Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-11-11 ,38 November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting), November 4, 1981 (Regular Night Meeting~ Mr. Fisher then noted the following letter dated October 30, 1981 from Mr. Duane D. Kart, President of the Scottsville Chamber of Commerce: "re: Former Scottsville School Building Dear Mr. Fisher: It has been the feeling of the Scottsville Chamber of Commerce that more jobs are needed in the Scottsville area. We believe that the former school building offers opportunity for expansion of the job market in the private sector. Therefore, we believe that the building should be made available for commercial uses and an appraisal made of the p~operty to place it on the market. We wish to thank you for allowing the gymnasium to be open this winter for use. The ideal solution would be one that allowed the public-the use of the gym as well as making the rest of the building available for private enterprise. Please advise us if the Scottsvil!e Chamber can assist in making the building a useful part of the community. Thank you for your assistance in this matter." Dr. Iachetta~noted that the Building and Properties Committee will be presenting a report next week on the old Scottsville School property as well as some other matters. Agenda Item No. 6. At 9:52 P.M., Mr. Fi.sher requested a motion for executive session to include legal and personnel matters. Motion to this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Miss Nash and carried by the following recorded vote-: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. The Board reconvened into open session at 11:00 J~.M. and immedia~tely adjourned. CHAIRM~ November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was heid on November 1I, 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, F. Anthony Iachetta, C. Timothy Lindstrom (Arrived at 9:05 A.M.), Layton R. McCann and Miss Ellen V. Nash. Absent: Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr. Officers Present: R. St. John. County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr. and County Attorney, George Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Fisher. The meeting was called to order at 9:07 A.M. by the Chairman, Agenda Item No. 2. Introduce Extension Agent. Mrs. Betty Payne, Unit Chairman of the VPI-SU Extension Office, was present and introduced Mr. Mark Reynolds, the new extension agent for the Extension Office. Mr. Reynolds is a graduate of the University of Maryland and was a farm manager in Florida before coming to Virginia. She also noted that Mr. Reynolds had previously worked in Culpeper and is therefore familiar with this area. Mrs. Payne then introduced Mr. Edsel Phillips, a horticulturist specializing in fruit trees. She noted that Mr. Phillips is based in Steele's Tavern but will be at the local extension office every Friday beginning January 1 and will be available for local calls. Mr. Fisher acknowledged appreciation for both gentlemen coming by and hoped they enjoyed their work. Agenda Item No. 3. Consent Agenda. Mr. Agnor presented five items for consideration by the Board. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. IaChetta, to approve the itemS as presented. Roll was called and the motion carried by the .following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) Item No. 3.1. Take road into state system. A request dated May 1, 1981, was received from Mr. W. Morris Foster for Bishop Lane in Bishop Hill Subdivision to be taken into the State Secondary System since all the necessary requirements are in order. The following resolution was approved by the Board: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Bishop Hill Subdivision: Beginning at station 0+08 of Bishop Lane, a point common to the centerline intersection of Bishop Lane and the edge of pavement of State Route 734; thence with Bishop Lane in a northwesterly direction 909.98 feet to station 9+17.98, a cul-de-sac, the end of Bishop Lane in Bishop Hill. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 40-foot unobstructed right of way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 693, page 768. Item No. 3.2. Statements of Expenses for the Director of Finance, Sheriff, Commonwealth' Attorney and Regional Jail were presented for the month of October, 1981; said statements were approved as presented. Item No. 3.3. Statements of Expenses incurred in the maintenance and operation of the Regional Jail for the month of October, 1981, were presented along with summary statement of prisoner days, statement of jail physician and salaries of paramedics and classification officer; said statements being approved as presented. Item No. 3.4. Report of the Department of Social Services for the month of September, 1981 was presented in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52. Item No. 3.5. The following letter from the State Highway Department dated November 5, 1981 was received: "As requested in your resolution dated August 12, 1981, the following addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved, effective November 5, 1981. ADDITION LENGTH From Route 641, 0.54 mile east of Route 20 to Route 641, 0.80 mile east of Route 20. 0.25 Mi." Agenda Item No. 4. Approval of Minutes: August 13, August 27, September 8, September 10 September 17, September 22, September 29, November 5 (Afternoon), November 12, December 3 (Night), and December 18, 1980, and January 7, January 21, February 4, February 11 and February 12, 1981. Mr. Lindstrom had read the minutes of August 13 and September 17, 1980 and did not find any errors. He also had read the minutes of September 10, 1980 and noted that on page 255, paragraph two, the sentence reading "This was Mr. McCann's first meeting." should be deleted because Mr. McCann's first meeting was September 8, 1980. Mr. Fisher had read the minutes of August 27, 1980 and did not find any errors. He also had read the minutes of September 8, 1980 and noted that on page 254, the first roll call at the top of the page needs to include Mr. McCann's name in the aye vote. Dr. Iachetta had read the minutes of September 22 and November 12, 1980 and did not find any erors. Mr. McCann had read the minutes of November 5 (Afternoon), 1980 and February 4, February 11 and February 12, 1981 and did not find any errors. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to approve the minutes of August 13, August 27, September 8, September 10, September 17, September 22, November 5 (Afternoon), and November 12, 1980, and February 4, February 11 and February 12, 1981, with the corrections noted above. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. The minutes which were not approved today were deferred to a later date. 440 November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 5a. Highway Matters: Abandon and Add Sections of Route 601. Mr. Agnor said letter dated October 13, 1981, has been received from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer,. requesting a resolution to abandon and add sections to Route 601; this resolution occasioned by recent reconstruction of the roadway. Mr. Fisher said his concern is whether or not the residents living along the roadway are aware of this request. Mr. Roosevelt said a public hearing is not required but one can be held if desired. Dr. Iachetta asked if the right of way and roadway which is abandoned reverts to the adjacent property owners. Mr. Roosevelt said yes. Mr. Roosevelt said from his review, no one will be landlocked nor will there be any problem with access. There may be some areas where the highway right-of-way is wider than it was in the past but it i's still highway right-of-way. Mr. Roosevelt then explained the specifics of the reconstruction of the roadway and noted the area that the Highway Department purchased. Mr. Agnor said the purpose of the resolution is to get the new alignment into the state secondary system and to abandon the old sections as a state road. Mr. Lindstrom said he did not have any problem with the request and felt the road has been in place long enough that the people are aware of what is going on and he did not feel anyone has been detrimentally affected. He then offered motion to adopt the following resolution. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion. Miss Nash asked what happens to old abandoned roadways. Mr. Roosevelt said in this case, the road has been scourified and the area reseeded. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Me'ssrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. WHEREAS, Secondary Route 601, from 0.087 Miles S.W. intersection of Route 829 to 0.388 Miles North Intersection of Route 678, a distance of 0.957 miles, has been altered, and a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Highway Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and WHEREAS, certain sections of this new road follow new locations, these being shown on the attached sketch titled "Changes in Secondary System Due to Relocation and Construction on Route 601, Project 0601-002-150, C501, C502 dated at Richmond, Virginia, May 21, 1981". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the portions of Secondary Route 601, i.e., Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, shown in red on the sketch titled, "Changes in Secondary System Due to Relocation and Construction on Route 601, Project 0601-002-150, C501, C502, dated at Richmond, Virginia, May 22, 1981,", a total distance of 0.79 miles be, and hereby is, added to the Secondary System of State ~ighways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia of 1950 as amended; And further, that the sections of old location, i.e., Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, shown in blue on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.84 miles be, and the same hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. Not Docketed. Mr. Fisher said a resolution was adopted by the Virginia Association of Counties for a wholesale tax to be applied on gasoline and diesel fuel for highway use in an attempt to increase funds for the Highway Department. Agenda Item No. 5b. Public Hearing: Ordinance to vacate plat in Woodbrook Subdivision. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 28 and November 4, 1981.) Mr. St. John summarized the request from Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Oswald and set out in the minutes of October 14, 1981. ~Mr. Agnor said when the request was presented to the Board in October, this Board felt the School Board should be asked to formally review the request since it involves a portion of a road remaining after a portion of the road on the Woodbr°ok School property was vacated in May 1965. Therefore, the ordinance was scheduled for public hearing today with a response to be returned from the School Board. However, the School Board members want to personally visit the site. Mr. St. John said this right-of-way does not serve as access to the school. Mr. Agnor said that is correct but it is used by the children walking to school. The public hearing was opened.' Mr. Robert Garrigus, an adjoining property owner was present and asked what a vacation of the .plat means. Mr. St. John explained and noted that one exception is an easement for the .Albemarle County Service Authority or for any other public utility. Mr.' Garrigus said based on the County Attorney's explanation, he did not object to the vacation. Mrs. Joseph 0swale, who requested this vacation, was present and asked several technical questions, which were referred to the staff. Mr, Fisher said both of the adjacent proper~y owners are present and are in favor of the vacation. However, the Board will have to wait for a response from the School Board before a final decision is made. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to defer the public hearing on an ordinance to vacate a plat in Woodbrook Subdivision to December 9, 1981. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: ~ AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. November 1!, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) 441 Agenda Item No. 5c. Public Hearing: Ordinance to vacate plat in Berkeley Subdivision. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 28 and November 4, 1981.) This request which is to vacate a right-of-way off of Dominion Drive between Lot 1, Block 5, Section 1 and Lot 11, Block 4 of the Berkeley Subdivision was discussed briefly at the October 14, 1981, meeting and set for public hearing today with the understanding that a maintenance agreement by the owners of the lots served by this right-of-way be executed and submitted by today. Mr. St. John said the agreement has been executed by the three property owners involved and provides Ms. Barnes with the right to use the vacated public right-of-way for ingress and egress. The agreement further states that the three parcels involved shall be responsible for the maintenance of the easement and shall share the costs of the maintenance equally. Mr. St. John felt all is in order for the adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Fisher said the concern at the October 14 meeting was the access to the one townhouse. Dr. Iachetta noted approval of the request was taken by the Four Seasons Townhouse Association on October 26, 1981 since this right-of-way accesses the back section of the townhouse section of Four Seasons, specifically property owned by Ms. Judith Barnes. Dr. Iachetta said the agreement apparently takes care of providing Ms. Barnes with access and deletes the nuisance that this right-of-way has become. The public hearing was then opened. With no one present to speak for or against the ordinance, the public hearing was closed. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adopt the following ordinance. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE A PORTION OF PLAT OF BERKELEY COMMUNITY, SHOWN ON RECORDED PLATS AS THE PUBLIC STREET LYING BETWEEN LOT 1, BLOCK 5, SECTION 1 AND LOT !1, BLOCK 4, SECTION 1, BERKELEY COMMUNITY: THIS PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON A PLAT RECORDED IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT IN DEED BOOK 337, PAGE 336 WHEREAS, a certain tract or parcel of land lying in Albemarle County has been heretofore subdivided under the name of Berkeley Community, the original plat of which is of record in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 337, Page 336; and WHEREAS, Michael J. Demetsky and Johnnie Lee Demetsky, husband and wife, are the owners of a lot in said subdivision, namely Lot 1, Block 5, Section 1 of said subdivision; and WHEREAS, Keith Mabe and Sharon Mabe, husband and wife, are the owners of a lot in said subdivision, namely Lot 11, Block 4, Section 1 of said subdivision; and WHEREAS, Judy C. Barnes is the owner of a lot in Four Seasons Subdivision at 56 Woodlake Drive; and WHEREAS, the said Demetskys, Mabes and Barnes have petitioned the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County that the said plat be vacated insofar as it affects the aforementioned street; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, as follows: Section 1. That the subdivision of Berkeley Community shown on a plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 337, Page 336, be, and the same hereby is, vacated as to that portion of said subdivision shown on the said plat as the public street lying between Lot 1, Block 5, Section 1 and Lot 11, Block 4, Section 1 thereof. Section 2. The vacation set forth in Section 1 of this ordinance shall in no way vacate any other street, road, right-of-way or lot duly platted and recorded on the aforementioned plat. Section 3. Pursmant to Section 15.1-485 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, shall write in plain legible letters across the vacated portion of the aforesaid plat the word "VACATED", and also shall make reference on the same to the volume and page in which the instrument of vacation is recorded. Section 4. Such vacation-of a portion of the aforesaid plat shall be effective on November 11, 1981. Agenda Item No. 5d. Discussion: Commonwealth Drive. ~On October 14, 1981, the Board discussed a petition from Mrs. Karen S. BrazelI regarding Commonwealth Drive. The matter was deferred to this date in order that the County Engineering staff and the Highway Department staff could examine further and determine what items are necessary for the road to be accepted into the State Secondary System. The Zoning Administrator was also requested to review the conditions of SP-60-76 for Eldercare, Incorporated, which is located on Northwest Drive, to determine if the conditions 44'2 November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) of the special use permit have been complied with in order that this section can be accepted into the State Secondary System. Mr..Agnor said the following memorandum dated November 2, 1981 has been received from Mr. Robert E. Vaughn~. Zoning Administrator: "The Board approved SP-60-76 with five conditions. I have reviewed these five requirements and have determined the following. Conditions one through four were complied with Prior to the approval and issuance of the building permi~ (March 7, 1979), and condition five, Northwest Drive and Commonwealth Drive road plans were approved by our Engineering Department and performance bonds approved by the Planning Department on January 23, 1979 (also prior to building permits). The road construction required by SP-60-76 was completed and built to state standards but has not, as of this date, been accepted into the state system. I have met with Ashley Williams (Engineering Department) and determined the status of the acceptance into the state system as of this date to be as follows: The developers are in the process of getting the roads accepted into the state system. Ashley advised me that he eXpects to have the resolution before the Board in one or two weeks." Dr. Iachetta asked if both sections will be in the state secondary system by winter. Mr. Agnor said Commonwealth Drive from Hydraulic Road to Northwest Drive could be taken into the State System. However, Commonwealth Drive, from Eldercare to Greenbrier Drive will not be in the system. Access to Eldercare via Northwest Drive will be in the system. Mr. Agnor said the other section of Commonwealth has a culvert underneath the roadway which Will require significant construction. Dr. Iachetta said Mrs. Brazell had called him after the last discussion expressing concern about the speed limit situation and the fact that cars pass stopped school buses at the corner of Northwest Drive. Dr. Iachetta said he felt the County should take some interim action to protect the neighborhood from the speeding traffic at fifty-five miles per hour since it probably will take six months before this section is in the state system. Mr. St. John said the Board has the power to set speed limits in subdivisions having roadways not in the state system. He felt the question is if the Board desires the expense of posting and maintaining signs. Dr. Iachetta said this neighborhood has a substantial amount of people, a nursing facility and children walking to school and he felt it cheaper to purchase a couple of speed signs than for someone to lose a life. He then offered motion for the County to purchase and install the necessary speed limit signs for interim protection until Commonwealth Drive is in the state system. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. A brief discussion followed on the authority that the Sheriff has to enforce speed limits on roads not in the state system. Mr. St. John said the Sheriff has the legal authority to enforce a speed limit once signs are posted. Mr. St. John personally felt thirty-five miles per hour in this neighborhood is too fast. Dr. Iachetta asked if anything could be done to lower that limit. Mr. Roosevelt said the normal speed recommended is thirty-five miles per hour and that cannot be lower until a traffic engineer has completed a study. Mr. St. John then recommended the motion establish the speed limit at thirty-five miles per hour and require the posting of the signs. Dr. Iachetta accepted such wording to his motion. Mr. Lindstrom accepted same. Mr. Fisher then asked Mr. Agnor to explain the exact location of this road in question. Mr. Agnor said the section is Commonwealth Drive from Northwest Drive northerly to its intersection at Greenbrier Drive. Dr. Iachetta asked if that was the entire section not in the state system. Mr. Williams said a portion of Commonwealth Drive from Hydraulic Road to Northwest Drive is in line to be taken into the system but the remainder of Commonwealth Drive will take six months or longer. Roll was then called on the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No. 5e. Other Highway Matters. Mr. Lindstrom said he has been asked if anything can be done to improve the sight distance at the corner of the Mormon-. Church at the intersection of Rio and Hydraulic Roads. The main problem is that traffic coming into town is having visibility problems when making right turns at the corner. Mr. Roosevelt said when the Highway Department owns the right-of-way and when the revised Hydraulic Road project is built, a small intersection will be retained at.that point which should take care of the problem. The bank will be cut into at the Mormon~ Church and ease the curve for traffic coming into town. The intersection of Rio Road Will be pulled around to come in at a ninety degree angle which will take part of the parking lot in the front of the Rock Store. Mr. Lindstrom asked the status of the Hydraulic Road projeot. Mr. Roosevelt said he has just a few more right-of-way problems, but the real issue is money. As he has said before,~there is enough money to build the bridge on Park Street (Route 631) but not enough for that and Hydraulic Road. The Park Street Bridge project is scheduled for advertisement in January and it is hoped that construction can begin in the next construction season. Mr. Lindstrom then asked if any interim work can be done to improve the intersection of~Rio and Hydraulic Roads. Mr. Roosevelt said he would look into the matter and perhaps some inexpensive grading could be done because he understands that the property is the Highway Department's. Mr. Lindstrom said he was speaking of the entire intersection. Mr. Roosevelt said the estimate for the improvement is $150,000 to $200,000-and there is no quick way to take care of the entire intersection. Mr. Lindstrom said whatever temporary measures can be taken to improve the problem would be appreciated. November 11, 1981 (Regular D&~Meeting) 443 Mr. Lindstrom asked if there had been any response/about the right-of-way necessary for the Georgetown Road pathway. Mr. Williams said he had received a response from Mr. Robin Lee and is waiting for a response from Mrs. Gay Joh~Bl~ir. In talking with the right-of-way people in Culpeper, her letter of agreement to give the right-of-way at the Georgetown Road intersection has been sent to Richmond and the actual deed and her compensatio~ should be completed by the end of December. Therefore, the final agreement should be ready by the first of 1982. Mr. Lindstrom said he hoped this would be ready by the spring construction season. If the County has to take some recourse other than voluntary acquisition of the right-of-way, he would appreciate knowing far in advance. Miss Nash commended Mr. Roosevelt for the double lining on Route 795 just past Simeon. She also noted appreciation for the black and yellow arrows there. Mr. Fisher noted the letter from the Highway Department regarding Route 641 as set out in the consent agenda. Mr. Roosevelt said he has talked to Mr. Spencer Young about Route 641 and Mr. Young has some final grading to do before the stone is put on the road. However, this should be done very soon. Mr. Roosevelt said once this is completed, he will return to the Board with a recommendation that the section of Route 641 which runs through Mr. Young's barnyard be abandoned from the state system. Agenda Item No. 5.1. Request from Nicholas Munger to vacate a plat. Mr. Nicholas Munger, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Martin Albert, was present. He said a technical error was made by someone who previously represented the owners of lots in Miran Forest Subdivision and Duntree Limited Partnership. The subdivision plat was put to record and then revised after County approval. The agreement that the owners joined into to revise the plats and vacation of same did not conform to the requirements set forth in Section 15.1-482(a) of the Code of Virginia. The present lot owners are scattered ~ve? the country and it seems that the appropriate way to vacate those old plats which were pursued incorrectly would be by an ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia. Mr. Munger said he has a copy of the proposed ordinance which has been distributed to the Board. Mr. Fisher said there have been so many applications to the Planning Commission on this property that he is unsure of what is going on. Mr. Munger said he does not represent the entire group of lot owners but rather the owners of Lot 11, Martin and Barbara Albert. Mr. Munger said the error was detected when he was a~tempting to secure mortgage on the Albert's lot and obtain title insurance on same. Mr. Fisher asked if this is similar to other requests to vacate plats which requires public hearing. Mr. St. John said no. The owners went through a vacation process voluntarily but improperly and now there is a problem for the title examiners. Mr. Fisher requested that a plat be submitted on this when the ordinance is heard. Mr. Munger said there is a correct plat showing which lots have been conveyed and gone through the Planning CommissiOn for approval which has been on the books for a couple of years. Mr. St. John said the people interested in this matter will have to do the background work and the County will review the matter as if it were a new subdivision. However, the County does not want to be responsible for correcting someone else's problem. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to advertise for public hearing on December 9, 1981, an ordinance to vacate the plats of Section One and Section Two of Miran Forest Subdivision. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. Agenda. Item No. 6. landfill. Request to drop tire-splitting fees for tires taken to the Mr. Fisher said Mr. McCann had told him several weeks ago that Mr. Carl Hunter, local district executive for the Boy Scouts had called him about a problem with fees at the landfill for tire splitting. Mr. Fisher then recognized Mr. Hunter. Mr. Hunter reviewed how the Boy Scouts are funded. · He noted that the Earlysville Boy Scout Unit raises money by collecting tires which also cleans up roadways and garages. He then introduced Mr. Dennis Marcello, Scout Master in Earlysville. Mr. Marcello said several years ago His unit started a project of collecting old tires. This is generally done in the fall. The old tires are taken to a recapper and for those worthy of being recapped, $2.00 a tire is paid to the unit. Mr. Marcello said out of every five tires one is recappable. Therefore, the other four tires go to the dump. Mr. Marcello said up until now the recapper would take the excess to the. dump until he discovered that there is a fee of forty cents per tire. The recapper said he could not pay $2.00 per tire and pay the forty cents to dispose of tires not recappable. Mr. Marcello said Earlysville is a rural troop, So other money raising events.cannot be done and this project has been successful' in the past, but the forty cents charge creates a problem and will diminish the project. Mr. Lindstrom asked if it were possible for the troop to deliver the tires themselves to the dump. Mr. Marcello said no. On a given Saturday, the troop may collect three to four hundred tires, the recapper comes with a large truck and picks them up. The recapper takes them to his shop and inspects them. Mr. Marcello said he personally does not have any idea whether a tire can be recapped or not. A couple of weeks pass between the time the tires are picked up and the troop is paid. Mr. Marcello said with such a time lapse he does not have anywhere he could personally store the tires. Mr. Fisher said he understands the problem. He felt any type of fee at the landfill discourages someone from bringing something and encourages dumping elsewhere. Therefore, he had requested Mr. Williams to examine the question of the fee and the status of same. 444 November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Williams was present and summarized a status report of the first four months experience of collecting a fee at the two landfills for disposal of tires; said months being July through October 1981. This fee of forty cents per tire or $26.00 per ton was instituted by the Board on July 1, 1981. Mrs. Williams said in keeping records of the tires received and money collected or billed, 298 tires were collected at the Keene Landfill and a fee was received for 26 1/2% of that number. Mr. Williams said a great number are just dumped. Mr. Williams said the Engineering Department has to take the tires from Keene to Ivy for splitting and fifteen trips have been made. Therefore, with the number of tires collected and the expenses of hauling such to the Ivy Landfill, the costs to split the tires are not defrayed. Ivy Landfill has collected approximately 15,557 tires during the first four months. He has talked to ten local tire dealers, and only one is not accepting old casings because of the fee charged at the landfill. The other nine dealers said it was difficult to turn away a customer at forty cents a tire. tn summary, Mr. Williams said it appears that the tire disposal operation is working well. The Keene Landfill appears to be a losing proposition financially, but the tire splitting at Ivy is almost paying for itself from the accounting of the tires. The revenue generated from tire fees is only paying about sixty percent of the salaries for the two workers that split the tires. Mr. Fisher felt the question today is the request to eliminate the fee and what it would cost the County. He felt the lost to the County would be about $1,000 per month. Mr. Williams said the established cost per tire based on the salary of the two men for the operation at the landfill is $22,000 per year and by using that figure, and the number of tires received, the fee is approximately forty cents per tire. Mr. Lindstrom asked if there is any way tax exempt organizations could have the fee waived. Mr. Fisher felt the County Executive should have an opportunity to examine this matter further with the City and for Mr. Williams to determine if there is some mechanism' to relieve the group of paying this fee. Mr. Fisher said he has been concerned about the fees charged at the landfill and felt the charges are an incentive for citizens not to bring trash to the landfill. Mr. Fisher said perhaps the simplest thing to do is to eliminate the fee for tire splitting. Mr. McCann felt the overall problem should be addressed. Mr. Fisher requested Mr. Agnor to prepare a recommendation on this matter by next month, if possible. Agenda Item No. 7. Discussion: use of water supply reservoirs. An Ordinance to provide for limited recreational Mr. Agnor said the ordinance is submitted by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority~ and is a request for a public hearing. Mr. Agnor said the ordinance essentially provides the same permitted and prohibited uses in all watershed areas of the County. Actually, administrative procedures which have been followed for years are being put into ordinance form. The need for the ordinance is a part of the reservoir protection activities of the City and County, but principally for the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority who are responsible for the quality'of the drinking water in the County and City water systems. Mr. Fisher asked who owns the reservoirs. Mr. Agnor said the Sugar Hollow, Ragged Mountain and South Fork Rivanna are still titled in the City's name. The creation of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority did not change that. Beaver Creek and Totier Creek are~ County owned. Mr. Fisher said anyone wanting to take advantage of some recreational uses would have to go to the City's Public Work's Department for a permit. He was very concerned about that because the County has made the law and then will have no control over the administration of same. Mr. Agnor said the procedure has been used for a number of years and is referred to in the ordinance principally to legalize its use. There has been some discussion of shifting the responsibility for permits to another agency. However, the consensus was that the procedure has worked well and should not be changed, Miss Nash asked who enforces the ordinance. Mr. Agnor said the ordinance will fall under the Sheriff's Department to enforce. Mr. Fisher said he had noticed at one of the reservoirs that boats were being used with electric motors but also had a gasoline engine on the rear of the boats. Mr. Agnor said he was under the impression that gasoline engines are on boats for safety reasons in case electrical motors fail. Dr. Iachetta said he thought the prohibited and permitted sections should be more inclusi~a and that any combustion system should be prohibited. He suggested that the only kind of boat to be permitted be electrical. Mr. Fisher noted that Section 14-17(b) does not refer to boats in the first sentence and then in the last part, boats are excepted. Therefore, he felt the language needed to be clarified. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Miss Nash, to advertise for public hearing on DecemberP9, 1981 an Ordinance Amending Chapter 14 of the Albemarle County Code (Parks and Recreation) by adding a new Article III to Provide for Limited Recreational Use of Water Supply ReservoSrs Utilized by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority.~ Miss Nash then asked if a statement would be included on the permits that gasoline engines were not permitted. Mr. Agnor said such could be. Roll was then called on the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs..Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No 8. Appropriation: Health Department repairs. Mr. Agnor said the renovations to the Health FaCility were included in the Capital Improvements Budget but the funds were not appropriated when the budget was adopted. Construction cost estimates have been submitted by the architect and the project bids are to be opened on November 17, 1981. The project consists'primarily of converting the heating system from a two pipe heating system to a four pipe heating and cooling system plus replacement of windows to a more energy efficient unit. Mr. Agnor said the request is for an appropriation in the amount of $9,834.00 which is one-half of the architectural fees, $19,668.00, from the General Operating Capital Outlay Fund. Mr. Agnor noted a roof November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) 445 repair job completed recently on the facility which was funded from the proceeds of the Joint Health Center account which receives state monies for rents on the building. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $9,834.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Operating Capital Outlay Fund and coded to Code 9700-7060.94, Renovations--Joint Health Facility. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No. 9. of Powers Agreement. Jefferson Area Board on Aging--Request to Amend Joint Exercise Mr. Fisher said the Chairman of the Jefferson Area Board on Aging has requested that this matter be deferred for an indefinite period of time. Therefore, Mr. Fisher requested the item be withdrawn from the agenda. At 11:00 A.M., the Board recessed and reconvened at 11:10 A.M. Agenda Item No. 10. Staff Report: agencies for 1982-83 budget. Evaluation of funding requests from outside Mr. Fisher said this evaluation was requested by Mr. Lindstrom and the Board asked that the staff prepare some form to be used for this purpose. He then asked Mr. Agnor to explain to the Board the materials submitted with the agenda. Mr. Agnor said a committee composed of the Director of Finance, Planning Director, Social Services Director and himself, with the assistance of the planning staff, surveyed a number of communities for information on such procedures. Charlottesville was the only locality to have a useful system. Mr. Agnor said the committee decided to present the report with a list of objectives to follow in considering funding requests from non-governmental agencies and a series of questions for those agencies to complete with their funding requests. Mr. Agnor said the creation of another board or committee is not recommended to review this information, but rather that the staff be the review group to analyze the requests and make recommendations to the Board on funding. The bulk of this review work will occur during budget preparation. Mr. Agnor then presented the following suggested objectives for funding requests: 1. Promote those programs/services which demonstrate efficient administration. 2. Discourage those programs/services being duplicated by others. Encourage those programs/services which address identified "community" problems. Promote those agencies/programs which have written goals and objectives and can demonstrate their success in achieving their objectives. Encourage programs which promote the active use of volunteers in achieving actual program objectives. Mr. Agnor said the program review form consists of twelve questions, however, he would recommend that the Board focus its attention on the objectives and if there are any changes desired then the questionnaire can be adjusted to provide the information needed. The questionnaire in its present form addresses the five objectives outlined above. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the committee recommended by Mr. Agnor would have the responsibility of reviewing these questionnaires. Mr. Agnor said the committee would review the questionnaire summarize the questionnaires, and make a recommendation for or against funding to the Board. Mr. Lindstrom asked if this information would be submitted to the Board at budget time. Mr. Agnor said yes. Mr. Lindstrom felt this evaluation will help the Board in its deliberations and noted his appreciation. Mr. Fisher was concerned that sending the questionnaire to agencies losing funds will be an invitation to request funds. Mr. Agnor said it is not the intent to send the form to agencies not already being funded and/or those agencies from which requests are received. Mr. McCann felt this is a move in the right direction and felt the entire package should be considered. He felt some services of these agencies are duplicates and could possibly be put together under one administration. Mr. McCann felt the first objective is one that most agencies demonstrate, but he is concerned about the results after the "efficient administration" Dr. Iachetta felt the last part of objective four "can demonstrate their success in achieving their objectives" should be added to the end of objective three. One of the more difficult aspects of evaluating any of the programs is to evaluate what they set out to do. To him, efficient administration is how well an agency does what they set out to do and if there is some way to measure that it could help to determine whether the County desires to continue funding. Dr. Iachetta felt the objectives should start with Number 3 "identified community problems" that already exist and evaluate the program dealing with those problems. Mr. Lindstrom then asked if the objectives were in a priority order. Mr. Agnor said no. Mr. Lindstrom felt the suggestion for objective three and four was a good one. Dr. Iachetta felt the combination of the two would make a better goal. 446 NovSmber 11, 1981 (Regular D~y Meeting) Mr. Fisher said the request is to consider the objectives, assigning to the established committee the responsibility of reviewing the information provided by the agencies and making recommendations to the Board for funding. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to approve the form to be used for evaluation of funding requests and amending the objectives noted by Mr. Agnor by deleting objective four and adding "and can demonstrate their success in achieving their objectiveS'to the end of objective three and the committee be assigned as initially composed. Mr. Agnor said if the Board did not object he would put objective three at the top of the list. There was no objection. Roll was then called on the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No. 18. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Agnor reported that Mr. Ray Jones has distributed to the School System, Albemarle County Service Authority, Joint Security Complex, and all other County staff, a summary for the Blue Cross/Blue Shield contract plan ending September 30, 1981. He noted that the plan ended for the first time in black and the renewal rates are on target. Mr. Agnor noted the following resolution adopted by the Albemarle County School Board on November 9, 1981: .~"BE IT RESOLVED, by the School Board of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that the 'below-described property is hereby declared surplus, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 22.1-129: Ail that certain lot or parcel of land, containing 2.7 acres, more or less, with improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto, situated near Whitehall, Albemarle County, Virginia, as shown and described on plat of Hugh F. Sims, S.A.C., dated October, 1917 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 173, page 172. This property is the same property in all respects a portion of which was conveyed to the Whitehall District School Board, predecessor in interest to the County School Board of Albemarle County, by deed of L. J. Poats, of record in the above Clerk's office in Deed Book 173, page 172, a portion of which was conveyed to the School Board of Whitehall District No. 2 of. the County of Albemarle, predecessor in interest to the County School Board of Albemarle County, by deed of Cornelia J. Railey and W. B. Railey, dated October 8, 1908 and recorded in the above Clerk's office in Deed Book 138, page 344, and a portion of which was conveyed to the Whitehall District School Board, predecessor in interest to the County School Board of Albemarle County, by deed of J. D. Wiant and Mary M. Wiant, dated August 24, 1888 and recorded in the above Clerk's office in Deed Book 98, page 457. Reference is made to the above plat and deeds for a more particular description of the property described herein. The Chairman of the School Board of the'County of Albemarle is hereby directed to take such action as may be necessary to accomplish the transfer of the 2.7 acres. The Clerk of the School Board of the County of Albemarle is hereby directed to file this resolution With the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia. It is the intent of the School Board of the County of Albemarle, pursuant to Virginia Code Section 22.1-129, that upon the filing of this resolution in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County title to the above-described property shall vest in the County of Albemarle, Virginia." Mr. Fisher was not aware that the School Board still owned the building and was curious if there are other such structures that the School Board owns. Mr. Agnor said this will be considered by the Building and Properties Committee and will be discussed with Dr. Carlos Gutierrez, Division Superintendent. Mr. Agnor noted response from Dr. Avery Catlin from the University of Virginia about the use of the vivarium by agencies other than the University. Mr. Agnor said at the October meeting this was answered as noted by a letter from Dr. Ralph Allen, Chairman of the Radiation Safety Committee to Mr. Lindstrom. However, he also received a response from Dr. Catlin similar to that given by Dr. Allen. November 11, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Lindstrom said he was very concerned about this room, Meeting Room #7. He did not feel the room makes the public feel welcome and puts a great distance between the public and the Board. He did not feel persons coming into the room should feel as if they are coming before the SUpreme Court. He was aware that correcting the problems will cost money, but he feels the cost will make the Board's operation more accessible. Mr. Lindstrom then noted the front railing around the Board table (even though the railing houses the electrical outlets for the microphones) and said he feels the railing should be eliminated and the microphone plugs made flush. Mr. Lindstrom felt the chairs create an impression that the Board is an imperial body and the chairs are just too "damn" big. He then noted that perhaps there were other officers in the building who are not so frequently confronted by the public who could use the chairs. He would like to have lower backed chairs because they are much less imperial. Mr. Lindstrom felt for a local government to create the impression that this room creates is unfortunate and unnecessary. Mr. McCann agreed and said, when he has been asked his comments about this building, his response has been that the old friendly atmosphere has gone. Dr. Iachetta agreed and felt the distance between the Board members and the public is caused by a loss of eye contact. A discussion followed on the items in the room which were uncomfortable as well as making the public feel unwelcome. Mr. Lindstrom said he was not sure where this matter should be referred but he would definitely like to see some response within~the next month on the costs to restructure the room. Mr. Fisher noted that he and Mr. Agnor had talked about this problem and he asked if Mr. Agnor had discussed this with the architect. Mr. Agnor said no. He understood that nothing was to be done until the County had "settled in". Mr. Fisher said when the Auditorium is finished, the Board will have two meeting places. Since chairs have not been purchased for the auditorium, he would suggest that the high-backed chairs in Meeting Room #7 be transferred to the Auditorium and new chairs (similar to those purchased for the staff) be purchased for this room. Mr. Lindstrom said he felt this problem should be corrected immediately, and that the entire Board be involved in the decision. In conclusion, the following list of items are the ones which at least one-half of the Board members felt should be corrected: 1. The horseshoe shaped table puts too much distance between the Board members and the public; 2. The railing in front of the horseshoe table needs to be removed; 3. Microphone plugs should be made flush; 4. The chairs are too big and should be replaced with lower backed chairs. It was left to Mr. Agnor to talk with the architect about necessary work to solve the above concerns; with a final report to the Board when prices are known. Mr. Agnor said an open house for the new County Office Building had been deferred until a positive date was given by the contractor as to when he would be finished. However, he is becoming concerned that the time will be too close to the Christmas holidays and would suggest that the second Sunday in December be set as a tentative date. After a brief discussion, it was decided to have the open house on December 13, 1981, beginning with a dedication ceremony in the auditorium and then a tour of the building from 3:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M. Agenda Item No. 1t. At 11:50 A.M., motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Miss Nash, to adjourn into executive session to discuss legal and personnel matters. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. The Board reconvened into open session at 2:25 P.M. and continued with the agenda. Agenda Item No. 12. Request from Pat Schwarzs.child. Mr. Fisher asked if this request concerned the Central Virginia Electric Cooperative case which is the subject of litigation. Ms. Pat Schwarzschild said yes and no. It pertains to the same matter, but not the same case. Mr. Fisher then informed her that on matters in court, the Board prefers to have attorneys for the various sides talk to the County Attorney. Therefore, if she was going to say anything about the case in litigation, he would prefer that she not. Ms. Schwarzschild said this was hard to answer but she did not intend to involve her clients in the case, but in talking to both of the attorneys about this, they have agreed that it is appropriate for her to make the comments she plans to make. Ms. Schwarzschild, from the firm of Hunton and Williams in Richmond, then presented her request. She noted that she represents Sunburst Yarns, Incorporated and Wintergreen. She had spoken to Messrs. St. John and Payne of.the County Attorney's office and Mr. Ron Keeler on various occasions. The subject of the conversations has been methods ~by which the matter involving the construction of the transmission line might be dealt with unrelated to any litigation. Out of those conversations, all the parties have agreed on January 6, 1982, as a date to discuss all possibilities. She said one of her reasons for being present today is to receive some indication from the Board on the possibility of CVEC's petition being heard on January 6. Ms. Schwarzschild said Sunburst Yarns is a manufacturer of continuous filaments, yarns and fabrics in Nelson County. Sunburst Yarns wants to expand but without adequate electrical power that expansion is not possible. There is no question that the power is not' available. The business decision and planning for the expansion was done some time ago and the company needs to know very soon whether it will be possible to follow through with these plans and if not, then the company will have to relocate. Ms. Schwarzschild said that would be a great loss to Nelson County. In line with all of that, her client had engaged her to meet with the various parties. Ms. Schwarzschild said, if for some reason the Board is not able to hear the proposal on January 6, the matter will end at that point. She noted that the Deputy County Attorney, Mr. Frederick Payne, advised her that it is not necessary for this rehearing of the CVEC petition to go before the Planning Commission. In conclusion, Ms. Schwarzschild said she would like to know if the Board feels the petition should go back through the Planning Commission and if the Board can hear the proposal on January 6. ~November 1!, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Fisher said the Board does not plan to hold the regular night meeting on January 6, 1982. The meeting has been rescheduled for afternoon only as an organizational meeting of the new Board members. Then, Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Butler are leaving for a meeting of newly elected supervisors, the meeting being in Lync~burg. Mr. Fisher said the present members of the Board are much more familiar with the issues than the new supervisors will be, therefore, he'felt the petition should be presented to this Board before the end of the year. He did not feel this petition should be referred back to the Planning Commission. Ms. Schwarzschild said she had suggested January 6, 1982, because the County Executive had given her that date as a meeting date. Mr. Fisher did feel a special meeting could be considered if there was an agreement reached by all the other parties and presented to the Board for review. Ms. Schwarzschild asked if the term "all the other parties" was specifically referring to the parties involved in the suit. Mr. Fisher said yes. Mr. St. John said parties means the county citizens along the line. Ms. Schwarzschild asked if Mr. Fisher was saying that there had to be an agreement of all parties before the Board would hear the request. Mr. Fisher said no, but in order to have a prompt resolution of the request, he felt that would be the only way to hear the request. Ms. Schwarzschild extended her appreciation for the Board's time. Agenda Item No. 13. A.H.I.P. Quarterly Report. Ms. Ann Paul, Executive Director of Albemarle Housing Improvement Program, was present. She said in addition to the quarterly report, the results of the follow-up survey conducted by AHIP have also been submittted. Ms. Paul said the Board requested that AHIP examine some of the jobs completed in the past to determine how the work was holding up. Ms. Paul said fifteen out of one hundred and fifty-four jobs were surveyed. The basis of the survey was to visit the job sites, examine the work performed, interview the families and research tax records on the house to get an idea of how the~AHIP work was billed on the house. Ms. Paul cOntinued her presentation and noted that AHIP has higher skilled personnel and'a more organized outreach approach than in the past. She noted that she was pleased with the results of the survey and found that the physical work was holding up exceptionally well. Ms. Paul said even though the survey was informal she did feel the results were fairly accurate in how the work was holding up and whether it was serving clients in the way the clients should be served. Mr. Fisher was pleased with the survey and felt it was a method of quality control. Ms. Paul said there are two ways of doing the quality control on a long term basis. One is on a call back basis, in particular if someone is having a problem they will contact AHIP. Another way is an informal follow up by outreach workers. Mr. Fisher said in the report it is stated that sixty percent of the families are eligible for tax relief for the elderly. He asked what percentage are actually taking advantage of the tax relief. Ms. Paul did not know. She said most of the families do not want to answer any questions about owning their house. Ms. Paul then noted that AHIP has had an extremely good quarter t~ ta~ th~e months and it was encouraging because skilled carpenters were used, three CETA workers, with the remainder being volunteers. Mr. Gary Oliveria presented a condensed version of the last two quarters combined. Those quarters being April 1981 through September 1981. There were fifteen jobs; six major involving the installation of plumbing and bathroom additions; four minor and five repair jobs. He then presented slides of the work completed in the. first quarter of fiscal year 1981-82. Mr. Fisher extended the Board's appreciation for the time and efforts that the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program has given to the County residents. Agenda Item No. 14. Report from Building Committee. Dr. Iachetta said the Building Committee (Henley, McCann, Iachetta and Agnor) met to discuss several items concerning the spaces vacated by the County when it moved to the new County Office Building on Mc!ntire Road. Dr. Iachetta said the Committee discussed the employment of an architect for the court square buildings in order to improve the situation f~r the Circuit Court. The recommendation of the committee is to authorize the County Executive to obtain a proposal from Johnson, Craven and Gibson for architectural services. After the proposal has been reviewed, it will be brought back to the Board for action. Dr. Iachetta said a number of agencies are interested in renting the space in the old Jailer's house, the old real estate building and the offices over the old County garage in back of the Juvenile Court. Those agencies are Albemarle Housing Improvement Program, Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, Jefferson Area Board on Aging, the National Office of Offender Aid and Restoration and the Region Ten Alcohol Program. The committee recommends that the County Executive be authorized to negotiate leases with the agencies, with final approval by the Board, with the following four points: 1. Two year initial terms; 2. Rents comparable to market prices for similar space; 3. Tenant to make lease hold improvements (if any), and bie responsible for interior maintenance and utilitieS; 4. County to be responsible ~or mecihanical system repairs and exterior maintenance Dr. Iachetta said the last issue discussed by tihe committee was what to do with the old Scottsville School but the committee has deferr!ed any further discussion until the first issues are resolved. Mr. Fisher asked if a two-year lease is loing enough to justify making interior improvements. Dr. Iachetta said the feeling o~ the interested agencies is that the necessary changes are few and the two-year ter~ is reasonable. Dr. Iachetta~said the committee felt a longer lease required the County to think more in terms of permanent rental and this is not desired. The two-year ~ease will allow the Board time to decide what the ultimate use of these properties should be. Dr. Iachetta added that the committee 449 .... November !~ l~_~~Flar Daz Meeting) did not want to make any capital investments in these buildings at this time and the rents would have to reflect the unwillingness to make improvements. He did not see any reason to invest public money to improve the appearance of the buildings. Dr. Iachetta said most of the agencies requesting available space are either government type agencies or quasi-government agencies or at least those County supported. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to authorize the County Executive to obtain proposals from Johnson, Craven and Gibson for architectural services for renovation to the Court Square Buildings (the old County Office Building and the Albemarle County Courthouse). Mr. McCann seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to authorize the County Executive to negotiate leases with the agencies interested in renting space in the Jailor's House, Real Estate building and the offices over the garage for approval by the Board with the four points he made in the foragoing comments. Mr. McCann seconded the motion. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by.the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No. 15. Discussion: Ordinance re: Smoke Detector. Mr. Agnor said the 1981 General Assembly adopted legislation which enables the County to adopt a smoke detector ordinance. The drafted ordinance presented to the Board today is taken almost verbatim from the State Code. Mr. Agnor said the County Attorney's Office drafted the ordinance at the request of Mr. Ira Cortez, Fire Prevention Officer. The ordinance essentially requires that buildings or structures, multi-family or hotel/motel or rooming houses, constructed prior to adoption of the Uniform Statewide Building Code have smoke detectors installed. The detectors can either be battery operated or AC powered. With respect to multi-family buildings containing four or more dwelling units, the owner of each unit which is rented or leased, shall furnish to the tenant a certificate at the beginning of rental and renew same at least annually thereafter that the required smoke detectors are present and have been inspected and are in good working order. Except for smoke detectors located in hallways, stairwells and other public or common areas, interim testing, repair and maintenance of such smoke detectors shall be the responsibility of the tenant. The owner shall be obligated to service, repair or replace any malfunctioning smoke detectors within five days of receipt of written notice that the smoke detector is in need of service, repair or replacement. In any event, the initial installation of the smoke detector is the responsibility of the owner. Mr. Agnor said smoke detectors are required now in the County for new buildings and when there are alterations. Mr. Ira Cortez was present and said in a memorandum to Mr. Robert Vaughn, Building Inspector, he had suggested that notices of the ordinance be sent to the owners of affected buildings and compliance requested within one year after adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Cortez said the Holiday Inn South does not have any detectors but there are very few buildings which have not already complied and installed smoke detectors. Mr. Fisher asked if Mr. Cortez was recommending battery powered smoke detectors in public places. Mr. Cortez said yes; the need is especially ¥itat in older buildings. Mr. Fisher asked the meaning of one or more persons in the ordinance for the definition of any hotel or motel. Mr. Cortez said the intent is one or more rooms. Mr. Fisher a~ked~if the ordinance regulations apply to guest houses. Mr. Cortez said no. Dr. Iachetta said it would if there were more than four rooms. Mr. Cortez said yes. Mr. St. John said if the Code is being used as a basis for the ordinance, then the best thing to do is to use the exact words and he did not feel there was any motel or hotel having accommodations for just one person. Therefore, he did not feel the phrase created any problem. Miss Nash asked if the ordinance applies to facilities offering breakfast and room. Mr. Cortez said the intent is for public buildings but there is another ordinance on boardinghouses which specifies four or more sleeping units for rent. Mr. Fisher understood the concern about hotels and motels needing this protection. He then asked if verbal persuasion had been attempted. Mr. Cortez said local owners such as the Sheraton Inn have been no problem, but the Holiday Inn South and some of the apartment units in the County are not locally owned and therefore, makes it difficult to send a message through the manager to the owner. Mr. Harold Pillar was present speaking in defense of apartment owners and landlords. He had put in smoke detectors in every unit he owns and the tenants take them out when they move. Therefore, the installation of a detector is not a one time thing. Mr. McCann said perhaps each tenant should be required to install a detector. Mr. McCann said he did not mind setting a public hearing on this ordinance, but felt people should look out for themselves. However, he did feel smoke detectors are a necessity in hotels and motels. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Miss Nash, to advertise for public hearing on December 9, 1981, an ordinance to amend Chapter 5 of the 'Albemarle County Code by adding Section 5-6.1 relating to the installation and maintenance of smoke detectors in certain structures. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. 450 November !1, 1981 (Regular Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 16 November 4, 1981). Requests from Industrial Development Authority (deferred from The Board at its meeting on November 4, 1981, reviewed a resolution from the Industrial Development Authority regarding a request from Price Wilson PartnerShip for assistance in financing a proposal to rehabilitate and expand the Scottsville Shopping Center. The Board at that meeting did not feel enough information was available to act on the request and deferred the discussion to this date in order that the staff could compile certain information relative to the request. The staff has submitted such information. However, Mr. Fisher noted that a request was received today from Mr. Lowndes Wilson, partner of the Price Wilson Partnership, to withdraw the request. Mr. Fisher said the applicant appears to be pursuing another method of funding. Mr. Fisher also noted that phone calls have been received today requesting this withdrawal and the staff has in turn verified the source of the call. He then asked Mr. St. John if action should be taken to approve the withdrawal in order to clear the docket. Mr. St. John said yes. Motion was then offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to allow withdrawal of the request for Price Wilson Partnership for Industrial Development Authority funding as requested by Mr. Lowndes Wilson, partner of said partnership. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. None. Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No. 17. Appointments. Mr. Fisher said there has been a vacancy for some time on the Industrial Development Authority and he asked if there were any nominees for the position. Mr. Lindstrom nominated and offered motion to appoint Mr. John Stewart Darrell to the Industrial Development Authority; said term beginning immediately and expiring on January 19, 1983, and replacing Mr. Donald A. Holden who resigned in January 1981. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley. Mr. Fisher said questions have been asked about appointments to the School Board next year. As he understands, the three districts which had regular elections for supervisors this year will have vacancies which should be filled at the first meeting in January, if possible, and the same is true for the Planning Commission. As for the at-large member on the Planning Commission, the term of the present member will expire on December 31 and this position will also be available for consider~tion. Mr. Fisher said the Clerk is preparing an advertisement for the vacancies. A brief discussion followed on the appointments in the near future but no action was taken. Agenda Item No. 19. Adjournment. Mr. Fisher said a motion is needed to adjourn to November 13, 1981, for a meeting with the City and also the Board w~ll be meeting on November 18, 1981 at 4!00 P.M. in another session. At 3:58 P.M., motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. McCann, to adjourn to November 13, 1981, at 3:00 P.M. in the County Executive's Conference Room, Fourth Floor, County Office Building. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta, Lindstrom, McCann and Miss Nash. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Henley.