HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-02-02
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
1P)
1~)
1~)
1~)
1~)
1~)
1p)
1[7)
1t7 a)
1~)
l~n
20)
FIN A L
9:00 A.M.
February 2, 1994
Room 7, County Office Building
Call to Order.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
Consent Agenda (on next sheet) .
Approval of Minutes: March 13 (A) and March 23(A), 1992, and January 5
and January 12 (A) , 1994.
Transportation Matters:
a) Median Strip Maintenance.
b) Georgetown Road Task Force - Recommended Improvements.
c) Hcadml Crcck rarlt\lay Updatc. (Moved to the Consent Agenda.)
d) Other Transportation Matters.
Work Session: Citizen Survey for Comprehensive Plan Update.
Section 8 Advisory Committee Report - Implementation Plan.
Report of the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee.
Request for $6000 appropriation for installation of weather vane on top
of the County Office Building.
Audit Committee Report.
FY 1994-95 Budget and Revenue Update.
Appropriations:
a) Metropolitan Planning Organization Grant, $72,950. (Form #930050)
b) Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Grant, $64,719.
(Form #930051)
c) Title II Dwight D. Eisenhower Grant, $27,225. (Form #93052)
*Executive Session: Legal and Personnel Matters.
Certify Executive Session.
Appointments.
Discussion: Board of Supervisors' meeting for April 13, 1994.
Cancel Board of Supervisors' meetings for February 9 and February 16,
1994.
Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Adjourn to February 14, 1994, at 4:30 p.m., Meeting Room #5/6.
*It is intended that the Board will hold an Executive Session under
Virginia Code Sections 2.1-344.A.1 (personnel matters) and 2.1-344.A.7
(legal matters) .
CON S E N T
AGENDA
FbR APPROVAL:
5.1 Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance, Sheriff,
Commonwealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk, Circuit Court, for the
month of December, 1993.
5.2 Resolution: State Budget cuts to Children and Youth Services.
5.2a Resolution to take Lanford Hills Drive in Lanford Hills Subdivision into
the State Secondary System of Highways.
FbR INFORMATION:
5.3 Letter dated January 11, 1994, from Ray D. Pethtel, Commissioner,
Departmentof Transportation, re: Addition of Mill Creek, Section 5,
into the Secondary System of Highways.
5.4 Letter dated January 12, 1994, from Ray D. Pethtel, Commissioner,
Department of Transportation, re: Addition of Mechums West Drive into
the Secondary System of Highways.
5.5 Letter dated January 13, 1994, from the Honorable John Warner, United
States Senate, acknowledging receipt of Board's letter, re: Interchange
at Interstate 64 and Route 742 (Avon Street) .
5.6 Copy of Planning Commission minutes for December 21, 1993.
5.7 Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Rivanna Water & Sewer
Authority for November 30, 1993.
5.8 Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County
Service Authority for December 16, 1993.
5.9 Notice of Application of Appalachian Power Company, filed with the State
Corporation Commission, for authority to implement Residential
Insulation Financing Plan.
5.10 Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apartments) Monthly Bond and
Program Report for December, 1993.
5.11 Copy of letter dated January 13, 1994, from James Christian Hill,
National Register Assistant, addressed to Donald B. and Joan P.
Caldwell, re: Longwood, Albemarle County (DHR No. 02-380), indicating a
recommendation that this property appears to meet the criteria for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
5.12 December 1993, Financial Report.
5.13 Letter dated January 26, 1994, from D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway
Engineer, addressed to Ella W. Carey, Clerk, re: monthly update on
highway improvement projects currently under construction and quarterly
report of projects under design.
5.14 Letter dated January 20, 1994, from E. C. Cochran, Jr., State Location
and Design Engineer, Department of Transportation, re: notice that the
Commonwealth Transportation Board has approved the location and design
features of the Route 743 Project (proj. #0743-002-153, C-502).
5 15 Meadow Creek Parkway Update.
5 16 1993 Fourth Quarter Building Report as prepared by the Department of
Planning and Community Development.
5 17 1993 Year End Building Report as prepared by the Department of Planning
and Community Development.
David P. Bowerman
Charlottesville
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. Humphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
FROM:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Planning & Community Development
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC e1iJ(
February 3, 1994
MEMO TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Board Actions from Meeting of February 2, 1994
1994:
Following is a list of the Board's actions from its meeting of February 2,
Agenda Item No.1. The meeting was called to order at 9:06 A.M., by the
Chairman, Mr. Perkins.
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public.
Ms. Cynthia Hash came forward to speak concerning the Meadow Creek Parkway.
She handed to the Board petitions and said a perusal of these will show how few
people in Forest Lakes would actually use the roadway. Only seven percent go out
across the dam to Hollymead School. She understands this matter is being returned
to the Planning Commission for reevaluation and she asked for the date this roadway
will be discussed by the Board. Mr. Tucker said he could not give a definite
answer. It will depend on the Planning Commission's schedule.
Agenda Item No. 5.1. Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance,
Sheriff, Commonwealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk of the Circuit Court, for
the month of December, 1993, were APPROVED as presented.
Agenda Item No. 5.2. Resolution: State Budget cuts to Children and Youth
Services. ADOPTED the attached resolution. Roxanne White will see that it is
forwarded to all of the correct people. The Chairman will send a copy to the
Govettnor. It was suggested that Albemarle County try to get other localities to
join in opposition, however, Mrs. Thomas said this is a budget issue, and Friday is
the last day for getting anything in for the current General Assembly session. It
was suggested that the Legislative Liaison be requested to put this high on the
priority list, and that the local legislators be requested to also become involved.
Agenda Item No. 5.2a. Resolution to take Lanford Hills Drive in Lanford Hills
Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. ADOPTED the attached
resolution which has been returned to Engineering.
*
Printed on recycled paper
To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
February 3, 1994
Date:
Page 2
Agenda Item No. 5.15. Meadow Creek Parkway Update. SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING
COMM1SSION for reevaluation prior to action by the Board of Supervisors. This is
based on the additional information which was developed since the Planning Commis-
sion took action on October 19, 1993, to recommend against all alignments proposed
by tte consultants.
Agenda Item No. 7a. Transportation Matters: Median strip Maintenance.
MOTIC~ to formally ask Mr. Roosevelt to mow at least three times a year in all
entrsnce corridors (the seven locations listed in Mullaney's letter), the full width
of tte right-of-way. Those locations are:
1) Route 20 from Route 53 intersection to the City limits;
2) Route 250 bypass from the Ivy exit to the City limits;
3) Route 29 from Ivy exit of 250 bypass to Route 64 interchange;
4) Route 250 East from Free Bridge to Route 64 interchange;
5) Barracks Road from Georgetown Road to the City limits;
6) Route 250 from Bellair to the City limits;
7) Fifth Street from the City limits to Route 631.
Agenda Item No. 7b. Transportation Matters: Georgetown Road Task Force _
RecoIT~ended Improvements. Mo~ion that with the exception of the items with dollar
amoun~s, the Board accept the report and staff take necessary steps to implement
items possible and consider dollar items (slip ramp and sidewalks) in Six-Year road
plan. Copy of report attached.
Agenda Item No. 7d. Other Transportation Matters.
Ms. Rebecca Lambert was present and handed in a petition concerning the paving
of Ropte 640. She has been working with people from the Culpeper District Office
and i~ having a notary come to a place where everyone involved in right-of-way
dedic~tion can come to one location to sign official documents.
Mr. Roosevelt said he has a large file on this road. It was in the Six-Year
Plan 'n the 1970s. In 1980 he staked out the needed right-of-way for a Mr. Turner
and t~ld him that without dedication of the required right-of-way this project would
have ~o chance of going forward. Since that time, the Supervisors adopted a
diffe ent policy concerning gravel road improvements.
Mr. Bowerman asked for a report on the possibility of having a pedestrian
cross~alk marked on Route 29 North at Woodbrook. He just wants comments, and told
Mr. Rposevelt it does not have to be a formal reply.
Mrs. Thomas said there were people present who had served on a committee
conce ning improvements to Routes 760 and 712. They met last month and reached the
follo~ing consensus. There is no possibility of getting the right-of-way necessary
for iI~provements to Route 760, but on Route 712 there is someone who will work with
the H ghway Department to get that right-of-way.
APPROVED proceeding with and spending the $24,400 shown in Mr. Roosevelt's
lette of December 13, 1993, on the improvements for Route 712.
Mrs. Thomas then brought up the subject of Route 682. She said that because
of th! weather she did not get to drive along the road until last week. She does
I
To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
February 3, 1994
Date:
Page 3
not want the people living on this road to have to wait until March for an answer,
so recommends that the Board discuss this road request at its meeting on February
14. Consensus to do that. (Mr. Marshall said he cannot be present that day.)
Mr. Perkins said he had received several complaints about Route 674 which is a
gravel road. He believes the Highway Department is probably getting lots of
complaints due to the recent weather. Mr. Roosevelt said lots of gravel roads have
failed because of the depth of the freeze.
Mrs. Humphris said she had been contacted by Mr. Henry Dean about Lamb's Road.
She asked Mr. Roosevelt if he would meet with her and Mr. Dean to discuss Mr. Dean's
suggestions. He replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Marshall said he had many calls about the Keene Landfill Road and also
about a street off of Market street. Mr. Tucker said it is a short section which
runs from Broadway to Market Street and it is not in the Secondary System. Mr.
Marshall said he was told that Mr. Peter Way was able to do something for the road
in the past. Mr. Perkins said the Board approved paying for sanding the road in
1989 because it was an emergency situation at that time. Mr. Marshall asked for a
report on anything that can be done for the people living on the street.
(NOTE: At 10:44 a.m., the Board recessed, and reconvened at 10:54 a.m.)
Agenda Item No.8. Work Session: Citizen Survey for Comprehensive Plan
Update. Mr. Tom Guderbach? from the Center for Survey Research at the University of
Virginia, was present to discuss a draft list of questions which will be used in
conducting a scientific sample survey of citizens on this question. There was no
vote, nor any real consensus. Mr. Marshall was afraid the replies will be from "too
many chiefs, and not enough indians." He also felt the word "growth" was too broad,
and without any definition. Mr. Martin wanted to be sure questions concerning jobs
mean "job diversification". Mr. Bowerman did not agree with questions where the
respondent has to be educated before making a reply. Mrs. Thomas suggested that in
No. 5A.8. "safer neighborhoods and streets" mention only neighborhoods.
The Board wants to see a list of the draft questions as soon as possible.
Board members are to give their input to staff so that a list of the final questions
can be reviewed on or about March 2.
Agenda Item No.9. Section 8 Advisory Committee Report - Implementation Plan.
APPROVED the implementation plan and directed staff to begin the activities
outlined in the plan.
Agenda Item No. 10. Report of the Agricultural and Forestal Industries
Support Committee. Mrs. Humphris mentioned the third paragraph on Page 10 of the
report, particularly the comment at the end of the paragraph reading: "Due to the
lack of understanding, some County employees present a negative view of county
agriculture policy." She said she has no idea what that statement may mean, but she
thinks staff needs to pay attention to the Comment for whatever reason it was
included.
. -
RESOLUTION
Concerning Governor Wilder's
Proposed Budget for 1994-96
WHEREAS, Governor Wilder's proposed 1994-96 Executive Budget recommends the elimination of Department
of Yo th and Family Services funding for the Charlottesville-Albemarle Children and Youth Commission, Community
Attenfon Family Group Home program, and a ten (10) percent cut in the Community Attention Home budget; and
Depa
portio
WHEREAS, these proposed cuts, which total $207,000, will result in a thirty-five (35) percent reduction to the
ent of Youth and Family Services Block Grant allocation to Charlottesville and will in effect transfer a significant
of these costs to the locality as the children and families involved will still need to be served; and
WHEREAS, the elimination of $53,630 in Virginia Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act funds will
a fifty (50) percent reduction of operating funds for the Charlottesville-Albemarle Children and Youth Commission;
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Services Act proponents promised localities that support of the Act would not lead
crease in local costs, that it would allow localities to serve more children in their home communities, and would
reduce or contain local costs; and
WHEREAS, six months after its implementation, we are finding that local costs are in fact increasing and these
cuts will only add to these local costs, eliminate or drastically reduce local treatment alternatives, lead to more
childre being sent out of their home community for residential services, and further overload an already underfunded
Compr hensive Services Act system; and
WHEREAS, the Children and Youth Commission and the Community Attention programs are well respected and
effecti e local programs that address the needs of troubled children and their families and are critical to the success of the
Charlo tesville-Albemarle Interagency Network; and
WHEREAS, the Children and Youth Commission and the Community Attention programs direct! y address the issues
prevention, rehabilitation, socialization, and vocational training necessary to reduce the alarming increase injuvenile
d violence affecting our community, and these programs served approximately forty-seven (47) Albemarle County
nd their families during Fiscal 1992-93;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors hereby adamantly
oppos the proposed elimination of Department of Youth and Family Services funding for the Charlottesville-Albemarle
Childr n and Youth Commission, the Community Attention Family Group Home program, and the ten (10) percent cut in
the Au ntion Home budget totaling $260,600, and asks that the General Assembly not balance the state budget by reducing
service to the population that has the smallest voice, least resources, and the most needs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate members of the
Genera Asse~bly and the Governor.
*****
I, Ella W. Carey. do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution unanimously
adopt by the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors at a regular meellng held on h:bruary 2, 1994.
// r, '"
0:~~ (;~{un{~~e:;d
J
"
. .
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin-
a, in regular meeting on the 2nd day of February, 1994 adopted
he following resolution:
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the streets in Lanford Hills Subdivision described
n the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated February 2, 1994,
ully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats
ecorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
ounty, Yirginia; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department
f Transportation has advised the Board that the streets meet the
equirements established by the Subdivision Street Reauirements
f the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of
ounty Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transpor-
ation to add the road in Lanford Hills Subdivision as described
n the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated February 2, 1994, to
he secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 4,633.1-229,
ode of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Re-
uirements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board guarantees a clear
nd unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary
asements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the
ecorded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be
orwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
ransportation.
* * * * *
Recorded vote:
Moved by: Mrs. Humphris
Seconded by: Mr. Martin
Yeas:
Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins,
Mrs. Thomas and Mr. Bowerman.
Nays:
None.
A Copy Teste:
MC
I" "-
rll c: t; I
~ i~
0 0'1 0'1
b U ..J .
Ii c rl rl
rll .. i . .
'tj i 0 0
~
< 0
'E
CIl Gl
E CJl
.s:. ~
0
'" ;;!
s:: ]I
< 0
>-
I
'IS
z
OJ ..
r-l ;
H i
ctl 'i
S 0
..
OJ :i
.0
r-l
..x:
III
"tJ
c:
0
u ~ g -
CII
UJ 0 ii 0
i rt. ~ I.f)
G ~
~ ~ IV"o
-
0 .. \0
- .!: ("")
~ I
~ rl
In ~ \0
0 M
c,; Ii Ii Ii Qj Qj Qj Qj
Ii rl CJl CJl CJl CJl CJl CJl CJl
., ., :. ., ., ., .,
.. . n. n. n. n. n. n.
:3 CIi
II 0 CJl
I M .,
a: U) U') c
'il
S r-l 0'1 r-l i;
.. r-l "'" r-I ~
~ 'r-! \0 c
.,
Q. ::r: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !i
:3 jl:j
In iC
b '0 en .;
C( j H ;: u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 :;
0 i +J ctl 0
It) ~ ~ U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
. I--
a: iii ~ 6 OJ I .. Qj
UJ ctl .. S OJ i >
H 'tj OJ 'd ~ 0
~ -;:: .., :> I ~
"6 < S
a: c I ctl r-l al
0 Gl p.. ~ ~ B
6 0 .b
I.&. iii In U :l 'tj
~ '> ~ ., .!;
11: Qj Ii Ii Qj CD CD CD Gl
UJ ~ 'C 0 ~ il il il il il il il ~ i
z .!:? .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c
~ ~ al 'i 'i al 'i 'i al >- I-- E
0 E en c Z :3
'0 '0 '0 '0 .., .., ~ '0 CI w 8
t= i '0 'd ~ l:l l:l l:l l:l l:l l:l l:l e ::!: '0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :I:
C E CIl r.:I I:LI Gl 0 Gl
~ a: ~ a: ~ a: ~ II: ~ II: II: ~ II: > t;
0 0 E S 15 'OJ <(
il il il il il il il :J l- e
C( ~ lIS It 0 ii: It 0 ii: It 0 ii: It 0 ii: It 0 ii: It 0 ii: It 0 ii: '0 I-
< Z l- I- I-- >- l- I- I- )( <( i
Gl u.. Q.
>- 0 .,
U) CI
~ Z ..
r-l e 0 CI
r-l 1= 'i
r <(
-r-! 0 '"
Cy i
::r: .C u:
I e 1= 0
a: .!!
.b 'd .c w
In -0 0 i
b H it
. 0 OJ 1 E
~ 4-1 :> ". .c
0
Z ~'r-! c; ~
ctl H CI .,
HCl OJ ..
:J ~
Cl
.. ci .. N (0) ... It) <D ... ~
a: z 0
z
~./
.,&
, .
Date:
February 2, 1994
Subject: Presentation to the County Board of Supervisors by
the Georgetown Road Task Force
Purpo~e: To obtain approval of the Board of Supervisors of the six (6)
recommendations agreed by the Georgetown Road Task Force per
the attached "Recommended Improvements - Jan. 12, 1994".
Backg ound: The Georgetown Road Task Force is comprised of the
Citizens Group (Georgetown Neighborhood Commi ttee- 6 members)
a VDOT/County Group (6 members) ... as listed on the attached
Recommended Improvements list.
The Georgetown Neighborhood Committee started in June 1992.
A peti tiOr1'_'li was completed in September. 97% of dwelling
units surveyed supported various safety improvements, elimin-
ating through trucks, and classifying Georgetown Road con-
sistently with its neighborhood Collector character. The
petition was presented to the Board October 6, 1992.
The Board of Supervisors responded by establishing the
Joint Task Force Committee to study the assumptions,
determine the problems and establish best alternative
solutions. The first Task Force meeting was Oct. 26, 1992.
The key focus of the Task Force was/is to achieve a
better balance of service and safety of Georgetown Road
to serve the balanced needs of motorists and neighborhood.
Recom~endations: The work of developing agreed recommendations is
now complete and ready for Board approval and implementation.
Call ~or action: The six (6) recommendations are as follows (see
attached list) and your approval and decision to implement
each item is requested today.
.J
.-
..
F~OM JDOT/CULPEPEP MRTEPIRLS
01.13.19'314 ~j':;':25
P. 2
Georqatown Road Task Force
Reoommended Improvements
January 12, 1994
Talk Force Memberla
Linda Buttner - Citi~en'. Group
Leeter Hoel - Citizen's Group
Debbie Kron - Citizen's Group
Charlee stoke - Citicen'. Group
DouO Wood - Citieen's Group
Lincoln Young - Citicen'. Group
Charlotte Humphris - Board of Super,
Dave Benish - Albemarle county
Jeff Hor.e - VDOT
Oale Lip.comb - VDOT
Wanda Moore - VDOT
Dan Roosevelt - VDOT
1. Reolal.ity Georo.town Road from I major thorouqhfare to a 2-1ane
local road at.tU8 in all offloial road plane.
- Raqu.at the Board of Supervisor. to ooneider the funotion of
Georgetown Road within their compreheneive plan and a..iqn a
cla.eitioation which ie oona1etent with their intention..
2. Enforoe the ourrent 35 mph speed limit.
VDOT will install additional .peed limit aiqn..
- Commitment from police to monitor on a continual baai..
- Commitment from County that *ohool bUB drivera will drive the apeed
limit and appropriate routeB.
- Commitment from City that city bU81ee will drive .peed limit.
- Locate and U8e the County'e radar 8peed information li9n.
3. Padeatrian proteotion at Terrell Road and near Inolewood.
- VDOT will in.tall wider pavement marking8 along that part of the road
. and will inetall delineator. around the island area.
- Raleed ooncrete median. could be installed if the road i. widened to
accommodate aide-bY-8ide vehle-be( o...l/D/JJS j>4..f5:"'''') of- 44 bI~cf V 4...;.~, .
4. Revigiona to the intersection of Hydraulio and Georqetown Road~.
. -J
I
- VDOT will add an advanced left turn phase for the weetbound "ydr~ulio
Road approach.
VOOT will in.tall a yield ahead ei9n and yield li9n. on both aidee
ot the right turn slip ramp, a bue etop ahead si9n will aleo be
In.talled,
- VDOT will trim ~rQQa arouna ~h8 .lip ramp.
- VDOT will remove the .lip ramp and replace with a regular right turn
lane if county approves tunding trom aeoondary improvement fund..
Estimated oost il $10,000.
..../
F~!)r'l 1)( OT'/tULF'E'F''EF tHHEF I ALS
,
lJ1. 13. 1'~'?4
~t"?: 2~.
P. '"
5. Improve .idew~lk..
- Rebuild current .idewalk. to an elevation level to the exi.ting road
on the we.t a1de from Terrell to louth of Enqlewood. Ex1eting
.1dewalk 18 County'. re.pon.ibility and could be improved with
County Capital Improvement Program fund. or .econdary improvement
fund. available to the county. I.ttmated coat i8 $26,000.
6. Re.trict through truoks.
- Recommend the Board of Supervi80ra initiate prooedura. to reetrict
through trucks from Georgetown Road between Hydraulic and Barrack..
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ph~.e II - 6 Year Plan
- stress to the Board of Superviaora that additional curb and qutter
and .1dewalk. on both sid.. of Qeorgetown Road would improve and
enhance eatetyand 8hould be part ot the project currently included
in the 6 year improvement plan.
"
.+
. ... . p-
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930050
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE TISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
MPO GRANT
SE OF APPROPRIATION:
/94 OPERATING BUDGET
XPENDITURE
CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
*******************************************************************
81301110000 SALARIES-REGULAR $3,900.00
81301601700 COPY SUPPLIES 100.00
81302110000 SALARIES-REGULAR 15,940.00
81302550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE 410.00
81303310000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 30,000.00
81304310000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,600.00
81306110000 SALARIES-REGULAR 2,100.00
81306550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE 150.00
81306601700 COPY SUPPLIES 750.00
81307110000 SALARIES-REGULAR 9,900.00
81307113000 SALARIES-PARTTIME 5,900.00
81307601700 COPY SUPPLIES 200.00
TOTAL
$72,950.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
**** *******************************************************************
2120 24000240500 GRANT REVENUE-STATE $7,295.00
2120 33000330001 GRANT REVENUE-FEDERAL 58,360.00
2120 51000512004 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND 7,295.00
TOTAL
$72,950.00
*******************************************************************
STING COST CENTER:
PLANNING
VALS :
SIGNATURE
r'11'1"'P
BO
OF SUPERVISORS
~~4&~4--
/ "-,J:
(Zji~1 //;' d d/2Lf ;)
1/
. /
l/
/<.zy. --9- Y
/
:.-).,c "...(. /
TOR OF FINANCE
..
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCP.L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930051
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE~TISEMENT REQUIRED?
YES
NO
x
FUND
DRUG EDUC. GRANT
PURpDsE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 9p/94 OPERATING BUDGET FOR DRUG FREE SCHOOLS GRANT
~XPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
****~*******************************************************************
1310~61101312500 PROF. SERVICES INSTRUCTIONAL $1,000.00
1310~61101312700 PROF. SERVICES CONSULTANTS 49,250.00
l310~61101601300 INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS 500.00
1310~61101580000 MISCELLANEOUS 6,000.00
1310~61311550400 TRAVEL-EDUCATION 919.00
l310~61311580000 MISCELLANEOUS 4,550.00
1310 61311580500 STAFF DEVELOPMENT 2,500.00
TOTAL
$64,719.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
**** *******************************************************************
2310 24000240233 DRUG FREE SCHOOLS $64,719.00
TOTAL
$64,719.00
**** *******************************************************************
REQUl STING COST CENTER:
EDUCATION
"!II. 'r'I'r'lT'"'l' T"'."".~~:
,............_..,..."..r'T"'........--.~
~...-.'-'L'''.-........ '-_............
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
BOARI OF SUPERVISORS
$~~ ~4'4--
/'. I 1
)7- ;I ![I /j / (Liei)
(:/ / /
/ //
1.../
/- 2..1"- 91/
J'l ~ /
. >",' ,)~ Cj-i 'I
.
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930052
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE TISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
EISENHOWER GRANT
SE OF APPROPRIATION:
/94 OPERATING BUDGET FOR TITLE II EISENHOWER GRANT
XPENDITURE
CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
*******************************************************************
61311152100
61311210000
61311520100
61311580500
61311601300
61311601700
SUBSTITUTE WAGES
FICA
POSTAGE
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
MATERIALS
COPYING
$5,310.00
406.22
133.78
18,350.00
2,800.00
225.00
TOTAL
$27,225.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
**** *******************************************************************
2320 33000330200
TITLE II EISENHOWER GRANT
$27,225.00
TOTAL
$27,225.00
**** *******************************************************************
STING COST CENTER:
EDUCATION
SIGNATURE
DATE
OF FINANCE
~~~~~/2~~_
C) illl;> If /' / /,
~_ ,A .J___cA, 1/ \ ./ ()~ '.. c i
/-~~-/,~
:,] ',) pi
BOAR OF SUPERVISORS
~ - ..J-.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, studies indicate that revenues generated by residential
growth do not offset expenses associated with residential
growth; and
WHEREAS, the below-designatated governing bodies are in agreement
that innovative and equitable means of producing revenue
should be considered; and
WHEREAS, the below-designated governing bodies are committed to
providing quality public education and cost-effective
public facilities; and
WHEREAS, the below-designated governing bodies are in agreement
that simply increasing property taxes as the primary
means of paying for increased residential growth is
unacceptable,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the below-designated
governing bodies hereby request their state legislators
to investigate the implementation of an impact fee on
developers and land speculators to be directly tied to
capital expenditures.
Chairman, Greene County Board of Supervisors
1,1\ l-f~ n '1 ..
L,UQ f,~..::t- U~kvv~
Chairman, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Chairman, Madison County Board of Supervisors
cnalrman, urange coun~y boara OL ~u~erv~~or~
Chairman, Culpeper County Board of Supervisors
..
".
/!;(~j~,,~-Z-~9/ /
, ~.v1
L
.,.
~-:" j"
:::CUAL::;:
'T -,-
4,....
C/l~l1!.:.-I;~
v
[;"::',. '" f).,.,!: !:21.:2.H.:3.:;j
ri.,~' . ,CJ'-I_.C12[2~:C5.')
State Compensation Board
Month of ()eu-rvt kr I ) q17
STATEMENT OF EXPENSES
Clerk, Circuit Court
--d-
I, D /1. q 1
/ ,0/'].91
Expenses listed above are only those office expenses in
ich the state Compensation Board has agreed to participate, and
e not the total office expenses of these departments.
David p, werman
CharlOfll? vill€
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OffICe of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 9724060
February 4, 1994
Charles S Martm
Rt\/21nTl,l
Charlotte Y. umphns
Jdck Jo Ie!!
Walter F. Perkins
While Hdll
Forrest R. M rshall, Jr.
Scotts lie
Sally H Thomds
Sdrnwd MIller
he Honorable George F. Allen
overnor, Commonwealth of Virginia
tate Capitol
ichmond, VA 23219
ear Governor Allen:
Attached is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Albemarle
ounty Board of Supervisors at its meeting on February 2, 1994,
oncerning Governor Wilder's Proposed Budget for 1994-96, spec i-
ically, the proposed elimination of Department of Youth and
amily Services funding for the Charlottesville-Albemarle Chil-
ren and Youth Commission, the Community Attention Family Group
orne Program, and a ten percent in the Attention Home budget.
he Board is strongly and adamantly opposed to such cuts, and
etitions you to help in this instance.
Sincerely,
/ ,.... /
/~~'~: , ~~:'~-,
/
Walter F.
Chairman
/ /'
- -c:j a.z:::,.
Perkins
ttachment
*
Pnnted on recycled poper
..
"
....
SUBJECT
approval
budget c
Commissi
STAFF CO
Messrs.
-
.
..
r'
.':'J
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Cl- ~~ ~j1L-1,
L..,
AGENDA DATE:
Budget Cuts to Children and February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
qL( i D2L2- .~).z )
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
~
{
REVIEWED BY:
Wilder's proposed state budget for fiscal year 94/95 severely cuts state block grant
funding to the Community Attention Home, eliminates funding for Community Attention's Family
Group H me program, and virtually eliminates Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development
funds f r the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth Commisission. The total reduction
in stat funds to the Charlottesville/Albemarle area is $260,600, approximately $53,600 of
which f nds 50% of the Children and Youth Commission's current operating budget. The Family
Group H me program served 9 Albemarle youth in 92/93; the Community Attention program served
23.
Not onl
effecti
propose
loss of
service
local d
Pool re
shift c
provide
block g
The Com
the sta
this is
(as opp
care by
contrar
sent to
will the elimination of state funds to the Children and Youth Commisison curtail the
e coordination and delivery of children and youth services to the community, the
cuts to the block grant will increase local costs and possibly even result in the
a valuable resource for serving our troubled children. In order to continue these
after the block grant reductions, the community will either have to fund them with
lIars or with state pool funds under the new Comprehensive Services Act. The State
uires a 30% local match. Therefore, the effect of the proposed cuts would be to
sts to the locality. Since, these funds are already projected to be insufficient to
all legally mandated services, it will likely require additional local funding if the
ant is cut as the governor proposes.
rehensive Services Act was "sold" on a promise that costs would not be shifted from
e to the localities. But six months after its implementation, we are finding that
in fact happening. The Act was also intended to encourage community-based services
sed to sending children elsewhere) and to reduce the use of expensive institutional
encouraging less costly local programs. Cutting funding for Community Attention is
to both these principles. Without these programs, more children will have to be
facilities elsewhere in the state, often at greater cost.
approval of the attached resolution.
'~-'-"'--'-~' ~-......... ..-._-----_._..,.~ -~ ,..'-
t::) " IlI"\;1
t~ i~ U VI
2.
~._,__,___""""'..........i__'.'.
i. '.,j ~ '_.1';" .
"-",~_.,,,,,........,_..,,,.,.....<--,......._~-*-,.~_..,_.-., ""
.
,
'.. ~
RESOLUTION ON GOVERNOR WILDER'S PROPOSED BUDGET
WHE EAS, Governor Wilder's proposed 1994-96 Executive Budget recommends the elimination
of Dep rtment of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) funding for the Charlottesville/Albemarle
Childre & Youth Commission (CACY), Community Attention Family Group Home program and a
10% cu in the Community Attention Home budget; and
EAS, these proposed cuts, totaling $207,000, will result in a 35% reduction to the
Depart ent of Youth and Family Services Block Grant allocation to Charlottesville and in effect
transfer a significant portion of these costs to the locality as the children and families involved still
will nee to be served; and
WHE EAS, the elimination of $53,630 in Virginia Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development
Act fun s will result in a 50% reduction of operating funds for the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children
& Youth Commission; and
WHE EAS, the Comprehensive Services Act proponents promised localities that support of the
Act wou d not lead to an increase in local costs, that it would allow localities to serve more children in
their ho e communities, and would actually reduce or contain local costs; and
WHE EAS, six months after its implementation, we are finding that local costs are in fact
increasi g and these proposed cuts will only add to these local costs, eliminate or drastically reduce
local tre tment alternatives, lead to more children being sent out of our home community for
residential services, and further overload an already underfunded CSA system; and
WHE EAS, the Children & Youth Commission and the Community Attention programs are well
respect d and effective local programs that address the needs of troubled children and their families
and are critical to the success of tile Charlottesville/Albemarle Interagency Network; and
WHE EAS, the Children & Youth Commission and the Community Attention programs directly
address the issues of crime prevention, rehabilitation, socialization, and vocational training
necess ry to reduce the alarming increase in juvenile crime and violence affecting our community,
and ser ed approximately 47 Albemarle County youth and their families during fiscal 92-93;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby
oppose the proposed elimination of DYFS funding for the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children &
Youth C mmission, the Community Attention Family Group Home program and the 10% cut in the
Attentio Home budget totaling $260,600 and asks that the General Assembly not balance the state
budget y reducing services to the population that has the smallest voice, least resources, and the
most ne ds.
URTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to appropriate members
neral Assembly and the Governor.
I, Ella arey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution
adopted by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors at a regular meeting, Wednesday, February
2, 1994.
)
'.
.
RESOLUTION
Concerning Governor Wilder's
Proposed Budget for 1994-96
WHEREAS, Governor Wilder's proposed 1994-96 Executive Budget recommends the elimination of Department
of Yot th and Family Services funding for the Charlottesville-Albemarle Children and Youth Commission, Community
Attentipn Family Group Home program, and a ten (to) percent cut in the Community Attention Home budget; and
WHEREAS, these proposed cuts, which total $207,000, will result in a thirty-five (35) percent reduction to the
Depart(nent of Youth and Family Services Block Grant allocation to Charlottesville and will in effect transfer a significant
portion of these costs to the locality as the children and families involved will still need to be served; and
WHEREAS, the elimination of$53,630 in Virginia Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act funds will
result i~ a fifty (50) percent reduction of operating funds for the Charlottesville-Albemarle Children and Youth Commission;
and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Services Act proponents promised localities that support of the Act would not lead
to an i crease in local costs, that it would allow localities to serve more children in their home communities, and would
actuall reduce or contain local costs; and
WHEREAS, six months after its implementation, we are finding that local costs are in fact increasing and these
propos td cuts will only add to these local costs, eliminate or drastically reduce local treatment alternatives, lead to more
childre being sent out of their home community for residential services, and further overload an already underfunded
Compr hensive Services Act system; and
WHEREAS, the Children and Youth Commission and the Community Attention programs are well respected and
effectiv~ local programs that address the needs of troubled children and their families and are critical to the success of the
Charlo esville-Albemarle Interagency Network; and
WHEREAS, the Children and Youth Commission and the Community Attention programs directly address the issues
of crim~ prevention, rehabilitation, socialization, and vocational training necessary to reduce the alarming increase injuvenile
crime apd violence affecting our community, and these programs served approximately forty-seven (47) Albemarle County
youth and their families during Fiscal 1992-93;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors hereby adamantly
oppose the proposed elimination of Department of Youth and Family Services funding for the Charlottesville-Albemarle
Childrep and Youth Commission, the Community Attention Family Group Home program, and the ten (to) percent cut in
the Attt ntion Home budget totaling $260,600, and asks that the General Assembly not balance the state budget by reducing
service to the population that has the smallest voice, least resources, and the most needs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate members of the
General AsseIJ.1bly and the Governor.
*****
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution unanimously
adoplt:u tJY lht: Albemarlt: Boarl1 01 Lounly ~upervlsub at a regulal UlCC,Iug UclU uB j'Curuary 1., 1 Y':H.
:-:.../- /.'., / 1./ ...."
. it j / I! . ,/ /; .,
(~ie~k,BI~ard ~~ ~:un~y';~;e~i;6)s
~
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin-
i , in regular meeting on the 2nd day of February, 1994 adopted
t e following resolution:
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the streets in Lanford Hills Subdivision described
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated February 2, 1994,
lly incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats
corded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
unty, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department
Transportation has advised the Board that the streets meet the
quirements established by the Subdivision Street Reauirements
the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of
unty Supervisors requests the virginia Department of Transpor-
tion to add the road in Lanford Hills SUbdivision as described
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated February 2, 1994, to
e secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 4,633.1-229,
de of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Re-
irements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board guarantees a clear
d unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary
sements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the
corded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be
rwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
ansportation.
* * * * *
Recorded vote:
Moved by: Mrs. Humphris
Seconded by: Mr. Martin
Yeas:
Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins,
Mrs. Thomas and Mr. Bowerman.
Nays:
None.
A Copy Teste:
rll
15
rll
'E
CD
E
.s=-
u
CI
:t:
-<
Q)
.--l
H
rU
S
Q)
..Q
.--l
~
CD
"C
C
0
()
CD
en i
G
.c E
- i:
0 ..
- .E
~ !
c
..2 ::I
en
- 0
=ti
"C 6
< ~
::I
"C 15
CD I
~ a: tfl
0 S .--l
.. .--l
0 " .r-!
... :r::
D- o..
::I
en ru
li
< ~ H
0
Il) 4-l
. s::
a: e
en rU
...:I
~ >:
a: '6 c
0 .
6 0
LL 'ii
:JC '>
en i '6
Z ~ .c
::J
0 !! en
t= i '0
is E CD
r. E
C 0
~ III
< < z
a:::
::J
o
U
~ ~
01
i ~ 0'1 0'1
....J .
6 C; rl rl
:c i . .
't; i 0 0
"0
< 0
.
Ol
II
~
S
0
....
I
li
z
..
~
i
i
0
..
~
~ g -
0 ~ 0
ct "0 If)
~
-
\D
('Y)
I
rl
H \D
~ ('Y)
ii ii ii ii ii ~ iIi
rl Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
. lL lL lL lL lL lL lL
0 iii
Ol
('Y) ..
C;
If) 'f!
m rl "0
"'" rl "0
C;
\D ..
P:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
iC
U) ,.;
c u i i i i i i i '5
l +J rU 0
s:: tfl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l!
....
6 Q) I ..
~ S Q) i
't; Q) '0 Iii
"0 :> I
< ..
j rU .--l II
P-t ::l ~
b U :l
en
4-l ..
ii ii ii ii iIi ii ii .
0 4-l Ci OJ OJ Ci OJ Ci Ci l!l
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c:
~ i i i i i i i >-
C;
'0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 ..
'0 s:: b b b b b b b '0
r;:j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
a: g a: g a: g a: g a: g a: g a: >
E 'OJ
0 OJ 0 OJ 0 OJ (; OJ 0 OJ 0 Ci 0 Ci :>
It ii: It ii: It ii: It ii: It ii: It ii: It i[ '0
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... ><
.
tfl ..
'l:
.--l '0
.--l :c
.rl
:r:: 'C;
j '0
b '0 :6
'" "0
15 H 'i
. 0 Q) ". i
5 4-l :>
z S::-r-! C
rU H e
...:IQ ..
"
(!)
'5 cj - N C') ... on <0 .... ii
a: z 0
z
>-
Cll
iIi
>
0
..0
..
i
B
't;
.6<
i
.... E
z "
w 8
::!; "0
J: .
0 ~
<
l- e
I-
< li
l.l.
0 0..
..
Z ..
0 ..
i= i
<
u '"
u:: i
i= 0
a: .!!
w
0 i
E
r.
0
~
..
..
~
~
"., ,j
Q;, ,,___:--:-J_,,:;; __ ~-?'L./-
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin-
i , in regular meeting on the 2nd day of February, 1994 adopted
t e fOllowing resolution:
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, the streets in Lanford Bills Subdivision described
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated February 2, 1994,
lly incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats
corded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
unty, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department
Transportation has advised the Board that the streets meet the
quirements established by the Subdivision Street Reauirements
the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of
unty Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transpor-
tion to add the road in Lanford Bills Subdivision as described
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated February 2, 1994, to
e secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 4,633.1-229,
de of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Re-
irements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board guarantees a clear
d unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary
sements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the
corded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be
rwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
ansportation.
* * * * *
Recorded vote:
Moved by:
Seconded by:
Yeas:
Nays:
A Copy Teste:
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC
. '-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ~1\
\i~~j])J~j\
,\ \, \ A'" .... .,
\, \ U) \
. \ \ \
c. \.\
, II
.- 'I __"" ..
L----'::':"'::?ER'I\S 0 ?, ~) i
~;oAR.O Or sU
MEMORANDUM
0: Ella Carey, Board of Supervisors Clerk
FROM: Peter Parsons, civil Engineer II 91t
DATE: January 28, 1994
RE: Lanford Hills Subdivision
he road serving the above referenced subdivision is
ubstantially complete and ready for a VDOT acceptance
'nspection. Attached is the completed SR-5(A) form for the
esolution, which I request be prepared and taken to the Board
or adoption at your next opportunity. Once the resolution has
een adopted, date and sign the SR-5(A) and please provide me
ith the original and four copies.
your assistance. Please call me if you have any
Reading File
D;:Eirli1c~D_-' ~::
OlE "uu
-::-'~h_~__:"~ i~]
(LLLQ?():?-i.~=3 )
~[;,
RAY D, PE HTEL
COMMISSI NER
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIAI~ll~lf_@_ ~:~~_~\~J'V'~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION)
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND,23219
January 11, 1994
Secondary System
Additions
Albemarle County
ard of Supervisors
unty of Albemarle
1 McIntire Road
ar1ottesvi11e, VA 22901
ERS OF THE BOARD:
As requested in your resolution dated September 1, 1993, the following
to the Secondary System of Albemarle County are hereby approved,
January 11, 1994.
LENGTH
SECTION 5
(Stoney Creek Drive) - From Route 742 to 0.35 mile West
0.35 Mi
1168 (Shady Grove Court) - From Route 1167 to 0.37 mile North
1167 0.37 Mi
(Homestead Lane) - From Route 1168 to 0.15 mile North-
1168 0.15 Mi
~e(
,Sf~mllitfJ
f!ann;'ld
Z~>tD
..J '
, o-tC e..R.-.
Sincerely,
~~. flJIM
Ray D. Pethtel
Commissioner
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
Di:str:!wt22 h f;'l~,r!: J,I /Ze-9::j.
-0_"11._-1' 'i.;; f 77lS-.I_i\
A6~i";~_ ;:. _'Vvc,..."J)
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
.,.~"",......"",,--.,., -
RAY D. PE HTEL
COMMISSI NER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND, 23219
January 12, 1994
i~: r;,) f?, Pi
Secondary System
Addition
Albemarle County
"'.f\I.~; "...-'r
..,~.......-.................-.... ....--........_.~".
Bard of Supervisors
C unty of Albemarle
4 1 McIntire Road
C ar10ttesvi11e, VA 22901
BERS OF THE BOARD:
As requested in your resolution dated October 6, 1993, the following
a dition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved,
e fective January 12, 1994.
LENGTH
M CHUMS WEST
R ute 1248 (Mechums West Drive) - From Route 682 to 0.47 mile
N rthwest Route 682
0.47 Mi
Sincerely,
'R~ ~.~
Ray D. Pethtel
Commissioner
~
~ e, c( flQ" JUt. j I\D
p~~
V
OltUt/';f:~
/1 .
jJl)ltl/iUO
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
/
.
f:.;;,', ,
;' (
in P'1 ?rd: - ')225 RUSSEll SENATE OFFICE BUilDING
, ). , , ?!, -, I ," ,'" WASHINGTON. DC 20510..4601
~:..t::-1.~'h:t.Jd..f::l..."') :_~) (2021 224-2023
CONSTITUENT SERVICE OFFICES,
ARM D SERVICES
SELECT COMMI EE ON INTelLIGENCE
ENVIRON MEN AND PUBLIC WORKS
RULES AN ADMINISTRATION
tinittd ~tatts ~rnatt
490 WORLD TRADE CENTER
NORFOLK. VA 23S10-1624
(804' 441-3079
MAIN STREET CENTRE
600 EAST MAIN STREET
RICHMOND. VA 23219-3538
January 13,
1994
235 FEDERAL BUILDING
1 BO WEST MAIN STREET
ABINGDON. VA 24210-0887
(703) 628-8.158
FIRST UNION BANK BUilDING
213 S, JEFFERSON ST, SUITE 1003
ROANOK.li..v~'f'.1714
.. '. "/'lfl31 8$f'-2616
2 : ..'
n. David P. Bowerman
airman
bemarle County Board of Supervisors
4 1 McIntire Road
C.arlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
..,"......._,.....,-~..-
Mr. Bowerman:
Thank you for your letter regarding your interest in an
terchange at Interstate 64 and Route 742 in Albemarle County.
I have contacted the proper authorities regarding this
tter and will be back in touch with you when I receive a
sponse.
With kind regards, I am
Sincerely,
vJ~
John Warner
Icc
PLEASE REPLY TO THE OFFICE INDICATED: 0 WASHINGTON 0 RiCHMOND d ROANOKE
o ABINGDON 0 NORFOLK
,/
..
Edward H. Bal . Jr
Samuel Miller
David P. Bowe man
Charlottesville
Charlotte Y H mphns
,Jack Jouett
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R Marshall. Jr
SCOllsville
Charles S. Marlin
Rivanna
Walter F Perkins
White Hall
December 22, 1993
Th Honorable John W. Warner
Un ted states Congress
Vi ginia Delegation
Ru sell Senate Building, Suite 225
Wa hington, D. C. 20510
RE Request for Interchange at Interstate 64 and Route 742 (Avon street)
r Senator Warner:
r the past several years, the County of Albemarle and the City of
rlottesvil1e have encouraged the Virginia Department of Transportation and the
eral Highway Administration to consider the construction of an interchange at
erstate 64 and Route 742 in Albemarle County. As development has occurred
r the past 20+ years, a need for an interchange at this location, in our
nion, is evident. Response from VDOT and FHWA have not been favorable.
ently, Congressman Payne has requested State Secretary of Transportation
liken to reconsider this matter. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
now requesting that you also make a similar request to appropriate VDOT
icials. If there is any information or data that would be helpful to you or
r staff in examining this issue, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Robert
Tucker, Jr., County Executive, or me concerning this matter. We thank you for
r consideration.
Sincerely,
.,)~
' . /
L!' ~// ./~
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DP jdbm
93.070-C
At achment
cc: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
'.
<i)
Printed on recycled paper
Edward H. Bai J,
Samuel Mille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R Marshall, Jr
SrollsV'ille
David P. Bowe man
Charlottesvill
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F Perkins
White Hall
December 22, 1993
Honorable Charles S. Robb
ted States Congress
ginia Delegation
sell Senate Building, Suite 493
hington, D. C. 20510
Request for Interchange at Interstate 64 and Route 742 (Avon street)
Senator Robb:
the past several years, the County of Albemarle and the City of
rlottesville have encouraged the Virginia Department of Transportation and the
eral Highway Administration to consider the construction of an interchange at
erstate 64 and Route 742 in Albemarle County. As development has occurred
r the past 20+ years, a need for an interchange at this location, in our
nion, is evident. Response from VDOT and FHWA have not been favorable.
Re ently, Congressman Payne has requested State Secretary of Transportation
Mi liken to reconsider this matter. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
is now requesting that you also make a similar request to appropriate VDOT
of icials. If there is any information or data that would be helpful to you or
yo r staff in examining this issue, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Robert
W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, or me concerning this matter. We thank you for
yo r consideration.
Sincerely,
C))~
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DP jdbm
93 070-B
At achment
'.
cc: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
*
Printed on recycled paper
Edward H. Bal , Jr
Samuel Milln
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R Marshall, Jr
Scotlsville
David p, Bowe man
Charlollesville
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y HI mphns
Jack Jouetl
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
December 22, 1993
T Honorable Thomas J. Bliley
U. S. House of Representatives
Se enth District
2241 Rayburn HOB
Washington, D. C. 20515
RE: Request for Interchange at Interstate 64 and Route 742 (Avon Street)
r Congressman Bliley:
r the past several years, the County of Albemarle and the City of
rlottesville have encouraged the Virginia Department of Transportation and the
era 1 Highway Administration to consider the construction of an interchange at
erstate 64 and Route 742 in Albemarle County. As development has occurred
ov r the past 20+ years, a need for an interchange at this location, in our
opinion, is evident. Response from VDOT and FHWA have not been favorable.
ently, Congressman Payne has requested State Secretary of Transportation
liken to reconsider this matter. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
now requesting that you also make a similar request to appropriate VDOT
icials. If there is any information or data that would be helpful to you or
r staff in examining this issue, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Robert
Tucker, Jr., County Executive, or me concerning this matter. We thank you for
r consideration.
Sincerely,
()~
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DP /dbm
93 070-A
At achment
'.
cc Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
*
Printed on recycled paper
Dlstibut;2d to r :Jud. 0 i-Z6;:.9H
^"'en'~' "'''Ti Ii, q, J,(I-7"(' IS,C!)
.1"\b- l..~ (lo;..,:. ,\,.,;. _~~__
WOODS, RoGERS &. HAzLEGROVE
Roanoke Office
Dominion Tow r . Suite 1400
10 South Jeffer n Street. P,O, Box 14125
Roanoke, Virgi ia 24038-4125
Telephone 703 983-7600
Facsimile 703- 83-7711
Danville Office
530 Main Street. P.O, Box 560
Danvdle, Virginia 24543-0560
Telephone 804-791-1350
"iacsimUe 804-799-3527
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL TELEPHONE
January 12, 1994
In re:
Application of Appalachian Power Company
for Authority to Implement Residential
Insulation Financing Plan; SCC Case No. PUE800018
Sir or Madam:
Pursuant to paragraph (4) of the State Corporation
mmission's Order for Notice entered on December 8, 1993, we
reby serve you with a copy of that Order.
Sincerely,
WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE
~~~9--
H. Allen Glover, Jr.
H G:mbh
M 191186
~' "
-
, ,
'-"
!'.;~ OJ'C -p PH 4: 0'"1
I....) _ v, I. U
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 3
STATE CORPORATION COMMlSsIO;t 1 21 0 3 6 8 fry.
AT RICHMOND, DECEMBER 8, 1993
D~ .JLr:-.i~E~--~1. CC:'~T~:JL
APPLICATION OF
APPALACIDAN POWER COMPANY
CASE NO. PUE800018
For Authority to Implement Residential
Insulation Financing Plan
ORDER FOR NOTICE
By Order dated May 27, 1977, the State Corporation Commission rCommission")
authorized Appalachian Power Company ("Appalachian" or "Company") to implement a
residential insulation financing ("RIP") plan. Under the RIP plan, the Company issues loans to
residential customers for the purpose of assisting such customers to purchase and install insulation
in their residences. As originally implemented, Appalachian was authorized to issue up to 1,000
such loans, with each such loan not to exceed $750.
By Order dated September 25, 1980, the Commission approved the continuation of the
RIP plan, removed the 1,000 loan limitation, but capped the maximum outstanding loan balance at
anyone time to no more than $1,284,000. That Order also directed the Commission Staff to file
a cost/benefit analysis of the RIP plan, and provided the Company with an opportunity to
comment on the Staff's report. For reasons which are not immediately apparent, the Staffreport
On November 19, 1993, Appalachian filed a Motion to Modify and Make Pennanent the
plan. The Company reported that over the years, it had made a total of2,412 loans,
epresenting a total dollar amount of$I,402,629. There are currently 56 loans
utstanding, representing a balance of$19,472.
Appalachian proposes to modify the RIF plan to increase the maximum individual loan
eiling to $1,500 and seeks pennanent implementation of the RIF plan. The Company filed with
ts Motion an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the plan and reports that the plan has been
::;. I
successful in reducing the amount of energy required by its customers to heat and cool their
houses. The Company seeks to increase the maximum loan amount due to increased costs and the
occurrence of inflation since the original plan was implemented.
NOW THE COMMISSION, having considered this matter, finds that Appalachian should
provide notice of its intent to make permanent the RIP plan; that the Commission Staff should
investigate the reasonableness of the proposal; and, that a period of time in which interested
persons might comment upon the proposal or request a hearing should be established.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
(1) That on or before January 15, 1994, Appalachian shall make copies of its motion and
supporting information available for public inspection during regular business hours at all of its
offices where customer bills may be paid;
(2) That within five (5) business days of receipt ofa written request for a copy of the
motion, Appalachian shall serve a copy of the motion and all supporting infonnation now or
hereafter filed with the Commission on the person requesting same. Requests for copies of the
motion shall be served on Appalachian through its counsel, H. Allen Glover, Esquire, Woods,
Rogers & Hazlegrove, P.O. Box 14125, Roanoke, Virginia 24038- 4125.
(3) That on or before January 15, 1994, Appalachian shall complete notice by publishing
once as display :ldvertising in newspapers of general circulation in its service territory the
following notice:
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC OF A MOTION BY
APPALACIDAN POWER COMPANY TO MAKE
PERMANENT ITS RESIDENTIAL INSULATION FINANCING PLAN
CASE NO. PUE800018
On May 27, 1977, the State Corporation Commission
ordered Appalachian Power Company to implement its Residential
Insulation Financing (RIF) plan. Under the RIP plan, Appalachian
could make loans to its residential customers to finance the purchase
and installation of insulation in their residences. As modified by order
dated September 25, 1980, Appalachian could issue loans of up to
2
1:' .
$750 per customer, with a maximum outstanding balal;1ce of
$1,284,000.
On November 19, 1993, Appalachip" moved the Commission
to modify the RIF plan to increase the maximum individual loan from
$750 to $1,500 per customer, and to make the modified RIF plan
permanent. A copy of Appalachian's motion and supporting
information is available for public inspection during regular business
hours at all of Appalachian's offices where customer bills may be paid,
and also at the State Corporation Commission's Document Control
Center, 1300 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia. Appalachian will
provide a copy of the motion and supporting information to any
interested person who submits a written request for same to its
counsel, H. Allen Glover, Esquire, Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove,
P.O. Box 14125, Roanoke, Virginia 24038.
Any interested person who wishes to comment or request a
hearing on the motion shall file an original and fifteen copies of such
comments or requests for hearing with William J. Bridge, Clerk of the
State Corporation Commission, Document Control Center, P.O.
Box 2118, Richmond, Virginia 23216, on or before February 15,
1994, referring to Case No. PUE800018. Requests for hearing should
state specific grounds upon which the Commission should grant a
hearing. The Commission may act on the papers filed in this case
without convening a public hearing.
All written communications to the Commission regarding this
proceeding shall refer to Case No. PUE800018 and be directed to the
Clerk of the Commission.
APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY
(4). That on or before January 15, 1994, Appalachian shall serve a copy of this Order on
he Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of each affected county and on the Mayor or Manager of
ach affected city or town in which the Company provides service. Service shall be made by first-
lass mail, to the customary place of business or residence of each person served;
(5). That on or before February 15, 1994, any person desiring to comment or request
earing on the Company's proposal shall file with the Commission an original and fifteen, copies of
uch comments or requests for hearing as provided by Rule 5: 12( e) of the Commission's Rules of
ractice and Procedure ("Rules"), and shall serve a copy of same on Appalachian's counsel,
3
, .
"
i"
H. Allen Glover, Esquire, Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, P.O. Box 14125, Roanoke, Virginia
24038-4125. Requests for hearing should state specific grounds upon which the Commission
should grant a hearing;
(6). That the Commission Staff should investigate the reasonableness of the proposal and
file a report on or before February 28, 1994; and
(7). That discovery shall be governed by Part VI of the Rules, except that the Company
shall respond to interrogatories within ten days of receipt of same.
AN ATTESTED COpy hereof shall be sent by the Clerk of the Commission to H. Allen
Glover, Esquire, Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, P.O. Box 14125, Roanoke, Virginia 24038-4125;
Edward L. Petrini, Esquire, Office of Attorney General, Division of Consumer Counsel, 101 North
8th Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219; and to the Commission's Division of Economics and
Finance.
-
A True Copy 11 J\ IJIJ ~ ~ -. -r~.
Teste: Vv~ V"-
Clerk of the
State Corporation Commission
4
\EC - Hr~/\~" .L\L SERVICE'>. IN'.,
..
.ATA
P.O. Box 334
Belcamp, Maryland 2101.l.,_ .-..qt1
410-575-7~12 t d to Doad:UJ..:.:.ca:. )..:r. ")
Dlstribu,e q:l.G2L:1J!i-~IO
Agenda Item No, - -'
Ja uary 11, 1994
."~,._---
j{ @ ffWl~R-'j
l' --~:;:~.~.,,,.'-.---,~L_"~'-~~-'71
f
Mr. Bob Richardson
So ran Bank, N.A.
Po t Office Box 26904
Ri hmond, Virginia 23261
(--;t~
Re: Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.)
Dear Mr. Richardson:
Enclosed please find the Bond Program Report and Monthly Report
Pursuant to Section 7(a) of the Deed Restrictions for the month
of December 1993.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me
at 410-575-7412.
Sincerely,
VuJ:Ct~;lL 'J\Y\ ~uha~,
eila H. Moynihan
oject Monitor
_.,~lc.;,I!f.. .C.rey.~,ejl,.r'k,. ~~.. \,
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
( . aONe PROGRAM REPORT
Month December YM(~
p,o~t1y: Arbor Crest Apartments (Hvdraulic Road Apts.) PtO;.cl': 051-35371
l.ocalion: Charlottesville, VA Numbe, 0' Unit. 66
Subm.Ut b Dy, Loretta Wyatt January 5, 1994 Effective 12/31/93
MII\&~r DITe
Total Occupied 66
LOW'1 " IHCO"~ Bond Occupied 18
I.
The 10110 ,..ng unlll ,,,~ bc-cn dcs.gn.\ltd IS "lower Incom." unlls
, 1 Arbor Crest Dr 2' Dorothy B. Hubicsak 4' el.
7 4 Arbor Crest Dr n Beverly T. Lane 47
62,
3 5 Arbor Crest Dr 73 Margaret L. Mawyer ~J 63,
.. 9 Arbor Crest Dr 24 Virginia .Burton 44 64.
S 12 Arbor Crest Dr 25 G. Robert Stone ~5
e~.
6 14 Arbor Crest Dr 76 Evelyn Dover 46 68.
7 . 15 Arbor Crest Dr 21 Jane Wood ~7 17.
a 20 Arbor Crest Dr 2a Evelyn Mandeville .ca e.a
9 24 Arbor Crest Dr 29 Gertrude Breen 49 68,
'0 30 Arbor Crest Dr 30 Mary Cox Allen 59 70.
\, 76 Arbor Crest Dr :It Barbara Datz ~,
71.
12, 78 Arbor Crest Dr 3~ Ernest M. Nease 52 72
13 84 Arbor Crest Dr 3J Juanita Boliek SJ 73,
14 90 Arbor Crest Dr 34 Betty B. Elliott ~ 74.
IS 92 Arbor Crest Dr 3S Dorothy H. Reese SS
75,
16 94 Arbor Crest Dr 36 Sarah E. Fischer ~
7e,
11 102 Arbor Crest Dr :11 Anne Lee Ballard 51,
77,
III 106 Arbor Crest Dr JS Katherine T. Nowlen ~.
. 78.
19 39 S9 71,
:'0 40 60 10,
T I'Ic cn.&r ~s hom pI ev.ous rcpo" rrllecled in Ct\. abO". Jasllng .rt
Oelellona Mdl1lone
,. 1 Arbor Crest Dr tt Eleanore Blair 1 Arbor Crest Dr 11. Dorothy B. Hubicsak
,.
'2 '2 2 12,
3 'J 3 13,
.. ,~ ~, 14.
S IS S \5.
6 '6 6 ,a,
I 7 t7 7 17.
a '1 e. 11..
. 19 9 ".
\0 20 '0. 20.
j -
Effective December 31, 1993
MONTHLY REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 7(a) OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS
TO: ABG Associates, Inc.
300 E. I..cmb3.rd Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
RE: Hydraulic Road Apartments - Aroor Crest Apart:Irents
Charlottesville, Virginia
Pursuant to Section 7(a) of the Deed Restrictions (the .Deed
Restrictions.), as defined in an Indenture of Trust dated as of
At: r ill, 1983, between the Industr ial Development Author i ty of
Albemarle County, Virginia (the .Authority.), and your bank, as
tI us tee , the undersigned author ized representative of
Rj chmond-Albemarle Limited Partnership, a Virg inia Limited
Pa rtner ship (the · Purchaser.), hereby cert if ies with respect to
tte operation and management of Hydraulic Road Apartments,
Ctarlottesville, Virginia (the .project.), that as of the date
stown below:
1) The number of units in the Project occupied by
lower income tenants is 18 .
2) The number of units in the Project unoccupied and
held available for Lower Income Tenants is -0-
.
3) The number of units rented and the number of units
held available for rental other than as described in
(1) and (2) is 48
4) The percentage that the number of units described in
(1) and (2) hereof constitute of the total number of
units in the Project is 27%.
5) The information contained in this report is true,
accurate and correct as of the date hereof.
6) As of the date hereof, the Purchaser is not in
default under any covenant or agreement contained
in the Deed Restrictions or in an Agreement of Sale
dated as of April 1, 1983, between the Authority and
the purchaser.
I~ WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Report as of
January 5, 1994
RICHMOND-ALBEMARLE LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, a Virginia
limited partnership
By: ~~ ~.-</~
Aut orized Representative
..
Distributed to F10'1rd:.t:.d::-fJ.~:::N/
q;~x:t~~\ Agcr.d:lll::,Ti r!/t!1\"OZ(~.".~ ._~"~ r~ ..~ u \'7 ~;
1)'-".. \l · . 0 r -..-' ~'" ,',
\, '-';. ~/~ : ~ f~
'~;.]l,'Gr,~~~r ; ~ ! I I
'j~~~jF .- j~_.l ;
,L~__..._,~_, J
,COMMON\\'EALTH of VIRGINIA.~.9!\.~),~"SU~'E,F:y'l'.:;;;~.~_
Hugh C Miller Director
Department of Historic Resources
221 G,)\ ern or Street
Richmond. Virginia 23219
TOO (804) 786-1934
Telephone (804) 786-3143
FAX (804) 225-4261
D nald B. and Joan P. Caldwell
R ute 1, Box 164
lysville VA 22936
Longwood, Albemarle County (DHR ~ 02-380)
Mr. and Mrs. Caldwell:
T e National Register Evaluation Team at the Department of Historic Resources has recently
e uated the Preliminary Information Form submitted for Longwood.
T e Preliminary Information Form will be presented to the State Review Board on Tuesday,
F bruary 15, 1994, at the Tredegar Iron Works, third floor of the Pattern Building, 570
T edegar Street (directions enclosed), Richmond, Virginia, beginning at !0:00am, with the staff
r mmendation that this property appears to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register
o Historic Places. The meeting is open to the public and you are welcome to attend, although
it is not necessary that you be present. It is the opinion of the Evaluation Team that this
pr perty is significant at the local level in the area of architecture and commerce. Following
th meeting, you will be notified of the board's decision regarding the eligibility of this property.
S ould you have any questions regarding the staffs review or the registration process, please
d not hesitate to contact me.
Si cerely,
~
es Christian Hill
N tional Register Assistant
Longwood, Albemarle County (DIIR NR 02-380)
January 13. 1994
Page 2
cc: The Honorable David P. Bowerman, Chairman
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Albemarle County
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director
Albemarle County Planning Department
Phil Grimm, Chairman
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Director
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission
Melinda Frierson
Albemarle County Historical Society
CHECKLIST FOR STATE AND NATIONAL REGISTER PROCFSS IN VIRGINIA
(1llI denotes completed step in the process)
Preliminary Information Form received and
r viewed, additional information requested if
sary
Prel~ Information Form reviewed and
ted by RegIster Evaluation Team at semi-monthly
eeting
Information on properties potentially affected by
fi era! undertakings reviewed and rated by Register
valuation Team at semi-monthly meeting
Preliminary Information Form mailed to
embers of State Review Board for review two
eeks prior to meetin~. Board makes
r ommendation of elIgibility at bi-monthly
eeting. Section 106 evaluations are not taken
fore the board.
R .
applicant elects to pursue registration, applicant
ts with Department staff regarding cnteria,
of significance, period of significance and
undaries.
Department staff reviews nomination drafts upon
uest and provides technical assistance
o Department staff reviews completed nomination
o Copies of nomination sent to members of both
B a.rdS two weeks prior to meeting
er, consultant and local officials notified of
, s decision
QJ Owner(s) and officials notified of receipt of
Preliminary Information Form. Department of
Historic Resources archives checked for property
file and any additional information
QJ Owner(s) and officials informed of team
recommendation, notified of pending consideration
by State Review Board. Additional information
requested if necessary. In the case of historic
districts, public informational meetings may be held
at the request of the applicant or the locality
o Officials notified of review team
recommendatior.s regarding Section 106 projects
o Owner(s) and officials notified of Board's
decision
o COMPLETE nomination due to Department of
Historic Resources by first day of the month prior
to the month of the State ReVIew Board and
Virginia Board of Historic Resources meetings at
which the nomination is to be considered
o Owner(s), adjacent property owners, consultant
and local officials notified by letter no less than 30
days prior to State Review Board meeting to initiate
3o-day comment period
o In the case of a historic district, Department of
Historic Resources holds a public heanng within
the locality not less than thirty days prior to the
Board meetings and publishes legal notice in the
local paper to initiate 3<k1ay comment period
o Nomination presented at State Review Board
meeting. If approved, State Review Board
recommends that nomination be forwarded to
Keeper of the National Register; nominations
presented to Virginia Board of Historic Resources
If approved without owner objection will be listed
on die Virginia J Jlnomarks Register on day of
presentation
o Nomination is forwarded to the Keeper of the
National Register in Washington, D.C.
o Following 4S day, review period, Department is
notified of decision. If approved without owner
objection, 'property is listed on National Register. If
owners object, Keeper declares property eligible.
Subsequest owners may rescind objection.
::. , .~ r., - ' r-'
- ~ .--.
. <
, 'I '-:" =-
- ,- --.-
-.~ ,: ". - - -
-:- .~, Cl
, - : ':.
. '; :: . ~ '~i:-
.... ,-.....,
DIRECTIONS TO TREDEGAR IRON WORKS-GUN FOUNDRY
From downtown, take Fifth Street south to Byrd Street. Turn left onto Byrd Street tbllow
Byrd StreeL east to Seventh Street by the Federal Reserve. Turn right on Seventh Street
then right again at the fountain onto Tredegar Street. The Gun foundry is on the right at
500 Tredegar Street. Take the right before the Gun Foundry and park on the grass on
your right. The Gun Foundry is a large brick building with brown doors and a tall
chimney,
From west of the city and south of the James, take Downtown .Expressway (195) to the
Second StreetlByrd Street exit. Follow Byrd Street east to Seventh Street by the Federal
eserve, Turn right on Seventh Street, then right again at the fountain onto Tredegar
Street. The Gun Foundry is on the right at 500 Tredegar Street. Take the right betore the
un Foundry and park on the grass on your right. The Gun Foundry is a large brick
uilding with brown doors and a tall chimney,
rom 1-64 West, take Fifth Street exit. Head south on Fifth Street to Byrd Street, Follow
yrd Street east to Seventh Street by the Federal Reserve. Turn right on Seventh Street,
hen right again at the fountain onto Tredegar Street. The Gun Foundry is on the right al
00 Tredegar Street. Take the right before the Gun Foundry and park on the grass on
our right. The Gun foundry is a large brick building with brown doors and a tall
himney,
fom 1-64 East, take Third Street exit. Head south on Third to Byrd Street. Tum left
nto Byrd Street. Fallow Byrd Street east to Seventh Street by the Federal Reserve,
urn right on Seventh Street, then right again at the fountain onto Tredegar Street. The
n Foundry is on the right at 500 Tredegar Street. Take the right before the gun
'oundry and park on the grass on your right. "f.he Gun Foundry is a large brick building
'th brown doors and a tall chimney.
rom 1-95, take Downtown Expressway (195) to Canal Street exit. Turn left onto lOth
treet, Follow 10th Street behind Riverfront Plaza. 10th Street becomes Tredegar Street.
ollow Tredegar Street around fountain. The Gun Foundry is on the right at 500
redegar Street. Take the right before the Gun Foundry and park on the grass on your
ght. The Gun Foundry is a large brick building with brown doors and a tall chimney.
.
iYi"': ',. ~...:.-:,_~- T~- ...._. '..,~L: ;','1.f;;/,'\~~ .::Jtj
G.; ."QL~:Zf3_~--!.<}~,~-----
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-.., ,: ~', ~:: ;
'.<;'.'.-...........--...- .-,.....f
AGENDA TITLE:
December Financial Report
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
qt.j- ,(,ZoZ(:) '12)
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
December
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION: X
STAFF CO
Messrs.
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
Huff, Breeden, & Walters
the December Financial Report of the General and Education Funds.
al Fund revenue proj ections are based on collect ions through December. General
expenditures have not been revised at this time.
cted Education revenues reflect a reduction in State aid due to lowered average
membership estimates.
Education expenditures reflect a 7 1/2% holdback of certain discretionary
94DE RPT.EXE
94.0 2
4
OJ en en CJ)~ZG) m -4 "enenr-r- :zJ
> enmo c>om >< :D m-tmOO m
5: -4 cr-::I: OJZZZ "'U -I>-to>r-oo <
0 OJ"O m OZom-4">> m
z -4 -410 -4en1m Z -Ien-l:zJmlr-r Z
0 > Oenr- 0,,0:0 en >,,>> CJ)-- C
-tmm> r-m,..r- cenG)
m r ~c" >:o"r m :0 Om m
0 m r-~e r-en>G) P} ~en:D ~::I:Z P}
>< cn>z G) :DO ~_m >om
"TI "'U ozo m -t< :rz< zo~
:zJ m J:-O z 3:m m -r-
m z oZ" m m:o -t Z zenr-
< CJ) oG)m :D zz :zJ e G) - "
m m r":D > -43: > m "'T1 e
z en oe> r- >m Z en e z
c -Z-4 G) r~ en z .8
m <0- "TI 0
en menD o 0 m en
0 _ z rii " :zJ
D en en
< z :D m
m z :0
:zJ 3: >
m m ::!
)( z 0
"'U -t Z
m en
Z
en
m
CJ)
~
I
~~!m ~
000
C1l0~
(1ImQ)
'\HO c.,
(O....Q)
m~1\)
~ffl~"" _~ .~
(1I....~(O
(.o)O~"""
0...,(11......
""I\)<C~
0(.0)(0......
(11................
lco co I\) ~
~~~~f:m~~~~
Q)~"""~~~~~
o~1n......'Cn<cc.,:...
OOCO~I\)""""""
"",,I\)CO~o~""o
>
"'U
OJ"'U >
c:zJ 3: r
CJ
00 0 m
ti);;g z 3:
m- -4 >
-4> 0 J: :zJ
-4 r r
m m
0 0 -< m
m :!! 0
3: z 0
OJ > e
m z z
:zJ (") -4
""" :; -<
co r 0
co :zJ "'U
(.0) m m
"'U :zJ
0 >
:zJ -4
-4 0
Z
en
(")
::I:
>
Z
ti)
m
i
I ~
.... ....
(11 (11
(11 'Cn
(0 (0
(11 10 ..2!
"""
.
.....
(.0)
N
m
(11
<0
...~
IL
.-..... ....._-...
.' - "dO_""
.. .......-_._".....-..
. . -... -......_-"..
!~~I\) ............_.~. ............................................
~ (11 CO. .
I\) 1\).0.'.
(0 (0).,.(11..
1\)""'Cn
m~1\)
....0.........
I~
1*
I~ ~ ~
01\)0
0,0:':"
0....C1l
I~~~
101000
- ~
I 'i: ffl ~
Q) Q)I\)..., co
o '00........ en
I\) N(1IO (0)
~Io~t~ 0 0 I\)
.-..........-... . . ...._-..
.. __ __..... ,..." _d.._.
." ---......... .-. , ------,.
."....-.-,... ,.
.......--..........,- ....
..---........--....,.... -. ...
.-........_-.-."......,. .
"..,........,.-...,..,.-...
............... ....._,-..
..........--.. ...........,
.-...........,."......,.., .
...... .._--.,-,.
....,',..'.'.....-,.,-.....'.....'.,.'......,.,'.., '.
.'".............
..'.IC;;~(.o). ~ .
. [1\)"". (11..
..:...~....o:l .:~ ::4.::4
>1\) m<c':...,
(0....(111\)
..1\)""(110.
...............""... ..
....'.....'.,...'.'.....',....',..,",....,."..., ,.......,..,.
,.. . --. .........".........--....
....,.............,...,.............
.,... ....--"........-........
.. ....,'.'........ ..'..,..
.......,.,'.""" .,........'.'..,.."'....,.....,,,
. ..,....." ......................"... .
.-'......".... ...""...,..
.... .............. ....,..,...
.. ",.,'.'.......,"'. ",','.. "".
........' '.........,..,.... ....,...." '....
....... .."................. ..,.....,..,....
........'........,....., ............
........ .....,..-...
.~."'....'..""-,..,.,."..
....... --'...........'...................,..'.."..,.... .
.----',............,'......._,.......... .....",.. .....
.'.'....-.'..'."......',.."...'."..,..,..,....,,'..,.'..
. ',',',','" .....,'...".," '..,.. "..'..,.,..,".'....,.,:.
. .......... ...".,.,.....".,.....,....",............
.. . ........,... ,....."..,.".........."..
.,...................,". ....,..,'....,.,'..,.. .
......,..".......'.,..........."".,...
...", '-.'.."'" .,....'....",._"....,."."...".
.. ... . ........".'.'....."-,'."",,,..'.
.............,....'.-... ..'....'..............,.........
;.......,'. ...-......'........"".,,'., .,...'..
,..... .'.',.........,.,....,...._,,'..,...,. ,.'.
'.','.'," ,',."...-......,.,'..,"...,.,".,.....,..... ",'" .
. ..':........~:.f.. _::~~.....:~
..'...... t ) ..... . tr:(1I ;;j III ~ ;;:.
.....,. .'. N .... j'I". :~~ ..; b
""" .. """ I\) 0 0 I\) ~..
,', NIO N (0...., 0..., co
.. ...,'......".,'.'.".'.."..."...... .",., ,."...",.
~(11 C1l
(111\)01\)
Co~:':"i\)
1\)00....
~~~~
(11 (11 ~I\)c..:lo)
......'0 Q) 100 m Q) .... m
;""000,0:""(.,(.,
Q)O(1lC1l(O~Q)O
*~*~~~~~
-<
Om
'>>
....:D
m
~"
om
_::D
"'Uo
:zJm
oz
c..-4
m ~ m ~ ~ ::0
> O~ZO'1Jm:r:'1J"'O'-G') >< o~o-nenr m
5: ~~00>Occc6m "1J ~::o~m-iO <
> z~:Uc~mm_z m >>>o~o m
z r-zo~"o>CCom Z ,z,mm> Z
(') o~mc~~zoo>~ en ~~::D~ r C
m "'OgJ~~~5~~~;r m -mmr m
0 !IJ ~:u< 9J
~en::O:<oz<o'TIoG') :tcnm
-n -i:ll :Om 0
::0 > ~om m,,~~ ~-z
~ mm> 5en zC; ::oZc:
m z z<::! '1J -~ > m
< G) ~~o ~ ~E; Z C/)
m en
Z m ro~ m ::D~ ."
c: >< "'00 Z >- m
m "'0 ~c ~ :::!~ ::D
(J) m m~ Oen C/)
0 Z Zc z:ti
< en~:n >
m m m ~
::0 (J) _
0
m z
><
"'0
m
z
en
m
(J)
>
"1J
m"'O
r ~ r Q ~ c:::O
o .fD ~~ eO
or!":>!"!"!"!":,,:>!" G)~
~",,~Cil)0)0)U1"""'t.).... t:l f:~ fll ~t:l ~ io m-
COO~CD"''''''U1''''''''~U1 ~)>
.....U1CD"'.....O.....~Cil)~ CO.............U10
~"'<c(nc..,<cC>>:...1nC>>:... ~t.)i\)~-;..,,:... ~
~ m
t.)CDNO)~"",,,,,,,,,,,,,CD U1fDt.)U1.... e
U1.........~.....OU1.....U1.....N U1~....0....0
N
10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~'" I\) ~
0) 0) ~~
0) .0) ! '" U1 CD
. .0'N0l
'" NU1U1t.)
co 10 co rL..:::! '"
......
~:'"
I\)
fD
0)
.....
~
.-','-',. -..,'.-..-...-........ ",-,' - """,',',"'
'.'. - . .dO__.. ...,.... ......_.....
..................._-.-.
..........,._,._, ,..
.- ........,--.., .... -. -."..
. -,... .._---",. - -. - ---.-..,..-,...
.-...,.-..-,....., ._-.-,-.._..-.-,....'.._._..',..-.
........ .....
.'. _._ ,......__._........ 'd.__,...
'--'--'-. - .....--......"-.-..............
..,..--."., ..- ...-.-.,,-.....
." ...-----------." ".
.....--.... . -, ,.
..--....- ..-." ...--------".-...,.-..---.
. ,..--.... . .......-----.-............_-.--..
...". . ...-.... ""'--'.'---'-.'-"'--'..'
.... . -...-------.,..... -".
--...-.....-- ."----..--.....-.
. - ---....----. ---............. -------.--.
... ----....-... ..--.........-.."...--- ..., --..-..
..,..--....-.,."'.--.,..- ...
..----.. - .......-----...--_....
...----. .. ---- ......._------..-....
....---. -------........--......,....
,.. ...--....--.. . --..........---.-..--_.....
....--.......... -..- ---.........----........
....---."..---..---.. ....,..,...,-.-....".
..........-.-...- ....'...--.-.-.-.-.-.......-,.
~g t.) .... ., ....i~..~.. .. '.. t.) N
...,..... . b (D~ 0> (0 to 0) b
g ..... 0, ....~g U1 0 ..... 0)
!U1....,.1\) .,' .....',,(0'. .0).0 0) .t.)
. w. _ _.. _ _ .. _ _
'" ~ ~ ~ ~...~...~ ~~ ~ =
I\) ...... U1 en (0),.0 NO.... Cil) ....
.......~~,.. ............ ~
< U1.U1 <N ~
0....0"":...,
N. .....1\) U10 0)
. ..........., ........., CD 0) ...
.... ....:... ~:..., b
COCO"'o~
QIO," t.. "'
.U1 U1Ul....U1~U1U1~
~"'ONO.........t.)t.)O(o
.....~~~~o':...(.o('O:...Cn
.....00......t.)...............0)0)0)
~~~~*~~~~~~
0) O)"'~O)
t.) 10 . CD ~ 0)
Coo~~~(.)
CD 0 0).... 0) 0
~~~~~~
I
lo~
:to
)>'-
zm
G)O
m~
e
~"'O
em
_::0
"'00
::om
OZ
'-~
)>
r
!: m
m
0 !:
z )>
~ ::D
C :t r
m ~ m
(') ~ 0
m 0
!: z c:
m )> z
m z ~
::0 0 -<
- > G)
fD , m
CD ::D Z
'" m m
"'0 ::D
0 )>
::0 r
~ ."
c:
Z
c
m
>
5:
Z
o
m
o
."
::z:J
m
<
m
Z
C
m
(IJ
o
<
m
::z:J
m
><
"
m
Z
(IJ
m
(IJ
-I m
O-l"",.>z )(
-I:D>>COCl) -0
>>QQ:!3:-4 m
r-~ccr-z:D Z
O,,:::!:::!-tCiic (I)
-ommm::D-40 m
m:D(lJCJ)>:::u=i $I]
::z:JCI)ooi>o
> o,,~:j.Z
:::! ZgJoo
Z CJ)>::DZ
~ ~-4~>
m CQ-t:t
>< OZQm
" -t-...ZZ
m -3\:
Z ~~CD~
m ~~~~
CI) O>-m
o zo.
=ri>rnz
-ZCDm
00 )>
>m r-
:::! -4
o Z
Z
-f -f
0-40"CJ)r
-f:::U-fm-40
>>>0>0
r-zr-m~>
.cCJ)_:II r
<"-> I
~mmr- CI)
....:D< 0
...CJ)m ::I:
-f-Z 0
::z:JZc 0
> m r
Z CJ) CJ)
CJ)
"
m
::z:J
fJ)
~~ 1:(.0) ~ I\)
2~~!~~r
_ 01 _. CXl 0) 01
- 0.-.0 (.0) I\) ....
(,,)CO(,,)(,,)~'(.)
CXlCXlCO....O)....
I\,)CXl~~CO....
::z:J
m
<
m
z
C
m
fJ)
>
"
m"
c:II
cO
~~
m>
-1-4
m
o
f
~
~O1 ~
"'" O1~I\)(,,)
Cf:-..J ....~~'O. <0
tI\)OCXl........CO
-01CXl(,,)OIICotlCO
(,,)0'(.):"'0.<0'0
PlCXlO~OIIOtO
"'. 0 0) Ql .... I\) CO
i -
.... Cotl _
U1 CO ....
0) Ql
U1 - -
,,.. Ql -..J
- CO 0
U110 O~ 0 o~
..........-.-........... ......-.... --,.
...._-........_-.-... ---- .._--.
....,.,........----. ..---..--. ,..
.... -.................-...........
.- ,. . ........ .--, . --. . -.- .--
.-....... -..'..-..,..............-.... --.'.
- ..._........',...,'..-.._.".,'.-.-.................. .... ---,.-... .
..--..---.................-..,.--.. ,._,.
.", .......,............,...".--. ....
....."'..--.., .---....
.. ...-.-",....-.... ....
... ... ',. - .
. ".--..- - . ,...... __ ..... .d_..
... ................ ..--...-..-...
.-". . .. "--""'_""_--,.-.--..
....-. ....."..... ..-... ".. -.. .
.........-.."..--.... ..
...,-..,..-...".. ---...,-.. -"..
..,.. - -,.........".. - -..... --.......,...-.
..-.'...'..,...,.-....,.-..-.
....-.-.'....,_..-.........-.-.......
...---".......-.........".
""".... ...."-..,,..-.......
.-.. ......._-... ....... ,., ---,. ---..
...." "............"........" ".. ..
.."....._"....."................" ,,- -.
""...... ....---........."...... ..
.,'---,.,..._---.-,-,._...,.., -..
. .._"...._"....._"....".
.".-......-----.
..".....-..,...."..----".
......... .~~O1\~~ b f
, 0 0 c.1.,Ql ',CD 0 _.
. .. U1 (,)0. ~.',~. CD t.) .
U1~'(.),,-:..,CO'(.)
~t~ <;l &: g fl
"-'-,' --...,....-..."..--... .....- ,. ....
. ........."....-...'...."....."-..........,, ..
~O)I\)01~Ot(.o)
:-CO-..J(.o)CDO-..J
~:p.i.o<n;"':""(,.,
U1(,)COO)(o)OI\)
'**-*-*-<l.fI.*-
i -
(,,) (,,) -
.... .... (.0)
I\,) I\,) ....
. I\)
~ ~ :".
U1 U1 01-4:.4
I\,) 10 I\,) 10 I\) 0
- -
~~~ ~(,)
~ .... ~ 10 0) ....
=:""Oo:p.(,.,
........O)O....Ql
'**-'**-*-*-
"\",,
::z:J
.,~...~..
0,,_
m!e
"
."'"' :::J
'''''0
:J:c..
>m
Zo
~-4
mm
o
..../.
0-<
" em
,..,.,.",,>,~
. '..,.,.,.-1'....
..."'.'.m
~"
om
_::z:J
,,0
::z:Jm
OZ
c..-4
>
r-
~ aJ
m
0 ~
Z >
-f ::z:J
0 :J: r-
r- m
m -<
0 " 0
m 0
~ Z C
aJ > Z
m Z -i
:c 0 -<
.... > fJ)
co r- 0
CD ::z:J ::I:
(,,) m 0
" 0
0 r-
:II "T1
-4 C
Z
0
" > "
C -f"OJ:DII-f:DO"O C
Z -f rn~~2F~~~~~ Z
0 0 0
OJ ~ Zm>>CJJrZ"O:DO OJ
oCJJo;Eo-fCJJ-om<
> r m-fc)>>I"':Dzm >
> )> z:!!CJJ~fi1,o~~-fO >
-0
Z -0 ~~~~C1q}-f:O~> Z
0 :0 :0 0 :D-f0)> "0 0
m 0 8O~m'CJJ-f:O~ m
< ZOG):Dz-fOOo 0
m -f)>m)> Oz-o 0)
0 o zm:Denm"O I
)> ~~~o~~ ~~ Co\)
-0 0
-0 ren-<I~;E -f> I
:0 -fCJJ>z> -:::j CO
0 ~IZG)-f ~O Co\)
-0 mfTIo ~ enZ
:0 z-fCJJ en
~ -fmOJ I..
CJJ:Dr OJ
0 "0< C
Z :Do 0
en O:D G)
G))> m
~~ -f
-0 m
~en 0
>
r
OJ
G) m
~ ~ "m ,,~
-I. CZ c>
0 - 0 zm oZ:o
~ - ~-
-I. ~ _ 01 -I. CO 0:0 mOr
Co\) -I. - ~~(J) ~ > (")OJm
~ ~- -I. COO1~ ~C:>> r
- ~ moo m>O
....., CO-l. ~ 0
Co\) ~~ O~~ CD ~>o
~ 0 .g.g~ CD
-- - OJzc
moZ
:Om~
en -I.
co:Oo
"0 com"O
cz Co\) "Om
; ~ - ~ ZO 0:0
-I. 00 :0>
01
_0 r -f-f
0 0
0
.9 Z
en
0
,,>
C"O
I ~ - - ~~ z-
-I. -I. o~
~ - (j.) (J)
-I\) :-"l'J _01 r
~ ~-I. I\)
(J) 011\) 01
(J) 001 ~
--
#
RAY D. PE HTEL
COMMISSIO ER
C'! ./'.,", 01 J
Distributed to Roard: J/- !E- J":;'(
(]t..i tZ^'l/t;; '3)
Agend3 It3(,I i\o ':.J:::.1..!...:.!_._{!,~,,' I .,'
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
p, 0, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22902
~--.........-
r
! '
0'" .....:
,... l~~~. "i'
"-~~I r';,:::,.~'
. '~_.i
January 26, 1994
Ella W. Carey, Clerk
d of Supervisors
ty Office Building
McIntire Road
lottesville, VA 22901
Ms. Carey:
Current Projects
Construction Schedule
Attached find the monthly update on highway improvement projects currently
r construction and quarterly report of projects under design in Albemarle
ty. Please see that this information is forwarded to the Board of Supervisors
ers. I will be prepared to discuss this matter with them at the next meeting
hey so desire.
DSR smk
att chment
cc: R. W. Tucker, Jr. w/attachment
David Benish w/attachment
Yours truly,
P:::{~;c;::!l/~
Resident Engineer
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
FEBRUARY 1, 1994
IROUTE I
INO. I
+------+- -----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
STATUS
LOCATION
ESTIMATED
COMP.DATE
+------+- -----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
I
I 631
I
I
I 5rrH STREET EXT.
I S. ROUTE I-64
CONSTRUCTION 85% COMPLETE
MAY 94 *
+------+--~----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
I
I 20
I
I
I F~OM 3.4 MI. S. ROUTE 53
I '1p 3.8 MI S. RTE. 53
CONSTRUCTION 11% COMPLETE
SEP 94 *
+------+--~----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
I
I 29
I
I
I F~OM HYDRAULIC ROAD TO
I RIO ROAD
CONSTRUCTION 11% COMPLETE
DEC 95
+------+--~----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
+------+-- ----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
+------+-- ----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
-i------+-- ----______________________________+------------------__________________+----------- +
* REVISE] DATE
** NEW PRCJECT
RTE
NO.
20
29
29
29
601
610
627
631
631
637
656
671
678
682
691
711
712
743
760
866
~-
PROJECT LISTING
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
JANUARY 1, 1994
LOCATION - DESCRIPTION
MI. SOUTH RTE. 53 - SAFETY PROJECT
RAULIC ROAD ~O RIO ROAD - WIDEN TO 8 LANES
ROAD TO S. FORK RIVANNA RIVER - WIDEN TO 8 LANES
S. FORK RIVANNA RIVER TO AIRPORT RD.-WIDEN TO 6 LANES
RO TE 250-W TO RTE. 29 BYPASS - WIDEN TO 4-LANES
FR M RTE. 20 TO 1.8 MI. E. RTE. 20 - PAVE GRAVEL ROAD
RA LROAD CROSSING SIGNALS AT WARREN
RO TE 29 TO ROUTE 743 - RIO ROAD WEST
NC CHARLOTTESVILLE TO RTE 631 - MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY
RT . 635 TO 0.55 MI.W RTE. 682-WIDEN AND PAVE GRAVEL ROAD
GE RGETOWN ROAD FROM RTE. 654 TO RTE. 743 - SPOT IMPROV.
MO RMANS RIVER - BRIDGE AND APPROACHES
RO TE 250 TO .2 MI N. RTE 250 - AT IVY
RO TE 250 TO 1.7 MI. S. RTE 787 - PAVE GRAVEL ROAD
.4 MI E. RTE 240 TO RTE. 240 - PARK ROAD
FR M RTE. 29 TO ROUTE 712 - PAVE GRAVEL ROAD
RO TE 29 TO ROUTE 692 WIDEN AND PAVE GRAVEL ROAD
HY RAULIC ROAD RTE.657 TO RTE.631 - WIDEN TO 4 LANES
FR M ROUTE 29 TO ROUTE 712 - PAVE GRAVEL ROAD
RT . 743 TO GREENBRIER DRIVE - NEW ALIGNMENT
* INDIC TES NEW PROJECT
** INDI ATES REVISED DATE
ADV. IN ICATES THAT PROJECT HAS BEEN ADVERTISED
CURRENT
ADV.
DATE
ADV.
ADV.
07-94
06-97
07-99
07-96
ADV.
07-96
01-97
07-99
10-97
?
10-94
08-95
02-94
07-97
07-96
03-95**
07-97
07-97
PREVo
ADV.
DATE
01-95
EST.
CONST.
TIME
6 MO.
3 YRS.
2 YRS.
2 YRS.
18 MO.
9 MO.
3 MO.
12 MO.
2 YRS.
9 MO.
6 MO.
12 MO.
6 MO.
12 MO.
3 MO.
6 MO.
6 MO.
1 YR.
5 MO.
9 MO.
'--''''--'', ....--"",
,. , .- ',.-c-
, " "".I...~' , I I' L'. .,j ri,l . '.
'O;"'l">"'l"': l" ;("'I!"",~I.._o>...""" ." ..'
"l ,,-U ,..,.' . ()'(\:2,"1 (~~. h)
!\gend~ !',:.;-,-, i\D. ,-Ij-,::_.':'--~-'--;;: ,
I
,
--~ ~- ........._--~ --
~- ......-...".. ""-...-. ~
....:" -~ ". ..
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
,,......,.,,,,,,,"""'..,,.,,,,,"
RAY D. PET TEL
COMMISSION R
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND,23219
"
.-..........'..--...-......
EARL C, COCHRAN. JR.
STATE LOCATION AND DESIGN ENGINEER
January 20, 1994
Route 743
proj: 0743-002-153, C-502
Albemarle County
Fr: Intersection Lambs Road
(Route 657)
To: Intersection Rio Road
(Route 631)
Chairman, Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
I would like to take this opportunity to advise that the
Commonwealth Transportation Board of Virginia at its meeting today
approved the location and major design features of the above
project as proposed and presented at the March 11, 1993, pUblic
hearing with modifications in the final design phase to include a
four-foot bicycle lane in both directions within the proposed
roadway typical section, adjacent to the proposed curb and gutter.
Sincerely, _ "'-- ~
$=- C c- ~--=--\~ .
'---- ,.... ..- ( ",
E. C. Cochran, Jr., P.E.
State Location and Design Engineer
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
. C) ~~.-':~}t:PEtiVI:_^
RAY D. PE HTEL
COMMISSIO ER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
p, O. BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE,22902
February 1, 1994
D. S, ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
Route 743
Project: 0743-002-153,C502
From: Int. Lambs Road
To Int. Rio Road
Albemarle County
M . Ella W. Carey
C erk, CMC
Bard of Supervisors
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, VA 22902
D ar Ms. Carey:
The Commonwealth Transportation Board has approved the location and major
sign features of the above project as presented at the March 11, 1993 public
aring. Modifications to the final design will include a four foot bicycle lane
i both directions located within the proposed roadway, adjacent to the curb and
tter. The plan presented at the public hearing used a separate bike path
cated on the west side of Route 743.
The anticipated advertisement date for construction of this project is March
1 95.
Yours truly,
~,u4f ~ /'l/;_
Gerald G. Utz ~
Contract Administrator
G U/yrm
c Mr. D. R. Askew
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
.,..,__~..,.5>""
OFS
"....,.......u...'.........~'A.. - ,.,
RAY D. PET TEL
COMMISSION R
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND,23219
EARL C, COCHRAN. JR,
STATE LOCATION AND DESIGN ENGINEER
January 20, 1994
Route 743
proj: 0743-002-153, C-502
Albemarle county
Fr: Intersection Lambs Road
(Route 657)
To: Intersection Rio Road
(Route 631)
Clerk of the Court
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
I would like to take this opportunity to advise that the
Commonwealth Transportation Board of Virginia at its meeting today
approved the location and major design features of the above
roject as proposed and presented at the March 11, 1993, public
earing with modifications in the final design phase to include a
four-foot bicycle lane in both directions within the proposed
oadway typical section, adjacent to the proposed curb and gutter.
Sincerely, ~.
E: ,C-(C-~ '~A~
E. C. Cochran, Jr., P.E.
state Location and Design Engineer
, ,\ r\ ~J;
"':"'" (..
\., It!-: L. i
~ ~i
TRAN5PORTAT!9N FOR THE 21 5T CENTURY
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
G::~. ;,j: u~l~::-) T:' :: : '\ t) A,~... ~r:;(3
Ojl J) I :::.ZB::.:jLj
AGENDA T TLE:
Meadow C eek Parkway Update
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
Cfq 'OZD2'Zid-j
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
staff Up
UEST:
Status of the Project
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION: X
ATTACHMENTS: No
STAFF CO
Messrs.
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGRO
The con
options
Hollyme
of the
support
costly
SVEREDRUP Corp., has recommended for further study Meadow Creek alignment
B2, G1 and Y1, an extension of Meadow Creek west of us 29 (alternative W2), and
d connector T1. On October 19, 1993, the Planning Commission recommended against all
onsultant's recommended alignments by a vote of 5-2. The Planning Commission did
the concept of the Meadow Creek Parkway, but felt the alternative alignments were too
or the amount of traffic that would be served and the impact to neighborhoods.
DISCUSS
At the
norther
Adjustm
Further
amendme
area.
made.
verific
has del
ime of the Planning Commission consideration, the possibility of changes to the
terminus of the Western Bypass had just been presented to the Board of Supervisors.
nts to the traffic forecasting model to reflect these changes had not been made.
ore, shortly after the Commission's action on Meadow Creek, the Board approved an
t to the Comprehensive Plan to include Towers Land Trust in the Hollymead growth
djustments to the traffic forecasting model to reflect this change had also not been
taff has subsequently made traffic model changes and forwarded this to VDOT for
tion. VDOT has yet to complete their work. The Board of Supervisors to this point
yed consideration of Meadow Creek to allow the changes to be finalized.
RECOMME
Staff r that due to the additional information that has been developed on this
issue, he entire matter should be reevaluated by the Planning Commission prior to action by
the Boa d of Supervisors further review.
94.014
~.
'! L
"'
11:
, ,) ~ ~ ~ 1
..ic,.h ! ~ t)
'". 'W
.__._=.,~ '
>:.~lD OF SUF'ERVISORS
,
1993 \
I
l
FOURTH QUARTER i l
DOARD OF
BUILDING REPORT Lc.-~-'--"""'-""
~
,\
1 ~~
t'
I"
i....
-~-_.~~............~" \
,-.., :'~.
, .. ~
County of Albemarle
Department of Planning and Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
INDEX
I. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Month (Charts A - B)
II. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Type (Charts C - D)
III. Comparison of All Building Permits (Chart E)
I\: Comparison of Certificates of Occupancy (Charts F - H)
Key to Types of Housing Used in this Report
SF
SFA
SFffiI
DUP
MF
MHC
Single Family (Includes Modular)
Single Family Attached
Single Family Townhouse
Duplex
Multi-Family Residence
MobileHomes in County
-3-
FOURTH QUARTER 1993
II. COMPARISON OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
Chart C. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by
Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type
MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC D.U. D.U.
CHARLOTTESVILLE 4 0 4 0 12 0 20 10%
JACK JOUETT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 1%
RIVANNA 67 1 23 0 0 2 93 47%
SAMUEL MILLER 16 0 0 0 0 2 18 9%
SCOTTSVILLE 32 8 0 0 0 0 40 20%
WHITE HALL 20 4 0 0 0 3 27 14%
TOTAL 141 13 27 0 12 7 200 100%
Chart D. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by
Comprehensive Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type
TOTAL UNITS
COMP PlAN AREA MHC URBAN RURAL
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 0 0 0 0 0 12
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 11 1 14 0 0 26
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 1 0 0 0 0 1
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 20 8 0 0 0 28
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 5 0 0 0 0 5
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
CROZET COMMUNITY 6 4 0 0 0 10
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 27 0 13 0 0 40
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 0 0
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0
PINEY MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0
RIVANNA VILLAGE 22 0 0 0 0 22
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 92 13 0 : 12 0 I 144
RURAL AREA 1 13 0 0 3 16
RURAL AREA 2 9 0 0 2 11
RURAL AREA 3 13 0 0 1 14
RURAL AREA 4 14 0 0 1 15
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 49 0 0 7 56
TOTAL i 141 0 12 7 200
Prepared by Albemarle ~ounty Planning and Community Development
I'
. -5-
FOURTH QUARTER 1993
IV. CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY (continued)
Chart G. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by
Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type
MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE
DISTRICT SF SFA SF /TH DUP MF MHC TOTAL
CHARLOTTESVILLE 7 0 3 0 0 0 10
JACK JOUETT 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
RIVANNA 59 6 26 0 0 0 91
SAMUEL MILLER 17 0 0 0 0 3 20
SCOTTSVILLE 30 6 0 0 0 0 36
WHITE HALL 25 14 0 0 0 2 41
TOTAL 140 26 29 0 0 5 200
Chart H. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by
Comprehensive Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type
I I DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL UNITS
I
I COMP PLAN AREA r SF I SFA I SF/TH DUP MF MHC URBAN RURAL :
! i o I
I URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0
i URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 7 0 20 0 I 0 0 27
I URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0 0 0 i . 0 I 0 0
I
, URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 14 6 I 0 0 I 0 I 0 20
I URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 6 0 I 0 0 I 0 I 0 6
, URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I CROZET COMMUNITY 11 14 0 0 0 0 25
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 21 0 9 0 0 0 30
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PINEY MTN. VILLAGE 0 6 0 0 0 0 6
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
RIVANNA VILLAGE 20 0 0 0 0 , 0 20
i i
--_.--- -----+-- - ---..-.......---
, GROWTH AREA 80 26
i SUBTOTAL ; 29 0 o I 0 135
I
, I
i RURAL AREA 1 15 0 0 0 0 1 16
12 0 0 0 i 0 0 12
I RURAL AREA 2 I
RURAL AREA 3 19 0 0 0 0 I 2 21
. RURAL AREA 4 14 0 0 0 0 2 16
I -~_._._-- - ~.---+ ,-- .-
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 60 0 I 0 0 0 I 5 0 65
I TOTAL 140 i 26 I 29 0 o I 5 200
I ,
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
I
,
....-- .......,-- "..-,,-
-'- ,
"
1993 .' _,_."".._~",.__,.,..............._..............",...1
YEAR END ., -"", - (~i ,\"l;;/',Ji>'; ":'~;
.- ,c,_ \,...r' ,j ,J
",.._..--.;.."..;..~---,...,.-.~~~.,.....""".....,.;,,~...!},
BUILDING REPORT
County of Albemarle
Department of Planning and Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesvill~ Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
INDEX
I. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Month (Charts A - B)
II. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Type (Charts C - D)
III. Comparison of All Building Permits (Chart E)
IV: Comparison of Certificates of Occupancy (Charts F - H)
Key to Types of Housing Used in this Report
SF Single Family (Includes Modular)
SFA Single Family Attached
SFffH Single Family Townhouse
DUP Duplex
MF Multi-Family Residence
MHC MobileHomes in County
I
I
.
,
"
-2-
During the year of
805 dwelling units. In
homes in existing parks
total of $70,000.
1993, 739 permits were issued for
addition, 28 permits were issued for mobile
at an average exchange value of $2,500 for a
I. COMPARISON OF NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BY MONTH
Chart A. Nine Year Comparison of New Residential Dwelling
Units by Month
YEAR 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
JAN 46 37 38 22 93 56 64 183 49
FEB 29 43 35 40 172 68 31 72 56
MAR 94 37 62 ~l 61 92 57 64 58
APR 48 78 70 71 49 82 62 72 76
I MAY 121 73 73 83 89 75 44 62 45
I JUN 60 92 56 83 220 85 54 48 79
JUL 57 159 80 30 67 42 58 62 81
AUG 86 32 46 49 74 87 58 126 116
SEP 35 49 45 46 72 90 55 48 45
OCT 40 52 60 52 56 48 39 43 68
NOV 45 50 49 60 301 37 42 49 65
DEC 53 3S 40 46 5S 42 50 37 67
TOTAL 714 737 6S4 673 1309 804 614 866 805
-------.-----
Chart B. Three Year Comparison of New Residential Dwelling
Units by Month
190
180
t 70 "
160
150
::~ ~
I "
120 I t
I "
1: 0 -j,
'~H ~
60 l:il
50 ~
;-
40
30
~
~ f'
.---. +,'
l/I-' .':.'~
. 1 '
~ / I" / ~
kh;<
l/i,--t-~
lA "
i - - '1/<
,.,1",1 .
[/1~~;
l/-1-',l/~
f
I',
r-~ r-----
'; '1<
I ~ -'r<
" (;
I '...' .
I<"';~;
l<t~
20
10
o
JAN rES MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
UJ 1991
cs=sJ 1992
fZ:Zl 1993
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
.
,
1 -3-
YEAR END
II. COMPARISON OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
Chart C. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by
Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type
MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH T DUP MF MHC D.U. D.U.
CHARLOTTESVILLE 12 0 14 [ 0 60 0 86 11%
I
JACK JOUETT 15 I 0 0 i 0 12 0 27 3%
RIVANNA 231 I 1 81 I 0 0 5 318 40%
I
SAMUEL MILLER 71 2 0 I 0 0 I 4 I 77 10%
SCOTTSVILLE 121 31 0 0 0 7 159 20%
WHITE HALL 101 28 0 0 0 9 I 138 17%
TOTAL 551 I 62 I 95 i 0 72 25 805 100%
I
Chart D. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by Comprehensive
Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type
r-- '-T~~-' DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL UNITS
I
I COMP PLAN AREA SF i --SFA-l SF ITH 1 DUP I MF i MHC 1 URBAN RURAL
i I
i URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 0 0 0 0 I 60 i 0 60
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 29 1 55 I 0 0 0 85 I
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 1 0 0 i 0 0 0 1 I
I
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 54 31 0 0 0 0 85
i URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 18 2 0 0 0 0 20
! URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 12 0 12
CROZET COMMUNITY 44 28 0 0 0 0 i 72 i
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 82 0 40 0 0 0 122 I
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
i
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 !
!
PINEY MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 I
RIVANNA VILLAGE 77 0 0 0 0 0 77 !
I i
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 311 62 95 0 72 1 541 I
i I
RURAL AREA 1 54 0 0 0 0 8 ! I 62 i
I
RURAL AREA 2 47 0 0 0 0 5 52
RURAL AREA 3 78 0 0 0 0 2 80
RURAL AREA 4 61. 0 0 0 0 9 I 70 i
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 240 0 0 0 0 24 264
i
I TOTAL I 5s1__L_~~__-.l_~_~_1_ 0~__L?_~L2s J I 805 I
i ~~_ _ _.. ____ ____-1 . ~ --
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
~
III.
-4-
OMPARISON OF ALL BUILDING PERMITS
Estimated Cost of Construction by Magisterial District and Construction Type
NEW *NEW NON-RES. NEW COMMERCIAL FARM BUILDING
RESIDENTIAL & ALTER. RES. & NEW INSTITUT. & ALTER. COMM. TOTAL
No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$ No. Amount-$
30 3,838,550 74 1,305,293 6 1,911,000 80 4,959,550 190 12,014,393
17 3,774,695 54 1,226,380 2 188,500 17 425,050 90 5,614,625
318 33,863,239 197 3,972,911 23 9,980,369 53 2,645,443 591 50,461,962
77 12,647,770 187 5,134,550 6 355,700 23 264,400 293 18,402,420
159 12,059,751! 143 6,212,305 11 1,192,988 30 753,293 343 20,218,337
138 12 , 626 , 449 : 152 2,294,947 7 438,808 19 2,329,175 316 17,689,379
739 78,810,454 i 807 20,146,386 55 14,067,365 222 11,376,911 1,823 124,401,116 !
ional value of mobile homes placed in existing parks is included in Residential
ation category.
IV. TIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY
Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by Elementary
School District and Dwelling Unit Type
---~----_._.- PERCENT I
SCHOOL TOTAL
DISTRICT MHC D.U. TOTAL D.D. :
or-Hurt 20 0 52 0 0 0 72 10.18%
adus Wood/Henley 6 0 0 0 0 1 7 0.99%
Br adus Wood/Jouett 17 0 0 0 O! 0 17 2.40%
I Br wnsville 25 0 0 0 0 1 26 3.68%
Cr zet 63 31 0 0 0 1 95 13 . 44 %
Gr er 0 0 3 0 I 82 0 85 12.02%
~Ho lymead 62 16 36 0 0 0 114 16.12%
Me iwether Lewis 21 0 0 0 2 0 23 3.25%
Mu ray 17 0 0 0 0 1 18 2.55%
Re Hill 10 0 0 0 0 1 11 1.56%
Ca e/Burley 0 0 0 0 24 0 24 3.39%
.Ca ejWalton 51 23 1 0 0 2 77 10.89%
Sc ttsvi11e 17 0 0 0 0 0 17 2.40%
St ne Robinson/Burley 65 0 0 0 0 1 66 9.34%
St ne RobinsonjWalton 18 3 0 0 0 1 22 3.11%
St ny Point 19 0 0 0 0 2 21 2.97% i
Wo dbrook 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0J;j
Ya cey 11 0 0 0 0 1 12 1. 70%
TOTAL 422 73 92 0 1108 12 707 100.00% I
---- -.-..-- ---- ..
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
I
) -5-
YEAR END
IV. CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY (continued)
Chart G. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by
Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type
MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE
DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC TOTAL
CHARLOTTESVILLE 15 0 15 0 0 0 30
JACK JOUETT 7 0 0 0 82 0 89
RIVANNA 157 16 76 0 24 3 276
SAMUEL MI LLER 57 0 0 0 0 4 61
SCOTTSVILLE 85 I 26 1 0 0 2 114
WHITE HALL 101 31 I 0 0 2 3 137
i I
TOTAL 422 I 73 i 92 0 108 12 707
Chart H. Breakdown of CO's for Residential Dwelling Units by
Comprehensive Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type
, --.-..
I DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL UNITS
L-
COMP PLAN AREA SF TSFA SF/TH DUP i MF I MHC URBAN RURAL
-, I
1 0 0 3 0 0 ! 0 3
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 18 0 52 0 0 I 0 70
'URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0 0 0 24 0 24
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 37 26 1 0 I 0 0 64
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 14 0 0 0 0 0 14
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 I 0 82 0 82
CROZET COMMUNITY 51 31 0 I 0 0 0 82
I I
HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 57 0 36 0 0 0 93
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EARLYSVILLE VILLAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
PINEY MTN. VILLAGE 0 16 0 , 0 0 0 16 I
,
NORTH GARDEN VILLAGE 2 0 0 I 0 0 0 2
RIVANNA VILLAGE 45 0 0 0 0 0 45 i
I
GROWTH AREA SUBTOTAL 224 73 92 i 0 106 0 495
, RURAL AREA 1 48 0 0 0 2 2 52 I
RURAL AREA 2 39 0 0 0 0 3 42 I
I
RURAL AREA 3 64 0 0 0 0 2 66
RURAL AREA 4 47 0 0 0 0 5 52
RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 198 0 , 0 0 2 1.2 212
I
I TOTAL 422 !3~~__ 92 I 0 108 12 707
I __.___.W.. _____._.__ ___...
Prepared by Albemarle County Planning and Community Development
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
M E M 0 RAN DUM
Board of Supervisors
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC:t1.0C-.
January 28, 1994
Reading List for February 2, 1994
rch 13(A), 1992 - Mr. Bowerman
" " 0..-04
... . J ,\ -I..L-' "I
f\; t 'h '_r' \," ' "'~('i' '-' --"--,
&,IIS r1~U\': " ' ",--
qL--j.tzC2'~1
__....._..,,_.'e__.~
Agend<l 1'.", '
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
rch 23(A), 1992 - page 1 - top of page 12 - Mr. Perkins
nuary 5, 1994 - Mrs. Thomas
nuary 12(A), 1994 - Mr. Bowerman
E C:mms
*
Printed on recycled paper
L.
Charlotte y, umphris
Jack Jo tt
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
40 1 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
February 3, 1994
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R, M rshall, Jr.
Scotts lle
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
Mr. an S. Roosevelt
Resid nt Engineer
Virgi ia Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 2013
Chari ttesville, VA 22902-0013
r. Roosevelt:
Following is a list of items from the Board of Supervisors' meeting on February 2, 1994:
Agenda Item No. 7a. Median Strip Maintenance. FORMAllY request mowing at least three times
a yea in all entrance corridors (the seven locations listed in Mullaney's letter of January 3, 1994), the full
width of the right-of-way, Those locations are:
1) Route 20 from Route 53 intersection to the City limits;
2) Route 250 bypass from the Ivy Exit to the City limits;
3) Route 29 from Ivy exit of 250 bypass to Route 64 interchange;
4) Route 250 East from Free Bridge to Route 64 interchange;
5) Barracks Road from Georgetown Road to the City limits;
6) Route 250 from Bellair to the City limits;
7) Fifth Street from the City limits to Route 631.
Agenda Item No. 7b. Georgetown Road Task Force - Recommended Improvements. RECEIVED
report (a copy is attached). With the exception of the items with dollar amounts, the Board VOTED to
accep the report and directed staff to take necessary steps to implement items possible and to consider
dollar tems (slip ramp and sidewalks) in Six-Year road plan. All, Ayes.
Agenda Item No. 7d. Other Transportation Matters.
Ms. Rebecca Lambert was present and handed in a petition concerning the paving of Route 640.
She h s been working with people from the Culpeper District Office and is having a notary come to a place
where everyone involved in right-of-way dedication can come to one location to sign official documents,
Mr. Martin noted that Route 640 is No. 35 in the Six-Year Road list, so is on the list, but not in the
curren budget. He has driven over the road, and feels it is dangerous, about two and one-half miles in
length
*
Printed on recycled paper
.
Mr, Dan S. Roosevelt
February 3, 1994
Page ~,
Mr. Roosevelt said he has a large file on this road. It was in the Six-Year Plan in the 1970s. He
had s aked out the needed right-of-way for a Mr. Turner in the early '80s, At that time, he told him that
witho,",t dedication of the right-of-way, this project would have no chance of going forward.
Mr. Bowerman asked for a report on the possibility of having a pedestrian crosswalk marked on
Route 29 North at Woodbrook. He just wants comments, and told Mr, Roosevelt it does not have to be a
forma reply,
Mrs. Thomas said there were people present who had served on a committee concerning
impro ements to Routes 760 and 712. They met last month and reached the following consensus. There
is no ossibility of getting the right-of-way necessary for improvements to Route 760, but on Route 712
there s someone who will work with the Highway Department to get that right-of-way. She then offered
motio to proceed with and spend the $24,400 shown in Mr. Roosevelt's letter of December 13, 1993, on
the improvements for Route 712. The motion was seconded by Mr, Martin, and adopted unanimously.
Mrs. Thomas then brought up the subject of Route 682, She said that because of the weather she
did no get to drive along the road until last week, She does not want the people living on this road to
have tb wait until March for an answer, so recommends that the Board discuss this road request at its
meetirg on February 14 at 4:30 p.m.
Mr. Perkins said he had received several complaints about Route 674 which is a gravel road. He
believE s the Highway Department is probably getting lots of complaints due to the recent weather, Mr.
Roose elt said lots of gravel roads have failed because of the depth of the freeze,
Mrs. Humphris said she had been contacted by Mr. Henry Dean about Lamb's Road, She asked
Mr, Roosevelt if he would meet with her and Mr. Dean to discuss Mr, Dean's suggestions, He replied in
the aff rmative.
Mr, Marshall said he had many calls about the Keene Landfill Road and also about a street off of
Market Street. Mr. Tucker said it is a short section which runs from Broadway to Market Street and it is
not in he Secondary System. Mr. Marshall asked for a staff report on anything that can be done for the
people living on the street.
If you have any questions about the items listed (some are just informational), please contact me at
296-5843.
Sincerely,
~- ;, ~
l ~,; ,
1=11':) ,^, r..,rn., rl,"",~' r"'ltf'"
Board of County Supervisors
EWC:le ~
Attachn ent
............
D!=-;:P.:~:)~.~~ T:: "-' _..-:\ >)",\'~~;.;L~~RS
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
.._-_..,-"...
r'~~l ~.rL~LJL1",.
.{} \
,
!
.,.
Matters: Median Strip
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1993
i
---i
(, '70. ..L~
ON .:.lL-::k.;:i:..l._:J
~
ITEM NUMBER:
Cf L/. U]J}!. . (X/L
ACTION:
INFORMATION: x
SUBJECT
Discussi
availabl
maintena
strips.
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS:
and Mullaney
BACKGRO
On seve
on seve
section
and Rec
mainten
County
alterna
discuss
al occasions the Board has discussed the need for an increased level of maintenance
al entrance corridors into the City. Of particular concern is the Route 20 South
between 1-64 and the Thomas Jefferson Parkway. At the Board's direction, the Parks
eat ion Department secured a permit from VDOT and assumed responsibility for the
nce of that section for the latter half of the 1993 mowing season. In addition the
xecutive's Office directed the Parks and Recreation Department to develop budget
ives for the continued maintenance of this and other priority entrance corridors for
on during the 94-95 FY budget process.
DISCUSS ON:
Mr. Mul aney has had several discussion with Ms. Angela Tucker, Assistant Resident Engineer,
and has learned that some local VDOT jurisdictions put a higher emphasis on median and
roadsid mowing in selected areas. The cost for the County taking over this responsibility
next se son and performing it at a level commensurate with the City on the primary entrance
corrido s is estimated to range from $39,670 for a contracted service, to $131,975 to hire
and equ p a County crew. Mr. Mullaney suggests that prior to the County taking over the
financi 1 responsibility and the considerable liability risk involved in roadside mowing, the
Board s ould fully investigate the potential for an increased level of maintenance by VDOT.
Mr. Roo evelt has been advised by letter to be prepared to discuss this matter at the Board
meeting on February 2.
ATION:
Staff r commends that the Board formally express its desire to VDOT for an increased level
of main enance to the urban area corridors and discuss with Mr. Roosevelt the options
availab e for VDOT to provide for this increased level of maintenance.
VDOTMED
94.004
cc: Mr. Daniel S. Roosevelt
....,~/ a.''''
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Parks and Recreation Department
County Office Building
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Telephone (804) 296-5844
January 3, 1994
r. D. S. Roosevelt
esident Engineer
epartment of Transportation
.0. Box 2013
harlottesville, Virginia 22902
Mr. Roosevelt:
The Board of Supervisors has expressed an interest in
increasing the current level of median strip maintenance on
selected roads surrounding the Charlottesville City limits. The
following is a list of areas where additional maintenance is
esired. The areas are listed in priority order. Route 29 North
ould be a high priority area, but is not included due to the
c rrent construction project.
1. Route 20 (from Rt 53 intersection to City Limits) - .9 of a
ile, including median and sides of road.
2. Route 250 bypass (Ivy exit to City Limits) - 1.4 miles,
i cludes median and sides of road.
3. Route 29 (Ivy exit of 250 bypass to Route 64 interchange) -
2.7 miles, includes median and sides of road.
4. Route 250 (Free Bridge to Route 64 interchange) - 2 miles,
i cludes median and sides of road.
5. Barracks Road (Georgetown Road to City Limits) - .4 of a
m'le, includes median and sides of road.
5th Street (City Limits to Route 631) - .2 of a mile, sides
road.
6. Route 250 (Bellair to City Limits) - .7 of a mile, includes
m dian and sides of road.
r. D. S. Roosevelt
age 2
anuary 3, 1993
In the past, it has been my understanding that the medians
re maintained to certain uniform standards statewide. However,
have since learned that some local VDOT jurisdictions put a
igher priority on median maintenance. Prior to our department
etting involved, I would like to fully investigate the
ossibility of VDOT increasing the current level of maintenance.
What would be your response if the County Board of
upervisors made an official request to VDOT to increase the
urrent level of maintenance? Could other VDOT maintenance
riorities be shifted? What other services would need to suffer
'f more effort was placed on the medians? Would the Board need
o provide additional funding? If it was decided that our
epartment should assume responsibility for the medians, would we
e compensated by VDOT for the amount that is saved by removing
hese areas from the VDOT mowing contract?
The cost estimates that we have come up with for taking on
his as a County responsibility next season, range from $39,670
or a contractor, to $131,975 to hire and outfit our own crew.
hese costs are based on a 14 day mowing, trimming and trash
ickup cycle similar to that performed on the City's median
trips. Obviously, it is going to be very difficult for the
ounty to find funding for this purpose in this budget cycle.
ince VDOT is ultimately responsible for these areas and is
urrently equipped to do this type of maintenance, it seems
inefficient at best for our department to also get involved.
inally, I am concerned about the County assuming liability for
ccidents which may occur related to the mowing of these medians,
especially considered the high volume and speed of traffic on
ost of these roads.
In conclusion, I would ask that you be prepared to discuss
t is matter at the Board of Supervisors meeting on February 2nd.
t that time, I think the Board would be interested in hearing
w at options you feel are available for having the maintenance of
t e medians increased to a level that they determine is
a ceptable. If you have any questions, please feel free to give
m a call.
Sincerely,
.J/) I . /1"
~;j ~ ~1&i-'~1/
Patrick K. Mullane~
Director
P Isms
..
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
c:r7~::;::urG:D T,:,j ~>-, '; ,J f'~,\'- 1.':~i>~S
ON L~{ - 2~ _:c}'d - ',. '..~
AGENDA T TLE:
Georgeto~n Road Task Force - Recommended
Improvem~nts.
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
QLI' OZO ~~ (h3
ACTION: XX
INFORMATION:
SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REOUEST:
Recommen~ation of the Task Force for
Improvem~nts to Georgetown.
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CO ~ACT ( S \ :
Messrs. ~ucker and Benish
REVIEWED BY:
l\ttf
BACKGRotfND :
Resident s of the Georgetown Road area recently requested Board assistance in addressing
safety nd traffic concerns. A Georgetown Road Task Force was subsequently established
consist' ng of representatives from VDOT' s Construction District Off ice and Resident
EngineeI 's Office, Albemarle County Planning Department and interested area residents. The
Task FOIce began its work in March, 1993.
DISCUSS ON:
Attachec are the recommendations for Georgetown Road. The recommendations focus on: (1)
establiE hing a functional classification and design of the road which reflects the
residential character of the area; (2) enforcing the current speed limit and prohibiting
through truck traffic; and, (3) making road improvements which enhance pedestrian access and
safety end which eliminate hazardous spot locations for traffic.
RECOMME~rnATION:
Staff recommends that the Board accept the report and forward to the Metropolitan Planning
Organizetion (MPO) for use in the update of the Charlottesville Area Transportation Study
(CATS). The Task Force recommendations will also be considered in the update of the County's
Comprehensive Plan, and VDOT's Six Year secondary Road Construction Plan and Georgetown Road
project development.
GEORGE . ~ UM
94.016
- .1
f. imn ~ @ ~ n W.Jt, rn) \
"U { ,lIP
': \\ I 2 \) '(lq~ t II) ,
H \ \ ~.) ;","~"',. :, ,<
_;'-Ij i.~. ;
L~ __ ._~_.....-J I
0,...,.., ,or.:::j'nC:ORS\
' f';:) \_.)" ~_ Ii ~..' t...) \,,< ~~'_
,...,~,..-,.."-,....~-~--"-~""_._...,~'
-_/ .
aeorgetown Road Task Force
Reoommended Improvements
January 12, 1994
Task Force Member,.
Li~da Buttner - eitiEen', Group
Le,ter Hoel - Citi,en" Group
De~bie Xron . ettiEen', Group
Ch~rl.. stoke - Citi&en'l Group
Do~O Wood - Oitl&en'l Group
Li~coln ~ouno - OitiEen'. Oroup
Charlotte Humphril - Board of Super.
Dave Benilh - Albemarle Oounty
Jeff Hore. - VDOT
Oal. Lip,oomo - VDOT
Wanda Moore - VDOT
Dan Roo.evelt - VDOT
1. aeola..ity Oeoroetown Road from a m.~or thoroughfare to a 2-lane
local road It.tUI in all official road plan..
~ Requ..t the 80ard ot Supervisor. to oon.ider the function of
O.oroetown Road within their ecmprehen.ive plan and a..ion a
cla..itication whioh i. con.i.tent with their intention..
2. Entorce the current 35 mph .peed limit.
- VDOT will install additional .peed limit .i;n..
- Oommitment from police to monitor on a oontinual ba.i..
- Commitm.nt from oounty that .ohool bu. drLvere will drive the .p..d
limit and appropriate route..
- Commitment from City that city bu.... will drive ,peed limit.
- Looate and u.e the Oounty's radar .peed information li;n.
3. , ~ede.trian protect Lon at Terrell Road and near In;lewood.
- VDOT will in.tall wider pavement markin;. alon; that part of the road
. and will install delineator. around the i.land are..
- Rai.ed ooncrete median. could be in.talled if the road 18 widened to
aocommodate lide-bY-lid. v.hicle..
4. Revi.ion. to the inter..ction of Hydraulic and Oeor;etown ~o.d,.
- VDOT will add an advanoed left turn pha.e tor the we.tbound Hydraulio
Road approach.
. VDOT will in.tall a yield ahead li;n and yield li9nl on both ,ide.
of the ri;ht turn .11p ramp, a bu. .top ahead .ign will a1.o be
in.talled.
- VbOT will trim tree. around the .lip ramp.
~ VDOT will remove the .lip ramp an~ replace with a regUlar right turn
lane if County approve. funding from .econdary improvement fund..
Zetimated co.t i. 810,000.
/ ..
5. Improve, sidewalks.
- Rebuild current lidewalkl to an elevation leval to the existing road
on the welt aide trom Terrell to louth of Enolewood. Exiltino
lidewalk is County'. relpon.lbl11ty and could be improved with
County Capital Improvement Program lunds or lecondary improvement
tunds available to the county. latimated co.t ia 826,000.
6. Reatrict through ~ruok..
- Recommend the 80ard of Supervisors initiate procedures to re.trict
through truck. trom Oeorg.town Road between Hydraulio and 8arraokl.
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Phal II - 6 Year Plan
- Str... to the Board of Supervisors that additional curb and gutter
and aid.walke on both sides of Georgetown Road would improve and
enhance safety and Ihould b. part of the projeot currently inoluded
in the 6 year improvement plan.
"'''''''END''''''-
;-cJ
t: if ''(
--- -,
.-;. _...
-- /,/ //
-~ { ".: /' ~_.,-
Date:
February 2, 1994
Subjec: Presentation to the County Board of Supervisors by
the Georgetown Road Task Force
Purpos~: To obtain approval of the Board of Supervisors of the six (6)
recommendations agreed by the Georgetown Road Task Force per
the attached "Recommended Improvements - Jan. 12, 1994".
Backgrpund: The Georgetown Road Task Force is comprised of the
Citizens Group (Georgetown Neighborhood Committee - 6 member~
a VDOT/County Group (6 members) ... as listed on the attached
Recommended Improvements list.
The Georgetown Neighborhood Committee started in June 1992.
A peti tiot1'_'!l was completed in September. 97% of dwelling
units surveyed supported various safety improvements, elimin-
ating through trucks, and classifying Georgetown Road con-
sistently with its neighborhood Collector character. The
petition was presented to the Board October 6, 1992.
The Board of Supervisors responded by establishing the
Joint Task Force Committee to study the assumptions,
determine the problems and establish best alternative
solutions. The first Task Force meeting was Oct. 26, 1992.
The key focus of the Task Force was/is to achieve a
better balance of service and safety of Georgetown Road
to serve the balanced needs of motorists and neighborhood.
Recommendations: The work of developing agreed recommendations is
now complete and ready for Board approval and implementation.
Call for action: The six (6) recommendations are as follows (see
attached list) and your approval and decision to implement
each item is requested today.
. FROt'l \ ('OT. (ULPEPEF' t'lHTEF:IHLS
(11.13.1994 0';':25
P. 2
,
Georqetown Road Taek Force
Reoommended Improvement.
January 12, 1994
Task Force Member.,
Linda Buttner - Citicen's Group
Leater Hoel - Oitizen" Group
Debbie Kron - Citizen's Group
Charlea stoke - Citicen'. Group
Doug Wood - Citicen's Group ~
Linooln YounQ - Citi'en" Groupv'
Charlotte Humphri. - Board of Super.
Dave Beni.h - Albemarle County
Jeff Hor.. - VDOT
Oale Lipscomb - VDOT - J14 ~.L, -
- Wanda Moor. - VDOT
Dan ROQsevelt - VDOT
1.
Reolas.ify Georoetown Road from a major thoroughfare to a 2-lan~ _~./
local roaeS IIItatuB in all offioial road plan.. /,J');/C' t-dL/h~ tf':>l "b.?U/
-?r)' ;>/7 .('?oJe/, ,
- Requeat the Board of Supervisors to con.ider the funotion of
Georoetown Road within their compreheneive plan and .s.ign a
ela..itioation whioh i. conllllatent with their intentione.
2.
Entorae the ourrent 3S mph speed limit.
- VDOT will in.tall additional speed limit aign..
- Commitment from police to monitor on a oontinual baDia.
- Comm1~m.nt from County that .Qhool bUD driver. will drive the .peed
limit and appropriate routeB.
- Commitment from City that city bU81ee will drive .peed limit.
- ~ocate,and Ullle the County'. radar IlIpeed information lion.
3. pedeatrian proteotion at Terrell Road and near Inolewood.
- VDOT will in.tall wider pavement marking8 &10n9 that part of the road
, and will in.tall delineators around the i.land area.
- Railed ooncrete mediana could be installed if the road i. widened to
accommodate aieSe-by-alde vehic'le.( o-l/DwS ;>4.f.5;""') 0+ 4.. 61-#<f ~ e.l...;. ~ .
4. Reviaionlll to the intersection of hydraulio and aeor9.town Road~.
- VOOT will add an advanced left turn phase for the weetbound"ydr.aulio
Road approaoh.
VDOT will install a yield ahead li9n and yield .i9n. on both .lde.
ol the ri9ht turn slip rampl a bUI Dtop ahead lign will allo be
in.talled.
- VDOT will trim tree. around the Ilip ramp.
- VDOT will remove the Ilip ramp and replace with a re9ular ri9ht turn
lane if county approve. funding from aeoondary improvement funda,
EBtimateeS cost i, $10,000.
. FROt'l ~,IC'OTo,,"C~JLREF'EF: t'lATER IAL::.
!Ct!. 13. 1'~'H ~)'3: 2<:'
P. ~,
5. Improv. aidew,lka.
- Rebuild current aidewalke to an elavation level to the exi.tinQ road
on the west aide from Terrell to .outh of En9l.wood. ExiatinQ
aidewalk ie County'. re.ponslbillty and could be improved with
County Capital Improvement Pro9ram fund. or .eoondary improvement
funda available to the county. I'timated coet i. $26,000.
6. Re.triot through trucks.
- Recommend the Board of Superviaor. initiate procedure. to re.trict
through trucks from Geor9Qtown Road between Hydraulic and Barrack..
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ph .8 II - 6 Year Plan
- stress to the Board of Supervigor. that additional curb and 9utter
and .idewalk. on both sids8 of Geor98town Road would improve an;(
enhance 8atetyand should be part ot the project currently included
in the 6 yeAr improvement plan.
00,
0"
,
"
. ~f'
*.
RAY D. PE HTEL
COMMISSIO ER
Mr.
Coun
401
Char
..
'""
. DEe 1 5 :iq91
,
'"
~ 1;..~:,
.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA "XL": .'it ;:n~7:H';'r!
A//(tltl~cI
DEPARTME~T g~6::0~~PORTATlON 9 ~ j1.;::.t1'.J, ~/ 2-
CHARLOTTESVILLE,22902 . 0, S, ROOSEVELT
December 13, 1993
RESIDENT ENGINEER
Routes 760/712
. W. Tucker, Jr.
y Office Building
cIntire Road
ottesville, VA 22902
'. I ,
i I j .
[BOARD OF SLJPERV,SORsl
Dear Mr. Tucker:
710
impr
repo
of
stan
Augu
760
On July 16, 1993, you
and 712 to determine
ve the sight distance
t on that review.
wrote me and requested I review Route 760 between Routes
if some minor improvements could be made which would
and surface of this road. This letter will serve as my
Your request came as a result of concerns expressed by local citizens as a part
rezoning request before the Board of Supervisors. To obtain a better under-
ing of their concerns, I met with Mr. Will Rieley to review the route in
t. This review resulted in expanding the study to include Route 712 from Route
o Route 29.
As a part of the study I had our Drainage Engineer review both routes. He
indi ated that standard ditches stabilized with rock or jute mesh could retain and
cont 01 the drainage during normal circumstances which are the ten year storms we
norm lly design for on secondaries. With this information in hand I developed
esti ates for four locations to be graded for improved sight distance and
impr vements to the ditch along Route 760 and Route 712. Attached is a sketch
indi ating the four locations to be graded for sight distance and the location of
the ditches to be improved on both routes. I have listed below my estimate of cost
to i prove each of the four sight distance locations and the ditches on each route.
Location #1 (Route 760)
Location #2 (Route 760)
Location #3 (Route 712)
Location #4 (Route 712)
Ditches Route 760
Ditches Route 712
$ 4,900
30,500
9,900
6,500
13,000
8,000
Total
$72,800
Both Route 760 and Route 712 have prescriptive rights of way
Depa tment to work only 15' from the centerline of the existing
loca ions reviewed both for sight distance and ditch improvements
be n eded to accomplish the additional grading needed for this work.
which allow the
road. At all
permission will
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
..
Mr. b. W. Tucker, Jr.
Routes 760/712
Your letter indicated
imprbvements in this area.
am ~repared to discuss it
supe visors meeting.
DSR/ mk
attaf.hments
cc: V. W. Cilimberg
H. W. Mills
Page 2
December 13, 1993
that the Board of Supervisors wished to consider spot
I request that you advise them of this information and I
in more detail with the Board at a future board of
Yours truly,
SJ /l ~=<; ;unJ 1-------
D. S. Roosevelt
Resident Engineer
. .
----
~
/J
~
:::t:.
- ." ---.
-
'.
I
. ,
~
-.
~
: -::;::::. 0
-.
,
--
'-
~ ~---
,~ . .
~
\
~~C'~
~'-
/ ~----\I
/ . .
'. -.--:' .
r .',
~ "----..,
\
~ '",-,,'
~..
......,
........
r:n . ".
~
....~
~ .
I ...
\ -
-
..(r
~
'~.
\ /
I . ~::
~
. ~~
~-- \
----
I
-/,I
- II
I
------
DEFERRED UNTIL
Form.3
7/25/86
'}
"-
P"
/
2-:?~
I
/? //r/,
~ p y/t7~
I
/f /~}'L~
,
"
t.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
-,- ". <""\ T _"'l \~~.:') ~ ,;\
D\'--:-I-'l'~'!J.;';J, ',...- l.f ..f" ,I
, ,~, ,,~ , . [' \..i.-
f JI( - - '7y, 1-( "-t ,__.,_.-.,~
Ol'~~~"
I" .
.
AGENDA T TLE: Citizen Survey for
Comprehe sive Plan Update
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
c:jL-j .OZDZ- ,cx.~6
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
review a
question .
to
ACTION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Cilimberg, Benish
ATTACHMENTS:
Yes
~
REVIEWED BY:
(
BACKGRO
Researc
Compreh
develop
be revi
The County has contracted with the University of Virginia, Center for Survey
to conduct a scientific sample survey of citizen opinion on issues related to the
nsive Plan update. Staff has been working with representatives of the Center to
draft questions for the survey instrument. A conceptual outline of the survey will
wed by the Planning Commission on February 1, 1994.
DISCUSS After receiving input from the Planning Commission and Board, the consultant
will fi alize the draft survey instrument for pre-testing. Pre-testing is used to "de-bug"
the sur ey process and instrument particularly in regards to length of the survey interview
and the quality of the responses. Based on the results of the pre-test, the survey
instrum nt will be modified as necessary for conducting the actual survey interviews.
is to provide the Board an opportunity to review and comment on the
the survey.
94.015
",._,._"~...__~=-__,.........",,......W"-'" ",
R (itJ Ii; i,i,
l.~ '')'
r~""'=-"-'-''''''''''^'
\ ""1
:,
L.___~__" ~""'---' '"
Or
,..,~._~_.:.~_,.;;.~....,.u,.~._...._..,,,,,.,.,
'.
r
FRO~ DEP .OF SOCIOLOGY*UNIU.OF UIRGINIA
131.26.1994 17:55
P. 2
DRAFT
Jafiuary 26, 1994..tmg
,,'
QPESTIONNAlRE OUTLINB
1994 ALBI*_t..2 00UIft .UlO1IIO BIDS SVlVIY
Center for Survey l....rch
Vnlv.r.lty of Virginia
NOT~S,; '**' indicate. ite.s that c1upU.Olt. tho.. were lnoluded in the Fall
199a survey of Charlotte.vllle and were reviewed 1n advanoe by COUfity, City,
and Ufiivereity p1annln& .taff.
'R' ~ ae.pondent.
1. Introduotion
II. Qualification
A. R 1. over 18.
B. COfif1r~ Albemarle County ro.ldence
1. Ask neighborhood/subdivision loeation at this point, to
ensure actual County re.id.no..
a. If OK neighborhood name, ask neare.t road
inter.ection.
C. If not qualified or can't confi~ County re.idence, thank and
discontinue interview.
IU. Opening demographio.
A. How long live in County.
B. R's subjeotive delorlptlon of neighborhood: rural, Quburban,
urban?
C. Own or rent.
D. Type of dwelling
IV. Impressions of the area
A. ** Rate Charlottesville.Albemarl. .rea a. a place to live, on a 10
point Bcale.
B. Rating of area five year. ag01
1. [If improved].~OPEN&ND: how haa area improved?
2. [If became ~or.e)..OPENEND: how has area beoome worse?
C. OPENEND: 3 best thing; about living in Albemarle County.
D. OPENSND: 3 worat problem. faoing County.
E. Community attaohment: Would R like to be living in area 5 years
from now?
V. **Rat1ngs of planning goals.
Use same intro soript aQ on Clville lurvey, but mention Albemarle
County first. Each respondent will rate 12 of the items, picked
in random order by the computerized interviewing system.f~B:
City residants rated 10 items eaoh]. '
" .
FRO~ DEPT,OF SOCIOLOGY*UNIU,OF UIRGINIA
01.26.1994 17:55
p, 3
Sur..y OUtlino
Page 2
A. " **ltems used on City survey [paraphrased in thb outlf.ne]..all to
ba inoluded.
1. quality of education
2. more job.
3. quality of houling
4. affordable houdq
5, natural reSOuroe., open space
6. eoonomic growth
7. parks and recreatlon
8. aafer n.~ghborhood. and .tr.ets
9, oultural and entertainment
10. more reaionabl. oost of living
11. inorease diver.ity of nelahborhocd.
12. extend, improve water and sewer service
13. reduce traffic conge8tion
14. publio transportation
15. control rate of growth
16. expand social service.
17. improve ~edical and health .ervice
18. keep tax~. down
19. County.City-UVa 8en.e of community
20. ooncentrata UVa growth on grounds
B. Additional ite~8 to be inoluded on County survey, drawn at random
from list including the above item.:
21. preserving hi.toric building. and place.
22. preserving farmland and fore.ted land
23. promoting tourilm 1n our area
24. protecting water Quality in the re.ervoir. and streams
25. proteoting the quality of groundwater from wells
26. controlling urban sprawl
VI. County servioes.
A. Satisfaotion with servioe. 1n the area (gov't and non-gov't).
Eaoh item to be rated "very aatl.fied, aO~8wb&t satisfied,
somewhat disQati.f1ed, or very dissatiBfted."
1. Police proteotion
2. Fire protection
3. Re8CU8 .&rv1ce
4. Transit Bervice
5. L1brariel
6. Public w~ter
7. Parks and reo
8. Schools
9 . Roads
10. Sidewalks, paths
11. Social ..rvices "
12. Stormwater drainage
13. Publio s.war.
14. Tra8h oolleotion
15. Solid waste reoycling facllltiea
FRO~ DEPT.OF SOCIOLOGY*UNIU.OF UIRGINIR
01.26.1994 17:56
P. 4
Su vey Outline
Page 3
c;'
OPENgND: Aa County grows, we may need new .erv1oes; what new
services should County provide in future?
He1pfulne.. of County Itaff
1. Has R contacted County ln laat 12 monthe?
2. If Yes:
A. Sattafaction with helpfulne.. of employ....
b. Satilfactlon with aocuracy of lnfo.
c. Sati.faotion with time it took.
B.:'
VI. **City.County cooperadon question aeries ("favor" or "oppose"):
A. **Cicy & County work together more c10le1y in planning.
B. **More joint program.
c. **merge park and rec IYlteml
D. **merge police departments
E. **merge Ichoo1.
F. **consolidate City and County government
VI 1. Development serlea.
A. Is the county growing too fast?
B. Describe current growth management policy to R.
1. 18 the p.roent of county land that i. designated for growth
about right?
2. Should County continue to acco~odat8 growth along Rt. 29
corridor, or encourage growth ell.where instead?
3. Should county contlnue to keep land In deaignated rural
areas from being ,ubdivided into .mall lota?
.. 4. When new housing and bu.ine..e. are developed, should they
be located in and around exi8ting ~ommunitiea?
5. Question on implementing lome kind of impact fee ayatem.
6. Use value taxation/land use tax
a. 18 R familiar with this?
b. Doea R think thi. should be continued?
I~. Housing series: policy question. on. . .
A. Affordable hou.ina?
B. Allow more mob1le home. in the growth areas of the County?
C. Public housing/subsidized houling?
D. Auxiliary houling/acce8sory apartmente?
X. Design & preservation leries.
A. RIB opinion: 1s new development occurring In the County visually
attractive?
B. Intro: All of the following 8hou1d be con.idered in relation to
trade-off between concern with quality and appearanoe of
development on the one hand; OOlts, lo.t flexibility, and concern
with property right. on the othar hand, "
1. Protect lOCAl hhtod.c .ite. and bul1d1ng8?
2. Proteot mountain and ridge tops?
3. Keep arohitectural/d.sign review along major roadways?
F R 0'11. D E P . 0 F S 0 C I 0 L 0 f3 Y ... U N I V . 0 F V I R f3 I N I 1=1
01.26.1994 17:56
P. 5
J," .
Sur' ey OUtU.t\e
Page 4
Xl. Questions related to eoonomic development.
A. Are there enou$h job"
B. Are there enough high-quality job.,
C. Should County have a (.tronger) economio development policy?
O. Should County have aome land zoned in advanced. ready for industry
to build on?
XII Transportation .eri... Pol toy and prefence questions about. . .
A. making major new road. vi.ually attraotive and providing bike
paths or sidewalk. along thom.
B. improving the road. in the more rural area v. concentrating toad
money. on the ar.a. that are mOlt cona..ted.
C. developing alternative roadway. parallel to Rte 29 to ease the
traffic burden there: developing roads to connect one subdivision
to another.
D. bike paths and bike lanes.
E. bus servioe.
F. van pooling. park-and-rid. lot..
XIII. Closing demographics
A. Rig year of birth
B. empldyment status
C. N of adults in HH
D. N of children in HH
E. la R registered to vote?
F. R'g level of educatlon
G. R'g household income
H. R's tace/ethn101ty
I. R I S seX
J. OPENRND: Any closing oomment. by R
K. OPENEND: Interviewer rematks, if any
.:,.
.;.
','
"
I>
,
..... - \-,~:,~
ON COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA DATE:
the Agricultural and Forestal February 2, 1994
s Support Committee
ACTION:
SUBJECT CONSENT AGENDA:
Report 0 Forestal ACTION:
Industri
ATTACHMENTS:
STAFF CO
Messrs. Cilimberg REVIEWED BY:
I'rEM NUMBER l
(4Y .(jzcrL' Qt
INFORMATION: x
INFORMATION:
BACKGRO
The Agr'cultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee was appointed by the Board of
Supervi ors in December, 1992, to develop recommendations for ways to support and promote
agricul ure and forestry in Albemarle County. The creation of the Committee is a strategy
reCOmme ded in the Comprehensive Plan (p. 56). The Committee's description of work includes:
(1) Ana yzing activities and determining trends; (2) Evaluating obstacles to sustaining
agricul ural and forestal industries; (3) Recommending specific efforts to support and
encoura e agricultural and forestal industries; (4) Developing a report which proposes County
policie /strategies for supporting agricultural and forestal industries; (5) Addressing
protect' on of the resource base in addition to promotion of agricultural and forestal
industr'es; and, (6) Addressing issues as they arise which may affect agricultural/forestal
interes s.
DISCUSS ON:
The Sup ort Committee met from January - October, 1993, and produced the attached report
which in ludes a list of members, an introduction, recommendations, and discussion of future
trends. The Committee was assisted by the staff members listed in the report, guest
speaker , and many other persons from the agricultural and forestal community who were
invited to attend the subcommittee sessions.
RECOMME
Staff r commends that the Board of Supervisors continue its long standing support for
agricul ure and forestry in Albemarle County by accepting this report. The attached
recomme dations should be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan during the upcoming
review.
AFIND.W
94.007
, ,
','
AGRICULTURAL/FORESTAL INDUSTRIES SUPPORT COMMITTEE
REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FEBRUARY, 1994
COMMITTEE MEMBERS
1.
Agri-business
Jeffrey W. Clayton
John W. Clayton & Son
Mechums River
2.
1
~ .
c
Eo
I.
L
q
10.
11.
Beef cattle
Robert A. Bloch
President, Albemarle Farm Bureau
Clover Hill Farm
Keswick
Beef cattle
C. Woodson Baker
East Belmont Farm
Keswick
Dairy cattle
James C. Abell
Mechums River
Nursery/greenhouse/
truck farming
Whitney V. Critzer
President, VA Direct Marketing Association
Critzer Family Farm, Afton
Orchards
Joseph T. Henley, III
Henley Orchards
Crozet
Grapes
Chris Hill
Farm Manager, Glendower Vineyards
Keene
Horses-racing
Patrick Nuesch
Braeburn Training Center
Crozet
Horses-pleasure
Rosemary R. Dent
Polaris Farm
Free Union
Sheep
Jeffrey Hoffman
Sheepmen's Supply
Barboursville
Forestry
R. A. Yancey, Jr.
R. A. Yancey Lumber Corporation
Yancey Mill
1
. f
','
1~ .
13.
Forestry
Thomas Jefferson Soil
and Water Conservation
District
Board of Supervisors
Planning Commission
Department of Planning and
Community Development
Cooperative Extension
Service
Virginia Department of
Forestry
Soil Conservation Service
David A. Tice
Consulting Forester
North American Resources Management
Charlottesville
James R. Butler
Board Member
Gordonsville
Ex-Officio Members
Walter Perkins
Westvaco Corporation
Ivy
Phil Grimm
Virginia Department of Forestry
Charlottesville
Staff Members
Mary Joy Scala
Senior Planner
David B. Benish
Chief of Community Development
Rhonda Henderson
Student Intern
Charles Goodman
Unit Director/Horticulturist
David Vaden
Farm Management/Agent
Mark Reynolds
Extension Agent/Agriculture
Nelson Shaw
Area Forester, Albemarle County
Gordon Yager
District Conservationist
2
~ ~
TRaDUCTION
rmers and foresters were the first citizens of Albemarle County. All
sthetic and commercial prosperity enjoyed here, from colonial times until
e very recent past, must be ascribed to the successes of the many
nerations of those families and their efficient stewardship. Quality soils,
climate, terrain and individuals have come together in Albemarle County to
ake it an object of fierce, and sometimes divisive, local pride and national
e
e industries of farming, forestry, and livestock production have provided a
ependab1e economic base for all generations, regardless of external business
c c1es. The demand for goods produced by these industries has been relatively
constant through all economic conditions.
ese industries provide:
Stable employment and tax revenue.
Employment in all demographic segments of our population.
Free housing to many employees.
Paid, on-the-job training in meaningful trades from welding and diesel
mechanics to biotechnology and ultrasound.
Abundant wildlife habitat.
Outdoor recreational opportunities to non-employees.
Attractive landscape for tourists and neighbors.
More tax contributions than government services received.
ese industries do not create:
Increased commuter traffic.
Excessive noise.
Dangerous wastes.
ey do not require:
New schools.
New roads.
More police.
More social services.
3
r
short, these industries are community builders, not consumers.
oreover, Albemarle's farmers and foresters purchase most of their supplies
d services locally, thereby stimulating all segments of the local economy.
d they do this while raising perishable commodities. With very little
ception, local farmers and foresters cannot set prices for their goods and
roduce. Prices are set by national, and increasingly, global supply and
emand. They cannot be raised to cover cost increases of inputs, taxes or
egulation.
e agricultural and forestal industries have been models of economic and
ultural stability in Albemarle County. Our entrepreneurial drive, initiative
nd responsibility have helped make ours among the most attractive locales in
he country. We are the caretakers of the scenic landscape which continues to
uccessfully attract so many tourists. Our ability to sustain this requires
reedom and stability.
ur past has proven our commitment to the community. The "highest and best
se" for much of our land, as the colonists knew, and their succeeding
enerations proved, is and should remain agricultural.
sound future depends on ours.
4
?
RF.COMMENDATIONS
l~e Agricultural/Forestal Industries Support Committee reaffirms the
Agricultural and Forestal Resources Goal and Objectives from the current
Comprehensive Plan:
Goal: Promote the continuation of a viable agricultural and forestal
industry and resource base.
Objective: Protect the County's agricultural and forestal lands through
land use regulations and promotion of voluntary techniques.
Objective: Support the agricultural and forestal industry through
promotional activities.
1~e Committee recommends the following policies and strategies for supporting
and promoting agricultural and forestal industries in Albemarle County:
1. County Policies and Re2ulations Should SUDDort A2ricultural/Forestal
Interests.
1. The Comprehensive Plan needs to carry more weight. The Board of
Supervisors should follow the Comprehensive Plan when making
decisions. Changes should not be made to the Plan except during
the five year review. Farmers need stability in government
policy.
2. Developments requiring a rezoning or special use permit should not
be approved outside of Growth Areas. Both rezonings and special
use permits in the Rural Areas are a problem. Farmers do not have
time to attend public hearings to fight developments. In the
past, the cumulative effects of developments have not been
considered.
3. Consideration should be given to recogn~z~ng established
residential communities by designating them as Comprehensive Plan
Villages.
4. Review County ordinances to be sure they are realistic and serving
the intended purposes. Keep number of ordinances to a minimum.
Enforce ordinances properly.
5. Existing regulations, including the new state forestry water
quality law, are sufficient to ensure good forestry practices.
New regulations of timber operations on mountain tops and slopes
are not necessary and may devalue the land for timber use,
encouraging subdivision or conversion to other land uses.
6. County policies should support the farmers regarding nuisance
conflicts in Rural Areas.
5
?
7. A permanent agricultural/forestal committee should have the
opportunity to discuss with the Board of Supervisors the impacts
of proposed ordinances on agriculture and forestry. These new
duties should be assigned to the existing Agricultural/Forestal
Districts Advisory Committee which was established to review
agricultural/forestal districts; and a new member should be added
from the Agricultural/Forestal Industries Support Committee (Rob
Bloch has been endorsed for this appointment).
8. When establishing road improvement priorities, consider the
accommodation of farm and forestry equipment. Increase the weight
limit on low-weight bridges. Improve roads to decrease the
bruising of fruit transported from field to storage or market.
lI. Preserve Farmland and Forests.
1. Promote and use voluntary conservation easements and
agricultural/forestal districts.
2. Pursue legislation for the transfer of development rights.
3. Low density is a good idea, but a large lot size is not.
Twenty-one (21) acre lots waste land and limit future use.
Concentrate growth and reduce sprawl.
4. Leave the existing number of development rights in order to
maintain stability.
5. Policies and ordinances should favor clustered, mixed-use
development (so-called "traditional" or "neo-traditional" town
planning) in designated Growth Areas, as opposed to the large-lot,
segregated land-use policies prevalent today. The County's
existing ordinance that encourages clustering is a small step in
the right direction, but does not go far enough in density or
encouraging mixed uses in order to reduce automobile dependency.
6. Shenandoah Park should not be expanded.
7. Discourage farm/forest fragmentation.
8. Protect prime soils.
III. Provide Fair Taxation For A2riculture and Forestry.
1. Development should pay its own way. Policies should be enacted
following the current fiscal impact studies to ensure that tax
burdens on land more fairly match the costs of governmental
services to those lands.
6
.
L
2. The use value taxation program is fair and should be continued.
Land use tax is not a "tax break." (A farmer's home, other
dwellings and farm buildings are taxed at the regular rate; in
addition, the land is taxed at its production value.) A long-
term commitment to land use tax by the County is desirable. The
land use value of agricultural/forestal land should be based on
the production capability of the land to produce.
3. Pursue an exemption for all agricultural/forestal operations from
business tax.
4. Agricultural product storage buildings (silos, cold storage)
should be taxed at a lower value.
5. Lower appraisals on orchard and vineyard land due to their limited
use potential, and the initial capital investment required.
lV. DeveloD Marketin2 Strate2ies For All A2ricultural/Forestal Products.
1. The County should take action to foster the development of niche
agriculture such as garlic, cut flowers, etc. and direct
marketing, such as "pick your own" operations and community
supported agriculture (subscription farming).
2. Support farmers markets as a direct marketing strategy and a way
to educate people about agriculture. There is a potential for a
farmers market at the County Office Building parking lot or at a
location on Route 29 North or Route 29 at 1-64. Several smaller
markets operating on different days would serve the public better
than one large market. Good management, location, access and
parking are essential. Shelter and cold storage are desirable. A
joint or coordinated effort with the City Market is desirable.
3. Develop Albemarle County brochures listing products available for
direct sales, farms retailing to the public, and farms open for
tourists to visit.
4. Encourage tourist attractions to promote buying from farms.
5. Agricultural tourism should be recognized and encouraged.
Opportunities include bed and breakfast operations in historic
landmarks, tourist lodging, farm tours, livestock shows,
vineyards, "pick-your-own" operations, herb and flower producers,
etc.
6. Encourage stores to promote local products.
7. Develop a hotline for county agricultural products (Extension
Service).
8. Create a sticker, "Produced or grown in Albemarle County" to
promote County products.
7
,
V. DeveloD Educational Programs for the Public.
1. Improve the understanding of agriculture both at the County
official and the general public levels.
2. The County should promote appreciation of the rural area; the
community needs to know how important agricultural and forestal
lands are to them.
3. Rural area residents should consider the impact of their actions
on farming activities and livestock (ex: fast moving traffic
conflicting with farm machinery, dogs, hot air balloons
frightening livestock.)
4. Implement an educational tour of County farms for the general
public (similar to the spring House and Garden Tour).
5. Implement an educational farm tour for County officials and
decision-making staff. Include small operations not doing well,
along with larger, more successful operations. Suggested tour
designations:
Rob Bloch's beef cattle operation
A commercial vineyard
Whitney Critzer's or Scott Peyton's "pick-your-own" operation
Thomas brothers' dairy
Chiles', Clark's or Ron Harvey's orchard and packing shed
Pat and Felix Nuesch's horse operation
Eltzroth and Thompson's greenhouse
Clarwin orchards
Lost Valley tree farm
Blue Ridge Garden Center
Ivy Nursery and Garden Center
Snow's Garden Center and landscape maintenance business
6. Support agricultural education in the classroom. Implement a farm
day for school children. (Polaris Farm is a suggested location.)
7. Encourage and promote vocational education programs from middle
school onward. High school graduates should have a marketable
skill.
VI. Develo~ Educational Pr02rams for Producers.
1. Continue to provide local producers with up-to-date farm/forestry
technology including alternative methods, technical assistance,
and land management knowledge.
VII. Protect Water Resources and Water Oualitv.
(No specific strategies recommended.)
8
,
E FUTURE OF AGRICUL
E AND FORESTRY IN A EMARLE COUNTY
rends in agriculture and forestry in Albemarle County can be discerned from
oth industry statistics and from the experiences of farmers and foresters.
terprises on the increase in Albemarle County include specialty crops such
s fruits and vegetables, horse training, purebred cattle operations, sheep
d lamb operations, alfalfa and other hay production, agri-business, land
eased for hunting rights or hunting preserves, and forestry. Total forested
and acreage has increased. Grassland farming is thriving, with beef cattle
roduction value remaining stable. Sectors on the decline in Albemarle County
nclude cash grain farming (corn, soybeans, small grain), cash hay production,
airy cattle, swine and poultry. From 1974 to 1987 the total acreage and
erage size of farms decreased, while the number of farms in Albemarle has
ncreased.
n 1991 Albemarle County ranked 2nd out of the 95 counties in Virginia in
rapes (acres); 3rd in horses (head); 5th in apples (pounds); 8th in hay
(tons); 9th in pine stumpage value; 10th in forest products total added value;
4th in sheep and lambs (head); 16th in beef cattle (head); 21st in alfalfa
ay (tons) and 22nd in hardwood stumpage value.
Subcommittee
There will probably be less acreage, due to land being sold for
ousing, but more fruit due to intensive cropping. Yields per acre will
ontinue to increase as we use smaller trees, more trees per acre, and better
anagement techniques. The industry will continue to grow at a slow pace.
mall Fruit: Small fruit production will probably increase. One farm
ecently purchased will double our production of small fruit such as brambles,
trawberries and blueberries.
ra es' The interest in starting new vineyards has slowed and some have gone
ut of business or have been sold. But the vineyards and wineries now in
peration are managed well as a business and not as a lifestyle. As Virginia
ines continue to do well in show competitions, the industry will continue to
row at a slow, steady pace.
rnamental: The ornamental horticultural business is a fairly new industry
ith a bright future for Albemarle County. It is the fastest growing
gricultural industry in the United States. Being close to metropolitan
reas, Albemarle has a lot of potential in this area. We already have
reenhouses, tree and shrub nurseries, many garden centers, and approximately
o small business people in the lawn and landscaping businesses.
ivestock Subcommittee
e key problems identified by the Livestock subcommittee were:
(1) the extremely high cost/value of land;
(2) the lack of understanding of agriculture, both by the general public
and county officials; and
(3) the shortage of and/or knowledge of marketing opportunities.
9
,
ivestock operations in the County have slowly decreased over the past several
cades. Intensive operations like dairy and swine farms have become almost
on-existent, while small-scale operations like pleasure horses, sheep and
oats have increased. Because the backbone of the County's agriculture is
rass1and farming, cattle operations have remained relatively the same.
ere is a strong sense of tradition of passing the land from one generation
o the next, keeping it in agriculture, if possible. Because of the extremely
igh cost/value of land, there are immense development pressures; also heirs
rying to retain the land may be forced to sell because of estate taxes.
rrent1y the only viable alternative for some new farmers, or existing
armers looking to expand in the County, to avoid the high cost/value of land
s through land rental.
e lack of understanding of agriculture has hampered agriculture in the
ounty in recent years, both at the general public and County officials level.
eop1e no longer have a direct connection with agriculture as they did in the
ast. It is sad that many children think that food comes from he store, not
rom the farm. With such an image, how can they, as adults, be expected to
nderstand the inner workings of agriculture? To complicate the issue, there
re some environmental and animal rights groups that are presenting a very one
ided picture of agriculture. Due to the lack of understanding, some County
mp10yees present a negative view of county agriculture policy.
ribusiness Subcommittee
e health of the agribusiness sector is directly related to the health of
ther agricultural endeavors in the community. Agribusiness must be able to
upport an increase in new agricultural enterprises such as vineyards, small
ruit and vegetable crops, if it is to remain competitive and financially
ea1thy.
ompetition is strong from agricultural supply dealers from the Shenandoah
alley, Orange and Culpeper areas. Partly because of this competition and the
ec1ine in full-time commercial farming in the County, local agricultural
upp1y dealers are seeing a larger percentage of their total sales come from
omeowner and hobby farm customers. The total dollar volume of area supply
ea1ers continues to rise steadily however.
e legal liability placed upon agricultural supply dealers, especially
horough chemical sales and application of crop sprays, can be expensive. For
xamp1e, because the grape plant is extremely sensitive to certain herbicides,
t is nearly impossible to spray pastures and hay fields within several miles
f a vineyard location. To some extent this limits the types of services
upp1y dealers can provide to certain areas of the County.
gricu1tura1 supply dealers are seeing an increase in private industry
onsu1ting as a result of niches left by shrinking state and local agencies,
(eg. soil and forage testing, insect scouting, crop chemical recommendations,
ivestock nutrition). In some case local dealer prices are being undercut by
irect to producer sales from company representatives.
10
~
ny farmland owners in Albemarle County have limited agricultural experience.
cking basic knowledge of farm and farmland management, the new owner
equently undertakes less management intensive enterprises. They often
efer short term farm lease arrangements to active management of their farms.
e uncertainty of these tenure arrangements and high county land values tend
be prohibitive to increased long term agricultural production.
e subcommittee was also of the opinion that many of the larger farms in the
County were likely to be divided and sold in smaller tracts of twenty to two
ndred acres. This would have an impact on the kinds of farming enterprises
e will see in the future. An increase in the number of smaller farms also
eant an increase in the demand for smaller farm machinery and an increase in
ew fencing construction.
Subcommittee
The long-term outlook for wood products demand is bright. Many
important factors are involved, including:
. Increasing population growth, particularly in the Mid-Atlantic
region. The population of the Chesapeake Bay area of Virginia,
Maryland and D.C. is projected to increase by 2 million within the
next thirty years.
. Reduction of timber harvests in the Pacific Northwest.
. Expanding global economies.
. Trends in wood use are generally positive.
Continued forest fragmentation is probably the biggest threat to the
future vitality of the forest industry in Albemarle County.
The average size of forest stands is shrinking. This reduction in
acreage has several ramifications:
. As parcel size declines, operability for timber harvesting
decreases. Forest sizes below 40 acres are difficult to manage
economically. The proximity of houses and other structures
escalates the problem.
· Widely-spaced housing increases the total extent of utilities and
transportation corridors required, leading to further
fragmentation of forests and reduced operability. Similarly, such
development patterns increase traffic on rural roads, creating
problems with "sharing the road" with forestry equipment and
increasing air quality problems that may affect tree growth.
. Such fragmentation has many other indirect effects. Wildlife
"edge" species such as white-tail deer rapidly increase and damage
tree regeneration, shrubs and ground cover. Insect epidemics
become more difficult to control.
11
. <?
. Significant declines have been noted regionally in the numbers of
many bird species that require large forest areas for breeding.
Fragmentation of forest habitats is thought to be a likely factor
in this decline.
Previous and current County environmental policy is a major factor in
this trend of forest habitat fragmentation. Ordinances designed to
protect rural character by requiring large (2-21 acre) minimum lot sizes
and segregating uses have actually encouraged the fragmentation of land
cover.
3. As a result of fragmentation, there will be a trend towards smaller
logging equipment. This is seen as a positive trend for silvicultural
as well as environmental reasons.
Conclusion
l~e future of agriculture and forestry in Albemarle County depends on the
actions of the farm and forest owners, but also on the support of elected
cfficials and other citizens.
l~e importance of agriculture and forestry is not limited to the production
~alue of these industries. Each farm or forestry operation provides
employment and helps support other related businesses in the community. In
addition, the income derived by the landowner encourages the landowner to keep
the land resource intact. It is the land resource which provides the true
~alue of agriculture and forestry to this community, with related benefits
like open space for cleaner air, watershed protection and wildlife habitat;
scenic rural and historic landscapes which encourage tourism; and quality of
life for all residents. Maintaining agriculture and forestry also enables the
County to grow at a measured and deliberate pace, and to better plan for
services.
ln the past, Albemarle's citizens have recognized the importance of
agriculture and forestry through the Comprehensive Plan. The future of
agriculture and forestry in Albemarle County depends on this continued
support.
12
.. ...
Charlotte Y.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 2965843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S Martm
Rl\/dnn"
Walter F. Perkms
Whll('H.III
Sally H Thomas
Samuel Mille!
Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC eve/
February 3, 1994
JECT:
Expenditure approved on February 2, 1994, Weather Vane for County
Office Building on McIntire Road.
the Board's meeting on February 2, 1994, the Board approved an expenditure
an amount up to $6000 for installation of a weather vane atop the County
fice Building on McIntire Road as per the attached bid from R. E. Lee and
n, Inc. Staff recommended, and the Board agreed, that the funds could be
ken from Staff Services Maintenance budget.
E C: len
tachments (4)
Ai Waugaman
*
Printed on recycled paper
+<~;;~fY/ . !:: . LEt. :~,~ C' Ii . I :-1 C .
...~ ' -..a.
T~_
,. , ........
"::::.,:,'__-,:1: :--:'.:_
ho ':
. l ~ : j'=:
:J . ('11
r . '.I';'
flee
.fl1~;lIoy.lIMld' r-
HOME O!<FoCE'
2811 tiyCIlUlie "!0Id
P.O. Box Tm
Charloctll8Yllle. VA 229':l6
!"ele (eo.l 373-1321
F 14. (804j "i73-97&4
Tt~E'N.U,"I OFF;~:'
, 17&2 Jene~ .:.....w \,
Sufte 280
New1lOll News. VA 23808
Tile (S04' 873-77S5
FAX lllO&j a~'3
J.A. I(ESSL!:R, JR.. Pre;,den:
D. ~. SOURS, S!r.;or Voce Pre~.::er.'
R.E. LEE. JR., T'l'lIS<.I'e'
Please reply :0;
November 23, 1993
Charl ottesvl1 1 e
Mr. Stirling Williamson
c/o S. L. Williamsen Company, Inc.
1230 R1ver Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: Weathervane Installation
Albemarle County Office Buildirg (Former lane High School)
Charlottesville, VA
S t ) ,...1 i "9 ;
This is a follow up to our several recent conversations and your fax letter
11/22/93. We propose to erect scaffo~ding on the roof around the cupola, then
remove the scaffold at the completion af the weathervane installation. We will
utilize our 40 ton hydraulic crane, set up on the lawn near the southeast corner
of the building, south of the main entry stairs. Safway Steel Products of
Richmond, Virginia, will erect and remove the scaffold which is planned to be in
p1ace for about one week. We will provide barricades, timbers, and a f1agman to
protect the publ ic during the time the crane is in place. The proposal is based
on performing the work during normal weekday work hours. This may impede access
to the drive-in window In the south end of the building. Repairs to the lawn
would be by the County.
It is our understanding that the compa~y that will furnish and install the
(t1?.:tthervane will utilize the scaffOlding, but will not require any material
I\andl ing by the crane, and they will gain access to the scaffold by their own
means.
Based cn this unde~standing, our price proposal to do this work is 56,000.
The cost is broken down as follows:
Scaffold rental, erection, removal.
Crane rental - 28 hours.
Timbers, barricades, trucking, flagman.
Man lift basket renta1.
Subtotal
Less R. E. Lee & Son, Inc. donation.
Tota 1
S 3,135
S 2.200
S 1,000
~ 300
S 6.635
S 635
S 6,000
Let us know if you need additjo~al information or clari~ication.
require appraximatejj three weeks adv3nce notice to schedule this
scaffold work with S~fway.
We will
special
. ' '. ~. s : des.3 . 535
S i~'e 1 Y/(r:- ._____-------
VI.. v~
;... ). I
D. E. .)our:y
.....,.. .
....""'.
R. E. Lee, Jr.
~nst(lJctiO'l and Enlitneertno Mana\JlJmllnt Since i9:39
OaVld P. So nnan
Charlotte ille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
(804) 2965843 FAX (804) 9724060
Charles S Martm
R Ivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jou It
Walter F. Perkins
White H,lll
Forrest R. Ma shall, Jr
Scoltsvi e
Sally H Thomas
SilnllJel Miller
Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC eve/
February 3, 1994
Expenditure approved on February 2, 1994, Weather Vane for County
Office Building on McIntire Road.
the Board's meeting on February 2, 1994, the Board approved an expenditure
an amount up to $6000 for installation of a weather vane atop the County
fice Building on McIntire Road as per the attached bid from R. E. Lee and
n, Inc. Staff recommended, and the Board agreed, that the funds could be
ken from Staff Services Maintenance budget.
E C:len
A tachrnents (4)
c Ai Waugaman
*
Printed on recycled paper
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
D!STRI:tJ7:u T:) :JOAr".D A,SN.l][RS
Oij _4'L~.ili .J:J\}
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
tILl -0 lCIZ 'iJl~
ACTION:
X
INFORMA TION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
A TT ACHMENTS:
yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGR UND:
During the r novation of Lane High School for use as a County Office Building, the original weather vane was taken down from
the cupola a p the building and cannot be located. The Lane Class of 1954 has been raising funds to have a new weather vane
built and ins lled to its original position to restore the structure to its previous stature. The Lane Class of 1954 has secured
donations to mplete the project as well as install lettering for the Lane Auditorium entrance with the exception of $6,000 needed
for the crane necessary to install and remove the scaffolding required to set the weather vane,
DISCUSSI N:
Mr. Stirling illiamson, Jr. will make a brief presentation to the Board to request the County's financial participation in the
project.
RECOMM NDATION:
Staffreco ends that if the Board is interested in participating, the money can be absorbed from the Staff Services Maintenance
Budget.
.~~ Ju.J~l_.rn.
11lc
'~OARD OF <::
S. L. WILLIAMSON COMPANY, INC.
ahad ?5~/JAd 84; .
1230 RIVER ROAD ~
p, 0, BOX 64B
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
22902
AREA ODE 804
OFFICE TELE HONE 295-6137
FAX 7-7852
January 27, 1994
RED HILL PLANT TELEPHONE 293-6834
SHADWELL PLANT TELEPHONE 295-4517
RUCKERSVILLE PLANl TELEPHONE 985-3394
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Al emarle County Executive
40 McIntire Road
Ch rlottesville, VA 22902
De
Bob:
Enclosed is a copy of my letter to Calvin Jones, dated
11/24/93, which explains the weather vane project for the County
Of ice Building and which asks the county to pay for the necessary
sc ffolding and crane rental for the installation, the cost of which
wi I be $6,000.00. A copy of the quotation from R. E. Lee & Son,
In ., dated 11/23/93, is enclosed.
The original estimate for this work was $8,000.00. with the
of er of Stokes of England, who constructed the weather vane at
co t, to hand carry the weather vane (dismantled) to the top of the
Co nty Office Building and install it at no additional cost, the
ne d for a crane during the installation was eliminated. R. E. Lee &
So , Inc. reduced their quotation to $6,635.00 and donated $635.00
of this quote to reduce it to $6,000.00.
As you are aware, this was a project that Darden Towe was
wo ing on before his death, and the Lane Class of 1954, of which
Da den was a member, has taken it on in his memory. Within our class
we ave raised the money to pay for the construction of the weather
va e, which has been completed and which is awaiting installation,
as ell as the money for the "Lane Auditorium" lettering.
The Lane Class of 1954 respectfully requests that the Board of
Su ervisors approve the expenditure of the $6,000.00 to install the
wea her vane.
I look forward to meeting with the Board of Supervisors to
uss this request and understand that the matter will be on the
da for meeting scheduled for February 2, 1994.
do not hesitate to give me a call to discuss this
@
OM:
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Finance
Purchasing Division
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5854
MEMORANDUM
Rick Huff, Deputy County Executive
Calvin S. Jones, Purchasing Agent
TE: December 17, 1993
Weather Vane
Letter dated November 24, 1993
r
Please review the letter from Stirling Williamson and
a vise your thoughts.
C J/bd
A tachment
FAX (804) 972-4006
rn- ....' ~_U_"-._
'1O,,~rr Or
D!='C <:"1') 1('0,}
E ~\ .~: C '-._1 . ~1 f} ?:l~ e'f!
.17H~
.. '.. d...'r
J
S. L. WILLIAMSON COMPANY, INC.
c%ad ~-OAd 84 .
1230 RIVER ROAD ~
p, O. BOX 648
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA
22902
AREA ODE 804
OFFICE TELE HONE 295-6137
FAX 77.7852
November 24, 1993
RED HILL PLANT TELEPHONE 293-6834
SHADWELL PLANT TELEPHONE 295-451 7
RUCKERSVILLE PLANT TELEPHONE 985-3394
The class plans to raise money for this restoration, and I
ve enclosed a draft of a letter which the Lane Class of 1954
union Committee plans to send to all class members in order
begin raising funds to pay for the weather vane and the
" ane Auditorium" lettering. Mr. steve Stokes, of Stokes Of
E gland, has constructed the weather vane, and a copy of his
b'll is enclosed. He has donated all of his labor in this
e deavor and will also donate his labor to install the weather
v ne on the County Office Building. The Class of 1954 plans to
p y him the $500.00 cost of materials and, in addition, plans
t pay the cost of approxim~tely $1,200.00 for the "Lane
A ditorium" lettering.
r. Calvin Jones
lbemarle County Purchasing Dept.
01 McIntire Road
harlottesville, VA 22902
e: Weather Vane - County Office Building
Calvin:
This letter is in reference to the restoration of the
eather vane, which was removed from the top of Lane High
was converted to the Albemarle County Office
ilding. As you are aware, Darden Towe, who was a member of
e Lane High Class of 1954, began this project. His classmates
ve taken on the project in the memory of Darden and other
ceased schoolmates.
The class would like to ask the County of Albemarle to
rticipate in the cost of installation of the weather vane on
e County Office Building. A copy of the $6,000.00 revised
oposal from Mr. Don Sours of R. E. Lee & Son, Inc., dated
/23/93, is enclosed for your information. The original
,000.00 quotation, dated 7/30/93, included crane rental for a
ek while Steve Stokes performed the necessary repairs on the
pola and installed the weather vane. In an effort to reduce
e cost, Mr. Stokes said that he would need scaffolding but
uld hand carry the weather vane, tools and repair materials
d would climb to the site to make the installation. The crane
uld only be needed to install and remove the scaffold.
8
. - '~: 9 - ."' -:; \ - .
J (~
~.
age #2 - Mr. Calvin Jones - 10/24/93
It is my understanding that this project has been approved
y the Board of Supervisors. I would hope that the County would
gree to help with the cost of.the scaffold and crane rental to
estore the weather vane to the top of the County Office
B ilding.
I will look forward to hearing from you and will be happy
discuss the matter further, should you desire.
RE,
ee
HOME OFFICE:
2811 Hydraulic Road
P.O. Box 7226
Charlottesville, VA 22906
TeIe (804) 973-1321
FAX (804) 973-9784
TIDEWATER OFFICE:
11742 Jefferson Avenue
Suite 280
Newport News, VA 23606
Tele (804) 873-nSS
FAX (804) 873-8873
__.....'1e.___..
J.A. KESSLER, JR., President
D.E. SOURS, Senior Vice President
R.E, LEE, JR., Treasurer
Please reply to:
Charlottesville
November 23, 1993
M . Stirling Williamson
c 0 S. L. Williamson Company, Inc.
1 30 River Road
C arlottesville, VA 22902
R: Weathervane Installation
Albemarle County Office Building (Former Lane High School)
Charlottesville, VA
S irl ing:
This is a follow up to our several recent conversations and your fax letter
1 /22/93. We propose to erect scaffolding on the roof around the cupola, then
r move the scaffold at the completion of the weathervane installation. We will
u ilize our 40 ton hydraulic crane, set up on the lawn near the southeast corner
o the building, south of the main entry stairs. Safway Steel Products of
R'chmond, Virginia, will erect and remove the scaffold which is planned to be in
p ace for about one week. We will provide barricades, timbers, and a flagman to
p otect the public during the time the crane is in place. The proposal is based
o performing the work during normal weekday work hours. This may impede access
t the drive-in window on the south end of the building. Repairs to the lawn
w uld be by the County.
It is our understanding that the company that will furnish and install the
w athervane will utilize the scaffolding, but will not require any material
h ndling by the crane, and they will gain access to the scaffold by their own
mans.
Based on this understanding, our price proposal to do this work is $6,000.
The cost is broken down as follows:
Scaffold rental, erection, removal.
Crane rental - 28 hours.
Timbers, barricades, trucking, flagman.
Man lift basket rental.
Subtota 1
Less R. E. Lee & Son, Inc. donation.
Tota 1
$ 3,135
$ 2,200
$ 1. 000
$ 300
$ 6,635
$ 635
$ 6,000
Let us know if you need additional information or clarification. We will
equire approximately three weeks advance notice to schedule this special
scaffold work with Safway.
cks:des3.535
Si~. )relY,
( "
D. E. our
...-----"_.
c: R. E. Lee, Jr.
_ Construction and Eng;neering Manag.m.. ~n" 1009
LANE HIGH SCHOOL
CLASS OF 1954
\.
November 24, 1993
r Classmates,
The 40th Class Reunion of the Lane High School Class of 1954 will
be held the weekend of June 24-26, 1994. The Reunion Committee is
pI nning a celebration that will, involve the entire class. As we
wo ld like to bring everyone together who was a part of our class at
La e during all or a part of the period from 1949 to 1954, please help
us bring our mailing list up to date and send Pat Humphrey (address
be ow) the names and current addresses of your classmates.
We lost one of our most active and beloved classmates, Darden
e, on August 13, 1992. Darden gave so much to others and was
olved in many "special" projects and activities. Several members of
class have discussed doing something special in memory of deceased
ssmates. One of Darden's many requests was to restore the weather
e and have it put back in its proper place, on top of the Albemarle
nty Office Building (Lane High School). Darden had worked with the
emarle County Board of Supervisors on this restoration. When
ished, not only will the weather vane be reset on top of our alma
er, but "Lane Auditorium" in brass lettering will also be placed
ov r the auditorium entrance. The reunion committee would like to see
th's project carried out.
In looking into the project, we have found that the cost would be
ween $6,000 and $7,000. The committee thought this was quite high
has been looking for ways to cut the cost, which is mainly caused
the installation expense. Because of the height of the building, a
ge crane will have to be rented and special scaffolding will be
uired. The weather vane itself has been reconstructed, at a cost of
0, and is ready to be erected. The estimated cost of the "Lane
itorium" lettering is approximately $1,200.
The committee would like to raise the cost of the weather vane
the lettering, a total of about $1,700, within our class. In order
aise the remaining necessary funds and because Darden touched the
s of so many who have attended Lane High School, the committee
ask the County of Albemarle to contribute to the installation
and is considering opening up the project to all Lane alumni and
community. If you would like to join in this endeavor, please send
donation to Pat Humphrey, 415 Arbor Circle, Charlottesville, VA
2. Make the check payable to "Class of 1954, Weather Vane".
Mark your calendar for the reunion on June 24-26, 1994, and plan
to e there. We will be sending you more information after the first
of he year.
y,
~ -.
Comm1ttee
/
I
\
Name i.AN~ Nf6-H S'cr~QL
- '-I
U A~S 0 0C1-
Address "7
Phone
,V Q u. I C( I;t.. I ~ r :3
Date
!BD:t 73 ~2..t:'fJ Zan .~i
~ 'lit( 12347
Items. ?rdered, ProdUC~ Delivered . .\
Descnption:{Y'LtLtr..aJo ~~ L~u~
rv-~~ \.J~-ll~ foOO .00.
Notes: Q c;.MC JV1fjt~ C~CK 'To f}-/i;f)[)f~E2
'"';~-.:r J<,)(.::; r I I
~ (1/(' ~ f ---....-, ~
" (01;rjf/l,~. ',,-' ~/J J-j/U:'/~"
,
ON
_.~--
,!~ mJ~v.H W r~
1 ""-"""",,"..,..~ ..... a_-:;
WALTER J. KU HARSKI
AUDITOR
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Auditor of Public Accounts
~ ''''~'' ;;~T"OF-'FICE'B6xi'~915
RICHMOND, VIRGINtA 23210
(804) 225-3350
January 12, 1994
Bard of Supervisors
C unty of Albemarle
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, Virginia 22902
Our records show that we have not received the audited transmittal forms of the County of
A bemarle for the year ended June 30, 1993. Weare requesting that you send your transmittal forms
to our Office no later than February 1, 1994.
Section 15.1-166, Code of Virg:inia requires that this Office receive transmittal forms for the
c mparative report of local government revenues and expenditures accompanied by the audited
fi ancial report no later than November 30. Our office is not authorized to grant extensions from this
st tutory deadline. We must insist that you attend to this matter immediately so your locality may be
in luded in the comparative report of local government revenues and expenditures for the year ended
J e 30, 1993.
In the comparative report of local government revenues and expenditures for the fiscal year
e ded June 30, 1993, we will indicate that your transmittals were not submitted on time. The
c mparative report will also note that this is the fourth time over the past six years that you have not
m t the deadline.
Questions related to the transmittal forms and financial statements should be addressed to
illiam V. Sutton, Quality Control Manager at (804) 225-3350. Your cooperation is appreciated.
S incerel y ,
cc' Mr. Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance
Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates
Certified Public Accountant
,. .
..
.'
Distributed to Board: QI-21:3'i
Agenda Item No, q~ ,02Q1~:!it1
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE r
Department of Finance
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596
Telephone (804) 296-5855
MEMORANDUM
Audit Committee - Ed Bain
Walter Perkins
Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance~
January 3, 1994
FY 92/93 Annual Audit
Enclosed for your review is the annual audit for fiscal year
1 92/93 and the auditor's management letter. As in prior years,
t is audit conforms with generally accepted accounting principles
( AAP) except for the omission of the general fixed asset account
g oup. There are no significant differences in fund balances,
re enues or expenditures from those previously reported to you by
this office, therefore, my comments will be directed primarily to
th management letter.
ounting System/Controls
This comment, as in previous years, results from maintaining
ce tain activities as separate funds which then must be combined
fo reporting purposes in accordance with GAAP. Examples of this
ar the Textbook Rental Fund and the various School Federal
Pr grams ~hich must be merged with the School Fund. The curren~
au omated accounting system is not structured in such a fashion
th t these funds can be automatically merged for reporting. All of
th se specific activities could be combined into the primary fund,
ho ever, this office is of the opinion that separation of these
ac ivities provide 3ubsta~~ial:y ~cre control of daily 3c=ivi~ies
which offset the difficulties incurred at year-end for repor~ing.
The cost to modify the current system or to replace the entire
sys em cannot be justified at this time. This comment should be
kep in mind when comparing the audit amounts to the monthly
rep rts prepared by this office.
-~ ''1
r .
Current staffing levels make it diff icul t to complete all
sks on a timely basis. This office is discussing, with the bank,
agreement where they would perform the majority of the work
vol ved in reconciliations. .;::!.. :n'.'es-:::::ent:. ac-:: i vi:: .:.es ~: ~he
M Intire Trust Fund are perfor~ed by t:.he state Treasurer's Office.
The adjustments referred to resulted from the year-end activity
re orted to this office by the state.
ear-End Adjustments/Reclassifications
emo To: Audit Committee
4, 1994
Accounts receivables, other than taxes, are currently
aintained on a micro-computer independent of the accounting
ystem. Requests for a mainframe accounts receivable system and
mprovements to the Business and Professional Licenses system are
urrently on Information Services' "to do" list. Whether these
equests can be accomplished during the current fiscal year with
xisting staff is questionable. We are in agreement that this
ould reduce the need for certain year-end adjustments.
ederal Grant Revenue - General Government
Due to the complex reporting and reimbursement requirements of
e Equitable Share AGR (Drug Revenues), currently operated jointly
the County, City, and University of Virginia; and the United Way
ild Care Program, operated jointly by the County, City and United
y, the administration and overseeing of these programs have been
legated to the respective departments. The documentation
ferred to was on-hand and available in those areas. Maintaining
ese acti vi ties as separate operating funds does require the
versal of certain revenues and expenditures to eliminate the
plication of County contributions.
eral Fixed Assets
The County has recently entered into an agreement to inventory
record all fixed assets. Current plans are to begin the
entory process in January 1994 with the project to be completed
June 1994.
These recommendations are currently being revie'.ved by ':his
ice.
Current plans are to sUb:ni t the audit to the Board at a
meeting in late January 1994. ?lease advise if you would like to
, .
lemo To: Audit Committee
\ anuary 4, 1994
] age 3
neet to discuss any of the items prior to submission to the entire
Eoard.
l"~B/bs
cc: Richard E. Huff, II
Ed Koonce
Robert Walters
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
Fixed Assets Account Group
Implemantation SchcduJe
Tne following outlines the required task and estimated targart dates for the creation of the
gf neral fixed asset account group to be included as part of the County of Albemarle, Virginia
C llmprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1994.
Target
Completion
Date
Selection of Fixed Asset Accounting Software - We will
assist the County in the selection of appropriate fixed
asset accounting software. A variety of "canned" fixed
asset software programs are available for consideration.
February 18, 1994
Preparation of Fixed Asset Accounting Manual - We will
assist the County in the preparation of detailed fixed asset
accounting manual. Specifically, this manual will include
capitalization policies and thresholds, forms and reports to
be used in the fixed asset accounting process.
March 11, 1994
Collection of Fixed Asset Data - We will assist the County
in organizing the collection of the fixed asset data. We
will coordinate our effort through the Director of Finance,
Accounting, Purchasing, School Board personnel and
other departments as necessary. We will meet with
various departme:lt heads, as !"eque~!_ :. ~3 re\1ew the
actual data accumulation process. We.io not anticipate
physically assisting in the inventory process.
April 8, 1994
Selected Asset Valuation - We will assist the County as
requested in valuing certain assets, mostly real propeny, at
their hi.:;torical cost when actual historical cost is not
readily available. This valuation will be performed using
old audit reports and accounting records, construction
indices and other formulas designed to reflect historical
cost.
April 22. 199.f
Accounting: Entries - We will provide assistance to County
personnel in preparing necessary entries co record fixed
assets in the accounting records.
April 29, 1994
] an ual!y 1~. 199.f
I .
ROBINSON~ FARMER~ Cox .AsSOCIATES
..I. F ROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
CEIlTIFIED PCBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
DA IT: October 1, 1993
MEMORAJ.~DUM TO:
County of Albemarle
FROM:
Robinson, Far~ Cox Associates .
/fb~~(~~
FY 92-93 Audit
REGARDING:
In lanning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the County of Albemarle for the year
end~d June 30, 1993, we considered the County's internal control structure to plan our auditing
pro edures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to provide
ass rance on the internal control structure.
HO\ 'ever, during our audit, we noted certain matters involving the internal control structure and other
ope ational matters that are presented for your consideration. This letter does not affect our report dated
October 1, 1993, on the financial statements of the County of Albemarle. Our comments and
reccmmendations, are intended to improve the internal control structure or result in other operating
effic'encies. We will be pleased to discuss these comments in further derail at your convenience, to
perfprm any additional study of these maners, or to assist you in implementing the recommendations and
reql est you reply to corrective action initiated.
Accc untinl! Svstem/Controls:
T~e accounting system, as implemented, is designed to provide internal controls over financial
mpnagemem information. In particular instances the separation of this financial information within
th~ accounting system does not readily complement financial reponing.
D(Iring the preparation of both financial statements and the annual school report individual funds must
be consolidated and reponed in the school fund. This consolidation involves not only actual revenues
ar d expenditures of twenty various school funds, but also the original budget as adopted for each fund.
W~ recommend that these various funds be consolidated.
Si !nilar circumstances exist with funds maintained as part of the Federal and State Grant Fund.
Al hough such funds may be maintained internally for management control purposes, the individual
fu ds should b~ merged with the appropriate fund type for financial reponing purposes.
Thl> capability of the present accounting system appears to limit the ability to summarize and report
fin~ncial information at levels commensurate with the financial reponing requirements under the
Ur iform Financial Reoonine: Manual. Presently, preparation of the financial information for both
tIn ncial and comparative cost reponing is independent of the accounting system.
Th ability to generate the appropriate financial and comparative cost report should be an extension of
the present tinancial management information system and not as a direct effon requiring an additional
ver fication and reconciliation process.
FUJ ther, internal control procedures should be implemented to ensure consistent recording or all
int( rfund transactions. Such interfund transactions should be reconciled on a periodic basis.
Page 2
Year-end Financial Statements AdiustmentsIReclassification:
Rec eivables:
Recjeivables consisting of local, state and federal for all non-billed items should be consolidated due to the
req ired number of reclassification entries. Consolidation of these three accounts should aid in the
mo itoring of receivables at year-end, ideally to the specific revenue line item. For example, year-end
adjl stments were required for state sales tax. which is a School Fund revenue, recorded in the General Fund.
Adc quate monitoring of year-end receivables would aid in a more accurate reflection of actual receivables
and proper fund identification. Further general ledger controls should be maintained to document all
reet ivable by fund, reconciled to subsidiary ledger.
Pro edures should be implemented within the accounting system to control various local tax revenue
acc( unts. This procedure would permit the control over uncollected billed revenues such as business and
pro essional licenses. Also, any collected and unremitted revenue could be identified in a timely manner.
Rec assifications/Adjustments:
F evenue and exnenditure reclassifications/adiustments:
\Ve recommend that all audit adjustments and reclassifications be recorded within the accounting system
t ~ reflect revenue and expenditures as reported in year-end financial statements. Entries are made to
p~blic assistance and welfare administration expenditures and revenues which are not from outside
s purces. These items must be reversed for financial statement presentation. Also entries must be made to
r cord property tax relief for the elderly and to adjust revenue refunds to the proper revenue source line.
I ternal financial statements were adjusted by more than S6OO,ooo in order to conform to the reporting
r quirements promulgated by the Auditor of Public Accounts.
S ate and Federal Revenue Reclassifications:
} uditing standards require the identification of and segregation of various federal and state revenue
s urces. Internal accounting procedures do not adequately identify flow through federal revenue received
f] om the state. The following reclassifications were necessary in preparation of financial statements:
Public assistance and welfare administration
Special Education
Drug Education
Adult Literacy
Va. Commission of the Arts
Chapter Two
S 1,209,388
85.466
86,569
56,737
2.850
32,720
We ecommend procedures be implemented to adequately identify and classify all federal revenues within the
accounting syste,:1.
Federa Grant Revenue General Government:
We ecommend all general government federal revenues be under the control of one central designated
offic a1. Drug Fund revenues and the United Way Day Care grant revenues are outside the control of the
offic al who oversees most other general government grant revenues.
Gen ral requirements require federal revenues to contain adequate supporting documentation.
Doc mentation was not on file to support revenue recorded as Equitable Share AGR police on October 30th
or D~cember 28th. General requirements also require approval by appropriate supervisory personnel.
Page 3
Federa Grant Revenue General Government: (Continued)
Doc mentation to support this revenue source is maintained by an individual within the police department
thus approval of the recording of the amount as federal revenue is not apparent.
Uni ed Way grant revenues and expenditures totaling $139,324.97 had to be reversed. Receivables and
pay bles also had to be adjusted. It is essential that all general government federal grants activity be
app oved by appropriate supervisory personnel.
Cash:
I bank accounts maintained by the County should be reconciled by accounting in a timely manner.
S veral bank accounts are reconciled by individuals outside the accounting department; however, no
p ocedures exist to verify that these bank accounts reconcile to the accounting system general ledger.
ansactions of all investments should be recorded in the accounting system and reconciled to the trustee
s atements on a monthly basis. The McIntire Trust investments required adjustments at June 30, 1993.
Gener I Fixed Assets:
rowth within Albemarle County in the next few years may require the issuance of additional
i debtedness to finance needed capital projects. Bond rating agencies look favorably upon local
g vernments who prepare a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report in accordance with standards set by
t e Government Finance Officers's Association. The major obstacle to the County's issuing such a report
is having a record of its general fixed assets recorded in this audit report. We recommend the County
d velop a timetable for the recording of its general fixed assets and the preparation of a Comprehensive
nual Financial Report.
Other:
e recommend the County and Schools purchasing fOUcy be revised for consistency for all County
p rchases. For example, the County policy requires no written quotes while school policy requir~.
q otations for purchases between $500 and up to S5,CXX>. Also, we recommend that food purchases be
i orporated in the procurement process.
e accounting department should maintain records to reflect current fIXed asset additions and deletions
those entities which maintain fIXed asset records.
- J b responsibilities/descriptions should be documented to support various personnel functions within the
a counting and finance departments. Consideration should be given to cross-training personnel for
e sured operational support. Further, an accounting policy and procedures manual should be developed
d fining all accounting functions within the accounting system.
Issues:
Emer i
Subs quent to fiscal year end several Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements have
been issued. In addition to existing Statements, these Statements will effect both application of generally
acce ted accounting principles and financial statement presentation.
~'~''-__._' ._...._, __, ....._ ~ -_~, IJ",,:,~~r:-r::,,~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
.'.1 /y- (/)"'-,
. f - ':r''' -' - ,
" .J.,..:...W-.-,.,.--.
f- ~._~"~......_---~'"'''''''''''''-
j '.Y'\ fi; r.)
. "11 .~ IJj !
l i, r-.'-~'"'-''' '.
,1 i '
il! 4(
; l J",
',,': ~".I"
..,...~....-.......-..
'to
"
...~_.,..., '~"'-,.;-:-~
I \ i
) ; I
." ,I,
"..1 '.
" 1 ~
"j
,,'';''./
of MPO Grant
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
'. BOARD 0&:8ltmm&BlNORS
1.-.
q~ 'C2.~,2 .Dl (
INFORMATION:
ACTION: X
Program
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: X
STAFF C
Messrs.
:
Huff, Breeden, & Cilimberg
REVIEWED BY:
BACK ROUND:
The 1993/94 Unified Planning Work Program was prepared by the Thomas Jefferson Planning
Dist ict Commission for the Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization.
The rogram includes the Charlottesville-Albemarle Transportation Study, the Long Range
Tran it Development Plan, the South City Entrance Corridor Study, the Transportation
Plan ing Data Development and Analysis, the TSM Planning Analysis, Public-Private
Participation planning, and the Traffic Reduction Strategy Committee. The total program
is funded by the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transportation
Admi istration, the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Virginia Department of Rail
and Public Transportation, the City of Charlottesville, the County of Albemarle, the
Thom s Jefferson Planning District, and JAUNT.
SSION:
ork to be performed by the County of Albemarle will be funded by a $58,360 Federal
, a $7,295 State Grant, and $7,295 in required matching funds transferred from the
al Fund.
NDATION:
val of appropriation as detailed on form #930050.
9300 0
94.0 8
..----s_'. -~;';'l--'.~
.
,..:r",~'.:J\"~'
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISr.AL YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930050
TYP~ OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVIRTISEMENT REQUIRED?
YES
NO
x
FUND
MPO GRANT
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 90/94 OPERATING BUDGET
~XPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
****~*******************************************************************
1120 B81301110000 SALARIES-REGULAR $3,900.00
1120 B813 01601700 COpy SUPPLIES 100.00
1120 81302110000 SALARIES-REGULAR 15,940.00
1120 81302550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE 410.00
1120181303310000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 30,000.00
1120181304310000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,600.00
1120~ 81306110000 SALARIES-REGULAR 2,100.00
1120~ 81306550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE 150.00
112 O~ 81306601700 COpy SUPPLIES 750.00
1120881307110000 SALARIES-REGULAR 9,900.00
1120881307113000 SALARIES-PARTTIME 5,900.00
1120881307601700 COpy SUPPLIES 200.00
TOTAL
$72,950.00
21208 4000240500
21208 3000330001
21208' 1000512004
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***** ******************************************************************
GRANT REVENUE-STATE
GRANT REVENUE-FEDERAL
TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND
$7,295.00
58,360.00
7,295.00
TOTAL
$72,950.00
************************************************************************
REQUES~ING COST CENTER:
APPROV~LS:
DIRECTPR OF FINANCE
PLANNING
SIGNATURE
n 71 'T'17
BOARD (DF SUPERVISORS
~L /? Ai?q4..-
/// ;/. /~ / /.. ,
I /. / .fA./I./ i to'ic: ~)
Go- /
/1
l/
/ - .:2. y- .- 9- y..
,j
.rC: /
/ "
ALBEMARLE COUN1Y PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Memorandum
D TE: January 12, 1994
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Robert W. Paskel, Division superintenden~~
Request for Appropriation
At its meeting on January 10, 1994, the School Board approved the
following:
. Appropriation of the Title II Dwight D. Eisenhower Grant. This
entitlement grant provides financial assistance to strengthen
the skills of teachers and the quality of instruction in
mathematics and science in public and private elementary and
secondary schools. Albemarle County Schools will use the funding
to provide the training for math and science teachers K-12 in the
V-Quest lead teacher component. This will provide teachers the
training to (1) provide inservice training to other teachers;
(2) develop methods to attract and retain the under represented;
(3) manage mathematics and science resources within their schools;
(4) organize mathematics and science activities within their
schools; and (5) achieve V-Quest goals within their own classrooms.
. Appropriation of the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act Grant.
Albemarle County has participated in the Drug-Free Schools and
Communities Act for the past eight years. The purpose of the
grant has been to establish, enhance, and increase programs of
illicit alcohol and other drug use education and prevention
(coordinated with related community efforts and resources) in
order to achieve drug-free schools and communities. Over the
years, this grant has enabled us to pursue the following programs:
the DARE Program, prevention counseling (in coordination with
Region Ten Community Services Board), Peer Mediation Programs,
Charlottesville/Albemarle County CADRE activities, staff development
activities, and activities for our youth such as PULSAR, YADAPP, and
Youth Leadership Conferences. Funding will enable Albemarle county
Schools ,to continue to provide these services.
It is requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the appropriation
dinance to receive and disburse these funds as displayed on the attachment:
/smm
xc: Melvin Breeden
Ed Koonce
Ella Carey
.
'-.
Revenue
2-3107-24000-240233
E~n9nditures
1-3107-61101-312500
1-3107-61101-312700
1-3107-61101-601300
1-3107-61101-580000
]-3107-61311-550400
]-3107-61311-580000
-3107-61311-580500
];evenue
2-3203-33000-330200
l!xn9nditures
-3203-61311-152100
-3203-61311-210000
-3203-61311-520100
-3203-61311-580500
-3203-61311-601300
-3203-61311-601700
Albemarle County Public Schools
Drug Free Schools Communities Act Grant
FY 1993-94 Appropriations Request
Drug Free Schools
$64,719.00
Professional Services Instructional
1,000.00
49,250.00
500.00
Professional Services Consultants
Instructional Materials
Miscellaneous
6,000.00
Travel - Education
919.00
Miscellaneous
4,550.00
2,500.00
Staff Development Expenses
$64,719.00
Title II Eisenhower Grant
FY 1993-94 Appropriation Request
Title II Eisenhower
$ 27,225.00
Sub. Wages
5,310.00
FICA
406.22
Postage
133.78
Staff Development
18,350.00
Materials'
2,800.00
Copying
225.00
$27,225.00
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
0,: ..CL:_~_22.'
-\. .'.' .., .......
TLE: Appropriation - FY 93/94
Budget for Drug Free Schools Grant
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
q/ I I'? ...7 \12
., , vl..1j<--. . (, '.
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Drug Fre
Act Grant
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: X
SSION:
arle County has participated in the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act for the
eight years. The purpose of the grant has been to establish, enhance, and increase
ams of illicit alcohol and other drug use education and prevention (coordinated with
ed community efforts and resources) in order to achieve drug-free schools and
comm nities. Over the years, this grant has enabled us to pursue the following programs:
the DARE Program, prevention counseling (in coordination with Region Ten Community
Serv ces BOard), Peer Mediation Programs, Charlottesville/Albemarle County CADRE
acti ities, staff development activities, and activities for our youth such as PULSAR,
YADA P, and Youth Leadership Conferences. Funding will enable Albemarle County Schools
to c ntinue to provide these services.
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Huff, Paskel, & Breeden
ROUND:
chool Board approved this program on January 10, 1994 and requested the Board of
visors to approve the appropriation.
ATION:
recommends approval of the appropriations as detailed on attached form #930051.
9300 1
94.0 9
'!~f1Ll.UUl
If'i 2'
I: I
,JL,
j
i I
I, -0Ill~_--",..4
; ::;OARD OF SUPER\./l " C". ':'
',,'"'''''''"_ . ...._... lVtt".) il:
_no.....~."''''.:,,,.
_/"'
...
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
TYP OF APPROPRIATION
FIS 93/94
930051
NUMBER
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADV RTISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
DRUG EDUC. GRANT
PUR OSE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 93/94 OPERATING BUDGET FOR DRUG FREE SCHOOLS GRANT
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
61101312500
61101312700
61101601300
61101580000
61311550400
61311580000
61311580500
PROF. SERVICES INSTRUCTIONAL
PROF. SERVICES CONSULTANTS
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
MISCELLANEOUS
TRAVEL-EDUCATION
MISCELLANEOUS
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
$1,000.00
49,250.00
500.00
6,000.00
919.00
4,550.00
2,500.00
TOTAL
$64,719.00
2310 24000240233
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
**** *******************************************************************
DRUG FREE SCHOOLS
$64,719.00
TOTAL
$64,719.00
**** *******************************************************************
REQU
COST CENTER:
"" T""'lT'"'lT"'l
DIRE OF FINANCE
OF SUPERVISORS
EDUCATION
,..........."....,.,."Il,I"T"....._~
-.....I ....... ..... .i.', ,t-4.... ..... _ '"....~
-./...'....~
$~~~
C.~/I' /, ..(1/' ,..
,/ f [I ( J / _ fA...-zei )
f' / J
j /
(/
/- z-y- 9 //
")..) - c:J I
,"< 'x / L
. .
i. . < '\.
__.,._.._,.__ .___....... """'_. __,~. ..~_ ~. ....~.,r:lt)~
:..
:, (~\- ')<;. _qu
." . H .. ,-~ -.. --~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
. ,-"".,,,~.-,-,,,,..,----..,
~
~.'--'.'f~~'" :1
i
,-'
,.
~3
,
...-..''''."..........,--'''''.-...,--.-..__.""..J
ion - FY 93/94 operating Budget for
isenhower Grant
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ACTION: X
ITE
{ILl {;ZLZ- .()13
INFORMATION:
Grant
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
X
~
---
STAFF CO
Messrs. T
BACKG OUND:
The chool Board approved this program on January 10, 1994 and requested the Board of
Super isors to approve the appropriation.
REVIEWED BY:
Huff, Paskel, & Breeden
DISCU SION:
This ntitlement grant provides financial assistance to strengthen the skills of teachers
and t e quality of instruction in mathematics and science in public and private elementary
and econdary schools. Albemarle County Schools will use the funding to provide the
training for math and science teachers K-12 in the V-Quest lead teacher component. This
will rovide teachers the training to (1) provide in-service training to other teachers;
(2) d velop methods to attract and retain the under represented; (3) manage mathematics
and cience resources within their schools; (4) organize mathematics and science
activities within their schools; and (5) achieve V-Quest goals within their own classroom.
approval of the appropriations as detailed on attached form #930052.
RECO
Staff
93005
94.01
...
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISI"'AL YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930052
TYP~ OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADV RTISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUNI
EISENHOWER GRANT
PUR10SE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY c3/94 OPERATING BUDGET FOR TITLE II EISENHOWER GRANT
EXPENDITURE
COS" CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***.********************************************************************
132C361311152100 SUBSTITUTE WAGES $5,310.00
132(361311210000 FICA 406.22
132(361311520100 POSTAGE 133.78
132C361311580500 STAFF DEVELOPMENT 18,350.00
132(3613l160l300 MATERIALS 2,800.00
1320361311601700 COPYING 225.00
TOTAL
$27,225.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
****~*******************************************************************
2320~33000330200 TITLE II EISENHOWER GRANT $27,225.00
TOTAL
$27,225.00
**** *******************************************************************
REQU~STING COST CENTER:
EDUCATION
APPReVALS:
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
BOAR[ OF SUPERVISORS
SIGNATURE
DATE
~~#~/2/J~~
<.-., " -; ,?, :' ,i ,I "
illY/' /1/ " '/,., .
~ ,~,\ , / ~ ./ \ (.c '._ (. ~ '
v /
/-..a~-/~
," ,.) 0/
;..->4/ . (x. - I '-
MOTION: Mrs. Humphris
SECOND: Mr. Martin
MEETING DATE: February 2, 1994
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has
convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an
affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provi-
sions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, section 2.1-344.1
requires a certification by the
Supervisors that such executive
conformity with Virginia law;
of the Code of Virginia
Albemarle County Board of
meeting was conducted in
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors hereby certif ies that, to the best of
each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters
lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia
law were discussed in the executive meeting to which this
certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public
business matters as were identified in the motion convening
the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by
the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
VOTE:
AYES: Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins, Mrs.
Thomas and Mr. Bowerman.
NAYS: None.
[For each nay vote, the substance of the departure from the
requirements of the Act should be described.]
ABSENT DURING VOTE: None.
ABSENT DURING MEETING: None.
County
,~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
f""\~r'Tr:"'I<-'! :T~::':, T) ;~:',j\.. .::'
",.",," ~,- . - ~ .') UL i
0,,' C \ - ~O~~:-_:L--..
,-0. _,....~_,._..~.;.'- ;.
~':.>
AGENDA T TLE:
Section Advisory Committee Report -
Imp1emen ation Plan
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
q ;3 '12..0f . OCclLJ
ACTION:
x
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Plan for
by
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Ralston
REVIEWED BY:
In Marc
Assista
by area
and pre
number
1993, the Board of Supervisors appointed a committee to study the Section 8 Rental
ce Program and to develop recommendations for improving utilization of the program
property owners. The Section 8 Advisory Committee conducted its work during 1993
ented a report to the Board of Supervisors in December. The report contained a
f recommendations with associated costs.
recommendation of the staff, the Board referred the report back to staff for
ent of a detailed implementation plan setting forth staffing and additional cost
s.
mmendations contained in the original report have been reorganized and grouped into
eral categories: Landlord Outreach and Marketing; Programmatic Issues; Tenant-based
ce; and Affordable Rental Housing Development. Following each recommendation are the
actions required for implementation and the associated cost.
Staff
begin
commends that the Board approve the implementation plan and direct staff to
e activities outlined in the plan.
,~
SECTION 8 RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
A Strategy for Improving Program
Operation and Usage
TRODUCTION
bemarle County has operated the federally-funded Section 8
ntal Assistance Program since 1976. The Section 8 program
ovides a rental subsidy for income-qualified County citizens
ich ensures that no more than 30% of a family'S income is used
r housing. The Housing Office, located in the Department of
cial Services, administers the program, overseeing the rental of
6 units of housing.
T e Section 8 Program allows a family to select their own housing
w'thin certain guidelines. The actual rental assistance subsidy is
p id directly to the owner of the housing unit selected by the
f mily. The Housing Office advertises the program to prospective
t nants and then ensures that the family meets the program
g idelines. The Housing Office also conducts periodic inspections
o the rental units. It is the responsibility of the family to
1 cate a suitable apartment.
r various reasons, participation in the Section 8 Program by
ntal property owners is not as great as it could be. This has
suIted in a limited number of units available to Section 8
nants, sometimes creating a delay of several months before the
mily finds a landlord willing to accept the Section 8 subsidy.
bemarle County established a task force to examine this issue and
develop recommendations for improving the Section 8 Program by
creasing the number of participating property owners and by
oviding better service to landlords already in the program. This
sk force presented its report and recommendations to the Board
Supervisors in December 1993. Staff was instructed to develop
implementation strategy for the Board's consideration.
e recommendations contained in the original report have been
organized and grouped into four general categories: Landlord
treach and Marketing; Programmatic Issues; Tenant-based
sistance; and Affordable Rental Housing Development. Following
ch recommendation are the specific actions required to implement
e recommendation and the estimated costs.
1
. ..
NDLORD OUTREACH/MARKETING
th landlords and Section 8 tenants indicated that a lack of
ailable information has resulted in misconceptions about the
ogram and subsequent landlord unwillingness to participate. It
recommended that an active marketing campaign be initiated with
e goal of increasing landlord awareness of the benefits of
ction 8 and landlord acceptance of Section 8 tenants.
and maintain data base of existin
8 Landlords
otential
tain list of existing participating landlords from the Virginia
using and Development Authority (VHDA).
rk with the Blue Ridge Apartment Council, the Charlottesville/
bemarle Association of REALTORS and the University of Virginia
using Office to identify landlords interested in learning about
e Section 8 Program.
I entify any participating landlords willing to promote the program
w'th other landlords.
Staff:
Housing Coordinator with the assistance of the
Housing Office
Absorbed in Housing Coordinator budget
Cost:
Informational Brochure
D text and camera-ready copy for reproduction. Identify a
s or grant to pay for the cost of reproduction.
Staff:
Cost:
Housing Coordinator
$3,000 reproduction - grant or sponsor funded
D
Newsletter
D velop a newsletter or fact sheet for distribution to landlords.
T is will occur on a periodic basis, as needed to keep landlords
i formed of pertinent program and policy changes. This information
w 11 also be provided to related professional associations for
d stribution to their membership.
Staff:
Cost:
Housing Coordinator
$500 postage and reproduction Housing
Coordinator budget
2
,~
nual Surve of partici
Landlords
velop a survey to be administered annually to participating
ndlords. Information will be obtained regarding level of
tisfaction with the program and suggestions for improvements.
DA has agreed to mail the survey with a regular monthly mailing
rental payments to the landlords.
staff:
The Housing Coordinator and
will develop the survey and
Housing Office will provide
distribution.
Negligible development and
Housing Office budget
the Housing Office
review results. The
to VHDA annually for
Cost:
reproduction cost
nduct Annual Seminar on the Section 8 Pro ram Fair Housin the
erican with Disabilities Act and Landlord-Tenant law.
with related professional associations and the Central
V'rginia Fair Housing Board to conduct an annual educational
s minar for rental housing providers. The Housing Coordinator
w'll seek grant funding available through HUD to support ongoing
1 ndlord education and seminars.
Staff:
Cost:
Housing Coordinator
A fee will be charged to cover seminar costs
sure Landlord Re resentation on the Albemarle Housin Committee
ring the selection of members of the Housing Committee,
nsideration should be given to selecting representatives from
ong rental housing providers.
P ovide Briefin s on the Section 8 Pro ram to Pros ective Landlords
B iefings and information will be provided to prospective landlords
o the Section 8 Program. Information will be mailed and/or staff
w 11 make presentations on-site, as requested.
Staff:
Cost:
The Housing Coordinator will conduct the briefings
Negligible mileage and postage Housing Coordinator
budget
3
. .
OGRAMMATIC ISSUES
th state and federal legislation and policies regularly create
anges to the Section 8 program as well as related rental housing
ograms. It is important that these changes be monitored closely
determine their impact on the County with regard to the Section
Program budget, administration, landlord responsibility and
nant management.
e Housing Coordinator has the ongoing responsibility of
nitoring state and federal legislation and developing
commendations for the County's position on any new initiatives or
anges in housing programs. The Section 8 Program will be a major
cus of attention. Position papers, oral presentations and
tters will prepared as needed on such issues as obtaining
ditional vouchers and increasing the Fair Market Rent for the
gion.
needed, information will be disseminated to participating
ndlords through a fact sheet or letter discussed above.
Staff:
Housing Coordinator with assistance from
the Housing Office.
$430 - Purchase of Federal Reqister requested
in the FY95 Housing Office budget
Cost:
Negligible postage and reproduction Housing
Coordinator budget
NANT-BASED ASSISTANCE
other major issue raised by the committee was the perception of
ction 8 clients as undesirable tenants. Many landlords are
willing to accept Section 8 tenants because of a bad experience
the bad experience of a fellow landlord with such a tenant.
e various recommendations developed to address this issue focused
providing support and training to the tenants in such areas as
usehold maintenance, budgeting, parenting skills and job
adiness. These services would have the double benef it of
creasing the tenant's desirability from the point of view of the
ndlord and, importantly, providing the tenant with new skills and
ucation.
F
Self-Sufficienc
e primary vehicle for implementing tenant assistance programs
11 be through the Family Self-Sufficiency Program (FSS).
e FSS requires that tenants receiving Section 8 rental assistance
so participate in a full range of services designed to enable the
mily to be independent of welfare assistance wi thin 5 years.
4
, I
rticipation in this program is a prerequisite for receiving
ditional section 8 certificates and vouchers. The County has
ceived 34 units of FSS housing and is now developing a
mprehensive program of supportive services for the 34 families
o will participate . Ultimately, all Section 8 families will
ter the FSS.
e Department of Social Services is working closely with the
H using Coordinator to develop the program and locate funding and
w'll manage the program once it is operational. HUD provides the
h using assistance but there is currently no additional federal
m ney for case management or the other services needed by the
t nants. To the extent possible, services will be obtained through
e isting service networks and grant opportunities, but the
e perience of FSS managers in other localities has been that
a ditional case management staff are critical for success.
Staff: The Department of Social services is the lead
department with support from the Housing
Coordinator
Cost: $108, 655 - Requested in the FY95 Department of
Social Services proposed budget.
ntal Housin Director
shorter-term activity will be the development of a list of
rticipating landlords for distribution to Section 8 recipients
eking housing. Landlords will be listed only by permission.
Staff:
Cost:
Housing Office
Negligible maintenance and reproduction cost
Housing Office budget
T ainin Classes Volunteer-Mentor Pro ram
I entify existing resources available for educating tenants about
b dgeting, housekeeping and other life skills. Identify funding
s urces for operation of a program which would use volunteers for
s me case management and as mentors to Section 8 tenants. Both of
t ese activities would fit within the Family Self-Sufficiency
P ogram.
Staff:
Cost:
Housing Coordinator
Absorbed in Housing Coordinator budget
5
. .. . .
. I
AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
T~e committee recommended several initiatives for expanding the
sj,lpply of affordable rental housing such as rehabilitation of
eildsting units, new construction and increasing the number of
s~ction 8 vouchers and certificates. Included for further
r~search are topics such as inclusionary zoning and identifying
pj,lblic land that might be available for housing. These issues are
clearly beyond the scope of the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program
a~d it is recommended that they be reviewed in the context of the
Cpmprehensive Plan update.
Staff:
Cost:
Housing Coordinator, Planning Department
Absorbed in Housing Coordinator budget
6
. >
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Ll,2:.\
{x>-
---:-----
Committee Report
AGENDA DATE:
December 1, 1993
ITEM NUMBER:
c:A;:;, I'"~ i' ~
f, ~--\. 'v, \':' '
" :&
INFORMATfO'W:~
ACTION:
SUBJECT
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Ralston, Carruth
BACKGRO
At the of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission discussed ways of
impleme ing the Housing Advisory Committee report, "A Housing Strategy for Albemarle
County." At its December 22, 1992 meeting, the Commission passed a recommendation asking the
Board to establish a Section 8 Advisory Committee. The Commission asked that this Committee
provide specific recommendations for actions to improve the utilization of the Section 8
program and particularly to make the Section 8 Certificate program more attractive to area
landlor s.
In March 1993, the Board appointed five individuals representing property owners, VHDA, the
Housing Advisory Board and a representative from the financial field to this Committee.
Additio ally staff from the Department of Social Services and the Housing Office were asked
to facilitate this Committee. The Committee was to perform its charge in approximately six
months.
DISCUSSION:
The Co ittee met eight times. During this time, the Committee interviewed area landlords
who part'cipated in a housing survey sponsored by the Charlottesville Housing Foundation and
the Tho as Jefferson Planning District Commission, as well as Section 8 participants, about
their vi ws of the program and suggestions for improvements. The Committee reviewed required
paperwo k from HUD and VHDA, as well as the proposed revisions to the Section 8 program
publish d in the Federal Register. The Committee also reviewed current Section 8 program
rules a d regulations.
The att ched
discuss'ons.
present tion:
Avai1ab'lity.
pages list the recommendations that resulted from these meetings and
The Committee divided the recommendations into five categories for ease of
1) Marketing, 2) Case Management, 3) Program, 4) Evaluation and 5)
Staff determined costs associated with implementation.
RECOMME
Staff c
be acce
plan fo
assign
ATION:
ncurs with the results of this study and recommends that the report
ed. The Housing Coordinator and the Housing Office will develop an implementation
Board approval which will set priorities, further refine the cost estimates and
esponsibility for the various recommended actions.
93.191
S\:IOS'^H3dns :10 QH'QO'8
r ltY'
I, \ \~\ \\
. ._____"....,i. ~'\'
\.~-'iln~~r@ :n .~
.__.~------
. .
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Section 8 Advisory Committee
November 22, 1993
Section 8 Advisory Committee Report
e are pleased to offer the final report of the Section 8 Advisory Committee for your
onsideration. Our charge was to provide specific recommendations to the Board for actions to
mprove the utilization of the Section 8 Certificate program and to particularly make the program
ore attractive to area landlords.
e believe that the recommendations contained in this summary will provide the county with
direction to improve the services offered in a realistic manner.
hank you for the opportunity to serve the citizens of Albemarle County. Should any of you
ave any questions, we are available for consultation.
the direction of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission discussed ways of
i plementing the Housing Advisory Committee report, "A Housing Strategy for Albemarle
C unty." At its December 22, 1992 meeting, the Commission passed a recommendation asking
t e Board to establish a Section 8 Advisory Committee. The Commission asked that this
C mmittee provide specific recommendations for actions to improve the utilization of the Section
8 program and particularly to make the Section 8 Certificate program more attractive to area
I dlords.
March 1993, the Board appointed five individuals representing property owners, VHDA, the
using Advisory Board and a representative from the financial field to this Committee.
ditionally staff from the Department of Social Services and the Housing Office were asked
t facilitate this Committee. The Committee was to perform its charge in approximately six
onths.
T e Committee met eight times. During this time, the Committee interviewed area landlords
w 0 participated in a housing survey sponsored by the Charlottesville Housing Foundation and
t e Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, as well as Section 8 participants, about
t ir views of the program and suggestions for improvements. The Committee reviewed
r quired paperwork from HUD and VHDA as well as the proposed revisions to the Section 8
p ogram published in the Federal Register. The Committee also reviewed current Section 8
p ogram rules and regulations.
T e attached pages list the recommendations that resulted from these meetings and discussions.
T e Committee divided the recommendations into five categories for ease of presentation: 1)
arketing, 2) Case Management, 3) Program, 4) Evaluation and 5) Availability. Staff
d termined associated costs to implementation.
1
. .
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION
I. Marketing
T~e major area of concern expressed by both landlords and tenants was the need to market the
S ction 8 program. Currently no marketing is done and the result is a lack of information and
misconceptions about the program. The following recommendations are listed in priority order:
A. Letter or Brochure
A well written letter or brochure should be developed as a tool for basic
education to landlords and be sent to landlords and property managers with a
personal follow-up. The brochure/letter should have a one paragraph testimonial
from a landlord that has had positive experiences with Section 8, The
brochure/letter should indicate what assistance will be provided by the local
office. The certificate holder should be provided with the brochure or letter and
the name and phone number of an individual who could be contacted to educate
the landlord about the program. Additionally housing provider organizations such
as the Blue Ridge Apartment Council and the Area Association of the
Charlottesville/ Albemarle Board of Realtors should be targeted for this
brochure/letter as well as the general public through the media, tax bills, and
water/sewer notices.
COSTS - Approximately $3000 - Development and printing of Landlord
brochure.
COSTS - Approximately $500 - Development and printing of a letter.
COSTS - Approximately $240 - Personal follow-up - Could be absorbed within
budget.
B. Family Self-Sufficiency
Develop a Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) program that would help tenants get a
job, Clients make themselves more attractive as tenants if they have a job.
Landlords repeatedly cited concerns about the perception of Section 8 tenants not
being employable and therefore not being good risks.
2
FSS, by HUD guidelines, is a program established to promote self-sufficiency
among participating families. The purpose of the program is to coordinate
Section 8 Certificates and Vouchers with public and private resources to enable
families to achieve economic independence and self-sufficiency. The program
involves contracting with a family for training and services with a plan for
specific achievable goals that are measurable. An interim goal for an FSS family
that is not a recipient of welfare assistance, for instance, may be for the head of
the household to complete his/her secondary education.
Currently the Social Services Department has developed the beginnings of an FSS
unit by combining their Day Care and Employment Programs into one unit.
However, supervision of the "unit" is shared among three people and only Aid
to Families with Dependant Children (AFDC) families can be served through the
Employment Program. The Department has recently been awarded 34 additional
vouchers and must begin formal plans for a FSS program with full
implementation by September 1994, a HUD requirement but without HUD
funding. The Department is awaiting approval on two more grant requests for
forty-five additional vouchers.
COSTS - Potential costs and service provision are broken down two ways:
1. Hire one Employment Services Worker to case manage the FSS
caseload. Hire one Supervisor and allocate one-fourth of their
salary to FSS with the remaining three-fourths allocated to Social
Services to supervise the entire FSS Unit within Social Services.
Salary and fringe benefits @ $29,200 for the Employment Worker
and $9,740 for the Supervisor. Start-up and operations @ $5,000;
Supportive Services @ $100,000 broken down as follows:
$60,000 day care services and $40,000 transportation and work or
school related expenses not covered by other sources of funds.
Total Cost - $143,940; or
2. Contract Services through Request For Proposal process from
private sector.
With option 1 other administrative costs would be absorbed within Social Services
and Housing such as management of an escrow account required by HUD and
administrative oversight such as personnel and program management.
Ramifications of either option should be fully explored before a decision is reached.
C. Seminar
A seminar should be developed for prospective landlords and current landlords
to educate them about the Section 8 program as well as the Fair Housing Act and
3
the Landlord/Tenant Act. Owners as well as managers of properties should be
included in this and staff should contact landlords listed in the newspaper to invite
them to the seminar. The implementation of the seminars should be done in
coordination with the Blue Ridge Apartment Council, the Area Association of
Charlottesville/Albemarle Board of Realtors and the Fair Housing Board. Items
to include in the seminar are:
1. Using the lease as a tool to coordinate between the landlords and local
g ~vernment by starting proceedings against the tenant at the same time a 30 day notice
fc r program violation is given to the tenant by the Housing Office;
2. An introduction of the VHDA and HUD-approved local leases
lalndlords;
to the
3. Landlord responsibilities versus Section 8 program responsibilities; for
e ample, the landlord has responsibility for inspecting their own units as they
would if they were not in the Section 8 program;
4, Screening techniques including determining outstanding
jl dgements;
financ ial
5. Development of a lending program among landlords for
Sl ch as lawnmowers, vacuum cleaners, mops, etc.;
cleaning supplies
6. Encouragement of landlords to supply a list to the tenant of appropriate
cl~aning supplies to use in the unit so tenants do not damage appliances, floors, etc
w.th improper cleaning supplies or utensils;
7. The option of using the Mediation Center to settle
u ilizing the justice system;
disputes before
8. The importance of move-out inspections, which are
S ction 8 program, to collect damage reimbursements.
required by the
COSTS - Approximately $2100 for the first seminar - Costs determined in
development of seminar in staff time, meeting costs and follow-up. Other
responsibilities of staff would have to be temporarily shifted to absorb this. Costs
of ongoing seminars would include staff time in adjustments to seminar, meeting
costs and follow-up.
D. Increasing Security Deposits
The proposed regulations published in the Federal Register include rental history
disclosures, a one month security deposit collection and the allowance for the
4
. .
Public Housing Authority to terminate leases for certain issues. All of these were
seen as positive by the landlords interviewed. However, the Committee believes
that the one month security deposit could be a hardship on many low income
people. This could result in more demand for assistance from the community,
specifically from the Community Assessment Program. The Committee wants
to make the Board aware of this problem and help identify alternatives to the full
security deposit such as encouraging landlords to accept installment payments or
work on the unit in exchange for the full deposit.
COSTS - NA at this time.
E. Landlord Buddy System
Develop a reference list of existing landlords for new landlords in order to
provide peer support and guidance outside the Housing Office.
COSTS - Negligible. Could be absorbed in current budget.
F. Changes in Federal and State Regulations
Encourage a process in the county whereby information about program
simplification and suggestions for changes can be identified and funneled through
the County Executive's Office to Virginia's representatives in Congress and the
Virginia General Assembly. Many of the cumbersome rules and regulations are
federal in nature and can only be changed at the congressional level. Some
mechanisms for providing affordable housing require change on the enabling
legislation of the Virginia Code.
COSTS - Unable to estimate - Costs associated with staff time in reviewing
program rules and regulations on an ongoing basis, determining changes that
would be helpful and formulating those changes into legislative action.
Il. Evaluation
T~e second category of recommended actions surrounded the need to evaluate the program on
at established cycle in order to stay on course or make changes if things are not working. The
fc llowing recommendations are made in order of priority:
A. Landlord Advice
Expand the current Housing Advisory Board to include landlords who are active
in the program to provide advice to the County.
COSTS - Negligible in the beginning. Costs are dependent on scope of work the
Advisory Board chooses to address with staff assistance.
5
B. Fair Market Rent
The County should become proactive in attempting to get increases in the fair
market rent for this area.
COSTS - Depends on scope of research needed for an annual response. Probably
could be absorbed in current budget with assistance from the Department of
Planning and Community Development.
C. Past Landlord Recruitment
Determine ways to draw landlords that have dropped out of the program, or who
are not accepting new applicants, back into the program. Again this is a
marketing issue and a well written letter or brochure with a follow-up visit would
be important.
COSTS - See A under Marketing.
D. Annual Evaluation
Do an annual canvas of Section 8 landlords to obtain evaluation and feedback on
the program; ask them to identify problems that are occurring and suggest how
they could be changed. Have the Housing Advisory Board review the results of
the canvas and work with staff to solve any problems.
COSTS - Start-up costs in design of canvas could be absorbed within Housing and
Social Services. Additional costs of review and analysis of survey would also be
absorbed. Budgetary line for postage and copying would probably increase as a
result. Costs associated with any changes suggested by the Advisory Board
cannot be estimated.
E. Landlord Newsletter
Consider developing a newsletter to keep landlords up to date on changes or
proposals.
COSTS - Costs and service provision are broken down in two ways:
6
1. Contracted services through a Request For Proposal process to develop a
newsletter.
2. Staff time and expertise to develop a newsletter is currently not available.
Estimate less than a part-time position if a newsletter is the extent of their duties
or combine this with another position within the county, i.e. public information
within the police department or the schools.
I I. Case Management
The third category of recommended actions surrounds the client and making them more
a ractive tenants. Many landlords were unwilling to rent to Section 8 tenants because their
e perience, or the experience of fellow landlords, indicated an inability or unwillingness on the
p rt of the tenant to adequately care for the unit. Additionally, Section 8 tenants were perceived
tc be people who did not have a job and therefore had too much time on their hands. The
fe llowing recommendations are listed in priority order:
A. Family Self-Sufficiency
The County must implement a Family Self-Sufficiency Program within the next
year that would provide education, training and job search services along with
supportive services such as child care and transportation. Clients and landlords
interviewed both expressed interest in and the need for such a program.
COSTS - See Section B under Marketing.
B. Training Classes
The County should offer Life Skills Readiness classes and access to cleaning
supplies for the clients. Classes should include budgeting, housekeeping,
parenting, a simplified explanation of expectations of being on the program,
education about when to call a landlord with problems, etc., and should be
required as part of the orientation to the program.
Classes should be offered prior to the issuance of certificates or vouchers and
fellow-up should be done in the applicants' current residence, (before they move into a
Section 8 unit), as well as in the new Section 8 unit. Ongoing classes should be
p ovided and follow-up provided by a homemaker aide. The landlord should be notified
thlat the County will provide this service and whether the perspective client completed
th,e classes. Clients should also be told that this information would be supplied to
landlords.
COSTS - Potential costs and service provision are broken down in several ways:
7
1. Contract entire service as a package through a Request For Proposal process
from the private sector.
2. Contract pieces of the services through different groups, i. e., Children, Youth
and Family Services for the parenting classes, the Extension Service for
housekeeping classes, Love, Inc. or Salvation Army for budgeting classes, etc.,
and have each do follow-up and reporting to the Albemarle Housing Office.
3. Place a homemaker aide within the Housing Office for ongoing follow-up and
just have outside agencies provide the classes. Salary and fringe benefits for one
aide @ $19,671; operations @ $3000. Aide could coordinate transportation and
day care as needed.
4. Transportation reimbursement estimated @ $1200
Day Care estimated @ $5400
5. Any combination of the above.
C. Volunteers/Mentors
Consider the use of volunteers for some of the case management services and
provide mentors to work with clients. Volunteers may include existing tenants
who have graduated from the Life Skills Readiness Classes.
COSTS - Approximate costs for a part-time Volunteer Coordinator @ $16,933
for salary and fringe benefits; $5000 for start-up costs; $3000 ongoing operations.
Total costs first year @ $21,933.
D. Landlord List
The certificate/voucher holder should be provided with a list of current and
previous program landlords that could be contacted for housing. Landlords
should be given an opportunity to have their name deleted from the list
before the list is compiled. Additionally, landlords could remove their name from
the list by calling the Housing office and asking that their name be deleted.
COSTS - Approximately $100 to set up and maintain. Could be absorbed within
budget.
f1. Program
Tile Committee heard both landlords and tenants suggest changes to the Section 8 program rules
8
.
at d process that could be beneficial. The fourth category addresses program rules and
regulations and what could be done to improve them. The following recommendations are in
p iority order:
A. Lease Update
Landlords requested lease-ups be available any time of the month. The
Committee agreed and the Housing Office implemented this immediately.
COSTS - Negligible
B. Inspector Availability
The Committee recommends an "on call" inspector for weekend and holiday
inspections for "scheduled" move-outs and move-ins.
COSTS - Based on Inspector's time and vehicle expense @ $70 per inspection x
10 inspections yearly = $700. Would need to add overtime budget to Housing
division.
C. Legislative Change
Consider asking for congressional action to change the law so that the tenant
actions would determine the privilege of having a certificate or voucher. The
process for this was identified under Section I - Marketing.
COSTS - Unable to estimate - Costs associated with staff time in research for
recommended action and Legislative liaison working with congress members and
staff.
D. Vehicles
Landlords asked that the tenant have responsibility for inoperable or abandoned
vehicles rather than the landlord as owner of the property. The Committee
suggests the
landlord be able to pass the cost of removal to the tenant by allowing the landlord
to add this to their lease.
V Availability
Tile fifth and final category of recommended actions was outside the scope of this committee but
in,.Juded issues that impacted the availability of low income housing. The Committee heard
9
I
.
.
frpm tenants about how difficult it was to find affordable housing. The following
n commendations are in priority order. Costs are unknown:
A. Certificates and Vouchers
The committee recommends the county review the federal register announcements
regularly and set policy by Board resolution to seek more certificates and
vouchers for Section 8 units as they become available. The committee further
recommends that the Board seek other ways to provide assisted housing
opportunities to meet the basic shelter needs of residents.
A. Inclusionary Zoning
Approach the General Assembly for changing enabling legislation to allow local
inclusionary zoning provisions for affordable housing, either by land set aside,
percentage of units or inclusionary fees.
C. Land For Housing
In disposing of excess public land, the county should make the offer of land to
developers who would build with Section 8 housing as its highest priority.
vt Other Issues Identified
Tpere were several items that were recommended by landlords and/or came out of the Housing
S ~rvey mentioned earlier that were discussed by the committee but are not included as
n commendations for the following reasons. They are included here only for your information.
A. Government Oversight and Paperwork
Intrusive government oversight and related paperwork was cited in the Housing
Survey Report. The Committee found that both of these concerns are overstated.
The only paperwork that the landlord must complete is the lease, the Request for
Lease Approval and the Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contract which are
one time only forms per tenant. The lease is actually completed and reviewed
with the client by the Housing Office staff. No other paperwork is required of
the landlord. Some landlords felt that the inspections were too intrusive and that
the landlord should be trusted to fix units with an inspection. Inspections of units
are done yearly except when a unit is vacated. When a client vacates a unit an
inspection is done at move-out, at the landlord's request, to determine damages
if any. Prior to a client moving into a unit, an inspection is done to determine
that the unit meets Housing Quality Standards (HQS). Landlords do have to fix
broken or unsafe aspects of their unit. Any other action on the unit is a landlord
action and not a Section 8 action.
10
.
.
B. Tenant Screening
Landlords asked that the clients be screened by the Housing Office. Legally the
Housing Office cannot screen out any citizen who wants subsidized housing.
They can screen out those clients who owe the program money as a result of
damaging an apartment or not having paid their portion of rent; however, this
must be money owed as a result of court action on the part of the landlord. It is
the responsibility of the landlord, just as he would do with any other citizen, to
adequately screen the potential renter.
C. Legal Aid
Landlords asked that Legal Aid be better educated and listen to all sides before
agreeing to represent a tenant. The Committee felt Legal Aid are attorneys
representing tenants as clients therefore Legal Aid should decide on approaching
landlords for mediation or legal action.
D. Problem Clients
Landlords asked that there be a way to "flag" a client in the system who has
caused problems in the past. The Committee determined that the new proposed
regulations, if passed, would allow this to happen but cannot be accomplished
under current regulations.
E. More Rent Payment
Landlords asked that VHDA or the County pay more for some units to allow the
landlord to more closely monitor certain families. However, it is not legal by
federal regulation to allow higher payment in order to more closely monitor units.
F. Inspection Reminder
Landlords suggested that the Housing Office mail postcards to landlords asking
how the family was doing. This would remind the landlord to monitor the
situation more closely. The Committee felt that it was the landlords'
responsibility to inspect their own properties without a reminder from the
Housing Office. The Committee also felt that this could be covered more
thoroughly in the landlord seminar or newsletter.
G. Tenant Counseling
Landlords suggested that the Housing Office provide counseling to families about
to lose their certificate due to problems in the unit. The Committee felt that this
was better covered before the problem occurs in the classes and related follow-up
11
.
.
for the tenant.
H. Arbitration Board
Landlords requested the County provide an arbitration panel in lieu of court. The
Committee felt that the Mediation Center was an already existing alternative in
the community and recognized by the justice system.
I. Insurance Pool
Exploring the establishment of an insurance pool for damage reimbursement was
recommended in the Housing survey as a last resort reimbursement. The
Committee felt that landlords had some recourse through the courts for damage
claims because VHDA currently reimburses up to two months contract rent for
damages and unpaid rent. Although the Committee understands that this may not
cover all damages, a pool of funds administered by the County could be subject
to abuse and would place the county in a role that should be reserved for the
courts.
The Committee also felt that the County should focus on prevention and teaching
the client to be a more responsible tenant.
J. Cleaning
Landlords and clients asked that the County give tenants access to cleaning
supplies. The Committee felt that tenants should be responsible for these items
or the landlords should supply some items on their own, i.e. lawnmowers, mops,
etc.
K. Tenant Criminal Check
Landlords requested that the County provide them with a felony criminal record
check on all referred clients. The Committee questioned the confidentality
regulations and whether release of such information violated those regulations.
Further investigation of this request should be done by the Housing Office with
the County Attorney and Police Department.
12
.
,. l>
C bST SUMMARY
ecommendation Additional Costs Costs absorbed within budget
I. Marketing
Brochure $3,000
Letter $500
Personal follow-up $240
Family Self-Sufficiency $143,940
Seminar $2,1 00
Increasing security Unknown
deposits
Landlord buddy system Negligible
Changes in federal & Unknown
state regulations
Tenant criminal check Unknown
I . Evaluation
Landlord advise Negligible
Fair market rent Unknown Unknown
Past landlord see I. Marketing -
recruitment Brochure
Annual evaluation Unknown
Landlord newsletter Contracted
I I. Case Management
Family Self-Sufficiency See I. Marketing B
!
Training Classes Contract Services
or
$29,270 in House
Volunteers/Mentors $21,933
,
,
i
. .
. .
COST SUMMARY
F ecommendation Additional Costs Costs absorbed within budget
Landlord List $100
I~. Program
Lease update Negligible
Inspector Availability $700
Legislative Change Unknown Unknown
Vehicles None None
-,IT. Availability
Certificates & Vouchers Unknown Unknown
Inclusion Zoning Unknown Unknown
Land for Housing Unknown Unknown
lotal Known Costs $201,143 $340
.. w,
ON ..QL-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
GENDA TITLE: FY 94/95 Budget and Revenue
pdate
AGENDA DATE:
February 2, 1994
.......""'''_i'.
ITEM NUMBER:
0/1 ""J/'n !\-r.C'
"i 'U t.J..1~. j J l'
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:n)es ~
REVIEWED BY: W\
BACKGR UND: Based on October's projection of new FY 1994-95 revenues estimated to be $2.9 million over FY
1993-94 ($ .3 million after debt service, revenue sharing and the board reserve), the Board at its November 3 meeting
allocated a roximately $975,400 to the School Division and $650,300 to general government for FY94-95 operating
costs. This eflected a 2.8% increase over current year operational spending for both divisions. The Board, which
initially ha a reserve fund of $200,000, chose to retain an additional $270,000 from projected FY94-95 debt service
savings in t eir reserve for a total fund of $470,000. These initial revenue and expenditure projections are shown at
the top ofp ge 5.
As indicate at the November meeting, these projections are always considered preliminary with tinalized estimates
provided to s by the Department of Finance in January after a full six months of data collection. Our revised January
update sho s that earlier revenue projections for FY 1994-95 are up approximately $750,000 mainly due to a strong,
and steady rowth in sales tax revenues. Local retail sales that have been cautiously monitored over the past several
months no seem to be showing a definite upward trend rather than a short-term spike, leading us to conclude that the
increase in he number of retail outlets, ie. Walmart, Sams, etc. has not merely shifted sales between stores, but has
actually inc eased the county's volume of retail sales.
DISCUSSI N: Based on the revised projection of $750,000 in additional FY1994-95 revenues, as well as the
extreme di lculty facing both general government and the school division in maintaining and funding current
operations d service levels, staff is requesting that the additional revenues be allocated at this time to the school
division an general government to balance their respective budgets. Using the 60%-40% split, this allocation would
provide an dditional $451,560 to the school division and $301,040 to general government. The Board would retain
$470,000 in their reserve fund to be used during budget worksessions for other unfunded needs.
The followi g report is provided as background information in evaluating this request, as well as to provide you with
a prelimin look at some of the critical funding issues facing the county that will be presented in more detail in
March.
~ -,
Baseline B d et Assum tions
Due to the imited revenues, all departments have submitted "baseline budgets" that fund operations at the FY93/94
level. Alth gh many costs, such as postage, service contracts, maintenance, etc. have shown increases, departments
were instru ted to find savings in other areas of their budgets. For many growing county departments, whose
operating b dgets have been held to 2% increases for the past two years, this has been difficult. All department
operating b dgets are currently level funded.
All comm ity agencies were forewarned in their application instructions that FY 1994-95 budgets would receive
minimal, if not level funding: most have responded to that information with relatively small requests over the FY
1993-94 Ie els. At this time, all agencies have been level funded regardless of the amount they requested.
In our initia attempt to maintain and fund operations and services at the current level, several unfunded areas are of
growing co cern, because they reflect needs that have been deferred or passed by in the last several years of lean
operational budgets. It is becoming increasingly difficult to defer or ignore these needs, ie. replacement capital
equipment, olid waste state mandates, market based compensation and affordable health care benefits for employees.
These un ded priorities, along with a minimall % increase for agencies, total approximately $700,000. They are
listed at the bottom of page 6.
Re laceme t ca ital: $220.000
alance baseline budgets over the past several years, the county has been forced to either defer replacing
outdated capital equipment, particularly vehicles, or push the purchases back into the current year using
salary laps or other one-time department savings. For example, although the police department operates
approximat ly 90 vehicles, which at 20,000 miles/year would require 22 new vehicles per year based on a four-year,
80,000 mile replacement cycle, the county replaced 10 police vehicles in FY92/93 and 11 in FY 1993-94.
The Police epartment has 15 vehicles that already have over 100,000 miles and by next February when the 94/95
replacemen vehicles arrive, they will have yet another 8-10 vehicles with over 100,000 miles. Even with a 100,000
mile replac ment policy, which we seem to have adopted out of necessity rather than choice, a consistent replacement
cycle woul need to replace at least 18 vehicles per year. For FY 1994-95 the police department has requested 19
vehicles (t 0 of which are animal control trucks currently with over 125,000 miles each) for a total cost of $263,000.
Funding at is minimum level would require an additional $131,000 over FY1993-94 funding. The remainder of the
funds are fo replacement vehicles in inspections, engineering, parks and recreation, and the sheriffs department.
Three possi Ie options are: 1) purchase the needed vehicles in order to get back on a regular replacement cycle, 2)
defer purch sing vehicles until they go over 120,000 -130,000 miles. Although this is already being done in many
cases, this s a potential safety issue; 3) take a look at the vehicle take-home policy for both police and sheriff
vehicles.
Groundwa er monitorin $80.000
Groundwat r monitoring at Keene Landfill will require an increase of $80,000 over the $80,000 appropriated in the
FY1993-94 budget last April for a total cost of $160,000 for FY 1994-95. Although an additional $210,912 was
reappropria d from the FY92/93 fund balance into the solid waste budget this past October, because it was not built
into the cu ent year baseline budget last April the $80,000 increase over baseline must be taken out of our FY
1994-95 all cation, This is not only an example of the fiscal impact of state mandates on the county's baseline
operational accounts, particularly in solid waste and recyling, but it is also an example of using one-time
appropriatio s from the general fund in mid-year that must be taken out of the new allocation in the following year.
1/27/94
2
..
.
Comnetiti~e Salaries for Countv Emnlovees: $250.000
The most r cent salary survey completed in October by the Office of Human Resources, shows that overall county
salaries are currently 2.3% below the market and are anticipated to be approximately 5% below the market by next
year. To ac dress this, the school division and general government are proposing a 2.5% scale adjustment for all
classified e jnployees in FYI994-95, the cost of which is approximately $250,000 for general government.
Although cbunty employees received a 1 % scale adjustment in FYI993-94, the average salary of an Albemarle
County em] loyee is only 1.9% over the rate of inflation over the past 4 years. Compounding the lack of a real dollar
increase in compensation is the effect of increased health insurance premiums, particularly family coverage, on the
average saMried county employee. The chart below shows the impact of the increase in family coverage on a sample
employee s, lary based on the projected increase in family coverage premiums for FYI994-95:
Impact of Health Premium Increases on a Sample County Emplovee
Salary Adjustments
Beginning Salary
Scale Adjustment
Vested Step at 2.5%
less Health Premium Family Coverage
Net Salary
Dollar Increase
Percent Increase
Net Increase after inflation (3.5%)
FY 93-94
27,368
27,642
28,333
3,600
24,733
FY 94-95
28,333
28,333
29,041
4,320
24,721
(-12)
(-.05%)
(-3.55%)
Affordable Health Benefits: $30.000
The County currently funds 80% of the cost of single subscriber health insurance for its employees with no additional
contributior for family coverage. With another 20% increase in rates projected for FY94/95, at the same ratio
employees will be expected to contribute an additional $7 per month for single coverage or an additional $60 per
month for amily coverage. A minimum start toward providing affordable health care benefits is to increase the
county's sha e of the premium cost from 80% to 85%. Each additional 5% increase requires an additional $30,000 for
general government. Shown on page 7 are the medical insurance cost increases for FYI994-95.
Shown on J age 8 is a list of the contributions toward single coverage and family coverage for 28 other jurisdictions.
Albemarle County is $384 below the average contribution for single coverage and $1,357 below the average for
family cove age. In the private sector, it is estimated that businesses pay approximately 80% of family coverage and
spend apprl ximately 7.9% of their total payroll on employee health insurance. Albemarle general government
currently paws only 30% of family coverage and only 6% of payroll on health insurance.
Salarv CODloression: $70.000
One of the ecommendations of the 1991 pay study was to address the issue of salary compression for certain salaried
employees. The compression resulted from the prior personnel policy that limited reclassifications to 5%, often
forcing expl rienced employees to be placed back at the "A" step of their new pay range. Numerous employees were
assigned steps at or near the beginning of their new payrange and in many cases employees who had been employed
for some tin e, found themselves at the same salary as a new employee with minimal experience.
1/27/94
3
'..
In an effort to address this situation, a budget initiative is proposed that would relieve some of the compression for
longer serv' ce employees who are still on the A to E step of their payrange. The estimated cost of this intitiative for
general gov~rnment is $70,000.
Communitlr A~encv Increases: $50.000
The last ill funded priority at the bottom of the list on page 6 is a 1 % increase for community agencies over
FY1993-94 funding levels. Since the county contributes approximately $5 million dollars to outside agencies, ego
EOC, the library, the health department, Region 10, as well as the smaller program review agencies, a I % increase
would cost approximately $50,000 to be spread across the agencies based on need. Many of the regional agencies,
such as the liail, EOC, TJPDC, and the Visitors Bureau, have funding formulas or level of service contracts to which
the County lIas agreed. These agreements must somehow be honored.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on these identified needs for FY1994-95 and the difficulty being faced by general
government and the school division to fund baseline expenditures within the current allocation, staff requests that the
Board alloc~te the additional revenues of $750,000 on a 60/40 basis to the school division and general government.
As you havF> seen at the bottom of page 6, even these additional revenues will not be able to fund all the identified
priorities fo general government, nor the priorities identified for the school division. Without an influx of additional
revenues, tb e budget recommended to you in March will not be able to fund even the most basic operational needs.
1/27/94
4
..
.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
FY 1994-95 OPERATING BUDGET - NOVEMBER 3 ALLOCATION
llRVENUES
FY 93/94 FY 94/95 DOLLAR PERCENT
BUDGET BUDGET CHANGE CHANGE
Local revenues
Property taxes 45,739,340 47,872,000 2,132,660 4.66%
Other local revenues 18,449,645 19,095,400 645,755 3.50%
T otallocal 64,188,985 66,967,400 2,778,415 4.33%
State/Federal 5,046,300 5,379,800 333,500 6.61%
Transfers/fund balance 167,047 (167,047) -100.00%
EXPENDITURES
FY 93/94
BUDGET
FY 94/95
BUDGET
DOLLAR
CHANGE
General Govt Operations
School Transfer
De bt Service
Revenue Sharing
Capital Transfer
Board Reserve Fund
23967820 I:ijjijij~lijll_.il
' , :'}:'~"~~:'bd~~ "''>., ";h.;,,. nm " Hi!;,
23,316,565
34,677,940
5,667,631
4,319,236
1,360,000
60,960
35,653,383
6,420,880
4,475,117
1,360,000
470,000
975,443
753,249
155,881
o
409,040
TOTAL
$69,402,332
$72,347,200
$2,944,868
AVA LADLE NEW REVENUES FOR OPERATIONS:
PRIOR COMMITTED EXPENSES:
FY 1992-93 vested merit costs
VRS rate adjustment and vesting increase
Health insurance 20% rate increase
Reinstitute VRS life insurance
Worker's compensation increase
TOTAL
NET AVAILABLE REVENUES
11 5/94
5
PERCENT
CHANGE
2.79%
2.81%
13.29%
3.61%
0.00%
671.00%
4.24%
$651,255
255,250
28,500
88,550
62,700
39.200
$474,200
$177,055
.. ..
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
FY 1994-95 OPERATING BUDGET - PROPOSED NEW REVENUE ALLOCATION
R F,VENUES
FY93/94 FY94/95 ~4/95 DOLlAR DOLlAR PERCENT
BlDGEf BlDGEf REVl5ID VARIANCE INCRFASE INCRFASE
L cal revenues
l>rope rty taxe s 45,739,340 47,872,000 47,706,900 (165,100) 1,%7,560 4.30"10
Other local revenues 18,449.645 19,095,400 19,941,300 845,900 1,491,655 8,09%
T tal ]0 cal 64,188,985 66,967,400 67,648,200 680,800 3,459,215 5.39%
Sl te/Federal 5,046,300 5,379,800 5,451,600 71,800 405,300 8.03%
T ansfe rs/fund balance 167.047 (167,047) -100.00%
TOTAL $69,402,332 $72,347,200 $73,099,800 $752,600 3,697,468 5.33%
F OCPENDITIJRES
FY93/94 FY94/95 FY94/95 DOLlAR DOLLAR PERCENT
BlDGEf BlDGEf REVISID VARIANCE CHANGE CHANGE
Ge eral Govt Operations 23,316,565 23,967,820 24,268,860 IllilrW!!lNIIIIII!lI.!~.11 952,295 4,08%
Sch bol Transfer 34,677,940 35,653,383 36,1 04,943 451,560 1,427,003 4,12%
De t Service 5,667,631 6,420,880 6,420,880 0 753,249 13.29%
Re e nue Sharing 4,319,236 4,475,117 4,475,]17 0 155,88] 3.61%
Cal ital T ransfe r 1,360,000 1,360,000 1,360,000 0 0 0.00%
80 rd Reserve Fund 60,960 470,000 470,000 0 409,040 671.00%
0
OTAL $69,402,332 $72,347,200 $73,099,800 752,600 3,697,468 5.33%
AVA LABLE REVENUES FROM 11/3/94 ALLOCATION $177,055
NEW AVAILABLE REVENUES 301,040
TOT 1\L PROPOSED REVENUES FOR OPERATIONS $478,095
PRIO RITIES TO BE FUNDED:
Net ded Replacement Vehic1es over 100,000 miles 220,000
Inc eased groundwater monitoring at Keene Landfill 80,000
Sa~ ~y Scale adjustment at 2.5% 250,000
Inc ease employer's share of medical costs from 80% to 85% 30,000
Sa~ ry compression adjustment 70,000
Inc ease in community agency fimding (1 % over 93/94) 50,000
~ tal unfimded priorities $700,000
SHOl ~TFALL WITH ADDITIONAL REVENUES ($221,905)
SHOl ~TFALL WITHOUT ADDITIONAL REVENUES ($522,945)
11 5/94 6
.
.,
2
<( >-
-I -I
a.. J:
.....
- 2
w 0
0::: ~
<( 2 Q)>
U
0 Q)-
>- >.- 00 00 00
w ..... oE 00 00 qq
-ro NO 000
~ U o.u.. (00
<( ~+ 1'00 Ll'l (0 N (0
W ~ 1'0 ~ 1'0
J: a..
..... ~
0::: 0
0 2
L1. ~
W
..... 0
<( -I Q)Q)
0::: -I Q)tn
0 >:::l 00 00 00
0::: 00 qq qq qq
~ L1. -0.
W o.Vl Nil/') 00 N (0 0'>
I- OJ w ~+ II/')q- Ll'l 0'> No:::t
~ J: ~N ~N
0:::
U .....
~ Ul w
! OJ >
an ::> <(
Ul J:
: en Ul w 0
en ~ -I
0 -I Q)
! ~ ::> 2 ::> Q)I-
~ 0 >0 00 00 00
~ Ul ~ Os::: qo qq qq
lll::I' o.~ r--
W W N . 00 I"-- (000
~ en 0::: -I ~+ 1'00'> Ll'l0 N~
en a.. J: w ~oo ~~
.....
.. ~ 2 >
L1. W
0 -I
W 2~
Ul ~
<( 0>-
w 0 -0
0::: 00 .....-1
U Ul ::>0.. Q)
2 w OJ~ Q)
..... > 00 00 00
O:::w 0
~ ::> .....J: qo qo qo
OJ 0. N ' 00' (0'
0 2..... E 1'01'0 Ll'lo NI"--
N 0::: 82 ~I'O ~q-
..... w
<( 2 ;:RO
0 0 o ~
2 U 0'
ooN
..... >- ....-
Ul -I ~<(
<( .....
U 2 .....0::: s::: s:::
w w 00 0 0
0::: 0::: 2L1. :p :p
0 0:::
::> - Ul :::l :::l Q)Q)
L1. 2~ .0 .0 tntn
Ul U 'C Q) 'C Q) roro
<(::> +-> l- +-> I- Q)Q)
0 1-1-
.....- s:::ro s:::ro uU
Ul 0::: 2~ o..s::: o..s::: E:E:
OJ <( -w uVl uVl
-
U 0 <(0::: o:::t I-Q) Ll'l I-Q) I-Q)
~o.. 0'> Q)Q) 0'> Q)Q) Q)Q)
OJ OJ Q) 0'> >> 0'> >> >>
I- ~ 00 ~ 00 00
ro , , 0.0.
U II/') 0.0. q- 0.0.
> 0'> EE 0'> EE EE
Q) 0'> 0'>
0 0 0 ~ ~ ww ~ ww ww
,'" ~
}.
"
I~~
I..~
~
;"
CD
U
c
as
...
::l
fn
C
.c
-
iii
CD
J:
fn
"
j
o
....
c
o
:=
::l
.c
'C
-
c
o
()
...
CD
>-
.2
c.
E
w
15
o
.c
u
f/)
~
C
::l
o
()
c..
E
8U)
f/)~
Q?m
o
m
Q)
m >
llSllS - -
f/)...'EU)~f/)Q)f/)f/)
Q?~~Q?l3Q?:UQ?Q?
() Q)'OO >-()()O()
m f/) <{ m Q) m iU'm CO
iU' ~ ~
~
fn
fn
Q)
t::
~
llS
~
lil
8
f/)
Q?
C,)
m
c.. c..
f/)EE
'E,88
()f/)f/)
mQ?Q?
0c,)
mm
.c
u ci.=
~~='ii) Em
O:O:~~~8J:
. . llS 0::::. C
C. c.. C,) f/) C,) f/) iii
E E iU' Q? mQ? ..c:
88~~ 0'5
.... mO
U)
~
.c0~~8008~00000000MOOOOO~000~~
..c:q~q .qq .~qqqqqq",:qcqqq~~qC'!qqq~,":
oo~~oo~~~~ooooO~O~OOM~O~OOO~M
~~~~~~~~re~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~
~
~~
~8~00000~00000000000000~000~~
..I; .cq~qqqqqqqqqqq~qqqqC'!C'!q~qOq~q
aOM~OO~~M~OOOOO~O~OOM_O~OoO~~
~~~~~~~_~_~~~~~M~M~~~_~M~~~-~
I ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ q ~~
c ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
~~
g.c
~~
~
c
~
I
J!!
C)
c
ti)
c
o
= ~~~oooo~oo~~o~~~o~~oo~o~o~~~
I: ~o~~ooo~oO~~OO~~OMMO~~O~O~O~
~ ~~~~ooo~~~~~m~M~~~~~~~OO~~~O
S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~~~~MO~
c~.q~~~~~~~qqqqqqq~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~..... ~ ~ ~..... ~..... ~.......... ~..... --.....
p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
... c
Ql'-
>oU)
.2
c.
E
w
~~~OOOOMO~~~~~~~M~~OO~O~O~~~
~~~~OOOMO~OO~~M~M~~O~~O~OM~~
~ ~ ex) ~ ~ 0 0 m ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ex) ~ ~ c-.i ~. 0 ~
~MMM~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MM""'O~
NNNN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~
iii
u
o
..J
fn l!!
Q) l!! 0 0 ~ l!!
~ 0 fn Ofnfn l!! 0 0 0
~~ ~o ~ o~ ~oo g ~~~~~ ~
~~~lJt::~~~~~~~~m~~~~gm~~t::u~o~
~~8~~8Eg~~~~8g~~~~~g~888~g~g
~8~~0~~C,)~C,)8~~uo~i8t::ggE~'OciC,)CC,)
Q)t::llSllS~-O'O~~ ~Q)llSC,)~~iii~~C,)llSQ)t::"Q)C)Q)
-~>..c:_O_"'~=~oFlil 00>0 ..c:~llS~O)"'t::
~~~~Ofn~i5~~C,)5~&C,)C,)0~~E~2~~t::~Q)
~~fno~Q)EEmOQ)om~C)oQ)t::t::Q)~~~fng"'~t::~
:~~~cllS~mC,)~..J~g~Q)~~~~-C)U!oasEo~0
c.._ ..., m ~ ~ """ 0 m - t:: C,) .=: 0 u 0 'C
m C,) c.. m 0 ~ 0)" Q) m .:zt: a: Q)"-
Q) ..c:...J t::......z:r: 0 .c m
o C,) - ~ <-:r:
:::.::: m
M
~
-
~
~
.....
~
o
o
-
-
~
.....
~
o
.....
,...
~
~
C!
.....
~
o.
~
~
w
(!)
~
w
>
<
o
q
~
~
,...
~
o
q
o
~
~-
~
tit
,...
M
o
~
,...
tit
C\l
~
M
C\l
~.
-
tit
Q)
. 0)
g,~
~ g!
Q) 0
~ 0
o~
~'E
~~
'ii) 0
...-
,gQ)
Q)O)
C)~
llS Q)
... >
g! m
llS Q)
Q)=:
=:~
~.Q
o Q)
Qi-e
.om
... Q)
:g~
~~
~"':
~~
. ~
ci'; M.
M~
...~
.~ .~
~~ ~
t::c ~
gg ~
() C,) ~-
~~ ~
... ...
E E ~
Q) UJ~
,g,g ~
<< ...,
co
z
:$
o
w,
:::E'
Distribti'~cd '~r
AgenGJ
Various Board & Commission Interviews
February 2, 1994 @ 1:00 p.m.
Time Name Board or Commission
1:00 Levi Wilson Children & Youth
1:15 Geri Schirmer Children & Youth
1:30 Maurice H. Lipper Children & Youth
1:45 Brian Lindquist Regional 'Disability Services
2:00 Tom Jakubowski Regional Disability Services
2:15 Don Swofford Architectural Review Board
2:30 Tim Michel Architectural Review Board
2:45 Robert Moje Architectural Review Board
01 -?J3-L14
q~L'.~;1'0':6 7y
l.._ .
.""/'
/" -:> -,.:J -. ..".1 L.
:..-.:~r~_::)
v,
David P. Bo rman
Charlottes iIle
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296.5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S, Martin
R Ivanna
Charlotte y, umphris
Jack Jou tt
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Ma shall, Jr.
Scottsvill
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Members, Board of Supervisors
Ella W . Carey, Clerk;:-20C/
February 1, 1994
Board meeting for April 13, 1994
This memorandum is to bring to your attention that April 13,
1994 (Jefferson's Birthday), which is a regular scheduled Board
eeting, is a County holiday. The Code states: "... should the
d y established by the governing body as the regular meeting day
f 11 on any legal holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next
gular business day, without action of any kind by the governing
dy." In essence this means that the Board would automatically
et on April 14 instead of April 13. In order for the Board to
et on April 13, it needs to adjourn to that date from April 6.
need to know on which date the Board intends to meet since
plicants will need to be notified when they file applications.
*
Printed on recycled paper
.,
" ? ..c-;,'L/
......- _..
i",,>i \ ...'-.~........ _ .,.-
David P. Bo rman
Charlotte ilIe
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jou tt
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R, Ma shall, Jr.
Scottsvil e
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
M E M 0 RAN DUM
Members, Board of Supervisors
Ella W. Carey, Clerk t)3J~
February 1, 1994
Tentative Agendas for March, 1994.
Attached, for your information, is the tentative schedule of
items to be heard by the Board in March. This does not include
the budget work sessions which are scheduled for March 14, March
16, March 21 and March 23. Most agenda items for the March 2
eeting will not be scheduled until later this month since items
for the day meeting generally come from the staff and are not
ublic hearings. The public hearings for March 9 and March 16
cannot be heard by the Board in February because they are not
scheduled for a hearing by the Planning Commission until the end
of February.
E C:mms
*
Printed on recycled paper
TEN TAT I V E
9:00 A.M.
March 2, 1994
Room 7, County Office Building
1) Call to Order.
2) Pledge of Allegiance.
3) Moment of Silence.
4) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
5) Consent Agenda (on next sheet) .
6) Approval of Minutes:
7) Transportation Matters:
a) Discussion: Route 760/712 (deferred from January 5, 1994).
b) Other Transportation Matters.
8) 10:00 a.m. - Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend and reenact Section
2.1-4(i) of the Code of Albemarle known as the "Jacobs Run Agricul-
tural/Forestal District". It is intended that the life of the
Jacobs Run A/F District which consists of 1123 acres located on
Routes 743, 764, 664, 665 and 660 near Earlysville be extended for
an additional six years.
9) 10:15 a.m. - Public Hearing on CDBG (need description).
10) Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
1) Adjourn.
TEN TAT I V E
7:00 P.M.
March 9, 1994
Room 7, County Office Building
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Call to Order.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
Consent Agenda (on next sheet) .
Public Hearing on CDBG (need description) .
Public Hearing to receive comments from the on the 1994-95 County Budget
before the Board begin their work sessions scheduled for March 14,
March 16, March 21 and March 23, 1994, all to be held in Room 7 at
1:00 p.m.
SP-93-41. Pagebrook Farm. Public Hearing on a request to locate six
impounding structures in flood plain on 315.86 ac zoned RA. Property
on E sd of Rt 231 approx 0.25 mi N of Rt 231/640 inters at Cash's
Corner. TMSO,P34. Rivanna Dist. (Property is not located in
designated growth area.)
ZMA-93-14. Rio Associates Limited Partnership. Public Hearing on a
request to rezone approx 1.6 ac from R-6 to CO. Property at W
inters of Berkmar Dr/Woodbrook Dr. TM45,P's 93Al,109(part)&109C are
recommended for medium density residential (5-10 du\ac) in the
Comprehensive Plan. Charlottesville Dist. (Property is located in a
designated growth area.)
ZMA-93-18. Forest Lakes Association/Hollymead Citizens Association.
Public Hearing on a request to amend ZMA-91-04 & ZMA-92-02 to add
2071 sq ft currently in Hollymead PUD open space to Forest Lakes
South PUD as an area for right-of-way dedication. Property E of
Kendallwood Dr in Forest Lakes South & directly S of The Greens of
Hollymead in Hollymead. The proposed road will cross a tributary to
Powell Creek. TM46,P26Bl, located in the community of Hollymead, is
zoned PUD & is recommended for medium density residential in t:he
Comprehensive Plan. Rivanna Dist. (Property is located in a
designated growth area.)
ZMA-93-20. Albert DeRose. Public Hearing on a request to amend Buck
Mountain Planned Residential Development to allow subdivision of a
5.4 ac parcel zoned PRD. Property on E sd of Rt 601 approx 0.33 mi
N of 601/667 inters. TMI7,P62. White Hall Dist. (Property is not
located in a designated growth area.)
Approval of Minutes:
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Adjourn to March 14, 1994, at 1:00 p.m., for Budget Work Session.
8)
9)
10)
1~)
1~)
15)
1~)
L
TEN TAT I V E
7:00 P.M.
March 16, 1994
Room 7, County Office Building
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Call to Order.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
Consent Agenda (on next sheet) .
SP-93-32. Ray A. Graham, III. Public Hearing on a request for a 7500 sq
ft gift shop, a 3000 sq ft outdoor market, a 7500 sq ft antique shop
& a 3000 sq ft animal hospital/commercial kennel with 84 parking
spaces (a maximum of 5 dwellings & greenhouses & an orchard are also
proposed) on 20 acs zoned RA & EC. Property in NW corner of Rt
250/Rt 22 inters is bordered by I-64 on N. TM79,P10(part). Rivanna
Dist. (Property is not located in a designated growth area.)
SP-93-36. McDonald's at Forest Lakes/Forest Lakes Association. Public
Hearing on a request for a drive-through in a commercial zone on
9.536 ac zoned HC & EC. Property in SE quadrant of Rt 29N/
Timberwood Blvd inters in Forest Lakes. TM46B4,P1. Rivanna Dist.
(Property is located in a designated growth area.)
ZMA-93-19. Glenmore Associates Limited Partnership/Marion Belts Long.
Public Hearing on a request to amend ZMA-90-19 by rezoning 8.028 ac
from RA to PUD. Property, surrounded by the Glenmore PUD, is east
of Paddington Circle. TM93,P61A, is located in Village of East
Rivanna. Scottsville Dist. (Property is located in a designated
growth area.)
SP-93-38. Wal-Mart #1780. Public Hearing on a request for outdoor
storage, display &/or sales of garden center merchandise on 3.123 ac
zoned HC & EC. Property at SW inters of Rt 29N & Hilton Heights Rd.
TM45,P68D5 is recommended for regional service in the Comprehensive
Plan. Charlottesville Dist. (Property is located in a designated
growth area.)
ZMA-93-15. Lloyd F. & patricia Wood. Public Hearing on a request to
rezone 0.53 ac from R-15 to C-1. Property located behind Putt-Putt
on Rio Rd approx 0.33 mi E of inters with Rt 29N. TM61,P124E(part)
is located in Neighborhood I and is recommended for office service
in the Comprehensive Plan. Charlottesville Dist. (Property is
located in a designated growth area.)
SP-93-34. Putt-Putt Golf & Games (applicant) i Lloyd F. & patricia Wood
(owners). Public Hearing on a request to expand the existing
miniature golf course with additional activities (gameroom/club-
house, bumper boats, batting cages and go-kart track) [Sec
24.2.2(1)] on 3.8 ac zoned HC. Property current site of Putt-Putt
Golf & Games and is located on N side of Rio Rd approx 0.3 mi E of
Rt 29N. TM61, P124E1&E (part) . Charlottesville Dist. (Property is
located in a designated growth area.)
ZMA-93-16. Robert Clark. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 14.24 ac
from RA to VR. TM88,P6 is located on S sd of Rt 29S approx 0.5 mi W
of Rt 760/29S inters. Site is located in the Village of North
Garden and is recommended for VR residential use (max 1 du/ac) in
the Comprehensive Plan. Samuel Miller Dist.
ZMA-93-21. Robert Clark. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 32.064
ac from RA to VR. TM87,P35C is on S sd of Rt 29S approx 0.33 mi E of
Rt 712/29S inters. Site is located in Village of North Garden and
is recommended for Village Residential use (max 1 du/ac) in the
Comprehensive Plan. Samuel Miller Dist.
Approval of Minutes:
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Adjourn to March 21, 1994, at 1:00 p.m., for Budget Work Session.
7)
8
9
1~)
1 )
1 )
1 )
1
1
1
-' )
David P. Bo rman
Charlottes il\e
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
February 7, 1994
Charles S. Martin
R ivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jou tt
Walter F. Perkins
While Hall
Forrest R. Ma shall, Jr.
Scottsvile
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
T e Honorable J. Brad Berry
V'ce Chairman
G eene County Board of Supervisors
P st Office Box 358
S anardsville, Virginia 22973
D ar Mr. Berry:
At its meeting on February 2, 1994, the Albemarle County
Bard of Supervisors adopted the resolution which you had for-
w rded concerning impact fee legislation. They did this because
o the short time in getting anything into the General Assembly
d ring the 1994 session.
For your information, Albemarle County has had as a part of
i s legislative packet for many, many years, a request for impact
f e legislation, however, if you still wish to appear before the
Bard, its next meeting is on March 2, 1994, beginning at 9:00
a.m. The Board could hear you under "Other Matters Not Listed on
t e Agenda" which is the first item on the agenda.
Let me know if you intend to appear so I can let the Chair-
know of your presence.
Sincerely,
.'7
u'~ Ie
Ella W.
/ \
C~:~~, ~~~~~::JMc
/ /
./
E C:len
A tachment
*
Printed on recycled paper
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, studies indicate that revenues generated by residential
growth do not offset expenses associated wi th residential
growth; and
WHEREAS, the below-designatated governing bodies are in agreement
that innovative and equitable means of producing revenue
should be considered; and
WHEREAS, the below-designated governing bodies are committed to
providing quality public education and cost-effective
public facilities; and
WHEREAS, the below-designated governing bodies are in agreement
that simply increasing property taxes as the primary
means of paying for increased residential growth is
unacceptable,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the below-designated
governing bodies hereby request their state legislators
to investigate the implementation of an impact fee on
developers and land speculators to be directly tied to
capital expenditures.
Chairman, Greene County Board of Supervisors
CJJ 1~.'")Rll'
at .~ ~~
Chairman, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Chairman, Madison County Board of Supervisors
Chairman, Orange County Board of Supervisors
Chairman, Culpeper County Board of Supervisors
..
Or
BOARD 0 SUPERVISORS
,,\~ of (fi)r
^ t\::}. """''''_''+ " ~-?
,(, ~T 111111/~ ~~~.~N~O,
~ \.1,.4. O....n....... "~ ('!)
(ff.tfTh!
\ \~c) &,.f.... f
\. "'~,!:.~~.~~~.., l
.....~..,.!.!'.Jj;,."'~'
STANLEY M. POWELL.
AT LARGE
JAMES A. ENSHAW, c.."h,"'~, _
STANARDS ILLE DISTRICT
JOANNE B RKHOLDER..
RUCKERSVI LE DISTRICT
JOHN B, BERRY
AT LARGE
JYl..lUSJ.... MORRIS
lcOtfNTfl Ao;,~ ;:;I~TRA TOR
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
p, 0, BOX 358
STANARDSVILLE. VIRGINIA 22973
TELEPHONE 985-5201
TO:
County Executi~e County A~ministrator
/' .:...::::z------
J. Brad Berry, ice Chairman
Board of Supervisors
Impact Fees
FR
January 27, 1994
Please find attached a copy of the resolution requesting
St te legislators to support enabling legislation granting localities
the option of implementing impact fees.
I would appreciate the opportunity to appear before your
Board on this matter.
Your confirming the next suitable time and date by calling me
at (804)985-6206 or leaving a message at the County Administrator's
Office at (804)985-5201 would be greatly appreciated.
.. ,..
IrSSUE:
PREMISE:
PROPOSAL:
How to raise the funds necessary for capital
facilities, particularly the school system,
which are generated due to increasing population.
studies indicate revenues generated by residential
growth do no ~ffset expenses of residential growth,
even when service-related commercial activity which
follows commercial growth is considered. Simply
increasing property taxes and fees to "put out
annual budgetary fires" is increasingly unaccept-
able. This is especially true when one considers
more unfunded or partially funded mandates from the
state government, and less help from the federal
government.
A residential impact fee should be considered by the
General Assembly. This impact fee would be appli-
cable to houses built in "Subdivisions" as defined
by local Subdivision Ordinances. Impact fees would
be payable based on number of lots and other
criteri.a, at the time of subdivision plat
recordation by the developer. Money generated by
impact fees would be earmarked for capital
improvements.
~
I \
,~.-\ ,_.
!_,;;
David P. Bo rman
Charlollesvi Ie
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 9724060
Charles S. Martin
R ivannd
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jack .Jouet
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Mar hall, Jr.
Scoltsville
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
February 4, 1994
r. Timothy Michel
1 20 West Pines Drive
C arlottesville, V A 22901
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on February 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Architectural Review Board, with term to expire November 14, 1996.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's
a preciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
Sincerely,
w~ ~..~~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
FP/jng
cc: The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Marcia Joseph
*
Printed on recycled poper
.. ,
County of Albemarle
,..\,. o<t A L8~1i
f:- .0 :7.p
..:; -_'r"
8 1'", trl
"" ~
i:, f'
VIRG\~\~
Office of Board of Coun!)' Supervisors
40 I McIntire Road
Charlottesville;. VA 22902-4596
(804) L96-5843
APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITfEE
(please type or print)
r-- -; - n '1/ ~ ;~:::-'
; rn' J-,-"@"V~,\ "J"_~""'T! \
LlL ..
\ :~\.\ ;
': ~ 1 ~;
Architectural Review Board
Mattheus Michel
Home Phone 295-8609
1520 West Pines Drive. Charlottesville, VA 22901
Magisterial istrict in which your home residence is located Samuel Miller District
Employer elf Phone 295-1131/979-8162
Business Ad ress ')01 F:ml c.OTIf>r Drive. Suite 5. Charlottesville. VA 22903
Date of Em loyment N/ A Occupation / Title Associate Broker, McLean Faulconer, Inc.:
Vice President, King Travel Inc.; President, Michel & Wilcox,In(
Years Resid nt in Albemarle County 20 years Previous ResicfenceDevon. PA
Spouse'sN e Virginia P. Michel Number of Children 2
Education ( egrees and Graduation Dates) Lafayette College BA 1970; University of Virginia, Master
of e Architecture 1976.
Chamber 0
Charlottesville/Albemarle Board of Realtors; St. Thomas Aquinas Church;
Publi
Public Re reational Facilities Authorit
Charlotte
- Board of Directors
Live Arts - Board of Directors
I have a tron committment to serve m community. My past experience as a Real Estate Broker,
business wner develo er and landsca e architect ma be useful in this osition.
-.-
on request.
The informat on provided on this application
December 20. 1993
Date
Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
,.<>1 ~;f
David P Bowe an
Charlot tesvill '
Charlotte Y Hu phns
Jack Jouett
Forrest R. Mars all, Jr.
Scotlsvllle
D . Maurice H. Lipper
34 0 Langford Drive
C arlottesville, VA 22903
D ar Mr. Lipper:
-,
w
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 2965843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
February 4, 1994
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on February 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Children and Youth Commission, with term to expire June 30, 1997.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's
reciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
W P/jng
Sincerely,
WCL~r}-~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
cc The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Jeanne Cox, Clerk, City Council
Rory Carpenter, Director
*
Pnnted on recycled popcr
or
County of Albemarle
4. or A LlJ/i'
.:f. ,; ~:t;7
iJ-. ~IIIJ ~
U' .rp . tTl
~,.!:..', :~
:,"" 1"
vlRGn~\\'-
Office of Board of County Supervisors j
40 I McIntire Road
Charlottesville). VA 22902-4596 ' SOARD OF SUPERVISORS
(804) L96-5843 '-
APPLlCA nON TO SERVE ON BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITfEE
(please type or print)
ission/Committec CHIL D /971!J) Y911T7-! COlY/bJ1S.5 Ju/Y
e J11I111RJ CG' 1-/, L IPPIZ7'<..J fl1.D Home Phone 2. qft., _ //p /15
'3" SO LIfrV(;'-FOF<. [) b;:{/';~, ctff/J{W7763VIL;~' VI} 22-C)03
I J
Magisterial D strict in which your home residence is located S.f1--nt lie:?- /11 J '-1.-F7<:..
Employer v)::, (} - W/ . Cierlr.- "Phone 9 "')-'1--2 7--K I
Business Add ess ?)~'r. Or ~/7t)/OLDb-- Y ,I130X 17;) I Cff;tJ1?~/ l~V/'-~ lJ 11 2.. 2/jD?j
{
DateofEmpl yment d11L Y 1/ /q/3 7 Occupation/Title /;'5:C:;oO~,P/(OF. /C1JlJ1t)L'1JtY~~Nf::TJlRPfl{I(Gt::f7<J
Years Residen in Albemarle County (b 1/ ~ Previous Residence X/eN m 0 /yj)) v,~.
Spouse'sNam FSE71IE:' ;:r: L/PF~ Number of Children 7
Education (De rees and Graduation Dates) iYJ j) D I1'J ~}'} (E'"7VG-) / q "7 .S-
/ /
7(P F
: I
~ i
S' e;;;-e .. ~/-Ib-V #
Return to : lerk, Board of County Supervisors
IbemarIe County
4 1 McIntire Road
harlottesvillc, VA 22902-4596
provided on this application will be released to the public upon request.
/~
/~""~ If Iu~
Signature I
/;2.- 7'-'1~
Date
12-08 1993 08:51
c. .. Maurice H. Upper, M.D.
1
Ci
p:
Security #:
M tal Statue:
AddreIs:
CerWicatic:m.t
P.02
CUBRICULUM VITAE
Maurice H, Lipper, M,D.
November 8, 1934
South Africa
United States Citizen
229..11-8577
Wife: Bethe
Children: David (1960)
Lesley (1962)
Norman (1964)
Thu Le (1969)
Van La (1972)
Kim Le (1978)
Philip (1989)
3480 Langford Drive
Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
Phone: (804) 296..1618
Del,lartment of Radiology, Box 170
UnIversity of Virginia Medical Center
Charlottesville, VU'ginia 22908
Phone: (804) 924.2781
Virginia (Flex) February, 1978 j29165
Certificate of Full Registration as a Medical
Practitioner in the Commonwealth List of the
Register, London, June 30, 1961, 107501
The South African Medical and Dental Council,
Registration Certificate.. January 29, 1959, #8045
American Board of Radiology
Diagnostic Radiology, June, 1979
The South African Medical and Dental Council,
Registration of Specialty - Diagnostic Radiology,
July 18, 1976, #4529
12-08- 993 08:52
.-
c.~ · Maurice H. Lipper, M.D.
8
P,04
University of Virginia Medical Center,
Charlottesville, Virginia, Associate Professor of
Radiology, Division of N euroradiology,
July 1, 1987 . present
McGuire Veterans Administration Medical Center,
Richmond, Virginia, Director, Magnetic Resonance
Imaging, Department of Radiology, November 1,
1985 - June 80, 1987
Medical College of Virginia
Clinical Professor of Radiology
November 1 .1985 - June 30, 1987
Medical College of V~ginia, Associate Professor of
. RadioloiD' (Section of Neuroradiology) with Tenure,
July 1, 1981 - October 31, 1985
. Medical College of Virginia, Chief,
Section of Neuroradiology,
December, 1983 - October, 1985
Medical College of Virginia, Acting Chief,
Section of Neuroradiology,
Department of Radiology,
October, 1982 - November, 1983
Medical College of Virg:inia
Assistant Professor of Radiology
Division of N euroradiology
January 1, 1977 . June 30, 1981
McGuire Veterans Administration Hospital,
Attending. N euroradiology,
May, 1977 - October 1985
Groote Schuur Hospital, Cape Town,
South Africa, ConsUltant Specialist
Department of Radiodiagnosis,
Division of Neuroradiology
February 1, 1976 . December, 1976
Association of American Medical Colleges,
Appraiser of Education Materials
12-0E-1993 08:52
.' "
c.~. . Maurice H. Lipper, M.D.
Pe.4
M . . .p Prc6ssiODal Scdeties:
C 'ttee Memberships:
P.05
American Society of Neuroradiology
Radiological SocIety_of North America
Medical Society of Virginia
Albemarle Medical Society
Southern Medical Association
South Central Professional Standard Review
OrJanization, MaL 1977
Amencan College of Radiology
American Society of Head and Neck Radiology
American Roentgen Ray Society
American Medical Association
Southeastern N euroradiological Society
Co-Director, Medical Student Education
Del?artment of Radiology
UnIversity of Virginia Health Sciences Center
1993-
Vice-Chairman Quality Assurance
Committee, Department of Radiology
University of Virginia Health Sciences Center,
1993-
Finance Committee, Department of
Radiology, University of Virginia
Health Sciences Center, 1995-
Member Physician Financial Interest and Self
Referral Stuc;br Committee, Office of Health
and Human Resources, Commonwealth of
Virginia 1992-98
Chairman, MRI Committee, Virginia
Chapter, American College of Radiology,
1990-1993
Member, MRI Research Committee, University
of Virginia Health Sciences Center,
1988-1992
Member Radiographic ~ent8 Committee
American Society of Neuroradiology,
1990..1991
Medical Student Advisor Committee
University of Virginia 1989-1990
Chainnan, Equipment Standards Committee,
Virginia Chapter, American College of
Radiology', 1988..1990
Member Radiographies Agents Committee
American Society of Neuroradiology,
1988-1989.
Member Housestaft'Medical Education
Committee, University of Virginia Medical
Center, January 1988 - Present
Member RadiographicwC'DContrast Agents
Committee, Aniencan Society of
Neuroradiology, 1987 - 1988
12-08-1993 08:53
P.06
.
C."". · Maurice H. Upper, M.n
P8lP 5
-
M - - p Ccmmunity
Orpnizaticms:
. and 8d101ady
Esperlence;
Member Equipment Standards Committee,
Virginia Chapter, American College of
Radiology, 1987 - 1988
Member Advisory Panel to Magnetic
Resonance Imaging Subcommittee of
Statewide Health Coordinating Council
of Commonwealth of Virginia,
March 1985 - present
Patient Care Committee.. Medical College
of Virginia Hospitals, 1984 - 1985
Program Chairman, 20th Annual
Postgraduate Course in Neuroradiology,
Williamsburg, Virginia, March 5-8, 1984
University Promotion and Tenure Committees,
1983
Executive Committee University Radiologists,
Medical College of Virginia, 1981
. Medical Student Faculty Advisor,
Medical College of Virginia, 1980 - 1985
Charter Member and President of Lions
International, 1966
Investigator: CT Section of Head Injury,
Clinical Research Center, NIH Grant
INS 12587..0 through March 31, 1984
Investigator: Familial and Sporadic (organic)
Subt~es of Schizophrenia.
A,D. William Grant, September 16, 1984
Investigator: Study_ Qf Alternative EndooPoints
in Head I~ury, UV A Health Sciences Center,
1989
CoooInvestigator: Randomized Dose Escalation
ofU-74006F in Moderate and Severe Head
injuries. Multicenter Research Project being
coordinated at UVA and funded by Upjohn-
1989.
Co-Investigator: Treatment of Prolactin.
Secreting Pituitary Macroadenomas With the
Long-Acti%1g Non.ergot Dopamine Agonist CV
205-502. Multicenter Trial Funded 'by Sandoz
Research Institute and General Clinical Research
Center USPHS Grant RR..00847.1989-90.
12-08-1993 08:54
P.07
"
c. v: .. Maurice H. Lipper, M.D.
PaI~ 8
A
-
Principal Investigator: The Evaluation of
Carotid Artery Bifurcation Disease ~y Magnetic
Resonance AngiographY. Research Grant
8-87051-23. June 1990
Co-Investigator: aD MP RAGE MRI in tumors
of the Nasopharynx - 1990
Princi~al Investigator: 3D MP RAGE Imaging
of PItuitary Microadenomae. July 1990.
Klaus Ranniger Memorial Award for
Excellence in Teaching - 1983
Fellowship of American College of Radiology
. September 25, 1990
DaVld P. Bo nniln
Jack ,lOll"!!
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 2965843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S, Martin
CnCirloltesv' 1('
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. H rnphflS
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Mar. hnll, elr
Scottsvill;->
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
February 4, 1994
r. Donnie Dunn
P.O. Box 231
F ee Union, V A 22940
ar Mr. Dunn:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on February 2, 1994, you were appointed to
th Equalization Board (White Hall District representative), with term to expire December 31,
I 94.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's
a preciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
Sincerely,
C))~7-~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Bruce Woodzell, County Assessor
*
Printed Or! recycled paper
~
I,
I (.Ji
\..:j \..._ i.J
7
David P. Bo rmilTl
Ch;nloltesv Ii,'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 9724060
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. H mphns
,Jilek ,lotH" I
Walter F. Perkins
While Hall
Forrest R. Mar hall, ,Jr
Sco!tsv:ll.
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
February 9, 1994
M . Donnie R. Dunn
P O. Box 231
F ee Union, VA 22940
D ar Mr. Dunn:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on February 2, 1994 you were
a pointed as a member of the Equalization Board for the calendar year 1994.
D ties of this Board are set out in the Code of Virginia, Chapter 32, Article
1 , Sections 58.1-3370 through 58.1-3389. The duties are more specifically
stout in Section 58.1-3379 and read as follows:
"The board shall hear and give consideration to such complaints
and equalize such assessments and shall, more-over, be charged
with the especial duty of increasing as well as decreasing assess-
ments, whether specific complaint be laid or not, if in its
judgment, the same be necessary to equalize and accomplish the end
that the burden of taxation shall rest equally upon all citizens
of such county or city. The (Director of Finance) of such county
. .. shall, when requested, ... call the attention of the board to
such inequalities in real estate assessments in his county or city
as may be known to him. Every board of equalization may go upon
and inspect any real estate subject to equalization by it."
In order to be eligible for appointment, every prospective member of
s ch board shall attend and participate in the basic course of instructlon
g'ven by the Department of Taxation under Section 58.1-206. In the near
f ture, you will receive notice of a meeting from Bruce Woodzell the Real
E tate Assessor.
If you have any questions about the duties of this Board, please call
Bruce Woodzell at 296-5856.
Sincerely,
~:tn~!~
Chairman
D B/jng
c Bruce Woodzell, County Assessor
*
Prinfed on recycled fJof)('r
\
'j)) . \
County of Albemarle
Jt,_"
f;ou~ny OF l\L8EMARLt-
rm/0;;r:Jr_:..r.~LQ~ G"'\.
I;-i:, DEe H 1993 :!
I:: I '. ! iJ
LJ ~,' - -." '. ..: ..1: :.~
(:1/', ,< "~ /', ,'_ v .:J ,.,
.....)\..,., ..\...,) VI V\".i ,,:".\
<Y,S
Board / Com
Applicant's ame
Home Addre s
<:f~1E I:.. L~ '0
I
Magisterial 0 strict in which your home residence is located
. . - (~,
Employer r; L -' 1"'\ t. l r:. \
S r
Business Add ess . I/~ \Nl 1-
Phone
, I f
hJ C(E.AJ
~t A"~soc.
..
to
Vnc/ Lj',Vf)
~
Return to : Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, V A 22902-4596 " '/ _7 /
j0;,lkl? ~~~/~t )d~vU ~. ~ )IV;',; ({7I<iti,,;/~ . z} /J/~r~ I. f/ ;:;}0-)
.- - ,1rtd ,/ (dto'~ ~7 ;?h:t~ /!~~;~<<- //J'/tj ~t(9- j,~qI7 ~II^ ,
~~/ .01~1/j"~//;,~4) 4o;;~1F? Il!!;,;;ip 11:/ !FJ}~...( ~fq -f~{j~?~':Ci:d8'J!ijYb9
v W rr/1 12 /1";ff-t~ yr.) '10~ OlUU<,,-D'L7 h /I.-fll L-.s;11(7/~/~r,r ;'T)t{ ,/
'-
1.
-... ,.-
David P. So rman
Charlottesvi Ie
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S. Martin
Rivdnnd
Charlotte Y. H mphns
Jack Jouet
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Mar hall, Jr.
Scottsville
Sally H. Thomas
Samu{>! Miller
February 4, 1994
M . Brian Lindquist
2 30 Locust Hill Drive
C arlottesville, VA 22901-9555
ar Mr. Lindquist:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on February 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Regional Disability Services Board, with term to expire July 1, 1995.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's
a reciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
Sincerely,
waJlb-.'1- ~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
P/jng
cc The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Nancy O'Brien
*
Printed on recycled paper
U'J9 DEPT, OF ART
{ .. :t.2./08\ 93 10: 37
TEL:804-924-3647
Dee: 08,93
12:19 ~o,006 P,02
~001
provided on this application will be rcleasc\1 to the public upon rc;qucst.
I A~.~ H~/)~ . _L
~ ~//,Il'J.L
. Signature
Retum to = erk, Board of County S"pervisol"s ----..
Ihh1arle County
01 Mcintire ROld
h.rlottesvUle, VA 2290Z..4596
County of Albemarle
.~A"
g ~
.~~. ~
. !oi, ~\,
Office of B8ard ofCoun~ Supervisors
4 1 Mcintire ROad
CharloUeeville" VA 22902.4S96
(804) .t96.S843
APPLICA nON TO SERVE ON BOARD I COMMISSION I COMMItTEE
(please type OJ print)
Board / Com ission I Comnlittee ~l5ilQ' h:he!l; Serwlcc---..&ard
Applicant's N 18 ~.I.r.&.n~ Home Phone ~g
HomcAddre _ _2A;O ~~Llh,t DrNe CI~.Jle VA ~2ql)1 -QSS5
MasJ,tcrial D .trice in which your home residence is looated ~Qrt\Ye L..M.J.ler ,_~
Employer _ ( OeP\+ or Ar+ lAd H'fl~ort) Phone. C8D4) 91~ Ei 1,3-_ _~
BusinessAdd IS~ Dept+ 6~y.rw"ilt+..r H4ll... Ch"rlo4leiOvlllel v.A - 2~9.Q3 .
Date of Empl ymellt Apr.iLJ 9 q 1 Occupation I Title _ \ Jnd~ r~ rG\ d uate. Ad fl\1r.u~+ra-hu:._..___
YelU'J Reside t in Atb~mlU'le County ---15_____ Previous Re~idcnc\: --PJlr~nk I ralrr(J% I VA_
Spouse'sNam ~.t....~ NumbetofChildl'en 4
BduCltlon (D rets lUId Graduation Dates)--1ab"B~,"S.!~n Urnv.ru\y I B.S. C M4th~mahCs)~ 'u"'_
l-'L5c..hool oUa",,. J J. l). , lqAl ..'. _.,____"_ .
s1n.e.s&...Cbur\'\b and It'lr Social Groups
t'):)UNTY OFAU3E: ViARLt:
ri1'. I f? ~ f? lULC r-,::. !. r.1."1
l~~t"i' ~ ~l'
~ ;_) \ - __ \ -~ :' i
,. ~ \"'~r' L..:, I ,. ,
,." 0,-'~.y .
,f d \ ;. ;
~ r+' ';- I
. ; I ' ~-n-,:.,i"-' ".--rr-..-I ! '..' I
,~ w l1::J ~ l-=: LJ II ~: L.~:~
BOARD OF SUPER\IISO'X';
l'l7B
-
Date
. "'1".'1._ '."
UVA DEP.T OF ART
TEL:804-924-3647
Dee 08,93
12:18 NJ,006 P,Ol
..
,
MCINTIRE DEPARtt'MRNT OF .llR'.l'
FAYEIMEA'l'HER If ALL
UNIVERSITY O~ VIRGINIA
CHARLO'l"J.'ESVILLE, VIRGINIA
22903
Telephol"1Ct
(804) 924-6123
FaCBimile
(804) 924..:36017
.,
I ,
FACSIMILE 'I'nANSMISSION COVER SHEET
IS TRANSMISSION CO~TAINS
L ' PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET
T z
Jill GI~IIO
FACSIMILE NUMBER: (
) 912 - 4060
,.
."
Brl.an p, LI'nd~",~s+
.ll! a/q3
TIME:
--I k Strvf Of') Ihe.
1
i~ 'Iln ibr. Mttl~ wQn~40 jn!i.Ure the
d~L ~rrJ deSIr-I' "r ~ t Qr\Y
R,r+her IntofrYla!'OOj r WOlJld be hoppy to pfO\lldt
SHOULO YOU lI1'.VE ANY DIFFICULTY IN REC:EIVING TliIS
~~SMISSION OR REQU!R! FURTHER INFORMATION,
PLEASE CONTACT THE SENDER AT'(a04) 924-6123
u CDl't'\ple~t CV or tA(\Swer th,ir iU'J~.
1h:.nk yov. ro., ,/011(' h.lp ,
~~
.:'i'..':'~.'!lI'~""l""~~I",,,..,,_.J,-!,,,,_~
....."
~
,.
,
Charlottesville-Albemarle ,-
Metropolitan planning Organization
~/
".' -" /
L - '~1/
e Honorable Walter Perkins
C airman, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, VA 22901
January 24, 1994
! m R (ji) . R. !l \1.p: lS. ----I. -"
! D ~lI; l!J l~_.U ..,L....-~'-1..... l..i.
~JU ..')~,. i\!J
,I L ... ... L:
" I 'I
\ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
e Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is seeking
r presentatives to serve on the Citizens Advisory Committee for the
C arlottesville-Albemarle Transportation Study (CATS) 1995-2015 Update.
T 0 Committee members are to be appointed by Albemarle County, two by the City of
C arlottesville, and the remainder by the MPO Policy Board. The two representatives to
b appointed by the County are as follows:
· County Planning Commissioner
· County Representative (staff or citizen).
description of the Committee activities, schedule, and representation is enclosed.
P ease forward the names, addresses, and a brief resume of the Board's two appointees to
teMPO by February 10, 1994
S ould you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact Hannah
T addell or me at 972-1720.
S ncerely,
'.
Charlotte Humphris, Chairman, Charlottesville-Albemarle MPO
Sally Thomas, Representative, Charlottesville-Albemarle MPO
413 East Market Street, Suite 102 CharIottes....ilIe, VA 22902
(804) 972-1720 (yoice) 972-1719 (fax)
. ,-
..
Charlottesville-Albemarle O;1?~ T' ~.';:)Y':;:":F;
I/IT., """~~""'''''';''''''-''_'W'-
Metropolitan planning Organization
Charlottesville-Albemarle Transportation Study
1995-2015 Update
Citizens Advisory Committee
e Citizens Advisory Committee is charged with advising the Charlottesville-Albemarle
tropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) during the Update of the
C arlottesville-Albemarle Transportation Study (CATS) 1990-2015.
e Committee's activities will include reviewing relevant information, hosting public
fo Ins, and meeting with citizen groups for the purposes of 1) determining the community's
gals for the region's transportation system, 2) establishing criteria for evaluating
al ernatives to improve the system, and 3) recommending alternatives for the updated plan.
e Committee will meet on a monthly basis from March to October, 1994 in order to
c duct a qualitative analysis of the transportation system and determine community goals
a d criteria for evaluating alternative improvements. The analysis will be reviewed by state
a d federal officials, after which the Committee will reconvene in order to continue its
a visory work on a quantitative analysis of the alternatives and development of the final
pI n.
e Committee recommendations regarding the draft plan are scheduled to be completed
fo MPO Technical Committee review by December, 1995. However, this end date may vary
by several months depending on the amount of time needed for the quantitative analysis of
al ernatives.
e Committee shall include the following representatives:
· City Planning Commissioner
City Representative (staff or citizen)
· Two City Citizens
· County Planning Commissioner
County Representative (staff or citizen)
Two County Citizens
· University of Virginia representative
Public Transit Provider
Private Transit Provider
· Major urban area employer
Pe sons interested in serving on the committee should forward a letter of interest and a
br'ef resume to the MPO by February 10, 1994.
413 East 1arket Street, Suite 102 CharlottcsYille, VA 22902
(804) 972-1720 (yoice) 972-1719 (fax)