HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-03-02
FIN A L
9:00 A.M.
March 2, 1994
Room 7, County Office Building
] )
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).
Approval of Minutes: March 23(A) and October 9, 1992; December 1 and
December 8, 1993; January 12, February 2 and February 14 (A) , 1994.
Transportation Matters:
a) Other Transportation Matters.
Presentation from Donald Martin, Virginia Employment Commission.
Presentation on Groundwater Sensitivity to pesticides from Michael
Collins, of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission.
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 1124.986 acres located on
Routes 743, 764, 664, 665 and 660 near Earlysville be extended for
an additional six years.
10:15 a.m. - Public Hearing to solicit public input on local community
development and housing needs in relation to Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funding for a project in the County.
10:30 a.m. - Public Hearing to consider requests for funding under the
Commonwealth of Virginia's Transportation Enhancement Program. The
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation is requesting $1,292,096 for
Phase II improvements to the Thomas Jefferson Parkway (Route 53)
from Route 20 to the entrance at Monticello. All non-Federal
matching funds for the project will be provided from private
sources.
Discussion: Hollymead Growth Area Expansion.
Work Session: Noise Ordinance.
Appropriations:
a) Teacher Incentive Grants for Stony Point Elementary School from
the Virginia Commission for the Arts, $900 -
(Form #930053) .
b) G. E. Extra Curricular and Science Grant, $8502.04 -
(Form #930054) .
c) Teacher Incentive Grant for Western Albemarle High School from
the Virginia Commission for the Arts, $300 -
(Form #930055) .
d) Eisenhower/Title II Mini Grant, $845 - (Form 930056) .
e) SLIAG Program, $1447.03 - (Form #930057).
f) Teacher Incentive Grant for the Math/Science Center from the
Virginia Commission for the Arts, $300 - (Form #930058) .
g) Rio Road Sidewalk Project, $7122.37 - (Form #930059).
FY 1994-95 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
Discussion: Regional Jail Authority.
ToT_ -, n n-' ~. . (Moved to item l3a)
*Executive Session: Personnel and Legal Matters.
Certify Executive Session.
Appointments.
Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Adjourn.
7)
8)
9)
10)
ll)
1~)
113)
l~a)
1f.l)
115)
lba)
" . \
1 )
1 )
19)
2 )
2 )
(*It is intended that the Board will hold an Executive Session under
Virginia Sections 2.l-344.A.l [personnel matters] for the purpose of
interviewing and discussing appointments to various boards and commis-
sions and 2.l-344.A.3 [legal matters] relative to acquisition of interest
in real estate.)
CON S E N T
AGENDA
'J;OR APPROVAL:
5.1 Affirm Resolution of Intent to amend Section 30.6, Entrance Corridor
Overlay District, of the Zoning Ordinance to include the Architectural
Review Board review of building permits in the Entrance Corridor.
5.2 Certifications necessary to access Federal HOME Funds.
5.3 Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance, Sheriff, Common-
wealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk, Circuit Court, for the month
of January, 1994.
5.4 Assign the Housing Coordinator position as the local official representa-
tive to the Thomas Jefferson Housing Improvement Corporation Board of
Directors, replacing the Chief of Community Development.
5.5 Approval of wording for Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Hollymead Growth
Area (CPA-92-05, Towers Land Trust) .
5.6 Resolution to accept Berkmar Drive Extended into the State Secondary
System of Highways and guarantee for a period of up to one year against
defective materials and/or workmanship up to a maximum of $7500.
FbR INFORMATION:
5.7 January Financial Management Report.
5.8 Copy of Planning Commission minutes for January 25 and February 1, 1994.
5.9 Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control 1993 Annual Report (on
file in Clerk's office).
5.10 Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apartments) Monthly Bond Program
Report and Monthly Report for the month of January, 1994.
5.11 Copy of minutes of Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service
Authority for January 20, 1994.
5.12 Letter dated February 17, 1994, addressed to Donald B. and Joan P.
Caldwell, from James Christian Hill, National Register Assistant,
Department of Historic Resources, re: Longwood, Albemarle County.
5.13 Letter dated February 21, 1994, from Elsie T. Fryer, Member of the
Disability Services Board, re: Disability Services Plan 1994-1999 for
the Jefferson Area Disability Services Board.
5 14 Letter dated February 23, 1994, from Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Adminis-
trator, to Gary and Elizabeth Edgecomb, re: Official Determination of
Number of Parcels - Section 10.3.1, Tax Map 67, Parcell.
David P. So nnan
Charlottes ille
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 JOll It
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Ma shall, Jr.
Scottsvil e
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
MEMORANDUM
Amended Board Actions of March 2, 1994
TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director/Planning & Community
Development
FROM: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC Clu V
DATE: March 25, 1994
S BJECT: Board Actions of March 2, 1994 (Day Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 13. Discussion: Hollymead Growth Area Expansion.
DIRECTED the Planning Commission to proceed to public hearing on a request from the University
R al Estate Foundation to include approximately 285 acres located west of Route 29, north of the existing
G owth Area to the North Fork of the Rivanna River, and west to Route 606, within the Hollymead community,
d to forward its recommendations to the Board at its earliest convenience.
REVIEW the Donald Brown/Terry Spaid application to add approximately 35 acres to the Hollymead
mmunity for low density residential use in conjunction with the comprehensive review of the Growth Area
e pansion.
DIRECTED the Planning Commission to proceed to public hearing on a request from the Kessler Group
add approximately 100 acres to the Hollymead Community for low density residential use.
Agenda Item No. 15a. Discussion: Regional Jail Authority.
ADOPTED the attached Resolution of Intent authorizing consideration of agreements required to create a
J '1 Authority with the understating that staff is to bring forth more information.
Larry W. Davis
George St. John
Amelia McCulley
*
Printed on recycled paper
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE CONSIDERATION OF
AGREEMENTS REQUIRED TO CREATE A JAIL AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board voted at its February,
1994 meeting to request the governing bodies of the County of Albemarle and the City of
Cbarlottesville to take action to create a Regional Jail Authority (hereafter "Authority") to
o berate the Joint Security Complex and to plan for the expansion of such facility or the
Cl nstruction of a new facility; and
WHEREAS, the creation of an Authority requires the County and the City to enter
ir 0 an Agreement creating the Authority and a Service Agreement outlining the obligations
o the County and the City including, among other things, sending prisoners to the Joint
Sl curity Complex; and
WHEREAS, the County desires to formally consider the creation of an Authority by
rewiewing drafts of the agreements, referenced above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
Cc unty, Virginia, agrees to consider the formation of a Regional Jail Authority in cooperation
wi h the City of Charlottesville and requests that a draft agreement to create such an
A thority, and a draft Service Agreement outlining the obligations of the County and the City
to such an Authority, be prepared by a representative of the Albemarle-Charlottesville
R( gional Jail Board.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, HOWEVER, that the adoption of this Resolution does
no bind the County to agree to the creation of the Autho~ity, such decision being explicitly
re*rved for consideration by the Board upon presentation and full consideration of the
ref~renced agreements.
* * * * *
..
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that ibis is a true, correct copy of a Resolution
adc IPted by the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors at a regular meeting held on March 2,
19S4.
~ !iV' CdA~'/f
Clerk, Board of County SuJ2Wvisors
Charlotte Y.
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
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
MEMORANDUM
TO: Robert w. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director/Planning & Community
Development
FROM: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC f3..tJ~
DATE: March 9, 1994
Board Actions of March 2, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
Following is a list of actions taken by the Board at its meeting on
2, 1994 (day meeting):
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
BLIC.
Mr. Phil waigant distributed a pamphlet on a program entitled "Respite
re Alliance Project" to children, youth and family services. He encouraged
unified approach to Charlottesville, Albemarle and areas of Virginia to
dress the troubled youth and disability.
Agenda Item No.5.
Consent Agenda.
APPROVED Items 5.1 through 5.6 and accepted Items 5.7 through 5.14 as
i formation.
Item 5.1. Affirm Resolution of Intent to amend Section 30.6, Entrance
rridor Overlay District, of the Zoning Ordinance to include the Architectur-
Review Board review of building permits in the Entrance Corridor.
AFFIRMED the action of the Planning Commission to amend Section 30.6,
trance Corridor Overlay District, of the Zoning Ordinance to include the
chitectural Review Board review of building permits in the Entrance Corri-
r.
Item 5.2. Certifications necessary to access Federal HOME Funds.
APPROVED and ADT.HORIZKD the County Executive to sign the certifications
cessary to access Federal HOME Funds.
Item 5.3. Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance,
eriff, Commonwealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk, Circuit Court, for
e month of January, 1994.
*
Printed on recycled paper
To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
v. Wayne Cilimberg
te: March 8, 1994
ge: 2
APPROVED Statements of Expenses for the month of January, 1994.
Item 5.4. Assign the Housing Coordinator position as the local official
presentative to the Thomas Jefferson Housing Improvement Corporation Board
Directors, replacing the Chief of Community Development.
Item 5.6. Resolution to accept Berkmar Drive Extended into the State
condary System of Highways and guarantee for a period of up to one year
a ainst defective materials and/or workmanship up to a maximum of $7500.
ASSIGNED the Housing Coordinator as the local official representative to
e Thomas Jefferson Housing Corporation Board of Directors, replacing the
ief of Community Development.
Item 5.5. Approval of wording for Comprehensive Plan Amendment for
llymead Growth Area (CPA-92-05, Towers Land Trust).
APPROVED the attached wording for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the
llymead Growth Area (CPA-92-05, Towers Land Trust).
ADOPT.KD the attached Resolution.
Item 5.13. Letter dated February 21, 1994, from Elsie T. Fryer, Member
the Disability Services Board, re: Disability Services Plan 1994-1999 for
e Jefferson Area Disability Services Board.
Mrs. Humphris said the letter from a member of the Disability Services
ard asks for guidance, help with grant writing and other things. She did
t want this to be overlooked. Mr. Tucker said TJPDC provides staff support
f r this agency and will handle grant writing. He will discuss this letter
w'th Ms. O'Brien because he feels these questions should be addressed by staff
a TJPDC.
Agenda Item No. 7a. Other Transportation Matters.
Mr. Roosevelt distributed the Department's monthly schedule of projects
c rrently under construction. He commented that the Route 20 South project
w s affected by the weather and it does not look like the work will be
c mpleted on time.
Mr. Roosevelt said he and the traffic engineer have agreed on the type
traffic signals to be placed at the intersections of Rio/Hillsdale, Green-
ier/Rio and Commonwealth/Greenbrier and are working toward having those
stalled under the district contract which means work would begin in May,
94. The cost of the traffic signals are $300,000 and funds will have to be
tained from secondary improvement funds to pay for these traffic signals.
will be recommending these as priorities in the forthcoming Six-Year Plan
dge t for next year.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the bond for Hillsdale Drive and Rio Road inter-
ction traffic signal had been released. Mr. Cilimberg said "yes," but a
rtificate of deposit was given. Mr. Bowerman asked how much was contribut-
Mr. Cilimberg said approximately $50,000 plus interest.
To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
March 8, 1994
3
Mrs. Thomas asked if traffic at the intersection of Old Ivy Road and
ute 250 West is being monitored to assure that it is working the way it was
anned. Mr. Roosevelt said this intersection will be monitored to insure
at the positive aspects of the improvements made are occurring. If the
provements anticipated are working, what was implemented will continue to be
ed. If the improvements are not working, VDoT may consider removing the
rriers and having traffic flow the way it did before the barriers were
stalled.
Mrs. Humphris said she has received comments regarding this intersection
ich concluded that it has helped the safety aspect under the bridge, but
ople coming off of the ramp are taking the right-of-way and not yielding
ich is causing the traffic on Old Ivy Road to come to a stop.
Mr. Roosevelt said he is
stalled today on the ramp of
ather this has been delayed.
oblem.
aware of this problem and a stop sign was to be
this intersection, but due to the inclement
He feels the stop sign will correct the
Mrs. Humphris asked Mr. Roosevelt if he had any information on a left
rn signal at the Barracks Road and Georgetown Road light for eastbound
affic.
Mr. Roosevelt said he has discussed this with the traffic engineer in
but has not received a response. He will contact him and update the
Mrs. Humphris said on October 6, 1993, Jack Hodge presented a concept
of the proposed changes to the interchange of the North Grounds at the
iversity. In the non-agenda information provided to the Board, there was a
from Canterbury Hills Property Owners Association and a copy of a
written to Jack Hodge about these changes. The Association has a topo
these changes and also sent a list of complaints as to what would
ppen if these changes were implemented. The map shows the taking of five
mes in Canterbury Hills and other intrusions onto the St. Anne's-Belfield
pus. She feels this Board needs to be up-dated on this situation, at least
much as the homeowners association's are. A number of suggestions were
afted and sent to Mr. Hodge by the Association regarding the impacts on that
ighborhood. Mr. Cilimberg said he just received this information from the
sociation as well.
Mr. Roosevelt said he will contact Mr. Hodge to find out what was sent
where it originated.
Mr. Marshall said there is a sharp left hand turn at the Avon Street
tended/Route 20 South intersection which needs a sign installed to slow
affic because vehicles are veering into the grassy area where the road use
be located.
Roosevelt said he will look at installing delineators along the
Item No.8. Presentation from Donald Martin, Virginia Employment
Presentation, no action taken.
To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
te: March 8, 1994
ge: 4
Agenda Item No.9. Presentation on Groundwater Sensitivity to Pesti-
from Michael Collins, of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commis-
Deferred to April 6, 1994.
Agenda Item No. 10. Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend and reenact
ction 2.1-4(i) of the Code of Albemarle known as the "Jacobs Run Agricultur-
/Forestal District". It is intended that the life of the Jacobs Run A/F
'strict which consists of 1124.986 acres located on Routes 743, 764, 664, 665
660 near Earlysville be extended for an additional six years.
ADOPT.BD the attached Ordinance.
Agenda Item No. 11. Public Hearing to solicit public input on local
c mmunity development and housing needs in relation to Community Development
Bock Grant (CDBG) funding for a project in the County.
APPROVED staff's recommendation to pursue CDBG funding for AHIP.
Agenda Item No. 12. Public Hearing to consider requests for funding
der the Commonwealth of Virginia's Transportation Enhancement Program. The
omas Jefferson Memorial Foundation is requesting $1,292,096 for Phase II
provements to the Thomas Jefferson Parkway (Route 53) from Route 20 to the
trance at Monticello. All non-Federal matching funds for the project will
provided from private sources.
ADOPT.BD the attached Resolution.
Agenda Item No. 13. Discussion: Hollymead Growth Area Expansion.
Directed the Planning Commission to proceed to public hearing on a
quest from the University Real Estate Foundation to include approximately
5 acres located west of Route 29, north of the existing Growth Area to the
rth Fork of the Rivanna River, and west to Route 606, within the Hollymead
mmunity, and to forward its recommendations to the Board at its earliest
nvenience.
On a request from Donald Brown/Terry Spaid to add approximately 35 acres
the Hollymead Community for low density residential use, the Board request-
that the Planning Commission review this application in conjunction with
e comprehensive review of the Growth Area expansion.
On a request from the Kessler Group to add approximately 100 acres to
e Hollymead Community for low density residential use, the Board requested
e Planning Commission to review this application independently for inclusion
the Hollymead Community Growth Area, upon resolution of the Meadow Creek
rkway.
Agenda Item No. 13a. Work Session: Noise Ordinance.
ADOPT.BD the attached Resolution of Intent to amend Section 12.1 of the
C unty Code by making moderate revisions to incorporate most noise regula-
t'ons, address noise levels and nuisances, clarify several procedures and
d finitions, and "grandfather" pre-existing uses.
Agenda Item No. 14. Appropriations:
.D~te:
F~ge:
To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
March 8, 1994
5
Item 14a. Teacher Incentive Grants for Stony Point Elementary
School from the Virginia Commission for the Arts, $900 - (For.m #930053).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Item 14b. G. E. Extra Curricular and Science Grant, $8502.04 -
(For.m #930054).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Item 14c. Teacher Incentive Grant for Western Albemarle High
School from the Virginia Commission for the Arts, $300 - (For.m #930055).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Item 14d. Eisenhower/Title II Mini Grant, $845 - (For.m 930056).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Item 14e. SLIAG Program, $1447.03 - (For.m #930057).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Item 14f. Teacher Incentive Grant for the Math/Science Center
from the Virginia Commission for the Arts, $300 - (For.m #930058).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Mrs. Humphris asked for a report on the results of this project.
Item 14g. Rio Road Sidewalk Project, $7122.37 - (For.m #930059).
APPROVED. Appropriation form forwarded to Melvin Breeden.
Agenda Item No. 15. FY 1994-95 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
ADOPTED the FY 1994-95 Capital Improvements budget in the amount of
$~,228,450.
Agenda Item No. 15a. Discussion: Regional Jail Authority.
ADTRORIZED consideration of agreements required to create a Regional
~~il Authority with the understanding that staff will bring forth information.
Agenda Item No. 16. Work Session: Noise Ordinance.
(lIoved to i tem ~3a)
Agenda Item No. 19. Appointments.
APPOINT.BD the following to the Albemarle County Housing Committee:
Walter A. Pace, Jr. (W.A.J
Beverly Dee Terrell
To:
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
v. Wayne Cilimberg
March 8, 1994
6
.z:1a te:
flage:
Leigh B. Middleditch, Jr.
Steve Runkle
Ronald Hancock
Forres t D. Kerns
Jenny Greenwood
Karen V. Lilleleht
Howard Allen
APPOI.NT.KD Karen Tarentino and Dennis Rooker to the Route 29 Intersection
Study Planning Advisory Committee.
APPOINTED Mr. William A. Finley, Jr. to the Community College Board of
D~rectors to replace Mr. Harold Dixon with term to expire June 30, 1996.
The Board requested that the following people currently serving on the
Spenic River Advisory Boards, be forwarded to the Governor and recommended for
r~appoin tmen t :
Moormans Scenic River Advisory Board
James R. Butler
John F. Marshall, Ph.D.
Charles W. Maupin, Jr.
Harriet Mohler
The Board also requested that one vacancy to replace Mr.
Fred Landess be advertised.
Rockfish State Scenic River Advisory Board
Joel D. Artman
T. Peyton Coyner
Jay Graves
R. King Pace
Philippa Proulx
Rivanna Scenic River Advisory Board
Francis H. Fife
Charles S. Martin
Jean B. Murray
Agenda Item No. 20. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the
Bp.uw.
Mr. Tucker said he had a request from Mount Carmel Baptist Church to
e~pedite its request for a special use permit to add a small addition.
Mrs. Humphris said she has also been contacted by Mr. Kevin Sower,
Rpwing Coach at UVa about expediting UVa's boat house request.
Mrs. Humphris made motion, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to expedite the
Cpurch and UVa's boat house requests.
Mr. Martin said he has been contacted by a gentleman who wants to put a
mpbile home on seven and one-half acres of land zoned R-4. Under current
Zpning Ordinance regulations this is not allowed and the gentleman is not in a
ppsi tion to pay the fee for a zoning text amendment.
Mr. Martin made motion, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to adopt the attached
R~solution of Intent to amend the Zoning Ordinance to proceed with a zoning
t~xt amendment to review waiver of fees in certain circumstances.
To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
v. Wayne Cilimberg
March 81 1994
7
At 2:15 p.m., Mr. Martin made motion, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to close
County Office Building due to snow.
Mrs. Thomas said she attended a recent meeting of the TJPDC. At the
eting, it became clear that there is a need for regional economic develop-
nt. There is a plan that was developed from an effort which took one and
e-half years and is simply waiting for an action strategy to be adopted by
e governing bodies involved. The cost would be borne by private employers
the plan could be worked out. She asked if the Board members had received
is action strategy.
Tucker will distribute the action strategy to the Board for its
Mrs. Humphris said she wanted to make sure the Board read the letter of
anks to staff persons Jan Sprinkle and Mr. Franco which was received in the
ards non-agenda infor.mation. These letters are very rare and she wanted to
ke sure that this was noticed.
Mrs. Humphris asked about the Board1s request of staff to have speakers
esent a village concept for the Comprehensive Plan Review. The last time it
s discussed the Board was told there were people at the University who were
perts. She feels the Comprehensive Plan is at the point where this should
presented.
Mrs. Humphris said she received mail about the budget and taxes and is
eing an abysmal ignorance of infor.mation on taxation in this County. She
s received letters from teachers who do not understand that the individual
alth in the County does not effect the tax system within which this County
erates. She feels that a fact sheet regarding what taxes can and cannot be
plemented should be published and sent to all taxpayers.
Mrs. Humphris feels, because of the situation regarding the change in
e southern ter.minus of the Western Bypass and the potential impact that
ople did not anticipate, staff should look at the impact on Berkmar and the
ople in the surrounding area. Something is being done at the southern end
at was not anticipated and this could happen at the northern end if it is
t monitored. The overlay that she saw of the northern end of the Western
ass and the County's Berkmar Drive Extended show that there is not room for
th to coexist.
Agenda Item No. 21. Adjourn.
At 2:42 p.m.1 the meeting was adjourned.
Cljng
tachments (6)
Richard E. Huff, II
Bruce Woodzell
Amelia McCulley
Roxanne Whi te
Jo Higgins
George R. St. John
Larry Davis
File
10-20-93 (Underlined)
LLYMEAD
CATION
e eastern boundary of the Community is the natural stream
oundary of Powell Creek and its tributaries, extending from Route
643 on the south to Route 649 (Proffit Road). The northern
oundary follows Route 649, Route 29 llorth, Route 785. north to the
orth Fork Rivanna River a stream between the North Fork Rivanna
and Route 29 and then a stream swale leading to Route 606. The
estern boundary of the Community follows the alignment of Route
606 to the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport where it goes west and
south around the airport to Route 743, following Route 743 to Route
643 and then heading east to Route 29 North.
USE
esidential - Hollymead contains an estimated (1985) 826 dwelling
nits and approximately 2,250 persons. Over 60 percent of the
otal dwelling units in Hollymead are single-family detached units.
he Hollymead Community also includes two large mobile home parks,
otalling approximately 230 units. An estimated 7 percent of the
otal housing stock was constructed during the preceding five
ears.
ommercial and Office - There exist a variety of commercial retail
ses in Hollymead totalling in excess of 780,000 square feet of
loor area. Most of these uses are highway oriented rather than
or neighborhood shopping. Commercial office uses total about
19,000 square feet of building area.
I dustrial - There exist approximately twelve industrial uses in
ollymead. Together, they include over 111,000 square feet of
floor area.
other Land Uses - The Hollymead community contains two churches, an
elementary school, a large cemetery, and the Charlottesville-
lbemarle Airport.
IRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS
e area is divided into two major watersheds by a ridgeline
nning along route 649. Land to the south of the ridgeline drains
to the Powell Creek system which leads eventually to the South
rk of the Rivanna. Land to the nortb of the ridgeline drains
rthward into the North Fork of the Rivanna.
e entire area consists of soils in the Elioak-Hazel-Glenelg
sociation. This association is limited for development because
moderately permeable subsoil, the clayey subsoil, and the
allow depth to bedrock.
Most of the area is forested with the
near the intersection of Route 29
Hollymead property, and some open
section.
exception of developed areas
North and Route 649, the
farmland in the northwest
PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER
Sewer service is available through the Powell Creek interceptor to
the south and the Camelot Treatment system to the north based on
natural drainage. Water service is available south of Route 649
from the South Rivanna system and north of Route 649 from the North
Rivanna system. There is an interconnect of the two systems which
has not been opened.
ROADS
Route 29 is congested and access has been limited for development
purposes.
RECOMMENDATIONS
No commercial uses are to be established on either side of
Route 29 up to the entrance of the existing Hollymead
Subdivision.
The area between the southern boundary of Route 643 and the
South Fork of the Rivanna River is to remain in an open state
as a buffer between the Urban Area and the Community of
Hollymead. This boundary is critical as it preserves the
distinct identity of the community from the Urban Area and
prevents continuous development from the City of
Charlottesville along Route 29 North to the North Fork of the
Rivanna. This area is included in the Rivanna River Greenway
corridor and provides an opportunity for passive recreational
uses.
· Preserve the stream valleys and their tributary drainage way,
plus adjacent areas of steeply sloping terrain, as an open
space network. This network is designed to tie into future
residential development areas in Hollymead. The stream valley
along the North Fork Rivanna forms a northern boundary of the
Community, and should be considered for qreenway development
for passive recreation.
Provide new landscaping with development along Route 29 North.
The area west of Route 29 North is i~tended for industrial and
office uses as a large employment area. It is expected that
these uses will be of a large scale and have a significant
airport orientation. The office service area consists of
approximately 25 acres along Airport Road and 40 acres west of
the regional service area on the west side of Route 29 North.
The balance of the employment generating area is Industrial
Service.
~
Establish a regional service area on Route 29 North at
649 consisting of approximatley 35 developable acres.
area is intended to serve commercial service needs for
Hollymead Community, the airport, and Route 29 North
traffic. This location is expected to accommodate multiple
uses for future commercial development convenient to a
variety of users.
Route
This
the
Establish an office service designation of approximately 23
developable acres on the east side of Route 29 north of the
regional service area.
Establish a regional service area of approximately 50 acres
on the west side of Route 29 North to accommodate multiple
uses for future commercial development convenient to a
variety of users. Access to this area should be limited to
three locations on Route 29. Development of the entire
commercial area shall be pursuant to an overall plan of
development. Zoning action and development of this area
consistent with this Comprehensive Plan shall occur after
the development of the high density residential area (to a
minimum of 100 mobile home sites as noted in the
recommendation for the development of this residential
area).
Establish a community serVIce area south of Route 649 on the
east side of Route 29 North to provide general retail needs
in the Community and the northern part of the County.
Establish a community service area centered around the
entrance to the Hollymead Subdivision. This recognizes the
approved commercial area in the Hollymead PUD. While too
large to be a neighborhood service area, the scale of
commercial development is to be in keeping with the
residential nature of the Hollymead subdivision and oriented
to the subdivision rather than highway uses. The area is
intended to meet local convenience shopping and professional
service needs and is to be screened and buffered from
adjacent residential areas. Access to high density
residential areas to the north and south is to be reserved.
Establish a neighborhood service area on Route 649 in the
northern portion of the Community intended to meet local
convenience shopping and professional service needs,
including medical and financial services.
Areas of medium and high density residential are to be
located internally east of Route 29 North. They are located
so as to access the internal road system and should not have
direct access to Route 29 North. The medium density area
adjacent to the Ridgewood Mobile Home Park is envisioned as
a possible expansion area for the park.
· Establish low and medium density residential areas north of
Proffit Road, east of Route 29 and west of Route 785. These
areas consists of ap~roximatleY 155 and 60 developable acres,
respectivelY.
· Establish a high density residential area of approximately 50
acres west of Route 29 for the location of a mobile home park
accommodating a minimum of 100 mobile home sites. This area
is intended to provide affordable housing for Albemarle County
low and moderate income persons. Consideration should be
given to cooperating with and utilizing the assistance of area
human service agencies in providing support services to those
residents. This area is intended to be exclusively for the
location of a mobile home park for a period of not less than
15 years from start of development. Because of its proximity
to areas designated for commercial and industrial use,
development shall provide an effective vegetative buffer
around this area.
· Public facility sites include:
A large area northeast of the Route 29 North/Route 643
intersection. This is intended to be retained for
passive recreation and greenspace and recognizes a site
identified by the state as having possible historical and
archeological significance. Should the County not
acquire this property, the existing zoning (R-1) shall
apply, with higher density not to exceed four dwelling
uni ts per acre possible with preservation of the historic
site, maintenance of greenspace and screening from Route
29.
The Hollymead School area to provide 'for expanded active
recreation uses and future school expansion.
The Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, which includes the
existing facilities, the southern runway approach zone,
and areas east of Route 606 owned by the airport for
future expansion and location of airport related
services.
· Development plans along Route 29 North are to be sensitive to
its status as an entry corridor to the Community and the Urban
Area.
Transportation improvements include:
Limitation of access points on Route 29 North to joint
entrances, frontage roads, and side streets.
Limit access to Route 29 to three locations for the
entire area east of Route 29 from Proffit Road to the
northern community boundary. Access to the regional
service. office service and the low and medium density
residential areas from Route 29 shall be limited to these
.~
three locations. The northern most access Doint should
be alianed with the future access on Rt. 29 for the UREF
North Fork Research Park. Access to Route 785 shall be
Drohibited.
Development of the Meadow Creek Parkway and associated
collector roads to provide more direct access to the
Urban Area and downtown Charlottesville. with final
alignment determination, right-of-way should be reserved
for these roads.
Alignment improvements and widening of Airport Road from
its intersection with Route 29 North to the airport.
Access to this road should be accomplished through joint
entrances, frontage roads, and side streets.
The fOllowing crossovers (see Map 20 for number and
location) are to be closed to maintain the desirable
function and safety on Route 29 North.
Crossover 1 - This crossover serves as a u-turn device
for Route 643.
Crossover 2 - This crossover serves only U-turns and has
inadequate sight distance on southbound lanes.
Crossover 3 (Hollymead southern entrance) This
crossover has inadequate sight distance on the southbound
lanes.
Crossover .. - This crossover serves U-turns and has
inadequate sight distance.
Crossover 5 - This crossover serves U-turns and has
inadequate sight distance.
Crossover 6 - This crossover is too close to the Route
649 intersection. It serves U-turns and has poor sight
distance on the southbound lanes.
Crossover 7 - This crossover serves U-turns and has
inadequate sight distance.
Crossover 8 This crossover presently serves a
commercial enterprise, but should be closed to provide
desirable spacing and sight distance.
· Water and sewer improvements include:
Extension of the Powell Creek Sewer Interceptor and
development of necessary collection lines to
accommodate development in the Route 29
North/Airport Road area, the airport, and northern
residential areas of Hollymead along Route 649.
Long range interconnection of the Camelot sewer
system with the Powell Creek interceptor. While
expansion of the Camelot Sewage Treatment Plant to
300,000 GPO capacity will meet short-term needs, in
the long term this interconnection will be
necessary to meet ultimate development
requirements. This can be accomplished with a
pumping station at Camelot and a force main back to
the Powell Creek interceptor. Timing and details
for this interconnection should be addressed in the
utilities master plan.
Analyze the long-term water supply capabilities of
the North Rivanna system and evaluate the
interconnection of this system to the South Rivanna
system in the utilities master plan.
Developable Dwelling
Acreage units
Residential-Low -s&=f 742 587 2348 742-2968
Residential-Medium i8-9 290 922 2300 1160-2900
Residential-High 190 1400 2800 1900-3800
RESIDENTIAL SUB-TOTAL 9-5+ 1222 2909 7448 3802-9668
Neighborhood Service 10
community Service 75
Regional Service &3- 118
Industrial service 480
Office Service 65- 88
Public 72
NON-RESIDENTIAL SUB-TOTAL 8-3-5 842
UNDEVELOPED TOTAL ~ 2064
*Note: The changes in this table reflect only the additional
developable acres added by amendments to the Land Use Map. The
table has not been otherwise updated to reflect recent development
activity.
(hmead2.wp)
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in
regu ar meeting on the 2nd day of March, 1994, adopted the following
reso ution:
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-aa-003) described on the
atta hed Additions Form SR-S(A} dated March 2, 1994 fully incorporated
here n by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office
of t e Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
portation has advised the Board that the streets meet the re-
ments established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the
nia Department of Transportation.
Coun
to a
tach
syst
and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of
Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation
Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-aa-003) as described on the at-
Additions Form SR-S(A} dated March 2, 1994 to the secondary
m of state highways, pursuant to 4,633.1-229, Code of Virginia,
he Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and
IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board guarantees a clear and
unre tricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements
for uts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and
Virg
the
Driv
of $
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby guarantees to the
nia Department of Transportation, for a period of one year from
ate of acceptance into the Secondary System of Highways, Berkmar
against defective materials and/or workmanship up to a maximum
500; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be
rded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
portation.
* * * * *
Recorded vote:
Moved by: Mrs. Thomas.
Seconded by: Mr. Marshall.
Yeas: Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr.
Bowerman and Mrs.. Humphris.
Nays: None.
A Copy Teste:
C
:J
o
U
-= ~
co
i :i 0'\ 0'
....J .
6 c r-i ,...,
"" 'i .
'6 i 0 C
'0
< U
Q) >-t I .,
tJ'lCO C") .. Ol
co ~ 0000 ~
~ I U') I C") .. :i
-,...j 4-1 <:31~C") '<t' S
co 0 r-- r-i 00 0
H I Ul C") I-
'd+l Q) . . r-i
..c: .. tJ'l 0...0
..tJ'l~ co 0.. . .
+I',...j.,...j 0.. 'd .0
I ..c: H .. .
tJ'l 'd "N ., 'd
15 -,...j 'd Q) 00 0'\ 00
Z
.. Ul ~'d 0'\ C") 0'\ .,
a co H N .-i I '<t'
r-! 0 r-i r-i 0
~ co .. u . 0'\ U') r-i
'i ~+I Q) ..1<:.0 I N
u 0 ~ H 0 . . r-i I
..
:i -,...j Q) O'd 0.. 000
+I S Ul .0 0.. U') r-i
-,...j Q)+I 'd .,
'd Ul co Q)00'd . .
'd COr-! Q)U') ~ 0..0..
r<t: Q) P. 'd'<t' co 0..0..
~ g 0
0 -= IJ)
cf:. u
~ "H
S .
0'\ H
H '<t'
~ co r-i
S q
~ ..I<: it'
H 0
~ Q) r;-:I 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; iIi
r:Q .,
Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol
.. .. .. .. .. .. ..
II. II. II. II. II. II. II.
~ cO
~ 0 Ol
..
-,...j N c
0+1 0'\ il
U
0::; co N u
U r-i c
o.,...j ..
.,...j 'd ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rl
0::; Q) iC
'd rl
C i i i i ~ i ~ s
i +I u
~ Ul 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
I- Q) ::1 ..
6 S 0 ~
:c Q).,...j C")
'6 :> :> 0'\ ~
u
< co Q) I ..
1 P< H r-i 2
0.. I ~
~ :l
<f) 4-l C")
..
04-1 0; 0; .. 0; 0; ;,; a; .,
0 Oi Oi Oi Oi Oi Oi Oi ~
Q) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c
.g 'd 'i 'i 'i 'i 'i 'i 'i c
~ '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 ..
h h h h h h h '0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..
~ a: a: a: a: a: a: g a: >
h h h h h 'w;
0 Oi 0 Oi o . Oi 0 Oi 0 Oi 0 Oi 0 Oi ::J
U: a: U: a: U: a: U: a: U: a: U: a: U: a:: "0
l- I- l- I- l- I- I- )(
.,
..
Q) "
:> '0
-,...j E
H 'c
1 0 '0
~ E
<f) H '0
0 co ''t
., S 'i
~ ..I<: Ql
Z H C
Q) ..
<;
r:Q ::J
Cl
~ 0 ..
~ '" (0) ... Of) <0 .... Ql
Ia: zl i5
z
Q)
r-!
H
co
S
Q)
.0
r-!
r<t:
P<
H
U
Q)
:>
-,...j
H
o
H
CO
S
..I<:
H
Q)
r:Q
c
o
'iij
~
"U
.0
:J
en
'0
(l)
E
III
Z
>-
>-
Ol
iIi
>
0
.0
..
al
Oi
u
'6
.!;
i
>- E
z ::J
W 15
:::; u
I .,
U E,
<(
>- '0
>-
0( a
u. a.
0 ..
z ..
0 ..
,::: al
<(
() ~
u:
,::: u
cr: .!l
w
U i
E
.c
u
~
..
..
~
o R DIN A NeE
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
SECTION 2.1-4, CHAPTER 2.1 OF THE
CODE OF ALBEMARLE
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that section 2.1-4(i) of Chapter 2.1
"Jgricultural and Forestal Districts" of the Code of Albemarle,
kr own as the "Jacobs Run Agricultural and Forestal District" be
anended and reenacted to read as follows:
(i) The district known as the "Jacobs Run Agricultural and
Forestal District" consists of the following described
properties: Tax map 18, parcels 40, 40F; tax map 19,
parcels 25, 25A; tax map 20, parcel 7A; tax map 31,
parcels 8, 16, 16B, 23 (part), 23D (part), 44C, 45
(part), 45B, 45C. This district shall be reviewed no
more than six (6) years from the date of its reenactment
on March 2, 1994.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that
WI i ting is a true, correct copy of an ordinance
Be ard of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
rEgular meeting held on March 2, 1994.
I .
~/fCc tJ C~
Clerk, Board of countyt$upervisors
the foregoing
adopted by the
Virginia, at a
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation
B< ard construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a
rEquest by resolution be received from the local government or
s ate agency in order that the Virginia Department of Transporta-
t on program an enhancement project in Albemarle County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of supervi-
s<brs of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby request the
C<pmmonwealth Transportation Board to establish a project for the
iI~provement of the Thomas Jefferson Parkway (U.S. Route 53) -
PI ase II, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
Fcpundation (on behalf of Albemarle County) hereby agrees to pay
tl~enty percent of the total cost for planning and design, right
o way, and construction of this project, and that if Albemarle
C<punty subsequently elects to cancel this project, Albemarle
C<bunty hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of
T ansportation for the total amount of the costs expended by the
D~partment through the date the Department is notified of such
c ncellation.
* * * * *
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS
BY
Walter F. Perkins, Chairman
DATE:
A'PTEST:
C erk
.
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
o F
I N TEN T
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
C unty, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend the
A bemarle County Code in Section 12.1, by making moderate
r visions to incorporate noise regulations.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w iting is a true, correct copy of a resolution of intent adopted
b the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a
r gular meeting held on March 2, 1994.
(~! / /)
~~Lr~,L\~a~dLof
/';
o {C/'!Lt-
County (DJervisors
''-,/
't
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
o F
I N TEN T
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
unty, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend the
bemarle County Zoning Ordinance in Chapter 35.0, Section B, to
r view waiver of fees in certain circumstances; and
FURTHER requests that the Albemarle County Planning
mmission hold a public hearing on said intent to amend the
ning Ordinance, and does request that the Planning Commission
nd its recommendation to this Board at the earliest possible
te.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w iting is a true, correct copy of a resolution of intent adopted
b the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a
r gular meeting held on March 2, 1994.
f(ltt iJ taL~t;l
~rk, Bo:rd of cou2l' Supervisors
..
1
.O,\HD OF SUPERVISORS
, .
...
, (:1:~5'9~
qL/ ',0303 .(j- /)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
MORANDUM
;;:':-:l--;;'--I;--~'2 n,'.f1
, I Ii' ,- \, ii, ,il
! !l. ' n '
~ 1, \
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning & Community
Development
February 2, 1994
Resolution of Intent to Amend the Zoning Ordinance
he Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on January
5, 1994, unanimously adopted the following Resolution of Intent.
The Albemarle County Planning Commission to serve the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare and/or good zoning
practice adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 30.6,
Entrance Corridor Overlay District, to include the
Architectural Review Board review of building permits in the
Entrance Corridor.
lease note that this item needs to be scheduled for review and
ffirmation by the Board of Supervisors. Attached please find the
eport as reviewed by the Planning Commission.
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
FEf3 :3 1994
.~
, .... ;,,,.~
..,
. ~
..
Staff Report: Proposal to Amend the Zoning Ordinance
Staff Person: Marcia Joseph
I roposal:
To amend Section 30.6, EC Entrance Corridor Overlay District, to include the
Architectural Review Board (ARB) review of building permits in the Entrance Corridor.
( rigin:
Albemarle County Planning Commission.
I ublic Purpose:
To provide an equitable application of regulations within the Entrance Corridor, and to
further the purpose of the Entrance Corridor as stated in ~ 15.1-503.2 of the Code of
Virginia.
I iscussion:
The negative attributes connected with this amendment include the following:
The surprise factor - Applicants are made aware that approval from the ARB is
required for site plan approval early in the site plan review process. However,
the applicant contemplating changes to his/her building; changes that do not
require site plan submittal may not be aware that their building plans may require
review by the ARB prior to approval. The applicant may not receive this
information until they actually submit building plans. This will require a means
to educate the public and county personnel. This could be done with mailings to
the developers, and posters displayed in different offices containing information
that explains the development process.
The time factor - The applicant may not have considered the ARB review into
the construction time line for his/her project. The additional review may delay
the project. The time required for ARB review should not take more than two
weeks of additional time. The ARB meets twice a month, or more if necessary.
Additional staff time - The ARB review will require additional time from
everyone currently reviewing building permits. The person responsible for
R~vision ARB Building Permit Review
J*uary 25, 1994
1
..
~
accepting the submittals must be educated to inform the applicant of all reviews
required. The design planner will be responsible for review of the project and
presenting it to the ARB. Past history indicates that an additional four items may
be added annually for ARB review if building permits are reviewed by the ARB.
The cost factor - The applicant may be required to submit additional information
not currently required for a building permit. This may include drawings
illustrating the elevation of the building. However, most building plans for
facade treatment require the architect to sketch the finished project for the client,
and the contractor.
1 he positive attributes of this amendment are as follows:
Maintaining the corridor - This would allow the corridor to be treated in its
entirety. The sense of place existing along the corridors could be better
maintained.
Establishing a sense of fairness - Under current regulations, any change to a site
requiring a site plan is reviewed by the ARB. Any structural change to a facade
requires a building permit, but does not require ARB review. It is possible to
phase the improvements to a site; this would enable the applicant to do the facade
changes in one phase and the site plan changes in another phase once the facade
treatment had been completed.
Maintaining the intent of the Code of Virginia - The Code states "that no
building or structure, including signs shall be erected, reconstructed, altered or
restored within any such historic district unless the same is reviewed by the
architectural review board or, on appeal, by the governing body of such county
or municipality as being architecturally compatible with the historic landmarks,
buildings or structures therein." The ARB is unable to review building permits
with the existing wording in Section 30.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Maintaining the economic health of the community - The Entrance Corridors
serve as significant tourist routes in Albemarle County. By establishing
guidelines governing all exterior changes in the buildings and the site, the
viability of the corridor will be maintained.
Revisions to the ARB Building Permit Amendment
3 D.6.4.1
A certificate of appropriateness is required for the following:
R vision ARB Building Permit Review
Japuary 25, 1994
2
.
-
a. Except as otherwise provided in section 30.6.5. no building permit shall
be issued for any purpose unless and until a certificate of appropriateness
has been issued in accord with 30.6.7 or 30.6.8 for improvements subiect
to such building permit.
b. Except as otherwise provided in section 30.6.6 and section 32.3.8. for any
development subiect to approval under section ~ 32.0 site development
plan, of tRis ordiHancc, the eommissioH sRall Hot approve any no final site
development plan shall be approved by the planning commission or be
signed pursuant to section 32.4.3.6 unless and until a certificate of
appropriateness has been issued in accord with section 30.6.7 or 30.6.8
as tRe case may bc for all improvements shown thereon.
The Stieft certificate shall be binding upon the proposed development as to
conditions of issuance. ,and shall statc The certificate shall certify that the
proposed development as may be modified by the conditions of issuance is
consistent with the design guidelines adopted by the board of supervisors for the
specific EC street. Signature by the zoning administrator upon the final site
development plan or building permit. as the case may be shall be deemed to
constitute such certification.
In making such determination as to consistency with design guidelines, the
architectural review board may specify any architectural feature as to appearance,
such as, but not limited to, motif and style, color, texture, and materials together
with configuration, orientation and other limitations as to mass, shape, height and
location of buildings and structures, location and configuration of parking areas
and landscaping and buffering requirements to the extent such practices are
authorized under the adopted design guidelines without regard to regulations of
the underlying zoning district or regulations of section 32.0 of this ordinance.
30.6.6.3
Exemptions
The provisions of section 30.6.4.1 notwithstanding. no certificate of
appropriateness shall be required for the following activities:
g,., The following exemptions shall apply to all buildings and structures:
1.... Interior alterations to a building or structure having no effect on
exterior appearance of the building or structure.
2. Construction of ramps and other modifications to serve the
handicapped in accord with section 4.9.
R vision ARB Building Permit Review
Japuary 25, 1994
3
~
....
1.. Repair and maintenance activities and improvements as may be
authorized by the zoning administrator pursuant to section 6.2.
1.. Main and accessory residential. forestal. and agricultural buildings
where no site development plan is required for the work subject to
the building permit.
l.. General maintenance/stabilization activities to correct deterioration.
damage or decay where no substantial change in design or material
is proposed.
6. Additions to a building where no substantial change in design or
material is proposed.
ffects on:
Housing Costs - Implementation of this ordinance change will not effect housing.
Housing will be exempt from review.
Length of Review - The current review time is approximately two weeks; this will be
increased by another two weeks.
Administration - The design planner will be the contact person for the public, and
review items in preparation for the ARB review. No additional staff will be required.
S ff recommends support of the zoning text amendment as presented above. The change in text
ill make treatment equitable for all properties located on the Entrance Corridor, and will
aintain the character of the Charlottesville/ Albemarle area.
Normal maintenance of a building including repainting is not subject to this amendment.
This amendment will only effect projects that require a building permit.
R vision ARB Building Permit Review
J uary 25, 1994
4
I .
. .
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
~r~$..q!rt,~ " ,,~....
AGENDA I
Federal
funds
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1994
, ITEMNUMBER.~.
qtq~"O~;{5 .~).
INFORMATION:
ACTION:
SUBJECT
Request
necessar
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS:
Carruth
ROUND:
arle County is a recipient of federal HOME funds as a result of participation in a
nal consortium administered by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission.
arle County will receive funding through this program over a five year period. The
arle Housing Improvement Program, as the County's sub-recipient, will use these funds
ousing rehabilitation projects.
DISC
The
appr
Coun
SSION:
ttached documents are standard certifications and other assertions that must be
ved by the County prior to receiving federal housing funds. Three documents require
y action:
1. Fair Housing Certification: the County agrees to conduct one fair
housing activity each year of the grant period. This activity
will be conducted by the Housing Coordinator.
2. Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation Assistance Plan: a
standard HUD document designed to protect residents from
wholesale relocation and setting forth procedures should
relocation be necessary. AHIP's rehabilitation projects will
involve no relocation.
3. Local Business and Employment Plan: requires that efforts be made
to hire employees and utilize businesses from the County in the
rehabilitation projects. TJPDC will coordinate the required
advertising and ensure implementation.
RECO NDATION:
Appr ve and authorize execution of the attached documents.
HOME EXE
94.0 8
~ dr~ ~1 dJ~
17/- ~3 td/ ;;:::;; ~ ~)jj.z
(~'J tJ~A<~Ol-52f3
~/ lJf/ <JP-J720
,0
( Ci7rVJ1u44W}'..../
~
0: Chief Administrative Officers
Nancy K. 0' Brien \.lc::::x:)
E: HOME resolutions, adoptions
February 1, 1994
s recipients of federal HOME funds through the Thomas
efferson Regional HOME consortium, and as members of the
Consortium, the governing body is being requested to approve
he following:
1. Fair Housing certification: agreeing to conduct one
fair housing activity a year during the grant
period.
2. Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation
Assistance Plan: a standard HUD document designed
to protect residents from wholesale relocation and
setting forth procedures should relocation be
required.
3. Local Business and Employment Plan: the TJPDC
will administer the advertising for this, but each
locality should agree to the basis premise of
hiring and buying from local people.
hose localities with current CDBG grants will find these
familiar; they are standard resolutions to conform to the
egulations in the Act. Please place them on the earliest
genda possible and notify me of the passage. If you have
estions, please call me. I will be happy to attend the
eeting at which these are discussed should you feel that is
ecessary.
,l!,
FEB 2 1994
l
t.:IJ:.'--'" ,~ err,~.
JU~
4 '"') ,""" 4, I~/'I
U l{/'(Uz.7/ I \ /!;tf.-c,!.r( (;-.;."rlf.," , '//U(J.1di J:-t(
~ /) 1'-1
I.. ."( 'L/l' . lj,.rvtl..( \. t'1{/":CU ...
"
7' (' 11/'"'
:;(!<<-~ 1.4, /V,c...tJi7, "J'wl't4
FAIR HOUSING CERTIFICATION
ompliance with Title VIII of the civil Rights Act of 1968
REAS, the Thomas Jefferson Regional HOME Consortium has been
ffered and intends to accept federal funds authorized under
he Cranston Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act, PL
01-625, approved 11/28/90, and
REAS, the city of Charlottesville serves as the Lead Agency
nd the administration of the program is the responsibility of
he Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, and
Charlottesville and the Counties of
lbemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa, and Nelson are
articipating jurisdictions, and
EREAS, recipients of funding under the Act are required to
ake action to affirmatively further Fair Housing;
REFORE, the County of Albemarle agrees to take at least
ne action to affirmatively further fair housing each grant
ear on behalf of all members of the Consortium, during the
ife of its project funded with HOME funds. The action taken
ill selected from a list provided by HUD.
3 ~.Jf-
Date
RESIDENTIAL ANTI-DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PLAN
The T~omas Jefferson HOME Consortium, City of Charlottesville as Lead
Agenc~, and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission as
Admin~trative Agency, member governments of the City of Charlottesville and
the Cpunties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa, and Nelson and
contr~cting housing non-profit agencies will replace all occupied and
vacan~ occupiable low/moderate-income dwelling units demolished or
conve~ted to a use other than as low/moderate income dwelling unit as a
direc~ result of activities assisted with funds provided under the Cranston
Gonza~es National Affordable Housing Act, PL101-625, all replacement
housirg will be provided within three (3) years of the commencement of the
demol~tion or rehabilitation relating to conversion.
Before obliaatina or eXDendina funds that will directlv result in such
demolition or conversion, the Consortium will direct the Thomas Jefferson
Plann~ng District to make public and advise HUD that it is undertaking such
an ac~ivity and will submit to HUD in writing, information that identifies:
(1) a description of the proposed assisted activity;
(2) the general location on a map and approximate number of
dwelling units by size (number of bedrooms) that will be
demolished or converted to a use other than as
low/moderate-income dwelling units as a direct result of the
assisted activity;
(3) a time schedule for the commencement and completion of the
demolition or conversion;
(4) the general location on a map and approximate number of
dwelling units by size (number of bedrooms) that will be
provided as replacement dwelling units;
(5) the source of funding and a time schedule for the provision of
replacement dwelling units;
(6) the basis for concluding that each replacement dwelling unit
will remain a low/moderate-income dwelling unit for at least
10 years from the date of initial occupancy; and
(7) information demonstrating that any proposed replacement of
dwelling units with smaller dwelling units is consistent with
the housing needs of low - and - moderate - income households
in the jurisdiction.
The Thomas Jefferson Regional HOME Consortium, using the City of
Charlottesville and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission as
agents for Consortium, the member governments of the city of
Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa,
and Nelson, and the local non-profit contractors will provide relocation
assistance to each low/moderate-income household displaced by the
demolition of housing or by the direct result of assisted activities. Such
assistance shall be that provided under Section 104 (d) of the Housing and
community Development Act of 1974, as amended, or the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended.
The Consortium's FY 94 project includes the following activities:
1. Rehabilitation of houses to Section 8 Housing Quality Standard.
2. First-time homebuyers assistance.
3. Tenant-based assistance.
The activities as planned will not cause any displacement from or
conversion of occupiable structures. As planned, the project calls for the
use of existing right-of-way or easements to be purchased or the
acquisition of tracts of land that do not contain housing. The Consortium
and its contracting agents will work with the grant management staff,
engineers, project area residents, and the U. S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development to insure that any changes in project activities do not
cause any displacement from or conversion of occupiable structures.
In all cases, an occupiable structure will be defined as a dwelling that
meets local codes or a dwelling that can be rehabilitated to meet code for
$25,000 or less.
THOMAS JEFFERSON REGIONAL HOME CONSORTIUM
THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT
LOCAL BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT PLAN
Member governments: City of Charlottesville,
Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa, and Nelson
1 The member governments of the Thomas Jefferson Regional HOME
Consortium, acting through the Thomas Jefferson Planning
District Commission as administrative agent designates as its
Local Business and Employment Project Area the boundaries of
the Thomas Jefferson Planning District (TJPD).
2 The Consortium, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District
Commission, its contractors, and designated third parties
shall in utilizing HOME funds utilize businesses and lower
income residents of the proj ect Area in carrying out all
activities, to the greatest extent feasible.
3 In awarding contracts for work and for procurement of
materials, equipment or services of the Consortium, the TJPD,
contractors, and designated third parties shall take the
following steps to utilize businesses which are located in or
owned in substantial part by persons residing in the Project
Area are:
(a) The TJPD shall ascertain what work and procurements
are likely to take place through the HOME Funds.
(b) The TJPD shall ascertain through various and
appropriate sources including: The Daily Progress
(Project Area Newspaper of General Circulation) and
the weekly local newspapers the business concerns
with the Project Area which are likely to provide
materials, equipment and services which will be
utilized in the activities funded through the HOME
Program.
(c) The identified business concerns shall be appraised
of opportunities to submit bids, quotes or
proposals for work or procurement contracts which
utilize HOME funds.
(d) To the greatest extent feasible the identified
business and any other project area business
concerns shall be utilized in activities which are
funded with-HOME funds.
4. In the utilization of trainees or employees for activities
funded through HOME, the Consortium, the TJPD its contractors
and designated third parties shall take the following steps to
utilize lower income persons residing in the Project Area:
( a)
The TJPD, in consultation with
(including design professionals),
its contractors
shall ascertain
the types and number of positions for both trainees
and employees which are likely to be utilized
during the project funded by HOME.
(b) The TJPD shall advertise through the following
sources: The Daily Progress (proj ect Area
Newspaper of General Circulation) and the local
area weekly newspaper the availability of such
positions with the information on how to apply.
(c) The TJPD, its contractors, and designated third
parties shall be required to maintain a record of
inquiries and applications by project area
residents who respond to advertisements, and shall
maintain a record of the status of such inquires
and applications.
(d) To the greatest extent feasible, the TJPD, its
contractors, and designated third parties shall
utilize lower income project area residents in
filling training and employment positions necessary
for implementing activities funded by HOME.
5. In order to ascertain substantial compliance with the above
affirmative actions and section 3 of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1968, the TJPD shall keep, and require to
be kept by contractors and designated third parties, listings
of all persons employed and all procurements made through the
implementation of activities funded by HOME. Such listings
shall be completed and shall be verified by site visits and
interviews, crosschecking of payroll reports and invoices, and
through audits if necessary.
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that this is a true, correct
copy of a document unanimously approved by the Albemarle Board of
County Supervisors at a regular meeting held on March 2, 1994.
,
i
Csl(~2
of Count(
-/1' ~t/1
superVisoro
.
i
,
i
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
c,;. CA:dO-91
Plan Text and Map Amendment
Trust (CPA-92-05)
AGENDA DATE:
March 3, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
93'o~' (lS.S)
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Approval
to the C
Profile
180-185)
CPA-92-0 .
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION: Y
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Ci1imberg, Benish
REVIEWED BY:
Yes (2)
(lt~
ATTACHMENTS:
DISCUSS
Attache
amendme
Board's
for pub
ON:
is the final wording and map amendment to the Hollymead Community Profile. These
ts reflect the Board's action on CPA-92-05, Towers Land Trust. Also attached is the
action on the amendment request. This is for the Board's information and acceptance
ication in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment packet.
, '~ GJ ,
\ :J '!q ,
CPA9205 WP
94.027
0-20-93 (Underlined)
OLLYMEAD
he eastern boundary of the Communi ty is the natural stream
oundary of Powell Creek and its tributaries, extending from Route
43 on the south to Route 649 (Proffit Road). The northern
oundary follows Route 649, Route 29 North, Route 785. Borth to the
orth Fo k Rivan a R.ve a stream between the North Fork Rivanna
nd Route 29 and then a stream swale leading to Route 606. The
estern boundary of the Community follows the alignment of Route
06 to the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport where it goes west and
outh around the airport to Route 743, following Route 743 to Route
43 and then heading east to Route 29 North.
XISTING LAND USE
esidential - Hollymead contains an estimated (1985) 826 dwelling
nits and approximately 2,250 persons. Over 60 percent of the
otal dwelling units in Hollymead are single-family detached units.
he Hollymead Community also includes two large mobile home parks,
otalling approximately 230 units. An estimated 7 percent of the
otal housing stock was constructed during the preceding five
ears.
ommercial and Office - There exist a variety of commercial retail
ses in Hollymead totalling in excess of 780,000 square feet of
loor area. Most of these uses are highway oriented rather than
or neighborhood shopping. Commercial office uses total about
9,000 square feet of building area.
ndustrial - There exist approximately twelve industrial uses in
ollymead. Together, they include over 111,000 square feet of
loor area.
ther Land Uses - The Hollymead Community contains two churches, an
lementary school, a large cemetery, and the Charlottesville-
lbemarle Airport.
NVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS
he area is divided into two major watersheds by a ridgeline
nning along route 649. Land to the south of the ridgeline drains
'nto the Powell Creek system which leads eventually to the South
ork of the Rivanna. Land to the north of the ridgeline drains
orthward into the North Fork of the Rivanna.
e entire area consists of soils in the Elioak-Hazel-Glenelg
ssociation. This association is limited for development because
f moderately permeable subsoil, the clayey subsoil, and the
s allow depth to bedrock.
lost of the area is forested with the
I ear the intersection of Route 29
I ollymead property, and some open
~ ection.
exception of developed areas
North and Route 649, the
farmland in the northwest
] UBLIC WATER AND SEWER
~ewer service is available through the Powell Creek interceptor to
1he south and the Camelot Treatment system to the north based on
ratural drainage. Water service is available south of Route 649
rom the South Rivanna system and north of Route 649 from the North
livanna system. There is an interconnect of the two systems which
t as not been opened.
lOADS
loute 29 is congested and access has been limited for development
I urposes.
lU:COMMENDATIONS
No commercial uses are to be established on either side of
Route 29 up to the entrance of the existing Hollymead
Subdivision.
· The area between the southern boundary of Route 643 and the
South Fork of the Rivanna River is to remain in an open state
as a buffer between the Urban Area and the Community of
Hollymead. This boundary is critical as it preserves the
distinct identity of the Community from the Urban Area and
prevents continuous development from the City of
Charlottesville along Route 29 North to the North Fork of the
Rivanna. This area is included in the Rivanna River Greenway
corridor and provides an opportunity for passive recreational
uses.
· Preserve the stream valleys and their tributary drainage way,
plus adjacent areas of steeply sloping terrain, as an open
space network. This network is designed to tie into future
residential development areas in Hollymead. The stream valley
alonq the North Fork Rivanna forms a northern boundary of the
Community, and should be considered for qreenway development
for passive recreation.
· Provide new landscaping with development along Route 29 North.
· The area west of Route 29 North is intended for industrial and
office uses as a large employment area. It is expected that
these uses will be of a large scale and have a significant
airport orientation. The office service area consists of
approximately 25 acres along Airport Road and 40 acres west of
the regional service area on the west side of Route 29 North.
The balance of the employment generating area is Industrial
Service.
Establish a regional service area on Route 29 North at
649 consisting of approximatley 35 developable acres.
area is intended to serve commercial service needs for
Hollymead Community, the airport, and Route 29 North
traffic. This location is expected to accommodate multiple
uses for future commercial development convenient to a
variety of users.
Route
This
the
Establish an office service designation of approximately 23
developable acres on the east side of Route 29 north of the
~egional service area.
Establish a regional service area of approximately 50 acres
on the west side of Route 29 North to accommodate multiple
uses for future commercial development convenient to a
variety of users. Access to this area should be limited to
three locations on Route 29. Development of the entire
commercial area shall be pursuant to an overall plan of
development. Zoning action and development of this area
consistent with this Comprehensive Plan shall occur after
the development of the high density residential area (to a
minimum of 100 mobile home sites as noted in the
recommendation for the development of this residential
area).
Establish a community service area south of Route 649 on the
east side of Route 29 North to provide general retail needs
in the Community and the northern part of the County.
Establish a community service area centered around the
entrance to the Hollymead Subdivision. This recognizes the
approved commercial area in the Hollymead PUD. While too
large to be a neighborhood service area, the scale of
commercial development is to be in keeping with the
residential nature of the Hollymead subdivision and oriented
to the subdivision rather than highway uses. The area is
intended to meet local convenience shopping and professional
service needs and is to be screened and buffered from
adjacent residential areas. Access to high density
residential areas to the north and south is to be reserved.
Establish a neighborhood service area on Route 649 in the
northern portion of the Community intended to meet local
convenience shopping and professional service needs,
including medical and financial services.
Areas of medium and high density residential are to be
located internally east of Route 29 North. They are located
so as to access the internal road system and should not have
direct access to Route 29 North. The medium density area
adjacent to the Ridgewood Mobile Home Park is envisioned as
a possible expansion area for the park.
Establish low and medium density residential areas north of
Proffit Road. east of Route 29 and west of Route 785. These
areas consists of aDDroximatley 155 and 60 deyeloDable acres,
resDectivelY.
, Establish a high density residential area of approximately 50
acres west of Route 29 for the location of a mobile home park
accommodating a minimum of 100 mobile home sites. This area
is intended to provide affordable housing for Albemarle county
low and moderate income persons. consideration should be
given to cooperating with and utilizing the assistance of area
human service agencies in providing support services to those
residents. This area is intended to be exclusively for the
location of a mobile home park for a period of not less than
15 years from start of development. Because of its proximity
to areas designated for commercial and industrial use,
development shall provide an 'effective vegetative buffer
around this area.
· Public facility sites include:
A large area northeast of the Route 29 North/Route 643
intersection. This is intended to be retained for
passive recreation and greenspace and recognizes a site
identified by the state as having possible historical and
archeological significance. Should the County not
acquire this property, the existing zoning (R-l) shall
apply, with higher density not to exceed four dwelling
units per acre possible with preservation of the historic
site, maintenance of greenspace and screening from Route
29.
The Hollymead School area to provide for expanded active
recreation uses and future school expansion.
The Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, which includes the
existing facilities, the southern runway approach zone,
and areas east of Route 606 owned by the airport for
future expansion and location of airport related
services.
· Development plans along Route 29 North are to be sensitive to
its status as an entry corridor to the Community and the Urban
Area.
· Transportation improvements include:
Limitation of access points on Route 29 North to joint
entrances, frontage roads, and side streets.
Limit access to Route 29 to three locations for the
entire area east of Route 29 from Proffit Road to the
northern community boundary. Access to the reaional
service. office service and the low and medium density
residential areas from Route 29 shall be limited to these
three locations. The northern most access Doint should
be alianed with the future access on Rt. 29 for the UREF
North Fork Research Park. Access to Route 785 shall be
Drohibited.
Development of the Meadow Creek Parkway and associated
collector roads to provide more direct access to the
Urban Area and downtown Charlottesville. with final
alignment determination, right-of-way should be reserved
for these roads.
Alignment improvements and widening of Airport Road from
its intersection with Route 29 North to the airport.
Access to this road should be accomplished through joint
entrances, frontage roads, and side streets.
The following crossovers (see Map 20 for number and
location) are to be closed to maintain the desirable
function and safety on Route 29 North.
Crossover 1 - This crossover serves as a u-turn device
for Route 643.
Crossover 2 - This crossover serves only u-turns and has
inadequate sight distance on southbound lanes.
Crossover 3 (Hollymead southern entrance) This
crossover has inadequate sight distance on the southbound
lanes.
Crossover .. - This crossover serves u-turns and has
inadequate sight distance.
Crossover 5 - This crossover serves u-turns and has
inadequate sight distance.
Crossover 6 - This crossover is too close to the Route
649 intersection. It serves U-turns and has poor sight
distance on the southbound lanes.
Crossover 7 - This crossover serves u-turns and has
inadequate sight distance.
Crossover 8 This crossover presently serves a
commercial enterprise, but should be closed to provide
desirable spacing and sight distance.
· Water and sewer improvements include:
Extension of the Powell Creek Sewer Interceptor and
development of necessary collection lines to
accommodate development in the Route 29
North/Airport Road area, the airport, and northern
residential areas of Hollymead along Route 649.
\ ~]
- Long range interconnection of the Camelot sewer
system wi th the Powell Creek interceptor. While
expansion of the Camelot Sewage Treatment Plant to
300,000 GPD capacity will meet short-term needs, in
the long term this interconnection will be
necessary to meet ultimate development
requirements. This can be accomplished with a
pumping station at Camelot and a force main back to
the Powell Creek interceptor. Timing and details
for this interconnection should be addressed in the
utilities master plan.
- Analyze the long-term water supply capabilities of
the North Rivanna system and evaluate the
interconnection of this system to the South Rivanna
system in the utilities master plan.
Developable Dwelling
Acreage Units
Residential-Low .sa-:1 742 587 2348 742-2968
Residential-Medium ~ 290 922 2300 1160-2900
Residential-High 190 140Q 2800 1900-3800
RESIDENTIAL SUB-TOTAL 95-+ 1222 2909 7448 3802-9668
Neighborhood Service 10
Community Service 75
Regional Service &3- 118
Industrial Service 480
Office Service -6-S 88
Public 72
NON-RESIDENTIAL SUB-TOTAL 8-3-S 842
UNDEVELOPED TOTAL H* 2064
*Note: The changes in this table reflect only the additional
developable acres added by amendments to the Land Use Map. The
table has not been otherwise updated to reflect recent development
activity.
(pmead2.wp)
. '''"- f
''"-- r )
,,' .... {\
.' .'
'V \
""'\ j(f .
\. \
..
"\ /1 .~\ f ~
._.~
..' ( \
,
l,_,
/-./~
,>
)
r...'
/'
..-./
,._.f
--~
~. .,../
l
I
""-
<:
'. \
.etl"'- ''',
/'Y" ,... ~ -.
"~~ ~ ~\,
---..
'."""
........r...
l .
.... "'-"
..
r
/
"'"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Novem er 9, '1993
Great
c/o D
P. O.
Charl
RE:
Dear
The A
appro
the a
Rivan
Commu
inclu
1.
2.
Eastern Management Company
n Wagner
Box 5526
ttesville, ,vA 22905-0526
PA-92-05 Towers Land Trust
bemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on October 20, 1993,
ed the above-noted request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include
ea north of Proffit Road, east of Route 29, South of the North Fork
a River and west of Route 785 in the growth area boundaries of the
ity of Hollymead. Recommendations for development of this area to be
ed in the Plan are:
Limit access to Route 29 to three locations for the entire frontage from
Proffit Road to the North Fork Rivanna River. The Towers Land Trust
property should be limited to two access points to Route 29. The
northernmost access point should be aligned with the future access to
the University Real Estate Foundation's (UREF's) North Fork Research
Park. Access should be prohibited from the Towers Land Trust site to
Route 785.
Consideration should be given to developing a Greenway along the North
Fork Rivanna River to protect environmental resources and provide
recreational opportunities.
Since
0.
have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action,
hesitate to contact me.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
Peter Parsons, Civil Engineer II .
Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of SupervisorsfVJ L/
March 8, 1994
E: Road Resolution for Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-88-003)
Attached is the original resolution (plus three copies) adopted by the Board on March 2,
19 4, requesting aceptance of Berkmar Drive Extended (RlP-88-003) into the State Secondary
Sy tem of Highways.
E C/jng
F RMS\ROADRES.FRM
At achments (8)
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in
regu ar meeting on the 2nd day of March, 1994, adopted the following
reso ution:
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-SS-003) described on the
atta hed Additions Form SR-5(A) dated March 2, 1994 fully incorporated
here'n by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office
of t e Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department, of
portation has advised the Board that the streets meet the re-
quir ments established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the
Virg'nia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of
Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation
Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-aa-003) as described on the at-
Additions Form SR-5(A) dated March 2, 1994 to the secondary
m of state highways, pursuant to 4,633.1-229, Code of Virginia,
he Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board guarantees a clear and
tricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements
uts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby guarantees to the
Virg'nia Department of Transportation, for a period of one year from
the ate of acceptance into the Secondary System of Highways, Berkmar
Driv against defective materials and/or workmanship up to a maximum
of $ 500; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be
rded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
portation.
* * * * *
Recorded vote:
Moved by: Mrs. Thomas.
Seconded by: Mr. Marshall.
Yeas: Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr.
Bowerman and Mrs.. Humphris.
Nays: None.
A Copy Teste:
i
E
0 5
OJ
- C
~
:;
P-l
H
U
OJ
:>
.rl
H
Q
H
cO
8
..Y:
H
OJ
CO
c
.Q
O'l
"5
=0
..c
:l
CIJ
'0
CD
E
tU
Z
C
:l
o
U
!; I
CII :i
i 0'1 ~
-' .
6 c r-i
'P i .
'0 i C) C
'0
< U
OJ :>-, I ..
ty)cO ('f) ... CII
cO ~ C) co C) Il
>::: I II) J ('f) ... :i
-rl lH .". \.0 ('f) .". 11
cO 0 r-- r-i co 0
H I UJ ('f) t-
'O-J-l OJ . . r-i
...c:: .. ty) 0...Q
... ty) >::: cO 0.. .
-J-l -rl -rl 0.. '0 .Q
I ...c:: H ... .
ty) '0 "'N .... '0
15 -rl '0 OJ co 0'1 co
Z
OJ UJ >:::'0 0'1 ('f) 0'1 ....
~ cO HNr-i I .".
r-l Or-i r-i C)
~ cO ... () . 0'1 II) r-i
'i >:::-J-l OJ..Y:.Q I N
u 0 >::: H 0 . . r-i I
OJ
:i -rl OJ 0'0 0.. C) co
-J-l 8 UJ.Q 0.. II) r-i
.rl OJ-J-l '0 ....
'0 UJ cO OJ co '0 . .
'0 cOr-l OJ II) >::: 0..0..
,:l:; OJ 0- '0"" cO 0..0..
~ g 0
0 !; ~
It '0 ...-j
~ ~
0'1 H
~ H .".
; cO r-i
8 I
~ ..Y: r--
H C)
OJ 1'7':i iD iD iD iD iD iD
~ CO ..
CII CII en CII Ol Ol Ol
OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ OJ
>::: ll. ll. ll. ll. ll. ll. ll.
.;
'g 0 Ol
"
.rl N C
O-J-l 0'1 'ill
p::; cO N -0
'0
() r-i C
O-rl "
.rl '0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '"
p::; OJ '"
'0 '"
c i i i i i ] i s
i -J-l u
>::: UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
t- OJ ~
OJ
6 8 0 ~
., OJ-rl ('f)
U :> :> 0'1 ~
'0
< cO OJ I ~
1 P-l H r-i
b 0.. I :l
(/) lH ('f)
OJ
04-4 iD iD ;" iIi iIi iIi iIi ..
0 0; 0; 0; <i <i 0; <i al
OJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C
,g '0 'i 'i 'i 'i 'i 'i ~ C
>::: '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 OJ
15 15 15 15 15 15 15 "6
~~ al ~ al al ~ ~ ~ ..
g C( ~ C( C( C( C( g C( g C( :>
~ E E '0;
(; 0; (; <i (; 0; (; 0; (; <i (; C; (; 0; :J
U:: 0: 0: 0: U:: 0: U:: 0: U:: 0: U:: 0: u
t- lL t- lL >- t- t- t- t- )(
..
"
OJ ~
:> "6
.rl E
H 'C
1 Q "6
b -E
'" H '0
"6 cO '~
.. 8 ~
~ .Y: '"
z H C
OJ "
~
CO :J
CJ
~ ci - N M '" U'l <D .... ~
C( z '5
z
OJ
r-l
H
cO
8
OJ
.Q
r-l
,:l:;
~
>-
>-
Ol
iIi
:>
0
D
OJ
'i
C;
u
U
.S;
~
>- E
z :J
W 8
::;; '0
I ..
U fj
<
t- "6
t-
< 1ii
lL a.
0 Cl
Z OJ
0 OJ
>= ~
<
u ""
u: i
>= u
C( .!!
w
U ~
E
.c
0
;!
"
OJ
~
The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is:
Berkmar Drive from the edge of pavement of Rio Road, SR
6100, .19 mi to end of previous dedication of Berkmar Drive
as recorded by plat dated March 1, 1993, in Deed Book 1291,
pages 107-140 in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of Albemarle County.
Additional sight, drainage easement, and right-of-way plats
recorded in: Deed book 1298, pages 450-458; deed book 1392,
pages 76-83 and pages 91-98; deed book 1330, pages 501-504;
deed book 1384, pages 18-21.
i~~_
U:
, ~-CA&).g4
0'4 .tb02{5~)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ella Carey, Board of Supervisors Clerk
FROM:
Peter Parsons , Civil Engineer I I (;J~
February 23, 1994
DATE:
HE,
Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-88-003)
he above road constructed by the County is substantially
omplete and ready for a VDOT acceptance inspection. Attached
s the completed SR-5(A) form for the resolution, which I
equest be prepared and taken to the Board for adoption at
heir next opportunity. Please add the following section to
he resolution:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board hereby
guarantees to the Virginia Department of
Transportation, for a period of one year from the date
of acceptance into the Secondary System of Highways,
Berkmar Drive against defective materials and/or
workmanship up to a maximum of $7,500.
nce the resolution has been adopted, date and sign the SR-5(A)
nd please provide me with the original and four copies.
hanks for your assistance. Please call me if you have any
uestions.
Jp/
ttachment
opy: Reading File
,
.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
c; . "cZ.~ as -91- ~
General Fund revenue projections are based on collections through January.
expendi ures have not been revised at this time.
Report
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1994
AGENDA T
January
ACTION:
ITEM NUMBER:)
q'f. a&:B(6. ?
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
January
Educatio
General and
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION: ~
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Breeden, Walters
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS:
the January Financial Report of the General and Education Funds.
General Fund
d Education revenues reflect a reduction in state aid due to lowered average daily
ip estimates.
d Education expenditures reflect a 7 1/2% holdback of certain discretionary accounts.
94JANRP .EXE
94.023
o
z
o I-
~ 0::
< 0
0:: 11.
W W
11. 0::
o ..J
> :!i
~ ~
:) <
o z
o u:
~ ~
0:: :I:
< I-
:IE Z
w 0
~ :IE
<
!zci
WO::
011.
0::-
wc
Q.~
(ft. (ft. (ft. (ft. (ft.1 ~ (ft.1 'at
~C\lC\I~LO""'O(")
..... LO(O (")(00) 0.....
o..tlliencO '0 .
"(")(")LO ~ ~
(ft.(ft.(ft.(ft.
~00l0l
O(OC\I(")
0"": en en
(oOlLO(O
(ft.(ft.(ft.
.....~.....
"(0"
cO cO cO
~~~
'at
(")
o
~
w
e"
Z
<
:I:
o
(0
"
~
1:1
");.i'....,
u.tO
\./,'.0::
}Q.
o
w
~tu
O::(,!J
Q.c
0:)
O::m
11.
11.
<
0....." 0 ~!C\I C\I!~I
..........(oC\I~LOOLO
.....(")"0"0)~(")
ci"':a)o)~';Ol~
OlLOC\I(")CIOO)..........
"':~q~(OC\I(")<D
~ (oLO ,..:.....co
~ C\I 0) 0)
CfJ
W
:)
Z
W
>
W
0::
CfJ
en 0::
o ~
o z CfJ
z::> CfJ Z
::> u. w <
u. _ C!' :) 0::
..Jenz Z I-
~6~ ~z:I:
WO< w-!:
Z:I:ln o::CfJ~ Ui
~~::> -I..Jffi..J w
__0 <<u.< CfJ
...J-Ilwa:1-01- Z
<<u.I-WOzO W
00-1<01-<1- 11.
OOWI-W 0: ><
-I...J(/)(/)u. I- W
" " .....ILO!
"0l(")0
~o)C\I"
~l()"LO
CIO~O(,,)
o)~.....LO
eti..;"LO
C\I (")
en
z I-
o z
i= W
< :E
0: Z
W 0:
a.. W
o >
o
!z-l CJ
W< ...J
::!:I- <
ZZ 0:
O:W W
W::!: Z
>1- ~
00: 'OJ
CJ<(/)...J
...Ja..a:<
<WWI-
a:OU.O
wlenl-
zzzm
wo<::>
CJzg:en
.....
C\I "I 0)1
CIO(o~
CIO. " (0
CIOOlClO
~C\I"
000
"':(0(")
LO (0
i
~
z
en 0
zen(j)
Qo>
I-Z-
<::>0
o:u.-I
WC!'O
a..zO
O-J:
c~O
z<en
::>I-...J
u.en<
...J::>I-
0(/)0
011-
J:u.m
-I::>
OWen
en(/)
o
W
o
Z
W
11.
><
W
0::
W
>
o
o
W
:)
Z
W
>
W
0::
LL
o
W
o
Z
:5
<
III
CfJ
W
CfJ
Z
W
11.
><
W
-I
<
I-
o
....
e
z
:J
u. I-
... a:
~ ~
w w
z a:
w ...
(!J ~
>- (,)
I- Z
Z <
:J Z
o u:
(,)
w ~
... :J:
a: I-
< Z
~ 0
w ~
~
<
!zo
wa:
(,)Q"
a:-
we
Q,,!;
'#. '#. '#. )f. '#.1 ~
'Oto..-coo..
",,:~~..qco
OCOOl '0 .
"....C\ICO ,....
'" co co
'#.'#.'#.'#.'#.'#.'#.'#.'#.'#.)f.
COO! C\I'Ot<O 0<0..-0 01 CO
01 I.t) 0<0 ('I) 0<0 'Ot<O C\I,....
cO.,.:C\ioC\iou;cO"':C"ScO
1.t)I.t)<OI.t)<OI.t)<OI.t)OI1.t)II)
e
Ww
....(!J
(,)z
w<
-':J:
~(,)
Q"
('I)~ co 01 CO!
1.t)CI.I CI.I
0'Ot ..
C\I lti co
co <0
CI.I CI.I
e
w
~lu
a:(!J
Q"e
O:J
a:m
Q"
Q"
<
C\I
Ii
~<O
.)a:
...,::..:{Q".
o ..- 01"- 'Otlll)!
..-II)('I)O)I.t)..
..-""''OtCI.I('l)CO
010..-"':<0('1)
01 "0 co'Ot..-
",,:O!.C\I('1)COCI.I
~'Ot a; 0
o co,....
C\I" I.t) "II) 0" 'Ot" "-111)
OIC\1""-"'Ot<OC\lOI('I)..
..-COII)..-COO)('I)II)O)C\ICO
..tcri..tC\ior-:C\io;u;,,('I)
II)'OtC\lCOI.t)"C\I01'OtO
..-. "'t C\I. "": I.t). ~ ~ co. "t ..- N
'Ot..-"C\I'Ot~C\I..-'Ot"o
,....
en
w
:J
Z
W
>
w
a:
(J)
a:
w
u.
(J)
(J) Z
W <
:Jza:
z-....
WC/):J:
>0::1-
...Jww-
<(a:IL.~
;;!WO::...C/)...
o~~<~<
Ol-wl-a:1-
...JC/)1L.01-0
I- I-
z
Q (J)
I- UJ W
~ 0::1- (J)
I-Z ::>z Z
~o ~w w
~i= I- a~ ~
::E~ aJ z-O..J W
01- ::E o..J<C (!:l
<(~ Q" j::~!z z
~Z>C/)O <(ww -
>~I-~..J WO::E 1-<
o Wo::W 0::>1-
~~~oGj~fd~~~ffi
<c..JC/)3:Oj::rrZQ"WQ"
o::~ooz<(=:::'::>wIL.O
wo--<(oC/)::EoC/)...
Zoffiffi::E::>~::EZ~<
W ::> ::> ::> ::> 0 <( 0 0 0:: 01-
(!:l-,Q"Q"J:WQ"OZI-
....
(J)
w
(J)
z
W
Q"
><
W
a:
w
>
o
(J)
W
:J
Z
W
>
w
a:
u.
o
w
(,)
z
:5
<
m
en
w
(J)
z
W
Q"
><
W
c
Z
:J ....
U. 0::
.J 0
o a.
o w
:I: 0::
o .J
en ~
> 0
.... Z
Z <
:J Z
o u::
(,)
W ~
.J :I:
0:: ....
< z
:E 0
W :E
~
<
......,
zO
wo::
00.
0::-
wC
o.~
*- ?f. ?f.1 ~ ?f. ~
C\lcoo~C')O
1t)1t)00)C')r---
~...to '0) .
It) C\I...O
1t)....1t)
?f.?f.?f.?f.?f.?f.~
..,.cor---OCOC\l.,..
oC')C\loco....r---
cOocrioaOcOcO
..,.COlt)coC')co..,.
<w
111
(<~
c
Ww
...."
Oz
w<
"':1:
~(,)
a.
II
:<>0.
c
W
~tu
0::"
o.c
O:J
O::m
a.
a.
<
.... 0) ""j"" col C\l1
.....co.... 0) co co
C')C\lC')COO')CO
"":(Y)C')":Oco
It)cocoO)It)..,.
..,.O')..,.co....o
fit 0 . It)
C\I .,..C')r---
C\I It)
0') C\I r--- co co 01 C\l1
Olt)co..,.ococo
It) 0) co....C') Oco
..tMaSMaSOCO
co........coo..,...,.
O')o..,.r---....r---o
Mc:J..,fU; r---
..,. It)
en
w
:J
Z
W
>
W
CE
en
0::
W
U.
en
en en Z
-I W <
o :JzO::
o z-....
J: W(/):I:
U >0::....
'1 ~~~i
~wa:.J(/).J
o....w<z<
o~fa....~....
-I(/) u-O.... 0
.... to-
Z
J: 0
.... wi=
..J u<(
<( U
w(/)z-
J:w<(~
.u Z 0
W-<i:o en
~ii:~~ W
<(W-z (/)
0(/)<(0 Z
zz:E- W
Woz"" a.
~i=og ~
<(<(-a:
...."" "
zoa:~t; z
o wZ -
zi=3;a...o ~
o<(zou(/)o::
i=a:<((/)(/)a:W
ut;a:!:!:!!:!:!Wo.
::>_............u-o
a:~..J:J:J~.J
t;::!O::uu<(i5
~~~~~~o
....
us
W
(/)
Z
W
a...
><
w
C')
~
en
W
(/)
Z
W
a.
><
W
a::
W
>
o
en
w
:J
Z
W
>
W
0::
U.
o
W
u
z
:5
<
m
.
, ,
j (Y) LOO co I I
It) C\Ilt) ~
C\I ,-1'-
...J U; C\f,..: N
<0 co ('I) - v
,- ,-
!::z - -
a.::J
<LL
U
en ~J Soo- I ;
z
0 Ov
00
i= ...J tt 6 ('1)-
< 00 It)C\1
I'- ,-('1)
c: Oz 4h --
W J:::J
a. ULL
0 ~
CD en
~ CD
'P""
Z ~
::J ~So - --- i
co 0 ('I)VO V
0 < co vl'-O ~ CO 1'-8 ('I)
U ::J 0 OOCO ,-0> I'-
...J 1'-- It)- 0>- - - r-: It)-
z co ,- 0>
W < <0 I'- COI'-l'- - ,- - C\I
...J C:z 0> ,- It) - - ,-
c: .., 0 -- 0
< w::J ,- ,-
~ ffiLL 4h
W ~
OJ
...J
<
0 en::E
W a.~
I- ::ECJ
W ~o
CJ en
0 00: Z
:J a. 0
OJ ::io: ~
"I OJw~ ::E
enen 0: CJ)~z W 0:
I-
('I) Z W OwW en a.
CD otj I-CJZI::E ~ 0
I i=- <z~enl- ,... 0:
~ ~ ~ 3: G~/~/5 0: a.
0 W a.
('I) a:wen::E3:zz(3o: I- <(
I a.a.zO:w<(w<(1- ~ 0
CO ooo~zo:CJoz w
0 >
W g:O:l-enlQ?ffioo ::E 0 W
U a.U)<(OI-O:::EO~O:O: 0: U
Z <>-O:I-a.ow3:o:wLf: e.. Z
:s e..o:Ww -l- e.. :s
Ol-oWO-1~enLLZW <(
< ~~~~I~~5t;~~ -1 <
OJ ~~e..z~~~~~Z5: ~ OJ
0 0 0
Z a.:JU)~U)-1:Jo:ollio I- Z
::J a.UO:I-IIa:OJLLI-U ::J
LL < LL
, \,
A.t~C: - HNr'J',),. ,/' L SERV!CFS '~K
.A
AT.
P.O. Box 334 ,(
Be1camp, Maryt~!l<i ".2:10 r'7 ,,'.CiiAz9I.
410-575-7412 f)f . ()?f)2/5-/1J)
-J"
:-;l:
F bruary 11, 1994
M . Bob Richardson
S vran Bank, N.A.
P st Office Box 26904
R'chmond, Virginia 23261
f::,..."_,,.__~~_-l l.
1
_ !::ru~ OF SUP~HVlSOH~J
R
Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.)
D
Mr. Richardson:
E closed please find the Bond Program Report and Monthly Report
P rsuant to Section 7(a) of the Deed Restrictions for the month
o January 1994.
I you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me
a 410-575-7412.
S'ncerely,
, ,,,,{ v)t~tOA OJJ. vY~(LLrytJ{fL^,-,
S ei1a H. Moyniharl
P oject Monitor
Ms...EJ,l. W..carey,Clerk"CMa'
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
.
.
Effective January 31, 1994
MONTHLY REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 7(a) OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS
TO: ABG Associates, Inc.
300 E. I..crnl::.a.rd Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
RE: Hydraulic Road Apartments - Aroor Crest Apa.rtn'Ents
Charlottesville, Virginia
Pur~uant to Section 7(a) of the Deed Restrictions (the .Deed
Restrictions.), as defined in an Indenture of Trust dated as of
April 1, 1983, between the Industrial Development Authority of
Albemarle County, Virginia (the .Authority.), and your bank, as
trustee, the undersigned author ized representative of
Richmond-Albemar le timi ted Par tnership, a Vi rg in ia Limited
Pa r tner ship (the · Purchase r.), her eby cert if iea wi th respect to
the operation and management of Hydraulic Road Apartments,
Charlottesville, Virginia (the .project.), that as of the date
sho~n 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.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Report as of
February 4, 1994
RICHMOND-ALBEMARLE LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, a Virginia
limited partnership
By: ~~ ~ J J ~/C';;:-z-
Authorized Representative
~
1 ~ BONO PROGRAM REPORT
Monlh January VM' ~
Proptrty: Ar ~or Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.) Pro;.et .: 051-35371
louliOn: Ch ~rlottesville, VA Num~' or Unita 66
Subm.lltO by: Loretta Wyatt February 4, 1994 Effective 1/31/94
MI~~' OITe
Total Occupied 66
LOW't" U ~O"! Bond Occupied
I. 18
The lollowln~ unll' hl\'C be-en Oeos.gn.tltd as ..~, Incom." un.ls
1 Art or Crest Dr 21 Dorothy B. Hubicsak
1 41 01.
1 4 Ar or Crest Dr 12 Beverly T. Lane 42
82,
3 5 Ar or Crest Dr 13 Margaret L. Mawyer 43 a.J.
4 9 Ar por Crest Dr 24 Virginia Burton 44
&4,
S 12 Ar por Crest Dr 25 G. Robert Stone 45
O~.
6 14 Ar por Crest Dr 16 Evelyn Dover 46
6e,
7 . 15 Ar por Crest Dr 21 Jane Wood 41
67.
a 20 Ar por Crest Dr 25 Evelyn Mandeville 45
6a
9 24 Ar bor Crest Dr 29 Gertrude Breen 49 &i.
10 30 Ar bor Crest Dr 30 Mary Cox Allen 59 70,
" 76 Ar ~or Crest Dr 31 Barbara Datz 51
71.
12, 78 Ar !bor Crest Dr 31 Ernest M. Nease 52
72,
13 84 A'r !bor Crest Dr 3J Juanita Boliek 53 73,
14 90 At bor Crest Dr 34 Betty B. Elliott s...
74.
l!l 92 At bor Crest Dr 35 Dorothy H. Reese
55 75.
16 94 AI bor Crest Dr 36 Sarah E. Fischer ~
70.
11 102 AI bor Crest Dr :17 Anne Lee Bullard 51,
77,
1~ 106 A bor Crest Dr JO Katherine T. Nowlen
~, 75.
19 39 59 71.
:'0 40 60 80,
T ~ C""n~s 'rom pll~....O\lS reopnf I r,.IIeocled in th. lbo.... listing .,.
Oelellona Addl1Sona
to H 1.' 11.
2 12 2 12.
J 13 3, 13.
.. 14 4. 14.
5 15 5 15.
6 16 6 10,
7 \7 7 17.
S 1& e, 1&..
, 19 9 ".
I \0 20 10. 20.
,~
~".....:~~
~'" . c'. -'t
#,' \"". "
;: to,~
:\1: ~. ~?'_ -~. /i
\).~
c~ .05' ql./.-
'fr"D~:!~\-----~.
r.t lli~_JI. :,;
..--
~"
<I
';,.'
COMMONWEALTI-I of VIRGINIA
,- SUPER\
Hugh C Miller. irector
Department of Historic Resources
221 Gmernor Street
Richmond. Virgima 23219
TOO 1804) ,86-1934
TelerlhOne 1804\ ,86-3143
FAX (804) 225-4261
Don dB. and Joan P. Caldwell
Rou e 1, Box 164
Earl sville, V A 22936
Longwood, Albemarle County (DHR NO 02-380)
At is February 15 meeting, the State Review Board determined that Longwood appears to meet
the riteria for listing on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the National Register of Historic
Pia s. The board concurs with the Department staff that this property appears to be eligible
at e loca11evel for significance in the areas of architecture and commerce.
The staff of the Department of Historic Resources does not plan to prepare the national register
no . nation which is the required next step in the registration process, as our work program is
full scheduled for the remainder of the year and we normally limit our preparation of
no . nations to those properties for which the Department is accepting an easement. If you are
inte ested in pursuing registration, I would recommend hiring a consultant or preparing the
nom' ation yourself. I would be happy to assist someone with the preparation and upon request
will send you a list of consultants and materials necessary to complete the nomination.
k you for your interest in the register program. Should you have any questions or concerns
ding the registration process, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sinc rely,
cUtvlWi
s Christian Hill
Nati nal Register Assistant
.-
c: The Honorable Walter F. Perkins, 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 Historic! Society
February 17, 1994
Donald B. and Joan P. Caldwell
RE: Longwood
Page 2
.---
.
HECKLIST FOR STATE AND NATIONAL REGISTER PROCESS IN VIRGINIA
(181 denotes completed step in the process)
Ii' P liminary Information Form received and
revi wed. additional information requested if
n sary
iZf P li~ Information Form reviewed and
ra ,by RegIster Evaluation Team at semi-monthly
mee g
Cl ormation on properties potentially affected by
fede undertakings reviewed and rated by Register
Eval 'on Team at semi-monthly meeting
~P liminary Information Form mailed to
me bers of State Review Board for review two
wee prior to meeting. Board makes
reco endation of eligibility at bi-monthly
mee g. Section 106 evaluations are not taken
befo the board.
licant elects to pursue registration. applicant
ts with Department staff regarding cnteria,
of significance. period of significance and
bo daries.
artment staff reviews nomination drafts upon
t and provides technical assistance
Cl D partment staff reviews completed nomination
ies of nomination sent to members of both
two weeks prior to meeting
Cl er(s), officials, and consultant notified of
Bo ' decisions
perty is logged in at National Register office
er. consultant and local officials notified of
r's decision
ra Owner(s) and officials notified of receipt of
Preliminary Information Form. Department of
Historic Resources archives checked for property
file and any additional information
!E1" 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
Cl Officials notified of review team
recommendations regarding Section 106 projects
~Owner(s) and officials notified of Board's
decision
Cl 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
Cl 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
30~y comment period
Cl 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 30~y comment period
Cl 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 the V~rginia Landmarks Register on day of
presentation
Cl Nomination is forwarded to the Keeper of the
National Register in Washington, D.C.
Cl Following 45 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.
O,-lI.l1d P So erman
CI"'_driottes'ilk
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OffJ('e of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Ch,lJlol tesvllle. Virginia 229024596
(SOli 2% 584:3 FAX (804) 9724060
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Walter F, Perkins
While Hall
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 10, 1994
M . Elsie Fyrer
307 Eastbrook Drive
C arlottesville, VA 22901
At its meeting on March 2, 1994, the Board of Supervisors
d'scussed your letter of February 21, 1994. At the meeting, Mr.
cker commented that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District
mmission (TJPDC) provides staff support for the Disability
rvices Board. Mr. Tucker has since indicated that he discussed
ur letter with Nancy O'Brien.
Ms. Fyrer:
It is my understanding that Mr. Tucker has resolved this issue
w'th the TJPDC staff. Further correspondence should be with Hanna
T addell, Senior Planner, TJPDC and Secretary, Regional Disability
S rvices Board.
If you should require any further assistance, please do not
sitate to contact this office.
Sincerely,
--{[Lit {L--J CJ {(LLl).'
Ella W. Carey
Clerk, CMC I
E C/jng
c Hanna Twaddell
@
P'inlee! on recl/cled paper
l
;"",-;,,":!
~i 9~S.q~
~~~~'-L~'!3) StlOSIAlj3c"r::--~"---~-:-"
-' , ,-'''''-'''''-'''''''''_-'
r....,~?" i
t
307 Ea~tbnook Dn~ve
Chanlotte~ville, VA 22901
Fe bnuan y 2 1, 1 994
, Ii I'
i \ ~, I
i: \...~"..._J
.-.....,.-------. --.....
r: c , t",.
: i!!
Albemanle County Boand 06 supenvi~on~
401 MQIntine Road
Chanlotte~ville, VA 22902-4596
RE: THOMAS JEFFERSON DISABILITY SERVICES BOARD
Dean Albemanle County Boand 06 supenvi~on~:
AttaQhed 60n youn in60nmation and neview ane:
1. DISABILITY SERVICES PLAN 1994-1999
JEFFERSON AREA DISABILITY SERVICES BOARD
2. MEMO TO DISABILITY SERVICES BOARD
VATE: FEBRUARY 4, 1994
FROM: HANNAH TWADDELL, SENIOR PLANNER
THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION
The Di~ability SenviQe~ Plan 1994-1999' 60n the Je66en~on
Anea Di~ability SenviQe~ Boand, whiQh wa~ appnoved on
DeQemben 15, 1993, i~ quite detailed in the anea~ 06
endeavon: Hou~ing, Pen~onal IndependenQe, Employment,
Tnan~pontation, PubliQ Awanene~~, AQQe~~ibility to PubliQ
Building~ and FaQilitie~,and Ongoing Planning and Coon-
dination.; DemognaphiQ Ovenview~; and Need~ and Senvice~.
The DSB i~ made up 06 nepne~entative~ 6nom: the City 06
Chanlotte~ville, and the Countie~ 06 Albemanle, Fluvanna,
Gneene, Loui~a, and Nel~on. Many houn~ 06 neading, li~tening,
and di~cu~~ion went into appnoving the attached Plan.
A~ noted in item 2. above, the DSB need~ to k.now youn,,:
idea~ nelating to educational aQtivitie~ and po~~ible
gnant wniting by the DSB. I am not 6amilian with wniting
gnant~ and would appneciaye any in6onmation you might be
able to give me.
Being a memben 06 the DSB ha~ been veny educational and ne-
wanding ~o 6an. I have attended all meeting~ and wonk.~hop~
~ince my appointment. Un60ntunately, I will be away and un-
able to attend the next DSB meeting on Manch 23, 1994. r
would appneciate it i6 you would ~end a copy 06 youn neply
to H ann/lh Twaddell, ~ ecnetany 6 on the DSB, and al~ 0 a:~co p y
to me. Kanen Monni~ i~ not an act~ve memben 06 the DSB, and
I do not know i6 a neplaQement 60n David Robin~on ha~ been
appointed yet. Thank. you 60n younfuelp in the~e matten~.
Sincenely,
~ -r: ~~
El~ie T. F ynentl
Albemanle County Repne~entative - DSB
\
,
Disability Services Plan
1994-1999
Jefferson Area Disability Services Board
Approved 12/15/93
"
Prepared by
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission
413 East Market Street, Suite 102
Charlottesville, VA 22902
(804) 972-1720
Nancy K O'Brien, Executive Director ,.
Hannah Twaddel~ Senior Planner
Disability Services Plan
1994-1999
Jefferson Area Disability Services Board
Contents
Introduction ..... ...................... ....... ................................. ............. ....... ........ ............ ...... I
Goals and Strategies............................... .............................. ....... ................... ......... IV
Demographic Overview..... ...................................... ....... ....... ..... .................. ........ D-1
Needs and Services ............................ ...... ........................... ................................... N-1
Appendix:
Inquiry Form
List of Respondents
Operating Procedures
;'
Ap ~d-i'21i5193"'~ge i..m..m......._.__.._....'m.._-'mT~t;;j~ctj'~~.&G~l;..m...__._._j.~fr~;ro-;k~;.D~bili.iY&-~;~s-Pi;n 1994.0
Definition of Terms Used in Report: Data from the 1990 Census includes estimates of the population with disabilities.
Three types of disabilities are defined, as described below. In each case, estimates were based on a random sample
survey completed as part of the Census, drawn from people age 15 or more reporting certain types of physical or mental
health conditions. Temporary health problems, such as broken bones expected to heal normally, were not considered
health conditions.
Mobility Limitation: Persons were identified as having a self-care limitation if they had a health condition that had
lasted for six or more months which made it difficult to go outside the home alone. Examples of outside activities on
the questionnaire included shopping and visitng the doctor's office.
Self.Care Limitation: Persons were identified as having a self-care limitation if they had a health condition that had
lasted for six or more months which made it difficult to take care of their own personal needs such as dressing, bathing,
or getting around inside the home.
Work Disability: Persons were identified as having a work disability if they had a health condition that had lasted for
six or more months which limited the kind or amount of work they could do at a job or business. A person was limited
int he kind of work he or she could do if the person had a health condition which restricted hid or her choice of jobs.
A person was limited in the amount of work if he or she was not able to work full time. Persons with a work disability
were further classified as ~prevented from working" and "not prevented from working.~
Base Map: Some of ~e Census data in the report is shown on maps. The following page is a base map showing the
Census block groups for which data was collected (block groups are clusters of smaller geographic areas called blocks).
Town names and major routes are identified on the base map; readers ar: asked to use the base map for geographic
reference points when looking at maps of data.
.
_..........~...............~...._........................~..................--
App~~d.i.2i15i93'-p~g~.iI._............_.....................................-f~.i;;;d~-;i;;;~.&.G~i~....._.._...,...._..j;rf~rson Area Disability Services Plan 1994.99
IJl IJI
Q/ QI M
C s... ~ (1'l
0 Ilj rtj "-
III - "'() Z .!)
l... 0 C ~.I
QJ l... :J :J ~
4- - 0 rG III ..r.
~ III m QJ C "-
~ QJ Q t QJ (f)
~ ':l ::t. <J: U ....
0 '\. (J
~ en c IS)
III C 0
as 3 (1'l u
J1j c 0 (J"l A
r: c IJI t- ...j n.. ~
0 I(j "J
.r. :J "'() .:;
l- n.. IJI I- ill
c c ~
W I1i 15
u "[
~
..c
u
Q/
l
nJ
L
OJ
...0
a:
Ie feISon Area Disability &~ces Plan 1994.99
Introduction & Goals
----~- ............~--......._....
Approved 12/15/93 Page III
Goals and Strategies
The Jefferson Area Disability Services Board (JADSB) proposes to concentrate its efforts from July 1,1993 to June
30, 1999 on the following goals and strategies.
Demographic Overview
Demographic Overview
General Population: Social and Economic Profile
Population, Economy and Employment
The Thomas Jefferson region is home to 164,210 people, according to the 1990 US Census. Most live in Albemarle
County (68,040) and the city of Charlottesville (40,341). Louisa County is the third largest in the region, with 20,325
people. Nelson County has 12,778 residents; F1uvanna has U,429; and Greene has 10,297.
The economic and social center for most of the region's residents is Charlottesville and urban Albemarle County, which
stretches primarily north, northwest, and east of the city along US Route 29 north/south and US Route 250 east/west.
Albemarle has increased dramatic:ally since 1970 as an economic force in the region, recently topping Charlottesville
in retail sales, and is increasingly a center of employment, primarily in government, retail, service,a nd light manufac-
turing industries. .
The University of Virginia and its Health Sciences Center, located primarily in the city of Charlottesville, currently
employ about 10,500 people. Other major employers, each with about 800-1,200 employees include city and county
government/schools, and headquarter locations for State FaJ\D Insurance and Virginia Power. Equipment manufac-
turers GE Fanuc, Figgie Industries, Comdial, Sperry Marine, Siemens/Murray, and Teledyne Industries each employ
500-1,000 people along or near Route 29 north in Albemarle. Major downtown Charlottesville employers, each with
about 500 civilian employees include the US Army Foreign Science and Technology Center, the Michie Company (a
specialty publishing firm), Martha Jefferson Hospital, and J efferson National Bank headquarters. The downto\\'D area
also includes many small retail shops, and a large number of professional offices, primarily attorneys and physicians.
Louisa County is home to several manufacturers of several hundred employees each including Kloeckner-Pentaplast,
Liberty Fabrics, and Woolfolk, as well as a large nuclear power plant. Nimbus Records has a CD manufacturing plant
in Greene County, while a large employer in F1uvanna is the Westvaco lumber company. The vast majority of urban
and rural employers in the region have less than 15 employees.
Albemarle
Albemarle County is the region's wealthiest area, with a median family income of over $42,000. Its rolling hills are home
to families on large, old estates, some working farms, and subdivisions of large single-family homes.. Several retire-
ment communities developed in urban Albemarle during the 1980's continue to grow. Tucked among the estates and
in the steep western hills are pockets of rural poverty.
Charlottesville
The City of Charlottesville, the population center of the. region in 1~70, has not grown signficantly in numbers nor at
all in land area since that time. Like most Virginia cities, it faces problems associated with increasing crime and pover-
ty, but the University of Virginia provides a stable economic influence not found in many of the other cities
Charlottesville's size~ A quarter of the city's residents during the school year are off grounds University students. Cur-
rent enrollment stands at about 17,000 including graduate students. The city's composition of permanent residents in-
cludes increasingly higher shares of minorities, elderly people, and single mothers.
Rural Counties
The region's 55,829 rural residents make up about 34% of the region's population. Louisa County is the largest rural
county in both land area and population and stretches close to the bedroom communities of Richmond at its eastern
end. Louisa Countians are more likely than other rural residents to work within their home county and about 20% are
oriented to Richmond for employment.
,
I,
Greene and F1uvanna County are both primarily centered around urban Charlottesville/Albemarle for shopping,
employment and services. Both counties have experienced rapid gro~h, espeCially among families and children, over
the past 20 years, concentrated in the parts closest to Charlottesville/Albemarle. Both counties also have pockets of
rural communities which have dwindled in size and become increasingly elderly since 1970, notably around Greene's
mountainous western section and Fluvanna's rolling eastern area.
I!
. I
!
: :
I,
Nelson County's mountainous terrain divides the County into four corners, each a long-distance telephone call from
the other three. Some southern Nelson Countians work in Lynchburg, and a few in the northwest corner traverse the
mountains to Waynesboro/Staunton. Nelson's population has barely changed in number over the past 20 years, and its
composition is increasingly elderly. '
Jefferson ~D~bijitY"~.~:j~~.PJ~~lm_gij~.uuu.~---.~Demoiraphic Chre;;;;'-~~-----_.u_----- Approved 121i5193Pag;O..1
C
r') 0
C .j) (J'l 1Il
0 .- -i "- '-
IJI .2 L IQ if) Q.
t- o..
L - (lI ::l -
{II III :> ~ - 4- "- 0'1
Cl- A 0 C L 0 .W ll. (1'1 0'1
.~ Q/ "- ] ::l (1'1
Ql C 0 to 0 Ul 0'1
L. 0 ...
~ .., al ..... t. ... C\I
C 0 () w ....
~ 'E - 0 1l L (j f1I I I
~ ftl f1I .I.) [ .lSl CSl
~ ~ C (7'l 0 :t. f1I (9 lSl
r fli ::l .... Q :J 0 (1'1 e
a. D.. Z IJ) I is)
0 ir .... 0 , ...
i. 0 "J lSl .... ("1
I- a.. I- J\ III IJ:l
w 0'1 c (illllm
:::!: a: ~
~
S
a
....:J
The following maps show populations of people with different types of disabilities based on 1990 Census data. Detailed
data on the number of persons in each Census block group is available, but the data used for the maps is grouped to
allow patterns to be seen. The maps help identify areas in which to focus further study.
Clusters of persons with mobility limitations are shown (map 3) in Louisa, Nelson, and Ruckersville in Greene Coun-
ty. The 'large number in western Albemarle is likely due to the presence of Innisfree Village, a residential working
cooperative for people with disabilities. Pockets of people with mobility limitations (high percentages within the cen-
sus block group) are often shown (map 4) a long distance from Charlottesville, notably in southwest Nelson and
southeast F1uvaona.
Many of the region's people with work disabilities (map 5) are clustered in northern Nelson and northern Louisa Coun-
ties. Again, the large number in Western Albemarle are likely residents of Innisfree, who are employed at that com-
munity. Looking at the map of pockets of this population (map 6) , one sees the Census block groups in half of Louisa
and Nelson are in the 16%-25% range, meaning one out of every four to six people in each block group has a work dis-
ability. Pockets are also seen in southern and eastern F1uvanna, as well as in Albemarle just south and east of the city.
The population of people with self-care limitationS (likely to need personal assistance) is distributed again in northern
Louisa, but not as prevalant in Nelson County as the other types of disabilities (map 1). A portion of southern Albemarle
and Greene County north of Ruckersville, as well as the Cr,()zet area, also appear as rural areas with relatively high
numbers of people with self-care limitations (map 8).
t~
(") c
0
c (J\ III C
0 - c , , '- 0
III 0 .J: 0 III 0.1 -
1. '[ - - III Il.. III
01 ~ ,
- :t :J - -
~ U'I :!: III L 4- r
c.. Q t: , 0 ll.
C"r') C C ,
~ QI 0 .J QI (f) .J :J
"1 .... L- a
II (J\ - <.> 0 Jl '-
~ .~ lli Jl !lI
III = (g ..0 - 0 (J\ (J\
.~ C :J Gl V t: ..0 /1'1 (') ..0
r---~ r c CL ..0 Q :J ::t. ~ I I
nI 0 (J\ a.. D 0 I S G
a a ~ z :r:
L n:: a.. 1:: OJ 0 1SI N ~
l- I- Jl .J: lQ
ll/ - ~.mI
::c 3: C ",;;
....
efferson Area Disability &~ces pi;;;-m4:99.........__w.......D~;;;.~g;~i;hi~.o.;~;:.:~'~.,-.;....".,.,..""'..................'..............-i\pp;;;,.ed 12/ls'fi"j-Page D-S
!: (") I!,i
(l'\
0 - " J C
III 0 "1J U) a. 0
L '[ W 1fI 0
Ql - <.- .... c ::l a.. 1li
4- .~ 0 'r
4- 0 VI ..!. c....
(II Q \/'1 ..J .... C " 0 ~ ~
") - ~ ~ (f) :J :J
~ 01 W Jl U -
:J () 0
~ 1Il .~ :t. - Q. r: L Jl
rG c 0 0 ~ Il.I ()
~ D ..Q <n Cl 0 - ,0,
t !: a.. 0 a.. en Q L ..0 X :-,:. :-,:
~ ::r.
0 I: .-1 u.. Il.I 0 0 \\I Ul O'l
.J: a.. "') a.. 0 ~ I I' I c:
l- I- ~ (')..J) C
,CQ ..c .oJ
Jl till.m
Il.I C
y :t
~
~
.
'~
y
~-..~_....__~~----...-~................,...........u................................u......uu..u............ .......
Approved 12115193 Page D-6 Demographic O\c:yicw
............................................u................u........................__~
Jcffcn;on Area Disability $en-ices Plan 1994-99
;'1
(J C
0 ' .
c r:> III :'l
0 .... .c tl "- L
ltI O~ - OJ lA lJ1 ~
lr) L 1> .~ ...D _.
~ :J a.. '.
~ _.": ~ '," - VI tG
~ 4- irl c .D c ...c "- III
4- 0" ." ro I1:i ~ "- a Q a. .:.
W . , lil (0') :J .l..~
U
"') ClI ~ rG Cl () L ::t. 0
C G CJ L G
ltI ~. :J .:t. 0\ ..CJ t- O (]> .J)
,. c a. () [ .Q tl) ('~
C l.. 0\ Cl :r
r-.-- ,0 - 0 .-i :J .:t. O\._~_ I
o ~ a. :! u. Z 0 r- I ts)
...c a.. "') ro 0 I ~ o,f)
l- I- Jl .c ~ lSl co ri
CJ c EmIl 1m
y ~ oj',,:,
J"I'.
..:. ~
&"J
,...>"...,
v.e~
,~
'.,
....:
"'-'(
L '".
\ -.
'-'-
~,..,..,..,_._._'-'
- . - - . . . - - . ~
. - . - . - -
.............
. . "' "' - -
-........_--.
. ~ - . '. . ',~...' ~'~
. . . . - . .
...............
. - . . - - .
,.----,--.....-...--
. . . - . . - .
.-..............
. .'. . - - - . .
.-...........-.
. . . - . . .
............---
A . _ . . . _
~2(Q(
..~____. '__"'.'__'U_~'''_'''''U... u..u._ ....... .......
Jefferson Area Disability Senices Plan 1994-99 De,.,.,obT2p~jc O\C!'\icw
Approved 12/15/93 Page D-?
0
C M ~
0 - VI (J\ :J J\
III 0---- ClI "- a. ,
J:.
1- t.; - +: UI In U .~_._- -._..~._-
Q,I , , 4- :J Ji
- 0 :r - iii .. a..
4- 1Il .Jl - "
'0 c.. CI tIl C fli C .L <... .!!
~ Q,I +- 0 IJ\ Q,I "- 0 a.
"1 w () (,l) ~ Q
~ en ..x - Cl - 0 ..;
III .f 0 tG G () C t.. ..x ^
,I!j c Cl :J ..:( (J'I III () t.. ~ 10-- -
r c 0... Il. L 0\ U 0 0 ~ It') (\1-
n; 0 0 ri Q !. ..:( :I ['- .... I '3, . . ~
0 .1."
J:. 0... 0... :I Cl.. III 0 1 I ..0
'J a.. 0 tG 19 (X) ri ~
l-
I- J\ l:Q J:. ~IEI
w c -
~ -. :1 ..
::c .... 3:
~.~~>..
-.:'-
~. -.........
Approv;d 12l15m-'Pag~"D:g'-"'"'''''''''''-''''''''''''''' '.... ........,....i5~;;;~i~~ph.i'c. .6~:~~i~w .,......., ,.. ...... j ~ ii~' ;;;~~. .X~~~'.i5i~'~.biiiiY&;.j;~Pi~(J94.99
r-
I
~(
C
III 0
III
.:: ("') C tG
C 0
~ ') 0 G\ If.
0 ..c _. "- ~
~ " - !!.l Vi 111 L :J
i. ClI
- ::I - :J
~ 'II . - 'f VI !l.
- Q/
Q -C' ..J C .r. ~ L
. ; 0, QJ "- 0 ro a.
Gl :~ ..~'"-:: iD () :J
:1- - (J) () 0
C L .... L J
C -- :J tG 6l U QI (,. L
C !l. ,I,) (TI ..Q (j CSI
(TI U QJ
l'li 0 I ~ m (TI
Q. 4- --i Cl J lO ::t. 0\ L'l .-4
a. OJ a.. Z ~ 0 N I I
'J 0 I e G
en t- m lSl (') ..0
]j ..c
III - ~fllmI
:r: ::I c
....
')
I
--~
,~.
J~ife~n Area D~bility Servi7es pj;;;-1994:w-.....................'6~;;;~p;;p.hi~'o~~~'~'~....,.........................................._.App~;~2j15193 Page D-9
C
,Ii ,Q
("')
~-;., :J rti
, 0. -
U') 0 'r
lil 0... :.J
c (.... ~
,Q tiI L 0 ll. ClI
C :> " J L .: +~.
0 - .L. rti ltI (0 0 n} -'
lI\ .~ C ..... C t. U
l. L 4- ~ .~ (II ~, llJ () I ~
III .... 0 ,', "- X X !'J ;,;..
It\ C :.J <.J () u C\J
C0- t. :t. M-~ --
4- Q It\ ,Q ~ Cl llJ 0 ClI f : I I "-
QJ ..- ..- ~l \J"l U. I 0... 0 !.? ~:<t CO .'
CO C1l QJ I'll L "')
!} "") C ::t. ~ IJ) Jl~ L
J .-/ r- ~11~
0 Ji =~'- '
~ lI\ C 0 a. u I Cl.J c ::r
;1 0 I
C a.. e..- X
t nf D-
O ClI
..J: a... v"l
I-
..
.
~
.j
.r
"'''''::"r -
--'-p ge'i).'iO"""''''-''''''''
-'--d 12115193 a
Approve
--'99
---~spj;n 1994. -
""'''''-bTty Semce
,.........m..................D~;;;;;.g:;;p.h.{~..O~:~.;.;:i~;;,;......................j~f.f~';.;;;~..A;ea Disa I 1
6
I>~'
't:...::
-'..:~
.~. - . . -' ...,
~ .\ ., ..
T}pes of Disabilities
The most common types of physical/sensory disabilities are visual and hearing impairments. According to local es-
timates based on percentages from the Virginians With Disabilities Survey, approximately 7,200 people (six percent of
the population) in the region have hearing impairments, 900 of whom are deaf. Close to 6,000 (five percent) have visual
problems; about 1,000 of these are blind.
The other major sources of disabilities which may result in physical andlor sensory impairments are chronic diseases:
cancer, diabetes, and arthritis. Each disease affects between 1,500 and 3,000 persons (two percent each) in the region.
Other types of disabilities measured include cerebral palsy (affecting an estimated 312 people in the region), spinal
cord injuries (111), traumatic brain injuries (78), epilepsy (11) and cystic fibrosis (11).
Estimated Number of People By Disability Type
Th:xnas JefferSQ"'l Pla.,.,ing District. EstiNte: VA ulDis. s--.rt
Visual Arthritis
~ring Ir.p.:lred
~Estimated RlII1ber of peq::!e IJlDis
Diabetes
Cancer
OU19r
Disability Types as Percent of Total Population
Thx.as JEfferSQ"'l PI a'cr.g District. Estir.ata: VA ulDi s. s--.rt
Visual
Cancer
0.e3'J
0,040
0.053
0.060
0.070
~ring Iepaired
Arthritis
Diabetes
Otror
0.C10 e.C?<l
~ Percoot of Total PWJlctiCl1
Jefrerso~ ~- DisabTliti&;;~~#pi~~--i994~'0""""""" . ,-",uD~;~~-phi~-o...~;::~.~.;_.#._..u_...._.um.n._..u.---.--.A-pp~d 12/15/93 Pag;r;:u
Persons Receiving Social Security Assistance
Many persons with disabilities receive social security assistance. An analysis of the estimated number of Social Security
recipients helps give another perspective on the estimated numbers and distribution of persons wtih disabilities.
2.5% of the region's population (4,230 people) receive social security benefits, divided fairly evenly between
beneficiaries and direct recipients.
Four percent of Nelson's population, 3.4% of Louisa's population, and 3.2% of Charlottesville's population receive So-
cial Security assistance. Albemarle, Greene, and Fluvanna's percentages receiving assistance are lower than the regional
average, each around two percent, with Albemarle the lowest at 1.7%.
Charlottesville is home to the largest number of recipients (1,272) in the region, followed closely by Albemarle (1,206).
Louisa has 724 residents receiving assistance, and Nelson has 222; Fluvanna and Greene are home to 147 and 122
recipients, respectively.
Social Security Recipients and Beneficiaries
12/91: Soorce, VA Dept of Rehab S\lcs
Chville Fluvanna
~ Number of Beneficiaries + Recipi
Percent of Locality Receiving Social Security Assistance
Thorr~s Jefferson Planning District, 1991
0.040
0.035
0.~
0.025
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.~'
AlbaTule CtlVi lle Fluvanna
~ Percoot of Total PcpulatiCl'l
H....~..~~_~..............~..........~._.........................~...-.~~~
API;;;'~d.i2/15fi3 Page D.li..........,m._.._..##..m.._._..._m..m_........D7~~~pt;f~H~;;~;.;....m_.. Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan 1994-99
Persons with Spinal Cord Injuries
According to estimates based on national averages, an estimated 111 people in this region (1% of the total population)
have a spinal cord injury. If national averages held true here, Albemarle County would be home to an estimated 42%
of the residents with spinal cord injuries; Charlottesville, to 24%, Louisa to 13%, and Nelson, FIuvanna, and Greene,
to six or seven percent each. '
Using a different data source, the VIrginia Department of Rehabilitative Services database, an estimated 94 persons
in the region have a spinal cord injury. The location of urban area residents according to the Virginia database is a
flipped image of the national estimate; Charlottesville is home to 44%, while Albemarle is home to 20%. Louisa at
17% and Nelson at 14% have higher than expected numbers, while FIuvanna and Greene have only two or three per-
cent of the region's share. '
. Estimated Spinal Cord Injured Population, 1993
Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Source: National Estimtes & VA Dept of Rehab. Services
120
100
80
60
40
20
o
Albemarle CtNille Fluvanna
~ Est. Based en Nat' 1 ~g
Greene Looisa Nelsoo
. QJrrent in VA Database
Rsgien
Estimated Distribution of Spinal Cord Injured Population
Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Source: VA Dept of Rehab. Services Database
Nelsoo <13.8%)
Albemarle (20.2%)
'Looisa (17.0%)
Greene (3.2%)-
Fluvanna (2.1%)
CtNille (43 .6%)
Disabilities Among the Working Age Population
Although the percent of people age 16-64 with a wotk disability has remained about the same in the past ten years the
actual number dropped slightly, from about 7,600 in 1980 to 7,400 in 1990. The 1990 count represents seven percent
of the total population aged 16 to 64, down from eight percent in 1980. Drops were most dramatic in Nelson (26%
decrease) and Charlottesville (16% decrease). Louisa had an increase of 13% (from about 1,300 to 1,450) and
Albemarle's work disabled population increased nine percent (from about 2,200 to 2,400).
About a third of the work disabled population lives in Albemarle, and one fifth each live in Charlottesville and Louisa.
Nelson is home to ten percent, and FIuvanna and Greene to eight percent each.
~_.."-"""._--""""--"-"""""'''''''''''.'''--'''''''-''''''''''''''''--''''''''_.'''''-...........~_.
Jefferron Area Disability Services Plan 1994-99 Demographic Overview
Approved 12/15/93 Page D.13
Number of Working Age People w /Work Disability
Ttnnas Jeffersoo Planning Di strict. SoJrce: US Census
~1980
[film
Distribution of Persons with a Work Disability
Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Source: US Census
Nelsoo 00.2%)
Chville (21.7%)
looisa <19.6%)
Fluvanna (7.9%)
~
Effect of Disability on Labor Force Status
The number of persons with a work disability decreased from 7,631 in 1980 to 7,407 in 1990. 4,204 persons with a work
disability are not in the labor force (dO\vn from 4,926 in 1980). 3,461 of the 1990 respondents not in the labor force said
the reason they are not working is their disability. The percentage of persons with a work disability who said their dis-
ability prevents them from working increased from 79% in 1980 to 82% iri 1990.
Number of People Prevented By Disabiliy From Work
1983-lm. Trorr~s Jefferson Pla1nlng District.
o
~ \.brkDis80
I
~
~ PreYerl t s:..br k83
'X1J 5eOO
rtI WorkDi sW
~ 7020 ~
~ PreventsWork90
~#..... ..~ ....~~......................~~.............-...-.................--_.............-
Approved 12/15193~P;;ge D:i4-.-----...............................D~;;;;.g;:;;p.~:i.~..O-::~.;.::i~~..~..... .. 'Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan 1994.99
EmploymentAssistancefor People with Disabilities
According to reports from the VA Department of Rehabilitative Services 1,528 persons in the region sought employ-
ment assistance during 1991-1993. 51% of their clients were from Charlottesville, and 23% were from Albemarle. The
rural localities were home to six or seven percent each.
The most frequently identified types of disabilities among people with disabilities who sought employment assistance
were mental Combining the VDRS statistics on total clients served in the categories of mentally ill (17%), mentally
retarded (16%), and substance abusers (12%), a total of 45% of the people seeking assistance \\ith employment had
sonie sort of mental disability. 20% were amputees, seven percent were deaf, one percent each had epilepsy, diabetes,
or cardiac problems, and 24% appeared in the "other" category. Less than one percent were visually or speech im-
paired, or had respiratory or digestive system disabilities.
Elderly Population
Previous studies in the region have shown a direct correlation between aging and disabilities. As age increases, the
likelihood of the incidence of disaibility also increases.'
While the working age population has remained the dominant age group over the past 20 years, the rate of growth
among persons age 65 + was higher than that of persons age 16-64, regionwide and in every locality. In 1990 there were
18,900 elderly people in the region, a 67% increase (7,551 people) over 1970. During the same period the working age
population grew from 66,981 to 108,648, an additional 41,667 people, or a 62% increase. Unlike many other socio-
economic trends (including the gro\\th of working-age population) which saw a sharp rise in the 1970's followed by
slower growth in 1980's, the number of elderly has increased steadily, by about 30% each decade. During the 1970-1990
period, the population aged 16-64 increased [rom 58% to 66%, of the region's total population, while the percentage
of children decreased from 32% to 22%, and the percentage of elderly increased from 10% to 12%.
16% of the region's elderly population is below poverty.
Population. By Age, 1970-1990
A,ses 0-17, 1S-fA, and 6S+. Scurce: US Ce1SJs
120 K
100 K
~ KJ
60 K J
43 K'
20K
,
, e
~ ChilG'7.l
~ Elm
fI Chil<Z3
~ EIC3:l
Regicn
~ lJor~e~ ~ lJorldisGSJ ~ lJor~e93
~ CI'lil&3
~ EIC93
Rates of Growth By Age Group, 1970-1990
PoSes 0-17. 18-fA, and 6S+. Scurce: US CenSJs
120 K
100 K
~K
60K
40K
20K
e
B Regicn
Chilcm ChilC93 lJorkP,s&ro Ela7J Elm
Chi 1<Z3 lJorkP..ge~ lJorkP.ge93 ElC3:l
eff ~Area Disability'&'~~~~~"pi~~"im:0''''''''''''----'''''''i5~;;;;;;';'ph;~'~~~~.~-;....., ........... ...................-.....'.......App.;;;Zei.iiii.s"i93 Page D.15
Percent of Population By Age Group! 1970-1990
Ages 0-17, 18~, and 65+. Soorce: US CenSJs
[!]
~
~
m Children
~ Working Age
~ Elderly
Compared to the total increase of elderly population, (67%), the population age 65-74 increased 58%, while the num-
ber of persons aged 75-84 grew 76%, and the number aged 85 + grew 100%. The percentage of the whole region's
population aged 85 +, however, is still only one percent, as it was in 1970. The percent aged 75~84 increased steadily
over the decades from two to four percent, while the 65-74 age group increased from four percent to seven percent.
Most of the increase in the percentage of population age 65.74 was during the 1970's. The fact that the percentage of
the population aged 75-84 rose steadily over the decades instead of leveling off in the 1980's indicates the population
of very elderly may have an increasing impact on the area during the 1990's. .
Regional Elderly Population, 1970-1990
Age 1970 1980 1990 Percent Change
Number ' Percent Number Percent Number Percent 70-80 80-90
65-74 7,044 4% 9,286 6% 11,118 7% 32% 20%
75-84 3,407 2% 4,336 3% 5,984 4% 27% 38%
85+ 898 1% 1,300 1% 1.798 1% 45% 18%
Total 11,349 . 10% 14,9~. 10% 18,900 12% 31% 27% .
Elderly Population Growth
HOllas Jeffersoo Planning District. Soorce: US CenSJs
12 K
10 K
8 K
6 K
4 K
2 K
o
~1970
~1933
m1993
............~~~...._~,...._.._.~.......................__......._.......-.....
Appro-:.;d..i"2/iSi9i..p;g;o:16-.................................................i5~;;~.g;;p.hT;~:~;:.~~:;.....................~J7ff~-;;on Area Disability Services Plan 1994.99
Elderly Population Relative Rate of Growth
Ttonas Jefferscn Plannins District. Source: us Census
201(
16 I(
....
- .. - - - - ....:...---
--_..- :--
...... -----
- .. .. .. :-.-.----
12 I(
81(
. f"-' ...... .--' .
.--. ....... ._, .-, .-' .-"
-
..-
4 K
o
1970
1980
1990
65-74
75-84
- --
85+
I
I
I
In general, the rural areas, especially Louisa and Nelson, contain a high percentage of the region's elderly population
in contrast to their small share of the general population. The following maps show the number of elderly persons
throughout the region by census block group (map 9); and "pockets" of elderly population (map 10), i.e. the percent of
elderly living in each census block group.
II.
II,'
I
<T
:
I ;
, ,
:
Ii
it
I iJ
'!
~
,
C
I
i
t
j
i
!
,
;
I
I
.~ -"
Jefferson Area Disability Senices Plan 1994-99
Demographic Overview
Approved 12/15/93 Page D.l?
"I
C
0
lil
C C (") t.
0 - .~ G'l QI
lil 0 Il.
- "- t.
t. t. fG III ['0 (lJ
(lJ - j 4- 1)
4- III ::l III 0 Q.
4- A Q. C ~ 0 j
0\ (lJ 0 6.0 ..c t. 0 IS)
~ 'J CIl a.. (,) "- 6.0 L t. I()
(I) .J) 0 () -l ~
C ['0
~ lil 'c 2) IS) ..... [
() It) .:x: t -l
l1i c t. C'\ j ...0 0 W I +
[ III (lJ 0'\ () Z 0 -0 IS) to
0 1) ...... Cl 1) C I() ['0
..c a.. W Il. :Il 6.0 ~ :J -l -l
I- "') QI (ll c lEf1~m
I- y <J: .... ...'\,'\.i
App~d"1iii'5193 P;ge D:i8-.-..-----......----.-.D;;;;~g;;phi.~..O::~.;.;:i~~.'.....................J~fi~';;;;;..A;~~..Di;;;bility Se-;:';ces Pla~994-99
c
0
.L'_._... . ; - # _.- -
-
- 1~ : .' (") ~
h _. f]> :l
Cl ....,-...-. ~ , ., "- a.
~. -.'.
"'""I - O. t .:~;~ ::-. ,_: bi n 1)
Q/
~ .t:' --, :J Q...
.~ a.
~ - 0 III ...:
1Il 0 C .r. f.... ~
Q OJ III "- 0 a. III
1Il Q.... :J 1)
, oJ' ~.\;O:"~: () (I) 0
01 QJ, - C 0
.' Jl 0 !.
, :.01' :i"'~'--~ t9
III ()
C 0,. t. P\ 0 !..
~. ,', u
c 0.' OJ en C- O
!l. 1) r1 Cl QJ :t.
Qj W 0- Il.. 0 It')
n.: ~ -.....<<--" '1 0 <JJ
-; r"~ ~ .1- Ji JI!
-. W
(u C D1
:x::: - <r
. .:'\ . ';"... t ::. . ~ '.. ....
. . ~ I; :: ; ,.J... :.... ..
- . ..-....
.~ .........., .;...
- -~:. . _!......
,.'t . .
-'.' ~.. ..,....
....-.
.~'-7 _'~~'':~.,~. ::':":":>.." :_..:.
.'_.';
. ..',r. -.'.., ..:.,...
I... "" _ ,~~ .v-
.~ .-:,::;:;; , :- -
'-,::.'-.' ~r::;...':' ~.~<
. , ,-~.J
........
\., --...;.-
,;.. -.J ~, :.. -.
x
. - \11'
. --, I'
'.,~ e<
FillilIm
~ :'<:~.:.:.
(I'l ~
....j M
~;'~:~~;.: ~ ~~~~:
__.__..~_......u.........u.....uuuu................. .......................................................................u............~.. ___~....
Jefferron Area Disability Services Plan 1994-99 D~mographic Overvi~w Approved 12/15/93 Page D-19
Disabilities Among the Elderly
Mobility limitations are more prevalent and numbers are on the increase among people over 65. Among the estimated
18,900 elderly people, 2,897 or 16%, have a mobility, limitation. This percentage remains unchanged from 1980, when
2,348 elderly people reported a mobility limitation (then called a "public transportation disability"). The number of
elderly persons with mobility limitations increased 20% regionwide, with the highest increase (147%) in Greene, whose
1990 count w~ 238 compared to 99 in 1980.
The elderly population has a higher percentage of self-care limitations but numbers are higher among working age
people. Among the elderly, 12% (2,085 people) have a self-care limitation, meaning they have difficulty functioning
alone at home. Three percent (3,726 people) of the working age population have a self-care limitation.
Another estimate showing 4,300 elderly self-care limited people has been generated by the Jefferson Area Board for
Aging (JABA). The agency estimated the elderly population likely to need assistance with daily living (ADL) through
multiplying 1990 Census totals by national percentages compiled by the Center for Health Statistics. Nineteen hundred
of the JABA estimated self-care limited elderly popluation are aged 65-74, 180 are aged 75-84, and 86 are aged 85 +.
These figures represent 17%, 29%, and 44% of their respective age groups.
Many elderly with mobility limitations live in the far reaches of the region, making transportation services more dif-
ficult. The accompanying map (11) shows the distribution of elderly persons with mobility limitations throughout the
region.
c\
App~5i93-'-P-;ge D-:-io-..__m__._._-_..__..,............D~-;;;ographTc-~~;:.{;.;--"'-'-'~jclferson Area Disability Service;P(~~
",
:n ;t) (") c ,
c - (T\ 0 (
0 t. , U'l
0 $ .~ , t. ..J
UI 1) U1 ~
L t. 0 b'I :n
Q/ - W L 1A :l , a..
4- VI C -
0 III ..c 4- .-
4- Q 4- ..c C , .1l a.
""'-l 0 - , 0 0 :J
""'-l III 1li Q/ (I')
'") ;:ll ::! - <.) .... t. L 0
~ C C () ~ ...,. ."-
VI 0 VI t (9 .tJ J ()
~ ~ C - C .J (l) f,) G\
C rG 0 L en
~ rG O'l Q J + :t. tf (\J cr
0 ) If) .... il.. Z Ii) 0 .... I I
L a.. a. t. '") ..[) 0 I ~"1 ~
I- 0 ~ I- l:Q IS) .... (')
0. a.. J\ 01
V 01 c ~.Em
): .,z
'clf~~~ Disabfi;;Y'~;:':;~~Plan 1994:99----D~;;.~~.phi~.o.:~~~.~-.:.;...,....."....................-..............--App~d 12/15/93 Page D.21
Transportation for the Elderly and People with Disabilities: Information from JAUNT
From 1983-1991, the number of trips for people with disabilities increased 10%, from 8,414 to 93,720. In April, 1992,
people with disabilities accounted for 60% of all passenger types. In April, 1993, this percentage increased to 66%.
During the same time period, trips for the elderly increased 88%, from 27,335 to 51,515. The elderly were 34% of all
age groups using JAUNT in 1983; by 1991 this figure had decreased to 29%. In April, 1992, the elderly were 31% of
all age groups; by April, 1992, this increased to 36%.
In 1992, 40% of all JAUNT trips (over 60,(00) were for nonmedical destinations of the elderly and people with dis-
abilities; an additional 26% (about 35,400) were medical trips which often serve this group. An additional four per-
cent of trips (7,642) were for mental health services. '
In the JAUNT 1992 Rider Survey, 55% of all passengers who responded had a disability, 13% of whom were in wheel-
chairs. Over a third (38%) were elderly, and 77% of all respondents were female. Six percent of all riders lived in
retirement communities, four percent in nursing homes, and three percent in group homes. 60% of riders surveyed
earned under $10,000 per year. 74% earned under $15,000 (the poverty level in 1990 was about $13,(00).
During 1992, JAUNT each month added an estimated 17 new Charlottesville riders, seven of whom were from an elder-
ly community or nursing home; 12 new urban Albemarle riders, nine from an elderly community or nursing home; and
10 new rural Albemarle riders, one from an elderly community or nursing home. ,
During 1992, the elderly communities which used JAUNT most frequently included The Collonades (15% of all elder-
ly community ridership); Piedmont Health Care (13%); The Cedars nursing home (11%); and Midway Manor (10%).
There was a total of 6,092 riders from elde'rly communities, 3,795 (62%) from Charlottesville and 2,297 (38%) from Al-
bemarle. The 1992 locations of nursing home/elderly community residents who rode JAUNT are shown below:
~._""-"-""'''''.~.''''''''''''-'~''''''''''''~''''-----''''''-''''''~-----
Demographic Overview
f~"Area Disability Setvices P~4:99
Approved 12115193 Page D.22
JAUNT Trips, Elderly Nursing Home/Retirement Community Residents July 1991-March 1992
COLONNAD~S
Number of Percent of
Trips All Trips
~297 37. 7%
394 65%
325 5.3%
252 4.1%
881 14.5%
28 0.5%
Albemarle_____
Herit3:g~.!!.~
Eldercare
Branchlands
Westminst!:.!'._.
g. Vill~g~_._.__.....:...__
Arborcrest
_9___.____.___.9.:0o/~_.
Charlottesville
219 3.6%
48 0.8%
38 0.6%
112 1.8%
3,795 62.3%
798 13.1%
91 1..?~_____.
-.
151 2.5%
...~_....... ............-..~...
86 1.4%
615 10.1%
427 7.0%
49 0.8%
.........-.-....... -
Windham
Reaves Home
Meadows
PIEDMONT HEALTH CARE
--.~--...............................
fgE?:~.!:!.@........-
Riverdale
Two Adult Care Ors
MIDWAY MANOR
Hi hrise
~__._..........m___
Rosewood Manor ,
""............A.O..........................................___....
CEDARS 682 11.2% 18.0%
..........n.....n.....................................-.................'......-..-.....................-...............~................................................_~n..................................n.............................................-.......................................-....___.........................................~.................n...........n_..................-..-........._
Marth~ J err Inf1rm~
Tar lc::!.2?_~9.~a:-e
Chville Towers
196
323
24
353
3.2%
5.3r~__.__
0.4%
5.2%
8.5%
0.6%
!3:~~<?~.:!~?,'~.~~~9.~.~.!.
__......_...._...~~~,._.................__._._.____.......,.~.:~.r~_...._..___..
..-..................--.....u.u...........................A.O
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan 1994.99
~_~... _.._...._..-..~_LO.*~.................___......._.........-........ .........-.................-..-...............-....-....-
Demographic Overview Approved 12115193 Page D-n
- '
Regional Profile: The Jefferson Area Community Census
The Jefferson Area Community Census (JACe) was a regionwide random telephone survey on community needs and
demographics conducted by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission in the fall of 1988. The margin of
error on regional results is plus or minus two percent.
The JACC estimated 14% of households had a member with a disability, totalling 9,034 persons. Most (79%) of the
reported disabilities were physical. The pr~sence of a mental disability within the household was only reported by five
percent of the population surveyed. Consistent with the US Census figures, Louisa and Nelson were the most likely
areas to have persons v.ith disabilities.
Housing types of persons with disabilites were similar to that of the general population. Most lived in single-family
homes (76%); this was slightly higher than the regional average of 70%. 12% lived in mobile homes, seven percent in
apartments, and six percent in duplexes or townhouses. Most of the disabled householders (81%) owned their own
home, and half had no mortgage payment (indicating perhaps a large share were elderly and/or had inherited homes).
The likelihood that a household member would have a disability decreased as income rose. HouSeholds with earnings
of less than $20,000 were three to six times as likely as wealthier households to include persons with disabilities.
Households with a disabled member were mice as likely to be receiving financial assistance (34% reported receiving
assistance), and half earned less than $15,000.
The incidence of disability increased v.ith age. For those over 85, the likelihood of being disabled was five times that
of not being disabled. 73% of the disabled population was over 60 years old.
Persons without disabilities were twice as likely to be working as persons with disabilities; both were equally likely to
be working full time. People with disabilities tended to be employed more often in manufacturing and business ser-
\ices, and less in construction, retail, finance, real estate, and personal services. While persons v.ith disabilities and
persons without disabilities were equally likely to be looking for work, persons with disabilities were likely to look for
a longer time. .
Focus on Rural County, Nelson:
An analysis of Nelson County's health care needs was compiled in 1990 from the JACC data and through focus group
discussions held in the County. The following information relates to the population of persons with disabilities.
Eighteen percent of households in Nelson had a member with a disability, comapred to 14% of households regionwide.
Of these Nelson households, 89% have one person with a disability, ten percent have two, and one percent have three.
Nelson residents were twice as likely as Albemarle or Charlottesville resiqents to have a household member with a dis-
ability. Elderly households were three times as likely to report a disability as other age groups.
Ten percent of Nelson's households reported transportation problems. Of those, a third said the primary transporta-
tion barrier was a disability (three percent of the total; using 1990 Census counts, this would be 212 households).
Seven percent of Nelson's households reported needing home medical care for an elderly person., compared to four
percent of the region's households. Over a third of the households needing care in Nelson were not getting it; reasons
included not knowing where to get care, cost, and not wanting care. Three percent of Nelson's households reported
needing home medical care for a child, compared to four percent of the region's households. Virtually all of the Nel-
son households needing this type of care were getting it. Five percent of Nelson's households reported needing men-
tal health care; all said they were getting it. Nelson residents were twice as likely as Albemarle residents not to have
insurance.
A direct correlation was found in Nelson between home values and incidence of disability: the lower the estimated
value of the home, the more likely the household included a person with a disability. These households were twice as
likely as the general population to need repairs, and, since the incidence of low incomes also correlated with disability,
less likely to be able to afford repairs. Over a fifth (22%) of Nelson's households said keeping their house cool in the
summer for health reasons was a problem. This was also the most frequently reported community need in the regional
survey.
Levels of education were more likely to be lower among persons with disabilities, especially in rural areas; they were
four times more likely than the general county population to have left school before ninth grade. This data may reflect
Approved '1i7i5i93"'P~'i~"D:24......_.._.m....__........,.......m_D-;~Ph'ic&-;-~;;-..._-_. Jef~ Area 'Disability ~-;-k~fu;'i"~4:99
the share of elderly persons in the population with disabilities; elderly persons, particularly in rural areas, are more
likely to have fewer years of education. In Nelson County, for example, half the population aged 65 + had not graduated
from high school, and 35% had less than an eighth grade education.
Focus on Rural Community: Stage Junction, FlU\'anna County
Stage Junction is a small community in the isolated southeast corner of Fluvanna County, far from major roads or
population centers. A study of the area's needs was conducted by the Fluvanna Community Development Foundation
in February of 1992. The following information from the study relates to persons with disabilities.
The community has 91 residential structures; 66%, or about 60 homes, were occupied at the time of the survey. At an
estimated 2.64 persons per household (determined in the study), this would indicate a community of 159 people. The
average age of a head of household in Stage Junction was 58; half the population was over 63. The average length of
residence in Stage Junction was 22 years; half the population had been there more than 17 years. 52% of the popula-
tion had not completed high school. 45% of the total population was employed (65% of the persons aged 16-64). N"me
percent of the population was looking for work.
..
Eighty percent of the population owned their homes, seven percent had life rights to their property, and 14% rented.
About half (49%) of the households reported needing home repairs; of these, 72% said they could not handle them
without help. Six percent needed modifications for a person with a disability. 90% of the households needing repairs
had an annual income of less than $25,000; 48% earned less than $5,000. Twenty-one percent did not have indoor
plumbing and/or hot water; these incidences were higher for renters than owners. Eighteen percent did not have
telephones, and six percent did not have electricity.
There is no public water system available. 78% of households had private wells, nine percent used a spring, and eight
percent used some other source of water, including water brought in by relatives or collected at gas stations in milk car-
tons. One elderly man with an ill spouse walked a quarter mile for water from an abandoned neighboring property.
Most households used wood heat, which was used as a sole source by 23% of the population and in combination v.ith
oil, electricity, or coal by an additional 52%.
23% of the population had high blood pressure, and half of these people had additional related health problems. Thir-
teen percent said getting to medical care was a problem. 17% had no insurance, and another 17% did not know if they
had insurance. Most with insurance were on Medicare (20%) or Medicaid (13%); another 20% had Blue Cross
coverage. There is no physician in the area. Many people (44%) went to Charlottesville and/or the UV A Hospital for
care, and 13% traveled south to Buckingham. Only six percent received medical care in F1uvanna County.
Five percent of the population said they needed elderly day care assistance, and 11% said they wanted a gathering place
in the community for recreation among old and young people. 27% said the lack of a store (which had once been there)
was the biggest pro~lem in the area. Fourteen percent had no car or driver. In group discussions, a number of people
expressed feelings of isolation as a problem.
!
___~~~"""6>.."'..".".'...""__."'''''.''_''''_.''''''.''._.__..''''''_''_..-....-_._....~_.._--_...._---
Jefferron Area Disability Services Plan 1994-99 Demographic Overview
Approved 12/15/93 Page 0-25
.
Needs and Services
.1
Oyerall Information on Needs and Services
If the percentages from the VIrginians with Disabilities Survey held true for our region, the greatest needs in order of
frequency among the region's people with disabilities would be as folIov.'S:
. housing (37%, about 2,400 people);
. transportation (26%, about 1,700 people)
. case management (26%, about 1,700 people);
. assistance with daily living (U%, about 800 people);
. help with mental and emotional problems (nine percent, about 600 people).
The Jefferson Area Community Census of 1988 found housing and transportation were the top areas of need among
people with disabilities in this region. Five percent reported needing mental health care.
The 1993 United Way Needs and Priorities update found the priority area needs for the general population are hous-
ing, physical health care, and employment/education. Other important needs are poverty assistance, public safety, men-
tal health care, sexual assault and domestic \;olence assistance.
Based on the above data and responses to agency surveys, the following needs among people with disabilities are iden-
tified in order of frequency:
. Housing, particularly supported group homes and Section 8 assistance.
. Increased personal assistance/home health care to allow people with disabilities to live in their homes.
. Increased employment opportunities and supenised training and development.
. Affordable transportation in rural areas and night/weekend service everywhere.
. Mental health care and increased social interactions to prevent isolation and depression among elderly
population in the general community.
. Free dental and eye care.
,
:--:ceds and Priorities
Approved 12/15/93 Page N.1
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994.99
I
Needs and Services Information By Category
This section of the report is an inventory of services and identification of needs arranged according to the service
categories identified in the Beyer Commission report. As the JADSB continues to work with area agencies in refIning
the planning process, this inventory is expected to become more comprehensive. It is important to note the appendix
list of agencies who responded to the survey; identification of needs and services may change as more surveys are com-
pleted in the coming months. .
to,.
Assistive Devices
Inventory of Services
The Department for the Visually Handicapped provides equipment for deafi'blind clients and purchases hearing aids
for eligible clients. The Department of Special Education assists school students. The Department of Deaf & Hard
of Hearing provides TDD equipment including telephone amplifiers, audible, tactile and light signalers, for free or a
small fee if clients meet income guidelines. The Department also provides the Virginia Relay Center, which relays con-
versations between text telephones and voice phones for no charge, and offers free 3O-day equipment loans through
T APLOAN. The Department has recently prepared a binder of information on all types of assistive technology through
a program called Project TAPE, which also provides training of service providers at Area Agencies on Aging (such as
JABA).
Region Ten Mental Retardation residents purchase walkers, canes, and hearing aids with assistance from Medicaid &
Medicare. Region Ten PV House provides communication boards, computers, and voice speakers to clients. The
Senior Center bolds bearing aid repair clinics and di~plays and information on h'ow to get them. JABA operates a com-
puter assisted search service for needed equipment. WorkSource Enterprises provide referral to clients needing equip-
ment. Greene County Transit has a TDD iOstalled at the Greene County Sheriffs' Office. Recording for the Blind
provides recorded books and educational resource material for people who cannot read standard print because of
visual, physical, or perceptual disability. The IRC helps procure equipment for all persons with disabilities.
Needs
Fundingfor HearingAids: The Virginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing reports funding for hearing aids
is a top need among people v.ith hearing impairments, especially the elderly and young children whose families are not
Medicaid eligible. Sources of funding include the Department of Health Children's Specialty Services and the Depart-
ment of Rehabilitative Services, but their programs are limited.
Dentures, Eyeglasses, and Hearing Aids for Rural Elderly: This is an unmet need identified by several area studies, par-
ticularly in rural areas. Health insurance programs often do not cover dental or eye care. An observation made during
1991 Nelson County health care focus groups was that it is probably easier to get fmancial support to get an artificial
limb than it is to get glasses, hearing aids, or dentures.
Needs identified in the agency survey include:
. More affordable translators for deaf residents. With the advent of the ADA, the responsibility for paling
for interpreters has shifted from the Department of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing to service providers
who are already strapped trying to provide basic services. This problem is coupled with a lack of
interpreters, especially in rural areas.
. Increased funding for hearing aids for elderly on fIxed incomes.
. Information about access to assistive technology.
Recommendations from the agency survey include:
. Bring together state and local agencies to pool funds for basic assistive devices such as hearing aids for
elderly.
. Increase use of clearinghouses such as IRC for information on personal care providers and assistive
technology.
Approved 12115l9j...P;ie..N.:2....--........._.....__............_..."_..~;~ Priorili;;-............_.Jcl'fe""~A;;; DisabiiiiY-~;;i~-;;~.PI~~.,..im:99
Case Management
Inventory of Services
The Department for the VISually Handicapped provides counselors and teachers to act as case managers for all clients.
The Department of Special Education provides case management services to students.
The Blue Ridge Medical Center Rural Outreach Program provides needs assessment and referral. WorkSource
Enterprises provides information and referral. The Salvation Army provides case management in the shelter to iden-
tify and refer clients to appropriate agencies and services to meet specific needs.
Region Ten provides case management including linkages, coordination & monitoring of services requested/needed
and advocacy for consumers and families for all persons with mental retardation or mental illness in each locality. Their
Youth and Family Services program., which operates in coordination with Outreach Counseling, a separate agency
housed in the Region Ten offices, provides targeted case management to emotionally disturbed children and families.
Needs
Case Management: According to the Virginians With Disabilities Survey, 26% of Virginians with disabilities need case
management; two-thirds do not receive it. According to the 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps report, a top need
among people with mental disabilities is in-home case management to be able to live independently.
Needs identified in agency surveys included:
. Outreach services for nonmedicaid families
. Increased case management/day support for people with mental retardation (including employment and
social activities) focused on allowing clients wider choices.
Ii
'I
I
i
I:
;,
i
'I
I
I
I
I
, I
1
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994-99
Needs and Priorities
Approved 12/15/93 Page N.3
"
r!
I
t
,
!
J'
f
I,
r'.
Communication
Inventory of Services
The Virginia Department for Deaf & Heard of Hearing maintains a list of qualified screened, certified interpreters
(persons who can translate spoken words into sign language for deaf persons). Payment for interpreters is provided
as needed in certain circumstances. The Department also provides TDD equipment and the Virginia Relay Center,
which relays conversations between text telephones and voice phones for no charge. .
The Senior Center provides speech reading classes. WMRA Radio Reading Service, operating out of J ames Madison
University in Harrisonburg, reads current print material for print impaired which is broadcast on a closed circuit ratio
station. Some residents in the western part of the planning district can pick up the station, but it is not available to
Charlottesville residents. The Independence Resource Center provides Braille printing services.
Needs
Deaf Interpreter Training: The Vrrginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing reports the supply of qualified
interpreters in Virginia is growing, but so is the demand, particularly among organizations needing to comply with the
Americans with Disabilities Act. Training interpreter programs are available at J. Sergeant Reynolds Community Col-
lege and New River Community College. Rural areas are particularly in need.
Recommendations from the agency Slln'ey include:
. Increase the number and provide a list, of a pool of interpreters for the deaf who are willing to reduce
rates or volunteer services. One suggestion was to work towards a goal of having interpreters employed
by state or local government for each region.
. Increase the number of training programs for interpreters for the deaf, particularly in rural areas.
. Increase education for and about the needs of the deaf among service providers. Teach more providers
sign language.
.'
Approved 12115/93 Page N-4
Needs and Priorities
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994.99
Counseling
Inventory of Services
The Department for the Visually Handicapped provides informational counseling to all referrals and provides voca-
tional and adjustment counseling to eligible clients. The Department of Special Education counsels students. The VII-
ginia Department for Deaf & Hard of Hearing prO\ides information and referral and a central library. The W oadrow
W1lson Rehabilitation Center provides counseling through its residential program.
~. .
Region Ten provides direct counseling to all clients who need it, including retirement counseling to aging persons with
mental retardation. The Salvation Army makes referrals to outside agencies. Senior Center programs include infor-
mation and referral, bereavement groups, and friendly visiting. WorkSource Enterprises provides free counseling to
individuals as part of the overall vocational services program.
~ ~
i1
I r.
I;
I
I
Needs
Legal Assistance: According to the 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps Report, more legal support is needed for
elderly homeowners caring for a spouse. If the spouse has to be institutionalized, the caretaker is often wrongly in-
formed s/he must sell their home in order to qualify for public assistance. This leaves the caretaking spouse homeless
and can force him/her into institutional care unnecessarily.
Also according to the United Way report, more legal assistance is needed for people with AIDS to Combat discrimina-
tion by health care providers.
Legal assistance is also needed for people trying to get Medicaid benefits, which are often unnecessarily denied or
delayed.
Safety Education: There is no safety education program for persons with disabilities in the region. Programs for the
elderly are offered through both the Senior Center and JABA v.ith assistance of Charlottesville and .Albemarle police.
I/!
-~..~~.._---_..~_......_~.._-~-_...~_.--....__.._---.............-
Keeds and Priorities Approved 12115193 Page N-S
Jefferson Area Disability Sel'\ices Plan, 1994-99
,
r
,
!.
i:
Early Intervention
Inventory of Services .
The Department of Special Education works with young students. The Department ofVlSually Handicapped specialist
works with families and children with visual impairments from the time of referral. The Department of Deaf and Hard
of Hearing provides information and referrals.
Region Ten Youth & Family Services works with children in Head Start as well as young children through outpatient
and outreach counseling. The Salvation Army provides referrals to PREP through the childcare program.
For prenatal care and care for infants and young children, the UV A Health Sciences Center OB/GYN clinic and the
Thomas Jefferson Health Department provide most of the direct prenatal and infant care for LMI women in the area.
The Health Department/MACAA Child Health Partnership assists clients throughout the region in accessing primary
care for children up to age six and their families. The Blue Ridge Medical Center services Nelson, and the Central Vir-
ginia Community Health Center serves part of F1uvanna. The Charlottesville Free Clinic, opened in the summer of
1992, serves residents who have transportation to the city. The Infant Development Project, operated through Region
Ten and the Health Department, provides services to pregnant women and young mothers with a history of substance
abuse.
Needs
No major gaps in this area are noted.
. '
Approvedi'2I1S;93- Page 'N~----
Needs and Priorities
Jefferron Area Disability Services Plan, 1994-99
Education
Inventory of Services .
The Department of Special Education works with students. The Department of Visually Handicapped specialist works
with families, children and public school staff to provide appropriate educational experience and equipment. The Vlf-
ginia Department for Deaf & Hard of Hearing provides information and referral for educational resources.
Region Ten educates aging persons with mental retardation on independent living skills and interpersonal/communica-
tion skills. The Red Cross assists one client with severe retardation through basic educational and training skills. The
Salvation Army offers computer training and GED tutors as well as literacy tutors to all clients, some of whom have a
mental or physical disability. The Senior Center provides fmancial management and nutrition education. W orkSource
provides an adult basic education teacher on site. '
Needs
Targeting Educational Materials: In several area studies, it is noted rural elderly persons are likely to have less than a
high school diploma or, in many cases, an eighth grade education. Other materials have to be developed for providers
who rely on brochures to educate consumers and flyers or newspaper ads to advertise services. '
Parental Support andAccessibility: More support is needed for parents of deaf children and increased accessibility for
deaf students in classrooIDS.
School Nurses: As more children with disabilities are "mainstreamed" into public school classes with non-disabled
children, the need for access to immediate medical assistance is growing. Meanwhile, cutbacks on school nurses are
occuring.
,
Jefferson ~ D~ilitYSe~ces Plan, 1994-"99
Needs and Priorities
Approved 12/15/93 Page N.7
"
'. ,..
:~.
".
, .
, f
: I
, i
r
t'"
I;
,
,.
f"-
! -
(
il-
L
~:
L
,I..,
~:
Employment
Inventory of Services
. The Department of Special Education provides assistance with high school children looking for work. The Depart-
ment of VISually Handicapped provides evaluation, training and placement for eligible clients and can purchase train-
ing and equipment as needed to support employment. The Department of Rehabilitative Services provides job
counseling and placement services.
The Salvation Army provides referrals to outside agencies. The Senior Center provides job referrals & listings. Work-
Source provides a sheltered workshop, individual community placement service, situational assessments to determine
job matches and ongoing support to maintain employment. The cost for WorkSource services is usually borne by the
referral agency and other public services. The Region Ten Community Builders program provides competitive employ-
ment to persons with severe and profound disabilities. The Adult Activity Center of ARC provides sheltered day sup-
port.
Needs
Ineligibility is the major cause for the case. closure among persons with disabilities seeking employment assistance
through the Department of Rehabilitative Services. Only one person in five is placed in a job. Of the 911 closed VDRS
cases in the last two years, 403 (44%) were declared ineligible, 239 (26%) were closed without finding jobs, 184 (20%)
were placed in jobs, and 85 (9%) were closed without complete service because the client found work through another
source, dropped out, or was relocated to another area. More information on why so many clients are declared ineligible
is needed so the situation can be addressed.
Education & Training: The 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps report noted persons with mental disabilities are in
critical need for specialized education, training, and placement assistance. This is reinforced by the data in the
demographic section noting the majority of clients seeking job assistance with the Department of Rehabilitative Ser-
vices had mental disabilities. The problem is more acute for rural residents.
Needs identified in the agency sun'ey include:
. More supported employment opportunities for persons with mental and physical disabilities (5),
particularly in Albemarle County (1). This requires both an increased base of employers and stable
public funding to support the emp.Ioyees.
. Increased transportation to and from work.
Recommendations from the agency survey include:
. Increase the base of businesses who hire persons with mental and physical disabilities; promote hiring of
persons with disabilities (2).
. Conduct further study into the reasons so many clients are declared ineligible for employment assistance.
.................................__.._..~.......................~..._.....__... ..
Approved 12115193 Page NoS Needs and Priorities
Jefferson ~-Disability &;.i7~Pi;~:1994-99
j-
Family Support
Inventory of Services
The Department of Special ~ducation consults with families of children in its program. The Department of VISually
Handicapped provides limited family counseling and support. The Department of Deaf and Hard of Hearing provides
information and referral. The Woodrow Wilson Rehabilitation Center works with families of residential clients.
L
,"
Region Ten encourages families of persons with retardation or mental illnesses to be a part of their family member's
service planning, and to becom~ ARC members. A flexible system of services and cash support is provided to help
families meet the needs they identify to improve care for their family member with mental retardation' and to relieve
stress in the home. Their Youth and Family Services provides family counseling in addition to youth counseling.
The Red Cross provides respite care to families of people with disabilities. Child, Youth and Family Services (former-
ly Family Services) provides supportive counseling for all types offamilies at a sliding fee. The Salvation Army provides
referrals to outside agencies. Respite care is also provided through the Interagency Council.
"'
I
,L
i
:!'
:,
!j'
Needs
Respite Care: The 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps report found respite care for families of children with mental
disabilities was a critical need.
I,
i
I
I'
)'
II
i
I
II
I
Ii
"
.j
J
Ii
[I
.1
~
.I
I'
~'
ti.,
Jcffcrson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994.99
Needs and Priorities
----
Approvcd 12115193 Page N.9
,
i.
t
i-
If
"
Ii
I~
if:
If
II
i
I
,
!
f
r
11"
H
:~ .
"
il
j
~
1.
r
Health Care
Inventory of Services
The Department of Visually Handicapped can purchase eye surgery for eligible clients and purchase special magnifiers
for eligible clients.
Region Ten is the major public agency providing mental health care for people with mentally illnesses, mental retar-
dation, and substance abusers. Their MR Aging Services provide medication administration and emergency care (CPR,
and rrrst Aid). Services by private physicians, psychiatrists, and the UV A Medical Center are offered to residents of
Region Ten facilities.
The Salvation Army provides referrals to UV A hospital and Charlottesville Free Clinic. Volunteer nursing staff is avail-
able at the shelter. The Senior Center provides screenings, informational talks, workshops, lectures, and fitness ac-
tivities. The Red Cross provides personal care on a limited basis. .
The Jefferson Area Rural Elder Health Consortium is a partnership of J ABA, Region Ten CSB, and the UV A Health
Sciences Center. The program provides information and referral on mental health services and strategies for inde-
pendent living among rural elderly and caregivers.
Home health services for LMI elderly are offered through JABA, in cooperation with DSS offices. The Health Depart-
ment and area hospitals meet short-term needs. Private services and volunteers provided through agencies such as the
AIDS Support Group are the major resource for long-term personal care and home health care. .
Needs
Other Facts: According to the Virginians With Disabilities Survey the primary disability of nine percent of the survey
population was a mental or emotional disorder. According to the.J efferson Area Community Census, households with
a disabled person are twice as likely as the general population to need mental health care and three times more likely
to need elderly home medical care. The same frequency of these households needed eye care as the general popula-
tion, but were three times more were likely not to get the care they needed. The Jefferson Area Community Census
found persons with disabilities were no more or less likely than the general population to have medical insurance, get
enough food to eat, or suffer from alcohol problems, drug abuse, or spouse abuse.
Mental Health Care for the Deaf: The Virginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing reports continuing needs
for qualified mental health counselors, inpatient mental health services for deaf youth, and substance abuse programs
for persons who are deaf.
Crisis Center. According to the 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps report, Region Ten's current top priority is es-
tablishing a 24-hour, non-hospital crisis center for people with mental disabilities and substance abusers.
Mental Health Care for the Elderly: The 1992 United Way report also found elderly nursing home residents have criti-
cal mental health care needs.
Home Health Care: for persons with disabilities and the elderly is a major area of need in which supply does not meet
demand, partly due to the lack of well-trained assistants. JABA recently added a training program being conducted
at the Charlottesville-Albemarle Training and Education Center (CATEC), but high worker turnover due to low pay
and transportation problems is still a critical issue.
Home attendant care for people v.ith chronic needs is a particular problem; Health Department programs are designed
for short-term, specific types of care. Services are limited due to lack of funding and personnel.
Cost of Care: Discussions in Nelson County held in 1991 noted residents had particular problems with costs of health
care and insufficient home health care. A number of people noted the expense of their medications left little funds left
over in their budget.
Food in RuralAreas: Congregate meal centers and/or food delivery services for the elderly and persons with disabilities
are lacking in some rural areas.
-- ......~---....~..........................-._....._.._..._................................_~..-
Approved iili5i93...P;.g;.N:io...uuu........._uu.u......u............u"'N;~-;;d'Pri;;rii~"-" Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994-99
Needs identified in agency surveys include:
. Increased outpatient counseling.
. Increased mental health services for people with emotional disturbances and/or in crisis situations but
who do not have a diagnosed mental illness.
. Increased alternatives to individual psychotherapy such as art therapy, play therapy, support groups with
professionals trained in working with mentally retarded.
. Increased mental health services for elderly to prevent depression, particularly through isolation.
. Medicaid requirements for personal care and nursing home placements are so stringent many people fall
through the cracks and suffer from insufficient care.
. Mental health services for people who are deaf and hard of hearing.
. Dental and eye care, particularly for people with mental disabilities.
Recommendations offered in agency surveys include:
. Increase mental bealth services, particularly outpatient counseling.
. Offer new alternatives to individual psychotherapy such as art therapy, play therapy, support groups with
professionals trained in working with mentally retarded.
. Obtain more pro bono services from dentists and eye doctors for people with mental disabilities.
. Change Medicaid eligibility requirements to allow more people to use services for personal care and be
placed in nursing homes.
Needs and Priorities
Approved 12115193 Page N-ll
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994-99
-
~~
i
i
'-
l-
E
I
I
(:,
Housing
Inventory of Services
The Department of Visually Handicapped offers no formal service but counselors may help clients look for housing.
The Red Cross occasionally refers clients to the Christmas in April Program for services such as re-wiring, carpentry
and painting. Region Ten provides supervised group homes for people with mental disabilities in Charlottesville and
Louisa, and temporary housing for substance abusers in Charlottesville. The Salvation Army provides temporary shel-
ter and referral to outside agencies.
JABA, the AIDS Support Group, the IRC, and Region Ten CSB assist their clients with obtaining necessary home im-
provements, sometimes through local housing agencies in each county. Ephphatha Village is a residence for deaf per-
sons in Albemarle County.
Needs
Special Needs: According to the Virginians With Disabilities Survey, over one third (37%) of the survey population
report having special housing needs. This was the most frequently mentioned need in the survey.
Repairs: According to t)le Jefferson Area Community Census, housing is the most frequently mentioned need in this
region among people with disabilities. 23% of households v.ith a member who had a disability reported needs for major
housing repairs; 65% of these households were not able to have them done. Households with a member who had a dis-
ability are twice as likely as the general population to be not able to repair their home, and twice as likely to have heat-
ing problems, which are usually related to the repair problem. There was no correlation between the incidence of
overcrowding with disability.
Transitional Housing For Deaf Peopl.e: The Virginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing reports a complete
lack of transitional living facilities (community group homes) for deaf persons. The general programs available do not
provide the technology or trained staff to meet the needs of deaf and hard of hearing people.
Lack of Adapted Housingfor Special Needs Population: The 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps report noted con-
tinued and growing needs for adapted housing. The grov.ing population of AIDS patients, for example, has an increas-
ing need for affordable housing with easy access to medical care.
Needs identified in the agency survey include:
. Increased supported residential options for frail elderly beyond nursing homes (2)
. Increased group homes for elderly v.ith mental retardation (1); increased group homes, transitional
housing, and Section 8 rental housing (especially in rural areas) for all disabled people (4).
, .
. Transitional housing for the deaf (there is currently none).
Recommendations identified in the agency survey include:
. Increase the number of group homes for mentally disabled elderly.
. Start more Oxford houses.
. Establish and advocate a regional housing plan to develop supported housing of all type.s for people with
disabilities.
_....-~~.--N~eds andPric;ri;Te';-'-~----:i~fre;;;;~ Disability Services Plan, 1994-99
Approved 12115193 Page N.12
Independent Lhing
Inventory of Services
The Department of VISually Handicapped pro\ides teaching services to help clients learn skills to be independent and
may pay for equipment and therapy as needed. Clients at the Woodrow Wilson Rehabilitation Center can apply for
residential program.
Region Ten offers senices to residents of facilities and consumers in the areas of daily living. The Red Cross provides
in-home personal assistance. JABA provides home medical care to both the elderly and persons with disabilities of all
ages. The Salvation Army prO\ides referral to outside agencies. WMRA Radio Reading services in Harrisonburg
provides information which helps clients to be more independent, such as shopping information. W orkSource provides
information, referral, and employment to persons with mental disabilities. The IRC provides counseling and helps
procure housing repairs and equipment to all persons with disabilities.
Needs
Areas of major need include more supported case management for persons with mental disabilities who can live in their
own homes with assistance, and increased in-home personal care for persons with chronic disabling conditions.
Needs identified in agency sun'eys include:
. More volunteer foster care prO\iders for persons with mental disabilities (2)
. Broader social outlets and community links for persons with mental disabilities (2) and recreation
opportunities for persons with physical disabilities.
. Increased in-home support and personal assistance for persons with mental disabilities to allow clients
more choices in their lives. (4).
. Increased volunteer personal assistance for disabled (3).
. Incomes and earning potential are very limited for most persons with disabilities. Most Red Cross home
care clients, for example, live on about 5420 per month and struggle to pay for food, rent, utilities,
medications, and transportation. They need more money on which to live.
Recommendations from agency surveys include:
. Bring together community organizations that rely on foster care to link recruitment, training,
transportation, and other support efforts.
. Educate and encourage the public, particularly church groups and social organizations, about including
people v.ith mental disabilities (2).
. Fund persons with disabilities and families directly and provide individualized support to allow them to
choose the support they need rather than creating more programs into which clients have to fit.
. Increase home-based senices for the aging to allow them to live in their homes.
. Encourage parks and recreation departments to increase recreation senices for persons with disabilities.
. Increase supported group homes and in-home assistance for all people with disabilities.
JeffersoD Area Disability Ser.ices Plan, 1994-99
:-:eeds and Priorities
Approved 12115193 Page N.13
I'
I
f
I
t,
~ .
!
~..
i
,
Personal Assistance
Inventory of Services
The Department for the VISually Handicapped provides counseling and teaching services to help clients function in-
dependently. .
Region Ten offers services to residents of facilities and consumers in the areas of daily living. The Red Cross provides
in-home personal assistance. JABA provides home medical care to both the elderly and people with disabilities of all
ages.
Needs
According to the VIrginians With Disabilities Survey, 12% of disabled VIrginians have personal assistance needs; two-
thirds don't receive any. Areas of major need in this region include more supported case management for people with
mental disabilities who can live in their own homes with assistance, and increased in-home personal care for people
with chronic disabling conditions.
Agencies surveyed suggested funding volunteer recruitment efforts to increase the pool of volunteers available for per-
sonal assistance to disabled.
.
,
,
Approved 12115193 Page N-14
Needs and Priorities
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994.99
Training
Inventory of Senrices
The Department of Deaf and Hard of Hearing provides extensive training in various areas for the consumer as well as
for those persons working with deaf and hard of hearing persoDS. The Department for the Visually Handicapped
provides vocational evaluation, training and placement service for all eliglble clients and may pay for training and equip-
ment. At the Woodrow Wilson Rehabilitation Center, clients are referred to vocational training programs. The Depart-
ment of Special Education provides training to school students.
WorkSource Enterprises provides sheltered workshop employment and training. Region Ten refers training to Work-
Source Inc and/or DRS. The Salvation Army offers computer classes.
Needs
Additional training and employment facilities are needed, particularly for people with mental disabilities.
Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994-99
Needs and Priorities
Approved 12115193 Page N-15
r
r
;,
f~
~ '
L
~:
L-
1
~'-
.,
.
1
h
,
,"
!
!:
j
j,
t'
~
"'
i
i
;
'Ii
..
!
L
f:
r
F
I
Transportation
Inventory of Services
The Department for the Visually Handicapped does not routinely provide transportation but may pay for transporta-
tion during vocational training or to get medical exams. The Department of Special Education provides specialized
public school transportation.
Greene County Transit provides wheeIchair-accesible transportation to all interested citizens of the county. JAUNT
serves the rest of the planning district. crs has some wheelchair-equipped buses, and JAUNT provides paratransit
service for city residents. University Transit Service provides paratransit service to students and employees of the
University.
Region Ten, the Red Cross, IRC, JABA, and the AIDS Support Group offer transportation provided by staff or volun-
teers, JAUNT, the City Bus system and the Yellow Cab company. The Salvation Army provides referral to outside
agencies. WorkSource offers assistance in securing transportation and providing travel and training. The Blue Ridge
Medical Center (serving Nelson) and the Central Virginia Community Health Center (serving southern Fluvanna and
Albemarle) provide transportation to their centers and to referrals if needed.
Needs
The relatively high percentage of elderly and people \\ith disabilities in Louisa and Nelson has important transporta-
tion implications. Louisa is a very large county, the eastern half of which is more oriented towards Richmond. Nelson
is large as well as mountainous, full of isolated spots difficult for vehicles to negotiate. Neither county has a convenient
center in which people can gather for senices.
Despite the apparent need for transportation senices in Louisa and Nelson, the number of JAUNT passengers from
Louisa and Nelson decreased from April, 1992 to April, 1993. In 1992, Louisa had 719 passengers (five percent of all
JAUNT riders) and Nelson had 1,931 (12% of the total). In 1992, Louisa's number had dropped to 471 (three percent
of the total) and Nelson's had dropped to 1,449 (nine percent).
According to the Virginians With Disabilities Sun'ey, 26% of the survey population has transportation needs; 66% can-
not drive under any circumstances, and 39% needs assistance to use public transportation. This was the second most
frequently mentioned problem in the survey.
According to the Jefferson Area Community Census, transportation ranks as the second highest need among people
with disabilities. Nineteen percent of households with a member who has a disability report having a transportation
problem; 13% have no car.
Nelson County residents and health care pro\iders noted transportation costs were a major barrier to health care during
1991 discussions.
The 1992 United Way Gaps and Overlaps report noted gaps in free transit for indigent people and the lack of night
and weekend senice, particularly in rural areas.
Needs identified in agency surveys include:
. Increased affordable transportation for persons with disabilities and frail elderly (6) particularly on
nights and weekends (4), especially in Albemarle (1) and rural areas (4). JAUNT is too expensive for
many poor rural persons v.ith disabilities.
. Legislation to protect drivers who are reimbursed for mileage from liability (currently if they accept
reimbursements they are treated as "hired drivers" by insurance companies and subject to liability).
. Increased transportation to and from Staunton (Woodrow Wilson center). Greene County Transit notes
they cannot accommodate indhidual schedules so clients often wait a long time at doctors' offices.
Suggestions from agency surveys include:
. Expand JAUNT transportation for mental health care.
. Extend city bus and JAUNT service to nights and weekends (3).
Approved 1211519~N:i6'---
'--"-N~;;;dp'ri-;;riir~~-'-'-'Jefferson Area Disability Services Plan, 1994.99
Appendix
Agency Sun'ey Fonn & List of Agencies Surveyed
List of Agencies Responding
lADSB Operating Procedures
"
i
r:
i.;
0,
"
;-
ii.,
,
"
"
1.
.
f.
.'
I
!
i
f
~~~~tD~C~
17/ ~~W-~~;lUUjM.
(~1 1/r~'Ol-5.2f.3
~ 11'1/ 'p-jJ'zo
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
serving people with Disabilities
O'Brien, Executive Director ~
Agencies
Nancy K.
5/6/93
Inquiry About. Needs and services
We need your assistance in putting together information on
services for people with disabilities in this region.
The localities of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District are in
the process of appointing members to a regional Disability
services Board. The first duty of the Board is to present a
draft six-year plan for service delivery throughout the region;
the draft is due to the state June 1.
staff at the Planning District Commission is currently
compiling relevant 'demographic and service information from
recent studies and the 1990 Census. Please help us by
completing the enclosed Agency Inquiry regarding current and
projected (if possible) client statistics and the inventory of
services. If you can, please also distribute the enclosed
consumer survey to you~ clients.
In order to prepare the draft plan, we need this information
sent back to us by Friday, May 21, so please respond as soon as
possible (the earlier the better!). The draft plan will be
presented to the Thomas Jefferson Disability Services Board and
to the pubI'ic for comment on Friday, June 18. The public
meeting will begin at 3:30 p.m. in the Lemon-Lime Room of the
Worrell Building, 413 East Market Street in Charlottesville.
Please call Hannah Twaddell or me at (804) 972-1720 if you have
questions. Thank you very much for your assistance.
;;{;~~ G~'v'"5 J C/.JAiLj1diL- J 1knwv.d~ (.YMrJ ' i~ C-w-5. Z~ C~, Ndun G.vrJ
Agency Inquiry: Services For Persons 'Vith Disabilities
5193
Profile r Agency Clients
1. Num er of People Served By Your Agency
1992
1993
2000
Disability
Impairment
er of Persons Turned A way Or On Waiting List for Services (if any)
1992
1993
Physi Disability
Impairment
Total lients WlDisability
4. Eli bility Requirements:
I
do you see as the most pressing unmer needs for your clients? Be as specific as you can, including infomwtion about types of
needed, demographic opes of clients in need (i.e. age, race, gender, income, etc.), and geographic references (locality or
ral).
6. a7t t solution s would you suggest to meet these needs? Again, please be specific identifying such ideas as starting new programs,
expand ng services to mo,:e geographic areas, changing eligibility requirements, merging programs, etc.
O"'~
)
"
~.-
~:~
to:
::.
"
~~c
."
"
~f
(
f-~
~'-
! ~
~:
..
....:-
Inventory or Senices
7. Please descn"be, within the categon"es listed below, what services your organization provides to people with disabilities in the
Thomas Jefferson planning district, and the costs, if any, to the consumer for the selVices.
Assistive Devices (braces, wheelchairs, hearing aids, etc.)
5193
Case Management (central point of contact to coordinate services)
Communication (TDD's, interpreters, Braille material, etc.)
Counseling (vocational or informational)
Early Intervention (with families of children under five)
Education (to develop skills, on the job or at school)
Employment (assessment, placement, support in job)
Family Support (supp?rt groups, counseling)
Health Care
Housing (affordable, accessible, supervised)
,
,
Independent Living (help or training with daily living)
Personal Assistance (help in daily activity)
..
Training (employment)
Transportation
,\
t Other (please describe)
17lallk you for completing this fonn. Please return it by May 21, 1993, to the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, 413
East Market Street, Suite 102, Charlottesville, VA 22902.
Consumer Inquiry: Persons With Disabilities
5193
1. Pl~as check the type of disability you have:
P ysical Disability
- Si t Impairment
-H aringImpairment
o her Disability (please describe):
2. What your age?
3. Follwl g is a list of services offered to people with disabilties. To the W1 of each item on the list is a line. Please write a 1, 2, or 3
on the li e to show its level of importance to you. A "I" means it is not a service you use or need, a "2" means it is something you use
but is no critical to you, and a "3" means it is somethingyou use and is critical to you. To the dihLof each item, you see a list of
problem that sometimes occur make it hard for people to get services they need. Do you experience any of these problems with the
services isted? If so, please check the line under the problem.
Write a 2. or 3 To Show
Rate of mportance
aleck Here If You Have These Problems Getting 17lis Service:
Lack of Cost of Distance to No Service
Other
sisti\'e De\'ices
(braces, lIeelchairs, hearing aids, etc.)
C se Management
(central oint of contact to coordinate services)
C mmunication
(TDD's, interpreters, Braille materia~ etc.)
C unseling
(vocatio alorbifonnauona~.
_ E rly Inten.ention
(with fi ilies of children under five)
E ucation
(to deve 'P skills, on the job or at school)
_E plo)Tnent
(assess ent, placement, support in job)
Haith Care
_H using
(afforda Ie, accessible, supervised)
_In ependent Living
(help or aining with daily living)
_ Pe sonal Assistance
(help in aily activity)
ining
ent)
nsportation
Thank y u for completing this fonn. Please return it by May 21, 1993, to the agency which gave it to you.
~ --.. .
Helen Poore
Transit Manager
Ch1ville Transit Service
P.o. Box 911
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Jerry Rosenthal
Business Manager
Louisa Co. Health Ctr.
Woolfolk Avenue, Box 543
Louisa, VA 23093
Alyne Smith
Coordinator
Interagency Council
P.o. Box 425
Louisa, VA 23093
Clarence A. Taylor
Skyline Cap, Inc.
P.o. Box 208
Quinque, VA 22965
Tom Vandever
Executive Director
Independence Resource Ctr.
201 W. Main, Exchange Center
:~ Charlottesville, VA 22901
i~.
David White
American Diabetes Association
404 - 8th Street, NE, Suite C
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Bethany Wilson
Coordinator
Nelson Interagency council
P.o. Box 417
Lovingston, VA 22949
5fqS
f);S pIq
I -;.
I::'
( ;
t
~
~
\~
JAISB AGENCY ~ RECIPIENrS
Earl Pullen
Executive Director
CRD and Housing Auth.
P.o. Box 1405
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Elizabeth Seabrook
Director
The Senior Center, Inc.
1180 Pepsi Place
Charlottesville, VA 22901
John Spanka
Director
Louisa Resource Council
POB 160 ~ 2:"lf
Louisa, VA '- '300 93
David Taylor
Nelson Cty Comm Dev Fnd
Rt 1 Box 36
Nellysford, VA 22958
Gordon Walker
Director
JABA
2300 Commonwealth Dr, , B-1
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Eugene Williams
President
Dogwood Housing
223 W. Main Street
Charlottesville, VA 22901
\qt
PAGE 1 of 4
Daniel S. Roosev
Virginia De of
po Box 3
Ch ottesville, VA
22902
Steve Smith
Director
Salvation Army
P. O. Box 296
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Sarah Jane Stewart
Director
Blue Ridge Medical Ctr.
Route 1, Box 340
Arrington, VA 22922
Oscar Thorup, M.D.
Chairm~n, T.J. Subarea Health
Advisory Council
P.o. Box 368
Charlottesville, VA 22908
Edward Wayland
Director
Ch'ville/Alb.Legal Aid Societ
P. O. Box 197
Charlottei~ille, VA 22902
Linda Wilson
Executive Director
JAUNT
104 Keystone Place
Charlotteville, VA 22901
,--
\-
JADSB AGENCY ~UIRY RECIPIENI'S
Director
Bloomfield
P.o. Box 5806
Ivy, VA 22905
March of Dimes - PO
2305 Com onwealth Drive
Charlott sville, VA 22901
VA Dept eaf & Hard of Hearing
po Box 4 6
Fishersville, VA 22939
Alzheimerls Disease
PO Box 4634
Charlottesville, VA 22905
VA AACCH
1613 Fern Brook Place
Charlottesville, VA 22901
VA Dept Deaf & Hard o~ Hearing
1100 Bank Street, 12th Floor
Richmond, VA 23219
VA Dept f Health VA Dept of Rehab Services
212 Chur h Avenue, Rm 300 2930 Uest Broad Street, #15
Roanoke, VA 24011 Richmond, VA 23230 .
Rehab En ineering Services COVER b>f\\~
Box 35-B H PO Box
Charlott sville, VA 22908 Cha ottesvillei VA 22902
Social S curity Administration
PO Box 1 48
Charlott sville, VA 22902
Social Security Administration
PO Box 2496
Lynchburg, VA 24501
National Soc to prevent
3820 Aug sta Avenue
Richmond VA 23230
BlindnessParent Resource Center
2776 Hydraulic Road #5
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Innisfre
RR 2, Bo
Crozet,
Village
506
A 22932
Greene C unty Public Schools
PO Box 9
Stanards ille, VA 22973
J~
VA Industries for the Blind
1102 Monticello Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Infant Development Project
PO Box 323
Charlottesville, VA 22902
, Kv PAGE 2 of 4
~\\uv-
Hyper-Active tention Defic
106 Sout treet, Suite 207
Char tesville, VA 22901
Shennandoah Blue Ridge Chapt
Rt. 2, Box 49
Charlottesville, VA 22901
VA Dept Visually Handicapped
1320-R Ohio Street
Uaynesboro, VA 22980
Dept of Physical Hedicine & i
Box 30, BRH, UVA HSC
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Godsey-Stillfried Fund
201 Uest Hain Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Louisa Cty Assoc. Resource C:
PO Box 7
Hineral, VA 23117
Senior Health Ins Benefits
2300 Commonwealth Drive #B1
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Chville Schools Special Educ.
1400 H el b 0 urn e R 0 a d
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Louisa PubLic Schools
PO Box 7
Hineral, VA 23117
~
~',
~;learning Needs &
r UVA Box 12 Brook
,fCharlottesville,
fl'
If
t... .
..:i~
F
Ie:
L' UVA Speech & Hearing Cntr
'Ii- PO Box 9022
;~~Charlottesvi lle,. VA 22906
iH"~
T' .
L Belton Hearing Aid Center
'Y 1936 Arlington Blvd #112
i' Charlottesville, VA 22902
JAIEB AGENCY llQUIRY RECIPIENTS
Eval Cntr
Hall
VA 22903
:,"
I i .:~
,.
j!, Beverly Adcock
Director
Assoc. for Retarded Citizens
509 Park Street
Charlottesville, VA 22901
'i Bodkin
Cathy
Director
~ Fami ly Service, I n c .
.; 116 Jefferson ST
I ,. U.
I ~ Charlottesville, VA 22902
r ;!
~-
Rory Carpenter
Director
CACY
POB 911 ,
Charlott~sville, VA 22902
Michael Costanzo
Director
Mo Mohr House
1014 E. Market ST
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Deaton
Alpha Medical Aids
1518 E. High Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
, ;
Emily Dreyfus
Director
. AIDS Support Group
t P.O. Box 2322
Charlottesville, VA
22902
'lo/
(.
Nelson Public Schools
PO Box 276
Lovingston, VA 22949
Valley Voice
UMRA, James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
Miracle-Ear Hearing Aids
7310 Ritchie Hwy #614
Glen Burnie, MD 21061
Margaret R. Anderson
Director
Recording for the Blind
1021 Millmont Street
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Hunter Bowles
Director
Louisa County Uelfare Dept.
P.O. Box 425
Loui~a, VA 23093
Judith E. Cole
Director
Fluvanna Co. Social Srvcs.
P.O. Box 98
Fork Union, VA 23055
Robert A. Cox, III
Director
Ch-ville social Services
P.o. Box 911
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dwayne Dixon
Greene Co. Health Dept.
p".o. Box 38
Stanardsville, VA 22973
Ronald H. Enders
Director
Uorksource Enterprises
413 E. Market, Suite 201
Charlottesville, VA 22901
PAGE 3 of 4
Recording for the Blind
1021 Mfllmont Street
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Uagner Hearing Aid Centers
300 Preston Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Kenneth Ackerman
Executive Director
MACAA
215 E. High St., Suite 7
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Reed Banks
Community Services Housing
413 E. Market St., Suite 103
Charlottesville, VA 22902
John U. Bullock
Louisa Salvation Army
Route 4, Box 29
Louisa, VA 23093
Thomas Conner
Director
Nelson Co. Social Services
P.o. Box 357
Lovingston, VA 22949
Janice DeFreitas
Community Meals on Wheels
C/O Blue Ridge Hospital
Charlottesville, VA 22901
E.F. Dre.ifuss
Eplilep~y Association of VA
Box BRH, Drawer E
Charlottesville, VA 22908
Howard Evergreen
Director
Fluv Cty Comm Dev fnd
PO Box 413
Palmyra, VA 22963
: Cindy Fredericks
; Executive Director
rMadison ~ouse
1
~; 170 Rugb" Road
r .
f CharlottltSVllle, VA 22903
r
Mark Jacpb
.L Attentioh Deficit Disorder
T 106 south Street ~ 2o':t
Charlottesvi lle, VA 22901
ii...
,;
: f
;f
"
It
Ii
r.
Ginny Kelly
Executiv~ Director
Hospice ~f the Piedmont
1002 E. Jefferson Street
Charlottesville" VA 22901
John Maple
Chairman
Christian Servo society
P.o. Box 98
Fork Union, VA 23055
Maureen McCrystal
Autism Society of America
2776 Hydraulic Road, #5
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Susan McLeod
Louisa Co. Health Department
PO Box 336
Louisa, VA 23093
Karen Morris
Director
Albemarle Co.Soc.Srvcs.
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Mary Newton
Coordinator
Drug Abuse Prevention
POB 911
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Merle painley
Director
" Mental Health Association
513-1 Stewart Street, Suite J
Charlottesville, VA 22901
I
I
')?r
JAI15B AGENCY m{UIRY RECIPIENl'S
Craig Hartz
Executive Director
Community Energy Consv.Program
1800 Monticello Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Tom James
Director
COVER
POB 1284
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Peggy King
Executive Director
NVHSA
Blue Ridge Hospital
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Louden Marshall
Executive Director
Central Va. Health Center
P.O. Box 20
New Canton, VA 23123
Susan McLeod
Director
Thomas Jeff. Health District
P.O. Box 7546
Charlottesville, VA 22906
Susan McLeod
Nelson Co. Health Department
PO Box 98
Lovingston, VA 22949
Ginger Morris
Greene County Transit
PO Box 437
Stanardsville, VA 22973
Nancy O'Brien
Director
T J H I C
Rt. 1, Box 405
Crozet, VA 22932
Fay Painter
National MS Society
PO Box 6808
Charlottesville, VA
22906
, ,
PAGE 4 on 4
Susan Huffman
Director
AMOS, School Nursing
McLeod Hall
Charlottesville, VA 22903
James B. Keenan, Jr.
Director
Greene Welfare Dept.
P.O. Box 117
Stanardsville, VA 22973
Chris Lamboscottie
Director
Center for Independent Livin
Woodrow Wilson Rehab. Center
Fishersville, VA 22939
Kathryn M. Mawyer
Executive Director
American Red Cross/Cent. VA
1105 Rose Hill DR
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Susan McLeod
Fluvanna Co. Health Departme
PO Box 136
Palmyra, VA 22963
Susan McLeod
Char-Albemarle Health Dept
PO Box 7546
Charlottesville, VA 22906
Betty Newell
Director
Ch'ville Free Clinic
418 W. Main
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Holly O~inger
Director
CHIP
106 Goodman St A-3
Charlottesville, VA 22902
James Peterson
Executive Director
Region Ten CS8
413 E. Harket, Suite
Charlottesville, VA
103
22901
"
.'
Agencies Responding to May, 1993, lefferson Area DSB Agency Inquiry
. American Red Cross
. Blue Ridge Medical Center
. Central VA Community Health Center
. City Department of Social Services
. Department of Rehabilitative Services
. Department of Special Education
. Department of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
. Greene County Transit
. Infant Development Program
. JABA
. JAUNT
. MACAA
~,
. Madison House
. MS Society of the Blue Ridge
. Recording for the Blind
. Region Ten CSB
. Salvation Army
. Senior Center
. TJ Health District
. WMRA (Harrisonburg Radion Station for teh Blind)
. WorkSource Enterprises
"
Comments Made at 6/18/93 Public Hearing:
. Independence Resource Center
. Charlottesville Free Clinic
. JABA
. JAUNT
Comments made throughout Autumn M eeings and Responses to Final Draft from:
. Charlottesville Housing Improvement Program
. Virginia Employment Commission
. Department of Rehabilitative Services
. JAUNT
. Independence Resource Center
. JABA
....-.---~..-..-..-....----.__.........~..
Appendix: Survey Form & RdPo~~ffe';;;-;-A;~~b'iiity &rvices Plan, 1994-1999
Approved 12115193
.
io
Jefferson, Area Disability Services Board
Operating Procedures
Name of Disability Services Board
The name of the Disability Sen1ces Board will be the Jefferson Area Disability Services Board (hereinafter referred
to as BOARD).
Purpose
The purpose of the JADSB is to fulfill the requirements regarding disability services boards as specified in the VIrginia
Code Section 515-48 and in the Resolutions establishing the BOARD in the area known as the Thomas Jefferson Plan-
ning District (attached). The jurisdictions include the City of Charlottesville, and the Counties of Albemarle, F1uvan-
na, Greene, Louisa, and Nelson.
The JADSB will provide input to state agencies on service needs and priorities of person with physical and sensory dis-
ability.
The JADSB will work with local ADA committees to help provide information and resource referral to local govern-
ments on the Americans \\ith Disabilities Act.
Localities are not mandated to fund any recommendations made by the JADSB.
The JADSB will not provide direct senices.
Members
The BOARD members shall be appointed by the member jurisdictions as follows:
Charlottesville
Albemarle
Flu van na
Greene
Louisa
Nelson
TOTAL
3
3
1
1
2
2
12
The term of office shall be three years, with each term beginning on July 1. Government representatives will serve ac-
cording to their tenure in office unless replaced by the local governing body. Citizen representatives will serve three
year terms. Each person will be limited to two terms on the BOARD. Citizen representatives will draw lots to stagger
tenns of office. Those who cb.w less than a full term will be eligible for two full terms.
Each locality will appoint one government person to the BOARD. At least 30% of the membership will represent in-
dividuals with or be family members of persons with physical, visual, or hearing disabilities. Persons appointed should
have indicated a willingness to serve and fulfill the duties of membership. At least one person \\ith a hearing, visual or
physical disability will serve on the BOARD.
Orientation
The BOARD will receive Orientation from the Department of Rehabilitative Services and shall receive a copy of the
Operating Procedures for adoption at the fIrst meeting. .
Duties of Members
Members shall indicate a willingness to serve on the BOARD, have an interest in, and knowledge of community ser-
vice needs of persons with disabilities, be willing and able to network, have an interest in and knowledge of govern-
ment, business, and community concerns, have expertise and/or experience in representing constituent concerns, and
have a willingness to seek advice or more information, if appropriate when issues are presented.
Ii
Ii
I
r
Meetings
The BOARD shall meet no less than quarterly.. The day and time shall be set by the BOARD at its fIrst full meeting.
Special meetings may be called by the Chair, or the staff with concurrence by the Chair, or by members with concur-
rence by the Chair.
. _..........._.........................._...._-._......~....--.~.....
Jefferson Area Disability Ser.;ces Plan, 1994.99 Appendix: Operating Procedures
........--...-..-....................----
Approved 12115193
Voting
Each BOARD member will have one vote. A quo~ will be a majority of appointees.
Attendance Requirements
A member who misses three consecutive meetings will be contacted by staff to determine continued interest. If the
member can not continue, the appointing governing body will appoint another to complete the term of office.
Replacement of Members
If, for any reason, a BOARD member resigns, or can no longer serve because of having served two terms, the appoint-
ing governing body will follow their regular procedures to appoint a replacement. When members are appointed to
replace a former BOARD member, they will serve out the term of the former member. Members so appointed will be
eligible for two full te~ in office after completing the term of the replaced member.
BOARD Business Procedures
The BOARD shall use Robert's Rules of Order to conduct all business coming before the BOARD.
Officers
At the April BOARD meeting, the BOARD shall elect a Chairperson, a Vice-Chairperson, and a Secretary from a
slate presented by a nominating committee which was appointed in January by the Chairperson. The Officers will serve
for one year and may be re-elected any number of terms during their tenure on the BOARD. Should any officer resign
or leave the BOARD during the term of office, the Chairperson will appoint a replacement who will be confirmed by
the BOARD at the ne>.t regular meeting.
Duties of Chairperson. The Chairperson shall conduct the business of the BOA...~D meetings and shall meet with com-
mittee chairs as necessary. The Chairperson shall be authorized to sign plans and documents related to the work of
the BOARD after the BOARD has approved of the documents. The Chairperson will be authorized to speak for the
BOARD on issues on which there is BOARD agreement and/or direction.
Duties of Vice-Chairperson. The Vice-Chairperson shall assume the duties of the Chairperson in their absence.
Duties of Secretary. The Secretary shall take minutes at the meetings and shall prepare or have them prepared for adop-
tion by the BOARD at the ne>.1 regular meeting. In addition, the Secretary shall, with the Chairperson, develop the
agenda for meetings and prepare what infon~ation is necessary to facilitate decision making by the BOARD.
Committees
The BOARD shall appoint such committees from time to time as it deems necessary. Committees may become stand-
ing committees of the BOARD or may be limited to topical or time limits.
Amending Procedures
The procedures may be amended by the BOARD at any meeting provided two weeks notice of any changes have been
circulated to the BOARD and that the majority of the quorum attending the meeting at which amendments are dis-
cussed approve of such a change.
Adoption of Reports
Reports developed for the BOARD for submittal to the Commonwealth are to be adopted by the BOARD, follov.ing
a public input session or hearing, whichever is required by the State Code. Reports developed and adopted by the
BOARD shall be circulated to the local governing bodies and available to interested groups either through the library
or by payment of the cost of copying the document. Reports will be made available in Braille or on tape, if they are re-
quested to be available in a medium other than print, and if funding can be secured to make them available in said
media, or volunteers are available to make them available.
These procedures were adopted by the Jefferson Area Disability Services Board as part of the disability services plan
approved ~~:)r 15, 1993. ~
Q' f2 _
SIGNED: c~ . (;-0.
Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Director
Approve'di2ii5i93......_.............................._.......__.._...mm.Ap~;&(j~;;;ling P;~~d~.~----J~fr~;;;;;- Area Di~bility ~'Plan. 1994.99
J efTerson Area Disability Senice Board
c/o 171 om as Jefferson Planning District Commission
413 East Market Street, Suite 102
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone (804) 972-1720; FAX (804) 972-1719
T(~:
flaM:
D~TE:
Rl~:
Disability Services Board
Hannah Twaddell, Senior Planner
2/4/94
Enclosed items
Er closed are the following items for your review and action:
· Copy of final report: Please circulate the executive summary to local
governments and interested others for suggestions on how the Board should
proceed with educational activities and possible grant writing. We need to
know about resources available (probably primarily information) for the
Board as well as ways in which Board activities can benefit local governments
and other groups. Be prepared to report your experiences to the Board at the
March meeting.
· Resolution Supporting Employment Service Organizations: At the last
meeting, the group agreed in principle to support the enclosed resolution, but
wanted to review the text before it went forward. Please review and comment
on the resolution no later than Wednesday, February 9, after which Mr.
Santowski will send it to the appropriate legislators.
Fo~ your information, also enclosed are the following items:
· Minutes of the 10/22 state Disability Services Council meeting.
· Invitation from VA Board for People with Disabilities for the Partners in
Policymaking Program.
Th~ next meeting will be Wednesday, March 23 at 10:00 a.m. in the JAUNT Board room.
An agenda packet will be sent out prior to the meeting. I look forward to seeing you then.
..
DRAFT FOR COMMENT
Resolution
Supporting HB _, Zoar Amendment
Funds for Employment Service Organizations
EREAS the Jefferson Area Disability Services Board (JADSB) was established in
acc dance with the Code of Virginia Section 51.5-47; and
EREAS, the JADSB has identified a significant regional need for, and strongly supports
the rovision of; employment services for people with physical and sensory disabilities; and
WH REAS, there is a statewide initiative to increase the number of employed people with
disa ilities by 2,000 over the next biennium; and
WH REAS, HB (the Zoar Amendment) would provide an additional $11,741,000
,in n w funds for employment services under the Department of Rehabilitative Services;
REFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Jefferson Area Disability Services Board
sup orts HB _ and encourages its passage for the good of citizens with disabilities in this
regi n and throughout the Commonwealth.
App oved by unanimous vote at a meeting of the Jefferson Area Disability Services Board
held December 15, 1993.
John Santowski
Chai man
Date
ST F WILL DETERMINE TIlE BILL NUMBER AND IDENTIFY TIlE
APP OPRIATE COMMITrEE MEMBERS BEFORE COMPLETING THE FINAL
DOC MENT FOR MR. SANTOWSKI'S SIGNATURE
M~
~ '.-' '. ~~
,q.. ~:-"'"'." -i\..
~ ,~ ;:J.
~~ ,\... ,~
~ ...,':.:0....' ".:7;7
'~'LA" ..lIt..... -,
~,......,f" ii ,~~':~
.,~:l'C:-~~.;I
~~~~
DEe .G}j 1993
SUSAN L. ROFSKY
COMMISSI NER
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Rehabilitative Services
4901 FITZHUGH AVENUE POST OFFICE BOX 11045
RICHMOND. VIRGINIA 23230-1045
(804) 367-0316
TOO: (804) 367-0315
TOll FREE: 800-552-5019
(Voice & TOO)
FAX: (804) 367-9256
December 22, 1993
TO:
Disability Services Board Chairpersons and Liaisons
./
Allen S. Gouse, Ph.D.tl
Deputy Commissioner
FROM:
RE:
Minutes of the Disability Services Council
With the goal of promoting greater awareness of its deliberations and actions, the
Disability Services Council wishes to share the minutes of its meetings with each of the
local Disability Services Boards (DSBs). As you may know, the Council is responsible for
setting certain guidelines for the DSBs and coordinating activities that relate to your local
needs assessments. No action is required at this time; rather, the minutes of this meeting
are provided for your convenience and information.
As always, thank you for your continued interest and support in meeting the needs
of individuals with physical and sensory disabilities.
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
COtvfMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DISABILITY SERVICES COUNCIL !vfEETING
Minutes:
October 22, 1993
Members Present:
Marianne Cashatt, Chairperson
Clayton Bowen, DDHH
Donald Cox, DVH
Cheryl Heppner
Ralph Shelman, Insight Enterprises, Inc./Peninsula CIL
Susan Urofsky, DRS
Ellen Wood, Chesterfield Recreation & Parks
Members Absent:
Dr. Joseph Spagnolo, Jr.
Others Present:
Sandra Wagner, Central VA Independent Living Center
Sandy R~en, Department for Rights of Virginians with Disabilities
Jane English, Department for Rights of Virginians with Disabilities
Allen Gouse, Department of Rehabilitative Services
Debi Golden, Department of Rehabilitative Services
Peggy Sheets, Department of Rehabilitative Services
Rosemary Holden
Ed Turner
Joseph Kavanaugh, Department of Rehabilitative Services
I. Call to Order/W elcome
The Virginia Disability Services Council was called to order by Marianne Cashatt,
Chairperson, at 2: lOP .M. She welcomed all visitors and asked that they introduce
themselves.
II. Introduction of New Member
Ms. Cashatt introduced new member, Ellen Wood from Chesterfield County
Department of Recreation and Parks, and welcomed her to the Council.
III. Approval of Agenda
Agenda was approved.
IV. Approval of June 17, 1993 minutes
Minutes were approved.
V. Process for Development of RSIF Guidelines
Commissioner Susan Urofsky provided the Council with a brief overview of the
process in developing the Rehabilitation Services Incentive Fund Guidelines. She
apologized for not having the guidelines in advance of this meeting and indicated
they were very complex and difficult to develop. Mrs. Urofsky recognized the
superb efforts of Allen Gouse, Clayton Bowen, Mary Childs, Sandy Reen and Jim
Taylor and indicated this work group had attempted to make the guidelines flexible
for local governments. Areas of consideration in developing the guidelines
included looking at relevant sections of the Code, other grant models and
preparing a step by step concept. Mrs. Urofsky expressed hope that the guidelines
would be a useful document.
Ms. Cashatt requested Mrs. Urofsky to explain the difference between the
Consumer Services Fund and the Rehabilitation Services Incentive Fund.
Mrs. Urofsky stated that the Consumer Services Fund is a fund of last resort. A
case manager can apply on behalf of clients when there is no other source of
funding.
The Rehabilitation Services Incentive Fund has no funds at this time but was
created by the same statue that created the Disability Services Boards to provide
incentives for service development. Local DSBs may establish a fund to meet
needs not otherwise met in their communities. State funds require a local match
and the incentives are to be short term, non-renewable so that funding does not
continue for the same purpose year after year.
VI. Review of Draft RSIF Guidelines
The chairperson read the purposed guidelines line by line and amendments were
made as indicated in italics (see attached guidelines).
Motion was made by Don Cox that the proposed guidelines, as amended, be
adopted pending public comment. Motion was seconded and passed.
VII. Process for Comment on RSIF Guidelines
Ralph Shelman moved that the proposed Rehabilitation Services Incentive Fund
Guidelines be distributed to local Disability Service Boards and others concerned
with disability issues the first week in November for public comment with a thirty
day return. Motion seconded and passed.
A cover letter will accompany guidelines with suggestions regarding dissemination
within the community. It was suggested that copies of the guidelines be sent to
DRS regional offices and Centers for Independent Living. Copies will be done in
Braille and on tape.
VIII. Unfinished Business - Letter to Governor Wilder
Ms. Cashatt read the letter she wrote to Governor Wilder on behalf of the
Disability Services Council requesting incentive funding be included in the 1994-96
biennial budget.
IX. New Business - DSB Next Steps
Ms. Cashatt noted that she had received a suggestion from Donna Heuneman that
the Council develop a state plan utilizing the DSB Needs Assessment reports. She
asked for suggestions on how to make sure the reports are being read. Ms.
Cashatt will write a letter to the agencies requesting information on how they have
utilized the reports and develop summaries.
The DSBs will receive copies of Disability Services Council minutes.
-
X. Matters of Public Comment
Covered
XI. Date and Subject of Next l\1eeting
It was agreed that the next meeting will be held on Friday, December 10, 1993 at
1:00 P.M., DRS Central Office. Subject of the meeting will be to review revised
guidelines.
XII. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 P.M.
.
. .
Proposed Guidelines for Establishment and Operation of
the State Rehabilitative Services Incentive Fund
The State Rehabilitative Services Incentive Fund (RSIF) is a short-term, non-renewable,
s imulus funding designed to promote investment in meeting the needs of individuals with physical
d sensory disabilities. An amount of state funds will be allocated for each disability services
b ard (DSB). Boards may access these funds by submitting a grant proposal. Access to the State
SIF requires matching funds, which a board may generate from philanthropic organizations,
I cal government, business and industry, and advocacy organizations. Boards would use the state
. centive grant and matching funds to allow service providers to develop, expand, establish, or
d monstrate a desired service or program needed by the community.
The Code of Virginia establishes incentive funds at both the state and local levels.
S bsection A of 9 51.5-50 establishes the State RSIF as a resource pool to be funded by the
neral Assembly and authorizes the Department of Rehabilitative Services to make grants to
di ability services boards for enhancing programs and services. In addition, 9 51.5-51 establishes
t e authority of a DSB to establish a Local RSIF. A board may use such fund as match to secure
a grant from the State RSIF or to meet other programmatic needs not met through existing
fe eral, state, or local programs.
ose of the RSIF
The guiding principles for the Rehabilitative Services Incentive Fund are:
A. To serve as a first step in the development of the community-based, consumer-focused
service delivery system envisioned by the Commission on the Coordination of the
Delivery of Services to Facilitate the Self-Sufficiency and Support of Persons with
Physical and Sensory Disabilities in the Commonwealth.
B. To establish fiscal incentives for state and local commitment of resources to address
needs identified by a DSB for new programs or expanded access to existing services.
The State RSIF cannot be used to supplant the existing funding of a service operating
in the community.
C. To provide seed money for program innovation and coordination of services among
organizations, jurisdictions, and disability services boards. The State RSIF may be
used for one-time or multi-year proposals.
D. To enable DSBs to serve as catalysts by leveraging resources for services from
multiple private and public sources and to stimulate statewide expansion of models
that work. Participation in the RSIF is at local option.
Allocation System '
The Code of Virginia requires that the Disability Services Council develop a grant allocation
system which requires local match. The local match may be either public or private funds, or a
combination. The Code also establishes that in-kind contributions shall not be considered in the
local match unless specifically approved by the Council.
2.1 The resources of the State RSIF shall be distributed in a manner that promotes equitable
access for all DSBs. Each DSB shall receive an allocation which reflects the number of
individuals with disabilities residing in the localities participating on that board Numbers
of people shall be estimated using total population, national prevalence data by disability,
age factors and reliable service or benefit related counts.
A. A rilinimum allocation will be established by the Disability Services Council to insure
the viability of the fund for communities with small numbers of individuals with
disabilities.
B. The Department of Rehabilitative Services will provide the DSC with updated
individual allocations each year to ensure responsiveness to changing conditions.
C. A board's decision not to access all or part of its State RSIF allocation will not reduce
its allocation in subsequent years.
D. State funds remaining from boards which have decided not to access all or part of such
allocation may be pooled to make supplementary allotments. Supplementary
allotments are one-year incentives that do not increase the board's allocation in later
years. Possible uses include non-recurring expenditures, start-up costs, and seed
funding.
2.2 DSBs must provide local matching funds in order to access the State RSIF.
A. The local match rate shall be adjusted up or down based on the per capita revenue
generating capacity of the localities within an individual DSa.
B. Local match is required for both the State RSIF allocation and any supplementary
allotments.
C. The local match rate shall increase for each year of a multi-year, proposal unless
otherwise ruled by the DSC.
2.3 Only the following types of non-cash contributions shall be accepted as part of the requisite
local match:
2
.
!.
. .
A. , Provision of administrative support services through an existing operation provided by
parties other than a sub-grantee (i.e., the potential provider whose services or
progr~ would be supported by the State and Local RSIFs).
B. Donation by parties other than a sub-grantee of office or service equipment needed
to support program operations.
C. Volunteer services provided to directly support a service or program.
24 Up to 33% of local match for non-recurring grant proposals for the first year of a multi-year
proposal may be in the form of in-kind contributions. The permissible amount of local
match for the later years of a multi-year proposal is, however, capped at the dollar amount
of in-kind contributions from the first year of the proposal.
Anolication Criteria
3.1 Applications must be consistent with the purposes of the State RSIF and meet the following
criteria:
A. Support may only be sought for short-term, non-renewable, stimulus funding leading
to:
(1) Continued service delivery, planned and coordinated through community
resources; or
(2) Pilot testing or demonstration of a model program or service delivery strategy
for possible state or local adoption.
B. The proposed project must:
(1) Increase capacity through creation of a new program, improve accessibility of a
previously inaccessible program, or expand an existing program;
(2) Broaden the range of service options for eligible individuals; or
(3) Enhance the overall service delivery system.
C. The proposal must also directly support one or more of the following goals:
(1) Inter-organiZational coordination, cooperation, or resource pooling. .
(2) Establishment of innovative direct service programs.
3
(3) Collaboration or delivery of services across programmatic and/or jurisdictional
boundaries.
(4) Development ofa comprehensive, consumer-focused service delivery system.
3.2 Access to the State RSIF for an individual project or program is time-limited, based on the
needs and design of the project and the justification by the DSB.
A. One-time requests for funding of non-recurring costs cover only one year. A DSB
may. however, elect to use incentive funding to support other non-recurring costs
during subsequent years of operation. Costs may include planning and consultation
associated with program start up, seed money, and operating costs for a one-year
demonstration project. Staff salaries and other costs associated with an ongoing
operation would not be considered.
B. Multi-year projects of up to three years in duration are intended to phase-in
community funding of a service or to demonstrate a service model. Access to the
State RSIF beyond the third year of a multi-year proposal is prohibited unless
otherwise roled by the DSC. Support through state incentive funds for staff and
operating costs would be reduced each year.
3.3 DSBs may access the State RSIF on behalf of services or programs from private, local,
state, and federal service providers. Such providers include, but are not limited to,
employment service organizations. centers for independent living, local offices of state
agencies, advocacy groups, and community service providers.
3.4 DSB access to the State RSIF is optional.
Grant Prooosal Develooment
4.1 Upon notification from the Department of Rehabilitative Services of an' annual allocation
from the State RSIF, DSBs seeking to access all or part of that allocation shall send to the
Department of Rehabilitative Services a letter of intent.
A. Submission of a letter of intent shall not be binding on a DSB.
B. It is not necessary for DSBs to have match funds in hand in order to submit a letter of
intent nor is a binding commitment from a funding source required for such a
submission.
C. A DSB's decision not to access all or part of its State RSIF allocation shall not restrict
access to or reduce its allocation in subsequent years.
4
.
. ,
D. The Department may make supplementary allotments to individual boards using funds
remaining from boards which have not submitted a letter of intent or have indicated a
need for less than the total allotment.
4.2 A DSB shall submit its State RSIF grant request to the Department of Rehabilitative
Services for review and screening. DRS shall use an interagency team which includes
consumer representation for this initial review and screening. The DSB shall include the
following information for each service or program proposal contained within that request:
A. A program description detailing the proposed good, service, or program that the
community intends to develop.
B. Specification of the requested duration of partial support from the State RSIF (i.e., a
request for immediate support of a non-recurring cost versus a multi-year proposal).
C. An operating plan, including identification of a designated fiscal agent.
D. A budget for the requested duration of State RSIF support (i.e., up to three years for
multi-year proposals).
E. Certification of the availability of local matching funds, including both public
appropriations, private donations, and in-kind contribution.
F. Identification of State RSIF use as either (1) incentive for continued service delivery
or (2) demonstration project. Proposal in the first category must include an assurance
and plan for continued service delivery beyond the period of incentive support from
the State RSIF.
G ant Award Process
5. The Department of Rehabilitative Services shall use an interagency team which includes
consumer representation to review all RSIF applications for compliance with the guidelines
and submission of all required proposal documentation. '
A. The Department may consult with or provide technical assistance to a DSB as part of
this review process if documentation is found to be missing, insufficient, or unclear.
B. The Department may also consult with a DSB regarding budget clarification and
options for improved cost efficiency and effectiveness.
C. In support of final review by the Disability Services Council, the Department of
Rehabilitative Services shall prepare recommendations for funding and a summary of
all request proposals including those who do not meet the criteria.
5
5.2 The Disability Services Council shall provide a final review of each board's grant request for
consistency with the State RSIF guidelines.
5.3 Upon approval by the Disability Services Council, the Department of Rehabilitative Services
shall issue grant awards for all proposals.
A. Funding of second and third year access for multi-year proposals shall be contingent
on the appropriations of the General Assembly and therefore can not be guaranteed at
the time of first year funding.
5.4 Following issuance of these grant awards, the Disability Services Council shall competitively
award any uncommitted resources remaining in the State RSIF.
A. The Council shall issue a request for proposals, with competition open to all DSBs,
Participating DSBs must provide the requisite local match.
B. Awards shall be based on the strength of the program description, as presented in the
grant proposal; potential impact; documentation of need through the needs assessment
process; and any program priorities which the Council may establish.
C. Both new proposals and proposals to expand a project or service already supported by
the State RSIF shall be accepted.
D. Submission, screening, and final review procedures for these competitive grants shall
parallel those employed for all other access to the State RSIF.
5.5 All awards will require a DSB to (a) monitor progress of funded projects in accordance with
operating and expenditure plans, and (b) provide quarterly reports and a year-end summary
report to the Department of Rehabilitative Services on the progress of all State RSIF
supported programs.
5.6 The DSC will provide information to DSBs annually regarding grants awarded
6
.
Ir
I~r~
JAN 24 1994
VIRGINIA BOARD FOR
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
.j
THE VIRGINIA BOARD FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
SEEKS PARTICIPANTS FOR
PARTNERS INPOLImIAKlNG PROGRAM
January 18, 1994
Partners in Policymaking is a leadership training program for self-advocates
and parents. It provides state-of-the-art knowledge about developmental
disabilities issues and builds the competencies necessary to become
advocates who can effectively influence public officials.
"
The Virginia Board for People with Disabilities is currently seeking
~uplications from interested people who have developmental disabilities or
who are parents of young children with developmental disabilities to -
participate in Partners in Policymaking. This program is designea to provide
information, training, and skill building so that participants may obtain the
most appropriate state-of-the-art services for themselves and others.
"Partners" learn about current issues and best practices and become familiar
with the policymaking and legislative processes at the local, state, and federal
levels. The overall goal is to achieve a productive partnership between
people needing and using services and those in a position to make policy and
law.
Partners attend 2-day training sessions eight weekends a year. Each session
is devoted to specific topics with nationally known experts as presenters.
Partners are expected to complete assignments between sessions and to
commit to one major assignment, such as serving an internship, orgimi7ing a
letter writing campaign, or orgt:mi7ing special receptions or town meetings for
public officials.
In general, session topics may include:
· History - Independent Living Movement, Parent Movement, Self-
Advocate Movement
. Inclusive Education
· Supported Living, Supported Employment, Personal Futures Planning,
Family Support
. Assistive Technology, Seating and Positioning, Challenging Behavior
. Federal Policy and Legislative Issues
. State Policy, Services, and Legislative Issues
. Parliamentary Procedure ~d How to Run Me~tings
. Community Org~ni7ing, Advocacy Organizations, and Successful Efforts
':
The Board is actively seeking highly motivated individuals to participate in
the Partners in Policymaking program. We are particularly eager that
members of the group represent different ethnic backgrounds, different
geographic regions of the state, and a variety of disabilities. Also, we are
especially interested in reaching persons who are not actively involved in
existing advocacy organizations. Please feel free to make copies of this
packet for dissemination to interested individuals or call Nancy Storie at
(804) 786-0016 or (800) 846-4464 TDDNOICE to obtain additional copies.
Expenses for travel and respite care will be reimbursed. Lodging, meals, and
assistant services will be provided at no charge.
.
.J
Applications must be received by the Virginia Board for People with
Disabilities by April 18, 1994. Faxed documents will not be accepted.
Documents postmarked on or before the deadline date but received at a later
date will not be accepted. It is the responsibility of each applicant to ensure
that the applications are received by the deadline date. An application sent by
mail must be addressed to
Nancy Storie
Virginia Board for People with Disabilities
P.O. Box 613
Richmond, VA 23205-0613
The Board will accept hand-delivered applications between the hours of 9:00
a.m. andA:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. An application that is hand-
delivered must be taken to the
Virginia Board for People with Disabilities
202 North Ninth Street, 9th Floor
Richmond, VA 23219
Participants will be notified in June. ATTENDANCE AT ALL SESSIONS
IS MANDATORY. Applications are available in large print and on audio
cassette. To obtain alternative formats, please contact Nancy Storie at (804)
786-0016 or (800) 846-4464 TDDNOICE.
.
'.'
~.~ VIRGINIA BOARD FOR
~~ PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Partners in PoIicymaking
Application for Participation
Application Deadline: Apri118, 1994
Name:
Address:
Telephone: ()
Daytime Number: ( )
Are you:
Male
Female Race:
1. Are you a person with a developmental disability? (See definition on back
page) YES NO Your age:
If yes, please describe the disability (or
disabilities):
2. Are you a parent of a son or daughter with a developmental disability? (If
you have more than one child with a disability, please answer for each child.
See definition of "developmental disabilities" on back page.)
YES NO Please give us your age:
<;..
2. Continued
If yes:
a. pescribe how the disability affects the ability of your son/daughter to
function in at least three (3) of the areas of major life activity (part D of the
definition):
b. How old is your son/daughter?
c. What is the disability (or disabilities)?
d. Describe the school placement:
e. Does your son/daughter live at home?
YES
NO
f. Do you have other children?
YES
NO
If yes, what are their ages?
"
.f
3. What services (employment, attendant, respite care, case management,
etc.) are you or your child currently receiving?
4. Why are you interested in participating in the Partners in Policymaking
program?
5. Is there a specific issue, area of concern, or problem that encourages you
to apply for this program?
..
6. Will you make a commitment to attend eight 2-day sessions, held monthly
from August to April?
YES NO
7. Will you travel to Richmond to attend the regularly scheduled meetings?
YES NO
8. Are you willing to do homework assignments (primarily reading)?
YES NO
9. Are there any special accommodations necessary for you to participate in
this program?
YES NO
.~
If yes, describe accommodations needed ( accessibility, interpreters, respite
care, attendant services, etc.):
10. Please list any memberships in advocacy organizations and indicate any
offices held. (Membership in other organizations is not a requirement):
.
..
11. What types of experience have you had in advocating for people with
developmental disabilities?
12. Please tell us a little about yourself and your family:
13, Please list two references - names, addresses, and phone numbers:
1.
2.
14. Please indicate how you learned about Partners in Policymaking:
Developmental Disabilities Definition
The term "developmental disabilities" means a severe, chronic disability of a
person 5 years of age or older which --
(A) is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or a combination
of mental and physical impairments;
(B) is manifested before the person attains age twenty-two;
(C) is likely to continue indefinitely;
(D) results in substantial functional limitations in three or more of the
following areas of major life activity:
- self care,
- receptive and expressive language,
- learning,
- mobility,
- self-direction,
- capacity for independent living, and
- economic self-sufficiency; and
(E) reflects the person's need for a combination and sequence of
special, interdisciplinary, or generic care, treatment, or other
services which are of lifelong or extended duration and are
individually planned and coordinate; except that such term when
applied to. infants and young children means individuals from birth
to age 5, inclusive, who have substantial developmental disability
of specific congenital or acquired conditions with a high probability
of resulting in developmental disabilities if services are not
provided.
Source: Develomental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 1990 (p.1.. 101-496)
-'" ...
.
DistdJw:.:i;, r 2 - 2?'.?i.,
. qff. 6$J2. ,--L~~!.4J
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 972-4060
roo (804) 972-4012
ebruary 23, 1994
ary and Elizabeth Edgecomb
512 Avon Street Extended
harlottesville, Virginia 22901
E: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PARCELS - Section 10.3.1
Tax Map 67, Parcel 1
ear Mr. and Mrs. Edgecomb:
he County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information you have submitted for the
bove-noted property. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official
etermination, that this property consists of seven (7) legally separate parcels. Due to their size
nd shape, each is not confirmed to be buildable in the present form. They are comprised as
llows:
1) Lot #7 along the railroad right-of-way and located in Louisa and Albemarle, consisting
of 5.02 acres more or less. This lot has one potential additional development right;
) Lot #8 along the right-of-way consisting of 0.98 acre more or less;
) Lot #13 along the right-of-way in Louisa and mostly in Albemarle, consisting of 0.58
acre, more or less. [The small size and dimensions of this lot present the question of
whether it is buildable;]
( ) Lot #14 on the west side of the main track in the area of the old spur, consisting of 2.69
acres, more or less;
( ) Lot #17 on the east side of the main track and adjacent to the north of lot #19, consisting
of 0.52 acre, more or less;
( ) Lot #18 on the west side of the main track and adjacent to the north of lot #14, consisting
of about 0.5 acre; and
.~ 4~
February 23, 1994
Gary and Elizabeth Edgecomb
Page 2
(7) Lot #19 on the east side of the main track and adjacent to the south of lot #19, consisting
of about 9 acres. This lot has four (4) potential development rights.
Of these seven (7) lawfully separate parcels, only two are of sufficient acreage as to be entitled
to additional development tights: Lots #7 and #19. Lots # 7, 8 and 13 are comprised of former
railroad tracks / right-of-way. They are of a narrow and elongated shape and as such, will be
~imited for further building. This determination results in six additional parcels than are shown
~ith a parcel number on the County tax maps.
rrhis determination considered the fact that each lot has separate title as described by recorded
~eed and researched by Southern Title.
rrhe most recent deeds of record as of the date of adoption of the Zoning Ordinance describe the
ollowing parcels:
(1) Lot #07: Deed Book 135, Page 350 for chain deed; plat. Deed Book 150, Page :3 for Last
Deed of Bargain and Sale;
(2) Lot #08: Deed Book 135, Page 320 for Report of Commissioners; order; plat. Deed
Book 150, Page 3 for Last Deed of Bargain and Sale;
(3) Lot #13: Deed Book 144, Page 364 for Chain Deed; plat. Deed Book 255, Page 393 Last
Deed of Bargain and Sale; plat;
(4) Lot #14: Deed Book 175, Page 7 for Chain Deed. Deed Book 255, Page 373 for Last
Deed of Bargain and Sale; pIal;
(5) Lot #17: Deed Book 199, Page 262 for Special Commissioner's Deed. Deed Book 256,
Page 84 for Report of Commissioners; order; plat;
(6) Lots #18 and 19: Deed Book 85, Page 442 for Last Deed of Bargain and Sale; plat. Deed
Book 256, Page 81 for Commissioner's Deed.
.' --
February 23, 1994
Gary and Elizabeth Edgecomb
Page 2
Anyone aggrieved by this decision may file a written appeal within thirty (30) days of the date
of this letter. If you have any question, please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
~;J,~q~
melia G. McCulley, A.I.C.P.
oning Administrator
Jan Sprinkle, Planning Department
Gay Carver, Real Estate Department
Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Reading Files
Frances Sebring, Attorney at Law
Bill Porter
OTE:
ix (6) additional parcels
ne (1) by Tax Map, seven (7) by determination
D~sti~'i
c-l. 2.2'5 . all
q~(03Q~~ )
ft,zcr..,j l'
David P, Bo nnan
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
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack JOll tt
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Ma shall, Jr.
Scottsvill
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
M E M 0 RAN DUM
Board of Supervisors
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC~~~
February 25, 1994
Reading List for March 2, 1994
~GLCl
r
~
D cember 1, 1993 - Mr. Martin
MY' p.()lA1€lrman.~
t+993
~
F bruary 2, 1994 - pages 1-5 (to Item #7a) - Mrs. Humphris
rs. Humphris ~
E C:mms
*
Printed on recycled paper
,,--' " .... '\.
SC(lti<'\/lne
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
DaVld P, Bownnan
ChM!nttesvI Ii-'
Charlotte Y, H mphns
,Jack ,r(llw!
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Mar hall. Jr
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 8, 1994
. Dan Roosevelt
sident Engineer
partment of Transportation
O. Box 2013
arlottesville, VA 22902-0013
ar Mr. Roosevelt:
Following is a list of actions taken by the Board at its
eting on March 2, 1994 (day meeting) :
Item 5.6. Resolution to accept Berkmar Drive Extended intot
State Secondary System of Highways and guarantee for a period
up to one year against defective materials and/or workmanship
to a maximum of $7500.
ADOPTED the Resolution.
Agenda Item No. 7a.
Other Transportation Matters.
Mr. Roosevelt distributed the Department's monthly schedule
o projects currently under construction. He commented that the
R ute 20 South project was affected by the weather and it does
n t look like the work will be completed on time.
Mr. Roosevelt said he and the traffic engineer have agreed
o the type of traffic signals to be placed at the intersections
o Rio/Hillsdale, Greenbrier/Rio and Commonwealth/Greenbrier and
a e working toward having those installed under the district
c ntract which means work would begin in May, 1994. The cost of
t e traffic signals are $300,000 and fuods will have to be
tained from secondary improvement funds to pay for these
affic signals. He will be recommending these as priorities In
e forthcoming Six-Year Plan budget for next year.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the bond for Hillsdale Drive and Rio
ad intersection traffic signal had been released. Mr. Cilim-
rg said "yes," but a certificate of deposit was given, Mr.
*
Printed on recycled poper
~~.. .,,'..
M . Dan Roosevelt
M rch 8, 1994
P ge 3
Mr. Marshall said there is a sharp left hand turn at the
A on Street Extended/Route 20 South intersection which needs a
s gn installed to slow traffic because vehicles are veering into
t~e grassy area where the road use to be located.
Mr. Roosevelt said he will look at installing delineators
a ong the curve.
ET~C/jng
FCDRMS\VDOTACT.LTR
Sipcerely,
,/~ " ,..,
l, It! J, I
//.; I i II I i I: , ,;, !
/ ' 'kA.. ' I LV u:.",'
~ w. c~~~y, cleff, CMC
Board of Superviso~s
cc: Robert W. Tucker
Richard E. Huff, II
Jo Higgins
!t5
0c~3!()/q4 Cf1j;
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
MARCH 1, 1994
+------+- -----------------------------------+-------------------------------------+----------- +
IROUTE I
INO. I
LOCATION
STATUS
ESTIMATED
COMP.DATE
+------+- -----------------------------------+-------------------------------------+----------- +
I
I 631
I
TH STREET EXT.
. ROUTE I-64
CONSTRUCTION 85% COMPLETE
MAY 94
+------+- -----------------------------------+-------------------------------------+----------- +
I
I 20
I
ROM 3.4 MI. S. ROUTE 53
o 3.8 MI S. RTE. 53
CONSTRUCTION 11% COMPLETE
SEP 94
+------+- -----------------------------------+----------------------------------.--+----------- +
I
I 29
I
CONSTRUCTION 15% COMPLETE
ROM HYDRAULIC ROAD TO
IO ROAD
DEC 95
+------+- -----------------------------------+----------------------------------.--+----------- .
+------+- -----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
+------+- -----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
+------+- -----------------------------------+------------------------------------+----------- +
*
REVIS D DATE
** NEW P OJECT
;, ?)?-5 kJ1
105 Woodhurst Court
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
February 17,1994
r7; j'
I:J )
."..Ji~J.~
Walter Perkins, Chairman
Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County
40 I McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
,L.~ ..,__
! ('.OARO OF sUPEmW;f)RS i
... -- J
Dear Mr. Perkins:
Enclosed please find a copy of my letter to Jack Hodge regarding the Virginia
Department of Transportation's proposed changes to the southern end of Alternative 10 of
the Route 29 Bypass. You may recall that the previously approved version connected to
the existing Rt. 250/29 Bypass on the southern side of St. Anne's-Belfield School rather
than at the location shown on the attached map. As you can see by their proposed ramp
locations (dotted lines), Canterbury Hills would be adversely affected by this change.
While we oppose the entire concept for reasons clearly stated in the letter (A
through F), we feel we must suggest reasonable alternatives (1 through 6) ifVDOT is
determined to relocate this interchange from the approved Alternative 10 route.
We would appreciate any support which you can give to preserve the integrity of
another neighborhood in Albemarle County.
Enclosure
Si~nCerel~Y/ i -/, /.I.vh
" Y \
/ ,'tv;; ~
Robert A Garland, Jr
Secretary for the Board
Canterbury Hills Association
105 Woodhurst Court
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
February 17, 1994
ack Hodge
hiefEngineer
ommonwealth of Virginia
epartment of Transportation
401 East Broad Street
'chmond, Virginia 23219
ear Mr. Hodge:
We appreciate you sending the aerial photo of Canterbury Hills showing the proposed
hanges to the southern end of Alternative 10 of the Route 29 bypass. While we understand that
he changes are not approved at this time, we realize that this plan must be under serious
onsideration by VDOT because of the presentation made to the Albemarle County Board of
upervisors and some advantages in this plan pointed out in that presentation.
However, the Canterbury Hills Association feels that it must oppose the proposed
hanges to the approved Alternative 10 based on the following:
A. The ramp positioned between the existing 250W/29S bypass and Westminster Rd has
at least 4 houses and an additional 3 or 4 lots which contain houses in the right-of-
~
B. The ramp at this point would be elevated behind the remaining houses, thus severely
decreasina property values.
C. The proposed Route 29N (Alternative 10) access ramp (from the current Rt.
250E/29N bypass) would be ifeatly elevated in order to pass over the existing road
and the proposed bridge. We estimate the height to be about 40 feet above the
current 250/29 bypass and likely above the tree height at this point. This will
certainly create sound problems with no way to abate them.
D. We think it will be difficult to justify the expense of the bridge into North Grounds to
the taxpayers. It is our understanding that VDOT has assured UV a that they will be
able to limit access into the North Grounds by keeping the road closed to through
traffic and only opening it "to ease traffic exiting events at University Hall". It seems
like a tremendous waste of money to build a bridge for use several times a year.
E. The current Alternative 10 has gone through the approval process and additional
proposals seem unnecessary.
F. The approved alternative 10 has no adverse impact on this neighborhood.
If a decision is made to pursue revision of the southern end of Alternative 10, we
espectfully submit the following suggestions to lessen the impact on Canterbury Hills and St.
e's Belfield School. The suggestion numbers correspond to the numbers on the enclosed
ap:
1. Shift the current Rt. 250/29 bypass closer to the UVa North Grounds side by
approximately one road width as it passes by Canterbury Hills. This side of the road
appears to be wooded terrain containing no homes or other structures.
2. Shift the Rt. 29 North bypass ramp (south-bound side of current Rt. 250W/29S
bypass) to locate it in the current Rt. 250W129S bypass lane. This would avoid
having to take any houses or property in Canterbury Hills.
3. Reposition the Rt. 29N bypass ramp (north side of current Rt. 250E129N bypass) to a
standard grade-level loop rather than the overpass. This would avoid building what
must be a costly and aesthetically unappealing overpass.
4. Reposition the R1. 250FJ29N access ramp to allow room for the loop (#3 above).
There does not appear to be any current or planned structures in this path.
5. Shift the Rt. 250W/29S access ramp (from revised Alternative 10) further away from
S1. Anne's Belfield School. By shifting the existing bypass, more room would be
allowed for this ramp.
6. We are assuming that the 'proposed revi-sion to Alternative 10 and the Rt. 250W/29S
access ramp will be below grade level at this point as they partially pass "through" the
existing hill rather than over it.
We do not presume to be highway engineers, but present this proposal out of concern for
e integrity of an established neighborhood. This neighborhood has already had property taken
or the widening of Barracks Road and we do not wish to further "contribute" property when
easonable alternatives seem available. The time has come for VOOT to place an increased
mportance on the damage done to the affected property owners in particular and the whole
eighborhood in general when a road is being planned. It also seems reasonable that if UV a
ants a North Grounds connector, that it should be prepared to "contribute" more land to this
roject.
Please keep us posted on any new developments regarding these proposals and notify us
f any public presentations or hearings relating to this matter. Thank you in advance for your
houghtful consideration of our concerns.
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Wayne Cilimber, Albemarle County
Earl Cochran, Jr, VOOT
H Carter Myers, ill, Transportation Board
Walter Perkins, Albemarle County
Dan Roosevelt, VDOT
William S. Roudabush, Transportation Board
Leonard Sandridge, UV a
UVa Facilities Planning and Management
Juandiego Wade, Albemarle County
Sincerely,
~
Robert A. Garland, Jr
S~(\U: for t7eloard ,
JU.'a~0- f/~
Diantha McKeel, President
'~'N~-~
Anita Dunbar, Vice President
j)~/ c.~
Don ib ard M
.J
Rob Brugh, Board Member
~ob ~
------- \
, ~~-
. '- ,,,-,
'~
I
'-
"
,-'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of County Executive
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
(804) 296,5841 FAX (804) 9724060
February 7, 1994
M . Donald Martin, Manager
V rginia Employment Commission
P o. Box 2063
C arlottesville, Virginia 22902
March 2nd Board of supervisors' Meeting
D
Don:
we discussed in late January, I would like to formally invite
a brief presentation to the Albemarle County Board of
on Wednesday, March 2nd. I believe that the
formation you presented at our Chamber meeting would be very
neficial to the Board of Supervisors and particularly to our
unty Planning staff whom, as you know, are currently working on
dating our Comprehensive Plan. Our meeting on March 2nd begins
9:00 a.m. and I would estimate that we will try to place you on
e agenda somewhere between 9:30 and 10:00 a.m. If you could,
wever, call me either Monday or Tuesday prior to March 2nd, I
uld give you a more definitive time.
ould you encounter any problems in scheduling a presentation at
is time, please do not hesitate to contact me. Otherwise, I look
rward to seeing you on March 2nd and thank you in advance for
ur willingness to share this information with the Board.
Sincerely,
~t?r-
-
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
County Executive
R T,Jrjdbm
9 .022
c Ms. Ella W. Carey
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
(; :" 1 ,! ~ ,~7'J (~~.::
F" '~:- :~~, -
i' MAR 9
I
L
&lph G. Con rell
Commu.ioner
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA;"
Virginia Employment Commission
400 Preston Ave.
Charlottesville, Va. 22901
Mr. Robert Tucker
Albemarle County Executive
401 McIntire;\Rd.
Charlottesville, Va. 22902
Dear Bob,
Here is data fori Charlottesville City and the Charlottesville
Metropolitan Area comparable to that I presented for Albemarle
County at the Albemarle County Board of Supervisor1s meeting on
March 2, 1994. Following are specific observations.
City of Charlottesville
1. The number of jobs increased 74% from 1978 through 1992
2. Manufacturing employment down 37% involving approximately 900 jobs.
3. Retail employment up 36%; approximately 1000 jobs.
4. Services employment up 101%; approximately 4500 jobs.
5. Local government up 72%; approximately 1000 jobs.
(There is an unexplained increase of 900 jobs between 1978-79).
6. The average weekly wage is below the state average in all
categories. Per capita income is higher than the state average.
These figures are a result of the low unemployment rate combined
with the high incidence of low paying jobs.
Charlottesville MSA (Charlottesville, Albemarle, Fluvanna, GreeneL
1. The number of jobs increased 48% from 1978 to 1992.
2. Manufacturing down 14%, approximately 1100 jobs.
3. Retail trade up 58%; approximately 4500 jobs.
4. Services employment up 142%; approximately 8800 jobs.
5. Local government up 50%; approximately 1900 jobs.
6. The results of the average weekly wage and the Per Capita Income
comparisons for the city of Charlottesville apply.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me.
-"
C~n~YA~
.. on ~artin, Manager
~
An Equ.al Opportunity I Affum4tive Action Employer
. ,.
" ,.
::i!P,. I:
1.,+' 1 I Cil'~ :
._.:.l ,~'!:~.- e,:l)~, ,:,,)
~:iJ': i! i
ll!l'LI(:;n: '/
iA;;"y'!",JTi:',[ '~")("j'I'~
r..C;h~ I (::.IJI._'l-I.Jf\~F~
1:1 J r-.l T.1\i(~i
r:CI~\-1'.::~.;THi.JC-l.. Or,)
I'::' '.:i ",Ii.l! }1,.I._
.. !-''-jf':'C; LtL.IP.JJ..I.:L..F
r....l ~:~ (:i ,-, i\; :~j r\\ D l. !j'-(
! h' ::\;.r::}'I:li::T i, T[ 01\1
'ri:~:p..DL ~ '1.:.;;' \c.tt...t:':~':.~l\LE
!!:P,){ F:E:T,dL
1: [1\1" ., I I\! ::.:;" i"l:" [ "
~:_:' !.~:' r < \j ~ (: l::: ':::
(:0\' ~:;TP,.T!::
(;(;\/.- L..C1C/:;..I._
Ij!)',/- F [D[i~,",L
I>..j I.'! i\h~.: L ,~, ~_:~; ~.::, I, . I .i\ L: LJ.:.
.r-'r;.c'{\'C( EC3 (~) - CIZ _,':;1._+ 'Ji~(1
[S-202 ANNUAL AVERAGE EMPLOYMENl BV SIZ[
f'!il,J'1F ~"v"LF,U'il:\F:L[ (iHII\I! V
Cf'-.~ (Ci"-.jT\() cJ (C:IT."{) ril~~':.:, (IYj~:.::,i\) F',L) (F-'J..)C~;
"11.1 Q'1Ei'iU) " iAi\!['IL \'iCE! LL U/TT: f)i',T.I\)
:":., T 7f~: (:nr.'lr:"(;
(IU:.::
! "if::,
......:. '""'.-".'
,':,,:. j" ':,'::.
.~ '! Z.4!;:~j
:': 'I i.) "1. ']
;..+ :; ? /~::::
1,,(<<:
l'j ;3,::,'-i
I .'., ,-,..",
J.:1 ,.:,'1 ",
:! ,,':0(:,'1
l '.i .-::,,,~,"/
[r'!riP /'-PEA !~.r\IL'/IJf:: i)F'TIIJI\1
.:::' :'::: ~..!
1',(\
c:~. i .:'...
~: 1
1')'( 'i
"'--,'T1
,'~, .~, 5 ':c, I ,
::'''~II; .
''',\i
,1 ',1 ?'''I!
C, :' 1 A.:~::
-'-'~':i !j.l '::;,
1. ,(,t.)2
Zl'o':,
l 'I ,~, -1'-
~':I() 1.
1 'I 1""" I
'::.: l:~ o::;,~:;
.' ~ .... , '.~.
1 : (,/~ :::'1
.:...
r:.' F7' (E~ l~r, (.:i<i.L.~:~\ r.~' D)
1');:;('
:':>) 1. ?:Cl
"'i':) I
,~;:,J
! ,,1 ';0:-
"', ,':',',J A
"-, ,'.', ,.", ,",
. ","r.",'"
1 ,'I ii"
,:::-,;::,,,',
.' .~, ,-',
,'~. ( .:::
,:.. ':r ..."..."..'
1 1 ..~., .~:.
.... ~ ., ~.-- ~-.
1 ,!/::;-:,::
1. 0:; (:,l)3
1 :16"j()
'::;''f
F,'r':::: (r:C:I.:~,\~,I.r~\~~D)
C'CIU!~'
~~;jJ ('''': U~.I ~::;:Z e~ J :,?F:. -.. CD)
f:'/,,(:iE: "1. elF :::
1 (:'::::1
PR iPRNT) E:X iEXITI
1',.':<:'
.._,I- '~ "? :::: '~':
":;~..;<..
,?'Q
:1 ",1)';'1'
~:) '.' ;:~: (9
...~. :i l....~ 3
1. ,:\:"(',
,:_ i '._'
::Zl
,:~_ ~ .l (\-::1
1;: U"/'4
1 ',I /!:::,'::.:
1. 1. " 1. L~>(i
J , ';0::-'-
~,::; :~:::
?F5 II :~~:1;.1
i"j..::.: ~:.~
/,"',
i.::,(:.
1 j 01?
I:: ~: If
/1. 'i () J !:.;
1. 5 :;~O?
::'"A"
, I
z~, ;??f..:;
1 ; ,~J.}1
1, ',:"4::1
J (> ~ 7 (:,!:j
1 ~ 6"'(<::;'
!'~~l?
.._,
'.~'
,.",
EI\rrTJI'}:t:::/T F'P;i:iL:)
"
/\j-;.~F'f\ ::
()()3
L~':: .M. ?o:~ /\r--..lrJ(J_;.~,(... A VFI-?!J.,{:j):~' ElvlF'L..C'y'lvjL:r)"!' B~{ ~?; I :2~t:: COI)["
F' 1\ Cit:: ~:~ l,iF 3
SD (S[)A) SZ (Sl~r~.-'C:I))
UF'I ICi!'j;
.i\!
i"'.,'\
NAME: ALBEM~RLE lOUNTY
eN ((:Trl'/) e1 tel! Y) l'if:;
MU 'MENU) YY (ANNl weEl
~.:~:; I ,.ll:"::: (:ClL"iF:~.~;
:":';I?E".-('D:; '.i':)
EI':!> ': 1,[1
I I'!l. )1,,1'::' r 1,:/
A-l ~k~ T U [/i,J ,:hl,;; i\~
"I'::,:::
[':<<:: 10::;'::>'1
2.~:! \ cc:()
~::4, :.-.:7::::
,f\r;~: I (I)[,T!!',::::
1","\ J i\! 1.1"..IG
\ I'd.t:., I :,,:tJ.Cl Iii'!
1{!!~II,"Ti:,:'1 /:',1.
" "IF (:1 , UUfU\:::L E
!-"'li:~(:i r'.\Ui\Il.)I...lh~
~:; ::::
1,0:>+
h 'I UZ:::~:
.:. , i) !
1 ~,:A.4
'F:;;:i:';:'Uin\.T IOrl
rT(AU!:~ .-I'I::il! E~~;,o.t,E
If.: ;\) +-+:cr,\ (L
r: 11'1, , 11\1::,. F:, E "
::-:! F: VI C E: '::;
:::'.C']
~~:l :~~: (,
,--, ....':1'-:-
,::., , .':"', ~i ,;..
1; /1:/;
Z,1:::::
U C! \/ .- ~:~:~ .r l-'" T E:
...., '..'..-,--;.
'i. j '...' .:~.
(;Ci\i '.. L.OC:,i\!.
J 'I :~:~~:IU
';I'tV.- ff:D!f< .L
i'LI:!,! (,'::::"::; I : 1/,[:I.L
~5':~;'
14
!~:i!Er-:: i'.i :'l:i\ tJ!L".' iih: UFf I UI\I I F'FI 1'L:P,(,i:j:L'\fH))
'::'"1
1 ,,:: [,)
~l ~ ::::(1:3
..:: I, :?O;~.::
1 I ~:i)~:;
Z ~i "::.10
J ~ :3::::0
.':.' F-~, ./ 'J
'_. ~ ..~"n .;.
,) ~ ;~:; :::~ :::
1 , 1':;: 1
"/ ()
!~:;::~: ::i
":', ~:t
:;=. ,::., ~:~
~;:; ::::~ /,
1.1'r":~'3,{i..) F' f) (F-' J.)(.;;
.'" "_, ( c:'r i:;.: j:' j~. T ,c',. )
I. ':f;:I",
. -. .~. ",... ,-,
,~... .'::' 'J (~=i .:~.
!:;CiC:
/'0
1 '.' hU~:)
::,;:,>1-
3" ';14,;j
J j 4 J.')
;:,[r:;
~,:! .:~ ~5
z ~ ..l :::~; /~
1,??A
~< ,. ,.:::,~_:l {'
':)\",'14
1 " (=:':~;c
:.~: :'~
PR IPRNT) EX (EXITl
;;:: :~:~ ~ ~? (,0
[ ,) I::: .;, 1 ,) I::: "/
6~:::~CI
C'(;' {
(,::.:
1 ~I r',:::: 1
~5 , ~j '::~'U
,4",;:,>1
1. ') :::(',(,
Z'l/j
A I.:...~..
Pl"'__.':...
..:: It :' '1
1. ;4"Ii::
z ~ ::~: '~,' :~I
1. () :i Z :~~;F.)
1 '.i ./ ()~5
l t;
;? ..::1.
z') I ..'1:::lo~
.,',-.,
10'
J ! (,':::"'!
5, ',i!:3:[
4" '-::;O::',;!,
1. ~ :3~:;6
I~.. <~, ~:..
d'II',
._' I. '_"..,"...'
l~~517
..':.-1 ,'-,
'... ~ ,.- .,
1 e" 4 J ';:'
1 , 'i{(,
l"1
,.',
(,>
F'F:::.; (F(:':hl~!i~\HD) \ Er....iTF:f;.: (\""1[/.". P/),.{:ir~~)
..
~ 12tcCL ~-02~?4-
ES 202 ANNUAL AVERAGE EMPLOYMENl BY SlZ~
/\::;'!~~r-~_ :: i')U:::~ N.tJ,rq[: AL.E:Er"!,(\n.LE CLJL.n-...ITY
U!-....~ l(Jj\~: i\! eN (Cr-.-.\T\{) C1 ((:I"f\/) IY1~.::; (l'i;~::;f\) r='}) (F'DC:}
~:;ELuC[): ';,':) r'lU n'IEI,IU) '{; U',J'Ii'lL W:,[) Ii ,'QTH DATi\!
[}II> ~ .\LL ::;I/E CODtY;
INOUST~Y 1988 1089 10Q~
*****TOTA_***** 30,073 33,101 32,612
1\(11;,: 1 C/.JEru ;:1:
1:\ 1 II I I\i;::i
(Ui.l':~;Tr:'I!CT II!!'j
l'jF (,.. rUT 1),1"
" 1'lFh" DUrU:\.::LE
i~,"+,::,
,..,-,"
:;-' i
;? 'I (>ZU
f5'1 )34
-4 ~ !::; ~:~~ ;:::
l,"j F (:i ~.- j\j:J j"',,[ U J F~
1. ,,>k.'
2:::1
4::,(.
3, /j '::; 1
1. ~ 620
::: , '(':;' 1
1. i)" (,1::"4
il,:,c:"f,r::;Fi'iRT\ T [or,!
iTU\l)[" !'IHU: ,E ~::1)J-'::,
ThJ\DI=~'Rcr ',IL
111'1",11'.1':';" F:"r::"
',:'! [(',,.' I cr I:,
C;O\/ -- :~:;T f),. TE~
GO\' "'Li:!C!~,L
r;c;\/.., FEUFF \1."
1",II\:'!.. A'3:::~: I .. I AE:LL
-; ,...,......-.}
,L OJ 1_..'
7~T
i i
ENfER A~EA AND/OR OPtION
~:' { ~::.I
~~l ()
:=, 16,~,
6 ~ :~:~5:::::
4,,:::9':::
'1 ,'::'/,(,
:::: ~.~ ;~':
(:~".I?
3,':)!:::;"1
1., n:;::
4 " ~>jil
10 ~ <:;'7.~t
.1 , ,) / !:~l
?(J
~~.
i....
F~.~ ./. (E:l~'..C-I<~,!:!\F'D)
(.h
z. '.1114':1
'"'" ,:1.\
4 ',i ;::...~::;'/
2,0/:::
.:+'.}r::,
4- '1 !~~I~..I!:::1
1, (, 1 T
4""',,.:"'1
9, ~/'h:l.
Z 'I C)6!~:1
,SZ!:~{
~~;C:t/,
, "
.-::. ..~l'
CODE
SD (Sl)A) SZ (S:(Z[--(:O)
P :~.c~'IE :~: fJr. :.:::
PR {F'h:r':T) I~:: n:'.... J: T)
1. ')':' 1 1. ,~"<
29,449 27.827
,',::.;" i.::.
I ;,/1.:3
t~;, ')'/9
4" OO::~
1 ~ ';:'/6
::~.1 ()
t:; 1. f~~
4- :1 :::;~~;":.
1 :; 6::~~.:!:5
4 ;, (/:/!
't~?7'l
,;.... ~,
1'::.'-.'
(,!:I
P F ::~~ .:. j:::' C F~. \.1..1 /~\ h' [) ;;
7e'1
I~:. L:'.
1 , !':::i:::::
1';':\ :E::::::
;:,604
1. L. :~; :~~: 0
4:?h
II ;:~:(::
,..( ",:..0::''-
I, ::::,'11
f::; ~ J. !~:; ;~::
~5. !:::: 1
.,:- ":~:'r
L_, .;,:_._.'i
(:.(:.
,~ ...
ENIER(NEXl PAGE)
. ,~ . ~J
_i\ F~ E ..=~\ ;~ (.) n .~::
U!'. C I (11"-,.1 :~ I'-IA
fr1C:;"'..l'rl-.iL.\ D.1\ T.~\
L!f::C':'::
11::]\/(1::
1)1:,(':'/
i\lj['ILJAL ,iVEf;AGF.:.;
1 ')''-;:'
1 ';,":i '
.I 'J'::J( \
j ')3':)
'1,.-,,-',,',
! ::'('1.'
1 'i::;'
1 ";':::"
!,':;':::::"
! .)~:=;, t
1 '!:<~
\.1 .11,:1:1 I 1\1 I /\ Et'IPU:(/liiLJ'IT CUrtl1il l ':::::; I 11:'1
ES1'IMATEO LABOR FORCE OA1A
i\ir\hL:::: 4LCU'iA:UJ: CIIUt'-IT\1 Rf' UUiJ;jf I i',IG)
':1.1 I(I'IT\') (:] ((:nn t,r3 0'1:>=',) I'D iF'DC) :::0 C-:;l\A) Uti (LJ'1A)
ttir" (!'Ii'ITII/li.i~U 1'l1il (i'll'lni'::) rilL! (liILl\/L1! I'P (i'fit!T) L:::; ([;i,IT)
(IVILlt'J.j
U\;:(:j::,: FU;:;:C[
FIYJj:I.,,(IYi'iLij'r
'-.:,,:: .'1/'::'
'..' '_.' ~ '~r '_,."_'
! )1',11::: 1'1 F' L U'y' It1 E 1\11
NUMB~R RA1E RANK
:~::'{ ~ ~:; 1. :~:
.I j U~50
1 " 1 t:, 'i
J. , ?7"'}
.- .,. ,~.~ .~.
'3 {' '.1 :,:;:~:;~:.'I
>:,,?:1
J./' 7- (>9:3
:.~: ~5 '! ;~:: 1. .4
,'~. '-,. .-'. ,.~. ,
',:' f '.' ~... ,_I i.~'
:.::!~~ Ij I::::O
:l,;!::/:\::,
1. , Z'~:'~:l
":::''>, ;,',47
.:::~j ~ ::::~~::!~:~
':~ (;, :,1 7' () e;
::~~,..:j .. .4()4
.'-11.:;' "'! 'r,''',
.::,: -' ~ f : '.:'
:::::::,C+4
~:::.:::,{)
. ,. I ,-' ...
~': '.:' 'I '-=, 0::. ,::'"
.... ,",
"":'_'! 1 ,:',
()C'I
3:2:: f::ll1
'.::; 1. ; >~:,<:' /:'
91!5
.:: t 'i 0:::' ::~: ,~~
:::: (.i '.j ~:~ (:, '/
1 '.I 1 (' !':;
.I ; ~:' /0
1. '1'::'.1:',:::
1.; L~::
:::: 1. , '~~/' ~5 :~:::
:0,:::,::4
31" ,:36
:~:U , )"()O
.'~, .'.:- ,I ..., ,..,
.::' ,::.. ~i "I ::: .::
:: J. ; 92::3
I::J,lT-P !IP[/\ i\i\IU/ UF: UI-' i I Uf\j
PF::~: (f.: O;::;~I.J!i\F~r))
F';:: / (:Cf\C:i<!.l~.i\HJ))
,_:- ,w..
.:~. " .::.
1. '3
11
:::: " 1.
:::,,4
4" 1
:: " :;
2.. f~,
.~.~: II ::1
.w;. ,_,
,:~.. " ':::0
,'-, .'1
,~', /1 (
4,,':;'
::::: Q ,)
,._, ,'.',
..) ,,'::'
. ,
, ,"
CI)
(j)
........
w CI)
N
~ I-- ........
> ~
0
~ <9 ()
(j) W
> >
. 0:
(j) W
> (f) ~
-
W Z
>- -
- 0: (!J
t- a:
LL -
Z >
'::> I
0
()
...J
W (f) >-
--I - I t-
3: z
0: ::>
<( :::::> 0
~ a. ()
0
W W
I-- ....J
OJ a:
--I <9 <(
- LL ~
<( ~
W
.. I-- m
>- (f) ....J
a: - z <( W
0 I 0
t- O <(
(j) 0:
I--
::> <9 WW
0 Cf) <( ...JO
a: <(<(
Z ~ (/)0:
....J ...J WI--
- ~ ...J
....J O~
>- 0 0 I~
OJ 0 I-- ~W
\U_ n l-n----T---~ I I
I a:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...J
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (f)~
r-... CO LO 'Q" (") N ~ IW
~a:
. I.
. ,I,' ."'4.
(V)
(J)
_._-.__._-_._-~. .........
(J)
.........
.q-
0 ()
<( ~ (J) W
(J) >
,.-
-
z
- <{
(!J -
a: z
(J) -
- CO (!)
> (J) a:
,.- -
>
CJ) I
>
CO
>- - CO
(J) >-
J- ,.- t-
Z Z
:J
::> 0
0 ()
.......
() - CO W
(J) ..J
,.- a:
lLJ <{ -
--1 ~ 0
a: w ctI
OJ ill
<( ..J .....
to ctI
CO <{ <1>
- -0=
2 (J) I <1> .-
,.- C >
lLJ ._ en
.0 <1>
(() E:::;
o~
--1 u '-
cu
<( to C.c
CO 00
- 0-
(J) ::J-o
CJ) ,.- -0 C
"'0 <1> cu
C ---~-- ---------.. en <1>
,
CO r---'----r-~ cu-
.0 ....
CJ) to 0 to 0 cu
::J C\J C\J ,.- ,.- en E
0 fF.} fF.} fF.} fF.} <1>
-.0
..c 0-
~ 0.. <( I
~
1990 CP!-L-81.
Table 2.
Selected Labor Force and Commuting Characteristics:
Albemarle County, Virginia
1990
The us
variabi
technic
variabi
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
r should note that these data are based on a sample, subject to sampling
ity, and that there are limitations to many of these data. Please refer to the
I documentation for Summary Tape File 3 for a further explanation of sampling
ity and limitations of the data.
LABOR F( RCE STATUS
P rsons 16 years and over
In labo force
P rcent in labor force
Civil an labor force
Emp oyed
Unel played
P rcent unemployed
Armed Forces
Not 1n abor force
and over
~
labor force
force
M les 16 years
In labo force
P rcent in
Civil an labor
Emp oyed
Unepployed
P rcent unemployed
Armed Forces
Not in abor force
F~males 16 years and over
In labo force
P rcent in labor force
Civil an labor force
Emp oyed
Une ~p I oyed
P rcent unemployed
Armed Forces
Not 1n abor force
With ow
Perce
With ow
only
Perce
Own
fa
All par
househ
Own
1n
All par
househ
Per
Not enr
not hi
Emplo
Uneml?
Not 11
F males 16 years and over
children under 6 years
t in labor force
children 6 to 17 years
t in labor force
children under 6 years 1n
ilies and subfamilies
nts present in
ld in labor force
children 6 to 17 years
families and subfamilies
nts present in
ld in labor force
ons 16 to 19 years
lied in school and
h school graduate
ed or in Armed Forces
oyed
labor force
COMMUTII G TO WORK
Worke s 16 years and over
Percent drove alone
Percent in carpools
Percent using public transportation
Percent using other means
Percent walked or worked at home
Mean tnvel time to work (minutes)
54,242
35,451
65.4
35,327
34,422
905
2.6
124
18,791
26,256
18,779
71.5
18,681
18,268
413
2.2
98
7,477
27,986
16,672
59.6
16,646
16,154
492
3.0
26
11,314
27,986
3,993
64.0
4,107
79.3
5,573
3,458
9,127
6,869
5,908
34,110
74.9
15.4
2.2
0.9
6.6
19.3
OCCUPATION
Employed persons 16 years
and over
Executive, administrative,
and managerial occupations
Professional specialty
occupations
Technicians and related
support occupations
Sales occupations
Administrative support
occupations, including clerical
Private household occupations
Protective service occupations
Service occupations, except
protective and household
Farming, forestry, and
fishing occupations
Precision production, craft,
and repair occupations
Machine operators, assemblers,
and inspectors
Transportation and material
moving occupations
Handlers, equipment cleaners,
helpers, and laborers
319
113
50
156
INDUSTRY
Employed persons 16 years
and over
Agriculture, forestry, and
fisheries
Mining
Construction
Manufacturing, nondurable goods
Manufacturing, durable goods
Transportation
Communications and other
public utilities
Wholesale trade
Retail trade
Finance, insurance, and
real estate
Business and repair serV1ces
Personal services
Entertainment and recreation
serV1ces
Health services
Educational services
Other professional and
related services
Public administration
CLASS OF WORKER
Employed persons 16 years
and over
Private wage and salary workers
Government workers
Local government workers
State government workers
Federal government workers
Self-employed workers
Unpaid family workers
34,422
4,926
7 ,621~
2,024
3,880
5,429
]82
413
2,676
1 , 153
3,296
1 , 1] 4
889
816
34,422
1,388
100
2,357
1,627
2,6113
949
869
952
4,952
2,282
1,059
1,092
363
4,1122
5,310
2,686
1 ,371
34,422
22,371 -t,')'
9,404~'"
2, 08~ I
6,281
1,038
2,506
1111
'. , t
-31-
Table 9. Camuti~ Pattern:; In 1re O1arlottesville S1SA
Wo rk In
L1 \Ie In
Albanarle Fluvanna Greene Olarlottesville
Albanarle 8,124 95 19 14,545
Fluvarma 551 1,585 14 1,351
Greene 768 932 1,214
Charlottes- 2,885 59 19 14,388
ville
C~arlottesville. There are several smaller flows directed towards Charlottesville
f~om Fluvanna and Greene, plus approximately 2,900 workers commuting from Char-
l~ttesville to Albemarle County.
The Charlottesville SMSA constitutes one of the state's smaller metropoli-
t~n labor forces with just over 50,000 workers. The worker retention rate for
t~e area is very high, 93.3 percent (this includes Nelson County, which is not
olfflcially part of the SMSA). The high worker retention rate is due to the lack
o~ any significant competition for the area's labor force, as well as the area's
sl~rong manufacturing sector and employment at the University of Virginia. The
S~SA attracts commuters from several neighboring localities, and most intra-SMSA
cpmmuting is directed towards Charlottesville City.
L~nchburg SKSA
~
The Lynchburg SMSA consists of Amherst, Appomattox (6) and Campbell
Cpunties, together with Lynchburg City. The most important industries in the
L~nchburg SMSA produce industrial tools and clothing. The area has one large
s~nthetic fiber weaving mill and numerous smaller firms producing clothing for
m~n, women, and children. There are two large iron foundries, and other firms
p~oducing a wide range of manufactured products such as industrial machinery,
mptors and generators, motor vehicle parts and accessories, fabricated struc-
t~ral metal, conveyors and conveying equipment, power transmi ssion equipment,
rlefrigeration and heating equipment, electrical transformers, electric capaci-
tprs, storage batteries, and radio and television communication equipment.
'.~'
-_. '---.. ...." --.
".,
10. ,~
1990 VIRGINIA COMMUTING PATTERNS
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND WORK IN THE COUNTY:
OUT-COMMUTERS TO:
Charlottesville City
Augusta County
Orange County
Greene County
Nelson County
Louisa County
Fluvanna County
District of Columbia
Charlotte County
Madison County
Culpeper County
Work Elsewhere
Total Out-Conmuters
IN-COMMUTERS FROM:
Charlottesville City
Greene County
Fluvanna County
Nelson County
Buckingham County
Louisa County
Orange County
Augusta County
Waynesboro City
Madison County
Rockingham County
Reside Elsewhere
Total In-Conmuters
NET IN-COMMUTING:
(In-Conmuters - Out-Conmutersl
16,725
14,597
326
301
235
201
170
151
1 17
78
75
65
1 ,069
17,385
4,087
1 ,917
1 ,530
1 , 108
710
658
615
525
523
366
238
1 ,226
13,503
-3,882
Prepared by: STATE DATA CENTER,VIRGINIA EMPLOYMENT COMMISSION
Source: 1990 CENSUS OF POPULA T ION AND HOUS I NG March 26, 1993
,
UtCLLYtlLLtlilJL ,
UNTIL
, .-~...
~
o R DIN A NeE
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
SECTION 2.1-4, CHAPTER 2.1 OF THE
CODE OF ALBEMARLE
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of county supervisors of
A bemarle County, Virginia, that section 2.1-4(i) of Chapter 2.1
n~ gricultural and Forestal Districts" of the Code of Albemarle,
klown as the "Jacobs Run Agricultural and Forestal District" be
alended and reenacted to read as follows:
(i) The district known as the "Jacobs Run Agricultural and
Forestal District" consists of the following described
properties: Tax map 18, parcels 40, 40Fi tax map 19,
parcels 25, 25Ai tax map 20, parcel 7Ai tax map 31,
parcels 8, 16, 16B, 23 (part), 23D (part), 44C, 45
(part), 45B, 45C. This district shall be reviewed no
more than six (6) years from the date of its reenactment
on March 2, 1994.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w r-iting is a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by the
B pard of County Supervisors of Albemarle county, Virginia, at a
r4~gular meeting held on March 2, 1994.
~/ea.. tJ ~
dfe~, Board of countyt$upervisors
, ".~'!j q,06.'l4,
. q4~O'X1J'fl,/I0
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
SECTION 2.1-4, CHAPTER 2.1 OF THE
CODE OF ALBEMARLE
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle
Ckmnty, Virginia, that Section 2.1-4(i) of Chapter 2.1 "Agricultural and Forestal
Districts" of the Code of Albemarle, known as the "Jacobs Run Agricultural and
Forestal District" be amended and reenacted to read as follows:
(i) The district known as the "Jacobs Run Agricultural and Forestal
District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 18,
parcels 40, 40F; tax map 19, parcels 25, 25A; tax map 20, parcel 7 A;
tax map 31, parcels 8, 16, 16B, 23 (part), 23 D (part), 44C, 45 (part),
45B, 45C. This district shall be reviewed no more than six (6) years
from the date of its creatioft Oft Jaftuary 6, 1988. the date of its
reenactment on
*****
J cob's Run Agricultural/Forestal District Review - Review of the Jacob's Run
gricultural/Forestal District which consists of 1.123 acres located on Rts. 743,
7 4, 664, 665, and 660 near Earlysville. The existing district is proposed to be
c ntinued for six years.
( iting a conflict of interests, Ms. Huckle excused herself from hearing this
it m. She left the meeting.)
r. Blue chaired the meeting in Ms. Huckle's absence.
s. Scala presented the staff report. Staff was recommending approval of the
d. strict, but for a four-year, rather than a six-year time period.
s. Imhoff attempted to understand the difference between the four-year and six
ear periods. Ms. Scala explained that a four-year period would bring the item
nder consideration sooner, and more in line with a Comp Plan review in the
vent the Board may want to consider expansion of the Earlysville Village.
r. Dotson asked what effect the A-F district would have on a possible
xpansion of the Earlysville Village, if it were in place at the time the expansion
as under consideration. "W ould the district automatically be cancelled? Would
i simply run out and couldn't be renewed, that part in the growth area?" Ms.
cala explained that it would not cancel the district, but it would create a
I
. ' ,
2-8-94
2
conflict. She explained that it is a statewide policy not to approve A-F district's
within growth areas. Mr. Cilimberg added: "It would also create an area which
could not be more intensely developed, that would be in the growth area, until
the district was, in fact, discontinued in that area."
Ms. Imhoff pointed out: "Even if that were the case, if the landowner's choose
not to develop it, it doesn't matter what you zone it or call it." Mr. Cilimberg
confirmed Ms. Imhoffs statement was accurate. He added: "The other option
would be if someone chose to develop because they are going to be in the
growth area, they could ask for withdrawal from the district."
The Chair invited public comment.
Ms. Anne Mallick, Dr. John Huckle, and Mr. Jim Heyward, participants in the
district, addressed the Commission and urged the Commission to approve the
district for a six-year time period. Ms. Mallick described her farm. Regarding
the possibility of the expansion of the Earlysville Village, both Ms. Mallick and
Dr. Huckle expressed concerns about groundwater availability.
Ms. Karen Strickland, an Earlysville resident, expressed support for the district
and for the maintenance of the rural quality of the area. She also commented
on the issue of protection of Jacob's Run because of the future possible use of
Chris Green Lake as a water supply reservoir. In the interests of protecting
Chris Green Lake as a potential future reservoir, and in so doing, saving
taxpayer's money by not having to create another reservoir, she recommended
that the district be approved for the maximum of ten years.
There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed and the
matter was placed before the Commission.
Mr. Nitchmann asked for further clarification as to why staff recommended four
years rather than 6 as requested by the applicants. Mr. Cilimberg again
explained that the timing is related to the Comp Plan review and the question of
the possible expansion of the Earlysville Village.
Ms. Imhoff noted that though a six-year period might result in a "conflict", it
would not actually be a hinderance, i.e. "it would not automatically drop the
land out of the A-F district and when it came up, whenever the Comp Plan
review came up, it could be corrected at that time. 11 She explained she was
2-8-94
3
trying to figure out if there was some "hidden flaw or problem or if this is
simply a matter of trying to match up dates."
Mr. Cilimberg explained that it was a matter of "consistency." Mr. Blue added:
"The key word is consistency, because I think staff has always recommended
that if the Comp Plan review is coming up, on various other issues, it's 'wait
until we get the Comp Plan before we go foward with any more long term
arrangement. ' That is the main (point) I got out of the report."
Regarding the possible expansion of Earlysville, Mr. Cilimberg explained there
had been no "master scheme of expansion" during the last Comp Plan review.
In the upcoming review, there is at least one one request for possible expansion.
Referring to the idea of "consistency," Ms. Imhoff stated: "Usually we use that
argument when we are looking at increasing density. ... So I think it is not the
same rule when we are looking at something which is basically a holding, or
low, or undeveloped area." She felt part of the Comp Plan review discussion
would be about the meaning of "rural area" and "are there things which need to
be differentiated in the rural area?"
Mr. Dotson commented: "In terms of consistency, another issue we are going to
have to face is, if we're saying 'let's not develop this area,' then we also have an
obligation to say where we are going to develop and that might be this area, if
it's expanded, or some others."
Regarding A-F districts, Mr. Dotson commented: "The A-F districts are a very
valuable tool. They are not a regulatory device--the fact that they are voluntary;
the fact that they offer an incentive to a property owner; the fact that they really
impose little in the way of public cost in terms of services, are things very much
in their favor. I also appreciate that we have people like these property owners,
with their values and attitudes and a willingness to undertake some risks to
continue farming in a growing, expanding environment. So, I am very
sympathetic to it. However, in my own value scheme, I would probably support
the staff recommendation because of the consistency reason, fully expecting that
there's a very good chance that this will continue in agriculture, that the village
wouldn't expand. But just for consistency sake, I think on principle, I would
support 4 years, rather than 6 or 8 or 10."
Mr. Blue expressed agreement with Mr. Dotson's comments.
, ,
2-8-94
Mr. Nitchmann expressed his support for a four-year period.
4
MOTION: Mr. Dotson moved that the Jacob's Run Agricultural/Forestal District
be recommended to the Board of Supervisors for approval with a time period of
four years.
Mr. Nitchmann seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Ms. Imhoff stated she was more in favor of the Advisory Committee's
recommendation for a six-year time period. She explained: "I don't think
consistency quite works the same way and I think the advantages of the district
outweigh--particularly since farming is a long-term activity--would for me push
me over into the six-year period."
Mr. Blue stated: "I, personally, doubt that the Earlysville growth area is going
to be expanded in the Comprehensive Plan. Nevertheless, I do think that
consistency is important, and I do think it's the same. There are people that are
arguing for more density and we're putting them off, and we're putting them off
and saying 'No, wait until you have the Comprehensive Plan review,' and I think
that the same thing happens. And I think that the people who are here and
wanting a longer term committment, if they don't change their property, it's not
going to change. So, I don't see that we're doing a disservice to anybody"
Mr. Jenkins noted that the participants had asked for six-years. It was his belief
that historically, requests for withdrawals from districts have been approved. He
stated he was having "trouble realizing what the magic is in 4 or 6."
Referring to Mr. Jenkins comments, Mr. Cilimberg explained that with the
exception of one instance where a piece of property was in the path of the By-
pass route, requests for withdrawal from districts have "not gone forward due to
lack of support." He stressed: "For the record, I wanted it to be clear that
withdrawals are not a normal occurance and, in fact, have not been encouraged,
and the Ag-Forestal Advisory Committee has not looked favorably upon them."
The motion for approval of the district with a 4-year time period passed (5: 1)
with Ms. Imhoff casting the dissenting vote.
, ,
,~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
ebruary 9, 1994
aymond John Devere or Devere A. Austin
mily Josephine Brock
ames Hall or Cornelia M. Brooks
irk G. & Eunice M. Dehooge
over Homes Inc
illiams N. Jr or Beverly L. Fields
laude D. & Julia V. Garver
obert R. or Eileen F. Herbert
ennis E. or Jill S. Holmberg
ue W. or Benjamin C. Howland
illiam E. or Nancy Hunt
ack N. or Georgia D. Kegley & Julia R. Doster
llan B. or Ada M. Kindrick
inwood A. & Ann W. Lacy
arold V. & Arlene Miller
and a E. Morris
ary K. or Christine Owens
oseph K. Porterfield
ermit E. or Ellen Bird Roberts
ary F. Shiflett
hilip T. Speasmaker
radyo Taylor
arry J. C. or Janny E. M. Van Beek
leo A. Via
rederick or Gail M. Weatherill
enneth W. Williams or Debbie Hamm
ichael o. Williams
ary P. 0 Kathleen E. Woodson
9 North Associates
imothy D. or Anne D. Averill
ank of Virginia Trust Company Trs
regory Bryan Barker & Susan J. Phillips
allie C. Breeden
rville Breeding Estate
ohn D. Jr. or Elizabeth C. Dangliesh
arland C. Jr or Leslie F. Gentry
harles H. or Daria Maria Giffen
~) (~
I
~(
nlands Limited
erald J. or Susan H. Kane
ight R. & Mary L. Kerns
tephen A. or Donna Kimata
van E. Letner, Jr
ftlands, Inc
harl~s R. or Dorothy Joanne Pace
anorama Farms Inc
dward E. III or Donna S. Rehorn
hristopher S. or Laurie J. Ricaurte
cott W. or Sheryl S. Ridenoure
arilyn B. Roper
avid L. & Ruth F. Rosene
arco Anthony Russo
ichard G. or Laurel K. Ryder
. Shannon G. Shirley
illiam Benjamin Sneed
ary K. or Renita S. Walker
obert F. & Marjorie H. Webber
. o. & Mary G. Whyte
ohn K. Youel Estate, ETAL
onald C. or Audrey J. Adams
lizabeth A. Baker
. Scott or Debra C. Bradshaw
ames J. or Rita R. Defrank
arlysville Commons Land Trust
arlysville Forest Homeowners
en Davis Jr & AlIi K. Eichelberger
illiam H. or Cynthhia A. Eichelkraut
ack C. or Jean M. Geiss
ale R. or Susan P. Herring
evin L. or Sharon K. Keller
onald R. or Connie V. Morris
orwood Water Corp
leh G. Pankewycz
obert G. or Kathleen o. Petchel
illiam H. or Sheila E. Porter
ollis T. & Mildred H. Proffitt
hampre C. & Jane W. Ransom
ean Q. or A. Remington Restivo
indy F. Riggs
arilyn B. Roper
obert J. Shnelller
effrey L. or Diane Shriver
ohn B. Shiflett
arl P. or Vera L. Williams
arwin M. or Patricia A. Bayston
edford Hills Homeowners Association
aul or Genevive A. Tarcha
'I
TO: ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS LISTED ON PRECEDING PAGES
RE: Jacob's Run Agricultural/Forestal District Review
Dear Sir or Madam:
We a~e required by State law to notify you as an adjacent
property owner of the recommendation of the Advisory Committee
and Albemarle County Planning Commission regarding the Jacob's
Run District Review.
The Advisory Committee at its meeting on January 24, 1994,
recommended unanimously to continue the District for six years.
The Albemarle County Planning commission at its meeting on
February 8, 1994 recommended by a 5-1 vote to continue the
District for four years.
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will hold a public
meeting and make a final decision on Wednesday. March 2. 1994.
10:00 a.m., Meeting Room #7, Second Floor, County Office
Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
If you have any questions regarding the application, or
agricultural/forestal districts in general, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
I.hAAAJ /' ,- ~ //
V,_;, -r5-J'if ~~-
Matt vJd~ Scala
Senior Planner
MJS/jcw
cc: Ella Carey
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Developmen,t
401 Mcintire Road '
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296,5823
ebruary 9, 1994
,
l__-'-'-""'~"::~:~;>;";'\: l
0... ,-, 1 ":I'-'~ oJ !>'" ,_
Ot-a """';.' ",,}'{" ~( .,~,...."...."":....,:",,,,,-
~~'~-
.............~,...'~
renda Jean Ayres Sprouse
inwood Wayne and Pamela P. Ayres
dward Morris Chisholm Estate
us an R. Coughlin
ames A. Heyward
ohn J. and Jacquelyn D. Huckle
. Stephen or Marguerite D. Lord
eo and Ann H. Mallek
osmo A. and Jan S. Mirra
avid C. and Barbara Yalden-Thomson
Jacob's Run Agricultural/Forestal District Review
Sir or Madam:
he Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
ebruary 8, 1994, recommended with a 5-1 vote, to continue the
acob's Run Agricultural/Forestal District for four years. The
lbemarle County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing
nd make a final decision on Wednesday. March 2. 1994.
pproximately 10:00 a.m., Meeting Room #7, Second Floor, County
ffice Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
f you have any questions, or require additional information,
lease do not hesitate to contact me.
Ella Carey
. '
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
EMORANDUM
n,.._._"_...""J:.
lease note that this is scheduled for review by the Board of
Supervisors at their meeting on March 2, 1994. If you have any
estions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner !1~5
February 10, 1994
Jacob's Run Agricultural/Forestal District
he Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
ebruary 8, 1994, recommended by a 5-1 vote that the Jacob's Run
istrict be continued for four years for the sake of consistency.
ttached please find a staff report which outlines this proposal.
TACHMENT
FF PERSON:
ISORY COMMITTEE:
NING COMMISSION:
D OF SUPERVISORS:
MARY JOY SCALA
JANUARY 24, 1994
FEBRUARY 8, 1994
MARCH 2, 1994 (10:00 a.m.)
AGRICULTURAL FORESTAL DISTRICT
ob's Run was created on January 6, 1988 for a time period of
years. The review of the district was intended by the Board
Supervisors to coincide with the five year review of the
prehensive Plan.
cedure: A 1993 amendment to the State Code made review of
tricts optional rather than mandatory. The Board of
ervisors has established a procedure to determine if a review
necessary. In this case, a review has been determined to be
essary because one of the property owners has chosen to
hdraw from the district. In conducting a review, the Board
11 ask for the recommendations of the local Advisory Committee
the Planning Commission in order to determine whether to
inate, modify, or continue the district.
Board may stipulate conditions to continuation of the
trict and may establish a period before the next review of the
trict, which may be different from the conditions or period
ablished when the district was created. Any such different
ditions or period must be described in a notice sent to
downers in the district, and published in a newspaper at least
weeks prior to adoption of the ordinance continuing the
trict.
ess the district is modified or terminated by the Board of
ervisors, the district shall continue as originally
stituted, with the same conditions and period before the next
iew (6 years) as were established when the district was
ated.
district is reviewed, land within the district may be
hdrawn at the owner's discretion by filing a written notice
h the Board of Supervisors at any time before the Board acts
continue, modify, or terminate the district.
ose: The purpose of an agricultural/forestal district is "to
serve and protect and to encourage the development and
rovement of the Commonwealth's agricultural/forestal lands for
production of foods and other agricultural and forestal
ducts..." and "to conserve and protect agricultural and
estal lands as valued natural and ecological resources which
vide essential open space for clean air sheds, watershed
tection, wildlife habitat, as well as for aesthetic purposes."
2
Factors to Consider:
Tte following factors must be considered by the Planning
Co~ission and the Advisory Committee and at any public hearing
when a proposed district is being considered:
1. The agricultural and forestal significance of land within
the district and in areas adjacent thereto;
2. The presence of any significant agricultural lands or
significant forestal lands within the district and in areas
adjacent thereto that are not now in active agricultural or
forestal production;
3. The nature and extent of land uses other than active farming
or forestry within the district and in areas adjacent
thereto;
4. Local developmental patterns and needs;
5. The Comprehensive Plan and, if applicable, the zoning
regulations;
6. The environmental benefits of retaining the lands in the
district for agricultural and forestal uses; and
7. Any other matter which may be relevant.
Ef~ects of a District:
1. The proposed district provides a community benefit by
conserving and protecting farmlands and forest;
environmental resources such as watersheds, air quality,
open space, wildlife habitat; and scenic and historic
resources.
2. The state Code stipulates that the landowner receive certain
tax benefits*, and restrictions on public utilities and
government action (such as land acquisition and local
nuisance laws) to protect the agricUltural/forestal use of
the land. In exchange, the landowner agrees to not develop
his property to a "more intensive use" during the specified
number of years the district is in effect.
*since Albemarle County currently permits all types of use
value assessment, a district designation may not provide any
additional real estate tax reductions. Land in a district
is protected from special utility assessments or taxes.
3. The state Code stipulates that, "Local ordinances,
comprehensive plans, land use planning decisions,
administrative decisions and procedures affecting parcels of
3
land adjacent to any district shall take into account the
existence of such district and the purposes of this
chapter." The district may have no effect on adjacent
development by right, but could restrict proposed rezonings
or uses by special use permit which are determined to be in
conflict with the adjacent agricultural/forestal uses.
Districts must now be shown on the official Comprehensive
Plan map each time it is updated.
In general, a district may have a stabilizing effect on land
use. The property owners in the district are making a
statement that they do not intend to develop their property
in the near future, and that they would like the area to
remain in the agricultural and forestal uses. Adjacent
property owners may be encouraged to continue agricultural
uses if they do not anticipate development of adjacent
lands.
ocation: Jacob's Run District consists of a core area located
n both sides of Rt. 743 north of Earlysville, and three
dditional areas within one mile of the core. other parcels are
ocated at the intersection of Rts 664/665; on Rt. 764; and south
f the intersection of Rts 660 and 743.
The original Jacob's Run District contains 1,227.713
14 parcels. The Grattans have requested withdrawal of
acres, leaving 1,124.986 acres in 13 parcels in the
The time period for Jacobs' Run District is 6
ears, which was established by the Board of Supervisors to
oincide with the five year review of the Comprehensive Plan.
ricultural and Forestal Si nificance: Land in the district is
eing used for hay, pasture for horses and cattle, a small
rganic farming wholesale operation, and forestry.
Si nific t nds ot A ricu tura Fo es al Production: The
se value assessment program is a good indicator of the actual
se of the properties. Approximately 544 acres are enrolled
nder agriculture; 496 acres are enrolled under forestry; 40
cres are non-qualifying (15 acres for dwellings); and 45 acres
are not enrolled.
other Than A riculture and Forestr
in the Jacob's Run district.
There are 14
cal Develo mental atterns a d Needs: The Earlysville area
c ntains a combination of farms and residential development.
M ny residential subdivisions were developed prior to development
rights. The Growth Area is mostly developed, with some larger
a reage remaining opposite Broadus Wood School.
Page 4
. .
lations: Jacob's Run District
's located within the Rural Area of the Comprehensive Plan and
.s zoned RA, Rural Areas. The nearest Growth Area is Earlysville
illage which is adjacent to several parcels in the district.
illage Residential, VR and Planned unit Development PUD zoning
ccurs within Earlysville Village. A Comprehensive Plan
bjective is, "All decisions concerning the Rural Areas shall be
ade in the interest of the four major elements of the Rural
reas, with highest priority given to preserving agricultural and
orestal activities rather than encouraging residential
evelopment.. (p. 203). A strategy is, "Actively promote and
upport voluntary techniques such as agricultural/forestal
istricts..... (p. 53).
Environmental benefits include
ground and surface water, wildlife habitat, open
pace and the historic landscape. The Coughlin, Mirra, Yalden-
homson, Heyward and Chisholm properties are in the South Fork
ivanna River Reservoir watershed. Jacob's Run traverses the
istrict and flow directly into Chris Greene Lake.
entire district is shown as important farmlands/forests in
Open Space Plan.
everal of the properties have historic resources: Oaklawn
(Heyward), Clunie (Yalden-Thomson), Adventure Farm cemetery
(Chisholm); Early House (Ayers), and Solitude Farm (Coughlin).
he possible expansion of Earlysville Village is an issue. The
arlysville Growth Area should not expand across Rt. 743/663/664
ecause those roads form the boundary for the South Fork Rivanna
rinking water supply watershed. The airport limits expansion of
arlysville to the east. The Jacob's Run District would conflict
ith possible expansion to the north. When the district was
stablished, it was noted that the expansion of Earlysville was
linked to the need for Chris Greene Lake as a supplemental water
s pply for the North Fork water treatment plant. If it is
etermined that Chris Greene is not needed, then Earlysville
c uld be expanded into the area covered by the Jacob's Run
istrict without impacting the supplemental water supply
tershed. If Chris Greene is needed for drinking water, then
e Jacob's Run District would offer protection to the watershed
d Earlysville should not be expanded into that area.
aff recommends continuation of the Jacob's Run District with a
ur year time period. Four years is the minimum time period
p rmitted under the State law (4-10 years). Continuation of the
d.strict for four years will serve to keep the district intact
Page 5
while the Comprehensive Plan five year review is being completed.
After the Comprehensive Plan review is completed, then a proper
decision can be made regarding the expansion of Earlysville
Village and the appropriateness of Jacob's Run District. Recent
chan~es to the state law permit the Board of Supervisors to
continue a district without a review if no changes are
ant'icipated. This could facilitate continuance of the district
in four years if the expansion issue is resolved.
Advisory Committee Recommendation: The Agricultural/Forestal
District Advisory Committee at its meeting on January 24, 1994,
unanimously recommended that Jacob's Run District be continued
for six years. Mrs. Huckle did not participate in the vote,
since she is a property owner in Jacob's Run District.
Planninq Commission Recommendation: The Albemarle County
Planning commission, at its meeting on February 8, 1994,
recommended by a 5-1 vote that the Jacob's Run District be
continued for four years for the sake of consistency. Mrs.
Huckle did not participate in the discussion or vote, since she
is a property owner in Jacob's Run District.
6
JACOB'S RUN AGRICULTURAL/FORESTAL DISTRICT
TM/P TOTAL USE VALUE ACREAGE OWNER DWELLINGS
ACREAGE AG FOR NQ
19-25 166.100 68.240 97.860 ... - -... John J. & Jacquelyn 0
"
N. Huckle
31-44C 39.190 ----- 36.190 3.0 J. Stephen or 1 + 2
Marguerite D. Lord cottages
19-25A 21. 000 11.200 8.800 1.0 Leo or Ann H. 1
Mallek
31-45C 20.000 ------ ------ -... ... ... Brenda Jean Ayres 1
Sprouse
31-45B 20.000 ------ ------ -...... - Linwood W. or 1
Pamela P. Ayres
18-40 107.730 47.080 58.650 2.0 Susan R. Coughlin 1
31-45 ------ 92.940 25.0 Linwood W. Ayres 0
117.94 and Brenda Jean
Ayres Sprouse
31-16 95.595 7.095 87.500 1.0 James H. Heyward 1
31-16B 31. 990 16.914 14.076 1.0 James H. Heyward 1
18-40F 5.010 ------ ------ -... -- Cosmo A. or Jan S. 1
Mirra
31-23 333.000 327.000 ------ 6.0 Edward Morris 2 + 1
(pt) Chisholm Estate rental
31-23D 14.000 14.000 ------ - - ... ... Edward Morris 0
(pt) Chisholm Estate
31-8 153.431 52.000 100.431 1.0 David C. & Barbara 1
Ya1den-Thomson
TOTAL 1,124.986 543.529 496.447 40.00 ACRES 14
DWELLINGS
7
, .
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Soil
Conservation
Service
401 MCIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
To:
FROM:
Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner, Albemarle County ,
d " . .\ [) I,~ I(.Jd~
J. Gor on Yager, D~str~ct Conservat~on~st, SCS .: (\! ,I.- /i-r
. '
Soils Report on Agricultural/Forestal Districts
Jacob's Run, Campground/Boat Launch at Hatton,
Boat Launch at Warren
RE:
DATE:
January 26, 1994
Soils are classified into eight capability classes with Class I
being the best and Class VIII having the most limitations for
agricultural uses. The following table gives a breakdown of
Capability Classes for the District.
Capability Class
II
III
IV
VI
VII
Jacob's Run
31111'
18%
29%
21%
1%
Hatton Campground
39%
14%
23%
2%
22%
Boat Launch At Warren
37%
0%
63%
0%%
0\
The following table gives the percentage of the district that is
suitable for cropland, hayland, pasture and forestry.
Suitable
Suitable for Suitable
for Grassland for
Cropland & Forestry Forestry
Jacob's Run 49% 78% 100%
Hatton Campground 53% 76% 100%
Boat Launch at Warren 37% 100% 100%
A very high percentage of this District is suitable for grassland
and agricultural uses.
The SOil Conservation Service
13 an agency of ihe
Department of Agnculture
.
/
/""
I
(
\
)
) /
f I
/ ..-- ~
~
'"-, )
~:;:?
f~----
Y
'f,'
'...... ----- ..--,. ~
, "
/
'-
'-
'''-,
'"
\ /
\ //
')
j
/'
I
\,/'
/'
.!
/"
'.'
./'
i
""I
, \.
)
("
, .:,..~
.....;.. ':'" ,\
..,
. r"
.....>--,
I
J
/
.......
,..~~~..:_~,
:TT
J1STRIGTS
SECTION 30
v.., ... ",'
.;... .'___-_u__. ~,;,;.........;,-__:.:..:~_~-
WHITE HALL AND
H RLOTTESVll.LE DISTRICTS
SECTION
"
AGRICULTURAL/FORESTAL DISTRICT ADVISORY MEETING
JANUARY 24, 1994
i
.,
The Ghairman Stephen Murray, called the meeting to order at 7:35
p.m. < other committee members present were Joseph Jones,
ice-chairman, Walter Perkins, Jacquelyne Huckle, Bruce Hogue,
arcia Joseph, Dan Maupin, Scott Morrill and Bruce Woodzell.
Staff members present were Gordon Yager and Mary Joy Scala. Also
resent were members from the public.
~cob's Run Distriot Review
s. Scala presented the staff report and recommended the district
e continued for the minimum time period of, four years because
he Comprehensive Plan 5-year review is just beginning, and
expansion of the Earlysville Village Growth Area is a
ossibility, which would conflict with the district.
ordon Yager presented the soils report. 31% of the area is in
lass II which is very good. The land in general is very good
gricultural land, good for grazing and forestry.
Chairman asked for public comment.
Huckle, a property owner in the district, said the proximity
o Earlysville and the open space which the district provides
akes it more desirable. The district also protects the Jacob's
un watershed for Chris Greene Lake. He requested a six-year
ime period.
n Mallek, a property owner in the district said they have a
mall organic garden wholesale operation, to supplement the beef
attle operation. Four years is a short time frame for farming
nd investing in fertilizer, and trees. A lake on her property
as been laughingly referred to by engineers as a siltation basin
or Chris Greene Lake. Every year they have undertaken ASCS
rojects to keep water clean.
an Maupin said that six years should be a minimum time period,
ossibly longer than that. If you do long range planning and
'mprovement, you won't reap benefit from only four years. The
hairman agreed.
s. Scala noted that the property owners in Jacob's Run
riginally requested an eight year district, the Board of
upervisors approved it for six years.
he Chairman asked for a re-explanation of staff's
ecommendation.
1
.
.
Ms. Scala said it was to tie it to the Comprehensive Plan review
of Earlysville Village. We will know more in four years.
Ms. Mallek said if the Comprehensive Plan is changed, we will not
be permitted to extend. With' six years it would give us a grace
peri9~"to get squared away.
The Chairman asked if districts are not permitted in Growth
Areas.
Ms. Scala said the statewide districts are not, but recent
legislation permits local agricultural/forestal districts which
we would allow within Growth Areas. Statewide districts are
preferred. There have not yet been any applications for local
districts.
The Chairman asked how far would Earlysville be expanded? As far
north as the Malleks? I can see Jimmy Heyward being gobbled up.
Ms. Scala said Heyward is in the watershed. The only way the
Growth Area could expand is to the north.
Mrs. Huckle questioned the staff report description of Route 743
as the Watershed boundary.
Ms. Scala said the staff report is in error, the boundary is
Route 743 to Route 663.
Ms. Scala said, would expansion have an effect if the property
owner wanted to keep the property in farming?
The Chairman agreed because the property owners are here tonight
asking for a six-year commitment. He would be in favor of six
years also.
Joe Jones noted that part of the land is a tree farm, which is a
long-term commitment.
Ms. Joseph asked if the County has spent money to provide
infrastructure on water, sewer or roads? When Earlysville is
built out, does it become like Ivy, which is no longer a Growth
Area?
..,
Ms. Scala said that is a good point. If Earlysville is to be
expanded, would it need public water and sewer?
Ms. Joseph said Gordon noted the good soils in the area.
Gordon Yager said the soils are capable of being used for ~llot
of different things, agriculture is one of them.
2
~
Dr. Huckle noted that the Department of Forestry requires a
ten-year commitment.
Mr. Pe~kins said yes, for some of the programs. You don't get
much ,in ten years.
Dan ,Maupin made a motion to (recommend) extending the district
for six years.
Bruce Hogue seconded.
The committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion.
" ".
Mrs. Huckle did not participate.
stephan Hawranke ReQUest for Withdrawals from Hatton Distriot
Ms. Scala presented the staff report. The applicant has
requested review of two separate, unrelated requests in the
Hatton District. Staff opinion is that the proposed campground
and private boat launch near Hatton Ferry is a more intensive
private commercial use which is not consistent with the purposes
of the district. Staff recommendation regarding the request for
withdrawal is that the 224 acres should remain in the Hatton
District.
Staff opinion regarding the proposed improvements to the river
access and parking area at Warren to be leased to the County on 5
acres is that the use is existing, and the improvements will
benefit the public. Staff recommendation is that the
improvements should be permitted in the Hatton District.
The Chairman asked for public comment.
Stephan Hawranke said there is no public boat landing at Hatton,
only a ferry site.
Ms. Scala noted that Bob Crickenberger is present to address
questions related to County Parks and Recreation.
Will Rieley representing the applicant made a presentation with
slides.
".
Mr. Rieley noted that the ownership of the property has changed
since the district was started, and Stephan Hawranke has
different objectives.
He would like both properties reviewed together; they are not
separate issues.
3
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SETTLEMENT
OF CLAYTOR, ET AL. V. ALBEMARLE COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 92-0063-C
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is a defendant in an action brought under the Fair
L bor Standards Act styled as Claytor. et at v. Albemarle County, Civil Action No. 92-0063-C;
d
WHEREAS, a settlement of that litigation is found to be in the best interests of the
unty; and
WHEREAS, a fair settlement agreement has been negotiated pursuant to a settlement
c nference held by the United States Magistrate Judge.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of the County of
bemarle, Virginia, hereby authorizes and approves the settlement agreement to be presented to
T e Honorable B. Waugh Crigler in the matter styled as Claytor. et at v. Albemarle County, Civil
tion No. 92-0063-C, and approves the payment of$8,281.56 in County funds in furtherance of
t at settlement
,
.
8-. . 06!j~
COUNTY OF" ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
(~UO~'" 10-' ~,,...,
., G ''''''r''::ldn~:, ::'U C
r-~--~~c._.".,.
IT
V66J V
SUBJECT P
It is re
solicit
projects
Communit
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1994
I,' --,.,
".~~E~..
AGENDA I
Community Development Block Grant
Public Hearing
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
BACKG OUND:
The irginia Department of Housing and Community Development administers the federally-
funde Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). These funds are available to
localities, on a competitive basis, to implement a wide variety of housing and community
impro ement projects. Prior to submission of an application for CDBG funding, a hearing
must e held to solicit public input on community development and housing needs in the
Count .
DISC SSION:
The a tached staff report provides some potential projects which could be funded through
the C BG program. Also provided is a description of the past use of funds, information
on th amount of funds available, the requirements on benefit to low- and moderate-income
persons, eligible activities and plans to minimize displacement.
NDATION:
receiving public comment, it is recommended that the Board of Supervisors indicate
which project, if any, will be submitted to the Virginia Department of Housing and
Community Development for CDBG funding.
CDBG. XE
94.02
Albemarle Count Pro. ects For Consideration of Vir inia
Development Block Grant Fundine:
he goal of the Virginia Community Block Grant Program (VCDBG) is to improve the economic
d physical environment in Virginia's communities and neighborhoods, benefiting persons of low
d moderate income, preventing and eliminating slums and blight, and meeting urgent
c mmunity development needs posing a serious and immediate threat to the health, safety and
elfare of Virginia citizens. There are fourteen (14) broad project types which may be
c nsidered for grant application in the VCDBG program. Two types of grants will be funded:
1. Community Improvement Grants (construction grants) - $22,562,500 is available in two
rounds, with a maximum $700,000 grant per project, or maximum $500,000 for housing
rehabilitation project; and,
Planning Grants - An amount up to two (2) percent of available CDBG money ($475,000)
is reserved for Planning Grants, Maximum $25,000 grant per project, except for a
regional infrastructure planning grant recipient which can receive a maximum of $40,000,
irtually all CDBG applications must demonstrate that the project provides primary benefit to
I wand moderate income persons. Low to moderate persons are defined as individuals whose
f mily income is less than 80% of the median family income for like size families within the
s me area. Such VCDBG proposal must demonstrate that: (1) 51 % or more of project
eneficiaries are low and moderate income residents, or; (2) the project serves an area where 51 %
r more of residents are low and moderate income; or (3) 51 % or more of the jobs created are
ailable to low and moderate income residents, Documentation of benefit to low and moderate
i come persons must be provided by one of four methodologies: (1) participation in the project
i limited to low and moderate income persons based on eligibility criteria; or (2) the project
f cility is designed for use by protected groups; or, (3) the project service area eligibility is based
low/moderate income data from the 1980 U.S. Census; or (4) an income survey for the project
s rvIce area.
he following is a list of VCDBG eligible projects that have been identified for Albemarle
ounty by the Planning staff. The only request for County sponsorship that has been received
t date is from the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP).
roO ect #1: Housing Rehabilitation- Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIPl
roO ect Descri tion: A rehabilitation housing grant would focus on upgrading substandard owner-
o cupied and/or rental units. AHIP received a Community Improvement Grant in 1991; activities
f nded under that grant will be completed by April 30, 1994. Thirty-six housing units will be
r habilitated. Securing additional funding under this program will permit AHIP to continue
h using rehabilitation efforts in the County. The maximum grant, $500,000 would be requested.
1
.
,
low and Moderate Income Benefit: All AHIP clients must be low-and moderate income persons.
j HIP maintains a waiting list of qualified individuals and families 10 need of housing
r~habilitation. The current list has over 200 families.
F elative Priorities: Repair and maintenance of the County's housing stock is a high priority as
eN'idenced in the Comprehensive Plan, past CDBG projects, the social program review funding
a locations, and most recently, in the Housing Strategic Plan. The County has also indicated its
s~pport of housing rehabilitation programs through the regional Comprehensive Housing
j ffordability Strategy. Housing rehabilitation is listed in the highest priority group for the
r~gional CDBG priorities developed annually by the Planning District Commission,
) dditional Proiect Funding Sources:
1. County administrative funding for AHIP.
2. Charlottesville Housing Foundation low-interest loan program for housing rehabilitation,
3. HOME funds through the regional HOME consortium.
4. Grant and loan funds will be sought through the Farmer's Home Administration, the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services and the Virginia Housing Partnership.
( ther Information: AHIP administers a comprehensive program of housing rehabilitation for
(ualified County residents. AHIP has received Community Improvement Grants in 1987 and
1991 but has not been successful in obtaining funding in subsequent rounds. These funds
rl>present the largest source of housing rehabilitation monies available to the County and
a~ditional awards will be necessary to continue this housing program.
I roiect #2: Crozet Community Improvements
Froiect Description: The improvement project for the Community of Crozet could be designed
as multi-purpose grant for:
· Housing Rehabilitation (51 % - 80% of total grant)
· Sewer line and lateral extension
· Flood and drainage facilities
Iow/Moderate Income Benefit: An income survey would need to be performed to determine
q~alifying target areas for such a project
B elative Priorities: Residential improvement projects would rank in the highest priority group
a~cording to last year's state and regional priorities.
2
ther Information: Crozet is designated as a growth area in the County Comprehensive Plan.
I is important to not only encourage growth there, but also maintain the quality of the existing
c mmunity for the benefit of its residents. Such improvements could encourage further
i vestment and growth in the community. A needs assessment would have to be conducted to
etermine specific improvement needs and benefits to low and moderate income families. The
1 mited time frame for application submittal at this time may be prohibitive. This project does
old promise for future requests.
he Planning staff is working with a committee of residents to develop a neighborhood plan for
rozet. Some of the recommendations of this plan may point to areas the community would like
t address upon completion of the neighborhood plan. A Planning Grant could be pursued for
roject analysis and development in lieu of a Community Improvement Grant (CIG), This would
i prove the opportunity for making application for a construction grant next year.
ro' ect #3: Agricultural CenterIFarmer's Market
ro'ect Description: Purchase and develop a facility to serve as an agricultural center including
se as a farmer's market to accommodate local farmers to market their goods to the public. Other
ses of this facility may include the option of allowing farmers to sell wholesale to local retail
usinesses, and/or incorporating a produce packing area for commercial distribution. An
ricultural center would serve to support and encourage agricultural related activities as well as
t draw other economic/tourist activities to the County,
ow/Moderate Income Benefit: An income survey would likely need to be conducted to
cument a 51 % benefit to low/moderate income persons. It is widely known that the cost of
1 d and farm production expenses are generally not recovered from the sales of agricultural
products. This cost-benefit disparity is especially great for cropland farmers. The enhancement
o a marketplace for local products may encourage:
· A diversification of the agricultural economy and related industries
· New jobs in the sector
· Retention of existing jobs and farm operations
ages paid in Albemarle County in the agricultural sector (as reported by Virginia Employment
ommission) are 84.5% of the average for Virginia. However, it may be difficult to verify
p imary benefit to low/moderate income persons with this project.
elative Priorities: "Other economic activities" would rank in the lowest priority group of state
p iorities and next to highest priority group for regional priorities based on last year's ranking.
ther Information: Due to difficulty in identifying benefit to low and moderate income
i dividuals and its ranking based on state and local priorities, this project holds a marginal
o portunity for funding at this time. The Agriculturall Forestal Industries Support Committee
h s recommended the County support farmer's markets as a direct marketing strategy for local
3
f~rmers and suggested that providing additional farmer's markets could better serve the public and
f~rmers. This project may hold promise for future requests.
SUMMARY:
I is not anticipated, at this point, that any of the projects listed above will necessitate
cisplacement of County residents. The County's use of VCnBG funds over the last five years
h as been dedicated to housing rehabilitation projects either through the Thomas Jefferson Housing
Improvement Corporation or AHIP and, most recently, to the development of the new affordable
housing construction. The VCnBG citizen participation process requires that the Board of
5 upervisors, at this public hearing, receive comments from the public before making a decision
en which project, if any, it wishes to pursue for funding. Staff is prepared to provide its
t:riorities and recommendations following the close of the public hearing.
4
Scoltsville
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
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 17, 1994
M . Will Rieley
Ri ley & Associates Landscape Architects
1 9 2nd SE
C arlottesville, VA 22902
D ar Mr. Rieley:
At its meeting on March 2, 1994, the Board adopted the attached Resolution to request
th Commonwealth Transportation Board to establish a project for the improvement of the
Tomas Jefferson Parkway (U.S. Route 53) - Phase II.
If you need any further informaton, please contact this office at 296-5843.
Sincerely,
') J
t t&-lu { av2<;r
Ella W. Carey t/
Clerk, CMC t
E C/jng
"
At achment
*
Printed on recycled paper
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation
ard construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a
quest by resolution be received from the local government or
s ate agency in order that the Virginia Department of Transporta-
t'on program an enhancement project in Albemarle County.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervi-
rs of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby request the
mmonwealth Transportation Board to establish a project for the
provement of the Thomas Jefferson Parkway (U.S. Route 53) -
ase II, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Thomas Jefferson Memorial
undation (on behalf of Albemarle County) hereby agrees to pay
enty percent of the total cost for planning and design, right
way, and construction of this project, and that if Albemarle
unty subsequently elects to cancel this project, Albemarle
unty hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of
ansportation for the total amount of the costs expended by the
partment through the date the Department is notified of such
ncellation.
* * * * *
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS
ByJJ)a~ 9-~~
Walter F. perklns, Chairman
DATE: ,It! art-It tj /991
&/lti'
----
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth tion
oard construction allocation procedures, it is neces ry that a
equest by resolution be received from the local gov. rnment or
tate agency in order that the Virginia Department of
ransportation program an enhancement project in lbemarle
ounty.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that th Board of
upervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, oes hereby request
he Commonwealth Transportation Board to tablish a project for
he improvement of the Thomas Jefferson rkway (U.S. Route 53) -
hase II, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that t mas Jefferson Memorial
oundation (on behalf of Albemarle y) hereby agrees to pay
wenty percent of the total cost fo lanning and design, right
f way, and construction of this pr j ct, and that if Albemarle
ounty subsequently elects~o ca el this project, Albemarle
ounty hereby agrees to r~mburs t e Virginia Department of
ransportation for the total a u of the costs expended by the
epartment through the date th partment is notified of such
ancellation.
ttest:
lbemarle County Board of Supervisors
~
DATE:
Clerk
liii..
.... .,
MONTICELLO
9, 1994
PETER]. HATCH
Director of Gardens and Grounds
. V. ~ayne Cilimberg, Director
anning and community Development
unty of Albemarle
1 McIntire Road
arlottesville, VA 22902
RECEIVED
FEB 1 0 1994
Planning Dept.
As you know, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation
a plied for funding last year, under the Commonwealth of
V'rginia's Transportation Enhancement Program, for the Thomas
J fferson Parkway. This application included funding for Phase I
i 1993, and Phase II in 1994. We were delighted that our
p oject was funded at the highest level of any project in the
C mmonwealthj and once again seek the endorsement of the
M tropolitan Planning Organization for Phase II of the
i plementation of the Parkway.
Phase II of the project includes $483,200 in roadside
I ndscape improvements, $450,000 in burial of overhead utility
l'nes, $258,800 in accessible trail construction, and $61,000 for
d velopment of the park and arboretum. Of the $1,615,120 cost
f r Phase II, $323,024 will be contributed by the Thomas
J fferson Memorial Foundation, and $1,292,096 is requested for
E hancement Funding.
We believe that the funding received for this project last
ar demonstrates a strong endorsement on the part of the
mmonwealth Transportation Board, and its Advisory Committee, of
e vision for the Thomas Jefferson Parkway. Funding for Phase
I of the project from the Transportation Enhancement Program
w'll ensure that vision becomes a reality.
Thank you for your assistance.
urs truly,
j/~
P ter J. Hatch
D'rector of Gardens and Grounds
THOMAS JEFFERSON MEMORIAL FOUNDATION, INC.
POST OFFICE BOX 316
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902
PHONE 804984.9836 FAX 804977.7757
THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PARKWAY
Monticello, Thomas Jefferson's home in Albemarle County, Virginia, is the only
ho se in America listed on the World Heritage List. It is an historic site of statewide,
na onal ,and international significance, The 1,6 miles of Route 53 from Route 20 to the
M nticdlo entrance serve as its gateway, Six thousand vehicle trips per day are made on
thi scenic and historic route because it is an important local road and also carries 550,000
vis tors per year to Monticello, Both the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, which
ow s and 9perates Monticello, and Albemarle County have recognized the need for a scenic,
pr tected, and safe approach to Monticello, Albemarle County's Comprehensive Plan is a
blu' print for future growth in the county, In 1991, the Planning Commission and Board of
Su ervisors modified it with the recommendation that a "scenic and protective" parkway be
co structed to Monticello within the existing Route 53 right-of-way, The parkway's purpose
is provide for safe and efficient access for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians while
pr erving the area's rural character, The Board of Supervisors subsequently designated
Ro te 53 the Thomas Jefferson Parkway,
The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation undertook a conceptual plan to create a
p ay in the true sense of the word: a linear park which contains a scenic road, This
p ay is designed to protect and enhance the existing vehicular corridor, offer access to
M nticello by other modes of transportation, and provide a recreational and educational
am nity which broadens and enriches the visitor's experience, but also stands alone as a
co munity parkway and park, The Thomas Jefferson Parkway features:
~ Safety and aesthetic improvements to one of the County's most heavily
travelled roadways, such as regrading side slopes, new guardrails and signs,
tree and shrub planting, burial of overhead utility lines, and safety alterations
to the Monticello entrance;
~ A biking and hiking trail, accessible by wheelchair, from the Visitor Center
to Monticello; and
~ A 175-acre park with overlooks, foot trails, a native plant arboretum, and a
pond,
We believe this project fully meets the criteria for funding from Virginia's
T sportation Enhancement Program, Although Route 53 was designated the Thomas
Je erson Parkway, no funds have been allocated to develop the road as a parkway, The
Th mas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, as the principal owner of property along the 1.6
mi e length of road, is prepared to develop this important traffic corridor as a true parkway,
Its plan for the Parkway falls into eight of the ten eligible enhancement categories,
~ Provision of Facilities for Bicycles and Pedestrians
The Conceptual Plan shows a two-mile bike/hike trail connecting the Thomas
Jefferson Visitors Center to Monticello, The entire length would be accessible
to the handicapped as well as children and older people, Along the path, there
will be opportunities for scenic views as well as access to a pond and pristine
native forest. Scenes of historic and archaeological significance will be
interpreted with historical markers, The parkway is designated as Interstate
Bicycle Route 76, It is used by many area biking clubs who would welcome
the additional opportunity to cycle on a recreational path separated from the
highway, By serving both pedestrians and cyclists, the path will also provide
other means to gain entrance to Monticello, Currently, the only access
available is by motor vehicle, With the implementation of these plans, access
will truly be intermodal, The Conceptual Plan includes modifications at the
entrance to Monticello to make a safe connection with this new access,
~ Acquisition of Scenic Easements and Scenic and Historic Sites
One of the Commonwealth's premier historic sites, Monticello is the only
home in America on the World Heritage List, which includes such sites as the
Great Wall of China, Egypt's pyramids, and Versailles, As its caretaker, the
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation has made preserving scenic and
historic views from the house and along the route to it an important part of its
agenda, The Conceptual Plan includes reference to obtaining critical
easements to protect views from the Parkway,
~ Scenic or Historic Highway Programs
Since the Thomas Jefferson Parkway is both a scenic and historic
transportation corridor, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation will
request that it be incorporated into the Commonwealth's Scenic Byways
Program, All the work proposed in the Conceptual Plan will protect and
enhance the scenic, historic, cultural, natural and archaeological integrity, and
visitor appreciation of this highway travelled by Thomas Jefferson,
~ Landscaping and Other Scenic Beautification
Fifteen percent of the projected budget is for planting along the roadway and
bike/hike trail. Over $100,000 is allocated specifically for the development of
a native plant arboretum, The rest of the planting budget will be used to
establish scenic vistas, screen unwelcome views, and enhance the settings of
the overlooks, trails, the roadway and the pond, Other important
beautification aspects of the project include burying intrusive overhead utility
lines, developing a pond to be viewed from the roadway and regrading the side
slopes along the road to blend into the adjacent landscape, The installation of
appropriate signs and guardrails will also contribute to the scenic quality of the
roadway,
~ Historic Preservation
This project will not only improve the visitor's ability to appreciate the historic
significance of the Parkway's landscape, it will also significantly improve the
experience of visiting Monticello, Interpretive efforts will include signs
describing historic road corridors and identifying the route taken by Thomas
Jefferson when he travelled between Charlottesville and Monticello, The plan
will preserve the historic character and scenic value of this ancient road,
~ Control and Removal of Outdoor Advertising
The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation would like to work with other
landowners along the length of the Parkway to ensure that unnecessary signs
are removed and those that remain are appropriate for their setting,
~ Archaeological Planning and Research
The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation is a national leader in historical
archaeology and has completed numerous projects designed to protect,
preserve, and interpret critical landscape features, The Thomas Jefferson
Memorial Foundation's annual field school in archaeology carries academic
credit from the University of Virginia and is one of the country's best known,
As part of this project it will develop a strategy for identifying and evaluating
potential archaeological sites along the Parkway corridor,
~ Mitigation of Pollution due to High way Runoff
By decreasing the amount of vehicular traffic and improving the character of
the surface drainage, the Plan as proposed will help mitigate the effects of
pollution,
The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation has a world-wide reputation for doing
thin~s well and is prepared to develop the Parkway as a model for similar undertakings,
Thi. project has been carefully planned and, through the process of preparing the
Enh~cement Funding application, has garnered the enthusiastic support of dozens of
com munity organizations representing thousands of Virginians, including the University of
Viq inia, the Piedmont Virginia Community College, the Sierra Club, the Potomac
APt alachian Trail Club, and the Garden Club of Virginia, Funding from the Transportation
Enh~cement Program will ensure that the Thomas Jefferson Parkway as described in the
Cor ceptual Plan becomes a reality,
Phase II of the project includes $483,200 in roadside landscape improvements,
$450,000 in burial of overhead utility lines, $258,800 in accessible trail construction, and
$61 000 for development of the park and arboretum, Of the $1,615,120 cost for Phase II,
$32S,024 will be contributed by the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, and $1,292,096
is r~quested for Enhancement Funding,
We believe that the funding received for this project last year demonstrates a strong
endprsement on the part of the Commonwealth Transportation Board, and its Advisory
Corl1mittee, of the vision for the Thomas Jefferson Parkway, Funding for Phase II of the
project from the Transportation Enhancement Program will ensure that that vision becomes a
real ty,
The Th( mas Jefferson Parkway
Phasing Recommendations
Future
Item Cost Phase I Phase II Phases
J, Roa side Landscape
( learing 25,023 25,023
( rading 258,000 258,000
Sleeding ,,_ 12,511 12,511
I lanting 75,000 75,000
S ignage 5,000 5,000
I ence 103,700 103,700
(lJuardrail 26,600 26,600
S tone Wall 211,200 33,000 178,200
S tone-lined Ditch 112,500 112,500
(f:oncrete Ditch 64,800 64,800
( ulverts 24,000 24,000
.., urning Lane
Clearing 5,000 5,000
Layout 3,000 3,000
Demolition 2,640 2,640
Paving 50,000 50,000
Grading 7,500 7,500
Striping 91 91
Traffic Control 5,000 5,000
~ ubtotal 991,566 508,366 483,200 0
II,Ma nTrail
4pn-grade
Clearing 4,591 4,591
Construction 262,000 262,000
Seeding 1,446 1,446
Planting 50,000 25,000 25,000
Culverts 3,000 3,000
j)oardwalk
Clearing 3,673 3,673
Construction 576,000 576,000
~ridges 18,000 18,000
Page 1
TheTh ~mas Jefferson Parkway
Phasing Recommendations
Future
Item Cost Phase I Phase II Phases
l ~isc.
Trash Receptacle 3,360 3,360
Bike Racks 2,475 2,475
Interpretive Signs 12,000 12,000
Traffic Signs 1,500 1,500
Benchc::s 600 600
Vistas 15,000 15,000
Paint Watertower 5,400 5,400
Hemlock Plantation 15,000 15,000
~ ubtotal 974,046 901,046 73,000 0
III, Co nmemorative Marker/
r railhead Parking Area
(~rading 1,500 1,500
laving 10,333 10,333
(t.urb 4,600 4,600
~ idewalk 3,520 3,520
~ tone Wall 11,200 11,200
(j:ommemorative Marker 5,000 5,000
~ triping 91 91
~ ubtotal 36,245 36,245 0 0
IV, Hi Ung Trails 4,445 4,445
~ ubtotal 4,445 0 4,445 0
V,Ov r100k
(r-1earing 1,377 1,377
~ tone Walls and Paving 39,200 39,200
(~n-grade Trail
Clearing 918 918
Construction 40,000 40,000
Seeding 1,000 1,000
Planting 20,000 20,000
Culvert 600 600
i
I
Page 2
The The mas Jefferson Parkway
Phasing ~ecommendations
Future
Item Cost Phase I Phase II Phases
~~isc.
Trash Receptacles 560 560
Bike Racks 825 825
Benches 200 200
Vista 2,500 2,500
Subtotal 107,181 107,181 0 0
VI, POI d
Fond 30,000 30,000
Sjeeding 964 964
I lanting 19,500 19,500
(Dn-grade Trail
Clearing 918 918
Construction 56,000 56,000
Seeding 1,000 1,000
Planting 25,000 25,000
Culverts 1,200 1,200
I ridge 4,500 4,500
Miscellaneous
Trash Receptacle 560 560
Bike Rack 825 825
Bench 200 200
Subtotal 140,667 50,464 90,203 0
VII, Hi Itop Meadow Spur Trail
<Pn-grade Trail
Clearing 551 551
Construction 42,000 42,000
Seeding 482 482
Planting 26,250 26,250
Culverts 1,800 1,800
Hidge 4,500 4,500
Overlook 15,000 15,000
l1iscellaneous
Trash Receptacle 560 560
Bike Rack 825 825
Bench 200 200
ubtotal 92,168 0 92,168 0
Page 3
.
,
The Th mas Jefferson Parkway
Phasing Recommendations
Future
Item Cost Phase I Phase II Phases
VIII, P~ rk
(r-learing 23,875 23,875
~ ceding 11,938 11,938
j lanting ", 121,000 60,000 61,000
[nterpretive Sign 2,000 2,000
~ ubtotal 158,813 97,813 61,000 0
IX, Ba k Fence 38,080 38,080
~ ubtotal 38,080 0 38,080 0
X, Uti ities
!)ury Electric 500,000 200,000 300,000
!)ury Telephone 150,000 150,000
~ ubtotal 650,000 200,000 450,000 0
XI, St< ne Bridge
I nd Road Realignment 1,200,000 1,200,000
ubtotal 1,200,000 0 0 1,200,000
TOTAl ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION 4,393,210 1,901,113 1,292,096 1,200,000
Contin~ ency and Fees (25%) 1,098,302 475,278 323,024 300,000
TOTAl PHASE COST $5,491,512 $2,376,392 $1,615,120 $1,500,000
Page 4
--
-
i
o
)1
,
(
"
../
'// \
/~"
, \
[.fQSl \
ll5Ol'
\,
I ! I
~ I ~ \
! J
dl
! · \w
I
"''IS!'
\'ltlJl
(1Ul
-mol
l11$j
..--~':::O:", """~---.~
~~..-
'\
)
I
..,
;
#'
!t
!t
":"i!
H
.. .
';.!l
It
.....'c> ~
~ ~ ~
'~~t~
~l ~
~ ~ .
oCl-S
~~
~
... ,
..... ,
, ..
~ i t-
r:::'!: ~
'~.c: ...
i;; ~:s
.1lS :s c:)
i'e;-
Cl.-S c:)
~...~
"I: r::: ~
~'~-G
~ Cl. ~
~... ::l
.c:~~
....~...
...:'=:S~
~ "E3 ...
s.S~
e' ~
Cl.~ ~
...... ~~
~l.c:
.. ...;::
~~
1;<...
L
~:Z
H
!ll;
" .,
~;i
~iil
.i . .
"-5",
100
d;
;j'i!'!i
.....
~
..
~
...
.,
.~.,
/
.' /
. ,
/J ~ ~ ~
'y .. "
G l1-.
t
, ~ 11
i 1
dJ ..
r.
;
! II)
/ I
V
'(0. ........'.,....:~.'
- - -:'I~~;',,,, ,
.<' , ","'-,,1
. ' .!!l
';'" -~
fo
;;
1
~!
i2!
h
::.
1
!
'...,
.~
g
...)
i
;.
~',- <~" '~
'''11'
.~ , ",,~\,~
\, :_"'~
~..
Sf'.,'
a,
I"
I
I
. .'-..~-
,
l'~
~r
(/
)
-'
..
,/
c3 . f),5- ql{J
>~'"..- -. ......'-~
, .'. ~ .- .'.' .. .
tff 'o_,~Q!3'i/)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296.5823
-:.-:-)'-=----
r-, J (t \1. -----'-..,
!Jj ~_JPJ,_-~".,a~ \W"~_"1 /~ J
! i i Ii:
~ !
1 ) ',,-.,,,,,'1
1___ ---J I
rliC:: SU~:'U.I I
-~_~_,_ u . . . t;,. 'J' ~Pf)~~
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive ~~#
.1',1'
David B. Benish:~thief of Community Development
February 22, 1994
Hollymead Growth Area Expansion
he Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
ebruary 1, 1994, made two motions regarding the above-noted
ssue which failed due to tie votes. The first motion to take up
he proposed Hollymead expansion requests and comprehensive
rowth area expansion with the full review of the Comprehensive
Ian failed by a 3-3 vote. The second motion, to go forward with
he specific request for expansion from the University Real
state Foundation (UREF), also failed by a 3-3 vote.
o provide a brief background, the Board of Supervisors decided
o reconsider a number of requests to expand the Hollymead Growth
rea which had been deferred by the applicants since 1991. The
lanning Commission and the Board of Supervisors reviewed and
ubsequently approved a request by Towers Land Trust (CPA-92-05)
o expand the Hollymead boundary north of Proffit Road. The
emaining deferred requests (UREF and Kessler Group) were not
cted on by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors at
he time action was taken on the Towers request. Based on their
ction of February 1, 1994, the Commission will consider the
emaining requests during the review and update of the
omprehensive Plan.
ttached is the staff report provided to the Commission and the
inutes of the February 1 Commission meeting. If you have any
urther questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
r
, '
Worksession:
Staff Persons:
February 1, 1994
David Benish
Ken Baker
Hollymead Growth Area EXDansion:
Purpose: The purpose of this report is to determine which
of the deferred Comprehensive Plan Amendment applications in
the Hollymead Community can be reviewed immediately and
scheduled for public hearing and which should be reviewed in
conjunction with a more extensive analysis of Growth Area
expansion.
Background: Since the previous review of the Comprehensive
Plan in 1989, a number of requests to expand the Hollymead
Growth Area have been proposed by land owners. A total of
five requests have been submitted, including the three
discussed in this report, the South Fork Land Trust
amendment (CPA-92-02) request recently deferred by the Board
of Supervisors, and the Tower's Land Trust amendment
(CPA-92-05) request recently approved by the Board of
Supervisors.
Staff initially evaluated all of the requests for expanding
the Hollymead Community. Based on the staff's and Planning
Commission's recommendation, the Board of Supervisors
decided not to amend the Hollymead Growth Area until the
following issues/studies had been completed or resolved:
1) Development of the Community Facilities Plan;
2) Development of the County Open Space Plan;
3) Development of a fiscal impact model and analysis of
the County to determine impact of Growth on the County;
4) Resolution of the Route 29 Bypass location;
5) Resolution of the Meadow Creek Parkway location.
It was the County's position that once the above
issues/studies had been completed, a comprehensive
evaluation of the Hollymead Growth Area would be undertaken.
To date, the fiscal impact model development and analysis
and resolution of the Meadow Creek Parkway alignment have
not been completed.
However, based on recent decisions by the Board of
Supervisors to consider and adopt amendments to the
Hollymead Growth Area and the nearby Piney Mountain Growth
Area (CPA 92-01), the Tower's Land Trust representatives
requested Board consideration of their Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Request(CPA-92-05). The Board of Supervisors
agreed to review this CPA, but only within the context of a
comprehensive evaluation of the need and location for Growth
Area expansion in the County (See attached October 5, 1993
Study). Based on the staff's finding concerning Growth Area
expansion, the Board of Supervisors approved the Tower's
1
Land Trust request for expansion. This request was for the
addition of approximately 257 acres to the Hollymead
Community. The Board deferred the South Fork Land Trust
request until resolution of the alignment of the Meadow
Creek Parkway. The remaining requests discussed in the
following report have not been before the Planning
Commission or Board of Supervisors for public hearing.
At the present time, the consultants (Sverdrup Cooperation)
have recommended an alignment for the Meadow Creek Parkway.
The Planning Commission has reviewed the consultant's
proposed alignment and has requested that an entirely new
parkway concept be developed. The Board of Supervisors is
not reviewing the consultant's recommended alignment until
traffic generation numbers associated with possible changes
to the Western Bypass alignment and approval of the Tower's
Land Trust amendment have been reviewed and confirmed by
VDOT. If the Planning Commission wishes it can continue to
recommend that these requests be deferred. However, the
possibility exists that it may be some length of time before
the Meadow Creek alignment issue is resolved. All
properties located east of Route 29 and discussed in this
report could be impacted directly by the Meadow Creek
Parkway depending on the final alignment. (See Attachment
B) .
Also, a consultant has been selected for the fiscal impact
model, but a contract has not been finalized. It is
anticipated that a contract will be signed in February with
the model operational by June.
Discussion: This report will summarize each of the deferred
applications followed by a recommendation on either to 1)
proceed immediately with staff review of the request and
scheduling of a public hearing or 2) continued deferral of
the application until a more extensive analysis of the
Growth Area expansion is conducted.
University Real Estate Foundation (UREFl -[Request to
include within the Hollymead Community approximately 285
acres located west of Route 29, north of the existing Growth
Area to the North Fork of the Rivanna River, and west to
Route 606.J The request is for industrial service land use
designation to permit the development of a 525 acre research
office park. UREF presently owns 240 acres of adjacent
property to the south zoned PD-IP, Planned Development
Industrial Park, and LI, Light Industrial. All properties
are to be developed under one consolidated plan. This
property is not in the alignment of any proposed Meadow
Creek Parkway (or other major road) alternatives (See
Attachment A) .
2
".
Recommendation: It is recommended that this application be
reviewed immediately and scheduled for public hearing for
inclusion in the Hollymead Community Growth Area.
J~stification: (1) The infrastructure to support such a
development is either planned or can be provided. Route 649
'(Airport Road) is scheduled to be widened to 4 lanes from
Route 29 to the Airport in 1998. This will allow for
improved truck and vehicle access to the property. The ACSA
has entered into an agreement to upgrade the sewer
faCilities once capacity has been exceeded in this area.
Water service can be provided through a number of means
including the utilization of Chris Greene Lake as an
impoundment area in conjunction with continued use of the
North Fork Treatment Plant or utilization of the existing
urban system. (2) This area provides a logical extension of
industrial land use in the area given the existing
surrounding industrial designated land and current
industrial uses and the close proximity of the
Charlottesville/Albemarle County Albemarle County Airport.
With development requirements such as internal roads that
access from Route 649, buffering of development from the
North Fork of the Rivanna and buffering along Route 606, it
is believed that this area can be developed in a manner that
will not sUbstantially change the character of the area; (3)
This designation would replace the 150 acres of industrial
designated land lost as result of CPA 90-03 Hollymead,
which changed the designation of 150 acres of industrial
area to residential, office and commercial land use; and (4)
While the existing inventory of industrial land appears
sufficient in the Plan for the foreseeable future, many
areas currently designated for industrial service, as are a
large percent of the parcels in Albemarle County, are
located on poorly developable land with a number of
environmental constraints such as steep slopes and wetlands.
The designation of this property will result in the
designation of a large area of developable and marketable
industrial land.
Both of the following requests are affected by possible
alignment of the Meadow Creek Parkway. The Board of
Supervisors has deferred action on the South Fork Land Trust
request until resolution of the Meadow Creek Parkway
alignment. The recommended action consistent with the South
Fork Land Trust action would be to defer the following two
requests until the resolution of the Meadow Creek Parkway
alignment. Staff has provided the following analysis and
recommendation should it be determined in the resolution of
the Meadow Creek Parkway alignment that either or both
requests will not be impacted by the Meadow Creek Parkway.
(
Donald Brown/Terry Spaid - Request ti add approximately 35
acres to the Hollymead Community for low density residential
us~ The property is located east of the existing Growth
3
. .
Area Boundary and west of Route 649 (Proffit Road) -(See
Attachment A).
Recommendation: It is recommended that~this application be J"
reviewed in conjunction with the comprehensive review of
,Growth Area expansion.
Justification: The only access to this property appears to
be by Route 649 (Proffit Road). Portions of Proffit Road
ar~ currently non-tolerable and the existing alignment is
not conducive to additional traffic. Also, the surrounding
area consists of residential lots which are rural in nature
(2 acres or greater). Development of a low density
subdivision would impact and change the character of the
immediate area. This area should not be considered alone but
rather as part of an assessment of a larger expansion area
in which these factors can be evaluated and infrastructure
needs and environmental resource protection can be assessed.
This small area provides limited benefit in terms of
expansion potential (holding capacity) in relationship to
possible impacts on the area.
/
{
Kessler GrouD - Request \ to add approximately 100 acres to
the Hollymead Community ~or low density residential use.]
The property is located north of Route 643 (Polo Grounds
Road), east of the Hollymead Community Boundary and west of
the Norfolk-Southern Railroad. This property would be
developed as part of the Forest Lake development (See
Attachment A).
RecommenFtion: It is recommended that this application be
reviewed independently for inclusion in the Hollymead
Communit Growth Area, upon resolution of the Meadow Creek
parkWay.]
Justific ion: Traffic created from development of this
property will access Route 29 by utilizing the existing
Forest Lakes South roadway network and thereby not impact
Route 649 (Proffit Road) or Route 643 (Polo Grounds Road).
The existing South Forest Lakes roadway network has been
designed in a manner to accommodate traffic generated by
this possible expansion area. Also, the property's physical
separation from Proffit Road and Polo Grounds Road by the
railroad and natural features should minimize the potential
change in character of these corridors.
4
"
\' '-.
f-
I I
'~
inclusion
Area
~
ATTACHMENT B
f"'
t-j;
~i'i
~
(,
W'
"j.
r:'
!"
,.
,
"
,
""
Mea Dwcreek Parkway Study
l
N
I
/
V
'--<""'----
",'1/\
" /.......
'------ ,
)
8//
/
, .
;
f
I I
'-
-' .
I I
,,;' ,(
/
..J
~~
</j
-9.. ...
',", '-(-
::tJ,4- , . &.
': ,::! .~()\-
"\"/
I',
: I
I:
-/
rr
II
~<l::,~.;
'<-~"~'"
1/
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY STUDY
ALBEMARLE COUNTY. VIRGINIA
;/
ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES
''\
'I,
I
:A:JJ.E, f-2fXXT
"Il':IMAI. SI/( lit ,lft'HE. 5
7
m not too concerned. I reiterate I think that the waiver of
critical slopes on this type thing is something I think staff
competent to handle. I realize under the present Ordinance
y qan't do that without our concurrence."
motion for approval passed (4:2) with Commissioners Dotson
Huckle casting the dissenting votes.
wth Area Ex ansion - Mr. Benish presented the staff report.
ff was asking the Commission for direction on how to proceed
four topics--three individual requests for expansion of the
lymead Growth Area and on a comprehensive evaluation of Growth
a expansion in general, i.e. whether or not to undertake
dies of these topics at this time, or to delay review and
lude them with the overall review of the Comprehensive Plan.
ff's recommendations on the four questions were as follows:
--That the overall issue of Growth Area expansion be
ertaken during the full review of the Comp Plan;
--University Real Estate Foundation (UREF) - That the
ap lication be reviewed immediately and scheduled for public
hearing for inclusion in the Hollymead Community Growth Area;
--Donald Brown/Terry Spaid - That the application be
re iewed in conjunction with the full review of the Comp Plan;
( TE: Staff later explained that the Board has already taken
an action on this request. Staff had not been aware of this at
the time the staff report was written. Staff noted, however,
that the "general area" is one which will want to be taken into
co sideration in the context of the full Comp Plan review.)
--Kessler Group - That the application be reviewed
i dependently for inclusion in the Hollymead Community Growth
Area, upon resolution of the Meadow Creek parkway.
Staff pointed out that none of the applicants have actually
requested that their applications be reactivated at the present
ti e. Both the UREF and Kessler applications have been pending
for some time as specific requests. In order to treat all those
a lications pending fairly, staff initiated this evaluation.
(The proposals were previously deferred.) Those requests would
be reactivated, and eventually scheduled for public hearing, if
t e Commission so directs. They would then go on to the Board
with the Commission's recommendation.
Mr. Cilimberg explained further that any general study of Growth
A ea expansion would also go through the public hearing process
a d on to the Board, but "that can happen early, in the next
couple of months, or can be taken up during the Comprehensive
Plan review and be forwarded to the Board as part of the entire
Plan recommendations." He pointed out that, in either case, the
2-
8
ission will be taking the initial actions, based on its
lic hearing.
h UREF and the Kessler Group were represented at the meeting.
Mr. Tim Rose and Mr. Bob McKee represented UREF. They expressed
th hope that the Commission would decide to recommend that the
re iew of their proposal proceed without further delay. They
ex lained that they have a number of firms interested in locating
in the r~search park and those prospective businesses may be lost
if,. there are further delays. They explained the planning,
ec nomic and marketing advantages of being able to plan the
de elopment of both the northern and southern parts of the
pr perty concurrently. (Mr. McKee clarified that 1/2 the
pr perty--the southern section--has been zoned PDIP for 15
years.) He also stated that approval of road plans for the entire
pr perty, both northern and southern sections, will be received
within the next week. (The Planning Commission and VDOT have
already approved the road plans.)
Mr. Cilimberg noted that the Board has taken action on three
Co prehensive Plan Amendments in the same general area as the
U EF property since UREF's original submittal, even though staff
h d recommended against those requests. This has placed staff in
a "awkward position of trying to advise applicants where there
h ve been independent actions taken that were not along the same
lines as the original action regarding growth area expansion."
M . Nitchmann asked the UREF representatives if they felt
d laying the request longer would be detrimental to the economic
w II-being of the County because of the resulting delay in
a ditional jobs. Mr. Rose responded: "I absolutely do."
ting that UREF has already completed a very extensive study of
e development of the property, Mr. Nitchmann asked if the
plicant had made any studies in the savings that would be
alized by development of both sections of the property at the
me time. Mr. McKee replied that there would certainly be
vings in doing it all at once, but he was unable to state the
tual percentage of savings.
. Imhoff asked if UREF had received comment from neighborhing
operty owners and she also expressed an interest in knowing if
ere are other similarly situated properties that might be
terested in comprehensive plan amendments. Mr. McKee responded
t at contact was made with property owners when the proposal was
f'rst presented, but because of the nature of tonight's meeting
(' .e. a work session), no recent contact has been attempted. Mr.
M Kee also pointed out that a very extensive study of existing
i dustrially zoned property was included with the original
oposal (a copy of which is still on file in the Planning
partment). In response to Mr. Nitchmann's question regarding
2-1-94
9
wether there are advantages to prospective businesses in
locating in the northern part of the part, Mr. Rose replied that
t e northern section has larger lots which can accommodate larger
firms.' Mr. McKee added that the northern section sites are "a
little nicer from a corporate standpoint." Mr. Rose added that
t e northern section will also be easier to develop. Mr. McKee
also confirmed that the infrastructure that the developer will be
p tting in place will not be a cost burden to the County.
M . Ste~e Runkle represented the Kessler Group. He described the
history of the property in question. He called attention to what
felt were significant issues:
--The lack of the ability to develop this property will
suIt in more growth in the rural areas since the growth will
ve to be absorbed somewhere else.
--The site will be served by its own internal road system.
--The property is not impacted by the "current proposed
ute" (turning west and intersecting 29) for the Meadow Creek
rkway does not come through this site. If the Parkway "turns
st and intersects with 29," the developer is currently building
"connector road."
garding staff's recommendation to tie the review of the Kessler
oup proposal to the resolution of the Meadow Creek Parkway,
. Blue pointed out to Mr. Runkle that the Comprehensive Plan
view would likely be completed as quickly as the Parkway will
resolved. Mr. Runkle expressed the hope that the proposal
uld be reviewed before the resolution of the Parkway (unless
e Parkway can be resolved in the next few months) .
e Chair invited public comment. None was offered.
significant Commission comments were as follows:
suggested the Commission's recommendation on the Meadow Creek
rkway might be different if it were discussed by the present
ission. (Staff pointed out that the Kessler request was like
e previously heard South Fork Land Trust proposal in terms of
e Meadow Creek Parkway question, but the UREF proposal is not
fected by the Parkway.)
Regarding the four issues on which staff was seeking Commission
direction (as stated previously), Mr. Blue interpreted that of
t e four, the UREF was the most critical since the other three
were "automatically delayed." He supported staff's
recommendations on all four issues.
10
stated she was reluctant to consider any of the proposals
t prior to the commencement of a full Comprehensive Plan
iew. She stated: "I don',t think it would serve the citizens
I ~o be doing this piecemeal just as we are beginning to look
the whole big picture." She pointed out however, that even if
Commission should decide tonight to defer all the topics
il the the Comp Plan review, the Board could still say: "No,
think there are few projects that you should look at on a
ter timetable."
"
agreed with Ms. Imhoff. She added: "Maybe we could expedite
Comp Plan review if we were to start some of these things now
we won't be so jammed up later on. I really think we need
e information than we have. ... I would like to see us wait
put them all in the Comp Plan Review." She expressed a
co cern about the lack of a parallel road for Rt. 29. She also
pointed out that studies are just getting underway to determine
the capacity of the Reservoir. She felt both these issues are
vital to this type of development. (Mr. McKee and staff later
co firmed that the Albemarle County Service Authority has
a ressed the issue of sewer and has determined there to be
ca acity for this development at the Camelot Plant. Mr. Benish
a ded that "the existing designated growth area will need to be
su plemented anyhow, so the expansion--either to Towers that was
j st approved or to UREF--won't have any significantly different
i act to what is already going to have to be done to provide
a equate service to the existing growth area.") She felt the
I ck of answers to the traffic and water questions would effect
t e marketing of the property.
H recalled that it was the UREF proposal which "almost
singlehandedly" gave rise to the Fiscal Impact study. (Mr.
Cilimberg confirmed "it was a major consideration.") He felt it
w s "illogical" to move ahead with the review of the proposal at
t is time since the completion of the Fiscal Impact Study was
n ar completion (approximately within 3-6 months) .
pointed out that given the time it will take for any of these
pics to go through the work session and public approval
ocess, both by the Commission and the Board, the Fiscal Impact
del is likely to be in place. He declared that, in his
inion, the Model is not a "is this good for the community or
t good for the community" type of document; rather it's a
" lanning and economic tool." He felt the two would "dovetail
n'cely." He felt delay of review of the UREF proposal "would be
v ry detrimental to the economic well being of the community at
2 1-94
11
M TION: Ms. Imhoff moved that all four issues be taken up with
e entire Comp Plan discussion.
t is time." He pointed out that the applicant has already put a
s bstantial amount of time and study into the proposal and "it is
a logical extension of that growth area." He added: "I think
i 's important right now that we have an entity within this
c mmunity that is willing to put forth the time and funds into
e tending the economic vitality of the community, but they need
o r help and the help we can give them is to give them a whole
p'e to work with." In conclusion, it was his recommendation that
r view qf the UREF proposal move forward but that rview of the
e tire growth area could wait. He noted that the Spaid/Brown
p nperty was "a given." Regarding the Kessler property, he
sated: "I think we all agree it is going to be part of that
n ighborhood, it's just a question of when." He noted that with
t e anticipated economic growth which the new State
a inistration will bring, "it would seem advantageous for us to
h ve homes or areas designated for them to live in that are close
t the potential areas of employment." He stated he would be in
f vor of reviewing the Kessler and UREF proposals concurrently
re it not for the Meadow Creek Parkway issue. (In response to
. Nitchmann's comments, Mr. Cilimberg confirmed that if it is
e Commission's desire, staff will bring the Kessler request
ck as soon as the Meadow Creek Parkway issue is resolved "in
atever way". "If it's 60 days from now, it's 60 days and we
uld bring it back to you.")
. Imhoff prefaced a motion by explaining: "I am very
pathetic to these amendments and I think it is just the kind
discussion we'd like to see within the context of the whole
mmunity. We've made a commitment to the entire community that
are going to do this Comp Plan update and I am also very
ncerned about equity to other landowners who may, themselves,
nt 240 acres of PDIP out there."
S e also expressed the hope that the Comp Plan review could begin
more quickly.
Mr. Dotson seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Nitchmann addressed Ms. Imhoff's comments and stated that
we e it not for the fact that the UREF proposal has had a great
de I of work done on it already, he might agree with her
po ition. He felt the Commission should "take a little bite out
of" the Comp Plan review whenever an opportunity "which makes
se se" presents itself. He felt consideration of the UREF
pr posal "makes sense" because "if there is an opportunity to
br'ng jobs to this community, then I do not want to be the one
th t says I delayed something long enough to prevent the
2-1-94
12
op ortunity for someone in this community to seek better
em loyment than what they have because we wanted to look at the
to al picture."
Mr. Dotson stated that though both UREF and the Kessler
re resentatives had presented arguments that made him want to
pr ceed, "logically," he felt it was premature. In answer to Mr.
Ni ehmann's question as to why he felt it was premature, he
ex lained: "I think the implications of that amount of
in ustrtal lands are potentially far reaching. I think we need
to, think about it. I'd like some information about the kinds of
jo s we need in the community. I'd like to have a chance to look
i to that question. I'd like to see information from VEC or
w erever we can get that kind of information so that if we can
ki d of agree on what we're looking for in the way of jobs, then
we can be very entrepreneurial as a County and work with the
U iversity to go after those. Right now I feel like it's
u known. In the meantime, there is an adequate supply of land
a ailable." He noted that staff had been very professional in
b inging up an unresolved issue, but in a sense, "it is almost a
h use keeping matter that has brought it before us at this point
i time."
. Nitchmann disagreed about the availability of industrial
nd. He indicated that his experience has shown that businesses
I oking for industrial land "don't feel that way." He stated:
"I would hate to see an opportunity like this go by us because we
w nt to tread softly." He estimated that getting the type of
i formation suggested by Mr. Dotson would be a six to eight month
ocess. He pointed out that the people who really need the jobs
re not the people who are articulate enough to come stand in
ont of this podium and tell us that, (rather) it will be the
ecial interest groups that will stand up here and tell us all
e facts that we need to know." He concluded: "I can't support
is (motion) and I've said enough."
r clarification, Ms. Imhoff clarified that her motion was that
a I four issues be delayed until the Comp Plan review "unless
d'rected otherwise by the Board of Supervisors."
T e motion faile~aue to a tie vote. Commissioners Imhoff,
D tson and Huckle voted for the motion and Commissioners
N'tchmann, Blue and Jenkins voted against.
M . Blue expressed the feeling that proceeding with the UREF
p oposal would "not be doing anything so drastic that it couldn't
b stopped because most of us realize that ultimately something
l'ke that is going to happen up there and if we go ahead and
s udy this thing, we are starting the train down the track but it
i not unstoppable. ... I think we would really be remiss if we
d'dn't give them the opportunity to get this train started and if
2 1-94
13
( egative) information comes later related to water or fiscal
i pact, then we can stop it."
M TION: Mr. Blue moved that the UREF proposal be studied as
r commended by staff.
M . Nitchrnann seconded the motion.
M . Imhoff suggested what she termed a "possible amendment to
t at mo'tion," i.e. "rather than saying, tonight, 'yes we're going
t ,go forward, study it, hold it to public hearing,' would it be
p ssible to come back next week and just talk about UREF when we
h ve a full Commission?"
. Blue was not amenable to Ms. Imhoff's suggestion.
. Nitchrnann expressed concern that Ms. Imhoff's suggestion
uld set a precedent.
Dotson asked if review of the UREF proposal could be "folded
" with the Comp Plan work sessions rather than waiting until
e Plan decision is made and then review it.
Cilimberg felt that would depend on the Comp Plan review
hedule and on whether or not the information that UREF has
mpiled thus far is adequate or if additional information will
required by the Commission.
. Blue guessed that a review probably could not take place
til the Comp Plan review. However, he felt a positive
commendation to review the proposal would "send a signal to the
EF people that we are at least moving that way." (Mr. Benish
It the review could take place faster since most of the work
s already been done. All that would have to be done is re-
ckaging and updating to 1994 perspective.)
T e previously stated motion to proceed with the UREF proposal
filed due to a tie vote. Commissioners Jenkins, Blue and
Nitchrnann voted in favor; Commissioners Imhoff, Dotson and Huckle
v ted against.
1-1 . Blue noted: "I think this sends a message to UREF, the
Kessler Group, and all those other people, that these projects,
worthy as they may seem to them, better have a lot of homework
do e and a lot of preparation because I feel that this is an
in ication of things to come."
Ms. Imhoff addressed Mr. Blue's comments: "I think the message
fo me is that we have a commitment to the community for a long
ra ge comprehensive planning process and that I understood that
th motion tonight would be very much an indicator to the
ap licants that we were heading for public hearing. If it is
2 1-94
14
less than heading for public hearing, then I would not
m'nd, but when I heard the staff present why they were doing
t eir work program--so that they can give us information, so that
can head towards public hearing, that is what really motivated
in'making my motion. ... I am very sympathetic to these; I am
stalso very sympathetic to this larger process."
the end of the work session, staff explained the work session
d pu~~ic hearing process.
Cilimberg explained that, based on the Commission's action
d discussion, it was staff's understanding that none of the
ur issues will proceed at this time, but rather will logically
f 11 under the Comprehensive Plan review, unless specific
d'rection is given to the staff to bring any of the items back
p ior to the Comp Plan review.
M . Dotson expressed the hope that Comp Plan review information
c uld start coming to the Commission so that it could be
a similated gradually. He anticipated, however, that "decisions"
w uld be made in a more comprehensive fashion.
. Jenkins suggested that each Commissioner review the
C mprehensive Plan and "pullout things that they think are wrong
w'th the one we've got." Personnally, he did not think there was
a lot wrong with the existing Plan.
M . Cilimberg reminded the Commission that staff had presented
i s list of topics to the Board and the Commission at a joint
s ssion in the Spring of 1993. But the Board and Commission had
b en interested in hearing what the public has to say through the
s rvey and public input process.
. Nitchmann suggested the Commission may need to conduct a work
ssion to determine how the review will be handled "among
rselves."
- ---------------------------------------
inistrative Review of Site Plan and Subdivisions -
. Keeler presented a report on the one-year experimental period
ring which staff was authorized increased administrative
view. The staff report described the benefits which have
suIted from the experiment. Staff encountered no problems with
e process.
aff was asking the Commission to endorse the following program
tended to officially authorize administrative approval on a
rmanent basis:
(1) Endorse the administrative approval process as having
d monstrative benefits over the existing process.
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFLICT OF INTERESTS ACT
TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
for Officers and Employees of
Local Government [Section 2.1-639.14(G)]
I. Name: Sally H, Thomas
2. Title: Samuel Miller District Supervisor
3. Agency: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
4. Transaction: Hollymead Growth Area Expansion Discussion
5. Nature of Personal Interest Affected by Transaction:
Employment Contracts With the University of Virginia
6. I declare that:
(a) I am a member of the following business, profession, occupation, or group,
the members of which are affected by the transaction:
Employees and Spouses of Employees of the University
of Virginia
(b) I am able to participate in this transaction fairly, objectively, and in the
public interest.
Date~:
mhtflv ~ J !'!o/r
I
c5~ W ~J
gnature
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
o F
I N TEN T
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
,County, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend the
Albemarle County Code in Section 12,1, by making moderate
revisions to incorporate noise regulations.
* * * * *
I, Ella W, Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing
writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution of intent adopted
tv the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a
regular meeting held on March 2, 1994,
f;0,/ tel 0~/Zi~ .
Gf~rk, Board of County ~ervisors
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE:, ,d'a6,q~:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA ITLE:
Workses ion - Noise Ordinance
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1993
ITEM NUMBER:
qL./ .()~~, 1M,
ACTION:
X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT PROPOSAL RE UEST:
Request to set public hearing for noise
regulat'on revisions
CONSENT AGENDA: N/A
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Yes
STAFF C
Mr. Tuc
REVIEWED BY:
McCulley
BACKGR
review our noise regulation arose with recent land use proposals. Review of
ses through special permit and site plan, such as the outdoor theater and the Boar's
t, brought citizen concern about noise impact before us. Each case illustrated the
determine how best to prohibit excessive noise through appropriate level standards,
, equipment and pre-planning for development.
staff reported the continuing efforts to review our community noise
regulations. Since that date, we have evaluated the public's needs with respect to the
current regulations, and we have examined the various policy, legal, technical and fiscal
issues associated with noise regulations. We will outline a series of options with a
recomme dation to set a public hearing for revision to the County Code Noise Ordinance.
Noise c mplaints are not a frequent occurrence for either the Police Department or the Zoning
Departm nt. Most are resolved through negotiation and mediation. Increasing development,
residen ial and non-residential, will likely cause an increase in complaints.
Noise r gulation in Albemarle is currently limited to these instances of maximum levels:
· N'ghttime noise in residential areas (nighttime
1 pm - 6 am) shall not exceed 65 dBA (County Code);
· N ise anytime from a motor vehicle shall not exceed 76 to 90 dBA (County Code);
· N ise anytime from industrial uses, sawmills, hydroelectric power generation, and home
o cupations, to be certified for the County Engineer (Zoning Ordinance Sec.4.14);
· N'ghttime noise in the Zoning Ordinance from clubs, lodges, fire and rescue facilities;
N ise anytime from commercial kennels, veterinary hospitals, swimming and outdoor
r creation facilities (5.1);
· A erage day/night interior levels in the Zoning Ordinance for airport overlay district
f om 45-70 Ldn (Sec,30.2,5.1); and
· N ise anytime from peak pressure blast for natural resource extraction district in the
Z ning Ordinance of 140 dBA (Sec,30.4,14).
.
.
st regulation is within the code as opposed to the zoning ordinance;
e Police / Sheriff are the enforcing agents in almost every case;
st noise regulations contain a "nuisance" component for enforcement, in addition to
jective noise levels;
st localities defined day and night for residential area standards. The most
equent range for the nighttime standard was 10 pm-7 am. The nighttime started as
rly as 7pm in some localities and as late as midnight in others;
vels were most often simple continuous standards; however, some ordinances had
parate standards for impulse noise. The maximum permitted noise levels were found
be:
We cond cted a survey of 9 Virginia localities and 5 from other states, to see how noise
regulat'on is handled, The findings are attached in full, and are in summary as follows:
.
.
.
EXE. S
I WORK$E NOISE ORDIANCE
PAGE 2
Reside tial: (of 10)
Day:
Night:
Average 61. 35
Average 56,41
60 decibels
55 decibels
(range 55-70)
(range 52-70)
Commer ial:
(of 6)
Day/Night: Average 64 (Day range 60-67); (Night 59-69)
Indust ial:
(of 6)
Day/Night: Average 74 (70 most frequently used)
The ex ent and complexity of noise regulation varied widely. Several localities have
produced site design guidelines for noise attenuation. Some regulations extended to
allowable hours and/or noise levels for loading/unloading, construction and small power
(lawn mowers, etc.). Because these noise sources are rarely instances of
we recommend that they not be specifically addressed and remain exempt.
he difficulties of certifying equipment and taking empirical noise measurements, the
ttorney's office advises us to consider a non-objective, or nuisance ordinance, This
e has been upheld in prosecution of cases, if worded properly. The draft ordinance
includes nuisance language, Please note, however, that we do not recommend deleting
rences to noise levels. They can stand as defined parameters for the enforcing agent
meter in the field and for the designer of a project.
Due to
County
ordinan
attache
all ref
with th
ATION:
current regulations with regards to the community noise issues led to these
1.
ounty Code regulation for residential areas permits higher noise levels and a
nighttime than almost every locality surveyed, (See attachments.)
2. The oning Ordinance for outdoor noises (40 decibels maximum) is impractical and is
sign'ficantly below that of other localities surveyed. A demonstration of noise levels
insi e an office at around 40 decibels, or higher with HVAC equipment, proves this point.
(See attachments.)
3. The
regu
4,
5, Ther
new
language which has effectively won cases should be included within our
is no evidenced need for a comprehensive amendment for additional regulation.
need for more advanced equipment and training, to address noise sources such as
uses. (This is included as a budget request for next fiscal year,)
fers these potential options:
I. no changes to any regulation (Code or Ordinance);
II, minor changes to insert appropriate noise levels to Code and Ordinance;
III, ke moderate revisions to incorporate most noise regulations into the County Code:
a dress noise levels and nuisances, clarify several procedures and definitions, and
" randfather" pre-existing uses;
IV. a comprehensive revision to noise regulations to repeal old sections, and in
dition to III preceding, further regulate items such as loading, noise sensitive
eas, etc.
Of thes , staff recommends III. The attached ordinance is a draft for further staff review,
In addi prior to a public hearing on the ordinance, we will meet with interested
citizen .
TABLE OF ATTACHMENTS
) Decibel Levels Attachment A
~ ) Decibel Effects Attachment B
. ) Background Noise Attachment C
<1 ) Commonly Accepted Limits Attachment D
~ ) Commercial Limits Attachment E
€) Industrial Limits Attachment F
i ) Residential Limits Attachment G
q Ordinance Examples Outside Virginia Attachment H
c ) Ordinance Examples Virginia Attachment I
.J 0) Noise Ordinance Attachment J
I'lm 1IIIIIIIIIlIIIIRmIIIIllR_--
Attachment A
Decibel Levels
dtl~ Sgslems UbonlenJ ~~\..:
1Il~
SAMPLE DECIBEL A-WEIGHTED (dBA) LEVELS
SOUtiD SOURCE
large bazooka (peak level)
jet aircraft
"monster" truck
jackhammer
chain saw
wood planer
sidewalk in large city
vacuum cleaner
ordinary conversation
personal computer fan
typical quiet office
soft whisper
threshold of hearing
smA
180
140
120
110
100
90
80
75
60
50
40
20
o
Huma F ec:ton &I gin ~ Cent<<
Prof. J, a.. C.ul
_ rIIII'I1111J1l1ftll11lIllnlllnmll". -,
Attachment B
Decibel Effects
Figure 2
HUMAN RESPONSE TO SOUND LEVELS (dB)
Sound Levels and Human Response
Sound
Level
-idID
Effect
140
Painfully loud
130
120
Maximum vocal effort
110
100
90
Very annoying
Hearing damage (8 hours)
80
Annoying
70
Telephone use difficult
60
Intrusive
50
Quiet
40
30
Very quiet
20
10
Just audible
o
Hearing begins
te that 70 dB is the point at which noise begins to harm hearing.
the ear each 10 dB increase seems twice as loud.
urce:
Modified from united states Environmental Protection
Agency, About Noise (Washington, D.C.: USEPA, revised
January 1977), n.p.
_ It'lllfI1l1lll1llll1rllll!lmlfllllll..nRIIIIIIIIII..IIIIII'III... ..10..11III.11IIII1.. .
Attachment D
Common Accepted limits
.wy SysIems laMr'al.... ~~
COMMON U.S. LIMITS IN dBA FOR
STEADY-STATE NOISE SOURCES
80
. DAY
- 70 NIGHT
60-65
60
SA 55
50
30
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL
40
SOURCE: L~omb and .Taytor
Hum F~on E/9"""'g CentN'
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
70 70
INDUSTRIAL
Pro ( J. G. C.uU
f11IiI rrilllllrr~lIm Imlllllll11l11n_.__1 _......'.11_1_0_." -
Attachment C
Ground Noise
~~
NOISE LEVEL AND COMMUNITY ANNOYANCE
AIda.." SysC emI .......c DI'I
%
HIGHLY &)
NNOYED
PEOPLE 4l
8)
jU
00
3)
2)
10
o
DA YINIGHT (L.) SOUND LEVEL in dBA
SOURCE: EPA, 1974
." Fac1Ot'l fn9InMr1ng C."W
Prot J, Q. c....
,'. -
,.- Attachment E -,
. Commercial Limits
, "
I -.-eIIl... SlrsleIM Laban'"" V1~WThch
EXAMPLES OF NOIS~ LEVEL LIMITS IN dBA
FOR COMMERCIAL LAND USE
ConmuAty 0.., Hight
-
Baltlrnor-. YD 58-70 S8-65
San Funcleco. CA 70 60
So_ton, AlA 6.5 55
Denww, CO 65 60
HaW1horne, CA - -
LowIan d, CO 52 .c.9
New Ycrk CIty, NY 6.5 -
FountAin V.ney, CA - -
Santi RoN, CA 60-65 55
Billing.. ... ~70 SS-65
MJaeoul.. MI 6.5 60
Coni GA bIee. F1. 4.5 40
He*,,, ... 60 55
WhMtrl~ CO - -
Henroaa BNch, CA 55 54
Grand ~pld.. "'I S2-6J 4S-S6
AJbuquer que. NM 62-M 52-66
San ~, CA 60 5.5
Ch'a1go, IL 62-66 62-66
Ollla.. TX S6-6.3 -
MlnnMpoi1a. MN 62 -
LaIc.wood, CO 60 "
Inglewood, CA 65 65
Salt LMe ary, UT 70 65
~cc UjNCefI'Ilt & T.~_
Hum. FKtOf'1I En ~..-ng c.n., Pr.f, J. a. c--w
- --,.,--j"IIII'''~ IIIIIflnll...", ....- -
.....,- Attachment F
Industrial Limits -
.
r ....taru Systems LMantDl"l , VI rgtnd; 1ech
...
EXAMPLES OF NOISE lEVEL LIMITS IN dBA
FOR INDUSTRIAL LAND USE
Convnun/ty Day NIght
Bal timore, MO &1.75 ~70
S.n Francl8CO. CA 70-75 7'0-75
Bo.ton, MA 70 60
Den'fW'. CO 80 75
Hawthorne., CA 53 53
LoYel."d. CO 56 53
New Y orit CI ty, NY 80 -
Fountain Valley, CA - -
Santa Ro.... CA 70 70
Billing.. W. 80 75
Mluoul.. .. 70-80 65-75
Coral G~ FL .50 ~
Hel<<1a. WI 80 75
'MMN bidge. CO - -
Henroea Beedl, CA 55 65
Gr."d Rapid&, .. - -
AJbuquerque.. NM - -
San DIego, CA 70-75 7'0-75
Chl~go. IL - -
0.11... TX 56-70 -
, Mlnneapola, MN
- -
LAkawood. CO 80 75 ,
Ing.wood, CA 70 70
~t LA_ aty, VT 7S-aO 7s.eo
s.w..: u.....,.. aT.,....
HuM. In F.ctere E.....-tn. CeftW Pref. J. a. CaMI
AlmI rr1mI1l11Rml!mrmllnI11111l11~"I,II!'IHIHlIllI'litI'IIIDIII_. nllllm_II__rnFt.....__ -..
....."'. Attachment G
-
Residential Limits
.
" :<
. Vlrg1nW1ech
r .....1 W1J Sq5t ems l........
EXAMPLES OF NOISE LEVEL UMITS IN dBA
FOR RESIDENTIAL LAND USE
ConTnwIlty Day htghl
Baltfmore. M 0 ss. 70 50-55
s..n Func>>co. CA S5-6O SO-55 .
BoMon, MA 60 50
- Denver, CO 55 50
....thome, CA 42 42
Loveland., CO 48 45
New Yoril ctty, NY 65 45
Fountain Val'-Y, CA 5().60 4~55
Santa ~ CA 55 45
B1llnga, .. 55 SO
Mi.~la. ,.. 60 55
Cot aI C. biea. Ft. ~ :u.35
Helen.."" 55 SO
Wheatridge, CO J7 37
Henroaa Beach, CA 45 45
Gund ~pld.. .. 4.S-52 38-45
AJ buq uerq ue., NM 5S-61 55-61
SM1 OJego, CA 5().60 4~55
Chlc.go, IL 5~1 5S-61
Oalla.. TX ~ -
Minneap04l.. MN 55 -
Ukewood, CO 55 SO
Inglewood, CA 55 45
Salt Uk. Ctty, UT 65 5~
s -.rea: u,-."-' . T.,.w
Hum ~ Mc:tofl e~n""'g c."..., Pret J, a. C..-J
~ CI) CI) ~
Cl)CI)~
-~~ c::: ~ .E-<
, OCl)> :::> CI)::I:
ZCl)~ OCl)E-< ~o
ovi~~ ::I::::>~ z_
oZ
E-<CI)O N>-
::I:C:::Z
. I ~~O_ O~- ~~
~ <<E-< .....>0 ~~
Cl)0 ,Z
co :::>~CI)~ Z~~
Z ~;:!i Cii::;
.,.., ~ o <0
r:: ::; :::>E-<~Cii <E-<:;l z~
.,.., 2:iCl)<~ oz ~c..
co ::; E-<~"'"
H 0 E-<~ c::: ZOU ~~
.,.., u Z2:~C::: ~CiiC::: Cl)E-<
:> oCl)-O - < .
C:::~~ o~CI)
Q) u~t::~ ~c:::::; z:::>uj
CI):::>CI)~ Ll.c:::::;
"0 ~c..ZE-< ~o>
.,.., CI)::;~z ~oo CI)~~
Ul :::>_CI)_ OLl.U :::> ~
.j..J
::l
0
CI)
Ul ~ N 0- Vl Vl
~
Q) > Vl Vl Vl Vl
~ ~ ~,-,,-, :;l~ :;l E-< ~ E-< ~,-, ~ :;l~
::z:: p. ~ <VlO ::I: ~ <::I: <0 <,-, ~ G'
8 ...r-;-~ U < .....'<t <
~..... -0 0 f:: 8 - r-- ur-- r;- .....0
.j..J co E-<VlO E-<_ c::: Z ~Vl E-<' C:::M ~ N E-<.....
r:: >< CI)"O ZVlVl zz Z Z ZOO zz
_ c '-' '-' ~ E-<oo ~::e.. ~c E-< C
Q) r:a o ., ~ E-< ~ .. ::;.;.; CI)~ ~ ::;E-< CI) ~ ..
..a Q) zu 8>-::I: or-- OVl OE-< :::> E-< 00
- Vl ::;10 2:;l _10 -::I: ::;::I: ::I: _r--
. ,-, CI)<o CI)>- CI)>- gjo 0 CI)>-
u u ><:.0 8~ 00 0
co r:: <~ ~oz ~< 2:i ~< c:::- u- Z - ~<
.j..J co ::; 0 0 0 Z Z -z 0
~ r::
.,..,
"0
H
0
. I ~,-,
c..::;
CI) ......<
c::: i ~~ ~ ~ ......N
:::> ' ......
0 c.. c.. ~'
::I: 0 <~ 0 0 <~
...... f:: , ...... ......
E-< , , , >-1 c <
::I: ~ z::; ~ ::; <c:::c
0 ~< < 0:::>
- 000
Z C Cii; C C ::I:c:::
~ >- >- >- E-<~
~< '::I:
< < < < zE-<
0 0 0 0 0 ~o
~
U
~ E-<
Z
~
~ Z
~
~ ::;
0
u
0 ~ CI) CI) CI) 0 CI)
u ~ ~ ~ Z ~
~ ~
rJl CI)
~ S
0 Z
Z
E-<
Z
~
0 c:::
< ~
E-< U
Z u:
~ Ll. ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 u u u u
~ ::I: ::J :J ::J ::J
u E-< ~ ~ ~ ~
c::: :;l
0
Ll. ~
Z ::I:
~
~
0
0
u
c:::
0
~
u
Z
< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Z
C5 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
c::: u u u u u
0
0
z
Z
0
N
Z
< < 0 <
~ ..... Z 0
~ Z s:
c::: ~ <
~ u
~ 0 c::: >- ~ 0
Ll. ~
~ ::J c::: s:
< < >-- 0
> u ~ ~ E-< >--
>- ~ ;;.: U
E-< ~ 0 0 E-<
::J 8 ~ E-< ~ U
E-< ~ U CI)
< < c::: 0
u rJ'J ::; ~ Z ~ c:::
0 E-4 < > 0
~ S Z ~ < Ll.
< U c::: ><:
CI) Z 0 E-< 0
- IX: .
0 "- 00
u u,~
fIi ~ '0 UJ '
, . enIX:..J <<
. ,I UJ ~Z ..JO:S ..JQ:l
zoO en z< ;::lu,E-<
O~;::l 00 o..~Z ;::l>-
NUJO ::E NUJ ::EellUJ ~~
UJ~~ UJ UJen -:gO E-<OUJ
..J >< O",[ii
~Q:l~ Q:l -Q:l ~ igJ uu,;::l
->-z 0 t:>- Ql~Q/
eel ~ enuo g: enu en;::lE-< E-<engJ
.,-l Z u' Zz ;::l::E< ~;::lu,
I:l z UJZ en <
.,-l UJ enUJu,..J ~UJ O-en o .
on UJ;::lOUJ u, UJ;::l ;::l~UJ .UJ
::E IX: en en
l-I ::E enQ/UJ> 0 enQ/ ~::E~ oZo
.,-l -gJenUJ ogJ e-.
:r: E-< 0 enQZ
:> 0 o ..J zoz~
u zu,::>UJ u Zu, IX:~UJ
rJJ u,u, ,en ::> u,u,en OUJE-<;::l 5..J~
OJ 00~..J ::E OO~ UUUO
.-l UJUJ>~ E-< en;::l<:r: :r:;::l::>
0.. UJUJ> UJO 0.. 0 o~o..
a enenUJ::E 0 enenUJ
eel ::>::>..J_ Z ::>::>..J ;ggJ~z zgJ~
H X
~
~ ~
I:l OJ
OJ U UJ - 0
a I:l > - '" ..J UJ
.c eel UJ - ..J ~ -lQ ..J - ..J~ ..J- - ..J <- ~
U I:l ..J _0 < < - ..J 0 <0 :S 8 ..JO < - -0 ..J-
eel .,-l UJ '" ~. ..J o .. U < <~ <0 Q:l
UJ- U < ~ 0 ..... _ a- U ..... ~ ~ Ur-- - 00
~'"Cl ua-u C:C:u !:l:: a- - ..... E-< .. !:l:: Ql ffi .. IX: .. ,
~ l-I en~ !:l:: Ql z IX: ZU U z
_ c:: Z .. '" 0 u'" UJ E-< UJ U E-< U ::Eu E-<u >-a-
<0 o ell UJu~ UJ 'i) E-< r-- UJ '" ::E u en U UJ ~ ::E'" eno UJ eno U'i)
zu ::E en 8 ~E-< 0 8 '" ::E~ ::>r--
8~E-< ..J ::> ..J C"-' ::E '" ;::l 0 , ::E'i) ;::l r-- '" z.;.,
::E 'i) r-- [ii o ..J ' e-.
~~ ..J ~ en>-:r: 0 '" O..J en..J O..J UJN
en>-:r: 0 < 0 gJ<8 0 ..J ~ ..J UJ '" 0..J Z..J gJ~ U..J ~ ~! ;::l
gJ<8 ~ u ..J ..J IX: ..J u..J
. U < -< <: Q/
1 ::E oz oz < <: ..J UJ
<: IX:
u,
en ~ en en
>-::E >- >-
<0.. <: <:
f2~ 0 Cl
en ::.::: ::.:::~
IX: UJ~ i UJ~ UJ:::E
;::l ~~ ~~ i
0 ~o 0..
:r: i~ ..... 0..
..... [~ ~::E r--
E-< 0.. en , ~<: ,
:r: a-E-< ~ a-O ::E
~ ,:r: ,a- I~ <:
- ::E8 '-' ::Ee <:
z t:. ::EIX: t:. ......
>; <:z >- <:UJ <:IX: >- C"-. Z
<: r--IX: <: r--:r: r--UJ <:
'-'UJ '-'E-< '-':r:
~ 0 >-:r: 0 >-0 >-E-< 0
U <:E-< <: <:0
g 00 0 Cl
E-<
Z
UJ
~ Z
~
0 :::E
0
u en C"-. en ~
~ UJ ~ ~ 0 C"-' 0
rJ). u >- z z
~ ~
0 en
Z :3
z
E-<
Z
UJ
~
<:
E-< UJ UJ UJ ~ U, UJ
U,
Z u u u z Ql u
UJ J - J Z -
::E ..J UJ ..J
~ ~ ~ C"-. 0 :r: ~
UJ
U N en
IX:
0
u,
Z
UJ
UJ
0
0
U
IX: UJ
0 U
UJ Z
u <:
~ z
is
z ~ UJ UJ UJ IX: UJ UJ
~ Cl Cl Cl 0 0 Cl
0 0 0 0 0
0 u u u ~ u u
z
~ Z
z 0
Z N
0
N
>- >- >-
E-< E-<
~ Z >- E-< Z >-
;::l E-< U >- ;::l E-<
~ 0 u -
~ E-< 0 U
U !:l:: Z U ~
0 :r: ;::l ::> >-
>- ..J U Q:l 0
UJ IX: en IX: UJ
E-< ~ ;::l ::.::: u UJ z
- ::E
~ :r: u z @
UJ U ~ ;::l 0
U E-< en UJ 0 ~ ~
0 en ..J Cl 0 E-<
..J UJ ..J UJ ::> z
:r: <: IX: 0 0 UJ
U U, U, ..J ::E z
U-l
en
, . 0
Z
v.i~
U-lO
ZQ2
OU-l ~
NE-< U-l
U-lZ ...J
t:::..... a:l
en E-<C:: 0
E-< .....0 c::
Z en~ p.,
U-l Z Z . <
~ ~t.:lll E-<
~ U-lfii"'O 0
0 ent.:lo Z
U OZ:::
Z.....U-l
en~;>
U-l<o
en~a:l
~ -<
en U-l
...J Z
U-l 00 C"1 C"1 r-
;> NlI"l lI"l ...JIO lI"l
U-l U-lE-< ...JE-< ...JE-<
...J <E-< ...J <:I:
U-l..... t::::I: ~:I: .....:I: < .....t.:l
en "'0 E-<t.:l E-<t.:l Ut.:l Q2r- E-<.....
..... c:: ..... ..... Z..... c::..... ZZ
o <'d ~Z U-lZ U-lZ E-<r- U-l ..
ZU U-l' o .. ~ .. en...J Or-
~~ en:g .....r- ~to ~...J .....10
enll"l 0< en>-
U-l>- U-l>- 0>-
~< ~< U< ~ ~<
~ 00 0 0 0
Z
~ ~ ~
::> c..
c.. 0
0 0 .....
:I: ..... I
E-< I ~
:I: ~ <
t.:l t:-
Z t:- >-
;;:; >- <
< < 0
0 0
E-<
Z
U-l
Z
~
~
0 en en
U ~ U-l
U-l >-
U
~
en
-
~
Z
E-<
Z
U-l
t.:l
< ~
E-< U-l ~
Z U Q2
-
U-l ...J U-l
~ ~ ::r:
U-l en
U
~
0
~
Z
U-l
U-l ell
0 d)
0 ......
U \-,
cI:l
~ \-,
0 .0
U-l ~
U
Z ell
< U-l U-l ]i
Z
Ci 0 0 .5..
0 0 ell
~ U U 0
0 ~
t.:l
Z ell
Z g
0
N ..r::
U
en
"0 I
c: d)
=s c:
0"0 0
en c: N
ell =s d)
>- >- =s 0 ;>
o en .Z
>- E-< E-< ~ d)'Vi
E-< U Z
::> ...... ell c:
:J ~ ....... - d)
0 C:=Sen
< ...J U o 0...
U 0 u E ~
0 ~ ::.::
...J ~ c:: -......
0 0 I I 0
Z >- u_z
~
-.
ATTACHMENT J - NOISE ORDINANCE
2.1-1
Noise
Chapter 12.1
NOISE
Statement of Intent.
Definitions.
Administration and Enforcement.
Application of Regulations.
Exemptions to Chapter.
Procedures for Measuring Noise.
Maximum Permitted Noise Levels.
Violations Deemed Nuisances.
Proposed Development Projects.
Variance of Maximum Permitted Sound Levels.
Penalties.
Severability.
Statement of Intent
I is hereby determined that certain noise levels are detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety, and are
c ntrary to the public interest. In order to control unnecessary, excessive and annoying noise in the County of
lbemarle, it is hereby declared to be the intent of the County to prohibit such excessive noise generated from or
b all sources as specified in this chapter.
. 12.1-2, Definitions
e defmition of technical terms not defined herein shall be obtained from the American Standard Acoustical
T rminology. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings
r spectively ascribed to them by this section:
"A" Weighted sound level: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using
the A-weighting network. The level so read is designated dB(A) or dBA.
Acoustic calibrator: An instrument which measures the accuracy of a sound level meter.
Agricultural receiving zone: Property zoned RA.
Ambient or Background noise level: The all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment,
being usually a composite of sounds from many sources near and far.
Commercial receiving zone: Property zoned C-l, CO, HC, PDSC, PDMC and commercial areas ofPUD.
Decibel: A unit for measuring the volume of a sound equal to twenty times the logarithm to the base ten
of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is twenty micropascals.
1
Emergency: Any occurrence or set of circumstances involving actual or imminent physical trauma or
property damage which demands immediate action.
Equivalent sound level: The equivalent sound level (Leq) is the A-weighted sound level corresponding to
a steady state sound level containing the same total sound energy as the time varying signal over a given
period of time. It shall be determined using an integrating sound level meter as set forth in the American
National Standards for Sound Level Meters.
Impulsive noise: Any sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid
decay. Examples of such sources include explosions, drum beats, drop forge impacts, discharge of
firearms and one object striking another.
Industrial receiving zone: Property zoned LI, HI, or PDIP.
Mobile noise source:
Noise disturbance: Any sound which (I) endangers or injures the safety or health of human beings or (2)
annoys or disturbs persons of normal sensitivities, or (3) endangers or injures personal or real property,
or (4) violates the standards of this chapter.
Property line: An imaginary line along the ground surface, and its vertical extension, which separates the
real property owned by one person or entity from another.
Public space: That property, which is interpreted by the Zoning Administrator to be a public facility,
including schools, libraries and hospitals.
Receiving Zoning: The zoning classification of the property receiving the noise, as shown on the Official
Zoning Maps.
Residential receiving zone: Property zoned VR, R-I, R-2, R-4, R-6, R-lO, R-15, PUD (residential area)
or PRD.
Sound level meter: The instrument, meeting the requirements of ANSI S1.4-1971 Type II rating, used for
making sound level measurements.
Sec. 12,1-3, Administration and Enforcement
Fpr the purposes of administering and enforcing the provisions of this ordinance, the Chief of Police shall be
d signated agent. The Police Chief may be assisted in the enforcement of this ordinance by the Departments of
Zpning, Engineering and all other officials of Albemarle County pursuant to their respective fields. During the
dl velopment proposal process, the County Engineering Department shall be the lead agency for review of a land
u e according to the applicable standards.
S~, 12.1-4, Annlication of Rel!ulations
Npthing within this ordinance shall be construed to prevent or limit the application of State or Federal regulations
oj noise sources.
2
"
12,1-5, Exem tions to this Cha ter
(a) An exemption from the provisions of this chapter is automatically granted for noise caused in the
rformance of emergency work. This shall include, but not be limited to audible signal devices which are
e ployed as warning or alarm signals in case of fire, collision or imminent danger.
(b) This chapter does not regulate bona fide agricultural activity, including noise caused by livestock,
ess regulated by condition of use approval.
ec. 12.1-6, Procedures for Measurin Noise
II noise measurements taken for the enforcement of this ordinance shall be in accordance with the following
p ocedure:
(a) Instrument of measurement: Any noise measurement made pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance
s all be made with a sound level meter, maintained in calibration prior to reading, and in good working order.
(b) Weather conditions: A windscreen shall be used on the sound level meter for all sound measurements.
o external measurements shall be made during precipitation, or if wind speed exceeds 12 miles per hour.
(d) Point of measurement: Noise levels shall be measured at any of the property lines of the intruding
n ise source, as proscribed by the noise level standards.
(c) Scale: All noise measurements shall be measured in units of the frequency weighted sound level
B(A)), in accordance with American National Standards Institute specifications for sound level meters.
easurements shall be made using the A-weighted scale with slow response, following the manufacturer's
structions; except the fast response shall be used for impulsive sounds or rapidly varying sounds.
(e) Orientation of instrument: Where practical, the microphone shall be positioned approximately five feet
ve the ground and ten feet or more away from any reflective surface. The orientation shall be as recommended
the sound meter manufacturer.
(f) Time for reading: Except as othelWise provided, measurement shall be taken over a five-minute period
o time. The sound level shall be the equivalent sound level (leq) measured.
(g) Ambient noise measurement:
(1) Ambient noise shall be averaged over a period comparable to that for the measurement of the
p rticular intruding source being measured.
(2) In order to obtain the ambient level, the intrusive noise source (the noise in question) which
is being testing to determine whether a violation exists shall be eliminated either by bringing to a cessation such
so rce, or by moving to a similar location which does not have the offending noise source and obtaining the ambient
n ise of that location.
(3) The ambient noise level shall be the numerical average of noise measurements taken at a given
ation during at least a five-minute period of time.
3
. .
~ ec, 12.1-7.
Maximum Permitted Noise Levels
a~ Noise or Sound Regulation
I shall be unlawful for any person to operate or cause to be operated, any noise source, such that the sound or noise
clriginating from that source causes the sound or noise level on the receiving property line to exceed the maximum
I vels as set forth in Schedule A as follows:
SCHEDULE A
EXTERIOR SOUND OR NOISE LIMITS
I aytime: Beginning 7 am and ending 10 pm;
?I ighttime: Beginning 10 pm and ending 7 am.
RECEIVING ZONE
ZONING CATEGORY TIME PERIOD NOISE LEVEL (dBA)
Category 1:
Residential or Agricultural Daytime 60
Nighttime 55
Category 2:
Public Space Daytime 60
Nighttime 55
Category 3:
Commercial * Anytime 65
Category 4:
Industrial * Anytime 70
(b)No person shall operate or cause to be operated a public or private motor vehicle or motorcycle on a
pI blic right-of-way at any time in such a manner that the sound level emitted by the motor vehicle or motorcycle
wpen measured at a distance of fifty feet or more exceeds the level set forth in the following table:
4
.. .
SCHEDULE B
MOTOR VEHICLE MAXIMUM LEVELS
VEHICLE CLASS
SPEED 35 MPH OR LESS
86
OVER 35 MPH
90
All motor vehicles of GVWR
or GCWR of 6,000 Ibs +
Any motorcycle
82
76
86
82
Any other motor vehicle or
combination of vehicles towed
SPI-. 12,1-8. Violations Deemed Nuisances
It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully make, continue or cause to be made or continued any loud and
n ucous noise. This term shall mean any sound which, because of its volume level, duration and character, annoys,
d sturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, health, peace or safety of reasonable persons of ordinary sensibilities
\\ 'thin the limits of the city.
S~, 12.1-9, Pro nosed Develonment Proiects
If at any time the Director of Planning and Community Development, County Engineer or the Zoning Administrator
h ve reason to believe that a new development project, addition, modification, or any other changes thereto may
n( t conform with the permitted noise level standards he or she may require as a condition of approval, an acoustical
ar alysis.
Sk, 12,1-10, Variance of Maximum Permitted Noise Levels
A~y use or activity lawfully in existence on the effective date of this chapter which does not conform to the noise
regulations herein, may be continued. However, the use or activity may not be modified so as to be<:ome less
cclnforming. And at any time it is discontinued for a period of two (2) years or more, and it may become
cclnforming without substantial expense, it shall be required to do so.
Sdc. 12.1-11. Penalties
(a) Any person who violates any provision of this chapter and/or creates a noise disturbance, shall be
deemed to be guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Each day of violation of any provision of this chapter shall constitute a separate offense.
5
.
. ..
Severabilit
hould any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter be declared invalid by a court of
c mpetent jurisdiction, such decision shalI not affect the validity of the chapter in its entirety or of any part thereof
er than that so declared to be invalid.
6
\ ~
f_ i
.'
...
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
0:
ROM:
ATE:
E:
Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance
Ella W, Carey, Clerk, CMC tZliX--
March 8, 1994
Board Actions of March 2, 1994
At the Board of Supervisors meeting on March 2, 1994, the Board took the following
ac IOn:
Item 14a. Teacher Incentive Grants for Stony Point Elementary School from the
V rginia Commission for the Arts, $900 - (Form #930053).
APPROVED the attached Appropriation.
Item 14b. G. E. Extra Curricular and Science Grant, $8502.04 - (Form #930054),
APPROVED the attached Appropriation.
Item 14c. Teacher Incentive Grant for Western Albemarle High School from the
V'rginia Commission for the Arts, $300 - (Form #930055).
APPROVED the attached Appropriation.
Item 14d. Eisenhower/Title II .Mini Grant, $845 - (Form 930056),
APPROVED the attached Appropriation.
Item 14e. SLIAG Program, $1447,03 - (Form #930057),
APPROVED the attached Appropriation.
Item 14f. Teacher Incentive Grant for the Math/Science Center from the Virginia
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930053
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE TISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUND
VEA-STONY POINT
PURP SE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 93/94 GRANT FUNDING.
XPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
1310460211312500
PROF SERVICES-INSTRUCTIONAL
$900.00
TOTAL
$900.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***** ******************************************************************
23104 4000240259
23104 4000240260
23104 4000240261
GRANT #94-0746
GRANT #94-0749
GRANT #94-0752
$300.00
300.00
300.00
TOTAL
$900.00
***** ******************************************************************
COST CENTER:
EDUCATI,ON
REQUE
APPRO
SIGNATURE
DATE
DIREC
OF FINANCE
d - 2..5:--:P?L
;7 - f --9 Lj
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930054
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE TISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUND
G E SCIENCE GRANT
PURP SE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 93/94 GRANT FUNDING.
XPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
1320631311601300
INST/REC. SUPPLIES
$8,502.04
$8,502.04
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***** ******************************************************************
TOTAL
23206 1000510100
GRANT FUND BALANCE
$8,502.04
TOTAL
$8,502.04
************************************************************************
ING COST CENTER:
EDUCATION
LS:
SIGNATURE
DATE
OF FINANCE
..:l ',3 ~ -~9
"'/ '7 --t/
/ -J ~ y /
BOARD F SUPERVISORS
"
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930055
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE TISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUND
TEACHER INCENTIVE GRANT
PURP SE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 93/94 GRANT FUNDING.
XPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
************************************************************************
1310460302312500 PROF SERVICES-INSTRUCTIONAL $300.00
TOTAL
$300.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***** ******************************************************************
23104 4000240263
GRANT #94-0754
$300.00
TOTAL
$300.00
******************************************************************
COST CENTER:
EDUCATION
SIGNATURE
DATE
OF FINANCE
f/t;jj(1:; &V~
~-~5-7'r
:1--f-;; f
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
"n~nnT'\n"""Arn~""""T ""'rt........T___
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC..I~L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930057
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVEITISEMENT REQUIRED?
YES
NO
x
FUND
SLIAG PROGRAM
PURPCSE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 9~/94 GRANT FUNDING.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
****~*******************************************************************
1311063380132100 PIT WAGES-TEACHER $1,000.00
1311063380210000 FICA 76.50
1311063380550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE 170.53
1311063380601300 INST/REC. SUPPLIES 200.00
TOTAL
$1,447.03
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***** ******************************************************************
23110 3000300001 SLIAG PROGRAM $1,447.03
TOTAL
$1,447.03
*****;******************************************************************
REQUE~TING COST CENTER:
APPROvALS:
DIREC10R OF FINANCE
BOARD PF SUPERVISORS
EDUCATION
SIGNATURE
~~ .A?AZ~
C// ~ I /7
{/J( (4 ?( / 0a/f~:)
(/
DATE
~-::z. '~-:P9
-5 __
;) -j/-9C/
,
. ' ,
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC} L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930058
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVEFTISEMENT REQUIRED?
YES
NO
x
FUND
VEA MATH/SCIENCE GRANT
PURPCSE OF APPROPRIATION:
FY 9~/94 GRANT FUNDING.
I XPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
****~*******************************************************************
1310460000312500 PROF SERVICES-INSTRUCTIONAL $300.00
TOTAL
$300.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
****~*******************************************************************
2310424000240262 GRANT #94-0856 $300.00
TOTAL
$300.00
************************************************************************
REQUESTING COST CENTER:
APPROK1ALS:
DIREC~OR OF FINANCE
EDUCATJ;.DN
SIGNATURE
~~~
;;" 1
</:{/(I It, ~tl,
DATE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
./ -"'<5"- r~
-::7_0 "Y
').~ -7 .
-
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISC L YEAR
93/94
NUMBER
930059
TYPE OF APPROPRIATION
ADDITIONAL
TRANSFER
NEW
x
ADVE TISEMENT REQUIRED ?
YES
NO
x
FUND
CAPITAL
SE OF APPROPRIATION:
CE DUE TO VA. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION FOR RIO ROAD SIDEWALK PROJECT
XPENDITURE
CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
*******************************************************************
41000950038 RIO ROAD SIDEWALK $7,122.37
TOTAL
$7,122.37
29000 1000510100
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
***** ******************************************************************
CIP FUND BALANCE
$7,122.37
TOTAL
$7,122.37
***** ******************************************************************
APPRO
COST CENTER:
PLANNING
SIGNATURE
DATE
DIREC
OF FINANCE
o?-.z.z;-'7~
}-%-7'/'
/
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
-
4"- P
.../
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
XJ;~~~' _
OJ; li'cxo-9f
.':"",1:
:~,
- FY 93/94 Educational Grants
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
qc.; .om. tiLt ~ /lq
INFORMATION:
ACTION: X
SUBJECT P
G. E. Sci
Teacher I
Title II
SLIAG Pro
VEA Math/
VEA - Sto
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS:
Paskel, Breeden
Board has approved and requested appropriation of funds for six educational
DISCUSSI
. The re
"'to.". fund b
<\4'O.'Y'" to pro
tlB (Appro
ppropriation of the remaining fund balance for the SLIAG Program. The grant had a
lance of $1,447.03 at the end of the 1992-93 fiscal year, The funds will be used
ide family literacy services to migrant and Chapter I students and their families,
riation #930057)
.
\~
~\,
~
fjf0
ropriation of the Teacher Incentive Grant for the Math/Science Center from the
a Commission for the Arts in the amount of $300,00, The grant was established to
rengthen the quality of arts education in the schools and to encourage innovative
s which integrate the arts into the basic curriculum of the classroom, The goal of
oject, integrating art and geometry on a sixth grade level, is to develop the
tanding and realization of how society influences art and mathematics, and how the
related, (Appropriation #930058)
~ The ap ropriation of three Teacher Incentive Grants for Stony Point Elementary School from
~~the Vi ginia Commission for the Arts: 1) Photography Project for $300,00; 2) Living
.~ Africa -American Tales Project for $300,00 and 3) Personal Expression for $300.00. The
~rr Teache Incentive Grant Program has been established to help strengthen the quality of arts
.~~ educat on in the schools and to encourage innovative projects which integrate the arts into
~. the ba ic curriculum of the classroom. (Appropriation #930053)
. The re
~ Scienc
.tOi.. '(. ye ar .
t!Jf' Scienc
~ togeth
ppropriation of the remaining fund balance for the G, E, Extra Curricular and
Grant, The grant had a fund balance of $8,502,04 at the end of the 1992-93 fiscal
The funds will be used to defray the cost of the Middle School Extra Curricular
Program, This program brings teachers, parents, students, and GE Engineers
r to pursue an integrated Science experiment and project, (Appropriation #930054)
. The ap
Virgin
~~helP s
.!{!.. projec
tf( this p
,\..~ interv
"'" philos
. tape r
advanc
their
ropriation of a Teacher Incentive Grant for Western Albemarle High School for the
a Commission of the Arts in the amount of $300,00, The grant was established to
rengthen the quality of arts education in the schools and to encourage innovative
s which integrate the arts into the basic curriculum of the classroom, The goal of
oject is to allow advanced art students at Western Albemarle High School to
ew community artists and record their studios in an effort to understand their
phies, their vision and how their choices led them to art as a career, (A camera,
corder and/or video camera will be provided to record information,) This group of
d art students will influence other art students, non-art students and teachers with
resentations during the school year. (Appropriation #930055)
, .
~~
;/ \\~
ropriation of the Eisenhower/Title II Mini Grant. The Eisenhower/Title II State
awarded Albemarle County Schools a grant in the amount of $845,00 to send a four
,r- 11
flGENDA 'lITLE: Appropriation - FY s93/94 Education Grants Funding
March 2, 1994
Page 2
membeI team from Brownsville Elementary School to the National Council of Teachers of
Mathenatics (NCTM) Regional Conference in Richmond, In-service sessions will be conducted
for school staff upon the team's return, (Appropriation #930056)
RECOMME~IDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the appropriations as detailed on the attached forms,
APPSCHOC . EXE
94.025
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
"".',.,
~.:., 'Ij - ,. . !
oNO_~g5'<J'f
';\:;~il~;
.,......<---..._~.
SUBJECT
Balance
Transpor
Project
- Rio Road Sidewalk Project
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1994
ACTION:
x
ITEM NUMBER:
q'-f 'D~1J,' )f\O
INFORMATION:
AGENDA T
Appropri
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF CO
Messrs.
Breeden
REVIEWED BY:
--
ATTACHMENTS: X
BACKGRO
The Cou ty originally approved $92,800 for the Rio Road Sidewalk Project as part of the State
Revenue Sharing Program,
DISCUSS ON:
This pr ject was thought to have been completed with the County cost being $58,876,11, The
remaini g $33,923.89 reverted back to the ClP Fund Balance and was made available for other
project. VDOT has an internal audit process that apparently revealed additional costs
associa ed with this project and has billed the County an additional $7,122,37, All projects
perform d by VDOT are subject to this type of audit adjustment, however, this is the first
time th re has actually been an actual adjustment,
RECOMME
Staff r commends appropriation of this amount from the ClP Fund Balance as detailed on
Appropr ation #930059 attached,
930059. XE
94,024
;'
I~
r
"
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Memorandum
iJ;;>."",,~,__.-~~d."""' >
~
February 16, 1994
. ~
."' ".,....'~k~..'-;.'.,.. -" ~-'<.--.'~.--,..-~
-. ....,.._.,-".~,,,.......,,... ",.,-"_.,--,,,,,,..
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Robert W. Paskel, Division superintendent~
RE Request for Appropriation
At its meeting on February 14, 1994, the School Board approved the
th following:
. The reappropriation of the remaining fund balance for the G.E.
Extra Curricular and Science Grant. The grant had a fund balance of
$8,502.04 at the end of the 1992-93 fiscal year. The funds will be
used to defray the cost of the Middle School Extra Curricular Science
Program. This program brings teachers, parents, students, and GE
Engineers together to pursue an integrated Science experiment and
project.
. The appropriation of a Teacher Incentive Grant for Western
Albemarle High School from the Virginia Commission for the Arts
in the amount of $300.00. The grant was established to help
strengthen the quality of arts education in the schools and to
encourage innovative projects which integrate the arts into the basic
curriculum of the classroom. The goal of this project is to allow
advanced art students at Western Albemarle High School to interview
community artists and record their studios in an effort to
understand their philosophies, their vision and how their choices
led them to art as a career. (A camera, tape recorder and/or
video camera will be provided to record information.) This group
of advanced art students will influence other art students, non-
art students and teachers with their presentations during the
school year.
. The appropriation of the Eisenhower/Title II Mini Grant. The
Eisenhower/Title II State Program awarded Albemarle county Schools
a grant in the amount of $845.00 to send a four member team from
Brownsville Elementary School to the National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics (NCTM) Regional Conference in Richmond. In-service
sessions will be conducted for school staff upon the team's return.
It is requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the appropriation
inance to receive and disburse these funds as displayed on the attachment.
Melvin Breeden
Ed Koonce
,..,Ella Carey
. ,
.r/
. .. I
Albemarle County Public Schools
G,E. EXTRA CURRICULAR SCIENCE GRANT
Re krenue
2- ~206-51000-510100 Appropriation-Fund Balance $8,502.04
Ex Ioenditures
1- 3206-61311-601300 Inst/Rec. Supplies $8,502.04
TEACHER INCENTIVE GRANT - #94-0754
Re !venue
2- 3104-24000-240263 Grant '94-0754 $300.00
E}C Inenditure
1- 2302-61101-312500 Prof. Services Instructional $300.00
EISENHOWER/TITLE II MINI-GRANT
Re venue
2- 3203-33000-330200 Mini-Grant Title II $845.00
EJl Inenditures
1- 3203-63347-550300 Travel - Out of County $665.00
1- 3203-63347-580500 Staff Development S180.00
$845.00
#.-"
-
.
ALBEMARLE COUNTI PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Memorandum
January 26, 1994
r-'
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Robert W. Paskel, Division superintenden~
Request for Appropriation
At its meeting on January 24, 1994, the School Board approved the
the following:
. The reappropriation of the remaLnLng fund balance for the SLIAG
Program. The grant had a fund balance of $1,447.03 at the end
of the 1992~93 fiscal year. The funds will be used to provide
family literacy services to migrant and Chapter I students and
their families.
. The appropriation of a Teacher Incentive Grant for the Math/
Science Center from the Virginia Commission for the Arts
in the amount of $300.00. The grant was established to help
strengthen the quality of arts education in the schools and to
encourage innovative projects which integrate the arts into the basic
curriculum of the classroom. The goal of this project, integrating
art and geometry on a sixth grade level, is to develop the .
understanding and realization of how society influences art and
mathematics, and how the two are related.
. The appropriation of three Teacher Incentive Grants for Stony Point
Elementary School from the Virginia commission for the Arts:
1) Photography Project for $300.00; 2) Living African-American
Tales Project for $300.00 and 3) Personal Expression for $300.00.
The Teacher Incentive Grant Program has been established to help
strengthen the quality of arts education in the schools and to
encourage innovative projects which'integrate the arts into the
basic curriculum of the classroom.
It is requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the appropriation
ordinance to receive and disburse these funds as displayed on the attachment.
/smm
xc: Melvin Breeden
Ed Koonce
Ella Carey
/
.<J ' ..
.. 1
Albemarle county Public Schools
SLIAG PROGRAM
1 evenue
, -3110-33000-300001 SLIAG Program $1,447.03
] xnendi tures
-3110-63380-132100 Part-time wages - Teacher $1,000.00
-3110-63380-210000 FICA $76.50
-3110-63380-550100 Travel-Mileage $170.53
-3110-63380-601300 Instruction/Rec. Supplies 5200.00
$1,447.03
VEA GRANT - MATH/SCIENCE CENTER
evenue
-3104-24000-240262 #94-0856 $300.00
xnenditure
-2111-61311-312500 Prof. Services Instructional $300.00
VEA GRANTS - STONY POINT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
i
evenue
-3104-24000-240259 #94-0746 $300.00
-3104-24000-240260 #94-0749 $300.00
-3104-24000-240261 #94-0752 $300.00
xnenditures
-2211-61101-312500 Prof. Services Instructional $900.00 I
I
I
I
,
I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
0: Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC
March 9, I 994
E: Board Actions of March 2, 1994
r/(~
l/ -
At the Board of Supervisors meeting on March 2, 1994, the Board took the following
a tion:
Agenda Item No, 15, FY 1994-95 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
ADOPTED the FY 1994-95 Capital Improvements budget in the amount of
$ ,228,450 (copy attached) which added $15,250 for Old Brook Road.
E C/jng
. ....
'.- ,." .
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
~ ';QS-.q<?
'";.:-:!} :~~
al FY94/95 Capital Improvements Budget
AGENDA DATE:
March 2, 1994
ITEM NUMBER:
(}r.; '()10C),' la!
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
approval of the FY1994-95 Capital Improvements Program ACTION: INFORMATION:
A TT ACHMENTS: yes
REVIEWED BY:
BA K R ND: At the December 15 public hearing on the FY1994-95 - FY 1998-99 Capital Improvement Program, the Board
request d that the FY1994-95 CIP budget be approved prior to the operating budget worksessions. The attached material presents a
summa of the proposed capital projects for general government and the school division, a sheet outlining the projected revenues,
and a d scription of the FY1994-95 proposed projects.
SI N:
The onl changes that have been made since the public hearing are the deferral of the expansions at Red Hill and Woodbrook from
94/95 t 95/96 and the deferral of the new Northern Elementary School until FY 1998-99, based on the changes approved by the
School oard at their February 14 meeting. The recommendations of the long-range planning committee concerning the new high
school roject, will be discussed by the School Board at their March 28 meeting to be forwarded on to the Board of Supervisors in
April.
Since d liberations with VDoT on the crosswalk at Western Albemarle have not been finalized, the full $120,000 previously
estimate for the crossing options is still in the CIP, although the final dollar amount for the fmal crossing configuration should be
conside ably lower. The revised number will be available prior to the actual appropriation of funds for this project in June.
Remov' g the FY 94-95 planning dollars from theWoodbrook and Redhill projects reduced the proposed FY 94/95 allocation by
$610,00 for a total FY94-95 CIP budget of$3.2 million. The breakdown of the FY1994-95 CIP by major function and revenue
source i shown in the table below.
EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTKJN
FY 1994/95
ONLY
ADMINIS"ffiA TKJN AND COURTS
PUBLIC SAFETY
HIGHlNA Y SITRANSPORTA TKJN
LIBRARIES
PA RKS/RECREA TKJN
lfnLmESlSTORMINA TER
8JUCA TKJN
TOTAL
483,005
341,020
562,500
97,500
314,800
236,810
1,177,565
$3,213,200
REVENUES BY SOURCE
BOND REVENUE
C1P FUND BALANCE
NON-LOCAL HIGHlNA Y FUNDS
M1SC8..LANEOUS
GENERAL FUND "ffiANSFER
TOTAL
444,900
1,104,480
o
303,820
1,360,000
$3,213,200
FY 94/95-
FY 98/99
1,911,081
951,020
134,785,956
97,500
2,631,675
456,810
43,768,470
$184,602,512
43,512,500
111,000,000
2,908,300
10,360,000
$167,780,800
94,026
I .' j .... to
BOARh OF SUPERVISORS PROPOSED CAPITAL PROJECTS FOR FY 1994/95 -1998/99
SUMMAR'" OF PROPOSED PROJECTS
ADMINIS RATION AND COURTS
FIRElRESpUE SAFETY
HIGHWA't SrrRANSPORTATION
L1BRARIE~
PARKS AI D RECREATION
UTILITIES
EDUCATllpN
1994-95
483,005
341,020
562,500
97,500
314,800
236,810
1,177,565
GRAND TPTAL
1995-96
1,105,916
150,000
7,921,187
o
1,272,322
220,000
4,129,820
1996-97
242,160
160,000
60,730,952
o
324,653
o
15,523,085
1997-98
80,000
150,000
62,650,900
o
387,900
o
13,771,000
1998-99
o
150,000
2,920,417
o
332,000
o
9,167,000
TOTAL
1,911,081
951,020
134,785,956
97,500
2,631,675
456,810
43,768,470
3,213,200 14,799,245 76,980,850 77,039,800 12,569,417 184,602,512
FUNDING SUMMARY - GENERAL GOVERNMENT PROJECTS
AVAILABLE RESOURCES
# GENERJ L FUND TRANSFER
E-911 C' NTEL REIMBURSEMENT
MISC. RE VENUES
FUND BJ LANCE
NON-LC CAL ROAD FUNDS
SUBTOTA REVENUES
1,360,000
82,020
121 ,800
1,104,480
2,668,300
EXPENDP URES
RECOM" ENDED PROJECTS
EXCESS F EVENUE / (SHORTFALL)
CUMULAl VE SHORTFALL
2,000,000
o
100,000
300,000
Q
2,400,000
2,000,000
100,000
300,000
55,500,000
57,900,000
2,500,000
100,000
300,000
55,500,000
58,400,000
2,035,635 10,669,425 61,457,765 63,268,800
2,500,000
100,000
300,000
Q
2,900,000
10,360,000
82,020
521,800
2,304,480
111,000,000
124,268,300
3,402,417 140,834,042
632,665 (8,269,425) (3,557,765) (4,868,800) (502,417) (16,565,742)
632,665 (7,636,760) (11,194,525) (16,063,325) (16,565,742) (16,565,742)
FUNDING ~UMMARY - SCHOOL PROJECTS
AVAILABL RESOURCES
BORRC ~ED FUNDS 444,900 4,361,000 15,336,600 13,371,000 9,499,000 43,012,500
INTEREST 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000
SUBTOTA REVENUES 544,900 4,461,000 15,436,600 13,471,000 9,599,000 43,512,500
SCHOOL EIxPENDITURES
SCHOOL F ROJECTS 1,177,565 4,129,820 15,523,085 13,771,000 9,167,000 43,768,470
SHORTFA L (632,665) 331,180 (86,485) (300,000) 432,000 (255,970)
CUMULAT VE SHORTFALL (632,665) (301 ,485) (387,970) (687,970) (255,970) (511,940)
TOTAL CIF EXPENDITURES 3,213,200 14,799,245 76,980,850 77,039,800 12,569,417 184,602,512
TOTAL CIF REVENUES 3,213,200 6,861,000 73,336,600 71,871,000 12,499,000 167,780,800
SHORTFAI L 0 (7,938,245) (3,644,250) (5,168,800) (70,417) (16,821,712)
CUMULATI~E SHORTFALL 0 (7,938,245) (11,582,495) (16,751 ,295) (16,821,712) (16,821,712)
02120/94
FY 94/ 5 - 98/99 PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
TOTAL
1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-1998 1998-89 1995-1999
EXISTING RESOURCES
CIP FUN BALANCE · 1 ,104,480 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 2,304,480
# GEN FU D APPROPRIATIONS 1,360,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 10,360,000
RESCU PAYMENT 21,800 0 0 0 21 ,800
MclNTIR SCHOOL (SALE) 0 0 0 0 0
INTERE T EARNED 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000
STATE EIMB JAil 0 0 0 0 0
E-911 C NTEl REIMBURSEMENT 82,020 0 0 82,020
NON-l Al ROAD FUNDS. Q Q 55,500,000 55,500,000 111,000,000
SUB OTAl 2,668,300 2,400,000 57,900,000 58,400,000 2,900,000 124,268,300
0
VPSA BO ROWED FUNDS 444,900 4,361,000 15,336,600 13,371,000 9,499,000 43,012,500
INTERES 93-94 BOND ISSUE 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000
SU TOTAL 544,900 4,461,000 15,436,600 13,471,000 9,599,000 43,512,500
0
GRAND T TAL RESOURCES 3,213,200 6,861,000 73,336,600 71,871,000 12,499,000 167,780,800
0
REQUES ED PROJECTS 3,213,200 14,799,245 76,980,850 77,039,800 12,569,417 184,602,512
OVER/(S ORl) Q (7,938,245) (3,644,250) (5,168,800) (70,417) (16,821 ,712)
ACCUMU TED OVER/(SHORl) 0 (7,938,245) (11 ,582,495) (16,751,295) (16,821 ,712) (16,821 ,712)
BOND IS UES.
Greer Rec eation Improve, 0 60,000 60,000
Red Hill 0 tdoor Recreation 55,000 55,000
Northern rea Elementary School Recreat 0 0 65,000 65,000
AHS Gym loor Resurfacing 0 31,000 0 0 0 31,000
Brownsvill Elementary Expansion 0 0 200,000 2,874,000 0 3,074,000
Burley Mid Ie School Blackboards 0 22,000 0 0 0 22,000
Burley Ro f Replacement 0 140,000 0 0 0 140,000
CATEC R ar Parking lot Resurfacing 0 0 9,000 0 0 9,000
CATEC R of Replacement 0 0 0 85,000 0 85,000
Greer Ele entary Renovations 0 0 0 25,000 267,000 292,000
Henly Mid Ie School Renovations 0 0 63,000 0 0 63,000
Hollymead ElementaryRenovation 0 0 0 22,000 0 22,000
Mobile Cia srooms 0 450,000 450,000
New High hool 0 2,100,000 8,000,000 8,540,000 0 18,640,000
Northern rea Elementary 0 0 0 0 7,890,000 7,890,000
Red Hill EI mentary Expansion 0 410,000 2,820,000 1,000,000 0 4,230,000
Stone Rob nson Renovations 0 0 10,000 185,000 0 195,000
Stony Poin Kitchen Renovation 0 15,000 135,000 0 0 150,000
Vehicular aintenance Reconfig. 324,900 0 17,500 294,000 143,000 779,400
Walton HV C/Renovations 0 0 28,700 26,000 283,000 337,700
Western AI emarle Crossing 120,000 120,000
Western AI emarle Roof Replacement 0 35,000 550,000 0 0 585,000
WAHS Tra k Resurfacing 0 78,000 0 0 0 78,000
Woodbroo Expansion/Renovation 0 200,000 2,646,000 0 0 2,846,000
Yancey Re ovations 0 25,000 126,500 0 0 151,500
ADA Structural Changes 0 425,000 0 0 0 425,000
Chiller Re lacement 0 15,000 386,000 20,000 551,000 972,000
Security S stems-All Schools 0 0 44,900 0 0 44,900
Instruction I Technology 0 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 1,200,000
SUBTOTAL 444,900 4,361,000 15,336,600 13,371 ,000 9,499,000 43,012,500
02125/94
, ,
PROPOSED FY94/95 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET
on s
Count Office Building ADA Renovations, Modifications to County buildings to comply with
ADA r gulations, which includes installing power doors, modifying bathrooms, replacing door
knobs, signage and lowering counter sections to accomodate wheelchairs. Original request was
$158,9 O. Funded at 35% over 3-year period.
Repla ement of Voting Machines. Replace all current mechanical lever voting machines with
direct ecording electronic voting machines. Current machines are old and increasingly
proble -ridden. Current estimate is that a total of 56 machines will be needed at time of project
initiati n for a total cost over a three year period of $330,000,
Count Computer Upgrade, To provide microcomputers and central network connection for
county staff. To provide backup power system for mainframe equipment and key central
microc mputer network equipment. Original request was $95,000. Funding reduction based on
availab lity of revenues.
Real E tate Appraisal System. The administration assessment system is a comprehensive mass
apprais I system for accurate and defensible property values using land, cost, market and income
approa hes. It will also be a geographic system that integrates data bases with computerized maps
includ' g tax maps, zoning districts, etc. The total cost of the project is $225,000, $50,000 of
which i funded in the current year.
Origina FY 94-95 request was $175,000 to complete funding to purchase the system. Although
the pro ect is not fully funded, a lease purchase arrangement may be pursued in order to have the
system place in time to begin using it for the next full reassessment cycle.
Health Department Clinic Wing. Addition of 8,000 SF to health department facility and
renovat on of existing space to meet increased demand for health care services and resulting
expansi n in staff. This is second year funding for a joint renovation project already in progress.
The ci has funded their share.
Jail A A Compliance, To make structural changes to remove barriers which currently limit
handica ped accessibility in the visitors area of the Joint Security Complex.
Satelite Receivers. This is second year funding to set up 4 receiver and message reply sites, which
will inc ease the reception to 95% of transmissions to field officers with hand-held radios.
Enhan ed 911 Building Locator. Development of an Enhanced 911 system, beginning with the
install at on of a Building Locator System (BLS). The BLS will provide an accurate, up-to-date
referen e of all locations in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County from which an
emerge cy call could be received.: Full funding offset by revenues from surcharge.
FireRe cue Building Equipment Fund, This building and equipment fund is similar in
philoso hy to the advanced allocation fund with funds set aside each year for the next five years.
Funds ill eventually be used to build a fre station in either the western, southern, or northern
urban ri g and to purchase an aerial ladder truck, Original request was $250,000 per year for a
total fu ding of$I,250,000, Annual funding reduced due to availability of funds
St, Ives Road Cul-de-Sac, At the time St. Ives Road was accepted into the State secondary system
for mai tenance, a portion (bulb or cul-de-sac) was not included in the legal description. Once
deterior tion from lack of maintenance is corrected, VDoT will take over.
$55,630
$109,000
$65,000
$100,000
$118,125
$35,250
$109,000
$82,020
$150,000
$7,100
. . I
e Sharing Road Projects. Each year the County participates in the Revenue Sharing
Progra in which the State provides funds to match County funds for the construction,
mainte ance, or improvements of secondary roads. The County has developed a list of roads which
are pro rammed for improvements with Revenue Sharing funds, Currently, the County allocates
its shar to the year the project is scheduled to begin construction. Recommended usage of the
revenu sharing monies is $360,000 for Berkmar Drive and $140,000 for Hydraulic in 94/95
Hydra lic/Rio Bike Path & Sidewalk. In conjunction with the road widening projects: (I) install
an 8' ide asphalt bicycle path on the north side of Hydraulic Road from Whitewood Road to
Greenb ier Drive and on the north side of Rio Road from Greenbrier Drive to Berkmar Drive; and
(2) inst II a five foot sidewalk on the south side of Hydraulic Road from Whitewood Road to
Greenb ier Drive and along the south side of Rio Road from Greenbrier Drive and Route 29. It is
expecte that all right-of-way costs, half of construction costs, on all maintenance will be borne by
VDoT. This project will be in conjunction with the widening of Hydraulic and Rio Roads. The
Hydrau ic Road portion of this project has been completed by VDoT and includes the construction
of the . e path and sidewalk. Since this project is being done in conjunction with the widening of
Hydrau ic Road, it reflects minimal matching funds in relation to the extent of the project.
Landsc ping Route 250 East. Landscaping the area disturbed by the proposed VDoT
improv ments. Original request of $13,000 reduced due to funding availablility.
Librari
HV AC Central Library, Replace/repair/rework mechanical system at the Central Library. Details
of the roblems and recommendations are contained in a report from 2rw Associates previously
submitt d. Cost to be shared with the City of Charlottesville.
Shelving and Reorganize to Meet ADA Standards for Public Library _Facilities and
Carpeting, Shelving must be moved and rearranged to comply with distance regulations
by ADA. Current carpeting is separating from floor and requires frequent repairs.
ADA ompliance-Various Parks/Recreation Facilities, Removal of architectural barriers at
Albema Ie County parks, that are detailed in the ADA transition plan. Project locations are
Greenw od Community Center, Scottsville Community Center, Mint Springs, Totier, Meadows
Comm ity Center, Chris Greene, Walnut Creek, Ivy Creek, and Rivanna.
Origina request was $247,005. Based on Planning Commission recommendation that ADA
request be spread out over 3-year period, funding level for FY 94-95 is approximatley 35% of
total re uest with remainder divided into next two years. Recommendation is also that the ADA
adviso committee reconvene and prioritize all ADA projects based on the total funding
allottm t.
m lian - ch I P rks, Funds for accessibility improvements for outdoor areas at
Ie County Schools which serve as community and district parks. Projects include signage,
paving or parking and accessible pathways to all facilities. Accessible ground cover under
playgro nd equipment and some accessibility improvements to equipment.
Origina request was $275,000. FY 94/95 recommendation reflects 35% of total request, with
remaind r of costs spread out over 2 years.
Crozet ark Building/Grounds Improvements, (94-95) Picnic shelter repair. Replace shingles
and d aged sheathing. Add additional trusses and support posts and update electrical to current
County ode. (96-97) Clearing of 2-3 acres of land for additional parking for 2 arts and crafts
shows d fireman's celebration, Prior allocation has been expended in numerous projects since
restricti e covenant agreement was signed in 1985.
Scottsvi Ie Community Center Outdoor Recreation Improvements, (94-95) The replacement of
the two softball/baseball fields lost by the construction of the levee on the town field, and the
purchas of portable lacrosse goals. (95-96) Construction of a picnic shelter, outdoor basketball
courts, d access to restrooms. (97-98) Construction of two tennis courts. All phases include
accessib e pathways as needed. Proposed developments will occur on County property and
adjacent town land,
$500,000
$43,000
$12,400
$77,500
$20,000
$86,450
$96,250
$10,000
$20,400
, .
Green ood Community Center Building Improvements, (94-95) Roof replacement. Reroof
main b ilding, new flashing, additional exhaust vents. (97-98) Replacement of present furnace
with a one-type heating system set up to deliver heat to different areas of the building as needed.
Holly ead Elementary Outdoor Recreation Improvements, Construction of outdoor recreation
faciliti s at Hollymead Elementary after the completion of the Middle School improvements.
Faciliti s will include 2 handicapped-accessible playground units: one for K-2 and one for 3-5.
Include installation, wood borders and wood carpet mulch. Also border and mulch around some
existin playground equipment and accessible pathway to all equipment.
Tennis Court Resurfacing. Resurfacing two tennis courts at Walton Middle School.
e used for community play and PE classes. Project will include cutting out and repairing
cracks, replacing and reinforcing net posts, and re-color coating.
Jack Juett Tennis Court Resurfacing, Resurfacing two tennis courts at Jack Jouett Middle
School. Courts are used for community play and PE classes. Project will include cutting out and
repair' g existing cracks, replacing and reinforcing net posts, and re-color coating.
Cale utdoor Basketball Court. Construct a 90' x 40' hard court area with 4 basketball goals.
Two gals at 10' and two goals at 8',
tiliti 1m r v m nts
Peyton Drive Storm water Detention Basin,An existing large ravine has developed land on one
side an upstream and is located in the urban area, A portion of the upstream development was
prior to the Stormwater Detention Ordinance, and therefore, there is no control for the storm water
runoff f the drainage basin. The runoff from this area eventually drains into Meadow Creek
which s susceptible to frequent flooding. The extension of Commonwealth Drive and other
subseq ent development makes this facility a critical need due to the legal implications. The
prope owners have agreed to dedicate the necessary land.
Count Master Drainage Plan, The original CIP request proposed a study to identify and correct
drainag problems from existing and future development. The scope of this project has been
expand d to include a master drainage plan for the entire County in anticipation of new State of
Virgini and Federal EPA stormwater management regulations.
The Ci /CountylUV A shared Moore's Creek basin area is to be done in 1992-93 and 1993-94.
Also, d e to the funds received from the City and UV A, South Fork Basin will be done in 1993-94.
Origina request was $100,000. Physical scope of the study will be reduced in order to defer cost.
Ricky oad Drainage, Project will alleviate minor flooding of residences on Ricky Road from
runoff anating from drainage areas above the residences on Woodstock Drive. This project is a
result 0 citizen complaints
E ucati n
PVCC umanities and Social Sciences Building. The proposed facility will be designed to
provide the specialized classrooms and laboratories needed for courses taught within the areas of
the hu anities and the social sciences. The theater will provide an area for artistic functions
includi g music, drama, theater and speech. Faculty members will have adequate office space for
the first time which will lead to more effective counseling and advising of students. Funding from
the loca ities will be used for site development.
Emerg ncy Stop Switches-Various Industrial Arts Shops. Install emergency stop switches for
all maj r pieces of equipment in the industrial arts shops at Henley, Jouett and Walton Middle
Schools
Stone- obinson Renovations, The self contained electric heating and cooling units in the library
and su unding classrooms will be replaced. The boilers and chiller were sized to handle the new
equipm nt in the previous renovation, therefore, new piping and unit ventilators will be installed.
Also, a Effluent Discharge Diffuser (EDD) will be installed on the discharge line of the sewage
system. The EDD is mandated by the State Water Control Board.
$15,000
$51,500
$12,400
$12,400
$10,400
$145,515
$60,000
$31,295
$62,335
$18,000
$25,000
. . . '"
,. f ,'10 It-
Vehicu ar Maintenance Facility Reconfiguration, A recently re-evaluated engineering and
archite< tural study recommends a three phase program to correct certain inefficient and inadequate
design onstraints which have had a negative impact on the facilities utilization. In Phase I, the
parts ar d service department would be moved to the first floor with all offices and a new employee
trainin~ room located on the second floor which would accommodate space for driver training.
This mpve would place the repair support areas nearest the repair bays. A 2040 SF, two-story
additio to the front of the building would be needed to accommodate these changes.
W AHS Underground Pedestrian Crossing, Provide some form of pedestrian crossing for safe
passagf from the grounds at Western Albemarle High School to the grounds at Henley Middle
School. The County is currently pursuing approval with VDot to allow a traffic signal for
pedestr an use at the Western Albemarle High School entrance for a much reduced cost.
ADA Structural Changes-Various School Locations, Many school facilities require structural
change to allow for accessibility. An inspection was performed on all school buildings and a list
of defI iencies has been compiled. Major renovations to facilities in this plan will meet present
ADA I quirements and include elevators, ramps, restrooms, drinking fountains, signage, etc.
Origina request was $573,800. Funded at 35% over 3 year period,
Contalninated Soil Removal and Monitoring-Various Locations. The underground storage
tanks r moval was a previous CIP. In six locations contaminated soil was found. This is to
remove dispose of the contaminated soil and monitor the sites as required under federal/state
regulaf,bns.
Energ) Management, This project would provide a means for monitoring and controlling the
energy ~onsuming equipment, ie. heating, cooling, and ventilation, of the following schools:
Burley, Meriwether Lewis, Stone Robinson and Walton.
Instru tional Technology for the School Division, This request to provide computer technology
to the s hools by the Dept of Information Services includes installing new networks, expanding and
fmishin~ existing networks, and providing computers in the classrooms, the computer labs and the
library. Also this includes software, CD-ROM drives and multimedia devices.
Origina request was for $300,000 per year for a total of$1.5 million over 5 years. Funding request
reduce< to $165,000 per year due to funding restrictions,
Water I ne Improvements-Various Locations. Install backflow prevention in all schools serviced
by the i\.lbemarle County Service Authority. Installing this device in the main water line prevents
any po sible contamination from the user to the public supply. This project is mandated by the
State" ater Control Board and the Albemarle County Service Authority.
RWW/h~t
CIPl
$324,900
$120,000
$200,830
$95,000
$59,000
$165,000
$122,500
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFLICT OF INTERESTS ACT
TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
for Officers and Employees of
Local Government [Section 2.1-639.14(G)]
1.
b A v, () P. B 0 Vol eK. M A f-J
Name:
2.
Title:
c: H A~ '- 0 -r-r' ~" It..'-i /) I $"'iA, c. T ':S (JPt:/Z v, :5' 0,(
3.
Agency:
AI.. 6e"'''j(",~ COU~WI 6oAt./J Or $"u!leA. VI $0"" S
4.
r'/ 111'1 -4 S
Transaction:
C/f/.-rA'" In/~lIvl.-,.,blVT'.s I,(d c~".,., 4U~6C';
(3-2-Cf~)
5.
Nature of Personal Interest Affected by Transaction:
OVJJJ'A..$~'" o~ '~~'e,(7"( Vo'HIc::'''' "It..., &. e-"",.II4''''~/) oil
~l-fl:c..reO 8'( ,Q f~Q"dSc/) 1l.,4~ In IA6VI!-I"1~^""
6. I declare that:
(a) I am a member of the following business, profession, occupation, or group,
the members of which are affected by the transaction:
61loIJI <::1r flttJl~I'f (JvJlVE,tf.S IfJ flt.dKIMI,"Y O~ /leA/)
1M II.D "6M~""" W~ Ie::.... A /l.tI: s,,, II. A~4 '( fj I-hbGT,( /)
(b) I am able to participate in this transaction fairly, objectively, and in the
public interest.
Datec: 3".z -'1 Y
./~
~./ Signature
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE CONSIDERATION OF
AGREEMENTS REQUIRED TO CREATE A JAIL AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board voted at its February,
1994 meeting to request the governing bodies of the County of Albemarle and the City of
( harlottesville to take action to create a Regional Jail Authority (hereafter "Authority") to
operate the Joint Security Complex and to plan for the expansion of such facility or the
c bnstruction of a new facility; and
WHEREAS, the creation of an Authority requires the County and the City to enter
i) to an Agreement creating the Authority and a Service Agreement outlining the obligations
o~ the County and the City induding, among other things, sending prisoners to the Joint
Sbcurity Complex; and
WHEREAS, the County desires to formally consider the creation of an Authority by
rc viewing drafts of the agreements, referenced above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, agrees to consider the formation of a Regional Jail Authority in cooperation
"ith the City of Charlottesville and requests that a draft agreement to create such an
Authority, and a draft Service Agreement outlining the obligations of the County and the City
t( such an Authority, be prepared by a representative of the Albemarle-Charlottesville
R,egional Jail Board.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, HOWEVER, that the adoption of this Resolution does
n~t bind the County to agree to the creation of the Authority, such decision being explicitly
n served for consideration by the Board upon presentation and full consideration of the
n ferenced agreements.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that this is a true, correct copy of a Resolution
a( opted by the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors at a regular meeting held on March 2,
1494.
{2J. Ii /1/ Ca/lc>y
Clerk, Board of County SuJ;#visors
David p, Be rman
Charlottesv 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
Rivanna
Charlotte y, H mphris
Jack Joue
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Mar hall, Jr.
Scottsville
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 25, 1994
. Mitchell Neuman
C airman
A bemarle/Charlottesville Jail Board
1 00 Avon Street Extended
C arlottesville, VA 22901
At its meeting on March 2, 1994, the Board of Supervisors adopted the attached
R solution to authorize consideration of agreements required to create a Jail Authority.
If further information is needed, please contact me.
Sincerely,
W k! (CVUY/(
Ella W. Carey {j
Clerk, CMC
E C/jng
"
*
Printed on recycled paper
( . , '
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
February 25, 1994
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Albemarle/Charlottesville Joint security Complex
A tached is a letter from Mr. Mitchell Neuman, Chairman of the
A bemarle/Charlottesville Jail Board advising the Board of
S pervisors and City Council of a recent vote by the Jail Board to
r quest the County and City governing bodies to take action to
c eate a Regional Jail Authority. This request was submitted after
o r packets were distributed and, therefore, is being submitt:ed as
a addendum to your March 2nd agenda.
M . Neuman's letter explains the basis for the Jail Board's action
a d the advantages of a Regional Jail Authority over that of our
c rrent structure. Ms. Humphris, as our representative on the Jail
Bard, may wish to elaborate on the letter, however, if further
a alysis is deemed necessary by the Board, staff will develop that
i formation for you as expeditiously as possible. If the attached
i formation, along with Ms, Humphris' comments are adequate to move
f rward with a non-binding resolution for the creation of a Jail
A thority, you can take that action at your March 2nd meeting or a
s bsequent meeting. A draft r~solution is attached for your
i formation.
S ould you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not
h sitate to contact me.
T,Jr/dbm
.033
tachment
.....
, I I '
~\\LE . CHARLOTTESVltL
,,\.1?>t.ll St.CURITY COl\fPL.F:X ~ J01Jv'l'
1600 AVON STREET EXTENDED
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22901 "..'... i,,;'
PHONE {8041977-6981
February 15, 1994 FEB 25 \994
~,
~, ':>0:
~. ~
E,._~: j'.;J t.; "~ : -.'--i: ~)r ~:"";- i ~~'E
Be rd of supervisors
Al emarle County
ci
ci
council
of Charlottesville
De r Members of Board and Council:
This letter is to inform the Board of Supervisors and City
Co ncil that the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board
vo ed at its February meeting to request that the governing
bo ies take action to create a Regional Jail Authority to operate
th Joint Security Complex and to plan for expansion of such
fa ility or the construction of a new jail.
Prior to 1990, the only option for localities was to operate
ional jails through a Regional Jail Board. In that year, the
Ge eral Assembly enacted Article 3.1 of Title 53.1 (Sections
53.1-95.2 et. seq. Code of Virginia) authorizing the creation of
Re ional Jail Authorities.
The primary reason fer the legislation was to allow an
hority to issue revenue bonds for the construction of a new
ility or the expansion of an existing facility without the
d for a referendum in the participating county and without the
ds being a general obligation debt of either the participating
or county.
In addition, the creation of an Authority legally separates
operation of the Jail from the city and county for purposes
liability. The only liability is on the Authority, which
iously is limited to Authority assets.
While the legal creation of the Authority is relatively
Ie, involving a resolution of both the Board of Supervisors
, .
Bard of Supervisors
c'ty council
F bruary 3, 1994
P ge Two
Since the localities will be paying a per diem set by the
thority, the issue of control is important. While the
thority is a separate political subdivision, the Board of
pervisors and City Council can continue to exercise control in
t 0 ways. The first is in the selection of Authority members,
s'nce the Board of the Authority is selected by the governing
b dies and can include members of the governing body or city and
c unty administrations. Second, the provisions of the Service
A reement can, for example, provide that any construction
c ntract for a new facility or expansion be subject to approval
b both governing bodies, or that any debt be approved by a 2/3
m jority of the Authority Board.
d City Council, there then must be a Service Agreement which is
opted by both bodies and the Authority outlining the obligation
the County and City to send prisoners to the Regional Jail at
per diem fee set by the Authority Board, and a corresponding
ligation of the Authority to house all prisoners from the City
d County. While these may be two separate actions, the Jail
ard would recommend that they be combined into one document
th creating the Authority and setting forth the provisions of
e Service Agreement. In this way, all parties will know the
ecific provisions of the Service Agreement prior to actually
eating the Authority.
The creation of an Authority is timely because the Regional
il Board feels that the need for a new regional jail facility
significant expansion of the present Joint Security Complex is
itical within the next five years. While the Jail Board feels
at the administration of the Joint Security Complex operates
e existing facility in a very professional manner, there simply
too much pressure from the criminal justice system to continue
operate the present facility effectively. One of the benefits
the Regional Jail Authority legislation is that it allows the
neral Assembly to reimburse its 50% regional construction
imbursement over a period of years equal to the long-term
nstruction financing authorized for localities. This will
low more regional projects to be funded, since the old system
paying the 50% in two payments would have made it impossible
r the state to fund all of the regional jail projects that have
en proposed across the state.
If the Board of Supervisors and City Council agree to begin
t e process of forming an Authority, the Jail Board would ask
t at resolutions be adopted to that effect. Such action is not
b'nding on the localities. The Jail Board has asked Bill Hefty,
, ,
ard of Supervisors
City Council
P ge Three
o is a Richmond Attorney currently representing 5 other
gional jail boards and jail authorities in Virginia, to begin
rk (following the adoption of the resolutions) on the draft of
Agreement creating the Regional Jail Authority and outlining
e provisions of the Service Agreement. It is anticipated that
draft Agreement would be presented to both governing bodies in
ril for approval by July 1.
The Jail Board would be willing to meet with either the
ard of Supervisors or City Council to discuss this issue
rther.
Very truly yours,
1//,/ , ;'
1,{/Jvf~{Jv( [;,/ .kt/t4(~
, I
M1tchell Neuman
Chairman
c: Mr. Cole Hendricks
Mr. Robert Tucker
W. Clyde Gouldman, II, Esquire
Larry W. Davis, Esquire
Jail Board Members
, .
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE CONSIDERATION OF
AGREEMENTS REQUIRED TO CREATE A JAIL AUTHORITY
W EREAS, the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board voted at
its February, 1994 meeting to request the govE!rning
bodies of the County of Albemarle and the City of
Charlottesville to take action to create a Regional Jail
Authority (hereafter "Authority") to operate the Joint
Security Complex and to plan for the expansion of such
facility or the construction of a new facility; and
W EREAS, the creation of an Authority requires the County and the
City to enter into an Agreement creating the Authority
and a Service Agreement outlining the obligations of the
County and the City including, among other things,
sending prisoners to the Joint Security Complex; and
W EREAS, the County desires to formally consider the creation of an
Authority by reviewing drafts of the agreements,
referenced above.
N W, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, agrees to consider the
formation of a Regional Jail Authority in cooperation
. .
with the City of Charlottesville and requests that a
draft agreement to create such an Authority, and a draft
Service Agreement outlining the obligations of the County
and the City to such an Authority, be prepared by a
representative of the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional
Jail Board.
B ~ IT FURTHER RESOLVED, HOWEVER, that the adoption of this
Resolution does not bind the County to agree to the
creation of the Authority, such decision being explicitly
reserved for consideration by the Board upon presentation
and full consideration of the referenced agreements,
U D / dbm
9-1 .007
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
Board of Supervisors
Ella W. Carey f!lO [-
February 23, 1994
Applications received for Boards & Commissions
E:
lbemarle Coun
Professional Affiliation
.
.
.
.
Walter A. Pace, Jr. (W.A.)
Nicholas E. Munger
Janice L. Frye
Beverly Dee Terrell
Banker
Attorney
Consumer
Health CareIPreviously
employed by CHRA
Attorney
Developer
Architect
Builder
Community Program Specialist
for MACAA
. Modernization & Handicapped
Accessibility Coordinator
for CRHA
Real Estate Broker
Executive Director, CHF
.
.
.
.
.
Leigh B. Middleditch, Jr.
Steve Runkle
Vito Cetta
John (Jack) L. Sadler
Peggy S. Kidd
.
Shirley L. Baldwin
.
.
Ronald Hancock
Forrest D. Kerns
he Albemarle Housing Coalition has recommended that Ms, Jenny Greenwood be the
d signated representative on this Committee. (Copy of letter enclosed with applications.)
he Charlottesville Housing Foundation has recommended that Karen V. Lilleleht be the
d signated representative on this Committee. (Copy of letter enclosed with applications,)
he Albemarle Housing Improvement Program has recommended that Mr, Howard Allen
b the designated representative on this Committee. (Copy of letter enclosed with
a plications,)
(itizens Advisorv Committee to advise MPO durin!! the Uodate of CATS 1995-2015
(lrhe following applications have been received thus far, the application deadline is February 28,
I ~94, and all additional applications received will be forwarded to the Board at its March 2, 1994
n eeting.)
. Frederic F. Catlin
. Walter F. Johnson
. John F. Marshall
. Kenneth C. Boyd
. Donald J. Wagner
. Susan Elizabeth Thomas
E WC/jng
]~ACT SHEET
]~OUSING COMMITTEE
!Duties/Function:
The Housing Committee provides advice and guidance to the Board
of Supervisors on housing issues in furtherance of the County's
goal to promote a variety of safe, sanitary and affordable housing
types for Albemarle County residents of all income groups. Staff
support is provided by the Housing Coordinator.
I ength of Term:
Initially, one-third of the membership shall be appointed for three
years, one-third for two years and one-third for one year. All
subsequent appointments shall be for a three year term with a limit
of two consecutive terms. All terms, with the exception of the first
year, shall begin on January 1.
f1requency /T imes
fil>r Meetings:
This is a newly created Committee. The
initial meeting shall be called by the Housing Coordinator. The
Committee will establish regular meeting dates and times with no
less than four meetings annually.
l\~embershi p:
The Board of Supervisors shall appoint nme members to the
Housing Committee. The Committee should include
representation from the following areas or organizations:
Real Estate
Construction/Development
Financial Community
Legal Community
Consumer
Housing Coalition
Charlottesville Housing Foundation
Albemarle Housing Improvement Program
Property Management
C ualifications:
A willingness to attend meetings and actively participate; a
demonstrated interest in and knowledge of affordable housing
issues in Albemarle County; expertise and/or experience in
representing constituent concerns; an ability to work in
collaboration with others; and an interest in community service.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
l ~ , .,....
ir \:<_d: _~~g f5,,~1.'-f
_9:1 . ~ ?Pd)~ 5
I\fi -,,".
~ ,-'Cild..~ ;,
" .
MEMORANDUM
Board of Supervisors
Ella w. carey~~L~
February 23, 1994
Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions
itizens Advisor Committee for CATS U date: Two vacancies. One
acancy is to be filled by a member of the Planning Commission and
another is to be a citizen. This vacancy has been advertisE~d and
the deadline for applications is February 28, 1994. All
a plications received thus far are attached and additional
a plications received will be forwarded to the Board at its March
2, 1994 meeting,
One vacancy. Mr. Harold
are two interveiws
The term for this
Committee: Nine vacancies, Three vacancies will be agency
minees to be appointed by the Board, The remaining six vacancies
will be public appointments. Attached, for your information, is a
ct sheet which summarizes the Housing Committee functions and
mposition, The applications for these appointments are also
tached.
Intersection Stud Plannin Advisor Committee: Four
cancies. The MPO has approved the formation of a committee to
vise VDoT during the location and design study of the Route 29
ade-separated interchanges. It is requested that the Board
point a planning commissioner, a resident living near the Rio or
eenbrier intersections, a business owner in or near the study
a ea and the Director of Planning.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
Board of Supervisors
Ella W. Carey ~
March 1, 1994
E:
Applications received for Boards & Commissions
The following applications were recelved by this office for the Citizens Advisory
ommittee to advise MPO during the Update of CATS 1995-2015 after Board packets were
d stributed:
Henry Weinschenk
Mitchell E. Neuman
Felice Boling-Key
The following applications of County residents who applied but were not selected by the
PO for service on the Citizens Advisory Committee for the Update of CATS 1995-2015 and
h ve requested consideration by the County for the Albemarle citizen representative position:
Susan E. Thomas
Peggy Beattie
Thomas C. Jorgensen
R. L. Kelsey
Lincoln M. Young
Julie Garroel
Donald 1. Wagner
Mark Edward Watson
James Hamrick
Henry Weinschenk
E C/jng
- - ---
Interviews
Tir ne Name Board or Commission
1 :( 0 Jack Baskins Community College Board of Directors
1 : 1 0 William Finley Community College Board of Directors
I
I
I
MOTION: Mr. Bower.man
SECOND: Mrs. Humphris
MEETING DATE: March 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 and 2.1-344,A.3 of the Code
of Virginia requires a certification by the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors that such executive meeting was
conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors hereby certifies 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: Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr.
Bower.man and Mrs. Humphris.
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.
David P. Bow rman
Charlottesv! Ie
Charlotte y, H mphris
Jilek Jouet
Forrest R. Mar hall, Jr
SC01Is\"lle
..
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972406()
March 9, 1994
T e Honorable Betsy Davis Beamer
Se retary of the Commonwealth
p, ,Box 2454
Ri hmond, VA 23201-2454
At its meeting on March 2, 1994, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County unanimously
re ommended the following persons be reappointed to the following Scenic Rm:r Advisory Boards:
Moormans Scenic River Advisory Board
James R, Butler
John F, Marshall, Ph,D,
Charles W, Maupin, Jr.
Harriet Mohler
Rockfish State Scenic River Advisory Board
Joel D, Artman
T. Peyton Coyner
Jay Graves
R, King Pace
Philippa Proulx
Rivanna Scenic River Advisory Board
Francis H, Fife
Charles S, Martin
Jean B, Murray
If further information is needed, you may contact this office at (804) 296-5843,
Sincerely,
{tI~ Id (!l'a~t:1
~;a W, Carey (J
Clerk, CMC
E C/jng
*
Printed on recycled paper
Charles S, Martin
R ivanna
Walter F, Perkins
While Hall
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Office of the Governor
George All n
Governor
Betsy Davis Beamer
Secretary of the Commonwealth
.-
All Interested Parties
OM: A, Archer Payne
Gubernatorial Appointments to State Scenic River Advisory Boards
February 22, 1994
Pursuant to section 10.4-406 of the Code of Virginia the Governor appoints members to the
fi Howing scenic rivers: Appomattox, Catoctin Creek, Chickahominy, Clinch, Goose Creek, Guest, Falls
o the James, Moormans, North Landing, Nottoway, Rappahannock, Rockfish, Rivanna, Shenandoah,
Staunton,
The Code specifies that recommendations for appointments be solicited from boards of
s pervisors, town councils, and city councils, Enclosed, for your review, is a copy of the Code cite
r lating to the scenic river board within your jurisdiction and a current listing of the membership. The
vernor would appreciate receiving any recommendations that you care to submit no later than
prill, 1994.
Recommendations should be forwarded to the attention of:
The Honorable Betsy Davis Beamer
Secretary of the Commonwealth
Post Office Box 2454
Richmond, Virginia 23201-2454
If you have any questions do not to hesitate to contact me at (804) 786-2441.
P.O. Box 2454 · Richmond, Virginia 23201-2454 · (804) 786-2441 . TDD (804) 371-8599
Moormans Scenic River Advisory Board N0042 , 158
VACANT(Landess, R: 11-10-93)
90-W James R. Butler, Gordonsvi I Ie
MIB
90-W John F. Marshal I, Ph.D., Charlottesvi I Ie
M/C
90-W Charles W. Maupin, Jr" Crozet
MIB
90-W Harriett Mohler, Charlottesvi I Ie
F/C
pleasure of the Governor
07 pleasure of the Governor
07 pleasure of the Governor
07 pleasure of the Gove rno r
07 pleasure of the Governor
,.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA---
,
-. ~',,,--,,,,--,,,. ---..........,_......_,~ .~-.~,.- _ .....'
Office of the Governor
George All n
Governor
Betsy Davis Beamer
Secretary of the Commonwealth
All Interested Parties
OM: A, Archer Payne
Gubernatorial Appointments to State Scenic River Advisory Boards
February 22, 1994
Pursuant to section 10.4-406 of the Code of Virginia the Governor appoints members to the
fi llowing scenic rivers: Appomattox, Catoctin Creek, Chickahominy, Clinch, Goose Creek, Guest, Falls
o the James, Moormans, North Landing, Nottoway, Rappahannock, Rockfish, Rivanna, Shenandoah,
d Staunton,
The Code specifies that recommendations for appointments be solicited from boards of
s pervisors, town councils, and city councils, Enclosed, for your review, is a copy of the Code cite
r lating to the scenic river board within your jurisdiction and a current listing of the membership, The
vernor would appreciate receiving any recommendations that you care to submit no later than
rill, 1994.
Recommendations should be forwarded to the attention of:
The Honorable Betsy Davis Beamer
Secretary of the Commonwealth
Post Office Box 2454
Richmond, Virginia 23201-2454
If you have any questions do not to hesitate to contact me at (804) 786-2441.
P.O, Box 2454 · Richmond, Virginia 23201-2454 . (804) 786-2441 . TDD (804) 371-8599
. I
I
~ 10.1-402, Development of water and related resources and evalua-
tion as scenic resource. - The Department or administering agency may
review and make recommendations regarding all planning for the use and
development of water and related land resources including the construction of
impoundments, diversions, roadways, crossings, channels, locks, canals, or
other uses which change the character of a stream or waterway or destroy its
scenic values, so that full consideration and evaluation of the river as a scenic
resource will be given before alternative plans for use and development are
approved. To effectuate the purposes of this section, all state and local agencies
shall consider the recommendations of the Department or administering
agency. (1970, c. 468, ~ 10-167; 1988, c. 891.) .
~ 10.1-403. Hearing, - Prior to submitting recommendations to the Gov-
ernor and the General Assembly, the Director shall upon request of any
interested state agency or political subdivision, or upon his own motion, hold
a public hearing on a proposal to designate a scenic river. (1970, c. 468,
~ 10-172; 1984, c. 739; 1985, c. 346; 1988, c. 891.)
~ 10.1-404. Recommendation that a river be designated a scenic river..
- A recommendation to the Governor and General Assembly that a river or
section thereof be designated a scenic river shall be submitted with:
L The views and recommendations of the State Water Control Board and
other affected agencies; and
2. A report showing the proposed area and classification, the characteristics I
which qualify the river or section of river for designation, the general,
ownership and land use in the area, and the estimated costs of acquisition andi
administration in the Scenic Rivers System. (1970, c. 468, ~ 10-171; 1984, cc.
739, 750; 1988, c. 891.)
~ 10,1-405, Duties of administering agency; eminent domain prohib-
ited, - A. The agency designated by the General Assembly shall:
L Administer the scenic river or section thereof to preserve and protect its
natural beauty and to assure its use and enjoyment for its scenic, recreational,
geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other values and to encourage:
the continuance of existing agricultural, horticultural, forestry and open space
land and water uses.
2. Periodically survey the scenic river and its immediate environs and
monitor all existing and proposed uses of the scenic river and related land
resources.
3. Assist local governments in solving problems associated with the scenic
river, in consultation with the Director and the Advisory Board.
B. The administering agency shall not exercise the right of eminent domain
to acquire any real property or interest therein for the purpose of providing
additional access to the river. Nothing in this subsection shall limit or modify
any powers granted otherwise to any locality. (1970, c. 468, ~9 10-167,10-173;,
1988, c. 891.)
~ 10.1-406. Advisory Board. - A. Except as provided in 9 10.1-412, when
the General Assembly acts to include a river or section of river in the Scenic
Rivers System, the Governor shall appoint an Advisory Board of residents
including at least one riparian landowner, in the locality or localities of th
scenic river or river section and other qualified persons. The Advisory Boar(
222
~ 10.1-407
CONSERVATION
~ 10.1-410
shall elect a chairman from among its members. Members of the Advisory
Committee shall serve at the pleasure of the Governor and receive no
compensation,
B. The Advisory Board shall assist and advise the Director and the admin-
istering agency concerning the protection or management of the scenic river.
The Advisory Board may consider and comment on any federal, state or local
governmental plans to approve, license, fund or construct facilities which
would alter the natural, scenic or historic assets which qualified the river for
scenic designation. (1970, c. 463, ~ 10-170; 1984, c. 739; 1985, c. 346; 1988, c.
891.)
g 10.1-415.1
g
CODE OF VIRGINIA
E. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the continued oper ainte-,
nance, alteration, expansion, or destruction of the Embre Its appur-~
tenances by the City of Fredericksburg, including th CO canal and'
the existing City Reservoir behind the Embrey D any other part of the
City's waterworks. h
F. Nothing in this chapter shall preclu e Commonwealth, the City of'
Fredericksburg, or the Counties of St , Spotsylvania, or Culpeper from.
constructing or reconstructing a or bridge or from constructing any .'~
new raw water intake struc aevices, including pipes and reservoirs but
not dams, or laying wate er lines below water level. . J\
G. Nothing in thO r shall preclude the construction, operation, iij'
repair, maintena p acement of the natural gas pipeline, case number:
PUE 860065 lch the State Corporation Commission has issued a:'l'
~:8'~?~ate . 2~~.)onvenience and nece"ily. (1985, c. 124, i 10.173.8; 198~:1
g 10,1-415,1. Rockfish State Scenic River; Departme*t of Conserva::i;
tion and Recreation designated to administer, - A. The Rockfish River in ~
Albemarle and Nelson Counties from the Route 693 bridge in Schuyler to its ~4t
confluence with the James River, a distanc.e of approximately 9.75 miles, iSI.....1iilf...".'.'
hereby designated a component of the Virginia Scenic Rivers System. ~".
B. The Department of Conservation and Recreation is designated to admin-:
ister the Rockfish State Scenic River in accordance with this section. <,
C. The Gt>vernor, in consultation with the Director and the Nelson County;'1
and Albemarle County Boards of Supervisors, shall appoint the Rockfish State ....~
Scenic River Advisory Board, which shall be composed of five area residents, ",:~,
including at least one riparian landowner, from within the designated section. .....1"..'...'.
D. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the Commonwealth or local, '.
governing body from constructing or reconstructing any road or bridge. (1990,'
cc. 381, 422.)""
*'"
g 10,1-416, Rivanna State Scenic River; Fluvanna Co 19nated ;
to administer, - A. The river, stream or waterway kno' e Rivanna .;
from the base of the dam of the woolen mills in the Cit arlottesville to .;'
the junction of the Rivanna with the James River, ad' bfapproximately A
thirty-seven miles, is hereby designated the Riva nic River, a compo- J;
nent of the Virginia Scenic Rivers System. ~'iI"
B. The Department is designated to admi ' e Rivanna State Scenic~;
R~~ ~
C. The Gt>vernor, in consultation wit irector and the Counties of 4;
Albemarle and Fluvanna, shall appoi Rivanna Scenic River Advisory 'l.
Board, which shall be composed of se ea residents, including at least one .~
riparian landowner, from within ignated section."
D. No dam or other structure' mg the natural flow of the river shall be
constructed, operated, or mai unless specifically authorized by an act of
the General Assembly. (19 39, ~ 10-173.1; 1988, cc. 20, 299, 891.)
g 10,1-417, Shen State Scenic River; Department of Game and
Inland Fisheries ated to administer, - A. The Shenandoah River in
Clarke County e Warren-Clarke County line to the Virginia line, a
distance of app ately 21.6 miles, is hereby designated a component of the
Virginia Scenic, Ivers System.
B. The De' ment of Game and Inland Fisheries is designated to admin-
ister the S andoah State Scenic River.
C. Th~(}6vernor shall appoint the Shenandoah State Scenic River Advisory
Board.rJ.:he Director shall make recommendations to the Governor after
228
Rock fish State Scenic River Advisory Board N0051 , 473
92-W Joel D. Artman, Charlottesvi lie
M/C
92-W T. Peyton Coyner, Afton
M/C
92-W Jay Graves, Crozet
M/C
92-W R. King Pace, Charlottesvi I Ie
M/C
92-W Phi lippa Proulx, Afton
F/C
pleasure of the Governor
pleasure of the Governor
pleasure of the Governor
pleasure of the Governor
pleasure of the Governor
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Office of the Governor
George Al en
Govemo
Betsy Davis Beamer
Secretary cf the Commonwealth
All Interested Parties
OM: A, Archer Payne
Gubernatorial Ap1>ointments to State Scenic River Advisory Boards
February 22, 1994
Pursuant to section 10.4-406 of the Code of Virginia the Governor appoints members to the
~ llowing scenic rivers: Appomattox, Catoctin Creek, Chickahominy, Clinch, Goose Creek, Guest, Falls
o the James, Moormans, North Landing, Nottoway, Rappahannock, Rockfish, Rivanna, Shenandoah,
d Staunton,
The Code specifies that recommendations for appointments be solicited from boards of
s pervisors, town councils, and city councils. Enclosed, for your review, is a copy of the Code cite
rating to the scenic river board within your jurisdiction and a current listing of the membership. The
vernor would appreciate receiving any recommendations that you care to submit no later than
A rill, 1994.
Recommendations should be forwarded to the attention of:
The Honorable Betsy Davis Beamer
Secretary of the Commonwealth
Post Office Box 2454
Richmond, Virginia 23201-2454
If you have any questions do not to hesitate to contact me at (804) 786-2441.
P,O. Box 2454 · Richmond, Virginia 23201-2454 . (804) 786-2441 . TOO (804) 371-8599
. I
I
~ 10.1-402. Development of water and related resources and evalua-
tion as scenic resource. - The Department or administering agency may
review and make recommendations regarding all planning for the use and
development of water and related land resources including the construction of
impoundments, diversions, roadways, crossings, channels, locks, canals, or
other uses which change the character of a stream or waterway or destroy its
scenic values, so that full consideration and evaluation of the river as a scenic
resource will be given before alternative plans for use and development are
approved. To effectuate the purposes of this section, all state and local agencies
shall consider the recommendations of the Department or administering
agency. (1970, c. 468, ~ 10-167; 1988, c. 891.) ,
~ 10.1-403, Hearing, - Prior to submitting recommendations to the ~v-
ernor and the General Assembly, the Director shall upon request of any
interested state agency or political subdivision, or upon his own motion, hold
a public hearing on a proposal to designate a scenic river. (1970, c. 468,
~ 10-172; 1984, c. 739; 1985, c. 346; 1988, c. 891.)
~ 10.1-404. Recommendation that a river be designated a scenic river..
- A recommendation to the ~vernor and General Assembly that a river orl
section thereof be designated a scenic river shall be submitted with:
1. The views and recommendations of the State Water Control Board and I
other affected agencies; and
2. A report showing the proposed area and classification, the characteristics:
which qualify the river or section of river for designation, the general'
ownership and land use in the area, and the estimated costs of acquisition and;
administration in the Scenic Rivers System. (1970, c. 468, ~ 10-171; 1984, cc.
739,750; 1988, c. 89U
~ 10,1-405, Duties of administering agency; eminent domain prohib-
ited, - A. The agency designated by the General Assembly shall: i
1. Administer the scenic river or section thereof to preserve and protect its
natural beauty and to assure its use and enjoyment for its scenic, recreational,
geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural or other values and to encourage
the continuance of existing agricultural, horticultural, forestry and open space!
land and water uses.
2. Periodically survey the scenic river and its immediate environs and
monitor all existing and proposed uses of the scenic river and related land
resources.
3. Assist local governments in solving problems associated with the scenic
river, in consultation with the Director and the Advisory Board.
B. The administering agency shall not exercise the right of eminent domain
to acquire any real property or interest therein for the purpose of providing
additional access to the river. Nothing in this subsection shall limit or modify
any powers granted otherwise to any locality. (1970, c. 468, ~9 10-167,10-173;,
1988, c. 891.)
~ 10.1-406. AdvisoryBoard.-A. Exceptasprovidedin~ 1O.1-412,when
t~e General Assembly acts to include a river or section of river in the Scenic
Rivers System, the Governor shall appoint an Advisory Board of residentsl
including at least one riparian landowner, in the locality or localities of thE
scenic river or river section and other qualified persons. The Advisory Boare
222
9 10.1-407
CONSERVATION
9 10.1-410
shall elect a chairman from among its members. Members of the Advisory
Committee shall serve at the pleasure of the ~vernor and receive no
compensation.
B. The Advisory Board shall assist and advise the Director and the admin-
istering agency concerning the protection or management of the scenic river.
The Advisory Board may consider and comment on any federal, state or local
governmental plans to approve, license, fund or construct facilities which
would alter the natural, scenic or historic assets which qualified the river for
scenic designation. (1970, c. 463, 9 10-170; 1984, c. 739; 1985, c. 346; 1988, c.
891.)
~ 10.1-415.1
CODE OF VIRGINIA
E. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude the contin eration, main~
nance, alteration, expansion, or destruction of the E am or its appur~,
tenances by the City of Fredericksburg, including t VEPCO canal and>
the existing City Reservoir behind the Embrey D any other part of the,
City's waterworks. ;,t
F. Nothing in this chapter shall preclude t mmonwealth, the City 0'
Fredericksburg, or the Counties of Stafford ylvania, or Culpeper from.~
constructing or reconstructing any road 0 ge or from constructing any
new raw water intake structures or devic luding pipes and reservoirs bu
not dams, or laying water or sewer lin ow water level.'" '.
G. Nothing in this chapter sha ude the construction, operation~
repair, maintenance, or replaceme e natural gas pipeline, case numbe
PUE 860065, for which the S rporation Commission has issued a
certificate of public convenien ecessity. (1985, c. 124, ~ 10-173.8; 1988
c. 891; 1990, c. 225.) .
~ 10,1-415,1. Rockfis Scenic River; Department of Conserva-,
tion and Recreation d ted to administer, - A. The Rockfish River in
Albemarle and Nelson ies from the Route 693 bridge in Schuyler to its
confluence with the J River, a distance of approximately 9.75 miles, is',
hereby designated a onent of the Virginia Scenic Rivers System. '.:
B. The Departm Conservation and Recreation is designated to admiri
ister the Rockfis e Scenic River in accordance with this section.~..
C. The Gove In consultation with the Director and the Nelson County
and Albemarl nty Boards of Supervisors, shall appoint the Rockfish State '
Scenic River. isory Board, which shall be composed of five area residents,
including st one riparian landowner, from within the designated section:'
D. Not in this chapter shall preclude the Commonwealth or local'
governi .. Ody from constructing or reconstructing any road or bridge. (1990, :
cc. 381, 4 2.) '\i
At
~ 10,1-416, Rivanna State Scenic River; Fluvanna COlfnty designatedl"'~
to administer. - A, The river, stream or waterway known as the Rivanna ' , '
from the base of the dam of the woolen mills in the City of Charlottesville to":
the junction of the Rivanna with the James River, a distance of approximately '#
thirty-seven miles, is hereby designated the Rivanna Scenic River, a compo- ,it
nent of the Virginia Scenic Rivers System. ~
B. The Department is designated to administer the Rivanna State Scenic '/"
River. j;
C. The Governor, in consultation with the Director and the Counties of j
Albemarle and Fluvanna, shall appoint the Rivanna Scenic River Advisory',
Board, which shall be composed of seven area residents, including at least one .-i
riparian landowner, from within the designated section.'"
D. No dam or other structure impeding the natural flow of the river shall be
constructed, operated, or maintained unless specifically authorized by an act of
the General Assembly. (1984, c. 739, 9 10-173.1; 1988, cc. , 891.)
~ 10,1-417, Shenandoah State Scenic Riv
Inland Fisheries designated to admini
Clarke County from the Warren-Cl
distance of approximately 21.6 m'
Virginia Scenic Rivers Sys
B. The Department and Inland Fisheries is designated to admin-
ister the Shenand / Scenic River. .
C. The Gov' all appoint the Shenandoah State Scenic River Advisory
Board. Th ctor shall make recommendations to the Governor after
ent of Game and
. e Shenandoah River in
y line to the Virginia line, a
reby designated a component of the
228
. ,
R vanna Scenic River Advisorv Board N0018 202
9 -w
F B
9 -w
M C
9~-W
M B
9'-W
FIIC
9D-W
FIIC
9~-W
F/C
9~-W
M/C
Bertha K. Armstrong, Fork Union
05 pleasure of the Governor
Francis H. Fife, Charlottesville
07 pleasure of the Governor
Charles S. Martin. Charlottesville
07 pleasure of the Governor
Minnie M, McGehee, Palmyra
05 pleasure of the Governor
Jean B, Murray. Earlysville
07 pleasure of the Governor
Grace Lindsay Nolting. Columbia
05 pleasure of the Governor
J, Stephen Pence, Palmyra
05 pleasure of the Governor
(- '
, ~.'.-.......
DaV1d p, Bo nnan
-...-' ;; j
...I l.~l
Scottsl.nl!e
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
Charlot lesv lie
Rivanna
Charlotte y, H mphns
JclCk. JOUl'l1
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R, MaL halt. J,
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 9, 1994
, Dennis Rooker
1 00 Roslyn Ridge Road
C arlottesvillc. VA 22901
a1' Mr. ROOKlT
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Route 29 Intersection Study Planning Advisory Committee.
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.
Sincerely,
W~*~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
W P/jng
cc The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Nancy O'Brien
*
Pnnted on recycled paper
(-',
t;
'---, ''''',7
\ . .....
, ;
) f
I '
_.1 -1
~"
David P Bow
,Jdck ,I( 'I~,
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
ChcHlolk"
Rivanna
Charlotte Y H
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R M,l! "
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 9, I 994
Ms. Karen Tarantino
G 'l1cral Manager
h shion Square Mall
1 (On East Rio Road
Cl arlottcsville, VA 22901
D'ar \'ls, Tarantino:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994, you were appointed to
th' Routc 29 Intersection Study Planning Advisory Committee.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's
ap rcciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
Sincerely,
w CLl~ 7R~Lh~
Walter F, Perkins
Chairman
W'Pijng
cc The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Nancy O'Brien
*
Printed on recycled poper
~.
...
.
'....,j u.
David p, So rman
SCOllsvill
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902A596
(804) 296.5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jou It
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H, Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 9, 1 994
r. Walter A. Pace, Jr.
1 95 Pheasant Lane
C arlottesville, VA 22901
ar Mr. Pace:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994. you were appointed to
e Housing Committee, with term to expire December 31, 1996.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's
preciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
Sincerely,
W G-~ T l~hc.oM
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Lynne Carruth
*
Printed on recycled paper
.'
ission / Committee Albemarle Housing Committee
Applicant's Walter A. Pace, Jr. (W.A.) Home Phone 296-8581
Home Addr ss 1995 Pheasant Lane, Charlottesville, VA 22901
Magisterial istrict in which your home residence is located Jack J oue t t
Employer efferson Bankshares, Inc. Phone 972-1110
Business Ad ress 123 E. Main St., Charlottesville, VA 22901
DateofEmpoyment May 4,1950
Years Resid nt in Albemarle County
Spouse's N Jean
Education ( egrees and Graduation Dates)
Occupation / Title Banking
26 years Previous Residence
Winchester, Va.
Number of Children 2
Fluvanna County High School - 1949
of North Carolina Executive Pro ram - 1972
Presb terian Church
Public
Foundation Board member
more affordable housing in our community.
ion provided on this application w:!~e ~;~d to th~ ~~blic u~?n~~~u;.
)~~~~~c.--e>/~..-----
S. /
19nature
February 11, 1994
Date
Return to:
Clfrk, BQard of County Supervisors
A b~a.rle. Co!!nty,
01 clntIr l{
~har ottesvi~le, ~i 22902-4596
.;
j ,-/ ~
,
---.....,
,
liD (~Lr d
David P. So nnan
Scoltsville
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22902459h
(804) 2965843 FAX (804) 972 .j(it)()
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 9, 1994
s. Karen V. Lilleleht
R ute 16, Box 374
C arlottesville, VA 22901
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2. 1994, you were appointed to
Housing Committee, with term to expire December 31. 1995.
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 ru1t::t ,} (~~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
FP/jng
cc: The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Lynne Carruth
*
Printed on recycled paper
-.
~
C
H
F
February 22, 1994
Lynne Carruth, Housing Co-ordinator
County of Albemarle
Office of the Executive Director
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Lynne,
At the Charlottesville Housing Foundation's Board of Directors meeting
held on January 19, 1994, Karen V. Lilleleht was nominated to be CHF's
representative to the Albemarle Housing Advisory Committee.
If you have any questions please call me at the CHF office - 979-0967.
Sincerely,
~e~
George E. Loper
President
;, .,' \: f. I' '. t ) , L. fA
;';"'"
'$
~j
FEB 23 1994
", -
'.'
~;
~.-!
'Y1l".' k. "~"~~;:r'~7=~ q
100 Court Square Annex, Suite E . Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 . 804/979-0967
4'-'
Decid P. Bow nnan
Charlottesvil
Charlotte Y. H mphns
,lack Jouett
Forrest R. Mars all, Jr
SCO!!5~illp
..,
.,.
M . Howard Allen
10 Wakefield Court
C arlottesville, VA 22901
D ar Mr. Allen:
~) \~~') U /' U
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
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel MiIler
March 9, 1994
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Housing Committee, with term to expire December 31, 1994.
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,
W~~~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
cc: The Honorable James L. Carnblos, III
Lynne Carruth
*
Printed on recycled paper
..-
,
AHIP
Albemarle Housing hnprovement Program
700 Harris Street, Suite 101 . Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 . (804) 293-5708
February 17, 1994
s. Lynne Carruth, Housing Coordinator
01 McIntire Rd.
harlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
ear Ms. Carruth,
At the February 16, 1994 meeting the AHIP Board of Directors
ppointed Mr. Howard Allen as its representative on the Albemarle
ounty Housing Committee. Mr. Allen, a retired U.Va. faculty
ember, has served on the AHIP board since September 1992. He
as been a real asset to the AHIP board, as we're sure he will be
o the Housing Committee.
The AHIP Board is quite varied in its expertise; each member
aving something unique to contribute. It is for that reason the
oard has asked me to point out that another highly qualified
ndividual from the Board has applied to serve on the committee.
Mr. Vito Cetta is a semi-retired architect and real estate
eveloper. He has worked with the Monticello Area Community
ction Agency on projects as well as with AHIP. The Board feels
hat Mr. Cetta's technical skills combined with his social
onscience make him an excellent choice for the Housing
ommittee.
As AHIP's Executive Director, I have found both Mr. Allen
nd Mr. Cetta to be outstanding Board members. The County would
e very lucky to have both of these gentlemen on its Housing
ommittee.
Sincerely,
~~~
Theresa L. Tapscott
AHIP Executive Director
For the AHIP Board of Directors
FEB 23 1994
:;,
",."
"'..
t'-' rl'"
'.
David P. Bo nnan
Chdrloltes i11e
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S Mdt!tn
Rll.d!1'. .
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jdck .Joup t
Walter F Perkl!l~
\"Vh,t. i I.
Forrest R. Mar hall, Jr.
Scotlsvill
Sally H '11""",,,
March 9, 1994
r. Ronald Hancock
R ute 2, Box 93-A
C ozet, VA 22932
ar Mr. Hancock:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994, you were appointed to
e Housing Committee, with term to expire December 31, 1995.
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~+P~~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
FP/jng
The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Lynne Carruth
*
Printed on recycled paper
~"{~ OF
VOV
....,.-cc:.-;'. ".__'"'''''''_''''~'''''''''_' """'"',.....,..,..:....,_~..
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
'_..",".-_..."'-,',......._."".;,;'...~-"......
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22901
APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE
(Please type or print)
Corrunission/Corrunittee A j~e/1I.q./{(( #0 ~J /k r e().nr1r'IfC~
1(0 /vA lei II-AHc 0 elf-
ddress J2 f- -). J5,:)~ 9 J - A c It cz.. c I- t/A.;J..:l 7> J ,;l..
erial District in which your home residence is located Nl.. it' hA-l/
ss Address ~/O c"'~ JC F;:::Ce:tI ,'/Y: r!-. Phone -2. 9J -r/o ~
er e Lv ,left /2C/<L /17 e., - Occupation/Title %/f1J ~C/<
(
9'- yo - 7;2.
v
ant's Name
Home
Spouse's Name
#A-K/"e
.AI. C~-
:; j, -- Previous Residence A.;/?--,Y>'YC / 11.J;l1t:1
Number of Children L-0/( C;:,t <.d..AJ;U
//~ r~ kjG oJ (
./
Birthdate/Place
Date
f Employment
Years Resident of Albemarle County
ion (Degrees and Graduation Dates)
/yyy
,!-~(. (
/V. C_
Memberships in Fraternal, Business, Church and/or
A .tee H- .t: /01 / ~ ~ j "
-If -+ /V,/l-R
Lr
Charitable Offices and/or Other Activities or Interests
Reason(s) for Desire to Serve on This Board/Commission/Committee
~ ~ f /2.c c c> ('7 t'T ~ /'e J c (/ J "- Jc...y k" 7 &K ~r rY' W I,. '- ~~
. {'
ell Idt0r/( PA-Lf;~H J~,a I~,. #c.i/C 76 /~0 //7'/#dV(
h6 U [//1'i C'-'.H j, I-~ ~r~ I h /l to i..U /~"CC.,/7C ~rt {rc/
The information provided on this application will be released to the
public upon request.
g~4L~-
r SIGNATURE
9&
~~/j ,r-
DATE
Return to: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk of Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Phone: 2~6-5843
",
David P. Bo nnan
Charlottes ilk
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board 01 SUJX'rvisors
401 Mclntlll' HOdel
Charlottesville. V1r1llf11d 22902-4596
(804) 296.5843 F;\X (x04) 9724060
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. umphris
Jack Jou tt
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Forrest R. Mar hall, Jr.
Scollsvill
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 9. 1994
r. Forrest D. Kerns
2 4 Westminster Road
C arlottesville, VA 22901
ar Mr. Kerns:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Housing Committee, with term to expire December 31, 1994.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to takc this opportunity to express the Board's
a preciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity.
Sincerely,
JJctllu 7- ~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
FP/jng
cc: The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Lynne Carruth
*
Printed on recycled paper
\
County of Albemarle
Office of Board of County Supervisors
40 I McIntire Road
Charlottesville). VA 22902-4596
(804) .l96-5843
APPLICA TION TO SERVE ON BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMIITEE
(please type or print)
Committee US I n
or-rest:: J). Home Phone :195- </8.::f-9
Home Address tJ resin, . d. 4r//J t::.s~i//~ e2c:l.9 d I
MagisterialDi trict in which your home residence.is located 1a~i= ~tleft
Employer vi/Ie; uS/It: rolll'lda.-'1,OMJ Phone 9N- tJ '16.7-
Business Addr ss /00 Court Sg~re. t\J1n~x J Su;fe.., S {!I,.4rf,-tztespil/e. Wp..9~
DateofEmplo mentMat"dr ~ 1't'l:J- Occupation/Title E;(e/!u:tLV~ J),,-edor
Years Residen in Albemarle County c:l5 Previous Residence
Spouse's Nam 1O.f~e IJ t<e f'H..S Number of Children /
Education(De ees~'draduationDates)_~.S. i~ 13u..ilheSS ~rh/~".r-h-4..-hb~ /q63
ev.
provided on this apPlicat~~ ,b:, Z~~4e,puhliC upon request.
-:0 /Z{e / C 9f;.cAt:l ~
Signature
Febnurry /~ /1'1'1
Date
Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
Ibemarle County
4 ] McIntire Road
C arlottesville, VA 22902-4596
..I
,_.r "1.
Scottsvillf'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 2965843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Charles S. Martin
R ivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
March 9, 1 994
M . William A. Finley, Jr.
1 6 Harvest Drive
C arlottesville, V A 22903
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.
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on March 2, 1994, you were appointed to
Community College Board of Directors, with term to expire June 30, 1996.
Sincerely,
W c&tA. i-~
Walter F. Perkins
Chairman
P/jng
cc The Honorable James L. Camblos, III
Dr. Deborah DiCroce
*
Pnnted on recycled paper
;...
.
Board I Com
Applicant's N
Home Addres
County of Albemarle
C\ oy ALl1li',
i".."' _ 4-/
~. . iJ ~'?-
(jl' rp . [Il
~ '. j~"" ~
i.:", . ~~7.. ,.n
VI/(Gn-<\I'-
Office of Board of County Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville). VA 22902-4596
(804) ..::96-5843
APPLICA nON TO SERVE ON BOARD / COMMISSION / COMMITfEE
(please type or print)
ission / Committee Community College Board of Directors
William A. Finley, Jr.
Home Phone
804-971-9203
Magisterial D strict in which your home residence is located
Employer S err Marine Inc.
Business Add ss 1070 Seminole
126 Harvest Drive, Charlottesville, VA 22903
Jack Jouett
Date ofEmpl yment 06-01-59
Years Reside t in Albemarle County 4
Spouse's N Peg~y S. Finley
Education (D grees and Graduation Dates)
Technology, 1956.
Phone
Trail, Charlottesville, VA 22901
Occupation / Title Mgr., Plant .Engineering/Facilities/Security
Previous Residence City of Charlottesville, VA
804-974-2228
Num her of Children: 2
Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of
Return to :
First
Directors, representing City of Charlottesville, 1~8~-1990, appointment
Albemarle County.
PVCC meets a reat need in our
years ago on this
work, I believe I can be
January 27, 1994
Date
.
.>~ @ ~ u w [~ 'j
f,-. . .. _ .._""___..... ,. _"".._._'.__...._.__~.,. _"......".
""..,
,l
ounty of Albemarle
ffice of the Board of Supervisors
4 I McIntire Road
harlottesville, V A 22901-4596
iL...,_.
':-\:,RD OF SUPERViSee.
"':'_"'~<<O'\.__
Board Appointment-PVCC
o The Board:
ecently you received a letter from Harold G. Dixon resigning from the PVCC Board.
I imagine you will be appointing someone to fulfill the remainder of his term of office.
I would appreciate your consideration for an appointment to this Board. I served on the
oard for 3-years when I lived in the City. When I moved to Albemarle County in early
I 90, I had to leave the Board so they could appoint a resident to represent
harlottesville.
I have remained a strong supporter of Dr. DiCroce, her staff and the college as a whole.
uring my previous time on the Board I felt that I was making a contribution to the
c liege and its overall management. I was on the Board that brought Dr. DiCroce to
VCC and take pride that we found a top notch President to lead our community college.
I you appoint me to the PVCC Board, I assure you that through my experience and
c ntinuous contact with the college, I will represent Albemarle County to the best of my
a ility.
ttached is an application to serve on the PVCC Community College Board.
ours very truly,
.. j?(~~.;h
/ -71'
illiam A. Finley, iT.
1 6 Harvest Drive
harlottesville, V A 22903
]); ~-f 3l)~/G;f
tRflr{Y
t4AR
l
. "~"~~"-->~:;:;:-::l (' i
n,.. '"'l,'o,"'(.JI'JOr,o~
) l.~r 0 ):1-.:......._ ~
ounty of Albemarle
ffice of The Board of Supervisors
I McIntire Road
harlottesville, VA 22901-4596
'.~""".."'.';";'''''.#-'-
Board Appointment
o The Board:
hank you for appointing me to the Piedmont Virginia Community College Board.
I am looking forward to again working with Dr. DiCroce, her staff, the faculty and the
VCC Board.
I there are any specific instructions regarding this appointment, positions or policies of
he Board of Supervisors regarding the college, or any communications you wish
livered in person, please let me know.
SP RRY MARINE INC. . 1070 Seminole Trail. Charlottesville, VA 22901 . Phone: (804) 974,2000 . Fax: (804) 974.2259. Telex: 82.2411
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
o F
I N TEN T
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
ounty, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend the
lbemarle County Zoning Ordinance in Chapter 35.0, Section B, to
review waiver of fees in certain circumstances; and
FURTHER requests that the Albemarle County Planning
mmission hold a public hearing on said intent to amend the
ning Ordinance, and does request that the Planning Commission
recommendation to this Board at the earliest possible
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w iting is a true, correct copy of a resolution of intent adopted
b the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a
r gular meeting held on March 2, ~;L~ iJ {~lfb .
~~k, Board of cou;g-supervisors