Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-10-07October 7, 1981 (Regular Night Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 7, 1981, at 7:30 P.M., in Meeting Room #7 of the new Albemarle County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta, C. Timothy Lindstrom and Layton R. McCann. BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Miss Ellen V. Nash. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive and Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Director of Planning. Agenda Item No. 1. Call To Order. The meeting was called to order at 7:307.M. by the Chairman, Gerald E. Fisher. Mr. Fisher noted that Miss Nash would not be present tonight because she was in the hospital. Mr. Lindstrom then offered a brief prayer asking for guidance and support for the Board in its decision making process. Mr. Fisher noted that this is the first meeting in the new Albemarle County Office Building, and that it has been a process which has taken more than five years to complete. Mr. Fisher thanked all the County staff who had any part in the preparation of the new building, especially Mr. Agnor. Agenda Item No. 2. ZMA-81-24. Knopp Enterprises, Inc. (Deferred from September 16, 1981). Mr. Tucker noted that this petition was deferred in order to receive a report from the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority regarding increased phosphate loadings from the requested development to the existing Brownsville Treatment Plant, and the relat±on of such to what is already flowing into the reservoir, calculated on the number of bedrooms for the proposed apartments. Mr. Tucker then read the following two letters; first a letter dated October 1, 1981, from Mr. George Williams, Executive Director of the Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority, and the second from Mr. J. W. Brent, Executive Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority; dated October 7, 1981: "This is in response to the Board's request for information on phosphorus loading from the proposed Country Aire Apartments under zoning request ZMA- 81-24. Our calculation of flow for the sixty-one (61) proposed connections is as follows: 25 - 1 bedroom apartments ~ 200 gpd = 5,000 gpd 25 - 2 bedroom apartments ~ 250 gpd = 6,250 gpd 10 - 3 bedroom apartments ~ 300 gpd = 3,000 gpd i - office ~ 100 gpd = 100 gpd Total 14,350 gpd Using an estimated design flow of 100 gallons per capita per day yields an equivalent population of 144 persons. Assuming use of a phosphate deter- gent, the theoretical annual phosphorus contribution would be 504 pounds (144 x 3.5 #/cap./year). The Betz Report indicates a total annual phosphorus loading to the South Rivanna Reservoir of 54,128 pounds. Therefore, the increased phosphorus loading from total sources is 0.9% (504 + 54,128)100. The point source annual loading is 13,686 pounds. Therefore, the increased phosphorus loading from point sources is 3.7% (504 ~ 13,686)100. The Brownsville plant has a polishing pond which follows the secondary plant. Under this flow scheme, there are certain tmmes of the year when no stream discharge occurs. Therefore, the above figures are a maximum since they assume a constant discharge." "The Brownsville package treatment plant will accommodate the projected sewage contribution from the proposed 60-unit apartment development planned by Knopp Enterprises, Inc. Any additional connections beyond the proposed 60 units will necessitate a careful re-evaluation of this treatment plant." Mr. Fisher asked if the applicant or any citizen present wished to comment on this petition or the letters just made part of the record. No one wished to speak and Mr. Fisher referred this matter to the Board for a decision. Mr. Lindstrom said he requested this report and despite the findings, finds it difficult to approve a developme~ which seems to be in opposition to all the reservoir protection regulations which he has fought so long and hard to put into force. Mr. Fisher said on September 16, 1981, this petition was deferred to this date. that last meeting, a motion was made and seconded to approve the request for ZMA-81-24 with the amended proffer. Mr. Fisher said he rules that that same motion now stands before this Board and the discussion should be on that motion. At Mr. McCann said he made the motion for approval at the last meeting, and since it has been reported that hook-ups to the Brownsville Plant will be permitted, he still supports that original motion. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Brent if any other property in the area of the Brownsville Treatment Plant could connect to this plant should this petition be denied. Mr. Brent said the capacity is there and that it can be used by anyone within the service area of the Service Authority. :SmOTYOJ se ~aodaa JJeSS ~UTmueyd aM2 p~aa aa~on~ 'aX UT 'I~6I ¢8I 2sn~nv ua pasTSaoAPV) '2oTaSSTG T~Taa~ST~M aaIITM Ian~es sg6Z IaOaeg '6~0 90Z 'SH jo apTs MSaou aM2 ua p~2~ooI ST ~Saadoa~ 'seaaV Iean~ VH pauoz saaoe I'~ ua a~oM aITqo~ e aSeooI o2 2sanbaH 'uos~o~f 'M aIIaSSZ '6g-IS-SS '[ 'oM ~aSI ~pua~V · ~UTSaa~ ~ep T96I 'II aaq~aAOM aq2 2~ 'aYqTssod JT 'pasuasaad aq asuodsaa e 2eq2 pa~sanbea aaqST~ 'a~ 'aTOAaaSaa aqS. osuT s~uap~oy @seqdsoqd @onpaa :SgXV .q :SUOTSTPUOO ~UT~OyTOJ aq~ aajjoad aM '(aajjoag) TeTSuapTsaH 9-~ o2 yeTSuspTsaH T-H ~oaj aM2 jo ~UTUOZaa aoj ~ydde ~qaa~M am 2o~oad aM2 ~UTSaIdmoo moaj sn apnyoaad SUOT~O~ om2 asaq2 aouT~ 'uoTs~ooI aoueaSua aM2 jo payoff aq2 uoTssTur~oo ~UTUUeIg aq2 £q uoTso~ aAOq~ aq~ 02 ~uanbasqn~ 'aSTs STq2 aoj SUeTd ano q~T~ anuTSUOO o~ UOTSTSod ~ UT · sSua~Saede (09) ~SXTS jo UOTSOnaSsuoo aq2 aoj ueyd aSTS o2 ye~oadde jo ~UTSa~ sST 2V '~Saadoad aouaaajaa aAoq~ aq2 JO sa~u~o aq~ aaa ~ s~mM~TH jo 2ua~Saeda~ eTUT~aTA M~Tm aouepaoooe uT 0~ ~fl ua aouea~ua puc ~UTa~aq oTyqnd ~ PTaq UOTSSTttru~o0 gUTUU~Zg aM2 Y86Y 2sn~nv ~7 u0 · -[a :I96T '97 ~sn~nv IeUOTSTppe aq2 ~uTq2 2au PTP aq asneoaq 'uoTsom aM2 2aoddns ~ou pynom aq pTes moa~sPUT~ sTq aoj p@~o~Suoo aq s~TIIT~ a~aoaD 'a~ 2eq2 pa~sa~ns pue sS~uTP~OI snaoqdsoqd aonpaa o2 paaTnbea aq asia PInOqs ~STITO~J ~ua~Seaa~ aq~ 2eq~ uu~ooM 'aM q~T~ paaa~e aq pTes e22aqoez 'aG '~UTUOZaa aq2 aoj UOTS~OTidde aq2 ~aoddns TTTm aM pT~S aaqST~ ST UOTSeOTIdde sTq2 JT pies uu~oo~ 'aM 'aTOAaaSaa aM20SUT @~aeqosTp snaoqdsoqd jo 2uuome aU2 2TmTI 02 ,aadoIaAap aM2 SaaTnbaa qOTqm SSSTXa ~uapaoaad e PTeS aaqST~ 'aM · eaae 2azoao aq2 UT ~uTuoz ~Tsuap aaq~Tq ~u~ sam aaaq2 JT pa~se ~oa~sPUT~ 'aM '~ 'SueId ~a~Seaa2 a~2 2e ~SToedeo 2~aToTggns sT aaa~ ~no~2 ~aA$ SgTOAaaS@a a~2 o~uT a~aeqosTp jo STseq aq2 ua paTuap aq pynoo UOTS~OTYdd~ STM2 JT ~auao~v ~suno0 aM2 pa~s~ uaq2 e22aqo~! 'aG 'UOTSOm @q2 2aoddns ~ou pynoo aM 'aTOAaaS@a aM20SUT a~aeqosTP YYTm 2ua~dOyaAap STM2 MOTM~ snaoqdsoqd jo 2uno~e aM2 2unooo~ OSUT ~UT~2 pT~s e~aqoez 'aG · syooqos aq2 aeau ST 2T asia '~saadoad sTq2 aoj ash poo~'e sT STM~ PTeS ~aYuaH (:~uT~aa~ 2q:~TN aeTnSfaH)~:l:-9-6T ¢/, aaqo2oo 86g October 7_~1981 (Re~lar Ni_g~t Meetin~ 399 1981: Three mobile homes, one located on the applicant's property and two located directly east of the applicant's property, are the only other uses in the area. The applicant's son was issued a temporary mobile home permit earlier this year. Staff Comment: The applicant proposes to locate the mobile home in a clearing approximately 200-250 feet away from the existing mobile home. The proposed site is not visible from Route 706, but may be partially visible from the two adjacent mobile homes and single-family home to the east, and one other home to the south of the applicant's property. Objections to this special permit application were received from several adjacent property owners in the area. One adjacent property owner called the office in support of the application. Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors choose to accept this application for a special use permit, Staff recommends the following conditions: Compliance with Section 5.6.2 of the Zoning Ordinance; Maintenance of existing vegetation surrounding the proposed location. Mr. Tucker next read an addendum to this staff report, dated October 6, Access to Parcel 79F is currently through Dudley Mountain Road, a private road approved by the County in October, 1979. Approval of this special use permit will also require either: Waiver of Subdivision Ordinance Section 18-36(a) which requires not more than one dwelling unit per parcel served by a private road; or Waiver of Subdivision Ordinance Section 18-36(d) to permit a separate access to this parcel via Route 706. Waiver of either one of these two sections is not recommended because: The entrance from Dudley Mountain Road to Route 706 is currently not up to commercial entrance standards. Visibility from Parcel 79F to Route 706 does not appear to be sufficient for the issuance of an entrance permit. Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission, at its meeting on October 6, 1981, voted to recommend denial of this petition. Mrs. Estelle M. Jackson spoke next stating that the property was purchased by herself an~ her son. Mrs. Jackson said her son and his wife are presently living in a temporary mobile home until a home can be built. She is requesting a permanent mobile home so she can live near her son. Mrs. Jackson said the complaining property owners do not have sight of her property, and that the adjoining property owners do not object. Mrs. Jackson added that it is in her deed that access over the private road is guaranteed. Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing opened, and first to speak was Mr. David Mahone who said that he is one of the original developers of property in this area, and that he sold Mrs. Jackson her parcel. Mr. Mahone said the trailer would be clearly visible from the road. Mr. Mahone said the property in question is no longer a forested lot, but has been stripped of its vegetation. He noted that the unopposed neighbors referred to by Mrs. Jackson are not in his subdivision, and that everyone residing on Dudley Mountain Road ~s~ opposed to Mrs. Jackson's application. Mr. Mahone said to approve this application would devalue'.- his property as well as the property of the other home owners in the subdivision. Mr. Mahone also added that the Planning Commission indicated they might change their recommendation to deny after road improvements are made to. the road entrance. Mr. Mahone said those road improvements are being planned by Mr. Jack Stoner and two of his associates, not to accommodate Mrs. Jackson, but to improve the value of his lots and felt Mr. Stoner ~:~ was being taken advantage of. Next to speak was Mr. Jack Stoner who said he and two friends purchased this property with the intent to subdivide it into five lots. Mr. Stoner said two of those lots would be sold to cover the costs of improving the road and lots and that on the three remaining lots he and his friends would construct personal dwellings. Mr. Stoner said he is not opposed to a temporary mobile home, but would be strongly opposed to the issuance of a permanent permit. Mr. Leo Elliot said he is an adjacent property owner, and noted that his wife, Laura Wallace, sent a letter to the Planning Department stating that they have no objection to the temporary permit, but do object to a permanent mobile home. Mr.-Elliot said his strongest objection is to the clearing of the trees which has been done on Mrs. Jackson's property. Mr. David Wheatley said he agreed with the statements of objection made tonight. Mr. Wheatley said to allow a trailer permanent license on a piece of property creates a snowball reaction which causes many other trailers to locate in the same area. Mr. Wheatley said he has no objection to the temporary permit. October 7, 1981~(Regular Night Meeting) No one else wished to speak either for or against this petition, and Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Fisher said he felt it would be a mistake to allow a permanent mobile home to be placed on this lot, since this area of Samuel Miller Distr±ct has been developing over the last twenty years as single-family residential on rather small lots. Mr. Fisher requested that the Board accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Dr. Iachetta said that to allow a waiver of the Subdivision Ordinance (as would be required according to the addendum to the Staff's report) in order to approve this mobile home permit would be a serious precedent. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to concur with the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny this mobile home request, S?-81-39. Mr. McCann agreed with Dr. Iachetta's statement and seconded the motion. Roll was then called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. Agenda Item No. 4. SP-81-44. Richard G. Larson. Request to locate a mobile home on 12.61 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property is located on Rt. 641, approximately 1.1 miles west of the intersection of Rt. 20 and Rt. 641 on right. Tax Map 035, Parcel 5, Rivanna Magisterial District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 18, 1981). Mr. Tucker read the planning staff report as follows: Location: Property, described as Tax Map 35, Parcel 5, is located north of Route 641, approximately one mile west of the intersection of Routes 641 and 20. Rivanna Magisterial District. Character of the Area: The immediate area surrounding the applicant's property is rural in character and is composed primarily of forest- land. Open pasture and farm land are located further to the south of Route 641. There are approximately twelve single-family homes located within a half mile radius of the applicant's property; most are concentrated along 641. One mobile home is located adjacent to the applicant's property approximately 1,000 feet away. The applicant has a house under construction on the property. Staff Comment: The applicant proposes to locate the mobile home near the center of the property. From its location, the mobile home would not be visible to any of the nearby homes on Route 641. Staff is aware that there is some legal problem concerning one of the accesses to the property. We recommend, however, that this be con- sidered irrelevant in the discussion of this special permit appli- cation. Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors approve this request, Staff recommends the following conditions: 1. Compliance with Section 5.6.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission at its meeting of October 6, 1981, unanimously recommended approval of this special permit request with the one recommended condition. Mr. Richard Larson was present, but stated he had nothing to add unless the Board had questions they wished to ask him. Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing opened. There being no one present wishing to speak either for or against this application, Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Lindstrom to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve this mobile home permit SP-81-44 with the one condi- tion. The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann. Mr. Larson said he plans to locate the mobile home in such a way on his property that it will never be moved again. Mr. Larson added that he will most likely add a porch or patio to additionally disguise the structure. He said it would be for use by his immed- iate family only. Roll was then called and the motion to approve SP-81-44 carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. Agenda Item No. 5. Public Hearing to amend and reenact Section 4-19 of the Albemarle County Code to include Greenbrier subdivision as an area where dogs are not permitted to run at large. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on September 23 and September 30, 1981.) Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter dated September 1, 1981 from Mrs. Barbara R. Lane containing twenty-four signatures, representing forty-one residents as follows: "Enclosed is a petition, signed by the majority of the citizens of the Greenbrier Subdivision of Albemarle County. This petition requests the enactment of a dog leash law for this portion of the Greenbrier Subdivi- sion. The Greenbrier Subdivision is located in both the City limits of Char- lottesville and in Albemarle County, the major portion being within the Charlottesville City limits. The requested dog leash enactment would bring our portion of the Subdivision in conformance with that portion in the City." October 7, 1981 (Regular Night Meeting) 4'O t Mrs. Lane was present who stated that there are forty-two lots in this portion of Greenbrier Subdivision; on those lots are thirty-four homes of which twenty-four signa- tures were received in favor of the leash law. Mr. Lane was present and stated he agreed with the petition as submitted. Mr. Tom Aton said he also supports the petition and felt it was a good idea to have the entire Greenbrier community under the same rules and regulations. Mrs. Homer Tordoff said all the city dogs come into the County half when they are loose and hoped the Board would enact this ordinance. No one else from the public wishe~ to speak either for or against this ordinance and Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following ordinance: BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Chapter 4, Article II, Division 2, Section 4-19 of the Albemarle County Code be amended and reenacted by the addition of the following area as one of those areas where dogs are prohibited from running at large: (22) Greenbrier Heights Subdivision as platted and recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in Deed Book 550, Page 601. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom End carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. Agenda Item No. 6. Report on Preliminary Design, Scottsville Library. Mr. Agnor introduced Mr. Alexander Gilliam, Chairman of the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Building Committee. Mr. Gilliam reviewed the history of the Scottsville Library, from the burning down of the old building, to the new building being requested at this meeting. Mr. John Farmer, architect, was present,~ who reviewed the proposed square footage of the proposed new building. Mr. Farmer indicated that prior to preparing the drawings, he visited several libraries throughout the state in order to get ideas. Mr. Farmer said he also met with many people involved with the library system, as well as County officials and Highway Department officials in order that his design meet all public facility re- quirements. Mr. Farmer described the building according to plans which he presented to the Board (NOTE: copies of these plans are on permanent file in the office of the clerk to the Board of Supervisors). Next to speak was Mrs. Helen Wieneke, representing the Scottsville Library and the interested citizens of Scottsville. Mrs. Wieneke described the activities which have taken place at the Scottsville Library over the last several years, and stated that one of the most important features of Mr. Farmer's design is the activity room. She requested that the Board approve the plans as presented by Mr. Farmer, and allow the Town of Scott to have a complete library facility. Mayor Raymon Thacker was present and said he hoped that the Board would see fit to approve the plans as presented. Mrs. Margaret Melcher, Chairman of the Library Board, stated that the Library Board has seen and reviewed the plans and she hoped the Board of Supervisors would also approve them. Mr. Agnor said he met with Mrs. Wieneke and Mr. Gilliam and reviewed the plans for the Library prior to this meeting. Mr. Agnor said he believes that the plans presented represent the absolute bare minimum which could be constructed in ScOttsville and still serve the community adequately. Mr. Agnor said this project was incorporated into the Capital Improvements plan for funding. Mr. Agnor said the construction figures for this project, as estimate~ by Mr. Farmer, could vary by as little as 10% or by as much as 30% but that indications are that construction costs are on a downward turn. Mr. Agnor then ~recommended that the Library Board and the Architect be alloWed to proceed with the final design in order to get more specific information and exact costs for this proje~t~bring back to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Agnor said this will provide the ~Board more exact cost information as well as allow the Board to progress further into this fiscal year Which will ~l~ the Board to better determine the overall financial situation of the County.~ Mr. Agnor emphasized that bringing back final designs would not obligate the Board to take bids on the project or to final construction. Mr. Fisher noted that a cost of $50/$55 per square foot would cost $216,000 for the project. Mr. Fisher said there ks only $180,000 available in the Capital Improvements Budget for this project. Mr. Fisher said he would support having final plans drawn and brought back to the Board for review. Mr. Fisher asked Mrs. Melcher if there are any provisions in the Library system to obtain fees from residents of neighboring counties (those not members of the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library System) in order to help defray certain costs. Mrs. Melcher said many residents of Fluvanna and Buckingham use the Scottsville Library, and that a non-resident fee of $12.50 is charged each user per year. Mr. Lindstrom said he was impressed with the simple, efficient design presented and offered motion to bring back final plans for the Board of Supervisors to review. The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. ~ NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. 4O2 October 7, 1981 (Regular Night Meeting) At 9:10 P.M., Mr. Fisher declared a brief recess. order at 9:23 P.M. The meeting was called back to Agenda Item No. 7. Virginia Association of Counties Legislative Requests. Mr. Fisher said a list of possible legislation was presented to Sheriff George Bailey by the Sheriffs' Association, and Sheriff Bailey has requested that the Board of Supervisors support the following two items: 1) Amend Title 46.1-397 and 46.1-441.2 to provide that the Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles may not order a sheriff to serve Division of Motor Vehicle notices. 2) Amend Title 18.2-308.2 to provide that it shall be a crime punishable as a class 6 felony for any person to transport a pistol, revolver, or other hand gun who has been convicted of a felony involving violence or use of a firearm. Mr. Agnor explained the first recommendation regarding Title 46.1-397 and 46.1-441.2 and stated that as many as 100,000 documents per year are generated by the Division of Motor Vehicles, and that the State police department, being a branch of the State Division of Motor Vehicles should be required to serve those documents. Sheriff Bailey informed Mr. Agnor at an earlier private meeting, that serving papers generated by the General District and Circuit Courts is already a heavy burden on the County Sheriff's department. Mr. St. John said the State has regional process servers whose job it is to serve papers generated by the Division of Motor Vehicles. Mr. St. John said the State is trying to shift this job to the County Sheriff~n order to eliminate those State funded positions. Mr. Fisher said he would like to support this request by the Sheriff. offered by Mr. McCann to adopt the following resolution: Motion was The Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, endorses the following recommendation made by the Virginia State Sheriffs' Association: Amend Title 46.1-397 and 46.1-441.2 to provide that the Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles may not order a sheriff to serve Division of Motor Vehicle notices. The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. FiSher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. The second legislation requested by the Sheriff involves Title 18.2-308.2 regarding transportation of a pistol, revolver or hand gun. Mr. Agnor explained that this corresponds to a Federal law, but that the Sheriff is not authorized to enforce those laws without State authorization. Mr. St. John noted that a class six felony is the least severe, but that he does support the concept. Mr. Henley said he would support this proposal since it relates to violent crimes. Mr. McCann said he agreed with Mr. Henley. Motion was then offered by Mr. Henley to adopt the following resolution: The Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, endorses the following recommendations made by the Virginia State Sheriffs' Association: Amend Title 18.2-308.2 to provide that it shall be a crime punishable as a class 6 felony for any person to transport a pistol, revolver, or other hand gun who has been convicted of a felony involving violence or use of a firearm. The motion was seconded by Mr. McCann and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. Mr. Fisher said the County Attorney's staff has worked on proposed legislatio~ regarding biennial elections where no primary is involved. Mr. Fisher said in speaking to other counties throughout the State, he received support to shorten the election process to two months; the same as is presently being used by cities and towns. Mr. Fisher said he would like to see the Board support the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is hereby memorialized to amend and re-enact Virginia Code Section 24.1 to provide that for county elections, the filing deadline for all candidates shall be the second Tuesday in September. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adopt the resolution as proposed. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. October 7, 1981 (Regular Night Meeting) 403 Mr. Fisher said in case there was opPosition throughout the State to the previous resolution, he would propose the Board consider the adoption of the~following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, virginia, that the General Assembly. of the Commonwealth of'Virginia is hereby memorialized to amend and re-enact Virginia Code Section 24.t to provide that for elections in counties holding biennial elections, the ~ filing deadline for independent candidates and for party nominees selected by any means other than a primaryshall be the second Tuesday in September. Dr. Iachetta offered motion to adopt the resolution as presented by Mr. Fisher. Dr. Iachetta said when he originally ran for office, he was not required to file until September and that at that time the County was on a four year election cycle. The second time he ran for election, he filed in June. Dr. Iachetta agreed that from June until November was far too long a period of time for campaigning. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, and McCann. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Miss Nash. Agenda Item No. 8. Proposed Ordinance, Energy Sources Exemption. Mr.. St. John said the following ordinance was drawn in accordance with the State Code and as directed by the staff of the Department of Finance:- BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Chapter 8, Article 2' of the'Albemarle County Code is hereby amended to provide an exemption from retail sales and use taxation for artificial or propane gas, firewood, coal, or home heating oil used for domestic consumption by adding a Section 8-3.1 as follows: Section 8-3.'1. Exemption of certain energy sources. The tax imPosed by Section 8-2 of t~is Article shall not apply to artificial or propane gas, firewood, coal or home heating oil used for domestic consumption as defined in Section 58-441.6(gl) of the Code of Virginia. Mr. Agnor said this is before the Board for possible emergency action. Effective October 1, 1981, the 3% State sales and use tax will no longer apply to artificial or propane gas, firewood, coal and home heating oil purchased by an ~ndividual for domestic consumption. The 1% local tax will continue to apply to those fuels unless specifically exempted by local ordinance. Mr. Agnor said the staff's initial interpretation of the new law was that when the State removed their portion of the tax, it would automatically remove the local 1% tax. Mr. Agnor said it has since been learned that this is not true, and that the County must adopt an ordinance to remove the 1% tax if that is desired. Mr. Agnor added that this 1% local tax generates approximately $15,000 per year. Mr. Agnor stated that most of the surrounding counties have no plans to-remove the 1% tax at this time. Mr. Fisher said if the County votes to revoke this 1% tax, there is no way to replace those lost funds. Mr. Fisher also stated his concern that if this tax on home heating fuels is removed, it might lead to the removal of taxes on other utilities, especially electricity, which generates very substantial revenues to the County. Dr. Iachetta agreed with Mr. Fisher, that to remove the 1% tax would definitely be the wrong direction for Albemarle County to go. Mr. Henley said he agreed with Dr. Iachetta. There was no motion offered to set this ordinance for public hearing. Agenda Item No. 8a. Discussion: Use of Property of the University of Virginia for Vivarium. Mr. Lindstrom said in discussions he has had with Mr. Doucet of the consulting firm of Doucet & Mainka as well as Dr. Ralph Allen, Chairman of the Radiation Safety Committee; he received information which leads him to believe that the University is contracting out the use of the Vivarium to private contractors for disposal of non-University wastes. Mr. Lindstrom said he has requested an opinion from the County Attorney as to whether or not this would subject the Vivarium to County zoning laws. Mr. Lindstrom noted receipt of t~e following letter from Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attorney, dated September 28, 1981: - "You have requested my opinion as to whether the use of University of Virginia property (specifically, the Vivarium on Route 20 South) is subject to the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance and other land use controls. It is my opinion that the use and occupancy of such properties by private parties (i.e., non-political entities or persons) is subject to the pro- visions of the ~lbemarle County Zoning Ordinance. I believe the question is squarely answered by Virginia Code Section 15.1-491.01 C." Mr. Lindstrom said he felt there is a need for more information regarding this from the University, or he would like to know whether~this structure is exempt as a non-conforming use. Mr. St. John said no matter who is conducting the activity of waste disposal at the Vivarium, the County is all but powerless to control that activity. Mr. Fisher said he did not understand the question, because this area has already been covered in talks with the University of Virginia. Mr. Fisher said there must be substantial proof that the status has been changed by the University. Mr. Lindstrom said it was revealed to him during his discussion with Mr. Doucet and Dr. Allen that the University contracts to private waste dealers the use of the Vivarium, not for private nuclear waste, but private waste in general. 404 October 14 1981,(Regular Day Meeting) October 7,'t9~1 [Regular Night Meeting) Mr. Fisher suggested that Mr. Agnor attempt to determine if there are non-University sources of wastes being disposed of.at the Vivarium and bring back his findings to the BOard. Agenda Item No. 9. Lottery Permit. Mr. Agnor presented a lottery permit application from the Black American Law Students Association of the University of Virginia Law School for a raffle to be held September 28 through October 2 and October 5 through October 9, 1981. Motion for approval was offered by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. None. Miss Nash. Agenda Item No. 10. Approval of Minutes: June 18 (Afternoon), August 13, September 10, September 17 (Night), 1980. Mr. Lindstrom said he had not yet read these minutes, but stated that he would be certain to have them ready for the October 14th day meeting. Not Docketed. Mr. Agnor requested a brief executive session in order to discuss a property matter. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. McCann, to adjourn into executive session to discuss property matters. At 10:00 P.M., roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and McCann. None. Miss Nash. The Board reconvened back into open session at 10:20 P.M., and immediately adjourned. Chairman October 1~, 1981 (Regular Day Meel,ing A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 14, 1981, .at 9:00 A.M. in Meeting Room 7, Second Floor, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., C. Timothy Lindstrom, Layton R. McCann and Miss Ellen V. Nash (Arrived at 2:05 P.M.). Absent: Officers Present: St. John. Agenda Item No. 1. Fisher. Dr. F. Anthony Iachetta. County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr. and County Attorney, George R. The meeting was called to order at 9:10 A.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Agenda Item No. 2. Consent Agenda. Mr. Agnor presented the consent agenda consisting of eight items for the Board's consideration. Motion was offered by Mr. McCann, seconded by Mr. Henley, to approve the items on the consent agenda as presented. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and McCann. None. Dr. Iachetta and Miss Nash. Item No. 2.la. Lottery Permit. A lottery permit request from the Broadus Wood P.T.A. for bingo and raffles for November 6, 1981, was presented and approved in accordance with the Board's adopted rules and regulations for the issuance of same. Item No. 2.lb. Lottery Permit. A lottery permit request from the University of Virginia ROTC Honor Guard for a lottery to be held on November 23, 1981, was presented and approved in accordance with the Board's adopted rules and regulations for the issuance of same.