling points. Tactic: Keep pricing structure and options as uncomplicated as possible. Potential consumers of assisted living have complained to JABA that the different pricing options .,and contracts presented by facilities are difficult to decipher and are intimidating. The lower price structure offered by Mountainside become a stronger selling point to the extent that Mountainside can include the majority of care costs within this lower rate. Just as importantly, it will make price-related decision-making for prospects much easier. It is understood that to enhance revenue, some fees will be separate from the base price, including laundry and additional levels of personal assistance - if and When they become necessary. Tactic: Offer promotional discounts or rewards for early move-ins. To accompany the initial media blitz, Mountainside could offer a special "change of management" promotion. For example, private pay people who move in before September 30, 2002 could receive some discount, reward, or other incentive. Tactic: Establish a reservation deposit that will take the room off the market. Tactic: Develop a future residency program. For a refundable deposit of perhaps $250 and the completion of a short registration form, program members will be assigned a priority number, assuring them a better opportunity for admission in the future. This is an initial commitment that brings people into the Mountainside family and conveys the impression that there is strong competition for admission. 1) Develop coupons for print ads, saying we are now accepting deposits for the futures list. 2) Develop a registration form and include in the brochure. 3) Make it like a club, with specific benefits, such as special meals or invitations to events. JABA's Integrated System Strategy: Opportunities to collaborate and cross-market with other JABA programs and affiliates should be considered. With its core services, along with Care Advantage Plus, Woods Edge, Ryan School Apartments, and Mountainside, JABA has the makings of a vertically integrated 29 system, from community services, home care, and adult day healthcare to independent and assisted living. JABA needs to ensure that this collection of services and organizations works as a single interconnected system. Public awareness of the advantages that such a system offers should be fostered. There are numerous opportunities for cross marketing and maximizing efficiencies. These need to be identified. Affiliates should be comfortable and familiar enough with each other's services to describe them and make a referral for either current clients, or prospects who are more in need of an affiliate's services than their own. For example, someone looking for independent living might actually be a more appropriate candidate for assisted living, or someone currentlv at Woods Edge might find it is time to move to assisted living. It is in everyone's best long-term interests that the marketer identify the service that best matches the needs of the client. JABA, through its information and assistance service, must be careful to continue to provide equivalent information on all competitors or risk losing the trust of key stakeholders in the community. The private affiliates, however, are under fewer constraints. JABA has an established and publicized help line that, along with Aging Service Coordinators (outreach workers) in every jurisdiction of PD10, can certainly be utilized to make sure their contacts and networks know about Mountainside. It is acknowledged that there will be some competition among JABA related programs and affiliates that will vie for the time, attention, and material display space of referral sources and prospects. Marketers will have different incentives built into their compensation packages, and so naturally will want to promote their own services. Having said this, much can be done within the limits of the cooperative efforts. Tactic: Conduct twice-annual meetings of marketers from all affiliates. The staff members of JABA, Care Advantage Plus, Woods Edge, Ryan School, Mountainside, and Twice Is Nice should meet to explore how best to market together. The meetings can be used to educate marketers on each other's services and build relationships among marketers to encourage communication. They can also be used to identify the best ways to work together and to problem-solve common challenges. Tactic: Make sure staff have marketing materials for every affiliate. Tactic: Display materials in the office of every affiliate, as feasible. Tactic: Share time and other resources to the extent possible. For example, table space and the time spent tabling could be a shared responsibility. Expensive promotional items that are only sporadically used, such as large display boards and computer projectors, might be shared, It is possible that reduced ad rates could be obtained through joint purchasing. Staff and resident volunteers from sister affiliates could be utilized to evaluate an affiliate's new ads and materials from a fresh, non-involved perspective. For 30 example, Mountainside could ask Woods Edge staff and residents for feedback on its new brochure. Tactic: JABA board members, JABA's Advisory Council, and other JABA volunteer leadership should be educated about all JABA affiliates and their selling points, and be looking for opportunities to provide referrals. It is important that, insofar as possible, volunteer leadership receives event and newsletter mailings as well as all Other materials relating to each affiliate. Tactic: Encourage vendors to market Mountainside. Mountainside is large enough, and Crozet is small enough, so that local vendors will have a real financial stake in Mountainside's success. Mountainside is planning to contract with a variety of local businesses including a pharmacy, a rehabilitation company, a physician's office, and a laundry service as well as a moving company. These businesses should be educated about Windham's selling points and asked if they would be willing to display, and possibly distribute, Windham's marketing materials. AG Bed Marketing Strategy: As stated above, it is anticipated that, given the low supply of AG beds relative to the demand, little if any marketing expense will need to be allocated to fill these beds. However, the following tactics will be pursued to ensure full occupancy of AG beds: Tactic: Strengthen relationships with AG recipient referral sources. Management already has a long history and close relationships with physicians and hospital social workers - the primary AG referral sources - and will continue to develop these to maintain full AG occupancy. Tactic: Move private-pay residents to AG beds if their money runs out. Although it is not the primary purpose of the AG beds, it might be feasible to utilize an AG bed opening for someone who has been private pay. This will not happen frequently, but it could help to maintain full occupancy, The existence of this recourse will help to sell beds to private pay prospects searching for assurance of continuity of care. Tactic: If necessary, other local jurisdictions will be approached to assess their interest in placing and subsidizing AG residents from their areas in Mountainside. Marketing Evaluation Strategy: The marketing effort should be researched, monitored, and evaluated to the full extent possible. Some data retrieval is already imbedded in the marketing process, such as tracking 31 contacts with prospects using the data management system. The annual marketing budgets should include annual marketing objectives along with a calendar of activities. Tactic: All prospects that participate in a tour of the facility should be surveyed. The survey should be conducted within one week of the tour, and will assess the prospect's impressions of Mountainside - what they liked and did not like - and their likelihood of ultimately choosing Mountainside. To increase the response rate, a phone call follow-up should be attempted. If this is unsuccessful, a mailed survey should be sent. This survey is an excellent way to collect valuable information, and creates another opportunity to sell Mountainside. Tactic: Marketers will track how all referrals and prospects heard of Mountainside. Tactic: Utilize focus groups and surveys of prospects and residents to pilot-test materials, and to assess impact of marketing. Members of the potential market prior to final production should review all materials and ads. Convenience sample surveys can be conducted at tabling and other special events to assess awareness and overall impression of Mountainside among the general population. Surveys with a raffle prize for completion are an excellent way to involve potential prospects, as well as to collect pertinent information and add to the prospect database. Tactic: Calculate cost per lead, cost per sale, and cost per media lead. These statistics will inform marketers if their game plan is working within the budgetary parameters or if new activities should be pursued. If results are better than anticipated, some strategies can be scaled back or eliminated, saving time and money. The key to smart marketing is keeping close track of what works best and focusing efforts and resources in those areas. The marketing plan should evolve and improve with time. Marketing Budget Tactic: Designate a marketing budget of 4-5% of total revenue. A marketing allocation equal to five percent of total revenue is the average for this industry. Assuming annual revenue of $1.6 million, this would equal $80,000. If we include staff salaries, 3% of the management fee, and the $12,900 that has been earmarked for direct purchasing of marketing products, Mountainside will spend about $64,000, which equals 4% of projected revenue, in its first year. This is reasonable considering that well over half of the current clientele are subsidized. 32 With a goal of increasing the number of private pay beds from 10 to 64, the $12,900 per year for three years that has been budgeted for the direct purchase of marketing products is going to be stretched thin. The amount of $38,700 budgeted for 54 sales amounts to $717 per sale. This is slightly more than the cost of a large display ad in The Daily Progress. Fortunately, the majority of activities listed above, and probably the most important ones, are more labor than capital intensive. They also will derive from a different cost center (e.g. resident activities, staff payroll/benefits, etc.). Nevertheless, there are significant expenses associated with paid media, direct mail, and promotions, and these will have to be purchased at levels that are less than ideal. The limited marketing budget will require that some activities that would ideally take place in the first year may have to be delayed until there are sufficient funds. The proposed set forth below are recommendations of how the activities could be staged to remain within the budget and still move the marketing campaign forward in a timely fashion. Ihitial marketing expenses are generally higher than subsequent years since new materials and other marketing items and activities often must be developed from scratch. However, in this case, marketing expenses might have to increase as revenue increases over the next several years as activities are added to the plan. For example, as discussed above under the "direct mail strategy," a mailing to a purchased list of 10,000 names would cost about $8,700, more than can be afforded in the first year. This would clearly be a crucial marketing segment. If, for instance, just two private pay sales for private rooms result from the mailing, its cost would be recouped within nine months. It is recommended therefore that this strategy should be added as soon as is feasible. Mountainside Marketing Budget Staff Administrator Admissions/Marketer JABA Management Sub-total staff DIRECT pURCHASE BUDGET Contact management system Promotional items Brochure First Year Description 2 days/week (.4 FTE) 2.5 days per week (.5 FTE) 3% of effort ($80,000) Development Add when Year One Year Two fUnding permits 3.5% COLA $30,000 $31,050 $19,000 $19,665 $39,330 $2,400 $2,484 $51,400 $53,199 $200 $0 $750 $0 33 Rack card Folder Scrap book Promotional giveaways Post and note cards for residents Portable display board PowerPoint show Sign on exterior of building Business card for every employee Holiday lights, building promotions Sub-total promotional Items Paid Media Radio Print Web site Television Display ad for phone book Ads in local group publications Sub-total paid media Personal and Group Selling Open House Lunches for referral groups Lunches for prospects Tabling Conduct a special event Conduct educational series Sub-total personal/group selling Direct Mail To purchased list of adult children To purchased list of seniors 2 Mailings to database Sub-total direct mail Office-Related Transportation Misc. photocopying/paper Office Supplies Printing = .30 x 5,000 $200 level. + (. 15 x 5,000) .50 x 2,000 2 x $25 Pens, magnets, door hangers Board plus materials $30/ad x 50 ads $200 x 10 Development and maintenance Underwritten $200 x12 Dining room subsidy Dining room subsidy Food, publicity for 6 events 5,000 names 5,000 names 500 x. 158postage + .20/print each Return mailer: .72 x 25 +. 1 x 500 .27/ml. x 3,022 miles Paper for folders, etc.. 10 x 4,000 $1,500 $950 $1,000 $5O $300 $1,000 $0 $1,000 $0 $0 $6,550 $0 $2,000 $5OO $0 $0 $0 $2,500 $500 $0 $0 $200 $500 $300 $1,500 $0 $0 $358 $136 $494 $816 $400 $300 $1,000 $600 $0 $0 $800 $0 $0 0 0 0 $2,400 $0 $2,800 $1,000 $0 $2,400 $0 $6,200 $500 $0 $0 $300 $500 $400 $1,700 $0 $0 $371 $141 $511 $816 $400 $25o $1,ooo $4o0 $2,000 $1,ooo $1,5oo $500 $500 $4,400 $4,400 $2,000 34 Marketing staff training Miscellaneous Sub-total Office'Related Sub-TOTAL Direct Purchase TOTAL $0 $140 $1,656 $12,900 $64,300 $500 $123 $2,089 $12,900 $66,099 $500 $17,400 Activities Time Frame This section is divided into three time frames: 1) Activities to be started during renovations; 2) First-year activities following renovations; 3) Long-term activities conducted as soon as feasible. Most of the activities in this marketing plan are repeated and ongoing. Thus, once they have begun, it is assumed that these activities will continue. They are not repeated in this list for the sake of brevity. It should be noted that a number of the more immediate activities have already begun. To Be Done During Renovations: Months One Through Three: Months One and Two: · Establish all selling points; · Conduct competitive analysis; · Create a slogan for Mountainside; · Install, learn, and implement a contact management system; · Compile data base and mailing list of prospects and referral sources; · Create a monthly marketing calendar; · Develop a monitoring and evaluation data collection system for marketing activities; · Establish a quality assurance system for new prospects; · Develop new admissions, policy, etc, forms as needed, track prospects and their needs; · Establish first-newcomers' promotional discounts/rewards; · Establish an advisory council; · Finalize admissions and discharge policies; · Educate referral sources about changes in admissions and discharge policies; · Conduct sales visits; · Speak with local community' groups. 35 Months Two Though Four: · Produce PSAs; · Recruit underwriter for TV ads (maybe radio); · Create promotional materials; · Brochure, rack card, folder, informational inserts, PowerPoint show and scrap book · Create radio, TV and print ads; · Develop web pages/site; · Purchase promotional give-away items (pens, magnets) with Mountainside logo and slogan; · Make sure every company form conveys the company message; · Sign/mural on exterior of building. First Year Outreach Activities Following Renovations: Months Four Though Six: · Conduct marketing blitz: · Press release, press conference, PSA's, print and TV ads, articles magazines, community presentations/speaking tour, open house; · Meet with JABA affiliates; · Host lunches for potential referral sources; · Direct mail to data base (referral sources, prospects and other contacts), in newsletters and Months Six Though Nine: · Meet with JABA affiliates; · Promote through referral contacts as place available for community meetings and events; · Market to city and county employees through pay checks and newsletters; · Order new listing and display for 2003 phone book; · Participate in tabling opportunities (county fairs, etc.); · Use the exterior of the building to promote Mountainside. Months Ten Through Twelve: · Direct mail to data base (referral sources, prospects and other contacts); · Conduct a special event, Additional Activities in Year Two: · Diversify and expand promotional giveaways; · Yellow pages display ad. 36 Longer-Term Activities (as soon as feasible): Conduct a direct mailing to adult children; · Conduct a direct mailing to local seniors; · Advertise in publications oftocal organizations; · Develop and mail newsletter; · Business cards for employees; · Door hangers; · Holiday lights, other building promotions; Encourage residents and staff to volunteer with local organizations; · Ensure and sustain staff job satisfaction and enlist in marketing campaign; · Ensure and sustain residents' satisfaction; · Increase programs and activities for residents; · Develop staff satisfaction questionnaire/feedback process; · Develop resident satisfaction feedback process; · Encourage residents to make referrals and to bring guests into facility;; · Provide residents with post cards and note cards for correspondence with family and friends. 37 Cash Flow Analysis Current Resident Mix: A financially viable resident mix is the major ingredient involved in developing the logic and strategy for ensuring that Mountainside has the opportunity to succeed as an assisted living facility. Total income needs to equal or exceed costs if the facility is to remain open and available to provide much needed services to both those residents who can afford to pay for services and also to those residents who are without funds and must depend on Auxiliary Grants (AG). The resident mix at Windham as of November 10, 2001 was 23 private pay residents and 119 AG. Since the reimbursement rate for AG residents is approximately 67% of the total costs and the average fee private pay residents were paying equaled approximately 133% of total costs, it was obvious that a more balanced resident mix of fee-paying residents to AG residents would be necessary. Albemarle County on November 10, 2001 had 30 AG residents and the City of Charlottesville had 25 AG residents. Given the subsidies requested from these entities, it was agreed that the total number of AG residents that would eventually reside at Windham would be maintained at least at these levels. In order to reach this census goal and attain financial stability, as well as to take into consideration the human element involved, the plan developed would reduce the number of AG residents primarily through natural attrition. The goal is to maintain the County's and City's current AG levels while virtually eliminating the number of AG residents who have their permanent addresses outside of the County and City. This outcome, conservatively projected, will take approximately39 months. Under this scenario, the rate of substitution of private pay residents for AG residents will be one per month until the proper payment mix of residents is reached. A projected mix of 55 AG residents to 65 private pay residents should result in Mountainside realizing a modest profit over the long run. This projection provides for a 5% vacancy rate. Should Mountainside experience a lower vacancy rate, the profit margin is enhanced. The average private pay resident currently pays $1,583 monthly. Because the current census mix is so skewed - 84% toward subsidy requirements -the existing private pay residents would need to pay a monthly fee of $2,805 in order for the operating budget to have sufficient revenue to support the large number of subsidy residents. Maintaining this level of census is not feasible and would continue [o create a significant loss causing operations to fail. Determining Real Cost of Operations: In determining what level of support is needed to be cost effective and facilitate the transition of resident mix over the 39-month period, several assumptions were made. First, JABA assumes that the cost of inflation on expenses will rise an average 3.5% annually. The annual inflation factor was assumed at the beginning of the year and remained constant throughout each fiscal year. 38 Second, JABA has set the annual rent at $78,317 without escalation from one year to the next. This is possible since Crozet Partners LLC (formally called Stonehaus-JABA LLC) has agreed to keep the rent fixed. The Mountainside operations budget will assume all responsibility for insurance, taxes, and maintenance. The fixed rental charge will remain throughout the foreseeable future. Third, JABA will receive $80,000 for its management oversight and control in the first year of operations, with a 3.5% increase each year thereafter. JABA will employ a full time staff person who will provide supervision and management expertise to the administrator of Mountainside and his staff. These staff people will a vital link between the administrative operations of Mountainside and JABA's senior management team. This should enable the operations to proceed in the manner prescribed in this business plan. FoUrth, the operating budget also includes items for depreciation and capital improvements. Following the initial capital improvements, for which the amount of $100,000 to $200,000 is being raised, an additional annual amount of $29,000 is planned for other capital improvements. In the past, Windham's budget was $150.00 per room.' JABA believes the $29,000 annual amount ($376 per room) is more realistic. This figure seems reasonable since nearly all of the facility's heating/air conditioning systems (about 80%) have been replaced within the last three years. The roof of the facility was also replaced in its entirety within the last two years. Fifth, Windham's latest annual budget included only $900 for marketing efforts. This amount clearlv needed to be enhanced. JABA has budgeted $1,000 per month for direct expense marketing efforts. As indicated above, this amount does not include the additional marketing efforts JABA will make and expense through its management fee. JABA will be also providing accounting support to perform all payroll, receivable, and payable functions for Mountainside. The current owner is providing that service and will cease once Windham's ownership changes. It is expected that the monthly cost of accounting needs for Mountainside will be $1,000.This amount has been placed into the budget. Finally, a unit cost amount per resident for each category of expense has been applied by JABA, based on a review of the history of expenditures at Windham. JABA has instructed the administrator that he must remain at or below this unit cost per category. Under this directive, if the census decreases, there will be a proportionate decrease in expenses. Should the census increase, a similar increase in expenses would be allowed. The projected CPI has also been factored in the budget. Private Pay Pricing: In order to realize sufficient revenue to meet the projected expenses of Mountainside, the private pay rates have been changed. These fees currently are negotiated on a case by case basis and are based on the income levels of the residents. Some of these residents are currently actually paying less than the monthly AG reimbursement rate. Others pay more than the AG rate but less than the actual cost of service. A few pay an amount equal to the cost of services or higher. JABA will standardize the private pay rates. The monthly fee for a resident who 39 occupies a double occupancy room will be $1,615. A resident occupying a private room wilt pay $1,750 per month. A survey of the lowest private pay rates in Planning District Ten ranges from $2,100 to $2,400 per month. The new rates to be charged at Mountainside will keep it more affordable than other facilities. This should attract those elderly who have modest retirement benefits and thus are unable to afford the higher cost facilities. The rate of annual increase in the private pay rates will go up by an amount equal to the increase in the CPl. Should it become necessary to increase the rates at an amount greater than the CPI, JABA believes the projected market would support such increase. JABA's goal is to keep the rates as low as possible while making certain the total revenue is sufficient to meet expenses. Subsidies from Local Governments: Although the change in private pay fees and census will be sufficient to maintain Windham in a positive cash flow, it will take time to effect the resident mix and therefore the projected private pay revenues. In order to bridge this gap and to avoid the loss of available AG beds currently occupied by residents of Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville, these entities are being asked to provide a one-time subsidy in the amount of $177,617 and $148,014 respectively. These subsidies are needed to provide initial working capital and to fund the expected income deficiencies during the first 39 months of operations. These funds will also provide the reserve fund required by the lending organization. With a commitment of these subsidies, JABA will have the funds to allow Mountainside to change in such a way as to enhance its capacity to succeed as an assisted living facility for seniors serving both low and moderate income local residents. Keeping the facility open and providing its services to these populations could postpone and perhaps avoid more costly nursing home admissions. Breakeven Analysis: JABA expects Mountainside to reach a breakeven point by the 39th month. As indicated, this is made po,ssible, in part, through a revised private-pay-to-AG census that will provide greater revenue to meet expected costs. Also as stated above, JABA has developed a more realistic cost structure tied to unit cost budgeting rather than historical cost budgeting. Changes in census will result in changes in costs. This will allow for continuation of services and enable the facility to stay within the budget. The projected goal of increasing the number of private pay residents by one per month and leveling the number of auxiliary grant residents at 55 will enable Mountainside to meet the needs of the moderate income elderly while addressing the needs of the lower income person as well. 40 Working Capital Needs: Although the breakeven point will be reached at or before the 39th month, it does not provide for sufficient ongoing working capital to provide for variances in the delays in receipts or unusual/unexpected expenses. Therefore, JABA has projected it will take an additional 32 months to realize sufficient profits to build up an acceptable working capital reserve of one month's expenditures. Once the proper working capital level is achieved, then profit distributions are possible. Distribution of Excess Revenues: Beginning on the 72nd month, JABA projects sufficient "profits" from operations to begin the process of distributing excess revenue to both Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville as well as to Crozet Partners, LLC. It is envisioned that two thirds of the excess revenues will go to the two local governments and be divided proportionately between them based on the amount of subsidy provided by each. The remaining one third will go to the LLC. The distribution of excess revenue to the two localities will continue until the total absolute dollar amount of subsidy provided by each government entity is recovered. The final distribution to the local govermnents is expected to occur during the 11 th year of the venture. 41 Appendix: Cash Plan Statement Mountainside Senior Living -- Assumptions: Number of Licensed beds Current number of Single occupancy rooms Current number of double occupancy rooms Current number of doubles converted to triples Revised number of single occupancy rooms Revised number of double occupany rooms Total rooms available (does not include those converted as office/PT & Laundry rooms) Total maximum number of residents in the facility Total current number of residents in the facility Number of current private pay residents Number of Auxiliary Grant residents Number of private pay mentally ill Number of Auxiliary Grant mentally ill Total number of mentally ill Total number of non-mentally ill Plan A (revised) 2/21/2002 153 33 15 3O 33 44 77 153 142 23 119 9 48 57 85 Current residents home residence Ch'ville Albemarle Other PD] 0 Not PD 10 Totals Private pay Elderly 6 4 0 4 14 Mentally ill 2 0 0 7 9 Total Private Pay Clients 8 4 0 ] 1 23 Auxiliary Grant Elderly 14 23 0 34 71 Mentally ill 11 7 7 23 48 Total Auxiliary Grant Clients 25 30 7 5 7 11 9 Total Clients 33 34 7 68 142 Note - that private pay residents within Ch'ville & Albemarle represent 52% of total residents and 48% come from outside PD 10 Note - that Auxiliary grant residents within Ch'ville & Albemarle represent 46% of total residents and 48% come from outside PD 10 Note - that total clients from Ch'ville & Albemarle represent 47% of total residents and 48% come from outside PD 10 Note - with an immediate reduction of 20 AG from outside Ch'ville and Albemarle, then the current ratio of PP to AG is 1 PP to 4.35AG This represents the starting point of transition from current resident PP to AG mix to optimum mix. Current turnover of clients at Windham is approx 6 per month. Based on current resident mix of private pay to Auxiliary Grant, the ratio is approx 1 to 5. Based on revising occupancy to 33 private rooms and 44 dou hie occupancy rooms, maximum resident occupancy can only be ! 21 Th erefore, recommend 20 AG residents (outside PD10) be relocated in first month of transition, resulting in resident occupancy at 121 Also recommend that as AG residents leave Windham, those beds are then occuppied by PP until optimum mix is achieve of PP and AG Assume a vacancy rate of 5% or approximately 6 overall proportionately divided among the jurisdictions. 0 > ~ E o ~EEE ~ ~>>>>~ U~ <>~ 0 ..~q~ o ~g~o~ q~q. q ~<uo o>~ o Resident Hix for Windham Center 130 120 110 100 90 ao 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33~ 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 Time Period in Months Source of Revenue $160,000 $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $4O,000 $20,000 $0 Windham Center - Financial Analysis9 Time Period in Months ~/indham - Plan A 2/2'1/2002 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Update - Groundwater Committee Report SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Presentation on the Groundwater Projects & Groundwater Committee Report STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Graham, Hirschman AGENDA DATE: March 6, 2002 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Underground Albemarle: A Report From the Groundwater Committee (Working Draft); Memo dated January 15, 2002 from David Hirschman to Planning Commission REVIEWED BY: Go to Recommendation BACKGROUND: The formation of a County groundwater committee is addressed in Chapter Two of the Comprehensive Plan. The committee was envisioned to help implement the Plan's strategies regarding groundwater. The Board of Supervisors authorized formation of and representation on a groundwater committee on May 3, 2000, following similar action by the Planning Commission on March 21, 2000. The initial focus of the committee was to investigate groundwater assessment standards for site development. The committee completed its initial report in October, 2001. The report is termed a "working draft" because the committee felt that feedback and discussion with decision-makers is needed before proceeding with the technical details. Concurrent with work by the groundwater committee, the County has been working with ENSAT Corporation on a watershed- scale groundwater study for the Ivy/Mechums watershed area. This study is the first phase of what is envisioned as a six-phase program to study the County's groundwater resources. The first-year study report is completed in draft form, and is undergoing staff review. Ultimately, the work of the Groundwater Committee and the watershed-scale studies will become integrated into a groundwater program. At present, there may be confusion about the focus of the two efforts. The Groundwater Committee was charged by the Board of Supervisors to look at possible groundwater assessment requirements for proposed development, and thus, its work is focused as the site scale. The watershed-scale studies, such as the Ivy/Mechums Study, are designed to look at groundwater at a larger scale for the purposes of comprehensive planning and to provide baseline information for any studies that ultimately take place at the site scale. As stated, information from both efforts is needed to develop management strategies for groundwater. Two work sessions have been held with Planning Commission concerning these efforts: one on December 18, 2001 concerning the Groundwater Committee's draft report, and the other on January 22, 2002 to receive a presentation from ENSAT on the draft findings from the Ivy/Mechums study. At these work sessions, many complex technical and policy issues were discussed. The Commission scheduled a third work session for March 5 to try to synthesize the information and provide feedback and guidance to staff and the groundwater committee on the recommendations in its draft report. RECOMMENDATION: This presentation was requested by the Board and is for information purposes. View Hemo Providing Additional Information on Recommendations View Groundwater Committee Report ervice ,%r~r~ ~ Conservhg RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING Agenda Item #: March 4, 2002 Mr. David Hirschman Department of Engineering and Public Works Albemarle County Office Building Charlottesville, Virginia Re: Underground Albemarle Dear David: Thank you for providing me a copy of the working draft of UnderRround Albemarle being prepared by the Groundwater Committee. The Service Authority staff and Board of Directors have reviewed the draft report. While we recognize this document is unfinished, the overall goal and direction of the study give us concern. The first thirty years of Albemarle County Service Authodty's existence and many millions of our rate payers' dollars were spent providing a permanent source of water to failing community groundwater systems in the county. Some of these systems were: West Leigh Flordon Colthurst Northfields Medwether Hills West Woods Springfield Stony Point Oak Hill Key West Kearsarge Carrsbrook Northwoods Mobile Homes Southwood Mobile Homes Our current Capital Improvement Program contains funds to install public waier in Glenorchy where the central well has failed. Other community systems exist across,the county which may eventually require rescue at the public's expense. Perhaps we have better information on groundwater today than we did 10, 20, and 30 years ago. Maybe drilling technology has improved. However, the history of central well systems in Albemarle County makes us wary of promoting new such systems. Small community waterworks are the concern of the waterworks industry as well as the Environmental Protection Agency. The majority of the violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act occur in these small systems. The American Water Works Association is devoting great effort to train operators and bring these systems into compliance with regulations. Whether a small system can be developed and operated today at a cost that users can afford to pay is very questionable. I saw no reference in the draft report of a 1980 study of groundwater in the County by the State Water Control Board. This may be a useful resoume in your effort. A lot of good work has obviously gone into the groundwater report, However, it is the long history of central well system failures that prompts our plea to consider the history. Very~tn~il~yours, J~. Brent JWB/slrb cc: Bob 'Tucker Larry Tropea ]55 Spotnap Rood · PJD. Box2738 · Executive Director Charlottesville, VA 22902 · Tel (434) 977-4511 · Fax (434) 979-0695 ' wwv. acsanet.com COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING & PUBLIC WORKS TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Albemarle County Planning Commission David J. Hirschman, Water Resources Manager January 15, 2002 Groundwater Committee Report Additional Information on Recommendations The Planning Commission held its first work session on the Groundwater Committee Report (Underground Albemarle) on December 18, 2001. At that session, staff gave a presentation on the work and findings of the committee. The Commission requested additional information on the report's recommendations for the next work session, scheduled for January 22, 2002. The information requested pertained to the status of implementation of the various recommendations and staff impressions on relative priority. At the January 22 work session, an additional groundwater presentation will be given. This presentation will cover the watershed-scale groundwater study of the Ivy and Mechums watersheds, prepared by ENSAT Corporation. This study is the first phase of what is envisioned as a six-phase program to study the County's groundwater resources. The first-year study report is completed in draft form, and is undergoing staff review. The presentation will cover the scope of the study, findings, and recommendations. Ultimately, the work of the Groundwater Committee and the watershed-scale studies will become integrated into a groundwater program. At present, there may be confusion about the focus of the two efforts. The Groundwater Committee was charged by the Board of Supervisors to look at possible groundwater assessment requirements for proposed development, and thus, its work is focused as the site scale. The watershed-scale studies, such as the Ivy/Mechums Study, are designed to look at groundwater at a larger scale for the purposes of comprehensive planning and to provide baseline information for any studies that ultimately take place at the site scale. As stated, information from both efforts is needed to develop management strategies for groundwater. With regard to the Groundwater Committee's recommendations, as outlined in the report, the following analysis provides information on the status and potential implementation of the various recommendations. This analysis is not meant to replace the actual text of the groundwater committee report, and readers are encouraged to consult the original text for explanations of the recommendations. Memorandum Groundwater Committee Report, Additional Information on Recommendations January 15, 2002 Page Two Recommendation #1: Continue to Pursue and Fund Regional Groundwater Studies Status: As noted above, the first of six studies is near completion. Funding for phases 2 and 3 has been requested in the FY 02/03 budget as a new program in the Department of Engineering & Public Works. We will not know the fate of this funding request until the Board acts on the budget. Implementation: Staff believes this is a high priority for moving forward with a County groundwater program. The regional groundwater studies are an essential and integral part of understanding the County's groundwater resources. Neither site-level testing standards nor a general County-wide data base can replicate the detailed knowledge generated by these studies. The studies can be used for comprehensive planning and will be needed to provide baseline information for site-level groundwater assessments, if these are adopted (see recommendation #4). The Commission will have a fuller view of the scope and utility of these studies after ENSAT's presentation on January 22. Recommendation #2: Promote "Good Development Practices" for Groundwater Status: Good Development Practices were roughly outlined in the report. More detail for each of these practices will need to be developed for them to be implemented. Implementation: These practices are envisioned as recommended strategies to protect groundwater for new and existing development and other land uses. They could be added to the comprehensive plan under Groundwater Standards (Chapter 2, page 62). As such they are a low-cost means to begin to consider groundwater as recommended actions to the public or during the review of rezoning proposals, comprehensive plan amendments, or special use permits. This action would not the replace the type of groundwater assessments discussed under recommendation #4. Recommendation #3: Streamline the Rural Preservation Development (RPD) or Cluster Provisions for Rural Divisions Status: The Department of Planning & Community Development understands the need for this and is working on it in the context of the comprehensive plan update. The groundwater committee's recommendation will provide an additional reason for undertaking this revision. Implementation: As stated, this will be shepherded by Planning staff. Recommendation #4: Adopt Groundwater Assessment Standards and Incentives for Proposed Development Status: The report proposes different tiers of groundwater assessment for different sizes of proposed development. The primary reason the groundwater committee was formed was to explore this type of site-level assessment. The report provides a good starting place to develop these standards for possible inclusion in the subdivision ordinance. However, more work on the details in needed, as well as public review and careful evaluation by the Commission and Board of Supervisors. Memorandum Groundwater Committee Report, Additional Information on Recommendations January 15, 2002 Page Three Implementation: There are some major issues to resolve with implementing this program, ranging from impacts to the plat review process to cost impacts for landowners to staff resources. As stated in the report, one new FTE would be needed initially to administer the program. That said, this is a fundamental program with regard to managing and protecting groundwater in the Rural Areas. Essentially, the site-level is where the action is - this is where wells are drilled in one location rather than another, where lot and septic system design can either harm or work in concert with groundwater, and where either running out of or contaminating groundwater will effect citizens' quality of life and draw the County into complex policy and financial issues. Recommendation #5: Reevaluate the Use of Central Systems Status: The report provides some compelling reasons to reconsider the County's policy on central systems. However, dealing with the complex issues involved is perhaps a long-term prospect. Implementation: Resolving our approach to central systems may ultimately be a key ingredient for working out true clustering and how sites are developed to maintain groundwater quality and quantity. We must consider ideas such as a rural utility district, and ensure that, if new systems are created, they are managed and maintained for long-term sustainability. Recommendation #6: Consider Groundwater in the Rural Areas Section of the Comprehensive Plan Status: This series of work sessions on groundwater in the context of the comprehensive plan review is indicative that we are already integrating groundwater issues, the groundwater committee, and the watershed-scale groundwater studies into the process. Implementation: The Planning Commission may direct how these issues are integrated through future work sessions or other means. In summary, recommendations 1, 3, and 6 are already in some state of being implemented, and can proceed based on input from the Commission and, in some cases, the availability of funding (recommendation 1). Recommendation 2 can be implemented with little expenditure of resources by adding good development practices to the comprehensive plan. This action would be helpful, but of limited scope with regard to influencing how groundwater is managed. Recommendations 4 and 5 should be put in the ~no pain, no gain" category. This means that they affect County policies and resources more dramatically than the other recommendations, but their potential pay-off is greater for the sustainable use of groundwater. View Report Return to Executive Summary. Return to Regular Agenda DJH/ybv File: Hirschman/GW Committee Report Analysis of Recommendations.doc EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is the product of work conducted by a groundwater committee created by the Board of Supervisors in May of 2000. The committee's charge was to investigate groundwater assessment standards for new development in the Rural Areas. Groundwater assessment refers to any number of techniques that can be used to study and provide quantitative and qualitative information on a site's potential water supply in cases where groundwater will be used. As the committee met to discuss and formulate policy ideas for groundwater, it was decided that groundwater assessment standards for proposed development could not reasonably be isolated from many other issues pertaining to groundwater: regional studies, development practices, development design, and the use of central water systems, among other issues. For this reason, the core of the report addresses groundwater assessment procedures, but the overall report provides a much broader context for considering the use and protection of groundwater in Albemarle County. The report provides background on the formation of the groundwater committee, as well as on past groundwater efforts in the County. Three related groundwater projects are outlined, each addressing groundwater issues at a different scale: 1. A County-wide Groundwater Data Base 2. Regional Groundwater Studies 3. Groundwater Assessment at the Site Scale The report describes various categories of "Good Development Practices" that the committee generated. These practices are relevant to existing as well as future users of groundwater in the Rural Areas. A proposed system of groundwater assessments for new subdivisions is outlined. Four tiers of testing are described, based on the number and size of lots in a proposed subdivision. These size and density triggers are based on recent data generated for existing subdivisions in the Rural Areas. An important section of the report, entitled "Reevaluating Central Systems," discusses the advantages and disadvantages of central systems with regard to groundwater resources. In some cases, central systems may be the best tool to match development design with groundwater opportunities and constraints. However, some serious issues of system management and maintenance must be addressed. This discussion is also relevant to the pattern and form of rural development, which is a critical consideration for the Rural Areas section of the Comprehensive Plan. For instance, the extent to which the County allows and promotes some type of cluster design relates directly to how sustainable the groundwater resource may be for a particular development. The report concludes with policy recommendations, touching on the following categories: A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 1 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 Continue to Pursue and Fund Regional Groundwater Studies - The first of six planned regional groundwater studies will be complete by the end of 2001. The regional groundwater studies are an essential and integral part of understanding the County's groundwater resources. The County should continue to fund the studies for the remaining five study areas. Promote "Good Development Practices" for Groundwater- This report outlines various "Good Development Practices" to promote the sustainable use of groundwater. These practices should be recognized through adoption into the Comprehensive Plan, demonstration projects, incentive programs for development, and cooperative outreach projects with the non-profit and private sectors. Streamline the Rural Preservation Development (RPD) or Cluster Provisions for Rural Divisions - Development clustering is a concept that can be used to make better use of groundwater at the site level. This tool should certainly be promoted where it makes sense based on a technical assessment of groundwater prior to development. The County should investigate the review processes for cluster versus by-right development, and provide incentives and disincentives to promote the type of design most appropriate to the site. Adopt Groundwater Assessment Standards for Proposed Development - The report recommends different tiers of groundwater investigation for different sizes of proposed development. The standards, proposed to be adopted into the subdivision ordinance, must produce needed and necessary information, be within the technical and financial capabilities of those submitting subdivision plats, and minimize negative indirect and unforeseen consequences (e.g., promoting development design or layout that is inconsistent with the goals of the program). Implementation of a groundwater assessment program would initially require one additional County FTE. Reevaluate the Use of Central Systems - There are some compelling reasons to rethink the use of central systems. In some cases, central systems are the preferred method to best match development design with groundwater capabilities and limitations on a site. Central systems also have public health benefits due to the required testing and monitoring. Some sort of overarching management and maintenance structure could help to address some of the existing shortcomings of many central systems. The County should look for ways to make these systems work where they offer compelling advantages, rather than abandoning them altogether as a groundwater management tool. Consider Groundwater in the Rural Areas Section of the Comprehensive Plan - The Comprehensive Plan for the Rural Areas is currently being revised. This plan will have important implications for Rural Area land uses in the future. Groundwater should be an important consideration in the Plan. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 2 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Department of Engineering and Public Works would like to acknowledge and thank the representatives of the groundwater committee for their sacrifice of time and for sharing their insights and technical knowledge of groundwater: · Carl Christiansen, Virginia Department of Health, Office of Water Programs · Jack McClelland, Virginia Department of Health, Thomas Jefferson Health District · Don Franco, The Kessler Group · Nick Evans, Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District · Ed Imhoff, Citizen Representative · Scott Clark, Department of Planning & Community Development A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 3 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 THE GROUNDWATER COMMITTEE The formation of a County groundwater committee is addressed in Chapter Two of the Comprehensive Plan. The committee was envisioned to help implement the Plan's strategies regarding groundwater. Groundwater first emerged in the Comprehensive Plan in 1989, with one objective and six strategies. The 1999 Plan contains two objectives and twenty strategies concerning groundwater, demonstrating a marked increase in interest and concern for this resource. The Board of Supervisors authorized formation of and representation on a groundwater committee on May 3, 2000, following similar action by the Planning Commission on March 21, 2000. The initial focus of the committee was to investigate groundwater assessment standards for site development. Groundwater assessment refers to any number of techniques that can be used to study and provide quantitative and qualitative information on a site's potential water supply in cases where groundwater will be used. This is pertinent to Albemarle County's Rural Areas, where all development is groundwater-dependent, either through central well systems or private, individual wells. Groundwater assessment can be a tool to help verify that groundwater resources are adequate to serve a proposed level and/or density of development. Ideally, this assessment can also verify that a proposed use will not adversely impact adjacent and existing well users. GROUNDWATER IN ALBEMARLE COUNTY While interest in groundwater has been growing over the past decade, it is only recently that funded programs were approved to investigate groundwater resources. Prior to this time, the County engaged in policy development and limited studies. A brief timeline of County groundwater initiatives is provided below (for more detail, see Chapter Two of the Comprehensive Plan): · Groundwater Protection Study (1990): This report is a compendium of recommendations for the study of groundwater and policy initiatives. The study was "accepted" by the Board of Supervisors on June 13, 1990. · Water Resources Committee Update of the Groundwater Protection Study (1993): The committee reviewed and prioritized the recommendations in the original study. One action listed as a high priority in this report was to conduct a pilot groundwater study. · Pilot Groundwater Study for the Hardware River Watershed (1994): The pilot study provided a watershed-scale snapshot of water quantity and quality. The report lists several recommendations for the County groundwater program based on the results. · Evaluation of Household Water Quality in Albemarle County, Virginia (1996): This program, conducted by Virginia Cooperative Extension, tested five-hundred private wells in the County and provided educational material to hundreds of households. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 4 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 · Chapter Two of the Comprehensive Plan: Natural Resources & Cultural Assets (1999): As stated above, the update of the plan has an expanded list of strategies related to groundwater, including the formation of a groundwater committee. · Verifying Adequate Groundwater Supplies for Rural Subdivisions (2000): This report was produced in response to a request from the Planning Commission about what other localities in Virginia are doing with regard to hydrogeologic testing. The report provided the framework for formation of the groundwater committee. · Board Executive Summary, May 3, 2000 (formation of Groundwater Committee): The executive summary presented the "Verifying Adequate Groundwater" report to the Board and requested formal authorization for the groundwater committee. · Board Executive Summary, December 6, 2000 (update on committee's work): The Board requested an update on the committee's work. This summary also discussed three groundwater projects that the County is currently undertaking. GROUNDWATER AT DIFFERENT SCALES The chief groundwater concern for the County is to better understand and plan for rural development to ensure the sustainable use of groundwater. In this regard, it is helpful to view groundwater at different geographic scales - from the site to the watershed to the entire County. Currently, the County is engaged in three different projects, each of which addresses a different scale. These projects are described below. County-Wide -- Groundwater Data Base Project: At the scale of the whole County, the issue of groundwater is understanding the big picture: What general tools can be developed to understand how much groundwater is available for existing and future development? Are development patterns working with or against the availability and vulnerability of groundwater resources? Is groundwater quality being compromised by levels of development or other land uses? At this scale, it would be too expensive to undertake a detailed study of groundwater. However, there is opportunity to organize and analyze data that is already being collected in a way to help understand groundwater trends. The Comprehensive Plan states it as follows: Strategy: Seek an effective way to collect, store and use groundwater data. Coordinate with the Health Department and Division of Mineral Resources to develop a useable and continuously maintained groundwater database. Utilize the County's evolving geographic information system (GIS). Management objectives that outline how, for what purpose, and by whom the data base will be used should be developed. Funds were appropriated in FY 00 to develop a data base of all existing groundwater information, primarily from well completion reports filed at the Thomas Jefferson Health District. The Virginia Division of Mineral Resources began this initiative in 1998 as a pilot program, and County funds were appropriated to complete the task. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 5 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 The work was contracted as part of the Hydrogeologic Study project (see below), and is complete. The data base is fairly comprehensive for wells drilled between the late 1950s and 1999. The task of collecting well completion reports passed from the Virginia Division of Mineral Resources in the late 1950s and 1960s, to the Water Control Board in the 1970s and 1980s, to the Virginia Department of Health from the late 1980s to the present. The data base includes well completion data from all three sources, as well as older data from state agency studies dating to the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. There are approximately 4,000 records in the current data base. A major task remains to keep the data base continuously updated in coordination with the Health Department. The data base can be queried to learn the geographic distribution of wells, well depths, estimated blown yields, and other information in the Health Department records. It is anticipated that the data base will be used by the County and other government agencies for planning purposes, by well drillers, and by the private sector to identify general groundwater conditions in a particular area. Watershed Scale - County Groundwater Studies: At the watershed scale, one can begin to ask more refined questions: Where are specific areas of groundwater availability or vulnerability and how do these relate to development patterns? Are existing community well systems sustainable relative to groundwater characteristics? Will future uses of groundwater have any impact on the quantity and quality of existing supplies? How can land use planning respect the variability of groundwater resources at the watershed scale? The Pilot Groundwater Study was an example of a watershed scale effort. One finding of that study was that groundwater availability is related, more or less, to bedrock geology. As a result, geology provides a valuable basis for land use decisions in places where groundwater serves as the primary water supply. The Pilot Study was a low cost, low-tech study to demonstrate that regional studies do, in fact, have value for the County. New geologic data was not generated. The Pilot Study did recommend more extensive regional studies: Planning for growth in areas not accessible by public water and sewer involves attempting to understand hydrogeologic constraints for both water supply and quality. (Pilot Groundwater Study, pg. 56). On the topic of watershed scale studies, the Comprehensive Plan lists the following strategies: Work with the Division of Mineral Resources to conduct additional mapping in Albemarle County on recharge/discharge, lineaments, surficial and bedrock geology, and regional groundwater flow. Provide local cost-share funds to perform this mapping. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 6 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 Continue to gather information on groundwater by watershed areas using the Pilot Groundwater Study as a prototype. Produce a prioritized list of watersheds using criteria developed by the Groundwater Subcommittee of the Water Resources Committee. The need for this type of study was reinforced by the Peacock Hill request for public water in 1999. In order to realize the Land Use Plan objective of not extending public water and sewer lines into the Rural Areas, the County will need this type of information to promote the sustainable use of groundwater sources in these areas, and to help resolve crises when existing groundwater systems fail. It is anticipated that the studies, in combination with the data base, will provide planning level information to support the Land Use Plan and the update of the Rural Areas chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. In January of 2000, the Department of Engineering & Public Works developed a proposal for watershed scale hydrogeologic studies as part of the budget process. The proposal divides the County into six study areas, prioritizes the study areas, outlines study objectives, and provides an estimated budget. Based on this proposal and subsequent information, the first study was funded from the reappropriation budget for FY 01. The top priority area for the first study is the Mechums River and Ivy Creek watershed. While the groundwater data base is designed to collect existing information, the hydrogeologic study is researching and analyzing original data based on field work, the examination of aerial photos, and other technical sources. A contract is currently in place with ENSAT Corporation to conduct the work. Additional funding will be requested upon completion of the current study for the purpose of conducting similar studies in other parts of the County (five additional regional studies are proposed). The Site Scale - Verification of Adequate Groundwater for Development: At the site scale, the questions are quite different. First of all, the questions pertain to an individual development and how it relates to surrounding land uses with regard to groundwater use. Questions at the site scale may be: Is there adequate groundwater to serve the existing or proposed development? How will pumping of groundwater at this site affect surrounding groundwater users? Are there areas of the site where groundwater is more readily available versus other areas? If so, should groundwater development be concentrated in the most promising areas? Do recharge areas need to be protected? What effect will septic systems have on groundwater? Are there site design considerations that will help promote the sustainable use of groundwater? Are the residents aware of groundwater issues and acting to protect the resource? Are water systems being monitored and maintained? In most cases, the results of a County-wide or watershed study will not be specific or detailed enough to answer these questions at the site scale. Certainly, these studies A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 7 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 should act in concert with information generated at the site level to provide an optimum level of knowledge of groundwater. As stated in the "Verifying Adequate Groundwater" Report: In the best cases, a hydrogeologic testing requirement for new development is complemented by regional hydrogeologic studies undertaken by the local government. The objective is to understand groundwater, its movement, its availability, and its vulnerability. Relying solely on developers to provide this information is a piecemeal approach. While information is gained for the individual development site, it is difficult to patch together the site-level tests to gain any broader understanding of regional groundwater resources...Likewise, regional studies cannot be conducted with the specificity and detail ora site-level hydrogeologic test, especially with regard to a particular development proposal. In this sense, a regional study is not a substitute for a site-level testing requirement, but certainly provides a superior framework for understanding the site-level outcomes. The Comprehensive Plan contains the following strategy for site-level hydrogeologic testing: Strategy: The Groundwater Subcommittee should investigate a requirement for hydrogeologic testing to verify suitable groundwater quantity and quality in the Rural Area and develop a draft hydrogeologic testing policy and ordinance language for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. The Board approved formation of and representation on a Groundwater Committee in May 2000. The charge to the committee was to establish standards to verify adequate groundwater supplies for new development proposals in the Rural Areas. The site- level standards will be designed to examine and protect groundwater through site design, the collection of information, sound water system management, and education of homeowners. The Groundwater Committee met monthly between October 2000 and March 2001. The committee also reviewed and commented on drafts of the report through the summer of 2001. The remainder of this report will present results from the committee' s work. GROUNDWATER COMMITTEE FRAMEWORK The initial overall and task goals for the committee were established as follows: Overall Goal: Promote the sustainable use of groundwater as a water supply for the Rural Areas. Task Goal: Develop recommended policies and standards for the verification of adequate groundwater quantity and quality for new development proposals in the Rural Areas. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 8 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 The standards should strive for the following characteristics: · Cost Effective · Produces Useful Data · Useful for Long-Term Monitoring · Improves Subdivision Design · Can be Accomplished in Reasonable Amount of Time · Leverages Best Application of private individual systems versus centralized · Promotes water systems that can be maintained through time · Integrates with Regional Studies · Promotes coordination between County, Health Department, and other agencies GOOD DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES After learning about the issues and local hydrogeologic conditions, the committee chose to broaden their discussion beyond simply identifying appropriate standards for site-level assessment. The consensus of the committee was to identify a set of"Good Development Practices" (GDPs) that could be practiced by the County and other government agencies, the homeowner, and the community (developer, neighborhood, etc.). The committee came up with the following categories for GDPs: Site Design & House Construction: Locating houses and septic drainfields in a way that does not interfere with or enhances groundwater recharge. Preserving trees and forest cover to promote recharge. Using Rural Preservation or other cluster mechanisms to preserve recharge areas (preferably in easement) and groundwater quality. House design should incorporate water conservation measures. Landscape & Land Cover: Provide tax incentives and demonstration projects for preserving or restoring trees and forest cover during and after construction, and for planting drought-resistant landscaping to reduce outdoor watering. Investigate the use of such incentives in other localities and whether they are effective. Add recharge areas to the list of "resource protection" easements to be held by the Public Recreational Facilities Authority and other easement-holding agencies. Promote backyard habitat programs that can also help recharge. Testing & Research: Support regional or County-wide studies on groundwater availability, septic impacts from existing and potential development, and better site design. Include groundwater issues in comprehensive plan research on appropriate lot sizes and alternatives to existing lot size/density requirements. Research the advantages and disadvantages of central systems versus individual wells. Develop an observation well network with drawdown gages to monitor groundwater levels. Develop standards for groundwater assessments at the site level as input into development design (also, modify the development review process so that good practices are not more difficult to get approved). Promote and/or cost-share on periodic well water testing programs for homeowners and residents. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 9 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 Education & Outreach: Provide public recognition for model projects and good practices (e.g., website). Seek funding and a willing developer for a demonstration site for GDPs. Produce better documentation about central systems, including cases where they are working well. Consider a citizen monitoring network of drawdown gages to monitor groundwater levels, with attention paid to coordination and QA/QC. Distribute educational materials for homebuyers and citizens on the value and use of groundwater, pollution prevention, and water conservation. Water System Configuration & Management: Promote development designs that protect recharge and take advantage of the best groundwater areas on a property. Particular design features must be researched and disseminated to the development community. In certain cases, such as when development reaches a threshold of density or number of lots, allow or require central systems so that the water system is controlled and monitored. Provide an enhanced structure for ownership and maintenance of central systems through a utility or permit system. Improve overall management of central systems. Water Use, Reuse, Recycling: Consider water recycling in subdivision plans. Provide technical assistance and cost-share for water recycling, gray-water reuse, and retrofitting fixtures to conserve water. Store rainwater for watering landscaping and gardens. In some cases, construct ponds for outdoor water uses. SITE-LEVEL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT - THE CONCEPT The committee's recommendation for developing groundwater assessment standards is a tiered approach whereby assessment requirements are progressively stringent as the density and/or number of lots increase. The primary functions of the assessment are to: · Improve development design. · Provide some assurance that groundwater use is sustainable for the development without impacting surrounding uses. · Assist in determining the most appropriate type of water system - central or private individual wells. With the tiered approach, certain thresholds for the number and size of lots created by a proposed division, coupled with groundwater availability and vulnerability information, would trigger use of Tier 0, 1, 2, or 3 level assessment. The sophistication (intensity) and precision of the assessment increases with higher tier levels. The thresholds for the number and size of lots that trigger various tiers of assessment should be based on patterns of subdivision activity that currently exist in the Rural Areas. Figure 1 illustrates data from the Department of Planning and Community Development for divisions within the Rural Areas for 1999 and 2000. The figure clearly demonstrates that a majority of rural divisions create only a few lots (one to three). For the two years where data are provided, divisions creating three lots or less accounted for 87% of all A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 10 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 divisions. This means that a majority of rural divisions in Albemarle County are created by the County's rural landowners, rather than the larger, "professional" developers. Planning Department staff members confirm the basic trend that most rural divisions create only one or a few lots. For these types of divisions, the owner usually retains the services of a surveyor, and plats are reviewed administratively. These factors are important in order to understand how and by whom a groundwater assessment requirement would be carried out. One on hand, it is important to not make a groundwater requirement too onerous, technically-complex, expensive, or otherwise beyond the capabilities of small subdividers to implement. On the other hand, small divisions create a significant number of new lots in the Rural Areas. For the two year period 1999 - 2000, divisions of three lots or less accounted for 168 total new lots (45% of all new lots created), and divisions of five lots or less amounted to 217 new lots (58% of the total). Obviously, small divisions are a substantial source of new lots, representing a significant fraction of new demand for groundwater (these numbers are conservative estimates based on available data; the actual number of lots created may, in fact, be higher). There is no doubt that the adoption of a groundwater requirement for dividing property will create cost and plat approval issues, especially for the small subdividers. The committee has made an attempt to frame the tiers with an understanding of the financial obligations involved. For instance, a tier 1 assessment may delay the plat review process, but would be a relatively minor cost for the applicant (as described below, much of the onus for tier 1 assessments would be with County staff). Tier 2 and 3 assessments would require an applicant to retain the services of a professional geologist or engineer. The complexity and cost of assessment and site analysis increase with each tier. Figure 1 Land Divisions 1999 - 2000 150 100 50 Lots Per Division [] Divisions Approved A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 11 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 Aside from the development potential posed by future divisions of existing parcels, there are numerous parcels in the Rural Areas that have not yet been built on. The parcels have been platted and, in most cases, recorded. Construction on these lots can take place simply through the issuance of a building permit. Since these parcels have already been through the plat approval process, this potential construction activity cannot be addressed through a typical groundwater assessment requirement, as outlined above. However, the groundwater committee believes it is important to understand how much future groundwater demand can be attributed to these parcels. Figure 2 shows the number of Rural Area parcels with no dwelling units for different parcel sizes. There are a total of 7,421 parcels documented with no dwelling units. Of these, 3,442, or nearly half, are less than 5 acres in size. Just over 1,000, or 14%, are less than 2 acres. Obviously, these parcels represent the potential for many more wells to be drilled, and more groundwater demand. One way to provide some oversight of these wells is to require that wells be drilled prior to issuance of a building permit. Figure 2 RA Parcels with Zero Dwelling Units 2500 2 0 0 0 1 a. 1000 5OO o ',' 0 <2 2to4.99 5to20.99 21to100 100.01to 500.01to 1000.01 >2000 500 1000 to 2000 Acres A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 12 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 SITE-LEVEL GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT - THE NUTS & BOLTS Table 1 illustrates the tier level (intensity) of assessment proposed for a particular development based on four criteria: · Whether the application is for a new division or simply construction of a new structure. · The size and/or number of lots of a proposed division. · Whether the proposed development is within an area of high, medium, or low groundwater availability, based on a watershed scale study, or within an area that has not yet been studied for groundwater availability. · Whether the proposed development is within an area of high, medium, or low groundwater sensitivity (e.g., wellhead protection area for a community well system) based on a watershed scale study. It must be noted that the specific assessment standards listed below are subject to modification based on the final results of the groundwater study for the Ivy and Mechums watersheds, and subsequent watershed scale studies if they are funded. The exact nature of how different areas, or subwatersheds, are classified with regard to availability and sensitivity will be addressed by those studies. The general principles of site level groundwater assessment presented below are, however, consistent with the watershed scale studies. Table 1 High/Med Availability Low Availability Area Not Yet Criteria and and/or Studied Low Sensitivity High Sensitivity Building Permit Tier 0 Tier 0 Tier 0 for New Structure Creation of any development right Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 1 lot (< 21 acres) Creation of 4-9 lots, where at least Tier 1 Tier 3 Tier 2 3 lots are 5 acres or less Creation of 10 or more lots where at Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 3 least 5 lots are 5 acres or less A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 13 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 The general purposes of the groundwater assessment are to: (1) provide some assurance that successful wells can be drilled for new structures and new lots, (2) identify opportunities and constraints for the proposed development based on hydrogeologic conditions on and surrounding the property, (3) provide a plan that matches the proposed development design with the opportunities and constraints, and (4) provide a plan of "good development practices" that will be employed during and after construction to promote the sustainable use of groundwater without compromising supplies on adjacent and nearby properties or high sensitivity resources, such as existing community water supplies. For each tier, proposed assessment and reporting procedures are outlined below. TIER 0 - BUILDING PERMITS Tier 0 does not pertain to new divisions, but to building permits for new structures. For these permits, wells should be drilled prior to issuance of a building permit (At present, a Health Department "permit to construct" is required prior to issuance of a building permit. The permit to construct shows that a septic system and well can be constructed within the geometric limits of the lot. However, it does not verify that a successful well can, in fact, be drilled). At present, there is no required minimum yield based on State Health Department private well regulations. The Health Department, however, does specify recommended yields (e.g., 150 gallons per bedroom per day and a sustained flow of 5 gallons per minute for 10 minutes). In general, "inadequate" wells are self-correcting, since property owners and drillers will attempt another well site when extreme low flow wells are drilled. However, the County must consider if a minimum yield requirement is appropriate for Tier 0. The County should work with the Health Department to keep data on all new wells updated in the County's groundwater data base, improve the accuracy of well locations in the GIS, and account for all dry holes drilled. TIER 1 County staff will evaluate plats by referring to the County's data base, any available regional studies, and information from the State Health Department and Department of Environmental Quality. Based on the following criteria, staff may request that a Tier 2 assessment be conducted for the application: · Density of proposed and adjacent development · Number of total wells and septic drainfields in the sub-basin · Threats to known recharge areas · Known water quality problems near the site (e.g., leaking underground storage tanks) · Proximity to high sensitivity resources, such as community water supplies. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 14 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 If a Tier 2 assessment is not warranted, all wells must be drilled prior to issuance of a building permit. The yield is to be verified by a 2-hour minimum air-lift test, with results reported on the GW-2 form. It is also possible to require water quality testing for new wells. However, there is some concern that testing of new wells is less reliable or conclusive than testing of wells that have been in use for several years. An alternative for Tier 1 would be to have the applicants provide the information based on existing sources, and County staff would evaluate whether a Tier 2 assessment is warranted. This would shift some of the burden and cost to those proposing new divisions. TIER 2 Graphic Section (Maps): The graphic section shall include a map or series of maps at appropriate scale showing topography, water features and drainage divides; planimetric features; proposed development lay-out; geologic contacts and structural features; surrounding properties within 1000 feet of any property boundary (including known well and septic locations from the County data base and/or VDH files); known potential sources of contamination from VDH, DEQ, other agency files, and field reconnaissance; and other relevant information from existing sources, including County studies and the groundwater data base. To the extent that recharge areas and groundwater flow within the property can be ascertained, these should be shown graphically on the maps. Narrative Section: 2. Review of existing hydrogeologic information from County studies, the County groundwater data base, aerial photographs, topography, geologic maps, soils maps, and other available information. 3. Summary of geologic and hydrogeologic conditions based on field survey of property by qualified professional (certified professional geologist), including fractures, joints, land cover, and saprolite characteristics (well casings from the County data base can be used to approximate saprolite depths). 4. A review and analysis of information presented on the maps, and description of how the development layout matches groundwater opportunities and constraints, a description of the type of water system to be employed (central versus individual) and the framework for water system maintenance, and a groundwater management plan. 5. The groundwater management plan shall address practices to be employed through design and during and after construction to preserve groundwater recharge, protect groundwater from contamination, and promote the sustainable use of groundwater in the development (e.g., water conservation practices). These measures may include: use of cluster design/open space or "selected" grading to protect recharge and groundwater, establishment of a water level/water quality monitoring network (in A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 15 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 conjunction with County programs), and education and outreach efforts to inform residents about water-friendly landscaping, water conservation and reuse, enhanced septic performance standards for design and construction, a septic system maintenance plan, and recommended well assessment protocols. The management plan must also include a contingency plan for actions to be employed if wells go dry or become contaminated (a "reserve well-field" concept may be employed, similar to the reserve drainfield currently required for septic systems). Well Drilling & Assessment: For central water systems - the wells shall be drilled and tested according to Virginia Department of Health standards for community water supplies. The water levels of two adjacent on-site and/or off-site wells must be monitored during the test to estimate the cone of influence for the new supply. For private individual wells, wells must be drilled prior to issuance of a building permit, as outlined in Tier 0 and Tier 1 assessments. TIER 3 Graphic Section (Maps): The graphic section is the same as Tier 2. Narrative Section: The narrative section is the same as Tier 2. Well Drilling & Assessment: For central water systems - Wells shall be drilled and tested according to Virginia Department of Health standards for community water supplies. The water levels of two adjacent on-site and/or off-site wells must be monitored during the test to estimate the cone of influence for the new supply. For private, individual wells - The developer may choose to perform: (1) a geophysical study of the property, or (2) pump assessment of a representative number of wells to represent the site's landforms and geology, with a minimum of three. For each test well, the test shall consist of a 12-hours continuous rate drawdown test. The two closest existing or test wells shall be used as observation wells for each test. Water levels in the observation wells shall be measured throughout the entire pumping test for drawdown effects. Recovery of water levels in the pumping wells and observation wells shall be recorded until at least 90% recovery is reached. The cone of influence for the new supply shall be mapped based on the test results. All wells shall be constructed prior to issuance of a building permit, as outlined in Tier 0 and Tier 1 assessments. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 16 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT COSTS & STAFF IMPACTS The costs of the groundwater assessments are difficult to ascertain with any precision at this point due to the conceptual nature of the assessment requirements. However, some general estimates can be made based on testing procedures in other localities, such as Loudoun County, and estimates from private consultants, such as HSI Geotrans, Emory & Garrett, and ENSAT Corporation. · Tier 0 shifts the timing of well construction in cases where a well must ultimately be drilled anyway. There may be incidental up-front costs that cannot be passed along to the home buyer (if the buyer is not the same as the building permit applicant), but these are not expected to be large. · Most of the burden for Tier 1 assessment would be with the County staff as outlined in this report. There will be a time delay for plat approvals, and, of course, the costs of a Tier 2 assessment if this is deemed necessary by the staff review. Based on current data, we would expect approximately 70 Tier 1 assessments per year. If applicants were responsible for providing Tier 1 information instead of relying on County staff screening, then the services of a professional would be required. Tier 1 assessments (largely a desktop exercise) would likely be in the $1,000 range. · Estimates for Tier 2 assessment range from $3,500 to $8,500, depending on the size of the development. Actual pump testing costs are only incidentally higher than current costs associated with drilling and testing either a community well or private individual wells. The added cost would be to monitor adjacent wells to test for drawdown effects. Based on current data, 5 to 7 Tier 2 assessments would be conducted annually. · Tier 3 involves more extensive pumping and testing requirements. Total costs are estimated to range from $7,500 to $15,000. The drilling and testing of each test well is estimated to cost between $2,500 and $4,000. On a per lot basis, the assessment would likely cost $3,000 per lot for a project with a relatively small number of lots (e.g., 10 to 15 lots), and $1,500 per lot if more lots are involved (e.g., 50 lots or more). In general, costs would go down considerably if central wells were used, since there would be fewer wells to drill and test. Again, based on current data, 2 or 3 Tier 3 assessments would be expected each year. To administer this program initially, it would take one additional County FTE. This position could also be responsible for maintaining the groundwater data base, coordinating with the State Health Department, coordinating additional regional studies, and pursuing other groundwater initiatives of the Comprehensive Plan. REEVALUATING COMMUNITY SYSTEMS The committee believes that to truly address sustainable groundwater use in the Rural Areas, the County must reevaluate its approach to central systems. Based on several horror stories, this topic has become nearly forbidden in County policy discussions. However, it is important to look objectively at the strengths and weaknesses of central A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 17 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 systems with regard to groundwater-dependent development patterns. At present, there are just under twenty groundwater based water systems in the County that meet the State Health Department's criteria for a "community" water supply (15 connections or 25 people served). The following excerpt from the "Verifying Adequate Groundwater" report helps flame the issue of community water systems: Albemarle has made it clear through policy and action that new central water systems are unwelcome, based on the history offbilure of these types of systems. Primarily, this seems to be based on a real or perceived sense of the County's liability in cases offbilure, and assumes, in some cases falsely, that developments that rely on private, individual welh' are superior or more fail-safe. One very interesting result of surveying other counties is that their regulations, in many cases, actually require central systems to be created when lot size or density hits a certain trigger. In most cases, county policy also dictates that these systems should be managed by a county water and sewer utility (e.g., Fauquier County Water & Sanitation Authority). However, these policies can be slow to implement, and the counties still have many systems managed and operated by homeowners' associations or private water companies. Roanoke County has gone as far as acquiring old central systems that were failing so that they could be brought up to acceptable standards (the Albemarle County Service Authority has also expressed concern about the standards to which existing central systems were constructed). It seems that, from a policy perspective, these counties have balanced the liability of creating new central systems with the benefits these systems have for: (1) making optimal use of groundwater by locating well fields on parts of the site where yield potential is greatest, and (2) protecting public health due to the water quality testing required of these systems though State Health Department standards (private, individual wells have no such testing requirement). The staff' interviewed for this report also noted that the benefits of a hydrogeologic testing program accrue more to projects with central systems than those with private, individual wells. On the other hand, these counties have also realized the downside of having these systems managed by homeowners' associations, and have attempted, with varying degrees of success, to bring these systems under the umbrella of a public utility. While it is true that much of what we know or believe about central systems is based on case studies where these systems have failed, there is more to the story. If one could generalize about the spectrum of experience with regard to central systems, the two anecdotes outlined below would apply. A rural subdivision utilizes a central well system. The system was designed and sited based on a geological study conducted when the subdivision was being planned. The wells are located, based on the geologic study, in an area that was promising for groundwater yield compared to the rest of the site, and the wells have been successful over time. The well field is also removed from the individual lot drainfields, so is A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 18 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 better protected than individual wells on each lot would have been. All proper easements to access and maintain the system were recorded with the subdivision plat. Each owner pays monthly to not only run the system, but also provide for preventative maintenance to the pumps, pump houses, and distribution lines. Information is provided to the owners about responsible use of water. A rural subdivision utilizes a central well system. The wells are located in a part of the site that seemed promising for groundwater yield based on observations of the developer and well driller, but also to not interfere with prime land for lots. The wells are scattered around the site, some down gradient from septic drainfields. Access is difficult to some of well locations. The homeowners pay a monthly fee that only covers the bare minimum to run the system, and the homeowners' association has designated one of the residents to keep up with the system and take the samples. There has never been a preventative maintenance program, and the owners find out about leaks only when water starts running down the street or someone's driveway. Storage is inadequate, so it is often difficult to meet demand in the summer, particularly when many owners are watering their yards and washing their cars. Eventually, due to lack of maintenance, the distribution systems starts leaking like a sieve, and calls start coming into the County and the Health Department that they are "running out of water." While these two scenarios are hypothetical, they are based on real cases in Albemarle County, and illustrate the range of experience with central systems. It is true that some systems are well designed and well managed. However, one common problem that plagues most of these systems is that they don't have a large enough customer base to generate adequate revenue to conduct preventative maintenance, make repairs, and design and implement system upgrades. These systems are generally operated by owners' associations or small water companies with limited staff resources, and it is difficult to leverage the technical and operational expertise needed to keep the systems functioning smoothly over the long haul. These systems, compared to larger utilities, do not possess the assets to borrow and repay money needed for periodic repairs and upgrades. Are these legitimate reasons to not allow or encourage central systems across the board? The question can only be answered by considering the "default" alternative -- private, individual wells. It is short-sighted to assume that individual wells will always be superior to central systems, or will be designed and maintained any better than central systems. Furthermore, the County's virtual prohibition on new central systems merely "passes the buck" to the lot owner if wells become contaminated or go dry. Consider the following advantages to central systems: Central systems can be designed based on geologic information to take advantage of the best groundwater opportunities on a site. This can be more sustainable than spreading individual wells throughout the site, some of which will provide adequate yields over time, while others will not. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 19 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 · Central systems can be located away from drainfields, instead of interspersed among them, as individual wells are. Through design, central systems can better protect recharge areas from drainfields, fuel storage tanks, and other potential threats. · Central systems that are regulated by the State Health Department are required to conduct periodic water quality testing to protect the system's users. System designs must be reviewed and approved by the State Health Department prior to construction, and pump tests are conducted to determine adequate yield. No such provisions apply to individual wells. · From a land use perspective, central systems would allow for tighter clustering of lots because setback requirements from wells to drainfields would not apply to each lot. If shared drainfields, or drainfields located partially in open space, where also allowed, clustering could become quite effective. One could argue that true clustering is not even possible if each lot requires its own water and sewer provisions. · Central systems that are well operated have a good chance to influence user habits, such as not wasting water during the summer, by metering usage or providing educational material to the residents at the neighborhood scale This list should not be construed to imply that central systems should always be used or encouraged for development in the rural areas. However, the groundwater committee believes that central systems must be part of the mix, and should be utilized where they make the most sense. The committee also discussed the potential to overcome some of the chronic problems with central systems by creating a higher level of management. For instance, many systems could be grouped together under the umbrella of a public or private utility for the purpose of increasing the customer base and providing professional management and maintenance. Of course, this would require concerted action on the part of the County in a direction that is counter to current policy. However, the committee believes this discussion must take place. In essence, the "Catch-22" with central systems is as follows: they may be needed to promote sustainable use of groundwater, but, if used, must be managed and maintained in a more aggressive and proactive fashion. The committee recommends that central systems should be encouraged, if not required, in the following cases, based on the results of the groundwater study for a proposed development: · Individual wells cannot meet water demand, and selected areas of the site have potential for development of a successful well field. · Individual wells would be susceptible to contamination from drainfields based on soils and geology, or there is cause for concern for groundwater quality from existing conditions. If a central well field is identified, it can reasonably be protected. · The plan has a requirement for true clustering, or lot sizes suggest that few alternatives will exist if wells go dry (e.g., Village Residential zoning). Additionally, central systems should be considered strongly in the following cases: · There is cause to believe that individual wells will not sustain initial yields, and selected areas of the site have potential for development of a successful well field. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 20 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 · Clustering is an attractive and viable method to protect an identified recharge area and/or would have other land use benefits. Furthermore, the County should begin the process of exploring how to integrate central systems into an overall management framework under either public or private auspices. Virginia Code specifically allows for this type of integration through public service districts, utilities, or formal and informal agreements. If central systems are permitted prior to the formation of such a regional utility, then each system should have a management plan approved by the State Health Department and the County, including emergency and contingency plans and certification of financial competency. CONSIDERING DIFFERENT FORMS FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT It may be audacious to say that future development in the Rural Areas should be guided primarily by the limitations and opportunities posed by groundwater resources. This statement implies that other factors, such as affordable housing and transportation, are not as important as groundwater. However, the corollary definitely does apply - if groundwater is not used sustainably, then other factors will not matter anyway. Consider then, how the Comprehensive Plan would be modified if groundwater were given its due respect. Here is one possible scenario, based on the assumption that currently allocated development rights are irreducible: Regional groundwater studies indicate portions of the Rural Areas where groundwater can be used sustainab/y and other areas where it cannot The majority of new rural development is targeted into areas of "groundwater opportunity" as village clusters, perhaps surrounding existing setdements and places where the transportation infrastructure is adequate. Central well systems, operated by a public or private utility, are used to provide water within these clusters. Recharge areas are identified and protected through open space easements. Outside of these areas, where groundwater studies indicate that use should be limited, the land use pattern is quite different Lots smaller than a given size are discouraged, and every effort is made to maintain agricultural, forestry, and open space uses. This is one possible scenario that is probably attractive to some and completely unsavory to others. The key point is that we must begin an earnest discussion of how to promote the sustainable use of groundwater in the Rural Areas, while discerning how this can be framed within the County's system of development rights and other concerns. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 21 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Continue to Pursue and Fund Regional Groundwater Studies - The first of six planned regional groundwater studies will be complete by the end of the year. The first study addresses the Ivy and Mechums River watersheds. This study was funded based on a proposal from the Department of Engineering and Public Works, "Regional Hydrogeologic Studies in Albemarle County" (January 21, 2000). The regional groundwater studies are an essential and integral part of understanding the County's groundwater resources. Neither site-level testing standards nor a general County-wide data base can replicate the detailed knowledge generated by these studies. The County should continue to fund the studies for the remaining five study areas. Promote "Good Development Practices" for Groundwater- This report outlines various "Good Development Practices" to promote the sustainable use of groundwater. These practices should be recognized through adoption into the Comprehensive Plan, demonstration projects, incentive programs for development, and cooperative outreach projects with the non-profit and private sectors. Streamline the Rural Preservation Development (RPD) or Cluster Provisions for Rural Divisions - One concept that recurs in this report is the use of development clustering to make better use of groundwater at the site level. This tool should certainly be promoted where it makes sense based on a technical assessment of groundwater prior to development. At present, the Zoning Ordinance provides for limited clustering through the RPD option. However, there is concern that this option is not widely applied or favored by applicants. The truth is that, in most cases, the RPD option presents uncertainties and time delays when compared to the review process for a by-right development design. The RPD option is a discretionary review, and a variety of conditions can be imposed on applicants. For many applicants, by-right (e.g., large lot) development design is the path of least resistance. This is not the say that some discretionary review or conditions are not appropriate in these cases. However, the County must investigate the review processes for cluster versus by-right development. If a cluster option is in the County's (and applicant' s) best interest for groundwater or other reasons, then the review process must be outfitted with a system of incentives and disincentives to promote the type of design most appropriate to the site. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 22 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 Adopt Groundwater Assessment Standards and Incentives for Proposed Development - The report proposes different tiers of groundwater assessment for different sizes of proposed development. The adoption of site-level standards for the verification of adequate groundwater must be approached with care. The standards should produce needed and necessary information, be within the technical and financial capabilities of those submitting subdivision plats, and minimize negative indirect and unforeseen consequences (e.g., promoting development design or layout that is inconsistent with the goals of the program). Site-level testing standards should be adopted in the subdivision ordinance. The standards in this report are a good starting point, with refinements expected through the Planning Commission and Board review process. The groundwater committee will also provide follow-up review and comment. As outlined in this report, implementing a groundwater assessment program would initially require one additional County FTE. Reevaluate the Use of Central Systems - The County's current stance with regard to central systems is quite absolute in that new systems will not be permitted. Yes, there are some very weighty considerations for central systems. We are not even sure that systems currently operational can be sustainable into the future, much less create a batch of new systems. However, there are some very compelling reasons to rethink the use of central systems. In some cases, central systems are the preferred method to best match development design with groundwater capabilities and limitations on a site. Central systems also have public health benefits due to the required testing and monitoring. The section of this report on central systems addresses other issues with the use of central systems. The committee believes that some sort of overarching management and maintenance structure may benefit these systems and make the creation of new ones more palatable. We should look for ways to make these systems work where they offer compelling advantages, rather than abandoning them altogether as a groundwater management tool. Consider Groundwater in the Rural Areas Section of the Comprehensive Plan - The Comprehensive Plan for the Rural Areas is currently being revised. This plan will have important implications for Rural Area land uses in the future. Groundwater should be an important consideration as policies for the Rural Areas are revisited and revised. Groundwater considerations can operate at different scales for Rural Area planning. At the County scale, groundwater studies may indicate that the County is not uniform with regard to groundwater availability and sensitivity. In some areas, groundwater may be available for increased demand, but the long-term viability of the resource A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 23 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 depends on protecting important recharge areas. In other areas, groundwater availability may be a limiting factor to increasing demand beyond a certain threshold. The spatial variability of groundwater, therefore, could be used to analyze the overall patterns and densities of development in the Rural Areas. The role of groundwater in Rural Area planning, however, will be tempered by other factors, such as infrastructure, existing uses, and the allocation of development rights. At the site scale, groundwater data generated by County studies and site assessments will lead to certain design considerations about clustering versus by-right layouts, central water systems versus individual wells, and the relationship of development design to recharge and the protection of sensitive resources. These issues, as well, can be addressed through the Comprehensive Plan update process. A Report from the Groundwater Committee, Albemarle County Department of Engineering & Public Works Page 24 Working Draft, October 15, 2001 FY 2002/03RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA BUDGET MESSAGE March 6, 2002 RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING Agenda Item #: Clerk's Initials: FISCAL PLANNING GOALS This FY 2002/03 operating and capital budget and FY 2002/03 - 2006/07 Capital Improvements Plan was designed based on the following goals: · The Personal Property tax rate is maintained at its current level of $4.28/$100 assessed valuation. The Real Property tax rate is maintained at its current level of $0.76/$100 of assessed valuation; · Basic local government services are maintained; · Current fiscal planning policies are maintained; · Education and public safety continue to be priorities for the provision of services; · Employee compensation and benefits are a major priority of the budget but will be revisited by the Board of Supervisors and School Board during our budget worksessions; · Local revenues are not automatically used to replace or eliminate federal or state programs; · Fiscal stability is maintained through an appropriately funded General Fund Balance; and · Necessary capital infrastructure improvements are programmed for implementation. BUDGET HIGHUGHTS In accordance with our fiscal planning goals, the following highlights were included in this balanced budget: · FY 2002/2003 Budget totals $193,853,942 for a 5.14% increase over the current year budget; · State and federal revenues are estimated to increase by $0.6 million (2.15%) over the current year Adopted Budget. Our most recent estimate is that FY 2002 State and Federal revenues may fall about $0.5 million below the Adopted Budget; · School Division revenues are expected to increase by $0.4 million (1.2%) from State and Federal sources in FY 03, and by $4.9 million (8.12%) from local revenue; I recommend that an additional $125,000 of non-recurring revenues be provided to the School Division to be used for non-recurring expenses; BUDGET MESSAGE PAGE A-1 FY 2002/03RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA The Revenue Sharing Agreement with the City of Charlottesville will provide the City with an additional $0.2 million for a total payment of $6.7 million; Debt Service of $9.9 million for school construction, renovation and major maintenance projects has been funded from the General Fund; the General Fund transfer to the Capital Program will be $4.9 million to aid in the funding of the recommended $109.2 million FY 03/07 Capital Improvements Program; Community and regional agencies are recommended to receive an average funding increase of 2.5%; An Ivy Landfill Remediation Fund has been proposed with an additional amount of $0.475 million for FY 2003 to cover future remediation programs at the Ivy Landfill. Primary funding of the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority is the responsibility of the County and the City of Charlottesville to the extent that the Authority is not Funded through user fees. This fund will be increased on an annual basis; With the construction of the Monticello Fire Station this calendar year and anticipated opening in FY 03, $0.4 million has been provided for staffing and operating this new combined career/volunteer manned fire station for the last six months of FY 2003; Completion of a newly constructed Juvenile Detention Center located next to the Regional Jail (opening of this new facility may be delayed until January 2003 due to funding reductions by the State); Health care benefits are estimated to increase by 27%; Staff compensation is proposed for a 2% increase, however, the Board of Supervisors and School Board are scheduled to revisit the matter of staff compensation during budget worksessions; Development review fees are recommended to be increased by 25% in order to aid in covering county expenses for this service (Note: these fees have not been increased in 10 years and the Consumer Price Index has increased by 30% over this ten-year period); A Board of Supervisors reserve in the amount of $405,000 (recurring revenues) is provided and it is estimated that an end-of-year fund balance of approximately $0.700 million (non-recurring revenues) could be targeted for additional services or programs by the Board of Supervisors. FUNDING PRIORITIES Administration - Provide funding to the Board of Elections for anticipated precinct changes. Provide a part-time position (to be hired in January, 2003) to maintain our web site and coordinate our E-Government function; Judicial- Additional PC workstations are provided for the General District Court and the Clerk of the Circuit Court. Funding is provided to the Sheriff's Office for replacement vehicles, furniture and communications equipment. Public Safety - Funding is provided for the opening of the new Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Center this Spring/Summer (state funding changes may delay this opening date). Funding is provided for one additional police officer and associated equipment, BUDGET MESSAGE PAGE A-2 FY 2002/03RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA replacement of communication equipment and other furniture and equipment needs as well as replacement vehicles and radar equipment. With the opening of the new Monticello Fire Station later this year, 5 new firefighters and 3 fire captain positions are recommended for hiring at the beginning of October, 2002. A new Fire Department Plans Reviewer position is also recommended. Communications equipment and hazmat equipment are recommended for the Fire/Rescue Department as well as an additional thermal-imaging camera for our volunteer fire departments. Public Works - Funding is provided to continue our groundwater study and a new landfill fund is being created for future operational and capital needs to cover the County's solid waste costs and share of remediation through RSWA. One additional custodial position is recommended as well as repair and maintenance equipment for county facilities. Human Services - Department of Social Services programs are budgeted at $7.1 million, a 10.5% increase over FY 2002 Adopted Budget. A significant part of this increase is for assistance to children, families and adults in need. The General Fund transfer to the Comprehensive.Services Act (CSA) Programs will be $1.476 million (up $12.28%) to cover non-discretionary increases in costs and the number of clients served. Parks and Recreation/Culture- Additional therapeutic recreation funding is provided as well as the County's share of the Skateboard Park operations. Mowing and snow removal equipment has been funded. Increased funding is Provided to our Library system as well as to the Film Festival, Festival of the Book, Ash-Lawn Highland Summer Festival, the Lewis and Clark Festival, Discovery Museum and Piedmont Council of the Arts. Community Development - A new Senior Planner position is recommended for funding for a half-year to implement the next Neighborhood Master Planning area~ Additional communications equipment is provided in Zoning/ Inspections. CTS funding is supplemented to maintain bus service within the urban area. School Division- The School Board's requested budget for FY 02/03 is $110,929,406. An additional $0.537 million is requested to fully fund their budget request. Their requested School Fund budget increased by $5,334,914 (5.05%) over the FY 02 Adopted Budget. I am recommending an additional $0.125 million of non-recurring revenues to be used for non-recurring expenditures in opening of the Baker-Butler Elementary School. This would give the Schools a Recommended Budget of $110,518,248, a 4.66% increase over FY 02. BUDGET MESSAGE PAGE A-3 To: Members, Board of Supervisors From: Ella Washington Carey, CMC, Clerk Subject: Reading List for March (~, 2002 Date: February 2(~, 2002 September 27(A), 2001 October 3, 2001 December 12, 2001 January 9, 2002 January 16, 2002 February 13, 2002 Return to Regular Agenda /ewc Pls. Thomas Pages 33 (beginning Item # I I) - end - Ms. Thomas Mr. Perkins Pages I - 28(end at Item #23) - Mr. Martin Pages 28(beginning with Item 23) - end - Mr. Rooker Mr. Bowerman Ms. Thomas BYLAWS POLICE DEPARTMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PDCAC) PURPOSE: To provide for independent review by a citizen committee of policies, procedures, budget decisions and staffing allocations of the Albemarle County Police Department in order to improve efficiency and effectiveness of local law enforcement services and to promote the' community policing philosophy of the County in a way which advances shared responsibility and interdependence between the community and the Police Department. I. Duties of the PDCAC Upon request by the Board of Supervisors, the County Executive, or the Chief of Police, or in response to a citizen complaint, the PDCAC shall undertake the following reviews and provide recommendations to the Chief of Police: Review of Albemarle County Police Department (ACPD) policies, programs, procedures and practices. (i.e., community policing, crime fighting initiatives, traffic enforcement, monitoring of police vehicle videos, interrogation and interview procedures, etc...) Review of ACPD Rules and Regulations and General Orders. · Review of ACPD budget and funding priorities. Review of the level of staffing of the ACPD and how staffing is allocated. H. Responsibilities of the Chief of Police The Chief of Police will ensure ACPD cooperation with the PDCAC in all appropriate inquires and studies. The Chief of Police will review the recommendations of the PDCAC and w~l respond to the PDCAC, verbally or in writing, to address the ACPD's recommendations. III. Composition of the PDCAC The Board of Supervisors shall appoint four (4) citizen members to the PDCAC. They shall he selected on the basis of their professional experience, educational background, and history of community service. A Board of Supervisors member will serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the PDCAC and serve as liaison between the PDCAC and the Board of Supervisors~ IV. Each citizen member will serve a term of two (2) years commencing from their date of appointment, and may serve for a maximum of three (3) consecutive terms. PDCAC Chairperson A Chairperson will be selected by a vote of the members of the PDCAC to serve aterm ofone (1) year. A Chairperson may not serve in that capacity for more than two (2) consecutive years. · If a Chairperson cannot be elected by a vote of the PDCAC members, the County Executive will select the Chairperson from the sitting members. The Chairperson will be responsible for: 1. Scheduling committee meetings. 2. Appropriate record keeping of committee activities. 3. Assigning and coordinating PDCAC duties as defined in this document. Removal of a PDCAC Member During Term A PDCAC member may be removed from the committee for cause by the Board of Supervisors upon a determination that the member has committed nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance in performing the duties of the PDCAC or is otherwise unqualified to continue to exercise the assigned duties and responsibilities. I:X3DE pT~ATTORNEYX~LWDXPDC AC Bylaws.doe 2 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Members of the Board of Supervisors Laude Bentley, C.M.C. Senior Deputy Clerk March 6, 2002 Vacancies on Boards and Commissions I have been advised that the School Board has requested that Chuck Ward re~ilaee Ken Boyd on the Audit Committee (no set terms). Please make this appointment at today's meeting. Thank you, Cc: Bob Tucker Larry Davis David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Sco[t,~vi~le Charles S. Mar~in Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter E Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouctt Sall~ H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11,2002 Mr. Stephen von Storch 250 Chestnut Oak Ln. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. von Storch: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee (DISC) II. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, ] would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your. willingness to serve the County in this capacity. SHT/lab Enclosure cc: Commonwealth Attorney Elaine Echols Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman Printed on recycled paper SVSAROHITEOTS PAGE 01/01 County of Albemarle Board o~--Coun~r 5up~wl, 401 Mrlntire Road Charlott~v~¢, VA 22~0245~ APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type or prZat.) Board,IC~mmisdon/Committee DISC II Applk-a.m'~ Name ~ed~ Db~i~ ~ w~ch ~ home r=~e~e b located Smuel Mitl~ E~lo~ Smneki~'von DSWmh Architect~ Busiaes, .A~dres$ P.O. Box 1332 Charlot~eivflte, VA 22902 l-~me Yhoae $04.2~$.4204 4/2/1997 ~~ in Fra~rfml, Ru~insss~ Chumh and/or L~.blie.~ Civic a~d Ch~irabl~ Offlc~ and/or Od'~er Acfiv/~ You~ $oeo~ Coaoh, fom~¢riy sat on JABA building The information pre, vialed on this application will be re~a,¢d to ~e public ~poa Signature ~...--'~' w- - Date 1/2/2002 Cle~, Boom of County Supervisox~ Alb~n~rl~ County 401Mclnti~ Road Charlottesville, VA 22902- 4596 FAX,' (804) 296-5800 David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsvflle Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hail Dennis S. Rocker Jack ~Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11, 2002 Mr. Fred Hudson P. O. Box 84 Free Union, VA 22940 Dear Mr. Hudson: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Housing Committee, with your term to run from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your'convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney Ron White Printed on recycled paper County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 Mchatire Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITtEE (Please type ot print.) Boat-d/Commission/Committee Fred W. Hudson HOUSING COMMITTEE Applicant's Name Full Home Address P.O. Box 84 Free Union, Virginia 22940 Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Employer Re Lired Business Add~'ess N/A Home Phone 434./ 973-8584 Whitehall Phone Occupation/Tide Retired Y~ Resident in ~bemafle Coun~ 6 years Previous }~esidence 168 MacPherson St., To~ronto, Canada Education ~flDegrees and Graduation Dates) B.A, 1968; J.D. (Law) 1969 Date of Employment Spouse's Name Ontari~umber of Children Betty 2 (Grown) Memberships in Fraternal Business. Church and/or Sc)c/al Groups Public. Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests Industrial D~velopment Authority. R~son(s% for W~shin~ to Se~e on fl~s Bo~d/Comn~ssion/Com~fi~ee Affordable housing is a concern that I' have had ~or a long time. Localities in Albemarle County that engage in growth The ~app~~ased )o th~ publir upon requeat, Signature Date January 15, 2002 Return m: Clerk. Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 McIntite Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 PI_EASE RESTRICT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE 01-16-02P32:07 RCVD managemem should also have housing policies in place to ensure that home prices do not become unaffordable for low and moderate income families. I would like to participate in the effort to encourage affordable housing units in the county and contr?oute to the concept of the above housirtg policies. Our county will benefit from a citizenry made up of a diversified economic base. I believe that I can contn~oute to the direction of the issues that are before the Committee. David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier. Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 40I Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rocker Jack Joueti Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11, 2002 Mr. David Schmidt 1604 Stoney Creek Dr. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Schmidt: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Housing Committee, with your term to run from January 1, 2002 through December 31,2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willing ness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney Ron White Printed on rec~ucied paper County of Albemarle Office of Board of CounW Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type or print.) Board/Commission/Committee Housing Committee Applicant's Name David A~ Sehmidt Full Home Address 1604 Stoney Creek Drive, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Home Phone 434-923-3677 Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Scottsville District Employer City of Charlottesville Cimuit Court Clerk's Office Business Address 315 East High Street, Charlottesville, Va. 22902 Phone 4}4-970'~773 . . Occupation/Tide Deputy Clerk Years Resident in Albemarle Count3~ 23 Previous Residence 352 west Rio Road Education (Degrees and.Graduation Dates) Charl°ttesville High School - 1978 Date of Employment SpoUse's Name mane M. Schmidt Number of Children 1 5/1/1993 Membershi~ in Fraternal .Business. Church and/or Social Groups First PresbyuaSan Church - D~a¢on; Charlottesville-Albemarle Jayeess - past member. Va. Circuit Court Clerk's Association Public, Ciyic and Charitable Office and./or Other Activities or Interests Ga'eater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity - Chair Faith Relations Committee Volunteer with Albemarle Housing Imla~vment Program Reason(s) for Vgishln g to S~erve on this Board/Commission/Committee I would like to increase my public service and believe that my work with Habitat f~ Humanity, AHI? and my chumh's local outreach missions provides me the appropriate background for this committee. I also believe this exoerience would allow me to advise the BOS on local housin~ needs as well as suggest realistic solutions. tion provided on this~ will be red,leased to the public upon request. Signature Date 1zt2~/200t Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 Mclnflre Road Charlottesville, VA 2290g-4596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 12-26-01A09:20 RCVD David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier. Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker ,Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11,2002 Mr. Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. 724 Chapel Hill Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mr. Wood: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee, with your term to run from March 6, 2002 through March 5, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SH'l-/lab Enclosure cc: Commonwealth Attorney Ch ief John'Miller Prin~ed on recycled paper County of Albemarle 401 Mcl~tim Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 ¢04) 29~5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMrlTEE (Please type ot pOnt,) Boaed/Commission/uommattee ' - - - - Applica~es Name k I o~ A ~ Woo d Full Home Address ~ C~p~l ~ Il Ro~d ~stefid ~s~ct ~ wN~ yo~ home residmce is l~ted Business Ad&ess HomePhone q, Sq,' c~ Previous Residence ~ I ~ &[ 0 ~01 Number Children ! Re~ m: Cler~ Board of Co~ Supc~sors P~SE RESTRIOTANYA~ACHMENTS ~bematlc CounW. TO ONE PAGE 401 Mcln~e Road Charlo~esdRe, VA 229024596 F~: (~4) 296-5800 Occupation/Title Years Resident in Albemarle County Date of Employment I q--q q Spouse's Name ~-~0~'¥~ ;o__~ ~ ~-., 01_09~02P12:54 RCVD ,--/-],-l-. - q't~-ceo q .... David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier Jr. $cottsvi e Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins Whi~e Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouetl Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March I1,2002 Dana M. Slater, Esquire 1700 Bent Tree Ct. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Slater: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee, with your term to run from March 6, 2002 through March 5, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney Chief John Miller ?r~.nted on recycJed paper County of Albemarle Office of Board of Coumy Supetariso~s 401 Mclnti~ Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITr~.F. (Please type ot print.) Applicant's Name ~)al, X~ IL~, Sl~.4e..¢- HomePhone Full Home Ad&ess Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Employer 'S~\ (' Phone BusinessAd&ess '"l}e ~', ~qk Occupation/Title /~1~ Date oS Employment Yeazs Resident in Albemarle County ~&~& ~ac~ ~ e~'~11 ~101 Spouse's Name Previous Residence .~q'2.O i.l.~0ofl~a~ ~f/_ (a'/4~J:L~ ~7Jt~3 Number of Chil&en Education ~fl2)%gr. ecs and Graduation Dates) ~ Memberships in Fmterml. Bus~¢~.~, Church and/or Social Groups Public,_. Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests The i~a~o~&d on t~ ~k>dion ~11 be ~k~J?o the~c ~on nque~. Si~e ~te Returns: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 40! McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FAX: (804) 296-$800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE 07-23-02P01:43 RCVD DANA MARY SLATER BAR ADMISSIONS ~Virginia Bar Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals U.S. District Court for the W. Dist. of Va. EDUCATION University of Richmond, T.C. Williams School of Law October 1999 October 1999 October 2000 J.D. May 1999 Activities: Richmond Journal of Law and Technology: Senior Staff (1998-1999) Client Counseling and Negotiations Board- Office: Treasurer (1997-1999) University of Virginia, B.A., Psychology 1985 Honors: Dean's List Activities: Cross-Country- NCAA National Championship Team 1981, 1982, All-American Uni.versi .ty of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado Activities: Cross-Country- AllzAmerican Indoor/Outdoor Track- American Record: Indoor Three Mile 1977-1979 PAST EMPLOYMENT The Honorable Stanley R. Chesler, United States Magistrate Judge United States District Court, District of New Jersey August 1999-September 2000 Newark, New Jersey Law Clerk- Draft Court Opinions and Orders; legal research; review all motions and prepare the motion files for the Judge; entertain questions by counsel and pro se plaintiffs and defendants concerning federal court motion practice. Henrico County Commonwealth's Attorney Office January 1999-April 1999 Henrico County, Virginia Student Intern-Prosecuted cases in Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and General District Court-criminal and traffic; legal research, draft legal memorandums. Albemarle County Police. Department June 1985-July 1996 Patrol Officer Tactical Team Member (S.W.A.T.)- Served high risk warrants, resolved situations involving extreme danger. Basic SWAT School Instructor, Va. Tactical Association Seminar Instructor. Additional Positions Held- Field Training Officer; Accident Reconstruction Team; Youth Investigator; D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) Instructor; Liaison Committee to the Commonwealth Attorney's Office; Recruitment and Background Investigations Team; Firearms Training Committee; Directed the Physical Fitness Assessment Program. Certifications General Instructor, Diversionary Device and Chemical Munitions Instructor, D.U.I. Detection and Standard Field Sobriety Testing Instructor, Radar Operator, Breathalyzer Operator, Accident Reconstructionist. COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES Board, of Directors for Offender Aid and Restoration (O.A.R.), 1994-1996. Responsibilities: Reviewed personnel policies and procedures, reviewed and approved the budget, fund raising, oversees the Director of O.A.R.. Special Olympigs; Rg~[~ ~)ordinator for the Law Enforcement ]'l~l~h Run, 19~3, 1994. ~ DireCtor' or'the Regional Track and Field Meet, 1989, 1990. ' Hurricane Andrew Relief Worker, Homestead, Florida, 1992. David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsv~tte Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas .gamuet Miller March 11, 2002 Ms. Jewel C. Mason 1049 Hacktown Rd. Keswick, VA 22947 Dear Ms. Mason: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee with your term to run from March 6, 2002 through March 5, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. SHT/lab Enclosure cc: Commonwealth Attorney Chief John Miller Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman Printed on recycled paper County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type o£ print.) Board/Commission/Committee County of Albemarle Police Advisory Board Applicant's Name Full Home Address Jewel C. Mason 1049 Hackto.wn Road Keswick, VA. 22947 Ivfagisterial District in which your home residence is located Employer MontiCello Area Community. Action Agency Business Address 1,025 Park Street Charlottesville, VA 22901 , , Occupation/Tide Family Support Spedalist Years Resident in Albemarle County 12 Previous Residence , Charlo~es~e , Home Phone Rival-ma Phone . 434.295.3171 Date of Employment 1976 Spouse's Name Wllliam Number of Children ~ 2 Return to: Je~vel C. Mason Janua~ 22,.2002 Signature Date Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401.McItrtire Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 FAX: (804) 2964800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY A TTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE :'! 01-22-02P04:55 RCVD Reason(s) for W/shing to Serve on this Board/Commission/Committee I have.previously participated in the Ride Along Program.md have worked with the Chief on Community. Relations. TI~ information provided on this application mill be rekased to the pubh'r upon request. Public, Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests League of Women Voters: Regisf lmr for Albemarle County.; Monticello High School Parent Council: Charlottesville Redevelopment & Homing Authority Past Commissioner Memberships in FraternaL_ Business: Church md/or Sodal Groups Mt. Zion Baptist Church; Order of Eastern Star. Fair Hou.~ing Boar& PHAR (Public Housing Advisory. Board) Education .(D ~egrees and Graduation Dates) Lorn'sa County High.School; Germanna Commurt~ Colle.?:.. V~nia State University ...... David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis $. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas SamueI Miller March 11,2002 Mr. Dwight T. Colley 1597 Thomas Jefferson Parkway Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Colley: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to the Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee, with your term to run from March 6, 2002 through March 5, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your'willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney Chief John Miller Printed on recycled paper County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 McInfire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITI~E (Please type or print.) Board/Commission/Committee Police Department Citizen Advisory Committee App~canfs Name Dwight. .. T. Colleyr. .'PsyD Home Phone (434) ~45-0165~ Fu~HomeAd&ess 1597 Thomas Jefferson Parkway Cha'rl0ttesville ,. VA 22902 Magisterial DisMct in which your home residence is located Empl%v~, VA Dept. of Corrections Community Corrections BusMessAd&ess. 199 Spotqap Road, Suite A Charlottesville, VA 22911 Scottsville Phone (434) 977-4389 Occupation/Title Mental Health Clinica! S, upvr. Years Resident in Albemarle County 7 Previous Residence Springfield, VA Date of Employment_ , 1 2 / 95 -Present Spouse'sName Kimberly W. Co!ley Number of Cb31&en 2 Educafion.0DegxeesandGraduafionDates) Doctor of psychology, 1989; BA ~nn~g6m~nt; !'~'71) 1970 Memberships in Fraternal_~ Business,. . Church md/or Sodal GrouCs. nrn~4_ .......... c-~n ¢~,,.h~. ...... ~ ~.4~_~__~= ~ :~..~ .... 4, a ti on Virqinia Psycholoa'ical. _ As~qoa~atJonr VA Ao~mx~r ................ c~z olqnq~] D~xr~hr~l~¢4~-~~ ..... ~--~ Public, Civic and Charitable Office, and/or Other Activities or Interests Board (last term) Region Ten Community Services R~a,q.on(.s) for Wishing to Serve on this Board/Commission/Committee As s i st . department and ~c~mrn,~ni ty uszng my expereince and traininq to more. ~effectively..serve the community. Return tx): Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County' 401 McIntite Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4!i96 FAX: (804) 296-5800 RESTRICT ANY A TTACHMENTS PLEASE TO ONE PAGE 01-1~-02A09:32 RCVD Education: Dwight T. Colley, PsyD Clinical Psychologist Certified Sex Offender Treatment Provider 1597 Thomas Jefferson Parkway Charlottesville, VA 22902 (804) 245-0165 (H) (804) 977-4389 (O) Curriculum Vita Doctor of Psychology (PsyD), Forest Institute of Professional Psychology, Honolulu, HI Master of Arts, Psychology; Forest Institute of Professional Psychology Bachelor of Arts, Business Management, California State College, Fullerton, CA Professional Credentials: Clinical Psychologist, Board of Psychology, Commonwealth of Virginia Sex Offender Treatment Provider, Board of Psychology, Commonwealth of Virginia Professional Experience: Mental Health Clinical Supervisor, Community Corrections, Virginia Department of Corrections, 1998 to present. Regional Clinical Supervisor, Office of Health Services, Virginia Department of Corrections, 1995 to 1998. Private Forensic Psychology Practice (part-time), Charlottesville, VA, 1996 to present. Psychological Consultant, Augustus Institute, Alexandria, VA, 1990 to present. Chairman, Region Ten Community Services Board, Charlottesville, VA, 1999/2000, Board member since 1994. Lecturer in Psychology, Mary Baldwin College, Staunton, VA, 1999 to present. Special Agent, U. S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Washington, D.C., 1988 to 1995 (Retired). Resident Clinical Psychologist, Psychological Resources, Alexandria, VA, 1988 to 1990. Chief Psychologist, Department of Health, Courts and Corrections Branch, Honolulu, Hi, 1986 to 1987. Psychological Intern, Department of Health, Honolulu, HI, 1985* to 1986. Special Agent, U. S. Secret Service, Los Angeles, CA and Washington, DC, 1970 to 1982. Police Officer/Detective, Riverside, CA, 1965-1970. Squad Leader, U. S. Marine Corps, 1961 to 1964. David P. Bowerman Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville Chmfles S. ~artin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296~5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11, 2002 Mr. John A. Scrivani 5027 Advance Mills Rd. Earlysville, VA 22936 Dear Mr. Scrivani: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to complete Ms. Bettina Ring's term on the Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) Committee, with said term to run from March 6, 2002 through August 1, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure cc: Commonwealth Attorney Wayne Cilimberg Printed on recycled paper County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Chadottesvitlq VA 229024596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type o~ ~) Board/Commission/Committee Acquis! ,fion,of Conservation Easements (ACE), Applicant's Name John A. Scrivani Full Home Address 5027 Advance Mills Road, Earlysville VA 22936 Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Whitehall Employer Virginia DqC~t of Forestry Business Ad&ess Home Phone 434-978-3634 Phone 434-977-6555 900 Natural Resources Drive, Suite 800, Charlottesville VA 22903 Occupation/Title Years Resident in Alber~ _vle County 12 Previous Residence Blacksburg VA Education 02)eg~ ees and Gxaduation Dates) Dir~or of Applied Research Date of Employment Spouse's Name , ,Di~mc B. Serivani Number of Children 1 phD, 1985, Fore,st Man--t, Oregon Stato; MS, 1982, ForesRy, Clemsoa; MSP, 1976, Urb~ and Regional Planning, Florida Smle Univ~sity; BS, 1974, Geography & Political ~, Univcesity of South Florid 8/111989 Membexships in Fraternal. Business. Church and/or Social Groups Society of American Foresters; St. Thomas Aquinas Chinch Public. Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interest~ Pr~ideat, Ivy Cre~k Foundation, 2000 m present; Mea~aber, Ri~nna Traila Foundation; Member, The Nature Conservancy;, Adjunct Assislant Professor, PVCC, Geographic Information Sys~oms Reason(s) for ~rxshing to Serve on this Board/Commission/CommiRee To help in the eo~ation ofopon space, forestland, and the biological diversity of Albemarle County. To apply my professional knowld~ge of forests ami land.ape ecology in ~ to my e~mmuni~. The mfom~ii%n~qcMed on this al~licatlo~ will be released to the public upon reques[ Remm t~:// Cler~ Board of County Supervi~ot~ 401 McIntite Road Chado~ VA 229O2.4596 2/8/2OO2 02-11-02A10:48 RCVD David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Sco~s',dlle Charles S. Matin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11, 2002 Mr. Rodney S. Thomas 3411 Indian Springs Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mr. Thomas: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were appointed to complete Mr. C. Jared Loewenstein's term on the Charlottesville Albemarle Regional Transportation (CHART) Advisory Committee, with said term to' run from March 6, 2002 through April 3, 2003. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney Wayne Cilimberg Printed on recycled paper David P. Bowerman Rio Lind~ay G. Dorrier. Jr. Scotts~ille Charles S Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Joue~t Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11, 2002 Mr. Sterling K. Robinson, II 3278 Rabbit Valley Rd. North Garden, VA 22959 Dear Mr. Robinson: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were reappointed to serve on the Commission on Children and Families, with your new term to run from July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2005. I have enclosed an updated roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue to serve the County in this capacity. SHT/lab Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney Saphira Baker Printed on recycled paper David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scott$~ille Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas ,~arnuel Miller March 11, 2002 Ms. Roxanne VVhite 401 Mclntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Wl~e~~ At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were reappointed to serve on the Region Ten Community Services Board, with your new term to run from July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2005. I have enclosed an updated roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to continue to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure CC: Commonwealth Attorney James R. Peterson Printed on recycled paper David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsville Charles S. Martin Rivanna COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800 Walter F. Perkins White Hall Dennis S. Rooker Jack Jouett Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller March 11, 2002 Mr. W. Ivar Mawyar P.O. Box 60 North Garden, VA 22959 Dear Mr. Mawyar: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 6, 2002, you were reappointed as the Samuel Miller Magisterial District representative to the Board of Equalization, with term to run from January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002. Duties of this Board are set out in the Code of Virginia, Chapter 32, Article 14, Sections 58.1- 3370 through 58.1-3389. The duties are more specifically set out in Section 58.1-3379 and read as follows: "The Board shall hear and give consideration to such complaints and equalize such assessments and shall, moreover, be charged with the especial duty of increasing as well as decreasing assessments, whether specific complaint be laid or not, if in its judgment, the same be necessary to equalize and accomplish the end that the burden of taxation shall rest equally upon on all citizens of such county or city. The (Director of Finance) of such county ... shall, when requested .... call the attention of the board to such inequalities in real estate assessments in his county or city as may be known to him. Every board of equalization may go upon and inspect any real estate subject to equalization by it." In order to be eligible for appointment, every prospective member of such board shall attend and participate in the basic course of instruction given by the Department of Taxation under Section 58.1-206. In the near future, you will receive notice of a meeting from Bruce Woodzell, the Real Estate Assessor. I have enclosed an updated roster for your convenience. If you have any questions about the duties of this Board, please call Mr. Woodzell at 296-5856. S HT/lab Enclosure Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman CC; Bruce Woodzell Commonwealth's Attorney Printed on recycled paper COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: Members of the Board of Supervisors FROM: DATE: RE: Laurie Bentley, C.M.C~---.... Senior Deputy Clerk(c., ,~..~ February28, 2002 ~ Vacancies on Boards and Commissions I have updated the list of vacancies on boards and commissions through June 30, 2002, and have attached applications received for advertised vacancies. In addition, I have included a chart showing the times set for 12 interviews scheduled for March 6, along with the interviewees' applications. (Note: Paul Wood will not be available, as he is out of town that day, and Katya Spicuzza has rescinded her application.) Thank you. Cc: Bob Tucker Larry Davis Chamber of Commerce (list only) / ! I INTERVIEWS BOARD OR COMMISSION # VACANCIES APPLICANT INTERVIEW, IF SCHEDULED (1 Vacancy) james Grigg , '12':30 Fred Hudson (to be 12:40 interviewed for Housing Committee at the same time) ~ MiChael McGowan 12i50' Stephen yon Storch 2:10 Jodie Webber 1:00 (2 Vacancies) Fred Hudson - , (interviewed at 12:40) Jewel Mason (to be 1:10 interviewed for Police Dept Citizens Advisory Committee at the same , time) David Schmidt 2:30 (3 Vacancies) Dwight Colley 1:40 Jewel Mason (interviewed at 1:!0) Alberto Ojeda 2:00 Dr. Henry Silva 1:20 Dana $1ater 1:30 (empty slot) 2:20 Lloyd Wood 1:50 ~ NEW,ApPLICATIONS John A. Scrivani Jeanine Wolanski Jr. Russell M. Lafferty Leslie S. C, Weinhardt Leslie M. Burr ................ ~ (application sent to Mr. Martin)