The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-11-07 ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of November 7, 2001 November 13, 2001 1. Call to order. AGENDA ITEM/ACTION NonAgenda. Ms. Thomas introduced a group of students from Henley Middle School present at the meeting. 4. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. · Paul Grady, a resident of Crozet, requested that the County and City build Cell 5 at the Landfill. Cell 5 will provide a service. He does not think it is convenient for the people in western Albemarle County to take their debris to Zion Crossroads. 5.1 Public hearing to amend jurisdictional area of the Albemarle County Service Authority to provide water service to TM 45, P 15 (Jeff Saine). (Authorize public hearing to be Cancelled,) · CANCELLED public hearing. · Ms. Humphris commented that there is a need for better coordination of information between the Health Department, Service Authority and County staff to all applicants making requests for inclusion in the jurisdictional areas. 5.2 ZMA-01-04. SNB Car Wash - Proffers (deferred from October 17, 2001). · APPROVED ZMA-01-04 as proffered. 5.3 Proclamation recognizing November 11 through November 17, 2001 as Amedcan Education Week. · ADOPTED. Chairman presented to School Board Chairman. 5.4 Appropriation: Mclntire Skate Park, $11,541 (Form ~/2001030). · APPROVED. 5.5 Appropriation: JABA (Esmont Senior Center), $4,213 (Form ~t2001033). · APPROVED. 5.6 Funding Request for the "Midnight Ramble" Festival. · DEFERRED until November 14, 2001. {This was subsequently deferred until December 5, 2001.) Board members requested specific information on the program's goals; clearly define the amount of money needed in order to maintain ongoing scholarships; and set out specific conditions for us of Albemarle's contribution. Mr. Dorrier also asked who is on the scholarship committee. 5.7 Authorize public hearing for December 5, 2001 on Junior Firefighers' Ordinance. · SET public hearing for December 5, 2001. 5.8 Resolution to change Venue of the Community Criminal Justice Program. ASSIGNMENT Meeting was called to order at 9:06 a.m., by the Chairman, All BOS members present. Also present was Robert Tucker, Larry Davis, Wayne Cilimberg and Ella Carey. Clerk: Acknowledge comments for Chairman' s signature. None. Clerk: Set out proffers on Attachment 1. Clerk: Set out as Attachment 2. Clerk: Forward signed form to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. Clerk: Forward signed form to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. Clerk: Include on November 14, 2001 agenda. Clerk: Advertise ordinance for December 5, 2001 public hearing. Clerk: Forward signed resolution to James Hingeley. (Attachment 3) ADOPTED the attached resolution. 5.9 Installation of "Child at Play" Sign(s) on Shelton Mills Road (Rt 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt 751). · ADOPTED the attached resolution. 5.10 Establishment of temporary Biodiversity Work Group. · APPROVED the establishment of a temporary"Biodiversity Work Group" to assist in the development of the Biological Resources Inventory called for by the Comprehensive Plan. Appointments to the permanent Biodiversity Committee to be made by the Board when the Work Group has completed its tasks. 7a Work Session: Six Year Secondary Road Plan and County's Priority List of Road Improvements. · SCHEDULED public hearing for January 16, 2002. 7b Transportation Matters. Mr. Bryan reported the following information: VDOT is now ready for snow operations. Thinks the process at Morgantown Road went well and they are waiting to see how that develops. · VDOT had some personnel turnover which slowed some things down. Things seem to be back on track now. Mr. Perkins made the following comments: · He left Mr. Bryan a message about White Mountain Road. · He has received some calls and complaints about Allen Road, Route 666, near Earlysville. That is a dead-end gravel road, Mr. Bryan commented that this dry weather is real hard on gravel roads, and they cannot do much without water. · He commended VDOT on its spot improvements on some of the rural roads. · He asked if Morgantown Road was wide enough for stripping. Mr. Bryan said it is wide enough, but most of the residents do not want it stripped. It would not be conducive to pedestrian traffic if it is stripped. Mr. Tucker asked if any thought has been given to stripping on the curve where there is a blind spot. Mr. Bryan said VDOT will look into the situation. Mr. Dorrier made the following comment: · Referring to VDOT's monthly report, he commented on the proposed turn lanes at the intersection of Route 726 in Scottsville. He said that is a very dangerous intersection. Mr, Bryan said they will be gathering at the site this afternoon to take a look at it. Ms. Humphris made the following comment: · She has received some complaints about the synchronization of the light eastbound on Barracks Road at the Bypass ramp. Mr. Bryan said he would check it out. Ms.. Thomas made the following comments: A constituent mentioned the light on Route 250 at Broomley Road. The light works well in the mornings, but in the evenings you sometimes get, a red light on Route 250 when there is no traffic coming out of Broomley. Clerk: Forward signed resolution to Juandiego Wade. (Attachment 4) Planning staff: Contact work groups and individuals with the areas of experience outlined in the staff report and ask that they agree to serve on the work group. Clerk: Advertise public hearing. Clerk: Forward comments to Mr. Bryan. · People are concerned about scalping the trees alongside the roads. She does not know if any of that is recent. Mr. Bryan said VDOT is constantly vigil about that issue. · There are concerns about trucks using Taylors Gap Road as a short cut from Route 29 South to Route 250 or 1-64. · The quality of the paving that was put down on Shady Spring Drive has annoyed some of the people in the subdivision. It is a very rough surface. Mr. Bryan said that is surface treatment, not paving, basically tar and gravel spread over the road. The treatment is based on traffic count and how many years since it was done prior. · People are ecstatic about the paving of Old Lynchburg Road. · People are happy about the outside lines on Dick Woods Road. · Concerns were brought to her by the Mayor of Charlottesville regarding the purchase of land for the Meadow Creek Parkway. There are rumors are that it will take years instead of months. Mr. Bryan commented that he did not know the status of the land acquisition. Mr. Tucker suggested that it be looked into. Ms. Humphris asked why advertisement had been delayed for two years. Mr. Bryan did not know, but said he would find out. He added that it normally is a two-year process. · Following a discussion of Route 29 and the Bypass, the Board requested that staff prepare a letter to VDOT for the Chairman's signature addressing specific requests for VDOT to consider when it proceeds with the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Route 29 Bypass project. Specifically, the Board wants full public hearings rather than public information meetings, updated traffic studies for Route 29 and Bypass traffic, and a critical evaluation of the Black & Veatch study which appears to be flawed. 7. JAUNT's Annual Report, Presentation by Donna Shaunesey. None. · RECEIVED. 8. Presentation: Commission on Children and Families. None. · RECEIVED. 9. None. 10. Public hearing to amend jurisdictional area of the ACSA to TM 45, P 15 (Jeff Saine). (Applicant requests withdrawal.) ACCEPTED applicants request; no action required. Discussion: Amendment to ACSA Mandatory Connection Policy to include Farmington. ADOPTED the attached resolution. Clerk: Forward signed resolution to Bill Brent. (Attachment 5) · 11. Board to Board Presentation - School Board Chairman. None. · RECEIVED. 12. Presentation: FY 2002 and FY 2003 Estimated General Fund Revenues/Budget Distribution. · APPROVED the projected FY 2002/03 allocation of local revenues to the Capital Improvements Program, in accordance with the guidelines recommended by the financial advisors, and to the School Division and General Government areas of Ro.qer Hildebeidel/Melvin Breeden: Proceed as directed. operating costs. 13. Presentation: Overview of Court Square Enhancement Project. None. · RECEIVED. 14, Presentation: 2002 County-wide Customer Survey, Kate Wood, UVA Center for Survey Research. · Board members questioned the subjects that will be included in the survey, the design of the survey and how the survey questions would be asked. 15. Public hearing on proposed FY 2002 Budget Amendment. APPROVED the FY 2002 budget amendment in the amount of $777,125.66 and APPROVED the appropriations as detailed on the forms. 16. Appeal: ARB-F (Sign)-2001-016. Whole Foods Market Application for Freestanding Sign. · UPHELD the decision of the ARB and DENIED the appeal. 17. Presentation: TJPDC's 2002 Draft Legislative Program, David Blount, Legislative Liaison. Mr. Blount mentioned several corrections: · Transportation section, page 2, clarify the "new funding classification and street standards ..." language to refer to secondary roads that serve an urban function. · Environmental Quality section, page 7, 3r~ bullet, language to read: "The state should ensure that the closure schedules for landfills reasonably reflect the site-specific risk analysis for the locality. It should also provide adequate funding for landfill closure and post-closure costs. Further, the state should work..." · Housing section, page 8, 2nd bullet, amend to read: "... operation of affordable housing programs and establishment of affordable dwelling unit ordinances." · Housing section, page 8, add an additional bullet to read: "We support retaining local discretion to regulate the allowance of manufactured homes in zoning districts that permit single-family dwellings." · Mr. Blount announced that the Legislative Dinner is scheduled for January 3, 2002. · ADOPTED the Draft 2002 TJPDC Legislative Program with the changes recommended by Mr. Blount. · Mr. Blount stated that December l0, 2001 is the deadline for legislators to pre-file requests for drafting legislation. The Board needs to make its requests prior to that date. · CONSENSUS torequest our legislators to support or sponsor the five items outlined in the Executive Summary during the 2002 session. 19. Closed Session: Personnel and Legal Matters. · At 1:05 p.m, the Board went into Closed Session. 20. Certify Closed Session. · The Board reconvened into Open Session at 3:46 p.m., and certified. 21. Appointments. · APPOINTED Chuck Lebo to the Architectural Review Board, to County Executive staff: Provide Board members with a more detailed list of the questions to be used in the survey. Also determine how best to circulate information to Board members to allow them involvement in the process. Clerk: Forward signed appropriation forms to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. None. Lod Spencer: Forward action to David Blount and coordinate communication with legislators. Clerk: Notify appointees and copy appropriate pesons. complete Frank Kessler's term, to expire on November 14, 2002. APPOINTED Raymond E. East to the JAUNT Board, with term to expire on September 30, 2004. 22. Presentation: Landfill Options. DIRECTED Board representatives on the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority to support maintaining the status quo at the Landfill. 23. Development Departments Improvement Efforts. · RECEIVED as information; no action. 24, Restructuring of Fire/Rescue Division into Department of Fire/ Rescue. · APPROVED the following: · Restructuring the current Division of Fire/Rescue into a Department of Fire/Rescue · New position titled Director of Fire/Rescue at paygrade 22 · Advertisement for new position County Executive: Proceed as directed. None. Fire/Rescue; Human Resources: Proceed as directed. 25. First Quarter Financial Report. · RECEIVED as information; no action. 26. Resolution: Emergency Water Conservation Measures. Clerk: Forward resolution to Bill Brent. · ADOPTED the attached resolution. (Attachment 6) 27. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. · Regarding the police citizen advisory committee, Mr. Tucker said Chief Miller informed him he has been working on the matter and the Board will probably receive a proposal in December. · Ms. Thomas said the High Growth Coalition is getting information about and discussing new legislation that allows cluster development by-right. Although Albemarle County already allows cluster development, Delegate Albo has proposed a bill that would require a provision for clustering automatically in any residential zone. · Ms. Thomas said Board members received a letter from Charlie Anson concerning littering alongside roads. It is an increasing problem and ties into the Landfill issue. · Ms. Thomas said residents of Morgantown Road want the Board to look at the zoning text that allows large construction companies to have certain activities in LI. One way of looking at this is to look at how many LI parcels are located in the middle of residential areas, and then to look at whether what we allow in LI is appropriate for the locations. · Mr. Bowerman said he will be late for the November 14, 2001 Board meeting. 28. Adjourn to November 14, 2001, 4:30 p.m., for Joint Meeting with School Board~ · The meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m. Zoning/Planning staffs: Look into. Attachment 1 - ZMA-01-04. SNB Car Wash Proffers Attachment 2 - Amedcan Education Week Proclamation Attachment 3 - Resolution to change venue of the Community Criminal Justice Program Attachment 4 - Child at Play Resolution for Shelton Mills Road and Brownsville Road Attachment 5 - Resolution regarding ACSA Mandatory Connection Policy AttaChment 6 - Resolution regarding Emergency Water Conservation Measures PROFFER FORM Attachment I Date: October 17, 2001 ZMA # 01-004 Tax Map and Parcel Number(s) 61-147 0.6 Acres to be rezoned from C-1 to HC Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning request. The property zoned HC shall be limited to the area of the parcel south of the "proposed zoning line" as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan entitled, "Preliminary Site Plan Rio Road Laser Car Wash" dated August 27, 2001. If the area zoned HC is developed as an automobile laundry, development shall be in general accord with the Preliminary Site Plan entitled, "Preliminary Site Plan Rio Road Laser Car Wash" dated August 27, 2001. By-right use of area zoned HC shall be limited to 24.2.1(1) automobile laundries and uses permitted by right pursuant to subsection 22.2.1 of section 22.1, Commercial C-1 zoning district, as those regulations exist on October 17, 2001, a copy of which is attached hereto. Special use of the area on the parcel to be rezoned shall be limited to uses permitted by special use permit pursuant to section 22.2.2, Commercial C-1 zoning district, as those regulations exist on October 17, 2001, a copy of which is attached hereto. Architectural features shall be compatible with the character of the commercial and residential buildings visible from the site. Architectural features shall include building forms and elements, including roofs, windows, doors, materials, colors, textures and scale. No construction of a structure shall begin unless and until compatibility of the architectural features is agreed uponby the owner/developer and the Design Planner. John A. Taylor (S~ned) Signatures of All Owners F. Chades Sweiclart (Signed) John A. Taylor Printed Names of All Owners President & CEO F. Charles Sweiqart - VP, CFO 10/12/01 Date 10/28/01 Attachment 2 AMERICAN EDUCATION today's students veill be the leaders of tomorro~v; and it is the responsibility of our public schools to prepare students to successfully meet emerging challenges and opportunities; and by equipping young Americans with both practical skills and broader intellectual abilities, schools give them hope for, and access to, a productive future; and the responsibility of proeiding a quality education to our students is a responsibility of the entire community; and WHERF~S, the success of our public schools is reflected in the support given to them by the communify; and WHEREAS, the purpose of American Education Week is to focus attention on the important role education plays in our country and its future; and WHEREAS, the theme of American Education Week 2001 is "Together: Making Public Schools Great for Ever~ Child"; NOW, THEREFORE, L Sally H. Thomas, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors, do hereby proclaim the week of NOVEMBER 11, 2001 THROUGH NOVEMBER 17, 2001 AMERICAN EDUCATION WEEK IN ALBEMARLE COUNTY AND, FURTHER, encourage ali citizens to extend their commitment to public education and to the future of our children by supporting our community's schools through the contribution of their time and energy. Dated this 74 day of November 2001. 7 Attachment 3 RESOLUTION TO CHANGE VENUE OF THE COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission adopted a resolution on October 4, 2001 supporting the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position of the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board from planning district offices to the offices of OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections located at 750 Harris Street in Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on September 10, 2001, the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board passed a resolution approving the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position from the Planning District Commission office to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections; and WHEREAS, both the Planning District Commission and the Community Criminal Justice Board are in agreement that the proposed relocation would benef'~ the Thomas Jefferson area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle Board of Supervisors approves and supports the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections and agrees to the transfer of the financial management of all Community Criminal Justice Board funding to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections. RESOLUTION Attachment 4 WHEREAS, the residents of Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751) are concemed about traffic on their streets and the potential hazard it creates for the numerous children that live on these two roads; and WHEREAS, the residents believe that a "Child At Play" sign would help alleviate some their concerns; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby supports the community's requests for VDOT to install the "Child At Play" signs on Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751). Attachment 5 Resolution ApproVing the Albemarle County Service Authority Mandatory Connection Policy Whereas, the Albemarle County Service Authority on October 18, 2001 amended Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy of the Albemarle County Service Authority Rules and Regulations; and Whereas, Virginia Code Section 15.2-5137 requires the concurrence of the Albemarle CoUnty Board of Supervisors to implement any change to the mandatory connection policy for water service; and Whereas, the Board of Supervisors finds that the amended mandatory connection policy serves the best interests of the County by providing a safe and reliable water system in the water service areas for which the ACSA is providing service. Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia hereby concurs with the amendment of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations, Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy adopted on October 18, 2001. ]0 Attachment 6 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a lack of adequate rainfall has created a shortage in the public water supply which serves the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville; and WHEREAS, the capacities of the reservoirs serving the area have continued to decrease even after calls for voluntary conservation measures; and WHEREAS, Section 16-500 of the Albemarle County Code provides that should the Board of Supervisors declare there to be an emergency in the County arising wholly or substantially out of a short_age of water supply, then the Albemarle County Service Authority and its Executive Director are authorized during the continuation of the water emergency to order the restriction or prohibition of certain uses of the water supply as set forth in the County Code; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authority adopted a Resolution on November 5, 2001 declaring a water shortage emergency in the urban service area of Albemarle County and requesting that the Board of Supervisors also declare such a water emergency to enable the imposition of appropriate restrictions on water use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby declares that there is an emergency arising out of a shortage of water supply in the urban service area of Albemarle County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Service Author'rty and its Executive Director are authorized during the continuation of the water emergency to implement mandatory restrictions on water usage within the urban service area, as set forth in Section 16.02 of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations and in Section 16-500 of the Albemarle County Code, when the Authority or its Executive Director deem such restrictions are necessary. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesvill e, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296 - 5823 Fax (804/972 - 4012 October 23 2001 Jeff Saine 1702 Earlysville Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: Albemarle County Service Authority Jurisdicational Area - Request To Extend Water Service Dear Mr. Saine: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on October 3, 2001, set a public hearing for November 7, 2001 to consider the above-noted request to extend water service to Tax Map 45, Parcel 15. You may contact the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors at 296-5841 to determine the time this item is scheduled for review. If you have any questions, please, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Cc: Ella Carey ?0-25-01 P04:23 tN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296 - 5823 Fax (804) 972 ~ 4012 October 25, 2001 Douglas R. Bruce, LS Roudabush. Gale & Associates, Inc 914 Monticello Road Charlottesville VA 22902 RE: ZMA-2001-004 SNB Car Wash' Tax Map 61, Parcel 147 Dear Mr. Bruce: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on October 2, 2001 unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval was subject to proffers with modificationsdiscussed at the Planning Commission meeting. The Commission also approved the preliminary site plan subject to the approval of the rezoning. A letter of preliminary approval will follow if the Board of Supervisors approves the rezoning. The Commission approved a waiver allowing for one-way circulation and a critical slopes waiver with the condition that the 2:1 slopes be stabilized with Iow maintenance vegetative ground cover. The vegetative cover must be a variety selected from Table 3.37-C on page 111-391 of the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook or an equal approved by the Engineering Department. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition for action on November 7th. Original s gned proffers relating to your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of S, upervisors no later than October 31. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Elaine K. Echols. AICP Principal Planner EKE/jcf /' Cc: ,/~filla Carey Steve AIIsh ouse Amelia McCulley Bob Ball Jack Kelsey ~0-25-0~ P04:23 IN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 01:004 SNB Car Wash SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request to rezone 0.6 acres from CO to HC with proffers. STAFF CONTACT(S): Elaine Echols, Wayne Cilimberg AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONS ENT AGE~DA: ITEM NUMBERS: INFORMATION: ACTION: yes INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: yes REVIEWED BY: JOJ~..~ BACKGROUND: At the Board of Supervisor's meeting or~ October 17, 2001, the Board held a public hearing on this item but could not take action until a second signature was provided on the proffers. DISCUSSION: The signed proffers been received and approved for processing by the County Attorney's office. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning with the attached proffers. 10-3t-0t P05:35 IN glc~ (;30l 03:5~p Has~rouck Real Es'~ata (810~]E9~-3455 ATTACHMENTA PROFFER FORA~ Orig,.hal Proffer X Am~md~ut Proffer (Amendment # ._~ Date: _October ]7, 2001 Tax Map and Paxcc] Numb~ris)61-147__ Acre~ to be re2~nmi from _~:.L~ ~o I-lC Purr. u~nt ~o $~don 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinam:e, ~e o~er, or i~ duly au~d a~nr, h~e~y vol~ty p~ff~r~ ~ ~n~ona ~ted beto~ which shall be ~pplt~ ~ ~e p~, {fr~aod. ~ese ~onditi~s a~ procured as a p~ of ~c ~c~t~d ~zon~ ~d it is a~d ~at: (I) ~ ~g i~lf ~v~ ~ to ~need for ~e 'l'h~ p~l(~ z~cd HC shall b~ lbni~ed m thc ~ea of thc ~,cccl ~out~ of r. ha :'proposc~t zo~ng linm" as ~how~ Prciimin~ry Sim Plan entitled, "PreEmina,ry Site PJa~ Rio R~ad L~ser Car W~sh' 0at~l Au~$t 2'7; I001 By-right ,as~ of area zoned HC shall b~ limited to 24-~-.I (1) automobile laundrics and u~s ~i~ by right pu~u~t ro ~ecgon 22.2. I of ~gon 22. I, ~etci~ ~- 1 zon~g d~ic~, m ~ose mgutation.~ exi~ on 0~o~ I 7, 2001, a copy of which is a~cb~ h~. S~ci~ use of to ~ ~n~ s~E be l~it~ ~ ~e~ p~ined by sp~ial ~e pe~it puget to ~ti°n 22.2.2, Comment C- I ZO~g d {s~ict, ~s ~ose re~ladons ~xi~ on October I 7, 2001, a c~y o~ whkh is a~ched ~to. (Attach Proper Pow,r of' Attorney) ' O-~!-O') P12:i9 2 10/04/01 THU 10:29 [TX/RX NO 7858] ~004 ATTACHMENT B ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 18 ZONING SECTION 22 COMMERCIAL- C-1 Sections: 22.1 22.2 22.2.1 22.2.2 22.3 INTENT. WHERE PERMITTED PERMITTED USES BY RIGHT BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS 22.1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED C-1 districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning mar> to permit selected retail sales, service and public use establishments ~,hich are prwaarity oriented to central business concentrations. It is intended that C-1 districts be established only within the urban area. communities and villages in the comprehensive plan. (Amended 9-9-92) 22.2 PERMITTED USES 22.2. 1 BY RIGHT 'Fne following uses shall be permitted in any C-1 district subject to the requn'ernents and limitations of these regulations. The zoning administrator, after consultation with the director of planning and other appropriate officials, may permit as a use bv right, a use not specifically permitted: provided that such use shall be similar to uses permitted by rig2qt in general character and more specifically, similar in terms of locationat requirements, operational characteristics. visual impact and traffic generation. Appeals from the zoning administrator's decision shall be generally provided in section 34.0. a. The following retail sales and service establishments: I. Antique, gift. jewels', notion and craft shops. 2. Clothing, apparel and shoe shops. 3. Department store. 4. Drug store, pharmacy. 5. Florist. 6. Food and ~ocery. stores including such specialty, shops as bakery., candy, milk dispensary. and wine and cheese shops. 7 Furniture and home appliances (sales and service). 18-22- t Zoning Sunplemcnt :o. 12-30-°° 3 ....... ATTACHMENT~ - ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE 8. Hardware store. 9. Musical instruments. 10. Newsstands, magazines, pipe and tobacco shops. I 1. Optical goods. 12. Photographic goods. I_3. Visual and audio appliances. 14. Sporting goods. 15. Retail nurseries and greenhouses. b. The following services and public establishments: I. Administrative. professional offices. 2. Barber. beauty, shops. 3. Churches. cemeteries. 4. Clubs. lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic (reference 5.1.02). 5. Financial restitutions. 6. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.I.09). - Funeral homes. 8. Health spas. 9. Indoor theaters. I0. Laundries, dry, cleaners. 11. Laundromat (provided that an attendant shall be on duty at all hours during, operation): I".~.Libraries, museums. 13. Nurseries, dav care centers (reference 5.I.063. 14. Eating establishments. 15. Tailor. seamstress. I6. Automobile service stations (reference 5.1.20). 17. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including poles, lines, transformers, p~pes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and owned and operated by a public utility,. Water distribution and sewerage cellection lines, pumping stanons and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle Count3.' Service Authority,. (Amended 5-2-93) Zoning Suoolement =o. 12-30-oc~ ~r ATTACHMENT B ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE 18. Public uses and buildings including temporary, or mobile facilities such as schools. offices, parks, play~ounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies (reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines treatment facilities, pumping stations and the like. owned anduor operated by the Pdvanna Water and Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5: 5.1.12). (Amended I I- 1-9~ 19. Temporary. construction uses (reference 5.1. I 1. 20. Dwellings treference 5.1.21). 21. Medical center. 22. Automobile. truck repair shop excluding body shop. (Added 6-3-8 I' Amended 9-9-92) 23. Temporary. nonresidential mobile homes (reference 5.8). (Added 3-5-6) 24. Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9-15-93) 25. Farmers' market (reference 5.1.36). (Added 10-11-95) 22.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT t. Commercial recreation establishments including but not limited to amusement centers, bowling alleys, pool halls and dance halls. (Amended 1-1-83) Electrical aower substations, transmission lines and related towers: gas or oil transmission lines, pumping stations and appurtenances: unmanned telephone exchanze centers: micro- wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances. 3. Hospitals. 4. Fast food restaurant. 7 8. 11. Veterinary, office and hospital (reference 5.1.11). Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in secuon 18.0. residential - R-15. in compliance with regulations set forth therein, and such conditions as mav be imposed pursuant to section 31.2.4. Hotels, motels and inns. Motor vehicle sales and rental in communities and the urban area as aesignated in the comprehensive plan. (Added 6-I-83) Parking structures located wholly or partly above grade. (Added 11-7-4) Drive-in windows serving or associated with permitted uses. (Added I 1-7-84: Amended 9-9- 92) Uses permitted by ri~ht, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes. (Added 6-14-89) 12. Body shop. (Added 9-9-92) Zoning Sul~plement ~5.6-I 6-a9 5 ATTACHMENT B ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE I3. Animal shelter ~reference 5.1.11). (Added 6-I6-99). 22.3 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS t-n addition to the requirements contained herein, the requirements of section 21.0 districts, generally, shall apply within all C- 1 districts. (Amended 3-17-82: 7-10-85] commercial 18-22-4 Zoning Suppiemem aS. 6-16-o 6 AbIERI~ ED UCA TION WEEK 14q-IEREAS, WHEREAS, WHERF~S, 14q-IEREAS, today's students ~ill be the leaders of tomorro~v; and it is the responsibility of our public schools to prepare students to suceessful~ meet emerging challenges and opportunities; and by equipping young Americans ~vith both practical skills and broader intellectual abilities, schools give them hope for, and access to, a productive future; and the responsibility of providing a quality education to our students is a responsibility of the entire community; and the success of our public schools is reflected in the support given to them by the community; and the purpose of American Education Week is to focus attention on the important role education plays in our country and its future; and Making Public the theme of American ;Education Week 2001 is "Together: Schools Great for Every Child"; NOW, 2ZIEREFORE, I, Sally H. Thomas, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors, do hereby proclaim the ~veek of NOVEMBER I I, 2001 THROUGH NOVEMBER 17, 2001 AMERICAN EDUCATION WEEK IN ALBEMARLE COUNTY AND, FURTHER, further encourage alt citizens to extend their commitment to public education and to the future of our children by supporting our community's schools through the contribution of their time and energy. Dated this 7a day of November 2001. CHAIRMAN ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPER VISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Mclntire Skate Park SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation # 2001030 in the amount of $11,541 for the County's share of operating expenses for the Mclntire Skate Park STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White, Mullaney AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: At the June 6, 2001 meeting, the Board approved a recommendation from the Department of Parks and Recreation to contribute $11,541 to the City of Charlottesville as our share of the FY02 operating costs for the Mclntire Skate Park. Because this request was received subsequent to approval of the FY02 operating budget, the funds were never officially appropriated. DISCUSSION: Appropriation #2001030 in the amount of $11,541 appropriates the County's share of the FY02 operating costs of $36,066 for the Mclntire Skate Park. These costs are based on a 32% participation rate by County residents, which will continue to be the basis for future funding requests from the City. Operational costs consist of attendant wages, utilities, repairs and equipment. Funding for the costs will be taken from the Board's FY02 contingency account. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #2001030 in the amount of $11,54'1 for the County's share of the FY02 Mclntire Skate Park operating costs. c. Ms. Linda Peacock 01.196 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 01/02 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? FUND: PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: COUNTY CONTRIBUTION TO MCINTIRE SKATE PARK. E~X.~ENDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW YES NO GENERAL X 2001030 AMOUNT 1 1000 79000 567650 SKATE PARK $ 11,541.00 1 1000 95000 999990B.O.S.-CONTINGENCY (11,541.00) TOTAL $ REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL $ TRANSFERS REQUESTING COST CENTER: COUNTY EXECUTIVE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE DATE OCT. 12, 2001 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: JABA Appropriation - Esmont Senior Center SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #2001033 in the amount of $4,213 to JABA for the Esmont Senior Center Nutrition Program. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, White AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ITEM NUMBER: IN FORMATION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: .~ ~.~--'-~ REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: At the September 5~ meeting, the Board of Superwsors approved an additional $4,213 to the Jefferson Board for Aging to continue providing a two-day a week Senior Center Nutrition program in Esmont. For financial reasons, coupled with lower than anticipated attendance, JABA had proposed discontinuing the second day at the Esmont site. These new funds allow the second day to continue, while the community attempts to increase the center's daily attendance. DISCUSSION: The additional $4,213 will pay for the additional meal costs for an average daily attendance of 25 seniors for FY02. The funds will come from the already appropriated Board's contingency fund and, therefore, do not need to be included in the FY02 budget amendment process. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation ~2001033 in the amount of $4,213 to JABA for the Esmont Senior Center Nutrition Program. 10-26-01 A09:50 IN 01.202 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 01/02 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? FUND: PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW YES NO X GENERAL FUNDING TO EXPAND SENIOR MEALS PROGRAM AT ESMONT SENIOR CENTER BY JABA. 2O01O33 -E~V~NDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 1000 59000 563200'JEFERSON BOARD OFAGING $ 4,213.00 I 1000 95000 999990 BUDGET CONTINGENCY (4,213.00) TOTAL $ REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL $ - TRANSFERS REQUESTING COST CENTER: COUNTY EXECUTIVE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE OCT. 24, 2001 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Funding Request- Midnight Ramble Festival SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REQU EST: Funding request for the "Midnight Ramble" festival, a vintage African-American film festival scheduled for February, 2002 STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White, Catiin AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: On February 7-9, 2002, the Charlottesville/Albemarle Tribune newspaper and its 501(c)(3) corporation, Creative Communications Associates, will bring a vintage African-American film festival to the community. The films will depict black life during the era of 1900 - 1950 and showcase many of the black directors, actors and writers of that age. Ossie Davis, Ruby Dee and Harry Belefonte are scheduled to be guests for the festival, billed as the first of its kind on the East Coast and marketed from Pennsylvania to North Carolina. Films will be shown at local facilities, such as Vinegar Hill, the Ch'arlottesville Performing Arts Center, Dickinson Auditorium at PVCC and the County Office Building. Exhibits will also be shown at various venues and a kick-off event will be held in the Omni ballroom on February 7th. Proceeds from the event will be used to support a scholarship fund for Virginia high school and college students. DISCUSSION: Creative Communications Associates, a non-profit corporation, has requested a $5,000 contribution to the event from Albemarle County. Agnes White, the publisher of the Charlottesville/Albemarle Tribune and main spokesperson for the event, confirmed that the tax deductible portion of each $50 ticket is $35.16. The largest portion of the collected funds will go into a scholarship fund to provide a $2,000 annual scholarship to four (4) current or future college students in need of financial assistance. The scholarships will be open to any student in Virginia as long as they have and are able to maintain a B average or better. A scholarship committee composed of local community representatives, will approve the scholarships on an annual basis. A small portion of the funds will also go to fund the Mary Williams Senior Center and another portion will go to another as yet undetermined charity. The City has committed to fund $5,000. Other festivals similar to this one have been funded by the County through Tourism Fund revenues, e.g. the Virginia Film Festival, $10,300, Virginia Book Festival, $10,300; Lewis and Clark Festival, $2,500, although both the book and film festivals are ongoing annual eventS. The Midnight Ramble festival, if successful, is planned to be held every two years. For additional information on the event, Board members may want to visit the festival's Internet website: www.homelink2000.net RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends funding for the "Midnight Ramble" festival in the amount of $5,Q00 as requested to be provided from Tourism Fund carry-over. However, it is also recommended that funding be contingdnt on the assurance that an Albemarle County student, who meets the strict selection requirements, be selected for one of the annual scholarships. Without this guarantee, it does not seem appropriate for Albemarle County to contribute what amounts to a two-year scholarship or to a student from another area of the state. If the Board approves funding for this request, the official appropriation will be added to the next FY02 Budget Amendment hearing scheduled for December 5th, 01.211 11-02-01 AlO:08 IN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Junior Firefighters Ordinance SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Final recommendation to the Board of Supervisors regarding the establishment of a Jr. Firefighters program. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Trank, Pumphrey AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Ordinance; Sta~nce / In June, the Fire/Rescue Advisory Board (FRAB) first discussed the establishment of a Jr. Firefighters program. State law requires that the Board of Supervisors adopt an ordinance authorizing the establishment of this program. Enclosed is an e-mail from the County Attorney which includes the language that would be utilized in finalizing an ordinance for the Board of Supervisor's consideration. The actual State Code section that authorizes the establishment of such a program is also attached for reference. DISCUSSION: Adoption of an ordinance strictly following State Code, allows candidates 16 - 18 years old to "fully" participate in all activities of the volunteer company as long as they have parental consent and have attained Firefighter I certification. The Fire Rescue Advisory Board has considered whether or not the ordinance should restrict to some degree, the activities of Jr. Firefighters. From staff's understanding, restrictions have been included in some of the Jr. Firefighter ordinances adopted by other localities. Adoption of the ordinance in its current form would not prohibit each individual station from establishing limits on the activities of the junior firefighters. The draft ordinance was reviewed, accepted and passed by a unanimous vote at the October 24 FRAB meeting. However, the FRAB membership believes that some limits should be established system-wide and will develop a policy to be implemented by all County fire/rescue agencies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors authorize advertisement of the enclosed ordinance for public hearing for December 5, 2001. 01.204 '/'/-07-07 PO.T,:'/.~ tN ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL, OF CHAPTER 6, FIRE PROTECTION, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Article I, In General, of Chapter 6, Fire Protection, of the Code of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, is hereby amended and reordained by adding a new Section 6-102 (Junior Firefighter Programs), as follows: CHAPTER 6. FIRE PROTECTION ARTICLE L IN GENERAL Sec. 6-102 Junior Firefighter Programs. Persons sixteen years of age or older are authorized to participate in a volunteer fire company duly authorized to operate within the County of Albemarle under the following conditions. Any person sixteen years of age or older may work with or participate fully in all activities of a voluntary_ fire company, provided that, if such person is less than eighteen years of age, such person shall first: A. Supply to the chief fire officer of the volunteer fire company written confirmation that such person has parental or guardian approval; and B. Attain certficafion under National Fire Protection Association 1001, level one, fire fighter standards as administered by the Department of Fire Programs. State law reference -- Virginia Code § 40.1-79.1. This ordinance shall be effective upon passage. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a tree, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of to __, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on Mr. Bowerman Mr. Dorrier Ms. Humphris Mr. Martin Mr. Perkins Ms. Thomas Aye Nay Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Attachment A Code of Virginia § 40.1-79.1 and § 40.1-103 § 40.1-79.1. Exemptions from chapter generally; participation in volunteer fire company activities. local ordinance authorizino A. Any county, city or town may authorize by ordinance any person sixteen years of age or older, with parental or guardian approval, to work with or participate fully in all activities of a volunteer fire company, provided such person has attained certification under National Fire Protection Association 1001, level one, fire fighter standards, as administered by the Department of Fire Programs. B. Any trainer or instructor of such persons mentioned in subsection A of this section and any member of a paid or volunteer fire company who supervises any such persons shall be exempt from the provisions of § 40.1-103 when engaged in activities of a volunteer fire company, provided that the volunteer fire company or the governing body of such county, city or town has purchased insurance which provides, coverage for injuries to or the death of such persons in their performance of activities under this section. ~ 40.1-103. Cruelty and injuries to children. It shall be unlawful for any person employing or having the custody of any child willfully or negligently to cause or permit the life of such child to be endangered or the health of such child to be injured, or willfully or negligently to cause or permit such child to be placed in a situation that its life, health or morals may be endangered, or to cause or permit such child to be overworked, tortured, tormented, mutilated, beaten or cruelly treated. Any person violating this section shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dottier, ,Jr. Scotlsville Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouetl COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX I804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Walter F. Perkins White Hall Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller November 19, 2001 Mr. James Hingeley Chair, Thomas Jefferson Area CCJB PO Box 1505 Charlottesville, VA 22902-1505 Dear Mr. Hingeley: At its meeting on November 7, 2001, the Board of Supervisors adopted the enclosed resolution to change the venue of the Community Criminal Justice Program. Sincerely, ~ Ella Washington-Carey, CI~) EWC/mms Attachment Printed on recycled paper RESOLUTION TO CHANGE VENUE OF THE COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission adopted a resolution on October 4, 2001 supporting the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position of the Thomas Jefferson Area CommUnity Criminal Justice Board from planning district offices to the offices of OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections located at 750 Harris Street in Charlottesville, Virginia, 22903; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on September 10, 2001, the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board passed a resolution approving the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position from the Planning District Commission office to OAR- Jefferson Area Community Corrections; and WHEREAS, both the Planning District Commission and the Community Criminal Justice Board are in agreement that the proposed relocation would benefit the Thomas Jefferson area; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle Board of Supervisors approves and supports the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections and agrees tothe transfer of the financial management of all Community Criminal Justice Board funding to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of five to zero on November 7, 2001. ~er, oar o ~uperws. o/-s Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board P.O. Box 1505, Charlottesville, VA 22902-1505 (804) 979-7310 * Fax (804) 979-1597 Albemarle, Charlottesville, Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene, Louisa, Madison, Nelson, Orange Ms. Ella WashingtOn-Carey, Clerk County of Albemarle Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Washington-Carey: Enclosed is a copy of a resolution to change the venue of the Community Criminal Justice Program that is mutually supported by the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board (CCJB) and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC). As the Chair of the CCJB I would like to request that the enclosed resolution be added the next Board of Supervisors meeting agenda, scheduled for November 7, 2001, under a consent resolution agenda item. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or concerns (951-6300) or Mr. Thomas Foley, Assistant County Executive with the County of Albemarle, who is also a Board Member of the CCJB. Sincerely, Chair, Thomas Jefferson Area CCJB Public Defender, Charlottesville - Albemarle Office of the Public Defender CC; Thomas Foley, Assistant County Executive Thomas von Hemert, Criminal Justice Planner Thomas Jefferson Planning District commisSion 300 East Main Street, 1st Floor Mall Entrance PO Box 1505, Charlottesville VA 22902-1505 (434) 979-PD10 (7310) + FAX (434) 979-1597 City of (2harlottes~-ille Ke~4n L~ch Nancy Daraon Albemarle County Walter F. Perkins Sally H. Thomas Fluvanna County Thomas E. Payne Lea Gardner Greene Count3' 'Steve Catalano Philip Arms Louisa County Figgerald A. Barnes Jane H. Poore Nelson County Harry S. Harris, Chair Fred Boger Executive Director Nan~ K. O'Brien RESOLUTION TO CHANGE THE VENUE OF THE COMMUNITY CRIM~i'AL JUSTICE PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Community Criminal Justice Board has reviewed the needs of the program currently located in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commissiori offices and determined that the program would be better integrated into the criminal justice system by co-locating in an organization more fully focused on criminal justice issues, and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that co-location in the Offender Aid and Restoration program would provide the benefits to be derived from closer association with criminal justice issues, and WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission has reviewed the issues as well and come to the same conclusion and supports the move of the program to OAR, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission supports the request of the Community Criminal Justice Board to move the program and the financial management of the program to OAR as expeditiously as possible. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Commission requests the localities &nd Central Virginia Regional Jail to agree to the change of venue for this program for which they provide the funds. Harry H. Harris, Chair, TJPDC E-Mail: tjpd¢@'tjpdc.org + Web Sire: www.tjpdc.org · - Virginia Relay Users: 711 (TDD) DATE Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal JustiCe Board P.O. Box ~ 505, Charlottesville, VA 22902-1505 (804) 979-7310 * Fax (804) 979-1597 Albemarle, Charlottesville, Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene, Louisa, Madison, Nelson, Orange RESOLUTION To Change the Venue of the Community Criminal Justice Program WltEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission adopted a resolution on October 2, 2001 supporting the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position of the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board from planning district offices to the offices of OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections located at 750 Harris Street in Charlottesville, Virginia 22903, and WHEREAS, at its meeting on September 10, 2001, the Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board Passed a resolution approving the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position from the Planning District Commission office to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections, and WHEREAS both the Planning District Commission and the Community Criminal Justice Board are in agreement that the proposed relocation would benefit the Thomas Jefferson Area NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that County of Albemarle Board of Supervisors approves and supports the relocation of the Criminal Justice Planner position to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections and agrees to the transfer of the financial management of all Community Criminal Justice Board funding to OAR-Jefferson Area Community Corrections. SIGNED: DATE: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the residents of Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751) are concerned about traffic on their streets and the potential hazard it creates for the numerous children that live on these two roads; and WHEREAS, the residents believe that a "Child At Play" sign would help alleviate some their concerns; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby supports the community's requests for VDOT to install the "Child At Play~ signs on Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751). I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of the Resolution duly adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of ..... five to zero on November7, 2001. Clerk, Board of Superv~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683)and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751) Child At Play Sign SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request to install Child At Play sign(s) Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751) STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley,Cilimberg,Benish,Wade BACKGROUND: AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: Yes ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: ~~'~"~" The residents of Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751) have petitioned the County to request the Virginia Department of Transportation to install Child At Play signs on Shelton Mills Road and Brownsville Road (Attachment A). This request requires a resolution of support from the Board of Supervisors. These roads are located in the western part of the County, off of Route 250 West and near the intersection of Route 240/250/635 (Attachment B). Shelton Mills Road intersects with Brownsville Road. DISCUSSION: 1. "Child At Play" signs shall only be considered on secondary roads. The residents have requested the signs to be located on Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751). Both of these roads are secondary roads. 2. The request must come from a Homeowner's Association where applicable. Staff has received a petition from the residents of both roads. There is no established neighborhood association(s). There must be child activity attraction nearby for the sign to be considered. Staff could not identify any particular child activity attractions, but considers these locations acceptable for Child At Play signs because of the geometrics of the roads. There are many residents along these two roads with young children that often walk or bicycle on the roads to visit one another, yet the reads are narrow with poor site distance for seeing pedestrians and bikers. AJso, residents from surrounding communities often come to Shelton Mills Road and Brownsville Road to walk. Although it is not a major attraction, many residents visit the scenic Stockton Creek which Shelton Mills Road crosses. There are no sidewalks on either road. VDOT recently posted a 25-mph speed limit on these two roads due to the traffic and geometrics. The installation of the sign shall not conflict with any existing traffic control devices. The proposed location of the signs will not conflict with any existing traffic control devices. Staff will work with VDOT to determine the exact location for the signs. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Su pervisors endorse a resolution supporting Child At Play signs on Shelton Mills Road (Rt. 683) and Brownsville Road (Rt. 751). 01.201 10-26-01 A0C):50 IN ATTACHMENT A Neighborhood Request for Traffic Signage We the undersigned residents of Brownsville Road and Shelton Mill Road in Albemarle County are asking the Board of Supervisors and Virginia Department of Transportation to install "Child at Play" and speed limit signs on the above-cited roads. Over the last few years a significant demographic shift has occurred on in our neighborhood. Several long-term residents without children have moved away, and those homes are now occupied by families with children who play in their yards and bicycle on the county roads. Many families have pets, who accompany the children as they play. We ask that a "Child at Play" sign be installed at each end of Brownsville Road, at its east and west intersections with 250 West. Neither Brownsville nor Shelton Mill Road has a speed limit posted, and both contain intersections, curves and areas of poor site distance. It is our understandir~g that where there is no speed limit posted, the limit is 55 miles per hour by default. Tl~e.neighbors feel strongly that a speed limit of 25 miles per hour is appropriate, given the development pattern within the neighborhood, narrow road width, and engineering issues. With an increasing level of activity occurring throughout the rural area, we too have experienced an increase in volume and speed on our roads and thus safe travel speed becomes even more important. Thank you for your consideration and action on our request. Residents of Brownsville Road and Shelton Mill Road: Name (print) Address Signature Date Name (print) Address Signature Date ALBEMARLE COUNTY ATTACHMENT B / '-. 66 57 69 95 99A tOO 57 Illl 72 WHITE HALL DISTRICT SECTION 56 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Proposal for Biodiversity Work Group S U BJ ECT/PROPOSAL/REQU EST: AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION.: CONSENT AGENDA: Staff proposes that the County establish a temporary "Biodiversity Work Group" that will assist in development of the Biological Resources Inventory called for by the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Clark Backg round: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: Yes INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY:,/~~'~'''~'~''''''-''''-'' The "Natural Resources and Cultural Assets" chapter of the Comp rehensive Plan states that the County should: "Establish an advisory committee to assist the County in overseeing the development of a Biological Resources Inventory and the integration of such an inventory into the planning process." Staff is now preparing for the first stage of this work, the development of the Biological Resources Inventory. Discussion: The Comprehensive Plans calls for a standing Biodiversity Committee to address biodiversity issues and their relationships to County policy. One of the first tasks called for in the Biodiversity section of the Plan is a Biological Resources Inventory. In order to carry out this inventory efficiently, staff recommends the formation of a temporary "Biodiversity Work Group," whose task would be to prepare the Inventory, assess the biological value of various resources, and provide other background information necessary to the functioning of the ultimate Biodiversity Committee. (The ultimate committee would be charged with developing an action plan for protecting biodiversity, reporting to the Board on the state of the County's biological resources, facilitating voluntary protection efforts, assisting with public education materials, and assisting with policy development related to biological resources. It would also have a wider representation of community members and groups, in order to build consensus on policy directions,) Work Group members would be selected to provide the widest available base of local knowledge and academic background to support the Biological Resources Inventory. While the Work Group would establish the foundations of the Inventory and complete those portions available from existing data, the Inventory would be added to and monitored over the long term by staff and the standing Biodiversity Committee. Staff believes that this Work Group will provide vital information and expertise in developing the Biological Resources Inventory, which would be difficult or im possible to complete without such assistance. Further, developing the Inventory through a working group of experts will allow us to have significant amounts of data in place before policy-development discussions (with the full committee) begin. This will both better inform the committee and isolate the initial data-gathering process from the policy discussions. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board establish a County Biodiversity Work Group, with the following parameters: Duties/Mission: To advise and coordinate in the development of a Biological Resources Inventory and to identify ~ssues relating to biological resources in the County. Specific functions to undertake include: n Develop methods for and provide expertise and guidance in developing a Biological Resources Inventory for the County ll-Ol-O1 Ali:O§ IN AGENDA TITLE: Proposal for Biodiversity Work Group AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 Page 2 of 2 [] Determine criteria for identifying the types of biological resources to be inventoried (organisms vs. landscapes/ecosystems, etc.) Provide preliminary judgements of the biological value of various resources, and assess their priorities for conservation Assess existing data for its value to the Inventory, and assist in making that data available to the County's GIS databases Evaluate methods of conducting the Inventory [] Analyze and adapt local naturalists' field data for use in the County's biodiversity planning process [] Assess prospects for donations to the Inventory of time, expertise, or other resources from the community, including the University of Virginia [] Recommend one or more approaches for conduct of the Inventory to the Board of Supervisors, with estimates of costs [] Provide time, data, and other support to assist with the Inventory [] Assist in development of preliminary materials for public education on biodiversity Make recommendations regarding the size, composition, and necessary expertise for the permanent Biodiversity Committee Membership: A working committee of approximately 12 members. Membership includes individuals with experience in natural history (including those with detailed knowledge of local wildlife, plants, and other resources); terrestrial, aquatic, and landscape ecology; biological conservation; population genetics; forestry; geology and soils; Geographic Information Systems for conservation; and adult science education. Length of Term of the Work Group: 18 months from its first meeting. Frequency of Meetings: Monthly meetings of the complete group, plus meetings of subgroups as needed to complete tasks and supply information. If the Board agrees with the parameters above, staffwill contact groups and individuals with the areas of experience listed above and ask that they agree to serve on the Work Group. Appointments to the permanent Biodiversity Committee would be made by the Board of Supervisors when the Work Group has completed its tasks. Attachments A. Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan, pages 72-75 01.203 Albemarle County Natural R~sources and Cultural Assets OBJECTIVE: Implementation of a Biodiversity Program Increase the community's awareness of the importance of biodiversity to encourage protection of biological resources. BUILDING BIODIVERSITY AWARENESS We should value our natural surroundings as ecosystems that provide essential services to humans. Destruction and fragmentation of habitat is usually not deliberate, but results from other activities such as building a new home. Therefore, increasing the public's awareness of biodiversity, and how the public's actions affect our ecosystems, is key to implementing a successful program. Other than the Shenandoah National Park and other publicly owned parks and school sites, almost all of the land in Albemarle County is owned privately. Thus a motivated, informed citizenry can greatly effect changes in the health of ecosystems through increased awareness of the importance of biodiversity. Strategy: Develop and disseminate educational and technical material for the purposes of informing the general public, developers, and private land owners, including residents of urban Development Areas, on the value of biodiversity and volunteer techniques that can be used to protect biological resources located on their land. Recommendations: Develop material and conduct educational sessions to provide information to the public on the importance of biological resources to our County and the positive effect these resources have on maintaining our high quality of life. Develop illustrations and other materials that demonstrate biological resource protection efforts that developers can consider utilizing when developing a site. . · Educate individual landowners through pamphlets and other methods on immediate volunteer efforts they can do to protect biological resources on their property. The County could provide information at meetings or in leaflets to explain the importance of biodiversity and to inform landowners how to protect biological resources on their land. For example tO: · Seek to reduce habitat fragmentation by maintaining large contiguous areas of forests, meadows, wetlands, and streams. · Plan to allow old growth forest areas to develop. · Resist the urge to remove all dead timber. · Minimize lawn areas; plant and maintain meadows instead. · Avoid exotic and non-native plants; use native shrubs and trees that produce berries. 72 Albemarle County Natural Resources and Cultural Assets · Sow seeds of native wild flowers. · Keep livestock out of the streams· · Put up nesting boxes. · Minimize'the use of pesticides. · Preserve fencerows in a natural state as habitat for wildlife. · Do not allow domesticated pets to roam free, especially at night. · Learn to recognize and suppress invasive non-native plant species such as garlic mustard (/illiaria petiolata) and mile-a-minute (Po~ygonutn perfoliaturn). OBJECTIVE: Through a Biological Resources Inventory, develop systematic knowledge of the types and distributions of biological resources in Albemarle CoUnty, and develop an understanding of the requirements of our ecosYstems. CONDUCTING A BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES INVENTORY The County needs to develop systematic knowledge of the type and dist~'ibution of biological resources in the area. The Open Space and Critical Resources Plan, adopted in 1992, recommended completion of a critical resource inventory to plan for open space and significant resource protection in the Rural Area. Areas containing significant biological resources may be identified by a number of criteria, such as habitats of specific plant or animal types, catchment or filter areas, riparian areas, mountain areas, unbroken patches of forests, and patches of land that have been relatively undisturbed by humans. Sources for the preliminary identification of areas of concern include: aerial photos, satellite images, multispectral imagery, and digitized spatial data bases. Data bases available for Albemarle County include surface water distribution, elevations, soil types, vegetative cover types, and land classified by usage type. These databases can be used to construct layers in a Geographic Information Sysytem (GIS), to be incorporated into the-existing County GIS system. Other sources include the citizens of the County. Many local residents are avid, experienced naturalists and could provide much information on the distribution of plant and animal species and communities. Local foresters also have a great deal of firsthand knowledge of the distributions of forests of different types. A biodiversity committee composed of knowledgeable and interested citizens is essential for the coordination of the Biological Resources Inventory. Strategy: Establish an advisory committee to assist the County in overseeing the development of a Biological Resources Inventory and the integration of such an inventory into the planning process. 73 Albemarle County Natural Resources and Cultural Assets APPOINTING A BIODIVERSITY COMMITTEE A Biodiversity Committee should be appointed to oversee the development of a Biological Resources Inventory and its integration into the planning process. The committee should be composed of interested citizens representing environmental, agricultural, forestry, and business interests. Members might include local foresters and farmers, conservation biologists, skilled amateur naturalists, a representative of the Shenandoah National Park, land owners, developers and other concerned citizens. The Biodiversity Committee should be a continuing committee. It should assist the staff in developing an action plan for protecting biological resources, and should periodically report to the Board of Supervisors on the state of our biological resources. The responsibilities of this committee would be to: 1) develop public educational materials on biodiversity; 2) develop methods and oversee a Biological Resources Inventory to be conducted for the County;, 3) solicit regional cooperation among nearby counties in collaborating on a regional inventory; 4) determine criteria for identifying the types of biological resources to be inventoried; 5) assess prospects for donations to the Inventory of time, expertise or other resources from the community, including the University of Virginia; 6) evaluate methods of conducting the Inventory; 7) recommend one or more approaches for conduct of the inventory to the Board of St~pervisors,' with estimates of' costs; 8) assist staff in developing an action plan (discussed below) that specifies detailed steps for achieving protection of biodiversity as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan; and 9) provide periodic reports to the Board of Supervisors on the state of biodiversity in the County. OBJECTIVE: Conserve ecological communities to ensure their continued genetic diversity, and protect ecosystems that provide essential services to h~mans. Strategy:Staff will develop an action plan, with assistance from the Biodiversity Committee, and through a public participation process, to protect significant areas of biological resources. 74 Albemarle County Natural R~sources and Cultural Assets DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING AN ACTION PLAN FOR ACHIEVING BIODIVERSITY Following the completion of the Biological Resources Inventory, staff should develop an action plan in conjunction with the biodiversity committee. This plan should provide specific details for achieving the protection of biodiversity and biological resources as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. Actions to be addressed in the action plan at a minimum should include: How the information obtained from the biological inventory will be incorporated into the land-use decision making process. Procedures to protect biological resources may be similar to the implementation procedures for significant resources outlined in the Open Space Plan. · Establishing educational programs. · Procedures for the establishment/maintenance of a biological resource dktabase. Voluntary measures that could possibly be utilized by the County such as use-value assessments of rural lands, agricultural/forestal districts, conservation easements, etc. to protect areas identified as significant biological resources. · Whether there is a need for hiring a County staff member with expertise in conservation biology, and/or training existing County staff in principles of conservation bioiogy. Source References: Bierregaard, R. 1992. The Biological Dynamics of Tropical Rain Forest Fragments. BioSdence 42: 859-866. Olivier, T., Blair, C., Hermsmeier, J., Mellon, M., Ray G.C., and McCormick-Ray, J. 1996. Citizens for Albemarle: Protecting Our Biological Heritage. Albemarle County, VA. Primack, R. 1993. Essential of ConservatiOn Biology. Sunderland, MA. World Conservation Monitoring Centre. Biodiversity-./In Overview. http://www.wcmc.org, uk/infoserv/biogen/biogen.html#what 75 Albemarle County Service Serving · Conserving October 18, 2001 Board of Supervisors County of Albemarle 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Ladies and Gentlemen: Enclosed is a copy of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001. This report is being distributed to our trustees, financial advisors, underwriters and rating agencies, as well as central depository institutions and other interested parties, in order to both satisfy reporting requirements and provide.current financial and statistical dam on the Authority's operations. I welcome any comments or suggestions, and hope that you fred this report useful. Sincerely yours, Raoul James Kister Finance Director Enclosure 10-19-01 A09:03 N 168 Spotnap Road · P.O. Box 2738 · Charlottesville, VA 22902 · Tel (804) 977-4511 · Fax (804) 979-0698 www. acsanet.com FAX (434) 972-4126 COUNTY OF ALBEMARI F- Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 Mclntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 TELEPHONE [434) 296-5832 TTD (434) 972-4012 October 16, 2001 Irving L. Jones, III and Janice M~ Spink 1001 Woodlands Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND PARCELS- Tax Map 44, Parcel 4F Property of (Irving L. Jones, II! and Janice M. Spink ) Section 10.3.1 Dear Ms. Spink and Mr. Jones: The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information for the above-noted properties. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination that Tax Map 44, Parcel 4F is comprised of two separate parcels. The 12 ½ tract described below contains five (5) theoretical development rights. The balance of Parcel 4F has no (0) theoretical development rights The basis for this determination is provided below. Our records indicate Tax Map 44, Parcel 4F contains 35.810 acres and two (2) dwellings. The most recent deed for this parcel is recorded in Deed Book 1396, page 519. The parcel is not in an Agricultural and Forestal District. Deed Book 692, page 829 is the most recent instrument for this property recorded prior to the date of adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance (December 10, 1980). It is a certificate of a plat of the lands of C. Mercer Garnett and Yates Carr Gamett, dated May 1, 1980. The plat dated March 24, 1980 and recorded with this certificate shows a 62.4 +/- acre tract identified as Parcel A. The subject parcel of this determination, 4F is the residue of Parcel A after the creation of Parcels 4L, 4M, 4F1, 4F2 and 4F3. A note on the plat states: "Parcels A, B, C, D and E is the property of C. Mercer Garnett, Jr. and Yates Carr Garnett- DB 651 - 760; D.B. 539 -417 (Plat)." An unidentified parcel line is shown on this plat, as well as on the 1980 tax map, suggesting the existence of a separate parcel within this tract. The following deed references are provided to establish this 12 ½ acre tract as a separate parcel: :\DEPT1Building & Zoning\Determin of Parcel~Jones 44-4F Parcel Det.doc 10-18-01 Ail:07 tN Jones and Spink Determination October 16, 2001 Page 2 Deed Book 651, page 760, dated May 4, 1978, conveyed three tracts of land from C. Mercer Garnet, Jr. and Yates Carr Garnett to C. Mercer Garnet, Jr. and Yates Carr Garnet[ as tenants in common. The three tracts are described as follows: First. The greater portion of the tract known as Sunnyside containing 252 acres located on the southern side of Hydraulic Road. The balance of the 328 acre tract is on the northern side of Hydraulic Road. This is described on a survey by Hugh Sims dated June, 1934. The portion of Parcel A, exclusive of the 12 ¼ referenced below, that is shown on the May 24, 1980 plat was divided from this 252 acre tract. Second. All of that certain tract containing 12 ¼ acres adjoining the land described above, conveyed to C. Mercer Garnet[ from Annie Waddell, by deed dated July 14, 1942 and recorded in Deed Book 255, page 76. This 12.5 acre tract is shown by a dashed line as part of Parcel A on the Plat dated May 24, 1980 but is not further identified as a separate parcel. Third All of that certain tract containing by estimate 45 acres conveyed to C. Mercer Garnet, Jr. and Yates Carr Garnett from C. M. Garnett and Georgia L. Garnett by deed dated May 20, 1950 and recorded in Deed Book 291, page 220. This tract is located on the north side of Route 676 and is not part of this determination: Deed Book 255, page 76, dated July 14, 1942 conveyed 12.5 acres from Annie E. Waddell & Belle H. Waddell to C. Mercer Gamett and David C. Wood, Trustee. This deed references a plat recorded in Deed Book 130, page 237. That plat is made part of this file. Therefore, the tract of land identified as Parcel A on the above referenced plat, dated May 24, 1980, was comprised of two separate parcels on the date of the adoption of the zoning ordinance. One parcel contained 12.5 acres as described in Deed Book 255, page 76 and shown on a plat recorded in Deed Book 130, page 237. The other parcel is the balance of Parcel A that was divided from the tract known as Sunnyside. Each of these parcels had five development rights on December 10, 1980. The following deed references are provided to determine thedevelopment rights associated with the balance of Parcel 4F. The acreage figures match those shown of the plats and include the 12 ½ acres discussed above. Deed Book 821, page 506, dated December 5, 1984 is a certificate of a plat by R. O. Snow dated April 16, 1984 of the lands of C. M. Garnett and Yates Carr Gamett. The plat shows the division of two lots from Parcel 4F. These are now identified as Parcels h\DEFrr~Building & Zoning\Determin of Parcel~Jones 44-4F Parcel Det. doc Jones and Spink Determination October 16, 2001 Page 3 4L and 4M. These two lots each used one (1) development right. This plat also conveyed ParCel A3, containing 2.483 acres with one (1) development right from Parcel 4F to Parcel 4G. As a result of these transactions, Parcel 4F contained 48.477 acres and two (2) development rights. Deed Book 877, page 394, dated May 9, 1986 conveyed 50.96 acres from C. Mercer Garnett & Yates Carr Gamett to Irving L. Jones III & Janice M. Spink. The plat by R. O. Snow, dated April 28, 1986 and recorded with this deed restored the 2.483 acres that was conveyed to Parcel 4G back to Parcel 4F. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 4F contained 50.96 acres and three (3) development rights. Deed Book 920, page 405 dated February 6, 1987 is a certificate of a plat by R. O. Snow dated December 16, 1986 of the lands of Irving L. Jones III & Janice M. Spink The plat recorded with this deed. divided 3.80 acres from Parcel 4F. This new lot is identified as Parcel 4F1 on Tax Map 44. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 4F contained 47.16 acres and two (2) development rights. Deed Book 940, page 786, dated May 29, 1987 is a certificate of a plat by R. O. Snow dated May 20, 1987 of the lands of Irving L. Jones Ill & Janice M. Spink The plat shows the division of one lot from Parcel 4F. This is now identified as Parcel 4F2. This lot used one (1) development right. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 4F contained 41.83 acres and one (1) development right. Deed book 1327, page 408 is a deed of exchange, dated July 21, 1993 between C. Mercer Garnett & Yates Carr Garnett and Irving L. Jones Ill & Janice M. Spink. The plat by Roger Ray & Assoc., Inc., dated June 15, 1993 recorded with this deed shows an exchange of Parcel X and Parcel Y; each containing 0.13 acres. The plat also divided a new, 7.84 acre lot from Parcel 4F. Parcel A6 is now identified'as Parcel 4F3 on Tax Map 44. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 4F contained 33.993 acres and no (0) development rights. Deed Book 1396, page 519, dated April 12, 1994 is a certificate of a plat by Roger Ray & Assoc., Inc. dated May 9, 1994 of the lands of Irving L. Jones Ill & Janice M. Spink. The plat adjusts the boundary, between Parcels 4F and 4F3. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 4F contained 35.813 acres and no (0) development rights. Therefore, the tract of land identified as Parcel A on the above referenced plat was comprised of two separate parcels on the date of the adoption of the zoning ordinance. One parcel contained 12.5 acres as described in Deed Book 255, page 76 and shown on a plat recorded in Deed Book 130, page 237. The other parcel is the balance of Parcel A containing 49.9 acres that was divided from the tract known as Sunnyside. Each of these parcels had five development rights on December 10, 1980. h\DEP'P, Building& Zoning\Oetermin of Parcel~Jones 44-4F Parcel Det.doc Jones and Spink Determination October 16, 2001 Page 4 These parcels are entitled to the noted development rights if all other applicable regulations can be met. These development rights are theoretical in nature but do represent the maximum number of lots containing lesSthan twenty one acres allowed to be created by right. In addition to the development right lots, a "parent parcel" may create as many parcels containing a minimum of twenty-one acres as it has land to make. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $95. The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, ~ohn Shepherd Manager of Zoning Administration Copies: Gay Carver, Real Estate Department ~El'ia Carey, Clerk Board of Supervisors Reading Files I:\DEPT~Building & Zoning\Determin of Parcel~Jones 44-4F Parcel Der.doc FAX (434] 972-4126 10-22-01 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 Mclntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 TELEPHONE (434] 296-5832 AtO:08 ~N TTD (434) 972-4012 October 17, 2001 Jason K. Pollock P.O. Box 271 Batesville, VA 22924 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND PARCELS- Tax Map 71, Parcel 26, Tax Map 85, Parcel 21, Tax Map 85, Parcel 22B and Tax Map 85A, Parcel 1. (Property of Jason K. Pollock known as Lochwood Farm) Section 10.3.1 Dear Mr. Pollock: The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information for the above-noted properties. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination that Tax Map 71, Parcel 26 contains five (5) theoretical development rights. Tax Map 85 Parcel 21 contains no (0) theoretical development rights. Tax Map 85, parcel 22B contains six (6) theoretical development rights; five within the original Parcel 21 and exclusive of the 8.91 acres shown on the plat at Deed Book 721, page 514 and one within the original Parcel 22B. Tax Map 85A, parcel 1 contains one (1) theoretical development right associated with the original Parcel 1 on Tax.Map 85A. The basis for this determination is provided below. Our records indicate Tax Map 71, Parcel 26 contains 21.730 acres and no (0) dwellings. The most recent deed for this parcel is recorded in Deed Book 1642, page 554. The parcel is included in the Batesville Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent deed for this property prior to the date of adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance (December 10, 1980) is recorded in Deed Book 595, page 413, The deed, dated May 17, 1976, conveyed 21.73 acres from Virginia Parker to Lee R. Johnston & Margaret S. Johnston. It is described as the same property conveyed to Herman and Virginia Parker by deed recorded in Deed Book 508, page 455. A more detailed description is provided in that deed. This 21.73 acre tract is a parent parcel. Deed Book 508, page 455, dated June 15, 1972, conveyed 21.73 acres from Joe R. Headstream & Dorothy L. Headstream to Herman M. Parker & Virginia C. Parker. The h\DEPT~Buiiding & Zoning\Determin of Parcel\Pollock 85-21 & 22B 85A-1 71-26 ACE:doc Jason Pollock October 17, 2001 Page 2 deed references a plat by Hugh F. Simms dated August 1943 that is recorded in Deed Book 258, page 59. The parcel is described as being as being that portion of the property shown on said plat lying west of the present Scottsville Turnpike, now Route 692, except that portion containing 2.74 acres shown on a plat attached to a deed to Lee R. Johnson and wife and except that portion lying west of Route 692 shown on a plat attached to said deed to Fredrick Davidson and wife. This 2.74 acre parcel is identified on Tax Map 85 as Parcel 22B. Deed Book 1496, page 36, dated September 12, 1995, is a deed of assumption between Lee R. Johnston & Margaret S. Johnston to Lee R. Johnston & Margaret S. Johnston and Lee Robert Johnston, Trustee of the Lee Robert Johnston Revocable Trust and to Margaret Schuster Johnston, Trustee of the Margaret Schuster Johnston Revocable Trust. The deed conveyed an undivided one-half interest in Parcels One, Two, Three and Four. Parcel Four is described as containing 21.73 acres and as being the same property conveyed by deed recorded in Deed Book 595, page 413. Deed Book 1642, page 554, dated September 11, 1997, conveyed the four parcels identified in Deed Book 1496, page 36 from Margaret S. Johnston, as Trustee of the Lee Robert Johnston Revocable Trust and as Trustee of the Margaret Schuster Johnston Revocable Trust to Jason K. Pollock. The description of Parcel Four states the tract contains 21.73 acres and that it is designated as Tax Map 71, Parcel 26. There have been no off conveyances since this transaction. Therefore, this parcel is determined to have five (5) theoretical development rights. Our records indicate Tax Map 85, Parcel 21 now contains 42.0 acres and no (0) dwellings. The most recent deed for this parcel is recorded'in Deed Book 1993, page 250. The parcel is included in the Batesville Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent deed for this property prior to the date of adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance (December 10, 1980)is recorded in Deed Book 499, page 197. The deed, dated December 16, 1971, conveyed 113 acres from James H. Nay & Margaret H. Nay to Lee R. Johnston & Margaret S. Johnston. This deed included a plat by Thomas-Blue, dated November 2, 1971, of two parcels containing in the aggregate 7.18 acres. The 113 acre tract is the residue of Parcel 21 after the off-conveyance of these two lots (Parcel 21C and Parcel 21B). The 113 acre tract is the parent parcel. Deed Book 721, page 512, dated July 17, 1981, conveyed 8.9 acres from Herbert W. Stuart & Patricia B. Stuart to Lee R. Johnston & Margaret S. Johnston. This land was shown an a plat by R. O. Snow revised on June 18, 1981. The plat carried the following note: "The 8.91 acre parcel is not to become an individual parcel but is to be added to and to become a portion of Parcel 21, T.M. 85. No division rights are assigned with the h\DEP%Buildin§ & Zoning\Determin of Parcel\Pollock 85-21 & 22B 85A-1 7t-26 ACE.doc Jason Pollock October 17, 2001 '-- Page 3 8.91 acre tract from the Herbert W. Stuart property." The resulting acreag_e was not indicated on the plat. It is assumed to be 121.91 acres. Deed Book 1496, page 36, dated September 12, 1995, is a deed of asSumption and is described above. The deed conveyed an undivided one-half interest in Parcels One, Two, Three and Four. Parcel One is described as containing 120 acres less and except two tracts containing in the aggregate 7.18 acres and as the same property conveyed by deed recorded in Deed Book 499, page 197. Deed Book 1642, page 554, dated September 11, 1997, is described above. It conveyed four parcels identified in Deed Book 1496, page 36 from Margaret S. Johnston, as Trustee of the Lee Robert Johnston Revocable Trust and as Trustee of the Margaret Schuster Johnston Revocable Trust to Jason K. Pollock. Parcel One is described as containing 120 acres less and except two tracts containing in the aggregate 7.18 acres and as the same property conveyed by deed recorded in Deed Book 499, page 197. Deed Book 1993, page 250 is a certificate of a plat, by Roger W. Ray dated November 5, 2000, showing the lands of Jason K. Pollock acquired by Deed Book 1496, page 36. This plat conveyed Parcel X containing 22.97 acres from Tax Map 85, Parcel 21 to Tax Map 85A, Parcel 1. No development rights were transferred with parcel X. This plat also conveyed Parcel Y, containing 53.97 acres, and five development rights from Parcel 21 to Parcel 22B. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 21 retained 42 acres and no (0) development rights. Our records indicate Tax Map 85, Parcel 22B now contains 56.710 acres and no (0) dwellings. The most recent deed for this parcel is recorded in.Deed Book 1993, page 250. The parcel is included in the Batesville Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent deed for this property prior to the date of adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance (December 10, 1980) is recorded in Deed Book 508, page 451. The deed, dated June 15, 1972 conveyed 2.74 acres from Joe R. Headstream & Dorothy L. Headstream to Lee R. Johnston & Margaret S. Johnston. The subdivision plat by Thomas Blue, dated June 8, 1972, was approved on June 14, 1972. This 2.74 acre parcel is a parent parcel. Deed Book 1642, page 554, dated September 11, 1997, is described above. It conveyed four parcels identified in Deed Book 1496, page 36 from Margaret S. Johnston, as Trustee of the Lee Robert Johnston Revocable Trust and as Trustee of the Margaret Schuster Johnston Revocable Trust to Jason K. Pollock. Parcel Two is described as containing 2.74 acres and is the same property conveyed by the deed recorded in Deed Book 508, page 451. h\DEP-P, Building& Zoning\Determin of Parcel\Pollock 85-21 & 22B 85A-1 71-26 ACE.doc Jason Pollock October 17, 2001 Page 4 Deed Book 1642, page 554, dated September 11, 1997, is described above. It conveyed four parcels identified in Deed Book 1496, page 36 from Margaret S. Johnston, as Trustee of the Lee Robert Johnston Revocable Trust and as Trustee of the Margaret Schuster Johnston Revocable Trust to Jason K. Pollock..Parcel Two is described as containing 2.74 acres and is the same property shown on the plat by Thomas Blue recorded in Deed Book 508, page 453. Deed Book 1993, page 250 is a certificate of a plat, by Roger W. Ray dated November 5, 2000, showing the lands of Jason K. Pollock acquired by Deed Book 1496, page 36. This plat conveyed Parcel X containing 22.97 acres from Tax Map 85, Parcel 21 to Tax Map 85A, Parcel 1. No development rights were transferred with parcel X. This plat also conveyed Parcel Y, containing 53.97 acres, and five development rights from Parcel 21 to Parcel 22B. As a result of this transaction, Parcel 22B now contains 56.71 acres and six (6) theoretical development rights. One of these development rights is associated with the original Parcel 22B and five of these rights are associated with the original Parcel 21. The parent parcel does not include the 8.91 acres conveyed by the plat recorded in Deed Book 721, page 514: Our records indicate Tax Map 85A Parcel 1 now contains 22.97 acres and two dwellings. The most recent deed for this parcel is recorded in Deed Book 1993, page 250. The parcel is included in the Batesville Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent deed for this property prior to the date of adoption of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance (December 10, 1980) is recorded in Deed Book 583, page 585. This deed, dated October 24, 1975 conveyed two tracts of land from Fredrick Davidson & Janis L. Davidson to Jay A. Rothenberger & Sara D. Rothenberger. One of the parcels is described in part as all that certain lot of one (1). acres, more or less, located on the South fork of the Mechum River in Batesville. This 1 acre lot is a parent parcel. Deed Book 1874, page 664, dated April 5, 1999, conveyed 1 acre from Jay A. Rothenberger & Sara D. Rothenberger to Jason Pollock. It is described as being a portion of the property conveyed to the parties of the first part by deed of Frederick and Janice Davidson, dated October 24, 1975 and recorded in Deed Book 583, page 585. Deed Book 1993, page 250 is a certificate of a plat, by Roger W. Ray dated November 5, 2000, showing the lands of Jason K. Pollock acquired by Deed Book 1496, page 36. This plat conveyed Parcel X containing 22.97 acres from Tax Map 85, Parcel 21 to Tax Map 85A, Parcel 1. No development rights were transferred with parcel X. As a result of this transaction, Tax Map 85A, Parcel 1 now contains 23.99 acres and one theoretical development right associated with the original Parcel 1. h\DEPT1Building & Zoning\Determin of Parcel\Pollock 85-21 & 22B 85A-1 71-26 ACE.doc Jason Pollock October 17, 2001 Page 5 These parcels are entitled to the noted development rights if all other applicable regulations can be met. These development .rights are theoretical in nature but do represent the maximum number of lots containing less than twenty one acres allowed to be created by right. In addition to the development right lots, a "parent parcel" may create as many parcels containing a minimum of twenty-one acres as it has land to make. Effective January 2002, the 42 acre parcel will be identified as TM/P 85/21 D, the 23.99 acre parcel will be identified as TM/P 85/21 and the 56.71 acre parcel will be identified as TM/P 85/22B. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appea shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $95. The date notice of this determination was .given is the same as the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, J/ohn Shepherd Manager of Zoning Administration Copies: Gay Carver, Real Estate Department Ella Carey, Clerk Board of Supervisors McChesney Goodall, ACE Program Coordinator Reading Files Attachment: Plat by Roger W. Ray & Assoc., Inc. dated November 5, 2000 t:\DEPT~Building & Zoning\Determin of ParcehPollock 85-21 & 22B 85A-1 71-26 ACE.doc o~ °~ COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ~ UALITY James S. Gilmore, III Governor John Paul Woodley, Jr. Secretary of Natural Resources Valley Regional Office Street address: 4411 Early Road, Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801 Mailing address: P.O. Box 3000. Harrisonburg, VA 22801-3000 Telephone (540) 574-7800 Fax (540) 574-7878 http://www.deq.sta~e.va.us October 15, 2001 Dennis H. Treacy Director R. Bradley Chewning, P.E. Valley Regional Director Ms. Sally Thomas, Chairperson Albemarle County Board of Supervisors County Office Building 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Re: Moores Creek Regional STP, Permit No.VA0025518, Albemarle Cotmty Dear Ms. Thomas: In accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 62.1-44.15:4, this is to notify you of our receipt of the following wastewater discharge permit application: Modification of VPDES Permit No. VA0025518 to remove the zinc limit and all associated requirements and reducing the chlorine monitoring frequency based on new information received from the applicant. Applicant: Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Facility: Moores Creek Regional STP Location: 200 Franklin Street, Charlottesville Nature of Discharge: Sewage treatment facihty We will review the modification request and we may draft a permit modification for this discharge. If we draft a permit, a notice will appear in the local newspaper, probably in the next month, announcing our intention to issue the permit and inviting public comment on its content. This public comment period will run for 30 days from the date the notice first appears in the newspaper. In the meantime, the public is welcome to review the permit application at our office during normal business hours. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this notification. Sincerely, Norma C. Job Environmental Engineer Senior /OC CC; Permit Processing File JAUNT, Inc. 104 Keystone Place CharloHesville, VA 22902-6200 Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Albemarle County Executive 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 October 22, 2001 Dear Bob. We are pleased to submit our First Quarter Report for JAUNT services for FY02. The following is a summary of statistics for services ~n Albemarle County: Jul-Oct Estimated Actual Actual Estimated Actual Trips Trips Tri ps Hours Hours FY02 FY02 FY01 FY02 FY02 Agency 4,775 5,191 4,813 1,810 1,781 Urban Public 5,700 5,972 5,281 2,325 2,401 Rural Public 5,355 6,599 5,404 2,613 3,079 JABAJADC 1,800 1 436 1,401 676 430 NightNVknd 650 645 602 305 302 29 North 1,025 1,168 1,033 825 825 Actual Hours FY01 1,884 2,169 2,640 638 150 863 Total 19,305 21,011 18,534 8,554 8,818 8,344 Based on current financial and service information, we do not anticipate a budget shortfall at this time, though we will continue to monitor rural services, which are exceeding our expectations. Executive Director cc: Juandiego Wade Clifford Buys Carolyn Fowler Phone: (804) 296-3184, (800) 36JAUNT · Operations (804) 296-6174 ° Fax: (804) 296-4269 · www. avenue.org/jaunf Moving Central Virginians For Over 25 Years A Caring Retirement Community October 18, 2001 Walter Perkins, Chairman .A~bemarte Com~vy Board o~- Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Perkins: Our Lady of Peace is pleased to report that it has exceeded the requirements of the agreement dated November 24, 1992, by and between Our Lady of Peace, Inc., a Virginia non-profit corporation, and the County of Albemarle, Virginia. Our Lady of Peace now has in.residence,within its Assisted Living Facility eighteen indigent Albemarle County older adults. In' addition, there are eleven other hmited income Albemarle County elderly residents in our thirty bed Nursing Center. The Board of Directors of Our lady of Peace would like to convey our deepest and most sincere appreciation to you and the members of the Board of Supervisors for your ongoing support of the indigent elderly. We invite you and the other members of the Board of Supervisors to visit Our Lady of Peace at your convenience to see first hand the quality care all of the residents at Our Lady of Peace receive. Thank you again for your continued hard work on behalf of the elderly poor of A!bem~le Count,,. Sincerely, Rose M. Chioni President pc: Robert McNich°ls i .~ · .... . ..... :.. v~; . ,:... -. :-~ -.. Managemen~Agent . . . , 751 Hillsdale Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 804/973-1155 10-29-01 P03:39 IN A Caring Retirement Community October 18,2001 Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance County of Albemarle, Department of Finance 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Breeden: Re~ Certificate in accordance with Agreement dated November 24, 1992 by and between Our Lady of Peace, Inc., a Virginia non-profit corporation, and the County of Albemarle, Virginia. In accordance with the above referenced agreement, you will find enclosed a certificate from the Board of Directors attesting that Our Lady of Peace, Inc., is in compliance with paragraph 2 of the agreement. Thanking you and the Board of Supervisors for your assistance to the indigent elderly of Albemarle County. Sincerely, Rose M. Chioni President RMC/kj pc: Robert McNichols Management Agent 751 HillsdaIe Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 804/973-1155 A Caring Retirement Community Certificate Our Lady of Peace, Inc, herewith certifies that it is in compliance with the requirements of Paragraph 2 of the agreement dated November 24, 1992, by and between Our Lady of Peace, Inc., a Virginia non-profit corporation, and the County of Albemarle, Virginia. Our LadY of Peace, Inc. Rose M. Chioni, President 751 Hillsdale Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 804/973-1155 NOVEMBER Mission [] Essential Tasks Assessment [] Construction Maintenance Planning & Traffic Engineering · Issues Mission The VDOT Charlottesville Residency builds and maintains roads, provides transportation expertise and regulatory authority and facilitates traffic engineering issues for Albemarle and Greene Counties in ways that are: · focused on public safety · fiscally and environmentally responsible · supportive of alternative transportation means · supportive of neighborhood and regional development 2 ESSENTIAL TASKS TASK MMNTAIN SECONDARY & PRI~ARY ROADS ASSESSMENT (see legend below) REMARKS o ROW: mow, ditch, pipes, trim, guardrail, signs, patrols o ROADWAY: grade, pave, patch o EMERGENCY OPS o REPAIR & BUILD BRIDGES o MAINTAIN EQUIPMENT Legend: ( rea'~: 90-100% Excellent : $0-90% Go'od, room for improvement ~c<~: 70-80% Needs improvement Black: Below minimum standards Many gravel roads remain rough due to dry conditions Calcium chloride applied to many gravel roads - PMs completed 3 ESSENTIAL TASKS (continued) TASK ASSESSMENT (see legend below) 2. MANAGE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAdM o PE Activities o Project Construction REMARKS - New spreadsheet attached - 29 bridge - final Nov - 29/641 complete Legeu d: ( ~"~,~: 90-100% Excellent 80~90% Gnod~ room for improvement Re~,~: 70-80% Needs improvement Black: Below minimum standards 4 ESSENTIAL TASKS (continued) Task Assessment (See legend below) 3. CONDUCT PLANNING ACTIVITIES o Issue and review permits o Review site plans and rezoning request o Conduct studies and advise o Inspect and monitor subdivisions Remarks 39 land use permits issued, 3 subd submitted 3 major traffic studies under review Transportation Planner position vacant Legend: ( ~c~,~: 90-100% Excellent 80-90% Good, room for improvement ~,~: 70~80% Needs improvement Black: Below minimum standards 5 ESSENTIAL TASKS (continued) TASK 4. FACILITATE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT (see legend below) REMARKS o Request and advise on signals & signs o Request and advise on studies & data o Assist with design Turn over of Traffic Engineer at District Office Legend: ( r¢~: 90-I00% Excellent 80-90% Good~ room for improvement Re: 70-80% Needs improvement Black: Below minimum standards 6 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING November 2001 Albemarle County Six Year Plan Project Status Primary Projects PPM I~I) Scop- Field Fiekl Route S Contact ProjectNumber Description tag Survey Review P,H, Insp, R/W Adv. Comments 20 15996 BAA 00204)02.126,PEt01 BridgeReplacement-CariersBridge ~~~~~~ I2.0,3 , 20 17619 BAA 00204)02-127,PE101 PVCCto Monticello H.S.Erttrance No Ad, Date-Wait/ag forfimding 20 52494 BAA 0020-002d28,PEI01 Turnlanes atlnt, Rte~726-Scottsville ~ , Scop/ag 10.0t 53 18897 BAA 0053-002d01,B60t Bridge RepNcement-BucklslandCreek 2-02 6~02 2-03 10-03 12-03 250 50569 DWS 0250-002-1t4,115,C51BridgeRepL-Carroll&LimestoneCk, 10-01 2-02 1-03 250 56869 RDL 0250-002-116,C501 Lefl,?u,rn,tan~s ~,Route 6!6 10-02 , , Wait/ag forSc,ope approvalfornewdates No ad date set 29 16160 JAG 6029'002'F22,PE101Rte.29WesternBs~pass ~~~~~~~ WaitingforFundin~ 7 PRELIMINARY ENGINEE NG ,November 2001 ..... Albemarle County Six-Year Plan Project Status, ,, Secondary Projects PPM Dk&DereS~gn StreetName/ Field Field Route S ProjectNumber Descr~pt/on Scoping Smwey Review P.H. Inspect. R/W Adv. Comments Airpo r~ Road 649 2456 SIaM 06494)024 58,C50t 4-lane s w/s idcwa ~cs &bike lane s ~~~~~~ 74)3 NewAlignment CTB June 02 631 2530 BAA 0631-002-128,C$02 MeadowCreek Parkway ~~~~~ 64)4 NewP .H. by Co unty 9-2001 Free State Rd. Connector Waiting ibr resolution from County B.O.S. - 52393 JWH R000,002,2~9,C50I Construct21anes on44aneR/W ~ 12~01 ? ? ? ? ? Sched maychangependingdonatedR/W GraVel Roads Linds ayRd. Rte. 639 to Louisa Co. L/ne ,,~,I~ 54422 q6~?-,??P64~N501 W~denandPave N/A N/A N/A N/A 104)1 GravelRoadProject Mo untain VIS ta Rd. Ro ute 6 to 1.2 Mi E. Rte. 6 ...~3.~. ~4425 0737-002-P68,N501 Widen, pave &replace br/dge N/A N/A N/~ N/A 9432 GravelRoadPm~ect Secretarys Road R/Wnot available on 2 parcels 708 11130 - 0708~002-P 77,N501 34)2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 6-02 1~03 Grovel Road Project 8 PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING November 2001 Greene County Six Year Plan Project Status Field Field PauSePPMS Design Project Descriffion Sc(~e Survey Review P,H, Insp. ~ Ad,J, Commas Bacon Ho~ow I~d 627 D~eR~ad ~yo 650 57314 0650-039-P56,NS01 Fr.R~e. 810,c~l~.615 mmJjjJ~JjJj 9.02 624 17072 ~4.~02.P47,NS02Fr. Rte,623~0,55~..N.R~.623 ~ ~~ ~~ ~ '¢02 Watson ~d 640 2515 0~-03o¢137,N501Fr, RJe.6331oD~End 9 CONSTRUCTION PA ..... ...... CI'JARLOTTESVILL'E R~E$1DEI~CY CO,$TRLtC¥1~)N PR-~J~C~S , ..... ' -- ~ ' 2001 Percent ...... , .... Complete Street Name Project Description Duration JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOv DEC 6029-002-121,C502, B622, B624 Bridge Replacement SeminleTrail Comments! Rte. 29 NBLtraffic shifted io new bridge on 10-31-01. Anticipate 98 completion by end of November. 0029-002-129, C501 jSight Distance,improvement " ' se~inoie Yraii 'c~m'ments: Complete "' ~~ ~ ~~ 100 ....... 0637-002-P52, N501 j" Gravel Road I.mprovement ' " Dick wOods Road Com'ments: Pavement markir~g complete. ~ ~ ~~~ 100 0615-002:P64, N501 t. Gravel R~ad Improvement .... Lindsay ROad Comments: Contract to be awarded in November.'' ContiaCto, wi,I likely Tin work " 0 in eady spdng of 2002 dependent upon weather. 0022-002-1010, SR02 '[ Bridge RePlacement ' LoUisa Road . Comments: Traffic reduced to single lane at bridge with signals. Contractor working ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 on substructure. . ....... I ...... 10 CONSTRUCTION PAVING & CONSTRUCTION PROJ'ECTS ........ CHARLOTTESVILLE RESIDENCY CONSTRUCTION pROjECTS ............ 2001 Percent Complete 0637-002-6038, SR01 I Bridge Replacement Dick W~s Road ~ments: Replace bddge0~r !~ Creek: Tra~c r~uc~ t0 ~~~ ~ 15 Anticipate ptaci~, se, I bridge beams during second week of November, BO-7C-01 ,t, Bridge, rvlaintenance inte~[~e~ Comments: Anticipate ComPletion'°f bridge deck oveday work by [h'ird week of" 90 November dependent upon weather. .......... Overlay ..... Vadous PM~7B~01 I Asphalt Primaries and 'i~'mrn'ents:'Ro~es 780~ 875and 877(in areaof 0lO Lynchburg Rd.)remainto ~~~~ ~ ~ ' 80 Secondariescomplete original scheduled maintenance overlay. Widening areas of Rte, 29 SBL south of 1¢~4 have been added to this contract to be completed by end of November. GR-7B-01 ~, ....... Routes 20 and 29 Comments: Guardrail ins't~llation complete at cdtical location Rte: 29 SBL ~~ 5 approximately 2.5 miles north of Rte, 29/33 intersection, Mowing Patching Grade/machine/add stone Ditch/Pipe Guardrail Equip Maint Emergency Ops Other MAINTENANCE YANCEY MILLS HQ OCTOBER Mowed Rt 635, 691,633, 698, 748, 745, 696, 710, 708; long arm mowing on 689, F852, 692; cut I64 R/R bridges mtn Patched F177, 691 Sloped banks 738 & 250; 676 & 250; machined 633, 684,787, 682, 611,736, 636, 637, 689, 811 Clean equip for dry run Installed fence 693; traffic control for I64 bridge repair; NOVEMBER Long arm mowing Rt 250 mtn; cut bridges I64, 240, 250; cut limbs 689, F178, 691 Patch potholes on sec as needed Slope banks 693 machine secondaries as needed Finish repairs from dry run 12 Mowing Patching Grade/machine/ add stone Ditch/Pipe Guardrail Equip Maint Emergency Ops Other MAINTENANCE FI}AgE UNION HQ OCTOBER Completed mowing secondaries Mowing guardrail Rt 250 Removed dead trees Rt 829, 678 Spot patching Machined all gravel roads; repaired shoulders Rt 250 & Old Ivy Rd; received stone at HQ Cleaned drains; replaced large pipe in Belair Subd4 repaired pipe Rt 1472 As scheduled; completed equip repair for dry runs Applied calcium chloride to all gravel roads daily litter patrol NOVEMBER Finish g/r mowing; Remove dead tree Rt 29 ~ Haney's Market; trim & clean around bridges sec Patch cul-de-sac Rt 1554 Haul stone to 668, 687, 672; repair shoulders Rt 29 & sec.; machine gravel roads & clean; sweep intersections Rts 665, 601, 664, 660 Replace pipe Rt 663 Per schedule; Daily litter patrol; respond to 13 requests Mowing Patching MAINTENANCE BOYD TAVERN HQ OCTOBER Skin patching Rt 1487 Grade/machine/add stone Ditch~ipe Guardrail Equip Maint Emergency Ops Other All routes machined Shoulder work Rt 250 Opened pipes Rt 600, 640, 784, 747 Per schedule; dry runs Haz-mat clean up (asphalt tank) HQ Cleared r/w 231 & I64 Regional Jail Tree removal by contractor Rt 250; Fence repair NOVEMBER Pothole patching Rts 640, 600, 641, 1146 Shoulder repair Rt 250 & 231 Machine all routes as needed\ Shoulder, ditch, pipe Rt 20 As scheduled Dust control as needed Tree removal by contractor Rt 631,250, 20; clean bridges 14 Mowing Patching Grade/machine/add stone Ditch/Pipe Guardrail Equip Maint Emergency Ops Other M INTENANCE KEENE HQ OCTOBER Mowed Rts 630, 633, 631, 708,627, 727 Cut r/w 734, 1137 Skin patch 626 Machine 712,713, 795, 708, 761,717, 711, 760, 627, 716 Replace pipe 711,631 Rip rap & reshape ditches 699, 697 Per schedule; dry runs NOVEMBER Cut r/w 29, 633 Machine 703, 722, 723, 737, 735; haul stone as needed Reshape ditches 633, 723, 631,717; As scheduled; clean equip PM on bridge inspection 15 MAINTENANCE STANARDSVILLE HQ Mowing Patching Grade/machine/add stone Ditch,q~ipe OCTOBER Long arm mowing 61C607,670 Shoulder work on 29 Lee boy paver on I001 & 810 Cleaned bridges & structures NOVEMBER Long arm mowing sec. Brush & tree removal 29 median Machine non hard surf roads Replace pipe Rts 1001,743 Guardrail Equip Maint Emergency Ops Other Completed all due PMs Daily PM per schedule Litter pick up 16 EQUIPMENT ! T E I~.~'~ ~(ANC EY IVI ~LLS POSSIBLE # OF DAYS 0 P EI;t/~TI OHA L Trucks B 248 Loaders I 31 Grader I 31 Tractor mowers 4 124 Rollers I 31 FREE UNION Trucks 7 217 Loaders I 31 Backhoe I 31 Tractor mowers 3 93 Roi ler~ 2 62 EOYD TAVERN lr~ucks 7 21 7 Loader I 31 Backhoe I 31 Tractor ~owers 4 124 K~ENE Equipment # DAYS ~N THE SHOP 40 15 0 45 0 0 11 0 12 0 0 0 # DAYS OP E~Ti OhtAL 2O8 31 31 1 09 3~ 172 31 31 82 62 205 31 31 124 31 Trucks 7 217 I 7 200 Loaders 2 62 I 61 Backhoes I 31 0 31 Tractor mowers 4 124 41 83 Roi ler~ 2 62 28 ~ Chippers I 31 0 31 STANARDS~¢iLLE Trucks 7 217 24 193 Loaders I 31 0 31 Graders 2 62 I 7 45 Tractor mowers 4 124 I 3 I I 1 Rollers I 31 0 31 Backhoes 2 62 0 62 Chippers I 31 0 31 80-900_/~ Good room fi2r improement 70-80% Needs t rn provement Black: Below minimum standards (COLOR) 83.87°/~ Amber 100.00°.~ Green 100_ 00°/6 G r~n 87_ 90o/~ Amber I O0 ~ O0 % G r~e n 79.26% R~d 100_ 00~,/o Gr~en 100. 000/~ G nf~en 88. I 7o/f~ Amber 100.00°~o Green 94.47°,~ G teen 100.00°/o Gr~en 100.00% Green 100,00% Green 100.00°~ Green 92. I 7°/~ Green 98. ~9~/~ Green 100.00% Gresen 66.94 % B I ac k 5~t_ 84°~ Black 100, 00°~ Green 88.94o/, Amber 72.58o/o Red 89.52% Amber 100.00% Green 100,009/o Green 17 PLANNING & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Albemarle Towne Center (Sperry) - traffic study under review Peter Jefferson/Martha Jefferson site - waiting tbr traffic study Rivarma Village at Glenmore- traffic study revisions requested Sterling University Housing - traffic study under review North Pointe - traffic study being reviewed Morgantown Road- recommendations made Greenbrier crosswalk- under review Earlysville signs - under review 18 None ISSUES COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Six Year Secondary Plan SU BJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Work Session to review the VDOT Six Year Secondary Road Plan and the County's Priority List of Road Improvements STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley,Cilimberg,Benish,Wade AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: The Albemarle County Planning Commission reviewed the Six Year Secondary Road Plan at their meeting on October 16, 2001 and unanimously recommended approval of the attached Six Year Secondary Road Plan for 2002- 2008 and County Priority List of Road Improvements. DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission discussed the attached staff report and recommended approval of the proposed Six Year Secondary Road Plan and County Priority List (Attachments C and D of the staff report). The Planning Commission did not get an opportunity to discuss an unpaved road request for a section of Route 605 that staff received on October 16~h. Staff prioritized this request, which can be found as Priority #81 on Attachment D of the staff report. RECOMMENDATION: For information and discussion. The Board of Supervisors will need to hold a public hearing prior to the adoption of the Six Year Secondary Plan. 01.200 10-26-01 ^09:50 1N STAFF PERSON: WORK SESSION: JUANDIEGO WADE, OCTOBER 16,2001 DAVID BENISH WORK SESSION: SIX YEAR SECONDARY ROAD PLAN FOR 2002-2008 Introduction The purpose of this work session is to provide: · Initial overview of the Six Year Road Plan process; · General review of the existing projects on the County's priority list of road mmprovements and potential projects to be considered for inclusion in this year's revision of the list; and · Opportunity for Planning Commission to discuss the County's existing priority list or other potential projects/issues. Six Year Plan Process The Six Year Secondary Road Construction Plan is VDOT's Plan for the allocation of road construction funds for a six year period. It consists of a priority list of projects and a financial mmplementation plan. The Plan is based on local priorities adopted by the Board of Supervisors. The County typically reviews this priority list of projects every year. Attachment A is the current adopted VDOT Secondary Road Construction Plan. Attachment B is the current adopted County Priority List for Secondary Road Improvement. The focus of this annual review of the Six year Plan ms the County's priority list (Attachment B). The V/DOT Six Year Road Construction Plan is the implementation tool for this list. Since 1986, the Commission and Board of Supervisors have approved a priority list of road improvement projects that would cost, in total, in excess of available funds over the six-year planning period. With such a list developed, subsequent VDOT Six Year Plans can be prepared and revised zn response to available annual funds. The County has used a locally derived criteria-based rating system to prioritize road improvement projects in the County. This system, with some modifications and refinements, has been used since 1988. Once the proposed improvement has been prioritized in its particular category, all of the projects are combined for each category to make one priority list. These categories include spot zmprovements, major reconstruction, unpaved road, railroad crossing, and bridge improvements. There are no ma]or changes in VDOT's draft 2002-2008 Secondary System Construction Plan (Attach_merit C). VDOT was only able to add three projects to the Six Year Construction Plan. These projects are ~17-810,Brown's Gap Road, #18-795, Blenheim Road, and #29-712, Coles Crossing Road. Major changes to projects in the existing Six year Construction Plan include Meadow Creek Parkway-Phase I advertisement date changed from July 2, 2002 to June 1, 2004, Jarman Gap Road advertisement date moved from August 1, 2005 to December 1, 2004, and the cost of paving Doctors Crossing Road increased $63,105. Project ~12- 781 Sunset Avenue, due to the numerous university housing projects proposed in this area, the scope of this project has changed to include urban cross section and bike lanes and sidewalks. The cost has increased to $1,650,000. New Priority List There are minor changes in County's propose Priority List for Secondary Improvements (Attacb_~ent D). In addition to the changes noted in the section above, staff received several requests from the public during the year for the Planning Commmssion and Board of Supervmsors to consider for inclusion on the priority list. Staff received a recommendation from VDOT to include Rt. 729 to the County's Six Year Secondary Road Priority List based on the geometrics of the road and the traffic count of 4400 AADT. (Attachment E) Public/V/DOT Requests for consideration received include: Name From To Project 704 Fortune Lane Rt. 715 Dead End 680 Brown Gap Tk Rt. 240 Rt. 810 689 Pounding Ct. Rd Rt. 250 Rt. 635 614 @ 676 Garth Rd at Owensville Rd 637 Dick Woods Road 688 Midway Road 736 White Mtn Rd 605 Durrett Ridge Road 729 Buck Island Rd Rt. 691 Rt. 692 Rt. 635 Rt. 824 Rt. 635 Dead End Rt. 743 Swift Run Riv Rt. 53 Rt. 1120 Paving Spot Improvement Paving Inter. Improve. Paving Paving Paving Paving Spot Improvement Staff used the criteria-based rating system to prioritize these public requests. They have been added (bold and italicized) to the draft County Six Year Secondary Priority List (Attachment D) . Traffic Calming: Staff has been working with Hollymead Neighborhood Association and VDOT to implement several traffic calming initiatives. A copy of these initiatives can be found on Attachment F. VDOT's in still reviewing this request. VIDOT's District and Local Residency Offices are determining which of these traffic calming projects are eligible for secondary funding. Summary: The focus of this annual review of the Six Year Plan and work session is the County's Priority List for Secondary Improvements priority. The VDOT Six Year Road Construction Plan is the implementation tool for this list. Staff will take your comments on the proposed Priority List and Six Year Construction Plan and schedule another work session, if necessary. The Board of Supervisors will hold a work session and public hearing on the Commission's recommended Priority List and Six Year Construction Plan prior to adoption. Attachments: Ao B. C. D. E. F. VDOT Adopted Six Year Construction Plan County Adopted Six Year Priority List VDOT Draft Six Year Construction Plan County Proposed Six Year Priority List Letter From VDOT Concerning Route 729 Hollymead Traffic Calming Letter to VDOT 3 Secondary System County: Albemarle Construction Program Estimated Allocations ATTACHMENT A Fiscal Year 2001-02 2OO2-O3 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Totals New Surface Treatments Federal Other Total $735,923 $3,814,811 $195.000 $4.745,734 $864,395 $4.111.478 $445,000 - $5,420,873 $944.443 $4,830.936 $70,000 $5,845,379 $981.305 $4,919,786 $t70.000 $6.071,091 $1,026,419 $4,742,481 $565.656 $6,334.556 $1,026.419 $4.900.000 $408,137 $6,334.556 $5.578,904 $27,319,492 $1,853.793 $34,752,189 Page1 of 8 Board Approval Date:: April 4, 2001 District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM county: Albemarle (In dollars) Board Approval Date:: 2001-02 through 2006-07 Route {oad Nah~a Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance to Scope of Work Funding ' Complete FHWA # PPMS ID Project # Required Comments Accomplishment -'ROM Type of Funds: TO i 2001-02 2002~03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Type of Project Length I Pdu, it~/# Traffic C6unt AD Date: ' BUDGET ITEM RI 8000 Total County-Wide Allocation PE $0 PE $0 ID: CWI CWI ~ RW $0 RW $0 2003-04 $150,000 SIGNAL ~ RT Slate Forces NEW PIPE INSTALL., CON~ CON $0 631/164 STATE SIGNS, BleEDING Tola~~ total $0 Rev. Sh. 2003-4 $300000 County-Wide Incidental NEW PLANT MIX Pd#: 0 ! 0 r/1/O1 $850,000 $125,000 $125,000 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $t00,000 $300,000 Rt. 8001 Total County-Wide Allocation PE $0PE $0 ID: CWI CWl I RW $0 RW $0 Prelim. Engineering 2001-02 Contract TRAFFIC ,CALMING CON $300,000 CON $0 Hollymeade Dr. STATE VARIOUS' LOC. Total $300,000Total $0 County-Wide Incidental P~ ~. 0 I 0 r11/01 $300,000 $60,000 S5o,0o0 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $SO,OOO $0 Rt, 0625 HATTON FERRY PE $0 PE $0 ID: 0625-002~ RW $0RW State Forces OPERATIL HATTON CON $120,000 CON $0 , ,, STATE FERRY i Total $120,006 Total Regular (BUDGE~ ITEM) $120,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $0 Pri#: 2 i 220 7/1/01 RI, 9999 WEST LEiGH DRIVE PE $20,000 PE $20,000 ID: 56085 8999-002.269,C501 RW $20,000 RW $20,000 Contract Route 25(~ CON $460,000 ;ON $210,000 RURAL ADDITION STATE 0.4 N. RTE. 250 Total SB00,000 iota/ $260,000 Regular 0.4 MI. Pd#: 3 0 3/1/02 $250,000 $0 $250,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 RL 0631 MclNTIRE RD. EXT. PE $50,000 SE $50,000 ID: 2530 0631-002:128,B657 RW $0 ~W $0 4-LANE BRIDGE Contract *i BRIDGE OVER CSX RR CON $1,830,500 ;ON $840,000 BR NEW ALIGNMENT Total $t,8,0,~00 Folal $890,000 Regctar $990~800 $960,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Pd #: 4 0 ?ltlO~g~_ '~?"'"Y~- '- NEW ALIGNMENT-2 lanes RL 0631 Mc, NTIR~ RD. EXTENDED~ ~~ ~0 ~E $ t,205,000 ID: 2530 0631-00~.128,C502~ ~I ~W $2,403,000 Ccntrect NCL CHARLOTTESVILLE ~ ~ON",~$~;~ )~ iCON $8,550,105 STP CSX RAILROAD ~ ~i~~ To'e' $,0,t84,¶05 Regular t .37 MI.; ~ $2.460.495 $973,579 $1.486.916 $0 $0 S0 $0 S0 Pd #: 4 0 Page~2 otb Date: 4/5/01 District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM County: Albemarle (in dollars) Board AppmvalDate:: 2001-02 through 2006-07 Route Road Name i Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance to Scope of Work Funding Complete FHWA # PPMS ID Project # i Required ~ccomplishmen! FROM Comments Type of Funds: TO i 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 . 2006-07 Type of Project Length , AD Date: Priori~ # Traffic Count I ~I. 0631 MclNTIRE RD. E~. PE $150,000 ~'E $150,000 D: 2530 0631-002-128,B812 RW $0 ~W $0 ;ontrec{ BRIDGE OVER ' CON $2,054,600 30N $2,054,600 2.lane Bridge DR MEADOWCREEK Tote/ $2,204,600 Total $2,204,600 Regular 3ri#: 4 0 [ 7/t/02i $0 $8 $0 $6 $0 $0 $0 $8 ;IL 0649 AIRPORT ROAD i PE $1,237,400 ~E $1,237,400 4-LANE DIVIDED D: 2456 0649-002-158,C501 RW $4,856,.550 ~'W $3,092,477 ;on/mc/ ROUTE 29 i REVENUE SHARING $1,000,000 lgg~ ~TP ROUTE 606 ; CON $4,850,100 ~ON $0 I ; Tote/ $10,944,060 Total $4,329,877 Paid :{egular 0.83 MI. I $6,814,173 $650,732 $1,700,000 $2,920,122 $1,343,319 $0 $0 $0 URBAN DESIGN W/S.W. & BIKE LAN 3tiff;. 5 13411 i 71t103 :;IL RO00 FREE STATE R(~AD CONNECTOPE $600,000 ~E $000,000 2-LANE DESIGN D: 52393 R000'002'259'C501 RW $750,000 ~'W $502,641 7.ontract RIO ROAD i CON $2,000,000 3ON $0 REVENUE SHARING $1,000.000 ~TP ROUTE 651 ; Total $3,36~,e00 Total $t,102,~4t Paid ~egular 0.70 MI =d#: 6 0 i 7/1/05 $2,247,359 $0 $0 $38,882 $t,600,000 $610,477 $0 $0 ~t R000 MEADOWCREEK PKY. PE $4,200,000 =E $1,402,365 NEW ALIGNMENT D: 12981 R000-O02-253,PE101 RW $6,500,000 RW $0 REVENUE SHARING $800,000 ;ontrac~ RIO ROAD CON $26,800,0~0~ON $0 98 ~TP RTE. 29 Total $37,S00,000 Total $1,402,365 Paid ~egular 3.8 MI :'rift:. 7 0 111115 $36,097,635 $100,000 $109,900 $150,458 $432,681 $687,465 $300,000 $34,317,t33 ~ 0691 IARMAN GAP ROAD PE $650,000 =E $208.209 0:11129 0691-002-258,C501 RW $1,300,000 ~W $0 REVENUESHARING 1999-2000 7,o~tmcl ROUTE 240 CON $3,200,000 '~ON $0 $1,000,000 ~TP ROUTE 684 Total $5,160,000 Total $208,209 2-LANE URBAN W/S.W. & BIKE LANE ~egular 1.5 MI. $4,941,79t $100,000 $700,000 $1,500,000 $641,791 S1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 ~ 064~ ' PROFFIT RD. PE $1,500,000 PE $0 D: 54415 0649-002- ,C RW $3,000,000 RW $0 REVENUE SHARING $1,000,000 200~ .~ofltract ROUTE 29 CON $5,000,000 CON $0 07 ;I"P 1.6 MI. E. RTE. 29 Total $9,600,000 Total $0 {egular 2.60 MI. 2J_ANES RURAL W/BIKE LANES ~ 9 2273 ! 8/1,'178 $9,600,000 $1,000,000 $114,662 $223,476 $901,995 $1,085,326 $4,100,000 $1,474,541 age 3 of 8 Date: 4/5/01 District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM County: Albemarle (in dollars) Board Approval Date:: 2001-02 through 2006-07 route Scope of Work ~PMS ID FHWA # ~ccompllshment Comments 'ype of Funds: 'ype of Projec{ 'rlorit~ # REV. SHARING $ t.000.000 2000-01 3-LANES W/S.W. & BIKE LANES SPOT IMPROVEMENTS REVENUE SHARING $200,000 1997- 24_ANES W/S.W. & BIKE LANES INTERSECTION IMPROV. REVENUE SHARING $400.000 2005-06 SAFETY IMPROVEMENT AT INT. OLD STAGECOACH RD. REVENUE SHARING 2001q)2 SPOT SAFET~ IMPROVEMENTS REVENUE SHARING $20d.000 2002- 03 SPOT SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS Road Name ' Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance lo Project # i Funding Complete FROM Required TO i 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Length Traffic Count ~ AD Date: OLD IVY ROAD , PE $950,000 ~E $910,000 0601-002-237,C5~1 RW $2,500,000 :~W · $0 ROUTE 250 ! CON $3,750,000 ~O/V $0 RTE. 29 BYPASS. Total $7,200,000 total $910,000 4358 ! 8/1/08 $6,200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $244.539 $200,000 $s,845,401 GEORGETOWN RoAD PE $000,000 SE $600.000 0656~)02-254,c501 RW $600,000 ~W $100,000 ROUTE 654 CON $2,000,000 ;ON $0 ROUTE 743 i Total $3,200,~00 Total $700,000 0.8 MI. ' $2,500,000 S0 $0 $0 S0 S400,000 S200,000 $1,900,000 135OO , 12/1/08 ~UNSET AVE. ' PE $250,000 PE $0 0781-002- ,C i RW $300,000 RW $0 NCL CH¥1LLE~ CON $500,000 CON $0 OLD RTE. 631 ' Total $1,050,000 Total $0 275 i 10/1/08 $i,03o,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $395,s55 $14s,s~8 $510,746 oLD LYNCHBUR'GH RD. PE $250,000 PE $0 0631-002- ,C I RW $250,000 ~W $0 1.35MI.S. 1-84 i CON $1,500,000 CON $0. RTE. 708 i TotaI $2,000,000 Tote/ $0 1500 ; 12/I/08 $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 S0 $114,874 $100,000 $t,785,326 JAMES RIVER ROAO PE $150,000 PE $0 0726-002-,C i RW $200,000 RW $0 ROUTE 795 i CON $4.~0,000 CON $0 ROUTE 1302 ~ , Total SaO0,O00 Total $0 1200 ~ 12/1/08 $800,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $04,$30 S705,461 ~,AILROAD CROSSING PE $3,000 PE $3,000 ~679-002-260,FS713 RW $1,000 RW $1,000 0.25 MI S. RT. 7;~8 CON $96,000 CON $96,000 (LIGHTS & GATI~S) Total $100,000 Tote/ $100,000 0.05 MI. 485 8/1/01 $o $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 r 0~01 88O7 ntmct ,egular ri#: 10 t. 0656 ): 12982 ontrad TP egular 0781 17171 o~tmd TATE egu~ar =~ 12 ~t. 0631 D: 15329 ~3ntract ;TP {egular )ri~ 13 lt. 0726 D: 17170 ~TATE ~eg~lar ~rl~. 14 ;IL 0679 D: 17172 IRP ~eg~ar ~ri f~ 15 age 4 of 8 LIGHTS & GATES - Date: 4/§10t District: Culpeper County; Albemarle Board Approval Dat~:: {oute )PMS ID ~ccomplishment 'ype of Funds: 'ype of Project ~rlority # ti. O625 ): 17173 ~ontrac~ ~RP :egular ~ri #: 16 ,t. 0744 · }: 54460 .alkoad .RP .egular fi~ 17 .L 9099 ): 56086 ailmad TATE ~gu~r d #: 18 L 0637 ): 11125 o~bac~ TATE d~ 19 · 0791 : 11128 AAP TATE r~aved d#: 20 [ O6O5 }: 17175 TATE ~. 21 SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (in dollars) 2001-02 through 2000-07 Scope of Work GATES & LIGHTS Road Name Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance to Project # ~ Funding Comple[e FHWA # Required Comments FROM TO . 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Length Traffic Count AD Date: HATTON FERRY ROAD PE $3,0O0 PE $3,0O0 O625-O02,262.FS714 RW $1,0O0 RW $1,000 ~AILROAD CROSSING CON $96,000 CON $98,000 Conslruction Complete NEAR HATTON FERRY Total S100,000 Total $100,000 !' So $o $0 $0 SO $0 $0 $0 211 12/1/00 HUNT CLUB ROAD PE $1,00o PE $1,0O0 GATES & LIGHTS 0744-002-S63,FS~15 RW $0 RW $0 ~EAR INT. RTE. ;~2 CON $9,000 CON $g,0oO RAILROAD CROSSING Total $10.o0o Total $10,000 0.05 ! So $o $0 $o S0 So $o So 640 ' 5/1/01 WEST LEIGH DRIVE PE $1,000 PE $1,000 GATES & LIGHTS 9999-002-270,FS~'16 RW $0 RW $0 N. OF ROUTE 250 CON $09,000 CON $99,0O0 RAILROAD CROSSING Total Sl00,000 Total $100,000 o.o6 ML i 10/1K)1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 S0 DICK WOODS ROAD PE $25,000 :~E $2§,0O0 UNDER CONSTRUCTION O637-002-P52.NS01 RW $30,000 RW $30,0O0 ROUTE 635 ' I UNPAVED ROAD , CON $1,045,000 CON $1,04§,0O0 RT. 682 Total $1,100,0O0 Total $%100,000 CONST. STARTED OCT. 2000 2.9 MI. t10 , 10/1/00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MIDWAY ROAD; PE $10,000 PE $10,000 0701-002,P56,N ~501 RW $15,000 RW $16,000 UNPAVED ROAD ROUTE 635 CON $235,0O0 ~ON $235,000 Const. To Regtn 4.16-2001 DEAD END RTE! 791 Total $260,000 Total S260,000 0.73 MI. 307 11115/00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 DURRETT RIDGE ROAD PE $$,000. PE $$,0O0 0605-002-P57,N~01 RW $15,000 RW $15,000 UNPAVED ROAD GREENE CO. LINE CON $280,000 CON $280,000 ~ Const. Sle~fed March 2001 0.83 ME GREEN~ CL Total $30O,0O0 Total $300,000 D.83 MI. ; 93 11115/o0 So $0 $o $o So S0 $o $o ~ge 5 of 8 Date: 415/01 District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM county: Albemarle (in dollars) Board Approval Date:: 200'1-02 through 2006-07 Route Scope of Work PPMS ID FHWA # Accomplishment Comments Type of Funds: Type of Project PdoHbf/# RI. 0679 ID: 11127 SAAP STATE Unpaved P~J ~:2.2 Rt. 0615 ID: 54422 SAAP STATE Unpaved P~ #: 23 RL 0737 ID: 54425 Cmltrec~ STATE LJnpaved 3~f #: 24 Rt. 0708 D: 11130 STATE Jnoaved ~rl #: 25 ;~t 0702 D: 54426 ,~ontmc~ ~TATE Jnpaved ~L 0640 :): 54427 ~ntrac~ ;TATE In. eyed '~i ~. 27' Road Name Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance to Project # i Funding Complete Required FROM TO 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Length Traffic Count AD Date: GRASSMERE ROAD iPE $IO,OO0 PE $1o,ooo 0679-002-P61,N501 RW $10,000 RW $10,000 ROUTE 738 CON $280,000 CON $28o,0o0 END MAIN'r. :~ Total $300,000 Tote[ $300,000 2~ ~ ~/~/oo So $o So So $o So $o $o LINSDAY ROAD i PE $10,000 PE $10,000 0815-002-P64, N~01 RW $10,000 RW $I0,000 ROUTE 639 CON $2o0,000 CON $200,000 LOUISA CO, LIN~: Total S220,000 Total $220,000 0.50 MI. 237 ; 411/01 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MOUNTAIN VISTA RD. PE $20,000 PE $20,000 9737-OO2-P ,N RW $20,000 RW $20,000 ROUTE 8 CON $610,000 CON $347.365 1.19 MI.E, RT. 6 To[al $850,000 To[al $387,365 1.19 75 811/02 $262,635 $262,635 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SECRETARYS ROAD PE $30,000DE $30,000 0708-O02..P77,NS01 RW $50,000 RW $50,000 0.7 M.W. RTE. 795 CON $745,000 ~ON $09,067 0.28 M,W. RT. 6~0 Total $825,000 Total $149,067 2,09 · 151 1/1/03 $e78,933 $348,288 $222,17t $106,474 $0 $0 $0 . $0 RESERVOIR ROAD PE $20,000 =E $0 0702.002-P ,N ' RW $40,000 :~W $0 ROUTE 29 RAMP CON $1,340,000 CON $0 DEAD END Total $t,400,000 Total 2.4 MI. 406 12/1/04 $1,400,800 $125,000 $329,501 $578,512 $306,987 $0 $0 $0 ~ILBERT STATION RD, PE $20,000PE $0 i 9640-00243 ,N RW $40,000 RW $o ROUTE 641 CON $300,000 ;ON $0 ROUTE 747 Total $360,000 To[al $0 0.?0 MI. 230 1011/03 $360,000 $0 $220,000 $140,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 GRAVEL ROAD Const to Begin June 2001 UNPAVED ROAD RIGHT OF WA Y AVAILABLE UNPAVED ROAD RIGHT OF WA Y AVAILABLE UNPAVED ROAD PARTIAL RIGHT OF WAY UNPAVED ROAD NO RIGHT OF WAY UNPAVED ROAD NO RIGHT OF WAY ~ge 6 of 8 Date: 415/01 District: Culpeper Courtly: Albemarle Board Approval Date:: oute PMS ID ccomplishment ype of Funds: y, pe of Project riofity # IRoad Name . Project # FROM Traffic Count HEARDS MT.RD. Estimated Cost AD Date: PE $20.000 Previous Funding PE SO Additional Funding Required SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (in dollars) 2001-02 through 2006-07 PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS 2001-02 2002-03 I2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 : 54428 )ntmct rATE )paved ! #: 28 ): 54429 ontmct TATE npaved 1~29 t_ 0769 on~mc~ TATE npaved r~ #: 30 0633-002-P .N NELSON CO. LINE ROUTE 634 0.50 MI. 59 DICKERSON ROAD 0606-002-P ,N ROUTE 850 ROUTE 1030 l.g9 MI. 170 ~]EAM ROAD 0769-002-P ,N RTE 1484 END STATE MAINT. 0.27 MI 5O ~/OODS EDGE ROAD 0623-00243 ,N 0.5 MI. S. RT, 616 END STATE MAINT. 0.g0 MI. 140 3OCTORS CROSSING RD. D784~002-P .N ROUTE 600 ROUTE 640 2. g MI. 360 RW $40,000 CON $300,000 Total $360,000 1~1/04 PE $20,5O0 RW $60.000 CON $1,200.000 Fetal $1,280,000 10/1/06 PE $10.000 RW $15,000 CON $175,000 Fetal $200,000 PE $15.000 RW $30,000 CON $300,000 Total $345,000 PE $25,000 RW $50.000 CON $1,100,000 Total $t,175,000 10/1/08 RW $0 CON S0 Total SO PE $0 RW $0 CON $0 Tolal SO PE RW CON Tolal PE RW CON Tolal PE RW CON Tote/ $0 $o $0 S0 $o $o $o So $0 $o $o $0 $360,000 $1,280,000 $200,000 $345,000 $1,176,000 $92,723 SO $0 $0 $0 $120,457 $146,820 $350~00 $117,498 SO SO SO $650.000 S82,5O2 S15O.ooo $143,917 S280,000 $t95,000 S551~19 Balance to Complete So $0 S0 So $479,664 Scope of Work FHWA # Comments UNPAVED ROAD NO RIGHT OF WAY UNPAVED ROAD NO RIGHT OF WAY ~RADE & PAVE GRAVEL RD. GRADE & PAVE GRAVEL RD. GRADE & PAVE GRAVEL RD · 7 of 8 Date: 4/5/01 District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM County: Albemarle (in dollars) 2001-02 through 2006-07 i Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance to i Funding Complete i Required I 200%02 2002-03 I 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 County Totals T(~tal Allocated: $108,258,650 $25,188,129 $83,070,521 $4,745,734 $5,420,873 $5,845,379 $6,071.091 $6,334,556 $6,334,556 $48,318,332 i Report Totals ! PE $12,060,400 $6,500,974 $5,559,426 $I,220.000 $606,353 $373,932 $624,543 $1,132,139 $494,539 $1,107,920 i RW $23,106,550 $6,270,118 $16,836,432 $690.732 $1,551,550 $978,673 $1,025,610 $2,515,521 $1,018,139 $9,056,207 i CON $73,091,700 $12,417,037 $60,674,663 $2,835,002 $3,262,970 ~;4,492,774 $4,420,938 $2,686,896 $4,821,878 $38, I54,205 Ori~linal Allocation: $4,745,734 $5,420,873 $5,845,379 $6,071.o91 $6,334,556 $6,334,556 ' Balance $o $o $0 $o $o $o Pge 8 of 8 Date: 4/5/01 ALBEMARLE COUNTY PRIORITY LIST FOR SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 2001-02 Through 2006-07 APPROVED BY THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON APRIL 4, 2001 VDOT's County's Route Number and Name Location Estimated Estimated Priority Proposed From - To Advertisement Cost List Ranking Date Description/Comments ATTACHMENT B N/A N/A 606 Dickerson Road Intersection of Rt. 743 Jun-02 $6,500,000 Month-Year 1 1 County wide County wide Jun-07 $850,000 I 1 County wide Traffic mgmt. Program Jun-07 $300,000 2 2 625 Hatton Ferry Hatton Ferry Jun-07 $120,000 3 3 West Leigh Drive Rt 250 to .4 mi nor. Rt. 250 Aug-02 $500.000 4 4 Meadow Creek Parkway Melbourne Rd to Rio Road Jul-02 $14,505,100 4 4 Meadow Creek Parkway Bridge over CSX RR Jul-02 $2,204,500 5 5 649 Airport Road Route 29 to Route 606 Jul-03 $10,944,050 6 6 651 Free State Road Free State Road Jul-05 $3,350,000 7 7 Meadow Creek Parkway Route 631 to Route 29 Jan-15 $37,500,000 8 8 691 Jarmans Gap Road Route 240 to Route 684 Aug-05 $5,150,000 9 9 649 Profit Road Route 29 to Route 819 Aug-06 $9,500,000 10 10 601 Old Ivy Road Ivy Road to 250/29 Byp Aug-08 $7,200.,000 11 11 656 Georgetown Road Route 654 to Route 743 Dec-08 $3,200,000 12 12 781 Sunset Avenue NCL to Old Rt. 631 Oct-08 $1,050,000 13 13 631 Old Lynchburg Road 1.35 MI. S. 1-64 to Rt.708 Dec-08 $2.000,000 14 14 726 James River Road Route 795 to Route 1302 Dec-08 $800.000 15 15 679 Grassmere Road .25 miles south of Rt 738 Jun-01 $100,000 16 16 625 Hat'ton Ferry Road .75 miles south of to RR Dec-00 $100,000 Projec;s ~n bold are ~n the Deveiooment Area. relocated to meet FAA requirements, funded w/Fed. Funds, proj. will extend runway signs,pipe,plant mix projects, same funding Staff working with VDOT for traffic calming in the Hollymead area in 2001-02 operation of ferry [220] rural addition plans being dev. with citizen adv. cmt., includes bridge over CSX RR widen to four lanes (associated with project above) widen to four lanes, bike lanes,sidewalks,RS98/99 [14,800) substandard bridge in Developed Area,project may build a new connector road [420] new road, County also petitioning for eligib, for primary road funding RS 97/98 serve increased traf w/rain widening, pod/bike access,RS 1999t00 [2,100] CATS recom.,improve sight distance and alignment,bike/sidewalk,RS2002103 [3,000] widen, improve align, bike/sidewalk access,RS 2000/01 [5,400] spot improvement, pedestrain access,urban cross-section, RS 97/98 [14,000] spot improvements at various locations. RS 2005/06 spot improvements at various locations.RS01/02 [2.500] spot improve, improve sight distance. RS02/03 [720] Railroad crossing with no lights or gate [370] Railroad crossing with no lights or gate, [220] gl, 'eeJv lUGLLJOOJe^80 8LI~ U eJE~ ploq U~ SloefoJd 000'000' 14; 000'000' I,$ 000'095 ~.3e[o-~d vr4e~[espepuewLuooeJ iOQA e'[q!Jopd Alunooe,lou '90':¢009 S~J'.lJa^lno xoq Ile~,su! O00'0t, ff$ ;'[OGZ] g0/¢00 -~S'~l-.tPe:leleJ &leies :^oJdw! ],ods "uS!le ^o,JdLu! o]` 'beJ o!lqnd ' pepeeuse slee~ls pooqJoqqB!eu eJnlnj jo ~,oeuuooJelu! sJnooo $! sE lueuJdOle^ep eAJes ol pm, on~,suoo eq I1!~ [00~'~] 90/§009 S~'lUeLUe^oJdw! uo!loesJe],u! '~/VD woJj pepueLULUOOeJ [00~'~] g0/g00g S~I "WLUWOOeJ $1¥0 'o~eJl peloe[oJd elPUeq o~ e^oJduJi [0Zg] ']uewe^oJdw! uo!loes]elU! [009'~] lueuJe^oJdLu! uo!13eSJelU! [009'~'] ~0/g00g SM'luewe^oJdw! uo!loeSJelU! [000'g]'t'0/S00g SiB 'luewa^oJdw! uo!13esJelUl · e],e6 JO s~,q6!l ou ql!~ J~U!SSOJ3 peoJlie~J spunj Xlejes 'U!LUile pJezeH 'e],e6 ~o s],q6il ou q~!~ 6u!ssoJo peoJl!e~:l 000'000'~$ 000'0985 O00'OOg'~$ O00'OOg$ 000'0g95 000'00~$ 000'0g§$ 000'00~$ 000'0~$ L0-bnv e^pQ elepSlliH peo~j IIIH paM 90]. peo~ ~Ueld 969 peo~j uo],buNI!iN I,/_9 peon. lode(3 II!H peM g~9 peoM uo!~,elS ueql!D 0~9 ~tdu..l_ ell!^spJeMOH ~09 peo~l ebppB X JCl 90Z peo~ uo!le:lS XeluJnB t,t'9 Z6Z :l~l Ol-I. 69 '),~1 peo~:l qoueJ8 al!IN ,tleH 'F99 pe0~J ell!ASXIJe~ peou o!~1 pee~:l Illin s/~eJj b~9 pem~ Ili~ s~eJj ~9 peon! spunoJ9 olod g~9 ~/N X~d eoJuo~ sawer g6z peeM uosJe~o!O 909 peeM ~!eHUal8 g6z peo~ ell!ASua~o 9Z9 peon] peoM Ue~l!l 9Z9 peoM de9 su~o~8 eAIJO q6!eq lsa~ Pe0M qnI3 ~UnH ~Z 69 9g gg 0g 69 V/N V/N 99 61, slueuJLUOO/Uo!ld posea 1soo pelew!ls=l JeeA-qlUOR luewes!lJe^p¥ O.L- LUOJ-I peleLU !lS:l uo!le3o"l CLUeN pue JeqLunN elno~l §u~>tue~l lsF1 pesodoJd ~lUOJJcJ s,/b, unoci s,lOaA VDOT's County's Priority Proposed List Ranking 19 2O 21 57 22 58 23 59 24 60 25 61 26 62 27 63 prOjects in bold are in the Route Number and Name Location Estimated Estimated From - To Advertisement Cost Date Month-Year Descri ption/Comments 40 601 Garth Road Intersection of Route 658 41 676 Ownesville Road Route 614 to Route 1050 42 69t Park Road Park Road to Route 250 43 678 Decca Lane Intersection of Route 676 44 616 Union Mill Road FCL to Route 759 45 743 Advance Mills Road At Jacobs Run 46 732 Milton Road Intersection of 762 47 795 Hardware Street Near inter, with Rt. 20 48 622 AIbevanna Springs Rd Intersection of Route 795 49 622 Albevanna Springs Rd Intersection of Route 773 50 611 Garmans Gap Road Off Route 691 51 1310 Ferry Street .05 miles south of Rt, 6 52 682 Broadaxe Road Off Dick Woods Road 53 813 Starlight Road Off Route 712 54 676 Owensville Road Intersection of Route 601 55 56 add turning lane at Barracks Farm Road, CATS recomm. E6,4Q0] spot improvements at several points, CATS recomm [2,300] extend to eastern 240/250 street system [600] mprove intersection, located near school. CATS recomm[1,900] 637 Dick Woods Road Route 635 to Route 692 Oct-00 791 Wyant lane Route 635 to Dead end Nov-00 'reprove alignment improve approach to bridge spot improvement, requested by public spot imrovement, requested by Scottsville intersection improvement intersection improvement Railroad crossing with no gate Railroad crossing with no gate spot improvements, public request school request,needs turn-around space intersection improvement unpaved road, R-O-W available unpaved road, R-O-W available [4,100] [1,000] [1,000] [570] [710] [710] [230] [8o] [120] [60] [48oo] [132] [240] $1.100.000 $26O.000 605 Durrett Ridge Road .83 from Greene County Nov-00 $300.000 679 Grassmere Road Route 738 to Dead end Nov-00 $300.000 615 Lindsay Road Route 639 to Louisa CL Apr-01 $220,000 737 Mountain Vista Road Route 6 to Route 726 Aug-02 $650,000 708 Secretarys Road Route 795_to Route 620 Jan-03 $825.000 702 Reservoir Road Ramp to Dead end Dec-04 $1,400,000 640 Gilbert Station Road Route 641 to Route 747 Oct-03 $360 000 Development Area. unpaved road R-O-W available [110] unpaved road full R~O~W available [370] unpaved road, R-O-W available [230] unpaved road, R-O-W available [60] unpaved road. full R-O-W not'available unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined, sidewalks unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [240] ~iU!JlOq8 9nu~^a~ - S~J so!J/,~l!~C] aSeJa^V lue.un0 ]sola [ ] [g~] pau)uJJelepun M-O-~ 'ls@nbeJ o)lqnd 'peoJ [0/-] peu!LLIJelepun M-O-~I 'peoJ [0Z] PeU!LUJelePun M-O-M 'lsenbeJ o!1 qnd 'peoJ [0D] D9U!UJJ@lePun M-O-M '~$enbeJ o!lqnd 'peoJ [00 L] P~u!uJJ@l@pun M-O-~] 'ls@nbeJ o!lqnd 'DIOOJ [0~ ~] PeU!ULIJ~lePun M'O-~ 'lsenbeJ .o]lqnd 'peoJ [0~] elqel]eAe :lou M-O-~I 'peoJ [0~] elqel!e^e lou M-O-~ 'peoJ [0~] peujLuJel@pun M-O-~ 'lsenbeJ ~3Ot3 tpeoJ pe^edun pe^edun pe^edun peAedun pe^edun pe^edun pe^edun pe^edun peAedun [0E~] peu!LuJe~epun M.O-~I lsenbeJ SO~] 'peoJ pe^edun [0E b] peU!LUJelepun AA-O.M 'lsenbeJ o!lqnd 'peoJ pe^edun [0k!.] elqel!eAe lou/V~-O-~I 'DeoJ pa^eaun [0k ~] peU!LUJelepun'M'O'M 'lsanbaJ'D!lqnd 'peoJ pe^edun [0g b] peu!LuJe~epun M~O-M 'lsenbeJ o!lqnd 'peoJ )e^edun elqel!eAe ~ou M-O-M 'peoJ peAeoun [09 b] peu!LuJelepun AA-O-M 'lsenbeJ o!lqnd [0~;~] DeUlLUJe),ePun M-O-~I 'lsenbeJ o!lqnd [0/_P] peu!uJJelepun M-O-M [0gg] peu!uJJelepun M-O-~t [0gEl P@U!UJJelepun M-O-M [0~7] DeLI!UJJe:lepun M-O-M [0gL] DeU!LUJelepun [0gE] peu!LuJe~,epun M-O-~J [0g] DeU!LUJel@pun M-O-~ '~senbeJ O!lCl nd lsenbeJ oilqnd 'lsenbeJ o!lqnd '~senbeJ o!lqnd 'lsenbeJ o!!qnd 'lsenbeJ 3!lqnd · lsenbeJ o!lqnd 'peoJ peAedOn 'peoJ peAedun 'peoJ )eAedun 'peoJ )eABdun · peoJ )eAedUn 'peoJ )eAedun 'peoJ )eAedun 'peoJ )@Aedun 'peoJ )eAedun 0~;9'90g'6 ~ ~$ 000'gzb'~$ 000'g~g$ 000'00g$ 000'099'~$ 000'09E$ 90-100 90-1o0 90-~00 90-1o0 90-1o0 bu!punj J. OQA JOj :JOU elq~O~le lou/~lJuejJng ,. peo~j MOIIOH/~>iOOM 69Z Pe0M ~JecJ J!elE] L0Z peoM uoJeqS peo~j e6pi~J Jebns ~Z9 peoe. ~eaJ3 XddeH 909 peo~ iooqos I!H peri 09Z peo~l ell!^SuaMo 9/9 PeoM exv peoJ8 999 u-1 uoJnqO il!H eSOM PM [.~u!ssoJo SelOO pua peep ol 0~9 'IM peo~l laAel lnUleAA 999 09/_ elnOM ol 69 elno~t -10 eSueJo ol 909 '~1 pue peea ol 9L9 elno~ Z09L 'IM ol g6z elno~ puc peeQ ol 1~99 elnoM pUD PeaC] 969 '~1 ol 0~9 elno~J ol 009 elnoM pue peep ol 969 elnOM q~JOU 0~ elnoM JJO OEO b elnoM ol 099 elnoM '¢E9 elnO;bl ol -10 UOSleN peon.4 uepJe~ UlJON PM eAOJ~) uoPI!M 91~9 peo~l II!H JeOunE] 999 peo~j uo!lelS ~Jeql!E) 01~9 peoM II!H doqs!B peoM Uell¥ 999 peoM ple~JXehl ZV9 P~I 5u!ssoJ3 SelOO bu~ssoJo sJolooa PM eEip3 spooAA E~9 peoM LueeB 69/_ peoJ uosJe~io!a 909 peoM ulv~ spJeeH EE9 /_9 99 gg E9 99 09 6/_ L/_ gL g/- gZ O/ 69 99 Z9 99 99 0E 69 slueuJLUOC)/uo!ld p~sea ~,soO peleLU!lS:l JeeA-qluov4 lueLues!lJe^p¥ peleuJRs:l Ol- uJOJ:l uo!leoo-I euJeN pue JequJnN m, no~j buptueM pesodoJcl s,/~lunoD ~:J!JO!Jd s,IOOA Fiscal Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 ~2006-07 2007-08 Totals Page 1 o'f 8 Secondary System County: Albemarle Construction Program Estimated Allocations New Surface Treatments Federal Other Total $882,177 $4.143,670 $445,000 $5,470.847 $868,894 $4,489,851 $70,000 $5,428,745 $927,325 $4,637,949 $170,000 $5.735.274 $999,736 $4,527,964 $565,656 $6.093,356 $1,013,809 $4,759,205 $408,137 $6,181.151 $1,01 3,809 $4,703,495 $463,647 $6,181,151 $5,705,750 $27,262,134 $2, t22,640 $35,090,524 Board Approval Date:: 1/1/02 J.L. Bryan VDOT Resident Engl ~eer Date Robert W. Tucker: Chairman. Clerk. Co. Administrator Date ATTACHMENT C 1¸6 05 o$ a)aldWOO ol aouel~8 o$ o$ 05 o00'o~$ 000'O95 o00'00~$ o$ 05 ooo'0~$ 000'095 o00'00 I.$ o$ 05 000'0~$ 000'095 ooo'oo~$ o$ OS 05 oo0'0~$ oo0'og$ o00'00~$ o$ oo0'0~$ 000'095 8N01±¥00-1-1¥ ~V~ -I¥OSl:l C]3J. Oqf'O~Jd 9L6'98t'L$ 05 000'09~$ oo0'0~$ 0O0'O95 C0-~00~ 91,6'98~' ~$ o$ o00'09~$ 000'0~ ~$ 000'0055 '000'9~S$ 6u!pun3 leUO!l!pp¥ 90-L00~ q~noJqi C0-~00~ (SJellOP IN'¢dOO~d NOllOfl~lSNOO ~3£SAS A~VaNOO3S lZB9'Z8 ~' L I,$ lelO.L I~S9' 6~:S'].$ NO0 000'g0F~$ A'I~ 000'G0~' ~$ ~ OOCj'p'GO'~$ NOD 05 O00'Ogl,$ .~d 000'09~$ le~O.L 000'0 I, ES NO,g 000'0~$ AA~ oo0'0~$ 05 05 NO0 05 A,lb 05 05 le]OJ 05 NO0 05 A,I~ 05 ~d 0S lelO l o$ NO0 05 M~ o$ gd ¢u!punJ sno!AaJd 009't~9'C ~ le~O.Z 009'9 ~0'65 NO0 000'COK~$ O00'SOZ' I,$ f'Oll,/9 009't0~'~$ le~lq.L OOg'~'gO'~$ NO0 05 A,'I~ 000'091.$ 9d ~0/L/9 000'0095 I~O.L 000'09~$ NOO 000'0~$ /H.V 000'0~$ :ed 0 'IIAI Z£' L QVO~-II~I XSO ~]3-ilA$ ~ J.±O-I~l-t 0 -iON ~:OGD'g~:~'ZOO'L£90 Q:~C]Nq/X~] 'Q~l :l~liNIOlAI 0 O00'OZI,$ le~04 000'0~1,$ NOg NO//VH 05 A~/ -~00-9~90 05 ~ ,L~I~E]:I NO//¥H ~OLl,/Z 0 000'oo~$ le~Ol 000'00C$ NOD o$ o$ .:lc/ ~O/L/Z 000'9ZS$ le,JO.L O00'GZ;S$ NOD 05 Adb' o$ :aleC] CV 1soo paleUJ!lS3 g jo ~: a6ed £ :# Pd :IIVIS jOBJIUO0 sgogg :01 6666 ~ :# !Jd seoJo-I aleJS :CJI 0 :# !Jd leluapioul epiM-~iunog 'O0-1SROI~tVA B.LVIS ~DNI[AI-IVO OI=I_-i¥~LL mejiuoo IMO IMO :01 uo!ieOOll¥ eP!M"Xlunoo lel°Z LOOS 'IW 0 0 :# Pd XIIN J. NVqd N~N lelUep!oul ONIOn:iS 'SNelS "'I-IVLSNI =ldld M_~N sBoJO-I etelS IMO IMO :al uo!l~OOtl~ 9P!M-~lunoo I~1o/ gOOS )unoo O!JJEJ_L # qlBuaq loafoJd jo ad~/ O1 :spun:l jo ad~/ IAIO~I:I luaLuqmldLUoOoV # ioa[oJd al S~dd aU~eN peo~ alno~J al.m~uaql¥ :Xiuno3 Jaded InO 'lOUlS!G District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM county: Albemarle (in dollars) Board Approval Date:: 1/1/02 2002-03 through 2007-08 Route Road Name Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCA":FIONS Balance to Scope of Work PPMS ID Project # Funding Complete FHWA # Accomplishmer~t FROM Required Comments Type of Funds: TO 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 Type of Project Length ~' Priority # Traffic Count AD Date: Rt. 0631 MclNTIRE RD. EXT. PE $50,000 PE $50,000 ID: 2530 0631-002-128,B657 RW $0 RW $0 Contract BRIDGE OVER CSX RR CON $1,830,500 CON $1,830,500 BR NEW ALIGNMENT Total $1,880,500 Total $1,880,500 Regular Pri #: 4 0 6/1/04 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Rt. 0649 4-LANE DIVIDED AIRPORT ROAD PE $1,237,400 PE $1,237,400 ID: 2456 0649-002-158,O501 RW $4,856,550 RW $3,743,209 REVENUE SHARING $1,000,000 1998- Contract ROUTE 29 CON $4,850,100 CON $0 99. STP ROUTE 606 Total 10,944,060 Total $4,980,609 Paid Regular 0.83 MI. URBAN DESIGN W/ S. W. & BIKE LANI; Pti#: 5 13411 7/1/03 $5,963,441 $1,749,974 $2,870,148 $1,343,319 $0 $0 $0 $0 Rt. R000 FREE STATE ROAD CONNECTO PE $600,000 PE $600,000 2-LANE DESIGN ID: 52393 R000-002-259,C501 RW $750,000 RW $502,641 Contract RIO ROAD CON $2,000,000 CON $0 REVENUE SHARING $1,000,000 1995- 96 STP ROUTE 651 Total $3,850,000 Total $1,102,641 ' Paid Regular 0.70 MI Pti #: 6 0 7/1/05 $2,247,359 $0 $36,882 $1,264,183 $648,294 $0 $0 $0 Rt. R000 MEADOWCREEK PKY. PE $4,200,000 PE $1,502,365 NEW ALIGNMENT ID: 12981 R000-002-253,PE101 RW $6,500,000 iRW $0 Contract RIO ROAD CON 26,800,000 CON $0 REVENUE SHARING $800,000 1997- 98 STP RTE. 29 Total 37,800,000 Total $i,502,365 ' Paid Regular 3.8 MI Pri #: 7 0 1/1/15 $35,997,635 $92,118 $226,005 $432,681 $500,000 $312,610 $500,000 $33,934,221 =l~t. 0691 JARMAN GAP ROAD PE $650 000 PE $308,209 - ID: 11129 0691-002-258,C501 RW $1,300,000 RW $0 Contract ROUTE 240 CON $3,200,000 CON $0 REVENUE SHARING 1999-2000 $1,000,0o0 STP ROUTE 684 Total $6,150,000 Total $308,209 2-1_ANE URBAN W/S. W. & BIKE LANE~ Regular 1.5 MI. ' . Pti#: 8 2118 12/1/04 $4,641,791 $700,000 $1,250,000 $696,771 $637,131 .$558,889 $0 $1,000,000 Rt. 0649 PROFFIT RD. PE $1,500,000 PE $1,000,000 ID: 54415 0649-002- ,C RW $3,000,000 RW $0 REVENUE SHARING $1,000,000 2006. Contract ROUTE 29 CON $5,000,000 CON $0 07 STP 1.6 Mi. E. RTE. 29 Total $9,500,000 Total $1,000,000 Regular 1.60 MI. 2-LANES RURAL W/BIKE LANES Pri#: 9 2273 8/1/06 $8,500,000 $114,662 I $106,816 $901,995 $1,685,326 $3,387,706 $1,303,496 $1,000,000 Page 3 of 8 Date '0/4/01 6, ~0/~'/0~ :~e(] 9 jo ~ e~ec ; 000'00~$ le~O~ 000'00~$ le~O~ (S~IV9 ~ S~HgI~) 000'965 NOD 000'965 NOO ~ 'l~ 'S I~ ~'0 loeJlUOO 'i ' · 000'L$ ~ 000'~$ '~ ~ gLLS~'09~-~00-6Z90 ~ZLZ~ ~9Y9095 ~ 000'00~$ 6~'~65 05 05 05 05 000'0085 90/~1~ , ~ H :~ 05 le7Ol 000'0085 le~OJ ] ~og; ~lno~ ~lVl$ 05 le~O~ 000'009'L$ le]OZ 90Z '~1~ dis 000'000'~ 05 NO0 000'000' L$ NO0 ioeJluoo ' ' 05 ~d 000'09~$ ~d 'O~ Hg~N~HONA~ O~O ~90 000'000'[$ 9~Z'0 [ [$ 869'8~[$ 999'~85 05 05 05 000'099' [$ ~0/~10~ 80~L ~ :~ '1~ g'0 90 3iVIS 000'008' ~$ 000'00~$ O00'OOZ$ 0~'~ 05 05 05 000'00~'~$ 80/Lg ~ 0~ ~ L L :~ 86 05 NO9 000'000'~$ NO0 ~S9 ~iOO~ S~N3~3AO~d~I ZOdS ~ 000'0095 ~d 000'0095 ~d 0~O~ N~O~9~O~O~ 9990 ~9Yg~'85 000'000'~$ 000'00~$ S~'~Z$ 05 05 05 000'06~'95 80/LI9 ~8~ 0L :~ Z'O' Jeln6a S~N~ ~IB ~ ~'S/~ SgN~'~ 05 NO0 O00'OSZ'C$ NOO OS~ 3~flO~ ~0-000~ 000'000'~ ~ ~NI~VHS 'A~ 000'0~65 ~d 000'0S65 ~d Q~O~ ~1Q~O ~090 q~ue~ ~oabJd ~o WO~ ~uawqs~ld~ooo~ s~ue~woo peJ~nba~ ~OM jo adoos ot aOUele8 SNOliVOOqqV WV3A 9VOStJ 03~o3rowd ' leuo~l~ppv 6u~punj sno~AaJd 1soo pale~!~s3 aWeN peow alnok 90-Z. O0~ ql~noJq), gO-~O0~: ~0/~/!, ::aleQ le^oJddV pJeo~] (sJelloP u!) alJ~waqJv :/~:lun°o IAIV~lgOad NOIION~I.LSNO::) ~]iSAS AavaNo::)as Jadad no ~ou~s!O District: Culpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM County:. Albemarle (in dollars) Board Approval Date:: 1/1/02 2002-03 through 2007-08 Route Road Name Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLQCATIONS Balance to Scope of Work PPMS ID Project # Funding Complete Accomplishment FROM Required FHWA # Comments Type of Funds: TO Type of Project Length 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 · Priority # Traffic Count AD Date: Rt. 0744 HUNT CLUB ROAD PE $1,000 PE $1,000 GATES & LIGHTS ID: 54460 0744-002-S63,FS715 RW $0 RW $0 Railroad . NEAR INT, RTE. 22 CON $9,000 CON $9,000 RRP RAILROAD CROSSING Total $10,000 Total $10,000. Regular 0.05 Pri #: 16 640 2/1/02 $0 $0 .$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Rt. 0810 BROWN'S GAP ROAD PE $75,000 PE $0 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ID: 54413 0810-002- ,C RW $75,000 RW $0 Contract INT. ROUTE 789 CON $400,000 CON $0 STP (NEAR CROZET) Total $550,000 Total ' $0 - Regular 0.3 MI. Pri#: 17 1807 9/1/10 $55O,O00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $250,00O Rt. O795 BLENHEIM ROAD PE $50,000 PE $0 ' INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT ID: 0795-002- ,C RW $50,000 RW $0 Contract INT. ROUTE 790 CON $200,000 CON $0 STATE NEAR SCOTTSVILLE Total $300,000 Total $0 Regular 0.3 MILES Pri#: 18 1551 10/1/10 $300,000 . $0 ' , $0 $0 $0 $0 $83,101 $216,899 Rt. 0615 LINSDAY ROAD PE $10,000 PE $10,000 ID: 54422 0615-002-P64,N501 RW $10,000 RW $10,000 SAAP ROUTE 639 CON $200,000 CON $200,000 UNPAVED ROAD STATE LOUISA CO, LINE Total $220,000 Total $220,000 RIGHT OF WAY AVAILABLE Unpaved . 0.50 MI. Pri #: 19 237 11/1/01 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Rt. 0737 MOUNTAIN VISTA RD. PE $20,000 PE $20,000 ID: 54425 0737-002-P ,N RW $20,000 RW $20,000 Contract ROUTE 6 CON $610,000 CON $610,000 UNPAVED ROAD RtGHT OF WAY STATE 1.19 MI.E. RT. 6 Total $650,000 Total $650,000 AVAILABLE Unpaved 1.19 Pti#: 20 75 12/1/02 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 I $0 $0 $0 Rt. 0708 SECRETARYS ROAD PE $30,000 PE $30,000 ' ' ID: 11130 0708-002-P77,NS01 RW $50,000 RW $50,000 Contract 0.7 M.W. RTE. 795 CON $745,000 CON $417,355 UNPAVED ROAD PARTIAL RIGHT OF STATE 0.28 M.W. RT. 620 Total $825,000 Total $497,355 ~ WAY Unpaved. 2.09 I Pri#: 21 151 1/1/03 $327,645 $222,171 $106,474 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 F~age 5 of 8 Date 2O L0/t~/0 ~ :aleQ 05 000'0~$ 000'96 ~$ 000'09 I,$ 05 05 05 000'99S$ 'IN 06'0 pa^edul'l o$ le~O-L 000'~9S$ letO/ '.LNIVI,fl 05 ~ O00'g~$ ~d QVO~ 05 05 05 ~0~'~85 g6t'Z~$ 05 05 000'00[$ 90/~/oL 0~ 05 NOOI 000'~Z~$ NOg 05 ~ 000'S~$ ~ N' d-~00-69Z0 :QI 05 ~8 000'0~$ ~d 'Q~ 3~A~9 ~AVd ~ ~QV~9 ' ' 05 zgz'z9$ 899'0985 0SS'S99$ 0[0'96~$ 05 05 000'08~' ~$ 90/~/0~ '1~ 66' ~ peAeduR 05 le~O~ O00'OgZ' ~$ le;O~ 0~0 05 NO0 000'00~' ~$ NOO XV~ ~0 ~HgI~ ON OVO~ OEAVdNn , 05 ~ 000'095 ~t~ N' d-~00"~90 6~9 :Ol 05 ~d 000'0~$ ~d QVO~ NOS~NOIQ 9090 '~ 05 05 05 0S 0~8'9tt$ Z97'0[ tS ~Z'~65 000'09~$ '1~ 0g'0 ~ pe~eduR , 05 NO0 000'00~$ NOO ~NIq 'OO NOSq~N loeJluoo 05 05 05 05 05 000'0t~$ 000'0~$ 000'0985 ~0/~/0 ~ 0~ ~ :~ Pd 05 lelOZ 000'0985 lelO~ Z~L ~0~ ~V~S 05 NOO 000'00~$ NO0 ~9 ~1~0~ ~oeJ~UOO 05 05 05 LgZ'LS$ L86'99S$ ~96'E0~$ ~8['L~$ 000'SL~' ~$ b0/~/[~ 90~ ~ :~ p' I ' 000'~$ le~O~ 000'00~'~$ /e~o~ QN~ O~O ~IV~S , I 000'0~$ ~d 000'0~$ ~d QVO~ ~IOA~S~ [OZO I . :elWQ QV lunoo oljje]i ~ ~popd s~ue~oo paJ~nba~ ~ V~HJ a~a dmoo '. 6ulpun~ . ~o~ JO adoosI O~ aouele8 SNOIIVOO~V ~V3A qVOSIJ Q310~fO~d leuo!l]PPV 6u!punj sno!AaJd lsoo ParesiS93 a~eN peo~ aino~ ~n/~/I ::ale~ leAoJddv pJeo~ 90-L00~ qi~noJq), g0-;~00~ atJeLuaqlv (sJelloP u!) ~q990~d NOIIOrI~/SNOO ~3/SAS A~aNooas ~adadlnO ~o!J~.SIC District: C,~lpeper SECONDARY SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM County: Albemarle (in dollars) Board Approval Date:; 1/1/02 2002-03 through 2007-08 ... Route Road Name Estimated Cost Previous Funding Additional PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR ALLOCATIONS Balance to Scope of Work PPMS ID Project # Funding Complete FHWA # Required Accomplishment FROM Comments Type of Funds: TO ' 2002-03 2003-04 2004--05 2005-06 2006~07 2007-08 Type of Project . Length Priority # Traffic Count AD Date: Rt. 0784 DOCTORS CROSSING RD. PE $25,000 PE $0 . GRADE & PAVE GRAVEL RD. ID: 0784-002-P ,N RW $75,000 RW $0 Contract ROUTE 600 . CON $1,138,105 CON $0 STATE ROUTE 640 Total $1,238,106 Total $0 Unpaved 2.9 MI. Pri #: 28 360 10/1/08 $'1,238,105 $0 $0 $0 $'143,9'17 $468,'146 $636,042 $0 Rt. 0712 COLES CROSSING ROAD PE $50,000 PE $0 RECONSTRUCT & REPLACE BRIDG ID: 2307 0712-002-PO2,N501 RW $50,000 RW $0 Contract ROUTE 692 CON $350,000 CON $0 STATE ROUTE 760 Total $450,000 Total $0 Unpaved 0.6 MILES Pri #: 29 193 6/1/09 $450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $300,000 $150,000 22 °~age 7 oi 6 Date: 10/4/01 9 jo @ a6ecl 90-ZO0~ q6noJq~ £0-~00~ alJguJaqlV :~unoo (SJ~llOp u!) ~l~f'clgO~ld NOI~OFI~I/SNOO IN:I£SAS A~t~IQNOO:JS Jadad,no lOIJlS!C1 DRAFT ALBEMARLE COUNTY PRIORITY LIST FOR SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 2002-03 Through 2007-08 [SOME PROJECTS MAY NOT BE COMPLETED AS PRIORITIZED DUE TO PROJECT COMPLEXITY AND/OR AVAILABLE FUNDING] ATTACHMENT D VDOT's County's Route Number and Name Location Estimated Estimated Priority Proposed From - To Advertisement Cost List Ranking Date Description/Comments N/A N/A 606 Dickerson Road Intersection of Rt. 743 Jun-02 $6,500,000 Month-Year 1 1 County wide County wide Jun-08 $825,000 I I County wide Traffic mgmt. Prog ram Jun-08 $300,000 2 2 625 Hatton Ferry Hatton Ferry Jun-08 $120,000 3 3 West Leigh Drive Rt 250 to .4 mi nor. Rt. 250 Aug-02 $500,000 4 4 Meadow Creek Parkway Melbourne Rd to Rio Road Jun-04 $14,505,100 4 4 Meadow Creek Parkway Bridge over CSX RR Jun-04 $2,204,500 5 5 649 Airport Road Route 29 to Route 606 Jul-03 $10,944,050 6 6 651 Free State Road Free State Road Jul-05 $3,350,000 7 7 Meadow Creek Parkway Route 631 to Route 29 Jan-15 $37,500,000 8 8 691 Jarmans Gap Road Route 240 to Route 684 Dec-04 $5,150,000 9 9 649 Proffit Road Route 29 to Route 819 Aug-06 $9,500,000 10 10 601 Old Ivy Road Ivy Road to 250/29 Byp Aug-08 $7,200,000 11 11 656 Georgetown Road Route 654 to Route 743 Dec-08 $3,200,000 12 12 781 Sunset Avenue NCL to Fifth St Extended Oct-08 $1,650,000 13 13 631 Old Lynchburg Road 1.35 MI. S. 1-64 to Rt.708 Dec-08 $1,500,000 14 14 726 James River Road Route 795 to Route 1302 Dec-08 $800,000 15 15 679 Grassmere Road .25 miles south of Rt 738 Dec-01 $100,000 16 16 744 Hunt Club Road near intersection with Rt. 22 Aug-01 $10,000 Projects in bold are in the Development Area. relocated to meet FAA requirements, funded w/Fed. Funds, proj. will extend runway signs,pipe,plant mix projects, same funding Staff working with VDOT for traffic calming in the Hollymead area in 2001-02, multi-stops, ped. X-walk operation of ferry [240] rural addition plans being der, with citizen adv. cmt., includes bridge over CSX RR widen to four lanes (associated with project above) widen to four lanes, bike lanes,sidewalks,RS98/99 [14,100] substandard bridge in Developed Area, project may build a new connector road [420] new road, County also petitioning for eligib, for primary road funding RS 97198 serve increased traf w/rain widening, ped/bike access,RS 1999100 [2,100] CATS recom.,improve sight distance and alignment,bike/sidewalk,RS 2006~2007 [3,000] widen, improve align, bike/sidewalk access,RS 2000101 [4,300] s pot improvement, pedestrain access,urban cross-section, RS 97198 [16,000] spot and inter. Improve., urban x-sect, upgrade 2 lane. RS 2005106, ped/bike access spot improvements at various locations,RS01/02 [2,500] spot improve, improve sight distance,RS02/03 [720] Railroad crossing with no lights or gate [250] Railroad crossing with no lights or gate. Hazard elimin, safety funds VDOT's Priority List C o u nty's Proposed Ranking Route Number and Name Location From - To Estimated Advertisement Date Month-Year Estimated Cost Description/Comments 17 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 N/A N/A 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 810 Browns Gap Road 795 Blenheim Road 676 Tilman Road Road 678 Owensville Road 606 Dickerson Road 614 Garth Road 795 James Monroe Pky Southern Parkway N/A 643 Polo Grounds Road 641 Frays Mill Road 641 Frays Mill Road 631 Rio Road 743 Earlysville Road 729 Buck Island Rd 684 Half Mil~ Branch Road 641 Burnley Station Road 708 Dry Bridge Road 602 Howardsville Tnpk 640 Gilbert Station Road 642 Red Hill Depot Road 671 Millington Road 692 Plank Road 708 Red Hill Road Hillsdale Drive 601 Garth Road Intersection of Route 789 Intersection of Route 790 Intersection of Route 250 Intersection of Route 250 Route 649 to Route 743 Intersection og Rt. 676 Intersection of Route 53 Avon Str. to Fifth Str. Route 240 to Route 250 Route 29 to Route 649 Rt. 641 @ Jacob Run Rt. 641 @ Jacob Run Rio Rd @ Pen Park Lane Rivanna River to Rt 643 Rt. 53 to Rt. 1120 Rt. 691 to Rt. 797 Norfolk Southern RR Railroad overpass .01 miles south Route 626 Norfolk Southern RR .28 miles northeast Rt.708 Intersection of Route 665 Route 29 to Route 712 Route 20 to Route 29 Greenbrier Dr. to Seminole Sq. Intersection of Route 658 Sap-10 Oct- 10 $1,200,000 $350,000 $4,000,000 N/A $1,50O,OOO $440,000 $6o,ooo $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $550,000 Intersection improvement. RS 2003/04.[2 000] $300,000 intersection improvement. [570] $200,000 intersection improvement,RS 2003/04 [4;800] $650,000 intersection improvement [2,800] improve to handle projected traffic, CATS recommm., RS 2002/03 [6,000] intersection improvement, public request 2002 [3100] recommended from CATS, intersection improvement. RS 2005/06 [2,700] Extend to 5th St., with pedestrian/bike facility, and Neighborhood street design/speed interconnect of future neighborhood streets public req. to improv align, spot improv, safety related, RS2 004/05 [750] install box culved, RS 2005-06, not a County priodty,a VDOT recommendedsafety project install box culvert, no County Priority, a VDOT recommended safety project Inter. improve, requested by City, to be funded from private source [22,000] public request to improv align, spot improv, safety related. RS 2004/05 [8,400] improve road geometrics, two lane rural sction, VDOT request 2001 [4400] spot/safety improvement to serve increased traffic w/ minimum widening [680] bridge project with Iow sufficiency rating [340] school transp. Dept. request, Iow weight limit Railroad crossing with no lights or gate [390] bridge project with Iow sufficiency rating [170] Railroad crossing with no gate [80] intersection improvement [370] spot improvements, safety related [1,200] improve alignment [1,200] new connector road between Hillsdale Rd and Hydraulic Rd, most of project is located in City limits add turning lane at Barracks Farm Road, CATS recomm. [6,400] Projects in bold are in the Development Area. VDOT's Priority List County's Pro posed Ranking Route Number and Name Location From - To Estimated Advertisement Date Month-Year Estimated Cost Description/Comments 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Projects in bold are in the 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5O 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 6O 61 62 63 64 Development Area. 676 Ownesville Road 691 Park Road 678 Decca Lane 616 Union Mill Road 743 Advance Mills Road 732 Milton Road 795 Hardware Street 622 Albevanna Springs Rd Route 614 to Route 1050 Park Road to Route 250 Intersection of Route 676 FCL to Route 759 At Jacobs Run Intersection of 762 Near inter, with Rt. 20 Intersection of Route 795 622 Albevanna Springs Rd Intersection of Route 773 680 Browns Gap Tnpk 611 Jarmans Gap Road 1310 Ferry Street 682 Bmadaxe Road 813 Starlight Road 676 Owensville Road 615 Lindsay Road 737 Mountain Vista Road 708 Secretarys Road 702 Reservoir Road 640 Gilbert Station Road 633 Heards Mtn Road 606 Dickerson mad 769 Beam Road 623 Woods Edge Rd Rt. 240 to Rt. 810 Off Route 691 .05 miles south of Rt. 6 Off Dick Woods Road Off Route 712 Intersection of Route 601 Route 639 to Louisa CL Route 6 to Route 726 Route 795 to Route 620 Ramp to Dead end Route 641 to Route 747 Nelson CL to Route 634 Route 850 to Route 1030 Off Route 20 north Route 616 to dead end Apr-01 Aug-02 Jan-03 Dec-04 Oct-03 Oct-04 Oct-06 Oct-06 Oct-06 $220,000 $650,000 $825,000 $1,400,000 $360,O00 $360,000 $1,280~000 $200 000 $365 000 spot improvements at several points, CATS recomm. [2,300] extend to eastern 240/250 street system [600] improve intersection, located near school, CATS recomm[1,900] improve alignment [4,600] improve approach to bridge [1,000] spot improvement, requested by public [1,000] spot improvement, requested by Scottsville [570] intersection improvement [710] intersection improvement [710] spot improvements, public request 2002 [700] Railroad crossing with no gate [210] Railroad crossing with no gate [80] spot improvements, public request [120] school request, needs turn-around space [60] intersection improvement [4800] unpaved road, R-O-W available [230] unpaved road, R-O-W available [60] unpaved road, full R-O-W not available [260] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined, sidewalks unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [240] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [60] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermine(~ [360] unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined [780] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [4201 VDOT's Priority List County's Proposed Ranking Route Number and Name Location From - To Estimated Advertisement Date Month -Year Estimated Cost Description/Comments 28 29 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 9O 784 Doctors Crossing 712 Coles Crossing Rd 647 Maxfield Road 688 Midway Road 689 Pounding Creek Rd 666 Allen Road 736 White Mtn Road 734 Bishop Hill Road 640 Gilbert Station Road 685 Bunker Hill Road 645 Wildon Grove Rd 712 North Garden Road 668 Walnut Level Road 712 Coles Crossing Rd 762 Rose Hill Church Ln 682 Broad Axe Road 605 Durrett Ridge Road 704 Fortune Lane 678 Owensville Road 760 Red Hill School Road 608 Happy Creek Road 674 Sugar Ridge Road 723 Sharon Road 707 Blair Park Road 769 Rocky Hollow Road 637 Dick Woods Road Route 600 to Route 640 Rt. 711 to Rt. 692 Rt.22 to Dead end Rt. 635 to Rt. 824 Rt. 250 to Rt. 635 Route 664 to Dead end Rt. 635 to Deand End Route 795 to Rt. 1807 Route 784 to Route 20 Route 616 to Dead end Rt. 608 to Orange CL Route 29 to Route 760 Rt. 810 to dead end Rt. 713 to Rt. 795 Rt. 732 to Deand End Rt. 637 to 1-64 Rt. 743 to Swift Run Rt. 715 to Dead End Route 676 to Route 614 Route 29 to RHES Route 645 to Route 646 Route 614 to Route 673 Route 6 to Route 626 Rt. 691 to Dead end Rt. 1484 to Dead end Rt. 691 to Rt. 692 Oct-08 Jun-09 $1,238,105 $45O,000 unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [360] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [250] unpaved road public request, R-O-W undetermined [470] unpaved road, publi request, R-O-W undetermined [360] unpaved road, publi request, R-O-W undetermined [340] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [220] unpaved road, publi request, R-O-W undetermined [200] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [180] unpaved road, R-O-W not available [170] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [150] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [140] unpaved road, R-O-W not available [140] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [130] unpaved road, BOS request, R-O-W undetermined [130] unpaved road, BOS request, R-O-W undetermined [130] unpaved road, R-O-W not available [120] unpaved road, R-O-W not available [120] unpaved road, public request, R-O.W undetermi~ [~ 20] unpaved road, R-O-W not available [120] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [120] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [100] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [80] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [70] unpaved road, R-O-W undetermined [70] unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [45] unpaved road, public request, R-O.W undetermi~ [20] $117,506,755 ** Currently not eligible not for VDOT funding [ ] Most Current Average Daily Trips RS - Revenue Sharing CHARLES NOTTINGHAM COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 701 VDOT WAY CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911 September 25, 2001 ATTACHMENT E JAMES b BRYAN RESIDENT ENGINEER Mr. Juan Wade Dept. Of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Route 729 Albemarle County From Rt. 53 to Rt. 1120 Dear Mr. Wade: We recently completed a review of Route 729 for additional signage. All signs including a 35 MPH limit sign are in place. We are recommending additional enforcement of the speed limit in the short term, however this road should be included in long range planning for improvements due to the geometrics of the road and the traffic count of 4400 AADT. We are copying Chief John Miller to advise him of this enforcement recommendation. HW~smh Cc: Chief John Miller Yours truly, Asst. Resident' Engineer TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 28 ATTACHMENT F COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department o£ Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296 - 5823 Ext. 3368 Fax (434) 972 - 4012 July 31, 2001 Bill Mills Assistant Resident Engineer Virginia Deparanent of Transportation 711 VDOT Way Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Bill: As I discussed with you several weeks ago, the County Planning Department recently met with representatives from the Hollymead Neighborhood Association to discuss safety and traffic calming measures. The Neighborhood Association identified four major pedestrian safety issues. They include: I. Traffic flow (pedestrian and vehicular) at the Powell Creek / Hollymead intersection. '~ The inability o f children to safely cross Hollymead Drive and Powell Creek Drive to use the existing -' walkway (north side of Holl,vrnead Drive and the east side of part of Powell Creek Drive). 3. Speed of vehicles along the road and volume of traffic at peak periods. 4. Vehicle and pedestrian conflicts schools at the entrance to the school. The association has proposed the following improvements to address those concerns. Please review for VDOT approval and implementation timetable. · Raised and striped pedestrian crossings at the intersections of Hollymead Drive with Maiden Lane, Robin Lane, Derby Lane, Redwing Lane, and Ravens Place. · All-way stops at the following intersections: Hollymead Drive @ Sourwood Place Hollymead Drive ~ Powell Creek Drive Powell Creek Drive ~ Peppervine Court. The County is in favor of establishing appropriate traffic and pedestrian management devices to provide for pedestrian and vehicle safety and, therefore, supports the Neighborhood's request for traffic/pedestrian management improvements. As you may recall, the County identified the Hollymead development as its priority community for VDOT's traffic calming program. These improvements are even more critical in the near future with the connection of Powell Creek Drive and Timberwood Parkway which is now under construction. Once this connection is made a new pattern of traffic will emerge in a corridor which experiences a high level of pedestrian/bicycle use. Appropriate measures also need to be considered and installed in Forest Lakes [North and South) to avoid unnecessary Page 2 July 31,2001 Mr. Bill Mills cut-through traffic and maintain vehicular speeds at a reasonable level consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood. Therefore, the County also requests that VDOT and County staff consider other strategic locations for all-way stops and pedestrian crossings (marked and/or raised along Ashwood Boulevard, Powell Creek Drive and Timberwood Boulevard) in the Forest Lakes developments. I look forward to VDOT's response and discussing this very important issue with you in more detail at your earliest possible convenience. I would be happy to meet With you, perhaps on-site, to further discuss these issues. I would like to apprise the Hollymead and Forest Lakes Associations of the feasibility of these requests by the end of the month. Thank vou for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Juandiego Wade Senior Transportation Planner 3O JRUNT JAUNT, Inc. 104 Keystone Place Charlottesville, VA 22902-6200 Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Albemarle County EXecutive 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 October 22, 2001 Dear Bob: Enclosed are some materials for the Board of Supervisors packets for November 7th. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak to the Board and present JAUNT's Annual Report to them as well as answer any questions about our services. Please let me know if there are any questions. Donna Shaunesey Executive Director Phone: (804) 296-3184, (800) 36JAUNT · Operations (804) 296-6174 · Fax: (804) 296-4269 · www. avenue.org/jaunt Moving Central Virginians For Over 25 Years ,TAUNT in Albemarle County FVO0-01 # of Trips Public Demand-Response Medical 9,843 Work 11,766 Adult Day Care 3,625 Miscellaneous 12,775 Public Routes Covesville 1,563 Scottsville 4,275 Crozet 3,541 JABA Routes .2,725 Big Blue 4,171 Night and Weekend 2,657 Total Public Service 56,941 Welfare-to-Work Grant 5,416 Agency Service 19,849 ,. GRAND TOTAL 82,206 Children 5% AdUlts 56% Seniors 39% People with Disabilities (ail ages) 86% Highlights of the Year · JAUNT provided 7% more public transportation trips for Albemarle citizens than in the previous year; both the Scottsville and Big Blue routes had 22% more passengers than last year. · Usage of the night and weekend service doubled this year after tripling the year before. Both rural and urban Albemarle residents with disabilities are riding JAUNT to evening classes and jobs, church services, and a general expansion of their opportunities. · The welfare-to-work transportation project has been able to serve every VIEW client who needed a ride to work. Although we provided only half as many trips as last year, we believe this is due to the fact that people are transitioning off of welfare as planned. RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING Date: _ //- ~7'- ~2. ~ O j Agenda Item Clerk's Initials~ CHARLOTTESVILLE /ALBEMARLE ©N CHILDREn"4 AND C 0 M M S S 0 N ~ ~ A M ~ E S CCF Focus, 2000-2001 · Understanding conditions of children and families · Building community awareness and problem-solving · Improving systems efficiency and coordinating services · Administering state and local funds for youth in need 2001 New Format for 2001 Annual Report Provides an overview of the findings from CCF research and work groups Presents strategies for moving ahead in the coming year Identifies areas for Council and Board consideration 2001 This Presentation Highlights 4 of CCF's 10 Work Groups · Agency Budget Review Team · Data Management Work Group · Children Needing Extensive · Juvenile Justice Advisory Services Work Group Committee · Community Needs Assessment · Outcome Measurement Work Work Group Group · Community Relations Advisory · Partnership for Children Group · Teen Pregnancy/STD · Comprehensive Services Act Prevention Work Group Committee A N N U A L i ~ © r~ Presentation Highlights · Stepping Stones --Dr. Michael Dickens · Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee -- --Martha Carroll, Ruth Stone · Comprehensive Services Act Committee -Robert Cox, Kathy Ralston · Summary Recommendations-- --Saphira Baker Questions/Dialogue 2001 A N N U A [l~£PO~- Stepping Stones An Annual Report on the Well-Being of Children and Families in the Charlottesville/Albemarle Area 3 Vital Signs for Our Community "Stepping Stones was conceived as a 'vital signs' chart for our community. We are charting how healthy we are as providers of a nurturing, happy and suCcessful community for children and families. Like a vital signs chart at the bedside in a hospital, the Stepping Stones report is neutral when it comes to making a diagnosis of cause. It simply reports what is happening-nothing more. It is up to us to figure out the meaning behind the observations and to either rejoice n a finding of good health or to organize and direct a cure of ill health." Indicators Tracked in Stepping Stones · Academic achievement Community characteristics · Conduct in Community Discipline in School Early Childhood Education Family Characteristics Family and community safety Financial assistance program participation Financial status Infant and early childhood health School characteristics School participation 4 Birth to Teens Under 18 ~, 90 ~ 8o ~'~ 70 ~ ~ 60 · ', 5O ~u. 30 72 79 __58 56 -- ~~11~8~. 33 33 33 33 3~ ~- 3~ ~ ~ 27 24i Average Average Average Average A~erage A'~erage Average 1991-1993 19~2-1994 199~-1995 1994-1996 1995-1997 1996-1998 1997-1999 Source: Virginia Health Statistics from the Center for Health Statistics Juvenile Arrests for Violent Crime = 6.73 ~h~5'34 3.46 0.8 0.93 1.05 0.9 1.14 Avemge Avemge Avemge Avemge Avemge Avemge Avemge Avemge 1991- 1992- 1993- I994- 1995- 1996- 1997- 1998- 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Sources: Charlottesville & Albemarle Police Departments 5 Possession of Drugs & Alcohol in Public School 2.9 ~ 4,2 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.2 0.0 Average Average Average Average Average Average 1993-1995 1994-1996 1995-1997 1996-1998 1997-1999 1998-2000 Sources: Charlottesville & Albemarle Public Schools Children Receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) 174 189 196 34 33 31 28 23 A~mge A~mge A~mge A~mge A~ge Average A~rag~ Av.~e 1991- 1992- 1993- 199~ 1995- 199~ 1997- 199~ 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 19~ 1999 2000 Sources: Charlottesville & Albemarle Departments of Social Services 6 Stepping Stones Indicators to Watch in the Coming Year · Enrollment in sports and extracurricular programs Participation in parks and recreation programs Alcohol arrests · Kindergarten readiness rates · Students living with both parents A N N A L r) ~ c ~ Findings and Recommendations The Data Management Work Group encourages Council and Board to consider Stepping Stones data in policy deliberations. The Data Management Work Group can inform Council and Board of current and emerging trends related to children and their families and the implications for policy development. 7 A N N U A r: ~ ~ c ~ Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC) A N N U A LREPOR Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC) JJAC is a representative committee that links the major components of the juvenile justice system: including the court, probation services, schools, police, social services, and adult criminal justice services. JJAC highlights: improving information-sharing; shaping support services for the .new Juvenile Detention Center; and identifying local juvenile offenders' .risks and needs. JJA Improving Information Sharing for More Effective Services JJAC conducted a survey of 114 local professionals on current information-sharing practices and concerns, and published the results, The Exchange of Information in Charlottesville~Albemarle, in July 2000; Survey findings included: - Most professionals receive information through informal channels - such as telephone calls. - Most agencies have concerns about breaching confidentiality and Virginia laws. - 89% of respondents indicated that they would be interested in making information exchange easier to improve services to youth and their families. JJA Responding to Information-Sharing Survey Concerns Consolidated local procedures and designed a common release form; JJAC members are piloting the development of a secure web-based consent form; Recruiting and training agencies to adopt new web-based consent form to increase efficiency and impact of services, better adhere to State confidentiality laws, and reduce duplicative information requests for youth and families. JJA 9 Engaging the Community in Shaping a New Juvenile Detention Facility JJAC advises the assessment and support components at Juvenile Detention Center, and creates a link between the juvenile justice system and the Blue Ridge Detention Center Commission. A community forum to engage residents and professionals in designing support components drew 100 participants. The Juvenile Justice Coordinator leveraged state funds for capital equipment for the Center. JJAC is conducting a a study of past use of detention facilities, and recommending future design of the Center's assessment space. JJA A N N g A L E P D Responding to the Risks and Needs of Juvenile Offenders JJAC published Profile of Juvenile Offenders describing a range of characteristics present for 263 local young people on probation. The needs assessment su b-committee developed a pilot intake tool to identify high-risk youth; CCF staff using data from the study to leverage funds for prevention. JJA 10 Findings and Recommendations Juvenile offenders enter the system disproportionately experiencing domestic violence, child abuse, and exposure to substance abuse by parents. They are less likely than their peers to be involved in productive activities or mentoring opportunities. Support effective interventions to decrease young people's involvement in crime. JJA Comprehensive Services Act Committee (CSA) 11 Comprehensive Services Act Committee (CSA) The CSA Committee is responsible for financial oversight and planning of services funded by the Comprehensive Services Act and manages the interagency provision of service to children. CSA funds provide foster care services for children, strengthen families to prevent foster care placement, provide support services for children in Special Education programs, and provide residential care for children whose needs cannot be met in a public school setting. In Charlottesville/Albemarle 4 rotating Family Assessment Planning Teams of staff from 7 public and private agencies, as well as parents, meet each Friday to review and approve collaborative service plans for children. CSA Management of Funds for At-Risk You Members review financial and case reports, and encourage system where CSA-funded children can remain close to the residence. Information management systems have been improved. Medicaid reimbursements have reduced the costs of some previously covered by local tax revenues and CSA funds. CSA contracting system has been automated to insure that meet quality state and local standards as indicated in contr~ a flexible ir services vendors icts. CSA 12 Children Needing Extensive Services (CNES) Problem-solving for Children Needing Extensive Services (CNES) The CNES work group published a profile of 37 children needing ext~ensive services - served in 24-hour, 7-day week psychiatric facilities with costs ranging between $6,000-$14,000 per month. Work group members found that these children may not exhibit progress despite significant interventions, and that serving them is a long-term and expensive commitment. Members held a community forum of 65 practitioners to develop local strategy to intervene with CNES youth. CNES work group members developed post-forum priorities: improved collaboration, a short-term cdsis center, and renewed emphasis on domestic violence. CNES 13 CNES Work Group: Findings and Recommendations CNES members request Council and Board consideration to: - Assist in lobbying the legislature and the Governor to provide total cost for placement of CNES children who require long- term out of community placement; - Support early intervention programs that decrease domestic violence. CNES work group members are developing a pilot collaboration model to more effectively serve these children and help improve their transition back to local neighborhoods. CNES A N N U A L R _~ 0 P 2001 In Review: Summary of Findings 14 A N N U A L o E o C:, [~ · Policy and Program Recommendations · Sharing Information · Problem Solving · Increased Effectiveness and Efficiency Outcome Measurement Annual impact on local programs on residents' quality of life Understanding Conditions of Children and their Families Impact of local agency investments Residents' needs and resources Social, civic, and educational trends Knowledge of risk and protective factors Needs Assessment Portrait of residents' use of resources, services and family needs Stepping Stones Annual demographic, educational, social, and civic indicators Targeted Research Analysis of risk, need, and protective factors for special populations · Outcomes . Upcoming Survey · Information · Research on documented in and Focus Groups collected on SG youth applications from · Forums and aspects ora populations community agencies community healthy and issues ~unded by City, meetings community on a that are County and United · Collection and regional basis focus of CCF Way analysis of local ~vork groups studies and data and funding streams A N N U A L ~ E ~ © P. 2001. in Review: Summary of Findings · CCF staffand work groups compiled targeted research reports dudng 2000-2001; · CCF Needs Assessment work group will conduct a comprehensive study with results in the Spring 2002. · A partial portrait is emerging of a community relatively rich in resources for most children and families, with portions of the population living in unsafe and unhealthy conditions. 2001 15 Implications CCF members are analyzing the data, and developing a strategy for communicating the results and engaging residents and stakeholders in finding solutions. In addition, next year~s comprehensive needs assessment will set standards to measure future success; CCF members know that, for example, a supportive family is a critical element of a child's healthy growth and development. Members know that effective prevention programs can make a difference in reducing negative behavior later on. They know that where and how residents live can determine what they expedence. 2001 Moving Forward CCF has asked Council and Board to approve a recommendation to add one citizen member from each locality to better reflect the composition of local residents, and to include a broader range of voices at the table. Throughout the annual report, CCF members and work groups have put forth their own strategies for moving ahead, and identified areas for Council/Board consideration. CCF members look forward to continued problem-solving together, and make themselves available to you to help improve conditions for children and their families. 2001 16 ~ion 17 A09: 28 C O M [VS o° S C) N ~ S Ii ©VER~IEw: CHARLOI-rESVILLE/ALBEMARLE COMMISSION ON CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ................ 4 CCF Background ........................................................................................... 4 CCF Today ...................................................................................................... 5 Organization of Report .................................................................................. 5 Summary of Accomplishments ..................................................................... 6 Summary of Findings ...................................................................................... 7 CCF Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ............. 10 Accomplishments ......................................................................................... 13 Findings .......................................................................................................... 14 Recommendations for Board and Council Consideration ..................... 14 DATA MANAGEMENT WORK GROUP ......................................................... 16 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ 16 Findings ......................................................................................................... 17 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration .................... 17 NEEDS ASSESSMENT WORK GROUP ............................................................ 18 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ ] 8 Findings ......................................................................................................... 19 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 19 OUTCOME MEASUREMENT WORK GROUP ................................................ 20 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ 20 Findings .......................................................... ~ .............................................. 21 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 21 CONTENTS IV. COORDINATING SERVICES EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT & SCHOOL READINESS:, PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN .................................................................... 23 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ 24 Findings ......................................................................................................... 24 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration .................... 25 JUVENILE JUSTICE ADVISORY COMMI1ZEE ................................................ 26 Accomplishments ....................................................................................... 26 Findings ........................................................................................................ 27 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 27 TEEN PREGNANCYSTD PREVENTION WORKGROUP .................................. 28 Accomplishments ...................................................................................... 28 Findings ......................................................................................................... 29 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 29 CHILDREN NEEDING EXTENSIVE SERVICES WORK GROUP ....................... 30 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ 30 Findings ......................................................................................................... 31 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 31 HI ........................................... 33 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ 33 Findings ......................................................................................................... 34 Recommendations for Board and Council Consideration ..................... 35 BACKGROUND The creation of the new Charlottesville/ Albemarle Commission on Children and Families (CCF) in 1997 reflected a common goal by the City and County to coordinate the community's resources, and to improve the well-being of children and families. The CCF was established by a joint City of Charlottesville/ Albemarle County agreement in 1997 to advise Council and Board on improving the local system of services and to better coordi- nate and evaluate these local resources. A staff was hired and members were appointed in 1998. With an engaged group of resi- dents and agency heads leading the Commission, the localities set in motion their strategy aimed at capturing the expertise and concerns within the community in order to improve delivery of local services to children and families. WiTH AN ENGAGED GROUP OF PESIDt NTS AND AGENC¢ I~EAB~ iEAD!NG THE COMMISSION, iHE LOCALi~ iif:S SET IN MJ)'t()N 'I~EIR NEW STRATEGY AIMED AT CAPTURING THE EXPEl;rE!SE AND CONCERNS WI]H q ~E CON!BiJB Y iN Ofi'Df::R [O iMPROVE DELIV~!~Y OF: LC)CAE ~Ei~VICFS ~O CHIL-' DREN AND FAM LIES, I. Overview: CCF Background During 1998-1999, CCF members established a governing and work group structure, launched improvement and coordination efforts in early childhood development and juvenile justice, and began putting pieces in place to measure local human service investments. At its initial retreat in October 1998, CCF members also tasked themselves with raising awareness about the needs and resources of local children and families and engaging the community in planning for improved conditions. Many members saw the possibility of emphasizing preventive strategies; addressing a perceived duplication of services capturing reliable information on services to children and families, and hearing from residents about the state of youth and families in the locality. High on the list of member priorities for CCF were responsible evaluation of programs; investing in programs with effective outcomes; and developing a system for recommending the allocation of dollars to children and families. CCF members reported that they were concerned about young peoples' success in school, the health of young children, easing transition to kindergarten for young children, a lack of activities for teenagers, and affordable and safe child care, among other issues. During 1999-2000, CCF members moved from startup and planning activities to implementation in five general areas. These included developing a unified early child- hood development effort, creating tools to measure the well-being of children and families, engaging citizens in children and family planning efforts, overseeing the local implementation of the Comprehensive Services Act, and crafting a juvenile justice strategic plan. This work was accomplished through a network of over 130 citizens, educators, and community agency, business, and government representatives in ten targeted work groups. CCF is unique in that its 9 citizen members have the majority voice. CCF also includes 2 youth members, and seven heads of institutions serving children -- including the local superintendents CFtAiRL. OT'i ESV C O M M LLE/AL._BEM S S 4 of schools. Additional members include a representative of the University of Virginia, and non-voting members from the United Way- Thomas Jefferson Area, the Charlottesville City Manager's and the Albemarle County Executive's Office. The CCF accomplishes its mission with six staff members (three full-time and three part-time) and ten work groups including over 130 participants. CCF TODAY In this third year of operation, the Commission and its work groups remain committed to their goal of improving the local system of services and better coordinating and evaluating local resources. CCF has continued to expand upon the efforts of the past 2 years, and members are actively involved in putting forth solutions for system improvements and enhancement of services. CCF has shared the results of its research through electronic, written and public venues and has facilitated community meetings and forums. Its staff and work groups have coordinated services in juvenile justice, early childhood and school readiness, and teen pregnancy/STD prevention and helped shape services in response to local needs. CCF continues to develop and refine its stra- tegic plan for improving services, and will be implementing a comprehensive needs assessment for the coming year in order to help identify areas of changing need in the community. I. Overview: Organization of Report ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This year's report is divided into five areas. As in years past, each section includes a summary of accomplishments for 2000-2001. Unique to this year is that initial findings are reported in each section, and areas of concern are identified. Where applicable, each section includes recommendations and issues that merit Council and Board consideration. Highlights from all these sections are excerpted in this overview. The five sections are listed below: Overview Sharing Information Children & Family Service System Improvements Coordinating Services Administering State and Local Funds to Children in Need SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS: UNDERSTANDING CONDITIONS OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES · CCF's Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee published Profile of Juvenile Offenders, which describes the characteristics and risk factors facing juveniles involved in the court system. · The second edition of Stepping Stones was released including five-year trend data on children's well being as it relates to teen pregnancy, violent crime, drug and alcohol possession in public schools, and TANF rates. COMMUNITY AWARENESS AND PROBLEM-SOLVING · The Children Needing Extensive Services work group held a Roundtable Forum with 65 practitioners to develop realistic recom- mendations for coordinated prevention and intervention efforts for high-risk children. · The Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee held a forum drawing over 100 participants to design support services for the forthcoming Juvenile Detention Center. · CCF's revised web site now provides CCF and work group minutes, reports, and meet- ing dates on line, as well as information on available local services and has had over 2000 visits. · A children and family listserve networking residents and professionals has increased in membership 200% since its establishment by Leadership Charlottesville in 2000. I. Overview: Summary of ACComplishments SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS · CCF and the United Way- Thomas Jefferson Area, along with 20 community agencies sup- ported by City and County funding, completed the first year of utilizing outcome measure- ment data in the budget application process, producing important information about the measurable impact of interventions. COORDINATION AND ~MPROVEMENT OF SERVICES · The Partnership for Children designed and distributed Early Literacy Kits for parents, and leveraged local school, hospital, and private funds to distribute these to over 990 children, ages 0-6. · The Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee developed a common release of information form to reduce duplication for families and agencies and to facilitate effective delivery of services. This form will be available on the CCF website during 2001-2002. · The Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Group, with support from Monticello Area Community Action Agency, convened a roundtable of professionals to improve and streamline inter- vention efforts for middle school students. ADMINISTRATION OF STATE AND LOCAL FUNDS FOR YOUTI~ IN NEED · CCF provided administrative oversight and management for Comprehensive Service Act funds, totaling $8.19 million in FY01, and Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control (VJCCCA) dollars, totaling $1,034, 758. CHAI';?LC) TTESViLLE/ALBEMAI;,>LE <i' 6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS In preparation for the annual report, each Commission work group was asked to identify its major findings, priorities, and issues of concern for CCF and Council and Board. In addition to gathering the findings from the ten work groups, Com- mission staff participated in meetings with residents and agen- cies throughout 2000-2001, and reviewed a range of local research and studies underway. CCF staff also helped to design the Charlot- tesville Neighborhood Survey (a survey that summarizes City residents' perspec- tives on community needs and resources). I. Overview Summary of Findings HILDE'EN WFO TN) UP iN lite ,ii VEIxlLE C COLi:~ S A\~i NOT, A('}Cq)I~f)iNG [;~ECFNT DATA, BFEN A~ ACTIVE AS IN ?Hf- COMMUNITY ~/:PVl(i, P!C,i~i'ATION, AND YOUiH ENi'~ICttMi-N! AND MENTOPlNG ()PPOi~EUNillt:S AVAI/ABiE OCAliV, A CCF Needs Assessment work group and staff reviewed historic studies and human service needs assessments of the area from 1988-1995 and collected available data from the first edition of Stepping Stones, 2000, community agency applications, and local public school reports. While many of these research and data collec- tion efforts were targeted on specific popula- tions, CCF's findings have begun to generate a partial portrait of the lives of children and families in the area. This picture will become more complete in 2001-2002, as the Commission launches a comprehensive needs assessment to capture objective data from residents, U.S. census data becomes readily available and Stepping Stones evolves from a snapshot of current conditions to a summary of positive and negative local trends. These forthcoming studies, combined with information and corn- munication with the public and work group participants, will help CCF members continue to identify the most pressing problems, identify areas of strength, and formulate fur- ther recommenda- tions to Council and Board members The portrait that emerges is one of a community rich in resources, where children and their families have access to a wide range of local services. But while this picture and range of resources is encouraging, it does not reflect the reality for all children. For example, children who end up in the juvenile courts have not, according to recent data, been as active as their peers in the community service, recreation, and youth enrichment and mentoring opportunities available locally. Juvenile offenders appear to have experienced domestic violence and child abuse dispro- portionately; many had substance-abusing parents. A decreased number of children are receiv- ing Temporary Assistance for Needy Families in the City and the County, as is the case nationwide, yet it appears there has not been a corresponding drop in the localities' child poverty rates. In contrast, the number of children in poverty increased fairly steadily during the first part of the 1990s (from 1990-1997 moving from 9,5% to 12.6 % in the County, and 20.3% to 29.6% in City.) The numbers of 7 students receiving free and reduced lunch also increased steadily in the City of Charlottesville and have remained constant in the County during this time. Similar disparities show up when residents are asked about the resources lack- ing in their neighbor- hoods. For example, In a recent City of Charlottesville survey of 1000 households, res- idents in the South Central sector in Charlottesville were much more likely to see the need for additional resources to keep children away from crime and to avoid teen pregnancy than the population as a whole. I, Overview Summary of Findings comparable risk assessment survey in the future. There has been an increase in the number of children receiving Comprehensive Services THERE AFq'E LESS ViSiBLE PPOB/.EMS - SUCi-I AS SIIICIDE, VIOLENCE AN.~) MEN!AL t~/EAETH CC~NCEIRNS -- -~AT O ALL STRI~fE AT C ~iLDF~EN ,.F iNCOME LEVELS, AS DEMONSTRA!ED iN ?klE RECENT ALBEMARLE Yo J~-/ [~iSK BFHAVIO/4 There are less visible problems - such as suicide, violence and mental health concerns - that strike at children of all income levels, as dem- onstrated in the recent Albemarle County Youth Risk Behavior Survey. This survey reported that 12.5% of cou'nty public high school students had attempted suicide in the last twelve months, as compared to 7.7% nationwide. The survey also documented that 14.2% of County students had been involved in a physical fight within the previous 12 months, similar to the national average of 14.8%. Students also reported that 23.1% had carried a weapon within the last 30 days, as compared to the national average of 18.3%. CCF members have encouraged Charlottesville City Schools to consider implementing a Act (CSA) services - residential and non- residential special- ized services for chil- dren in foster care, at-risk of foster care, receiving special education services, involved in the juvenile justice system, and with serious mental health problems. In the City of Charlottesville, the number of children receiving CSA funding went from 190 in FY98 to 310 in FY00. In the County, the children served increased from 230 to 281. The Children Needing Extensive Services work group looked at a small group of 37 children requiring the most CSA resources and found that they are as young as six years old and as old as eighteen. They have multiple mental illness/mental retardation diagnoses; come from dysfunctional families who abuse sub- stances and who themselves may be mentally ill; and they require intensive services that may or may not result in their becoming productive members of the community. Many of these children have had to be placed in multiple expensive out-of-community facilities because there are limited facilities where children in crisis can stay for a short term and access immediate mental health services. C H A i'R L C) T T E S V i L L E / A L. B E M A 17 L E C O M M / S S i C) N 8 I. Overview Summary of Findings Race relations have been consistently men- tioned by those conducting assessments in the late 80s and early 90s as a barrier to a healthy community, The recent documented growth in the Latino and other minority populations in both localities makes the need to understand and improve racial and ethnic relations even more important today. Also important is the need to make services accessible and under- standable to non-English speaking residents. There are positive trends in the community as well. Over the last five years the rate of births to teen mothers has decreased in the City and the County, and the rate of violent deaths has declined in the City and remained constant in the County. Partnership for Children members note an increase in the number of children immunized by age two, and a decrease in the number of families who are using the local emergency rooms as a primary health care provider. The Albemarle County Youth Risk Behavior Survey notes that County students participate in physical activity at a much higher rate than the nation as a whole and have higher rates of participation in team sports. CCF Staff Members 2000-2001 CCF COMMISSION MEMBERS Rory Carpenter, Juvenile Justice Coordi- nator Dr. Kevin C. Castner Albemarle County Schools Martha D. Carroll 16th District Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court Service Unit Azzura Cox Youth Representative City of Charlottesville Robert A. Cox, III Charlottesville Department of Social Services Happy Darcus Youth Representative Albemarle County Dr. Michael D. Dickens City of Charlottesville Mark Kindler Albemarle County Dr. Susan L. McLeod Thomas Jefferson Health District Saphira Baker Lisa Climer Richard Merriwether Director PT CSA Coordinator Chair City of Charlottesville Gretchen Ellis Cindy Stratton PT Planner Analyst Administrative Secretary Larry Miller Albemarle County Amber Zavada, PT Information & Outreach Coordinator James R. Peterson, Region Ten Community Services Board Deborah Pomerantz City of Charlottesville Katherine A. Ralston Albemarle Department of Social Services Sterling L. Robinson, II Albemarle County Dr. Martha Snell University of Virginia Ruth Stone Vice-Chair Court Appointed Special Advocates, Private Provider Representative Dr. William C. Symons, Jr. Charlottesville City Schools Non-Voting Members: Linda Peacock City of Charlottesville Cathy Train United Way-Thomas Jefferson Area Roxanne W. White County of Albemarle 9 I. Overview Recommendations for BOard & Council Consideration RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOARD & COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: CCF and its work groups are active in addressing many of these priority issues, as well as conceiving strategies to make system and program improvements. The following issues are highlights of those put forth in the full report by CCF work groups and the organization as a whole - issues which will shape CCF's work during FY02, and areas where members believe that expanded community attention and focus is merited. PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN (PAGE 24) · Support Partnership members in raising community awareness of the impact of child abuse and neglect on local children. Recent research by CCF indicates that 29% of the local juvenile offenders studied and 78% of Children Needing Extensive Services were victims of abuse and neglect. These percentages are higher than the local and state rates (1.9/1000 in Albemarle, 11/1000 in Charlottesville, 5.2/1000 in Virginia). · Support efforts to improve access to afford- able dental care for Iow-income children, many of whom have never had preventive dental care due to tack of availability. · Promote the Partnership for Children as a local aSSet in creating a region that is a healthy place for children aged 0-6, and their families, and encourage all parents to take advantage of local parent education resources. JUVENILE JUSTICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PAGE 27) * Encourage effective interventions to mitigate young people's involvement in crime. Several family and societal factors - such as domestic violence parental substance abuse, child abuse and neglect, the absence of a sup- portive adult in a child's life, and a juvenile's lack of involvement in productive activity, may impact on juvenile delinquency. · Support the development of quality program- ming that balances the security and service needs of juveniles at the Detention Center and the Assessment Center Annex. CHILDREN NEEDING EXTENSIVE SERVICES (PAGE 31) · Lobby the legislature and the governor to provide the total state funding for placement of CNES children. Children most at risk receiving CSA services have multiple problems and may not exhibit significant progress in improving their behavior despite significant interventions and efforts. Serving and maintaining such children (who previously would have been served in state facilities) puts a tremendous burden on localities. · Support a community initiative to reduce domestic violence. Domestic violence has a serious and far-reaching impact of on children's mental health, social adjustment, and educa- tional development. CHAIR C 0 0 1 T E S V i L L E / A L B E M A IR k E M M I S S t 0 N 10 A N N U A L I, Overview Recommendations for Board & Council Consideration COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES ACT COMMITI'EE (PAGE 35) · Lobby for removal of the local match required for Medicaid. · Lobby for increased administrative funds to support CSA information management systems and reimbursement for staff and sup- port services required for state-mandated administration. · Support efforts to improve data collection capacity within each locality, and move toward a shared information management system to ease data access and trends analy- sis. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CCF ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS: In order for CCF to more effectively carry out its mission, members recommend continued system improvements in the community, and organizational changes within CCF. These include: OUTCOME MEASUREMENT · Support the continued and expanded use of outcome measurement by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) social programs and Weed and Seed in the City of Charlottesville. Outcome Measurement is an important step in measuring the impact of local funds, communicating their value, developing local funding priorities, and collect- ing community-wide data. (Page 21) DATA MANAGEMENT (STEPPING STONES) · Encourage communication with City Council and the Board of Supervisors about current trends and their policy implications beyond the current annual presentation. (Page 1 7) COMMISSION ORGANIZATIONAL · Expansion of citizen participation in CCF. CCF requests that Council and Board each appoint at least one additional citizen member to the Commission to beffrer reflect the com- position of its residents and include a broader range of voices in decision making and assess- ment. The Commission seeks its own member- ship to better reflect the diversity of Charlot- tesville and Albemarle neighborhoods. CCF members have agreed to help identify and recruit potential appointees for Council and Board consideration. · Open the channels of communication between human service and neighborhood planning efforts. CCF recommends enhancing links with local government neighborhood planning, land use, and community develop- ment initiatives to share resources and develop comprehensive community improvement efforts. Designing and planning for the social well being of children and their families is a common goal among local planners: "children do well when their families do well, and families do benefit when they live in supportive neigh- borhoods'' (Annie B. Casey Foundation.) 11 II. Sharing Inf~rmati°n Findings,,i,... .... , , ............................................................ ~ Recommendations for BQard a~d Counc Co~sidera~io~ : ii;i::: C H A i~ LOTT E S V t 1,. L E / A L E~ E M A i';! L E ® 12 A N N U A L Il. Sharing Information: Accomplishments A major emphasis among the CCF members and staff has been on gathering reliable information on children and their families, and making it more accessible to the public, to human service and education agency staff, planners and local leaders on a regular basis. The intended outcome is that residents, youth-serving agency staff, educators, public and private leaders can better understand the status of children and their families, and are aware of the CCF as a source of information about children and families. ACCOMPLISHMENTS During 2001, CCF convened roundtable discus- sions, expanded its website, provided data and technical assistance to community organiza- tions, focused the media on children and families, published reports and directories, and advocated for legislative issues. Highlights inctude: ~NCREASED COMMUNITY ACCESS TO AND USE OF CCF INFORMATION AND DATA · CCF witnessed an increase in website hits from 600 in 1999 to over 2000 to date in 2001. All CCF publications, minutes, available data, and event announcements are now on line. · The local children and families listserv, launched by Leadership Charlottesville and administered by CCF, grew to 150 from 25 in May 1999. Members share information on model programs, grant opportunities, local training and events, and opportunities for collaborative projects. · CCF averaged 40 calls per month for data, grant-writing assistance, and information about local services. This number has been steadily increasing. · Children's issues twice received front page coverage in The Daily Progress and The Observer, as well as airtime on WINA and Channel 29 News. The coverage focused on the 2001 publication of Stepping Stones, and the release of Profile of Juvenile Offenders. SPONSORED COMMUNITY FORUMS AND ENCOURAGED PARTICIPATION · CCF's Children Needing Extensive Services Work Group held a forum, attended by over 60 practitioners to recommend solutions and review current information and best practices. · CCF's Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee sponsored a forum, attended by 100 par- ticipants, to help design the support and educational services at the planned juvenile detention center. · CCF is working with Piedmont Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), the League of Women Voters (LWV) and a Legisla- tive Forum Planning Group to plan a legislative forum on children and families with Virginia state Senators and Delegates. 13 INCREASED DISTRIBUTION OF PUBLICATIONS · CCF issued 3 Quarterly Reports to over 500 community participants describing recent work. · CCF issued the first in a series of two-page research briefs highlighting critical issues facing children. · 250 copies of 2001 Stepping Stones were distributed to local decision makers, the media, human service and education agencies, plan- ning organizations, funders and residents. · Dissemination of CCF's Guide to Youth Services doubled from 1000 to 2000 copies, due to increased requests from local providers. · CCF, with input from all 130 CCF work group participants, generated a legislative agenda for children and their families that was included in the localities' and planning district's package to the General Assembly. II. Sharing Information: Findin~ ~ R~°mmend~°r~ FINDINGS There has been a significant increase in access to and utilization of data from the Commission. Information is being used to improve existing services and identify unmet needs. The major users of CCF information are non- profit and public human service agencies. CCF's challenge is to continue to build aware- ness and usage among the general public. RECOMMENDATIONS TO BOARD AND COUNCIL · Continue to reque~ & utilize information from CCF CCF has access to information about a variety of issues impacting the lives of local children and their families. When relevant public policy issues arise in Council and Board deliberations, staff and members are available to provide information and to inform recommendations for action. Legislative Forum Planning Group, ccF/CASAI~ SaPh ra Baker CCF KaY HobbS; League o~ women voters Richard Merriwether, CCF Chair Joyce Stratfon, People Places Ruth Stone, CASA Kathy Harris, Charlottesville pUbliC Scha°ls MaUrice JOnes; City of Charlottesville B~bble pome,an~z, CCF Cindy Stratton, CCF Joyce Stratton, People Places C HAB LOTTESVi LLE/A LBEMAiSRLE :?;~, C 0 M M I S S I 0 N :: 14 III. Children & Fami y Service Delivery Systems Improvements Ill. CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEMS IMPROVEMENTS ................................................ 15 DATA MANAGEMENT WORK GROUP ......................................................... 16 Accomplishments ....................................................................................... 16 Findings ...................................................................................................... 17 Recommendations for Councit and Board Consideration .................... 17 NEEDS ASSESSMENT WORK GROUP ........................................................ ~ 8 AccompliShments ..................................................................................... 18 Findings ......................................................................................................... 19 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 19 OUTCOME MEASUREMENT WORK GROUP ................................................ 20 Accomplishments ........................................................................................ 20 Findings ......................................................................................................... 21 Recommendations for Cound! and Board Consideration ..................... 21 15 III. Data Management Work Group AccomPlishments In 1997, CCF was tasked with improving a diverse system of services that currently functions as distinct organizations, departments, agencies and components. CCF members, staff, and work group volunteers have created strategic tools to understand current conditions and the overall impact of current investments, and to measure substantive change. These tools include an annual report card on child and family welt-being; transition of local funding applications to an outcome measurement- based process, and assessment of current resources and needs in partnership with other local planning organizations. DATA MANAGEMENT WORK GROUP A key focus for the Data Management work group is to increase residents' understanding of the conditions facing children and their families by sharing the data they have generated. Members aim to publicize the information, to raise awareness about the resources and needs of local children and their families and to generate informed responses from human service program staff, policy makers and others seeking improvements to residents' quality of life. In July 2000, the Data Management work group released its first edition of Stepping Stones, a statistical "report card" on the well- being of children and families in the City of Charlottesville and the County of Albemarle. The concept for the report card came from Dr. Michael Dickens, a citizen member of the CCF, when he first joined the Commission in 1998 and was searching for effective tools to advise local government on children and family policies. Similar to a chart of a patient's vital signs, Stepping Stones was intended to "chart how healthy we are as providers of a nurturing, happy and successful community for children and families.' The report card tracks 56 different indicators, including measures of academic achievement, family and community safety, early childhood development, community involvement, school discipline, family charac- teristics and financial status. ACCOMPLISHMENTS The second edition of Stepping Stones was prepared during the year and published in August 2001. The Data Management work group has made it a priority to link Stepping Stones data to other local, state and national findings, providing the information in the context of other small cities and semi-urban and rural areas like Charlottesville/ Albemarle. The group will also seek to compile new indicators in the areas of "social capital" and mental health, while continuing to watch for possible new trends. Data Management Work Group Saphira Baker, CCF Dr. Michael Dickens Chair Gretchen Ellis CCF Linda Peacock City of Charlottesville Diana Sacra Charlottesville Public Schools Susan Thomas City of Charlottesville David Uhlig Charlottesville Public Schools Juandiego Wade Albemarle County 16 A N N U A FINDINGS Stepping Stones" release has generated an increase in the number of phone call requests to the Commission from agency staff and others trying to understand the profile of the community. Data from Stepping Stones was used in grant applications submitted by Albemarle County Schools, the Music Resource Center, the Charlottesville Housing Authority, the Charlottesville Weed and Seed Network, Children, Youth and Family Services, and the Charlottesville/Albemarle Prevention Coali- tion. In the 2001 version of Stepping Stones, the following trends were noted: · Births to teens under age 18 have decreased. · Juvenile arrests for violent crimes have decreased. · The three-year average monthly rate of children receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (welfare) has decreased in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. · The incidence of in-school drug and alco- hol possession has decreased in Charlottes- ville. III. Data Management Work Group: Findings/Recommendations Five years of data for a number of indicators will be included in the third edition of Stepping Stones, in 2002. It is anticipated that trends may be evident for the following indicators, which will be watched closely. · Enrollment in extracurricular and sports programs · Participation in parks and recreation programs * Alcohol arrests under age 21 · Children in Need of Services/Supervision Petitions · Public school suspensions * Kindergarten readiness tests · Charlottesville students living with both parents · Women, Infants and Children (WIC) participation · High school graduation rates · Dropout rates RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL AND BOARD CONSIDERATION · Consider CCF data in policy deliberations. CCF and its Data Management work group seek an ongoing communication with Council and Board members to alert members of cur- rent and potential emerging trends and the implications for policy development. C HAPLC~TrES / .... .... ~ iL E/ALBEMAi-ELE 17 A N N U A NEEDS ASSESSMENT WORK GROUP CCF charged the Needs Assessment work group with making recommendations about conducting a comprehensive assessment of the needs of children and their families in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. ACCOMPLISHMENTS CCF brought together a diverse group of citizens, community leaders, and academic specialists to make recommendations about the purpose and scope of a comprehensive needs assessment. The work group identified its key area of concern: family functioning in terms of access to and utilization of local services. The work group concluded that, as part of CCF's mission to guide investments, policies, and programs for children and their families, a consistent assessment of community needs and resources should be conducted on a regular basis to measure progress and determine priori- ties. Further, findings and recommendations of needs assessments must result in tangible efforts to address identified priorities, particularly those findings that have not had community-wide attention despite the repeated identification of gaps. Based on the work group's recommendation, the CCF decided to conduct a comprehensive needs assessment designed to: * Understand how families function in Char- lottesville and Albemarle; how they obtain resources to raise healthy children and manage the obstacles they face. · Examine the utilization of and access to resources based on specific criteria such as eligibility, accessibility, family capacity, prior experience, race, income level, and level of public trust. * Develop a baseline understanding of chip dren's and families' need and resources to be reviewed on a regular basis. * Gather information to establish priority areas of need and create a specific plan to address these needs. When the assessment is complete, CCF will establish a mechanism; such as an implementa- tion work group, to develop a strategy which includes a general timetable and setting priorities within the recommendations. This work group would track and use the results of the needs assessment to accomplish the following: * Establish, communicate, and track priority issues for intervention based on identified needs and feasibility of meaningful impact. Needs Ass~ment Work Grip 1 MadiSon cummings; W t am EUcY; UVA Albemor!e County ~hod Board Ryde!! Bayne~ ja~q~iine Dsge~; Chari~tfeSgilie AbUndar}t Pew Partnership for Civic Change Life Ministries GretChen Ellis, CCF Lisa Trivits, UVA Kathy Harris Melvin Wilson UVA Charlottesville Public Schools C 0 M ESV M LLE/ALBEMAiRLE 18 A N N U A · Develop a strategic plan for CCF to address priority issues and create specific mechanisms to review progress on a routine basis. · Ask City Council and the Albemarle Board of Supervisors to consider setting funding priorities that are consistent with identified needs and findings. · Leverage additional funding sources to address identified priority needs and/or help to improve or strengthen services that currently are not being addressed adequately. · Conduct a similar needs assessment every 3-5 years to monitor progress and identify changing priorities. FINDINGS By reviewing historic needs assessments, work group members noted that the indicators studied and the responses to prior recom- mendations have been inconsistent. Members noted that community-wide efforts in response to earlier assessments focused on early child- hood, service coordination, teen pregnancy prevention, and treatment of children with mental health problems, often producing measurable results. However, other concerns identified in prior studies have not been tar- geted as visibly. There have been fewer large- scale prevention and intervention efforts for middle-school aged children, and discussion of the impact of racial issues for local children and families has been limited. III. Needs Assessment: Findings/Recommendations Additional areas of concern noted by the work group include: SOL passing rates (particularly for African-American and Iow income children), increased CSA utilization, consistently high free and reduced school meal and child poverty rates, and the impact of domestic violence and child abuse on youth. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL AND BOARD CONSIDERATION · Participate in the public meetings and hearings phase of the needs assessment pro- cess. * Receive and study the results of the assess- ment. · Consider service utilization, access, and outcomes in determining funding priorities. TESViLLE/ALBEN,IA 7LE 19 A N N U A L OUTCOME MEASUREMENT WORK GROUP CCF manages the annual review process for community-based agencies seeking local government funding. The year 2001 marked the first year during which all applicants completed a new joint City of Charlottesville/County of Albemarle/United Way-Thomas Jefferson Area application form, created by the Outcome Measurement work group, emphasizing the measurable outcomes of their programs. The new application was piloted in Fiscal Year 2000 by a combination of five agencies and collaboratives. The mission of the joint Commission on Children and Families (CCF)/United Way-TJA Outcome Measurement work group is: "Human service agencies, supported through funding, use outcome data and information to increase effectiveness, improve performance, and meet community needs." ACCOMPLISHMENTS Because this was the first year of the outcome measurement process for most agencies, extensive training and technical assistance was offered to agencies. Agencies crafted a logical model of their program inputs, activities, initial and long-term outcomes. Agencies identified and provided measurable indicators to report on in the next fiscal year. III. Outcome Measuremen Work Group: AccomPlishments The CCF also worked to expand the outcome measurement approach to other public agen- cies and departments. · During 2001, the City of Charlottesville Weed and Seed program adopted the application form and asked CCF to provide technical assistance and training to its applicants. · Beginning in 2002, the City's social develop- ment funds through the Community Develop- ment Block Grant will also be requesting outcome data, and consolidating technical assistance and orientation efforts with the CCF. · CCF staff has been active in providing training to City of Charlottesville Department of Social Service Adult workers, and Quality Community Council members. m MACAA Univers tY of vkgida Jack Gailagher Linda peacock Community Attent!an City of Char!o~esVil!e Home Cathy S~ith T~i~ GretShen Ellis united wayFTJA Saphira Baker Albemarle CaUntY CCF Jon Na~iger United Way-TJA 2O FINDINGS The Outcome Measurement work group assessed the progress of the method from the perspectives of agencies, CCF Agency Review Team members, and the United Way -Thomas Jefferson Area Program Review and Funding Committee. Survey results demonstrate that agencies and funding review team members believe outcome measurement is useful in communicating value, aligning management strategies with results, and measuring prog- ress. In the first year, some programs shared trends with supporting data that included: the rise in the number of non-English speaking students in public schools, an increased elderly demo- graphic and increased property values and decreased affordable housing. CCF also found that the use of technical sup- port and assistance in application preparation improves the quality of funding proposals that convey the intended measurable results and a logical approach. III. Outcome Measurement Work Group: Findings/Recommendations RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL AND BOARD CONSIDERATION * Support continued use and explore expan- sion of outcome measurement by CDBG social programs and Weed and Seed in the City of Charlottesville. * Consider establishing funding priorities based upon trend data, outcome measure- ment, and needs assessment. * In the future, as outcome measurement is expanded into the review of public agencies, support expansion of the capacity of City and County staff to serve as a resource for out- come measurement, CHA-~?L....~,T E,~cV/LLE~/ALBEMh~,.i~.i E 21 A N N U A L IV. Coordinating Services EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT & SCHOOL READINESS:, PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN .................................................................... 22 Accomplishments ................................................................................ 24 Findings ......................................................................................................... 24 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration .................... 25 JUVENILE JUSTICE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ................................................ 26 Accomplishments ....................................................................................... 26 Findings ................................................................................................ 27 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 27 TEEN PREGNANCYSTD PREVENTION WORKGROUP .................................. 28 Accomplishments ............................................................................. 28 Findings ........................................................................................................ 29 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 29 CHILDREN NEEDING EXTENSIVE SERVICES WORK GROUP ....................... 30 Accomplishments ................................................................................ 30 Findings ........................................................................................................ 31 Recommendations for Council and Board Consideration ..................... 31 22 A N N U A IV, Partnership for Children Current Focus EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND SCHOOL READINESS: PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN The Partnership for Children brings together 13 local agencies in a common mission: to build a supportive community where children, ages 0-6, are nurtured in healthy families and arrive at school ready to learn. This expanded effort builds upon the Growing Healthy Families home-visiting collaborative, established in 1995 and serving approximately 995 children and their families annually. The Charlottesville/Albemarle community faces increasing costs and case loads for children needing foster care, special education, mental health, and other services funded through the Comprehensive Services Act. Local demo- graphic and trend data show a high rate of births to single mothers in the County in 1997, and a higher percentage than state average of Iow birth-weight babies. Over the last four years, between 15 and 30 percent of the children entering kindergarten in the City of Charlottesville and the County of Albemarle have been identified each fall as needing early intervention services to prepare them for reading readiness at the Kindergarten level. The Partnership is a community wide response to many of these conditions, and is guided by its 13 partner agencies and advised by a diverse Advisory Board. The Partnership functions independently as a CCF work group, and receives technical assistance and support from CCF. Partnership for Children Partners Saphira Baker CCF Jackie Bryant, Coordinator Nancy Cook Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Robert Cox Charlottesville Department of Social Services John Freeman CYFS NancY Gercke, for Charlottes¥ille City Schools Susan McLeod, MD Thomas Jefferson Health District Para Moran Albemarle County Schools Jon Nafziger Success by 6, United Way Kathy Ralston Albemarle Social Services Beth Reed-Treadway, for Region Ten Community Services Board Noah Schwartz MACAA Judy Smith Child Health Partnership Cheryl Waxman, for ARC of the Piedmont CiqAi~LOTTESV v LL E/ALBEMA/-Rt. E: o S O N 23 ACCOMPLISHMENTS The Partnership accomplishes its work through six active and 6ngoing subcommittees, facili- tated by the Partnership Coordinator. These groups include: Benchmarks, Child Care, Parent Education, Home Visiting Collaborative, Public Awareness, and School Readiness, with guidance and support from a diverse Advisory Committee. · The Benchmarks Subcommittee defined a common set of outcomes and expectations that serve as a guide for accomplishing the Partnership's mission. A forthcoming report, "Reaching the Future,' will provide a road map to accomplish the mission. · The Child Care Committee is developing a coordinated strategy to improve the quality and accessibility of child care services. · The Home-Visiting Collaborative has devel- oped a uniform referral form for home-visiting services to enhance appropriate referrals for families and service providers. The Collabora- tive meets quarterly, and monitors and reports a collective set of outcomes monthly. · The Parent Education Subcommittee drafted a catalog of parent education and support programs to increase awareness for families and providers. The Subcommittee also con- ducted an initial survey of providers to deter- mine availability and accessibility of programs and to identify gaps in parent education offerings. IV. Partnership for Children Accomplishments & Findings · The Public Awareness Subcommittee created a brochure for the Partnership that will be used to educate families and businesses about the Partnership and its activities. It also developed public service announcements providing developmental information that are being broadcast on local radio stations. · The School Readiness Subcommittee facili- tated a joint dialogue between schools and human service providers about early learning and school readiness. They conducted three training sessions for home visitors and other service providers, Over 400 staff attended these training sessions. This sub-committee developed and distributed literacy kits for at- risk families served through the home visiting collaborative, Literacy kits will be distributed to all families receiving home-visiting services through Partner agencies in this next year. FINDINGS · The Partnership's home visiting agencies have helped to improve child immunization rates and to increase the number of families using a consistent primary care doctor. · Child abuse and neglect remains high for children in the area. Recent research by the CCF indicates that 29% of the local juvenile offenders studied and 78% of Children Needing Extensive Services were victims of abuse and neglect. These percentages are higher than the local and state rates (1.9/1000 in Albemarle, 11/1000 in Charlottesville, 5.2/1000 in Virginia) for the general population. CHAF LOTTESV LLE/AE. BEMAER 24 · There is continued need for reading-readiness intervention for children entering public schools. In 2001, in Albemarle County 14.6% of children entering kindergarten were identified as need- ing additional assistance to help them read at the kindergarten level and 30.4% of City children were identified. · Charlottesville/Albemarle has strong educa- tional resources for parents of children 0-1, but limited resources for parents of older children. * There is an urgent need for dental care for Iowqncome families in the area. Many Iow- income families receive costly emergency dental care that could have been prevented with routine preventative care. Only 5 local dentists out of 85 accept Medicaid for dental care for children, and these dentists are not currently accepting any more patients. IV, Pa nership for Children Recommendations RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL AND BOARD CONSIDERATION * Raise community awareness of child abuse and neglect. * Promote parent education as a normal and healthy activity, and direct employers and residents to the Partnership for Children as a local resource. · Continue to support community-wide efforts to improve local school readiness and early literacy. * Encourage schools to report on their efforts to welcome parents, collaborate with home visitors, and support early literacy. · Support efforts to acquire affordable dental care for Iow-income children. Partnership for Children Sub-Committees Home-Visiting Collaborative Parent Education Work Group: Child Care Work Group: Jacki Bryant Jackie Bryant Mimi Bender Christina Delzingaro Dinah Castillo Barbara Brown John Freeman Heather Lee Jacki Bryant Susan McLeod Etta Legner Cindy Camirand Judy Smith Melissa Ronayne Cathy Flanders Bonnie Rutherford John Freeman School Realness Wot( Group: Diane Samson Nancy Gercke Meg Sewell Charles Gleason Saphira Baker Helen Wanner Charity Haines Jacki Bryant Cheryl Waxman Sue Houchens Nancy Cook Etta Legner Nancy Gercke Public Awareness Work Group: Jon Nafziger Charity Haines Helen Reynolds Sylvia Henderson Robert Cox Meg Sewell Jon Nafziger Sonia Haimes Carrie Wilmer Denise Pilgrim Maurice Jones Judy Smith Ray Mishler Kathy Ralston Benchmark Work Group: Saphira Baker Jacki Bryant Debbie Childs Susan Clark Kathy Dowd Kathy Flanders Jon Nafziger Denise Pilgnm Judy Smith Cherrie Waxman .... H - LOTTES Vii E/A BEMAI'C LE 25 A N N U A L IV. Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee: Accomplishments The Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee is a representative committee that links the major components of the juvenile justice system including: the court, the schools, the police, social services, and adult criminal justice services. ACCOMPLISHMENTS The Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC) completed its Comprehensive Community Juvenile Justice Plan in July 2000 and is now in the implementation phase. The plan includes an analysis of the local juvenile justice system and identifies critical areas for improvement: Information Sharing, Risk and Needs Assess- ment, Juvenile Court System, Evaluation and Detention. Much of this work has been sup- ported through grants from the Department of Criminal Justice Services, which has generously funded researchers and consultants to explore and design system improvements. · The nformation Sharing Subcommittee completed a survey about information sharing and published the results in The Exchange of Information in Charlottesville/Albemarle Report · The JJAC received a grant from the Depart- ment of Criminal Justice Services for $35,000 to design a web site for the electronic sharing of the Consent Form. · The Detention Center Subcommittee con- ducted a Community Forum on the Blue Ridge Detention Center, which attracted 100 citizens and professionals to develop a community vision for the new Detention Center and the affached Assessment Center. The results were compiled in Blue Ridge Detention Center Community Forum Report in March 2001. tn May 2001 the Detention Center Subcommittee Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee and Sub-Committees Saphira Baker. CCF Jack Gallagner Mike Murphy JUVENILE CT. SYSTEM EVALUATION Community Attention Community Attention Rory Carpenter Rory Carpenter Diane Behrens Beth Hachstetler Jonathon Earl Albemarle County Charlie Edwards Cynthia Murray Libby Killeen Gretchen Ellis Schools Blue Ridge Detention Albemarle Common- Cheryl Lewis Mike Murplny Center wealth Attorney Earl Pendleton Andy Blocl~ INFORMATION SHARING Just Children Chip Harding Liz Murtaugh DETENTION CENTER Saphira Baker Charlottesville Police Public Defender's PROGRAMMING Rory Carpenter Rory Carpenter, CCF Department Office Diane Behrens Lisa Kelley Martha Carroll Libby Killeen Peter Sheras, UVA Rory Carpenter Libby Kitl~en Charlottesville Martha Carroll Ruth Stone Court Services Unit Cx3fTTnOnweatlh AttoT~y Ruth Stone, CASA Dave Chapman Dave Chapman Phillip Crosson RISK/NEEDSASSESSNENT Charlottesville Cecil Thompson Charl e Edwards Andy BlOck C4xnr-cc~weailh Attorney LeeLee Lawless Charlottesville Schools Jack Gal agher Rory Carpenter Juvenile Court Assess- Philip Crosson ment Center Bill Traylor Chip Harding Martha Carroll Charlottesville Social Jim Hodgson Dave Chapman Region Ten Cheryl Lewis Libby Killeen Jonathon Earl Community Services Albemarle County Services Lee-Lee Lawless Gretchen Ellis Jonathon Earl Department of Social Tom Von Hemert, Liz Murtaugh Jack Gallagher Services TJPDC Lisa Trivits Lee-Lee Lawless Albemarle Police Cecil Thompson C) I~E 5 26 received the Detention Utilization Grant to conduct a study on detention utilization for Charlottesville/Albemarle and to develop pro~ gramming for the Assessment Center Annex. · The Juvenile Court System and Evaluation Subcommittees developed a survey to mea- sure professional, youth and family perceptions of the juvenile court process in order to improve system outcomes through collaboration and communication between the court system and its stakeholders. A report with recommenda- tions will be completed in Fall 2001. · The Risk and Needs Assessment Subcommit- tee conducted a study of 263 juveniles placed on probation in 1997 and 1998 and developed a report entitled the Profile of Juvenile Offend- ers. A pilot Needs Assessment Tool was devel- oped for use at juvenile court intake to improve outcomes for juvenile offenders and to assist with the determination of the appropriate level of service or sanction. FINDINGS Through the data generated by the Risk and Need Study for the JJAC, a portrait of juvenile offenders in the City and the County emerged. A range of characteristics, such as family dysfunction, domestic violence, truancy, or lack of involvement in productive activity, were identified as being present for over half of the juvenile offenders. Specifically, Profile of Juvenile Offenders indicates that local court-involved youth have the following Risk/Need factors: · INDIVIDUAL RISK/NEED FACTORS IDENTIFIED Serious drug or alcohol abuse (45%); a history IV. Juvenile Juice Advi~ Committee: Findings & ReCommendations of violations of parents curfew (46%); history of incorrigibility (44%); a mental health diagnosis at the point of entry (30%); presence of a significant support system (13%); involvement in a productive activity (such as sports, work or clubs) (25%). · FAMILY RISK AND NEED FACTORS IDENTIFIED Dysfunctional families (56%); parents who were substance abusers (47%); exposure to domestic violence (39%); victims of abuse and neglect (29%); parents or siblings who were incarcerated (41%). · SCHOOL RELATED RISK/NEED FACTORS IDENTIFIED Truancy (68%); below grade-level for age (34%); special education services (36%); classified as seriously emotionally disturbed (17%); dropped out or were expelled (16%). RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL AND BOARD CONSIDERATION · Support effective interventions to mitigate young people's involvement in crime, Several family and societal factors - such as domestic violence, parental substance abuse, child abuse and neglect, the absence of a support adult in a child's life, and a juvenile's lack of involvement in productive activity may impact on juvenile delinquency, · Support efforts to develop quality program- ming that balances the security and service needs of juveniles at the Detention Center and the Assessment Center Annex. These programs will be developed based on the input of the participants at a January 2001 roundtable. 27 TEEN PREGNANCY/STD PREVENTION WORK GROUP The CCF's Teen Pregnancy/Sexually Transmit- ted Diseases (STD) work group, initiated in April 2000, originated when community members sought CCF sponsorship after an extensive community organizing effort. In September 1999, members of a Strategic Planning work group published the report, A Community Strategic Plan for Preventing Teen Pregnancies and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Organizers had also garnered support from local residents and representatives of schools, government, community organizations, health care services, funders, religious organizations, and the busi- ness community to help implement the plan's objectives. By Spring 2000, the strategic plan members had obtained financial SupPort for a cOordina- tor position from local fUndersl and Martha Jefferson Hospital had agreed to house the Coordinator and oversee program administra- tion. CCF members voted to adopt the team as an independent work group. Since then, the Coordinator and work group members have been active in supporting existing pro- grams, increasing voluntary community service, increasing public awareness of teen pregnancy and STD issues, supporting Family Life Education, and setting measurable outcomes to evaluate the plan's progress. Local funders include: The Perry Foundation; The Charlottesville/Albemarle Community Foundation; The J & E Berkley Foundation; The Waterson Foundation; The Rotary Club of Charlottesville; and an anonymous donor. ACCOMPLISHMENTS · The work group supports existing programs, including MACAA's prevention programs, Teensight, the Teen Health Center, the Thomas Jefferson Health District, Planned Parenthood, and public school Family Life Education pro- grams. Staff and members provide: consulta- tion; advocacy; community outreach and program presentations; group facilitation and technical assistance. The work group co- sponsored a Teen Parent panel at two area high schools with Teensight staff. * The work group facilitates additional preven- tion planning and intervention: -Members conducted a round table discus- sion aimed at coordinating/maximizing the effectiveness of prevention and intervention services for middle school-aged youth. Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Work Group i DebraAbbo~ Laude McDade MACAA BOb Parker jae Allen Thamas Jefferson Health Un veis ty of V rgin a Dstrot Dyan Aretakis Deborah Pomerantz I UVATeen Health Center CCI: Saphira Baker Steve stern CCF University of Virginia Alicia Lugo Sue Winslow, FOCUS/Teensight Martha Jefferson Hospita! Jack Marshall C C> M M F/ALBEMAF(~i E · S S 0 hq 28 -A sub-committee is involved in coordination of local youth volunteerism/service learning as a primary prevention intervention. · The work group has promoted the use of Family Life Education (FLE) in the City and County public schools. Members have advo- cated for the support of FLE, inclusion of sexual- ity questions in the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, and provided technical assistance to County and City FLE teachers. · The work group has increased public aware- ness of teen pregnancy/STD prevention: -Work group members and staff have provided presentations about preventing teen preg- nancy and STDs to school administrators, School Health Advisory Boards, perinatal nurses, school counselors and nurses, youth group home staff and residents. -Work group members have spoken on local TV and radio about teen pregnancy prevention, and provided interviews to local newspapers. -Written materials about teen pregnancy/STD prevention and the strategic plan have been developed and distributed. IV. Teen Pregnancy Work Group Findings & Recommendations FINDINGS · Local youth development programs target- ing teen pregnancy prevention are effective in reducing teen pregnancy and are also cost-effective. · Youth volunteers/service learning programs help prevent teen pregnancy and STDs. Such programs are more effective if they involve adults as supervisors/role models, as opposed to programs where individual young people work independently as volunteers. Supervised volunteer programs increase receptivity on the part of businesses and organizations that accept youth volunteers, and increase the likelihood that such organizations will continue to utilize youth volunteers. · Sexuality education can be effective in helping to prevent teen pregnancy and STDS, particularly when factual material is combined with skill-building activities. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOARD/ COUNCIL CONSIDERATION · Consider funding local programs that have a proven impact on prevention of teen pregnancy/STDs. @ C (.) M M S S i () N 29 A N N U A CHILDREN NEEDING EXTENSIVE SERVICES WORK GROUP The Children Needing Extensive Serivices (CNES) work group presented their findings in July 2000 on the relatively small population of children who require the most in human service and financial assistance from the City and County. The study looked at 37 Charlottesville and Albemarle children with multiple therapeutic needs who were served in 24-hour a day, 7-day a week psychiatric facilities during the past year. Costs per child per month ranged between $6,000 and $14,000, and placements were funded with state and local Comprehensive Services Act dollars. ACCOMPLISHMENTS In response to a recommendation from this work group, in November 2000 the CCF hosted a "roundtable' discussion among sixty-five profes- sionals, including CCF members, practitioners from the fields of education, social services, mental health, and juvenile justice, the state Office of Comprehensive Services, and private service providers. The work group suggested that a gathering of professionals who work closely with these children and know their strengths and needs best, would provide an opportunity for them to identify priorities and target service strategies, as well as mobilize community resources to improve outcomes. The program was designed to stimulate team- work and engage the experts in a discussion based on recent research and reliable informa- tion about the local support, prevention, and therapeutic services currently available for children. IV. Children N~ing Extensive~Nices Current FOCUS & AccomPlishments This new CNES work group adopted three priori- ties, based on the findings of the Roundtable participants. · Improved collaboration among agencies to provide effective case management for children needing extensive services, and for the transition of these children back into the community. · Address gaps in local services, including the lack of adequate shelters to provide short-term crisis care for children unable to return to home or foster care. · Tackle domestic violence in cooperative efforts throughout the community to lessen its negative effects on children's intellectual, emotional, or behavioral development. CNES work group members are currently designing a pilot project involving a collabora- tive team model focused on a sub-group of the 37 children identified in the original CNES study. ___ Children in N~d of Extensive Services Work Group jdie Eaad Benoit BilI Li~b Charlottesville Department Community Attention Of SOCial services Carrie Lominack Lisa ciimer~ She!te~ f°r Help CSA Coordinator in Eme~genc~ Daniel Key People Places of Charlottesville Lee-Lee Lawless Juvenile Court Assessment Center Cheryl Lewis Albemarle Department of Social Services John Pezzoli Region Ten Community Services Kathy Ralston, Chair Marti Snell University of Virginia CHA~ 1' ~;:LO T ESVILLE/ALBEMAI':~t..E < C O M M J S S I O N ::: i 3O FINDINGS The work group conducted a follow-up study on the original children studied and found that most had not progressed significantly in their status during the year that had passed, Members also noted: * Children most at risk receiving CSA services have multiple problems and may not exhibit significant progress in improving their behavior despite significant interventions and efforts, Serving this population is a long-term and expensive commitment. * There is no secure facility where children in crisis can stay for a short-term and access immediate mental health services. Children waiting for an available psychiatric placement or foster home have limited resources within the local community and must often be moved to facilities outside Charlottesville/Albemarle during this transition period. * Domestic violence has a serious and far- reaching impact of on children's mental health, social adjustment, and educational develop- ment. The early impact of domestic violence stays with individuals throughout life. IV. Children N~dlng Extens e Sen/ices Findings & ReCommendations RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL AND BOARD CONSIDERATION * Assist local CSA agencies in lobbying the legislature and the Governor to provide the total cost for placement of CNES children (who, in many cases, previously might have been institutionalized). * Support early intervention programs that decrease domestic violence, (~'HAR r)]TES~//L E/ALBEMA":?i.t:~ C O M M I $ S i C) N 31 RecOmmbndafions for Bbara a~d CoUnciI COnsiderationi,,.:,.,.,..i.i:i.35 C © O 1' T E S V L.L.E/ALBEMABt. E 32 ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES ACT: CSA COMMII'rEE The Charlottesville/Albemarle Commission on Children and Families is responsible for all aspects of administration of the Virginia Comprehensive Services Act in Charlottesville and Albemarle County. The two localities managed over $8 million in state and local funds during the past year to provide foster care services for children, to strengthen families to prevent foster care placement, to provide support services for children in special educa- tion programs, and to provide residential care for children whose needs cannot be met within the public school setting. In addition, the City and County set aside some of their Comprehensive Services Act V, CSA Commiffee: Current FocuS & Accomplishments ACCOMPLISHMENTS During 2000-2001 the CSA Committee has monitored the expenditure of CSA funds, projected funding needs, provided guidance and expertise on difficult cases, and kept themselves and CCF members abreast of General Assembly and Office of Comprehen- sive Act policies pertaining to the CSA that require local action. ** REVIEWED CART CASES ON MONTHLY BASIS On a monthly basis, CSA Committee members have reviewed financial information and case reports provided by the Case Authorization Review Team. The CSA Committee and its sub-committees have worked to maintain a flexible system that facilitates CSA funded children remaining close to their residence where possible. dollars to provide services for "non-mandated" court-involved youth, including counseling, substance abuse, and mental health treatment. A state allocation formula based on ability to pay requires that Charlottesville provide 31 per cent of CSA dollars and Albemarle provide 45 per cent of CSA dollars as the local match. In addition to its responsibilities for financial oversight and planning, the CSA Committee, together with its sub-committee, the Case Authorization and Review Team, manages the interagency process for planning and provision of services, and resolves issues in carrying out all CSA requirements as they arise. CSA Committee Usa Climer, CSA COOrdinator Martha Carroll 16th District Juve~J!e and Domestic RelatiOns Court Service Unit Thomas Nash Albemarle County Sohools James Peterson Region Ten Community Ser* vices Dasretta Sapp Robert Cox, Chair Charlottesville Ci~ Schools Charlottesville Depa~ment of SOcial Services Ruth Stone Paul MCwhinney CASA Albemarle c°~r~ty Depart- ment of Sociat services C; 0 M k/i S S 0 N 33 A N N U A · IMPROVED INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Members have also sought improvements in both localities' information management systems. Looking forward, members have made it a priority to conduct ongoing analyses of trends related to children served through CSA, vendor services, and service plans to both inform and improve current policies and shape early intervention and prevention efforts. · ENCOURAGED MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENTS During 2001, the localities have received Medicaid reimbursements for services that had been previously covered by local tax revenues and state CSA funds. Services covered by Medicaid require half of the local match amount required for CSA services. For those services covered by Medicaid, the City saved approximately 15.5% compared with CSA funded services, and the County saved 22.5%. · MEASURED IMPACT AND EFFECTIVENESS OF CSA VENDORS AS part of their ongoing efforts to ensure that the City and County are making the most effective and cost-efficient use of CSA funds, the CSA Coordinator identified vendor institu- tions which track and measure outcomes and began a research process to measure the impact and effectiveness of vendors with local children. · LINKED CSA VENDORS TO CCF WEBSITE During 2000-2001, the contracting system for CSA vendors has been automated and linked to the CCF website in an effort to monitor costs and the quality of service provided by vendor institutions. FINDINGS In reflecting on its work to date, the CSA Com- mittee has identified the following issues as areas needing more attention at the General Assembly and within the local system: · The requirement of a local match for Med- icaid negatively affects efforts to keep CSA children close to home. When Medicaid pays for CSA residential and therapeutic foster care services, there is a local match required ([half the amount for CSA funds). There is no required local match for anything else Medicaid pays for in Virginia. · Deinstitutionalization (in the form of closure of state psychiatric facilities) has resulted in higher costs for individual CSA cases - a growing number of children have severe emotional needs. Between 1994 and 1999, the rate for children receiving CSA funds has risen from 37 to 53 per 1,000 in the City and from 7 to 20 per 1,000 in the County. · The current allocation of $24,119 from the State for CSA administration does not begin to cover the costs of meeting state administrative requirements. · CSA vendors have varied information on child-specific outcomes, with a limited number regularly collecting, measuring, and com- municating the impact of their services to the localities. · Analysis of trends related to children served through CSA, vendor services, and service CHARt. C) TT ESViLLE/ALBEMARLE O M Iv1 S S I O N 34 plans can inform and improve current policies and shape early intervention and prevention efforts. An area of priority is improved usage and collection of data through City/County information management system. CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS · Advocate for increased State share of the financial burden for expensive CSA funded cases. · Advocate for removal of the local match required for Medicaid, · Advocate at the General Assembly for increased administrative funds to support CSA information management systems and reimbursement for staff and support services required for state-mandated administration. · Emphasize measurable outcomes in funding to community agencies and CSA vendors funded through City and County tax rev- enues. * Support efforts to improve data collection capacity within each locality, and move toward a shared information management system to ease data access and trends analy- sis. V. CSA Commiffee: Recommendations Case AUthoriZation and Review Team (CART) Lisa Climer, CSA Coordinator Marl'ha Carroll 16th District Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court Ser- vice Unit Kevin Kirst Albemarle County Public Schools CheP¢l Lewis Albemarle County Department of Social Services Dana Neidley Charlottesville Department of Social Services John Pezzoli Region Ten Community Ser- vices Carol Zimorski Charlottesville City Schools 35 A N N U A L , VI, Acknowledgements/ Funding Sources ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS/ FUNDING SOURCES The Charlottesville/Albemarle Commission on Children and Families relies on a broad net- work of citizens, educators, and community agency, business, and government representa- tives working in ten targeted Work Groups to accomplish its work, CCF gratefully acknowledges each of those individuals who have contributed their time and insight to improve services to children and their families. Members of CCF Work Groups and sub-committees are identified throughout the report. The work of CCF would not be possible without the generous financial and policy support of the Charlottesville City Council and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. CCF is grateful for the financial support of the Department of Juvenile Justice of the Commonwealth of Virginia (D J J), through its Offices on Youth and Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) funds; the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services; and the Office of Comprehensive Services Act (CSA). A special thanks is given to the Albemarle County Depart- ment of Social Services (ACDSS) for IV-E fund- ing. CHA/~L©TTESV L L E/A L B E kx'! A R t~ I:? 36 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Approval of Albemarle County Service Authority Mandatory Connection Policy SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REQUEST: Approval of amendment to mandatory connection policy to include Farmington STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis AGENDA DATE: N ovem ber 7,2001 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Resolution and Section 15- Virginia Code § 15.2-5137 authorizes a service authority to adopt rules and regulations requiring property owners to connect to its water lines or sewer mains provided that the local government concurs with the requirement. In 1995 the Albemarle County Service Authority, with the concurrence of the Board of Supervisors, adopted a mandatory connection policy for water and sewer service for new construction abutting a street or public way containing a water line or sewer main. On October 18, 2001 the ACSA amended this policy to also require all parcels of land in Farmington subdivision that are served by the Farmington water distribution system to connect to the ACSA water system. The ACSA has requested that the Board of Supervisors concur with this amendment so that it can be enforced. DISCUSSION: The Farmington subdivision has requested the ACSA to upgrade and operate the water system providing water to the Farmington subdivision to 'mprove water quality, reliability, and fire flow. Currently water is provided by the ACSA but is distributed through privately owned and maintained lines. Eighty percent of the customers have already signed contracts to connect to the new water distribution system. In order to assure the financial assumptions for the system improvements, the ACSA wants to implement the mandatory connection policy to guarantee that all existing customers will connect. The ACSA intends to begi n construction of the newsystem early next year. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution concurring in the adoption of the amended Mandatory Connection Policy adopted by the ACSA on October 18, 2001. 11-01-01 Ali:06 IN O1.206 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority that the Rules and Regulatibfls ar6 Pi~op~ed to be amended and re-enacted, effective October 18, 2001, as follows: SECTION 15 - MANDATORY CONNECTION POLICY 15-01. GENERAL. The owner of any mobile home or building to be installed or constructed for residential, commercial or industrial use upon a lot or parcel of land lying within a jurisdictional area of the Authority and which abuts upon a street or other public way containing a potable water main or sanitary sewer main operated by the Authority or Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority shall connect such building to such potable water main and/or sanitary sewer main in accordance with these Rules and Regulations. in addition, parcels of land in Farmington subdivision served by the Farmington water distribution system as of October 18, 2001 shall be connected to the Authority's water distribution system once the system is placed in service. These parcels of land are identified on Albemarle County Tax Maps: 60E1- A-1 B-1 C-01 C-07 C,16 C-23 A-2 B-2 C-02 C-09 C-17 C-24 A-3 B-3 C-03 C,12 C-19 C-25 A-4 B-4 C-04 C-13 C-20 A-5 C-05 ' C-14 C-21 A-6 C-06 C- 15 C-22 D-15 D-16 D-17 D-18 E-3 E-10 H-2 N-1 E-5 E-11 H-2A N-2 E-6 E-12 H-3 N-3 E-7 E-13 H-4 N-4 E-8 E-14 H-5 N-5 E-9 G-8 H-6 N-6 60E2- E-1 E-2 F-8 F-9 F-10 F-11 F-12 F-13 F-14 G-1 P-01 60E3- 01 60E3- G-2 P-02 02A G-3 P-03 02B K-5 P-05 02C K-7 P-06 03 L-01 P-07 04 L-05 P-08 05 L-06 P-09 06 L-07 P- 10 08 L-08 09 L-10 10 60E3- I-1 J-1 K-01 K-13 I-3 J-2 K-02 K-14 !-4 J-3 K-03 K-15 I-5 J-4 K-04 K-16 I-6 J-5 K-08 M-01 I-7 K-09 15-02. EXCEPTIONS. This requirement may be waived by the Executive Director of the Authority if one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. The building or the mobile home replaces a building or mobile home destroyed by fire or natural disaster. 2. The capacity of the public water and/or sewer system is inadequate to serve the building or mobile home. 3. The cost of connecting the mobile home or building to the public water and/or sewer system exclusive of connection fees exceeds the cost of installing on-site well and/or septic systems. Adopted May 18, 1995; Effective January 3, 1996; Amended October 18, 2001 I certify that the foregoing is a true and exact copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority~ regular ses~sion on October 18, 2001 by a vote of J. W. Br~t, Secretary-Treasurer Resolution Approving the Albemarle County Service Authority Mandatory Connection Policy Whereas, the Albemarle County Service Authority on October 18, 2001 amended Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy of the Albemarle County Service Authority Rules and Regulations; and Whereas, Virginia Code Section 15.2-5137 requires the concurrence of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to implement any change to the mandatory connection policy for water service; and Whereas, the Board of Supervisors finds that the amended mandatory connection policy serves the best interests of the County by providing a safe and reliable water system in the water service areas for which the ACSA is providing service. Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia hereby concurs with the amendment of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations, Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy adopted on October 18, 2001. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby Certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of to , as recorded below, at a meeting held on Mr. Bowerman Mr. Dorrier Ms. Humphris Mr. Martin Mr. Perkins Ms. Thomas Aye Nay Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County . Service Serving ~ Conserving October 25, 2001 Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr County Executive Albemarle County Office Building 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Mr. Larry Davis County Attorney Albemarle County Office Building 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: Farmington Gentlemen: At its meeting on October 18, 2001 the Board of Directors amended the Authority's Rules and Regulations to requir~e certain developed properties in Farmington to connect to a proposed new water distribution system in this subdivision. These properties are presently customers of the Authority but are served from the privately owned and operated water distribution system. 80 percent of these property owners have already signed contracts to connect to the new distribution system. We anticipate.advertising for bids in mid-November. Unless bids are unexpectedly high, a contract could be awarded in December and construction could begin early next year. The Board of Directors has directed me to request the concurrence of the Board of Supervisors in this mandatory connection policy. Ms. Sally Thomas ~s abreast of developments in this project and the Authority appreciates her encouragement and support. J.W. Brent Executive Director JWB/slrb Enclosure cc: Board of Directors James M. Bowling, IV Ms. Sally Thomas 168 Spotnap Road · P.O. Box 2738 · Charlottesville, VA 22902 ° Tel (434) 977-4511 · Fax (434) 979-0698 www. acsanet.com BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority that the Rules and Regulations are proposed to be amended and re-enacted, effective October 18, 2001, as follows: SECTION 15 - MANDATORY CONNECTION POLICY 15-01. GENERAL. The owner of any mobile home or building to be installed or constructed for residential, commercial or industrial use upon a lot or parcel of land lying within a jurisdictional area of the Authority and which abuts upon a street or other public way containing a potable water main or sanitary sewer main operated by the Au~odty or Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority shall connect such building to such potable water main and/or sanitary sewer main in accordance with these Rules and Regulations. in addition, parcels of land in Farmington subdivision. served by the Farmington water distribution system as of October 18, 2001 shall be connected to the Authority's water distribution system once the system is placed in service. These parcels of land are identified on Albemarle County Tax Maps: 60E1- A-1 B-1 C-01 C-07 C-16 C-23 A-2 B-2 C-02 C-09 C-17 C-24 A-3 B-3 C-03 C-12 C-19 C-25 A-4 B-4 C-04 C-13 C-20 A-5 C-05 C-14 C-21 A-6 C-06 C-15 C-22 D-15 D-16 D-17 D-18 E-3 E-10 H-2 N-1 E-5 E-11 H-2A N-2 E-6 E-12 H-3 N-3 E-7 E- 13 H-4 N-4 E-8 E-14 H-5 N-5 E-9 G-8 H-6 N-6 60E2- E-1 G-1 P-01 60E3-01 E-2 G-2 P-02 OZA F-8 G-3 P-03 02B F-9 K-5 P-05 02C F-10 K-7 P-06 03 F-11 L-01 P-07 04 F-12 L-05 P-08 05 F-13 L-06 P-09 06 F-14 L-07 P-10 08 L-08 09 L-10 60E3- 10 60E3-I-1 J-1 K-01 K-13 I-3 J-2 K-02 K-14 I-4 J-3 K-03 K-15 I-5 J-4 K-04 K-16 I-6 J-5 K-08 M-01 I-7 K-09 15-02. EXCEPTIONS. This requirement may be waived by the Executive Director of the Authority if one or mOre of the following conditions exist: 1. The building or the mobile home replaces a building or mobile home destroyed by fire or natural disaster. 2. The capacity of the public water and/or sewer system is inade building or mobile home. 3. The cost of connecting the mobile home or building to the pub sewer system exclusive of connection fees exceeds the cost c well and/or septic systems. Adopted May 18, 1995; Effective January 3, 1996; Amended Octobe~ uate to serve the lic water and/or f installing on-site 18, 2001 I certify that the foregoing is a true and exact copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority~l ragu lar ses~sion on October 18, 2001 by a vote of ~) to <:~. '~/"//x~ J. W. BrUnet, Secretary-Treasurer Resolution Approving the Albemarle County Service Authority Mandatory Connection Policy Whereas, the Albemarle County Service Authority on October 18, 2001 amended Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy of the Albemarle County Service Authority Rules and Regulations; and Whereas, Virginia Code Section 15.2-5137 requires the concurrence of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to implement any change to the mandatory connection policy for water service; and Whereas, the Board of Supervisors finds that the amended mandatory connection policy serves the best interests of the County by providing a safe and reliable water system in the water service areas for which the ACSA is providing service. Now, Therefore, Be it Resolved that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia hereby concurs with the amendment of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations, Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy adopted on October 18, 2001. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of five to zero, as recorded below, at a meeting held on November 7, 2001~. Clerk, Board of County Supervis~r.~/ Aye Nay Mr. Bowerman X Mr. Dorrier X Ms. Humphris X Mr. Martin (Absent) Mr. Perkins X Ms. Thomas X David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. Scottsv~e i'Charlott¢ Y. Hurnphris .Jack Jouelt COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclnfire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Walter E Perkins White Hail Sall~ H. Thomas Samuel Miller November 19, 2001 Mr. J. W.'~nt Executive Director Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road PO Box 2738 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Brent: At its meeting on November 7, 2001, the Board of Supervisors adopted the attached resolution concurring with an amendment to the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations, Section 15-Mandatory Connection Policy. In addition, the Board adopted the attached resolution authorizing the Albemarle County Service Authority and its Executive Director to implement mandatory restrictions on water usage within the urban service areas when deemed necessary. Sincerely, /ewc Attachments (2) Printed on recycled paper COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11-02-01 A1t:22 tN AGENDA TITLE: FY2002 Revised and FY2003 Estimated General Fund Revenues/Budget Distribution SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Revenue Discussion and Proposed Distribution of New FY03 Local Tax Revenues to General Government and School Division Operations STAFF CONTACT(S): Mr. Tucker, Ms. White, Mr. Breeden, Mr. Hildebeidel AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: Each October, the Department of Finance prepares preliminary revenue projections for both the current and upcoming fiscal years. These revenue estimates are the first step in the budget preparation process and form the basis of the recommended budget proposals to come before the Board of Supervisors next March. Based on these preliminary revenue estimates, the Board also allocates the projected revenue growth, first to committed expenditures, such as revenue shadng, capital outlay and debt service, and then between General Government and School Division operations. DISCUSSION: FY2001102 and 2002/03 REVENUE REVISIONS/ESTIMATES Attachment A provides both the revised projections for FY2001/02 and the preliminary estimates for FY2002/03 General Fund revenues. Overall, current year (FY2001/02) revenues and transfers are expected to be approximately $1.2 million (0.9%) over the appropriated FY2001/02 budget level, which reflects both an estimate of current economic activity and the effects of the biennial real estate reassessment done in January, 2001. The estimated revenues and transfers for FY 2002/03 exceed the current year appropriated budget level by $6.9 million (5.4%), reflecting largely a continued, but slowing, growth in revenues from real estate and personal property taxes (including the Personal Property Tax Relief Act reimbursements from the Commonwealth). The individual revenue increases are described below, and an explanation of Attachment A is located at the end of the executive summary: REAL ESTATE TAX The FY2001/02 Appropriated Budget had been prepared based on an estimated January, 2001 reassessment increase of 11%. The actual average reassessment increase rate was 12.59%. The effect of this increase has been added to the base and will continue to influence future revenues. Staff had anticipated a slowdown in the real estate market when the FY2001/02 budget was prepared. Due to current economic conditions, that slowdown is now beginning to make itself evident, particularly in the commercial sector and in projected new construction starts. The next reassessment (January, 2003) rate is currently anticipated to be in the range of an 8 to 12% increase. For the FY2002/03 revenue projection, staff is using 8%, the lower end of the range. PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX, including PPTR This revenue source is projected to increase by $2.5 million (+9.8%) over the FY01/02 Appropriated Budget amount. The impact of the economic slowdown is just beginning to become evident here. The 1~t half 2001 tax bills increased 8.73% over the prior year. The 2nd half 2001 tax bills, however, only increased 5.20%, compared to 10.37% for the prior year. At the same time, the collection percentage rate is improving with the state reimbursement paying increasing percentages of individual tax liabilities. Automobile dealers report that sales have begun to slow, excluding the current spike due to zero percent financing, and do not anticipate sales to significantly increase until the 2nd quarter of 2002. Business personal property tax revenue has continued to decrease and staff anticipates additional decreases for the 2002 tax year. AGENDA TITLE: FY2002 Revised and FY2003 Estimated General Fund Revenues/Budget Distribution November 7, 2001 Page 2 For this revenue analysis, staff has included Personal Property Tax Relief (PPTR) reimbursements from the Commonwealth in this line item along with .the local portion of the personal property tax, since regardless of the proportion reimbursed by the Commonwealth, the total revenue realized should be approximately the same, with a only reclassification of revenue between state and local sources. PUBLIC SERVICE TAX The assessments of Public Service Corporations are performed by the Virginia Department of Taxation and the State Corporation Commission. Revenue has decreased due to a decrease in investment by public service companies and because of the full phase-in of liberal depreciation policies adopted several years ago by the State Corporation Commission. MACHINERY AND TOOLS TAX Revenue has dropped by an estimated $247,000 (a 21.6% decrease) in the FY01/02 revised projection, as the effect of the termination of operations in the County by several large manufacturers. PENALTIES AND INTEREST Revenues are down due to improvement in the rate of current year collections, due largely to personal property tax relief payments reimbursed by the Commonwealth for certain individual taxpayer personal property. SALES TAX Revenue projected for FY2002/03 is anticipated to remain fiat compared to the FY2001/02 appropriated budget amount due to the current overall economic slowdown. The effects of the national and state economic slowdown, as well as increased layoffs and job losses, is only now beginning to make an impact on local sales tax revenue. The trend is difficult to predict for the future, but staff should have more information in January when the final FY2002/03 budget revenue projections are prepared. BUSINESS LICENSE FEE This revenue is primarily based on sales and other forms of gross receipts earned by local businesses. In the revised projection for the current year (FY2001/02), this source of revenue is projected to decrease by about 3.3%, because of the effects of a slowing economy. TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX Projected revenues are expected to decrease, reflecting the reduction in tourism travel both nationally and statewide, influenced by current economic conditions and concerns about the security of travelling. OTHER LOCAL REVENUE The decrease in Other Local Revenue reflects several items, including a significant decrease in interest earned on bank deposits (down by $350,000) because of rapidly falling interest rates, decreases in income from various service fees, and the effects of reclassifying certain accounts (such as the E-911 fund) from revenue to transfers, as discussed below. STATE REVENUES (excluding PPTR) State Revenues (excluding PPTR) are projected to be flat or slightly declining, reflecting the current state budget and revenue situation and forecasts for FY2002/03. TRANSFERS Due to reporting changes, transfers are increasing as the County continues to reclassify certain receiptsthat are actually tranSfers from other funds where they were originally reported as revenues, such as $919,000 in the E-911 Fund, and transfers into the General Fund from the Tourism Fund. These changes are required to meet GASB 34 accounting standards and other generally accepted accounting principles in the financial reports. BUDGET GUIDANCE: Based onthe preliminary revenue estimate provided by the Department of Finance, the second step in the budget process is the allOcation of new local tax revenues, first to committed expenditures, i.e., city-county revenue sharing, capital funds and debt service, and then to general government and school operations on a 40/60 basis. 2 AGENDA TITLE: FY2002 Revised and FY2003 Estimated General Fund Revenues/Budget Distribution November 7, 2001 Page 3 Attachment B shows a Preliminary Estimate of the FY2002/03 local tax revenue increase as $7,028,868 over the FY2001/02 Appropriated Budget amount, followed by the deduction of the amount of revenue to the City-County Revenue Sharing expenditure, for a Net Projected Local Tax revenue increase of $6,818,769. The second section of Attachment B shows the increase amount for committed new non-departmental expenditures. For capital outlay and debt service, the increase is $1,199,655, which is subtracted from the increase in local tax revenues. This sub-total reflects a 4.1% growth rate in the current contributions to debt service and to the ongoing capital outlay amount, plus both a capital reserve fund amount based on 1 cent of the projected real property tax revenue in FY2002/03 and the one-half of a percentage point of the projected overall revenue growth (4.1%) to be dedicated to capital projects. This formula was proposed by the County's financial consultants and approved by the Board to fund the County's 10-year capital program. lNote: The 4.1% growth over the current year reflects the projected overall County revenue growth on the total County Budget, which is lower than the general fund increase due to the assure ption of level funding by the state for schools. The percentage is derived from the projected increase in total County revenues and transfers over the FY2001/02 Appropriated Budget level of $173.2 million. The next two committed expenditures subtracted from the increase in local tax revenues are to project an amount for the Board's Reserve at $200,000 (a decrease of $397,098), and the $92,100 estimated for refunds (the same as FY2001/02). After making the above deductions, the remaining uncommitted local tax revenues are estimated to be $6,016,212. Of this amount, 60% ($3,609,727) is allocated to the School Division and 40% ($2,406,485) to General Government operations for FY2002/03. This allocation provides a projected increase of 5.9% to the School Division in the recurring General Fund Transfer from local tax revenues, and of 5.2% for General Government operations to cover increased baseline costs, fixed costs and additional program needs. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the projected FY2002/03 allocation of local revenues to the Capital Improvement program, in aCCOrdance with the guidelines recommended by the financial advisors, and to the School Division and General Government areas for operating costs. AGENDA TITLE: FY2002 Revised and FY2003 Estimated General Fund Revenues/Budget Distribution November 7, 2001 Page 4 UNDERSTANDING A'I-FACHMENT A Attachment A provides both the revised General Fund revenue projections for FY2001/02 and preliminary revenue estimates for FY2002/03. Column A shows the current year appropriated budget revenues as of July 1,2001. Column B is the October, 2001 revised projection of FY01/02 revenues. Column B-A shows the difference between Column A (the July 1,2001 revenues) and Column B (the October revised FY01/02 revenue projection). To determine the total increase in estimated current year revenues, you will see that Column B-A shows a projected total $1.2 million increase, which is a 0.9% increase, over the FY01/02 appropriated budget revenue amount. Column C shows the preliminary revenue estimates for FY2002/03 at a total of $135.7 million Column C-B is the difference between Column C (the preliminary FY02/03 estimate) and Column B (the FY01/02 revised revenue projection), and shows that total General Fund revenues and transfers are estimated to increase by $5.7 million or 4.4% (shown in Column C-B) over the FY01/02 revised projection in Column B. The comparison of the FY01/02 appropriated budget revenues to the preliminary estimate of FY02/03 revenues is shown in Column CA. This column shows the difference (increase or decrease) between Column C (the preliminary estimated FY02/03reven ues) and Column A (the FY01/02 budgeted revenues). Column C-A shows that budget to budget total General Fund revenues and transfers are projected to increase by $6.9 million (+5.4%), which is a combination of the $1.2 million (+0.9%) increase in current year revised revenues over appropriated revenues (Column B-A) and the $5.7 million (+4.4%) projected growth rate over the current year revised revenues (Colum~ C-B). Each individual revenue source can be analyzed in this same manner as a way of understanding the basis of the projected budget to budget increase, however, individual percentage changes may not add to the total percentage change due to rounding of the percentage changes to one decimal point. For purposes of this revenue analysis, budgeted or estimated Fund Balance amounts and changes are NOT included, since they are not a factor in the allocation of new revenue dollars. Cc: Dr. Kevin C. Castner, Superintendent of Schools 01.210 m~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Presentation: Overview of Court Square Enhancement Project SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REQUEST: Architect's presentation on the Court Square Enhancement Project. STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: A'I-rACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes BACKGROUND: Improvements to Court Square were approved for funding in the County's FY 02 Capital Improvements Program. The attached letter from Satyendra Huja, Strategic Planner with the City of Charlottesville, outlines the proposed improvements to be completed by April, 2003. Also attached for your information prior to Mr. Huja's presentation are two drawings: (1) one a drawing of the overall plan; and (2) a drawing with ~mprovements specific to the Courthouse. DISCUSSION: Mr. Huja and the project architects will present an overview of the Court Square Enhancement Project at the Board meeting on November 7th. RECOMMENDATION: No action is required. 01.208 1!-01-01 i~03:15 IN CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE Director of Strategic Planning City Hall · P.O. Box 911 · Room B-230 Charlottesville, Virginia · 22902 Telephone 804-970-3182 or 3186 E-mail: huja@ci.charlottesville.va.us Fax: 804-970-3299 October 29, 2001 Ms. Roxanne White Assistant County Executive 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: Historic Court Square Dear Roxanne: The purpose of this letter is to forward to you the proposed improvements to the Historic Court Square area. A significant portion of these improvements will be on the County property. The City has been working with the community and the County and the City staff to develop the proposal for improvement. This has included two community charettes and numerous committee meetings. City Council has approved the proposed concept. We would like to make a presentation to the Board of Supervisors of the overall plan of improvements to the Historic Court Square, especially the parts owned by the County. The project has several different components and challenges. The main goal of the project is to highlight the uniqueness of Court Square and improve the pedestrian elements of the area. Several of the improvements that have been proposed for the area surrounding Court Square is to underground the utilities and replace the overhead streetlights with pedestrian-scale lighting, use of brick paver to reconstruct and widen the sidewalks around the square, add new benches and refuse containers, replace the deteriorating wall around lackson Park with a new brick wall, and install brick and granite crosswalks at ail the street comers around the square. The improvements to the Court House grounds are an important aspect of this project, Proposed enhancements for this portion of the project include replacing the wall around the Court House to match the new wall around the park, refurbishing the existing light poles and installing new light fixtures atop those poles, reopening the entrance on the southwest side of the square and relocating the History descriptive board to this entrance, replacing the entrance steps to the Court House grounds off orE. Jefferson St. with a handicapped-accessible ramp and adding an decorative iron fence atop the wall at this entrance, reopening the entrance on the southwest side of the square and relocating the History descriptive board to this entrance and refurbishing the shrubs, trees and other landscape elements including the addition ofhenches and new refuse containers. The project is primarily funded through TEA-21 funds with local matches. The projected revenues are $2.24 million dollars, of which the County is contributing $250,000 and the City is contributing approximately $720, 000. We hope to bid the project in February of 2002 and start construction in April of 2002. The construction process will take approximately one year and should be completed by April 2003. We look forward to the presentation to the Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, November 7, 2001 at 11:00 a.m. Please find attached two drawings, . one dealing with the overall plan and the second dealing with the improvements around the Court House. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or if you need further information. Sincerely, Satyendra Singh Huja Director of Strategic Planning Attachments SSH:sls COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: 2002 Citizen Survey SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Information on the county wide citizen survey to be conducted in January 2002 STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White, Spencer, Bullard AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: X INFORMATION: Yes Citizen surveys are a valuable tool used by many jurisdictions to systematically assess citizen satisfaction with government services and to assist the locality set direction and determine strategic goals. In 1994, the County contracted with the University of Virginia's Center for Survey Research to conduct a county wide planning needs survey to assist the county in updating the Comprehensive Plan. In 1998, James Madison University students assisted the County in assessing services and programs by conducting a countywide citizen satisfaction survey. DISCUSS ION: The Board approved funding to conduct a countywide survey to assist the County in setting strategic goals and policy direction, gauging citizens thoughts regarding the provision of County services, and helping guide the use of County resources. In October, the County selected the University of Virginia's Center for Survey Research (CSR) to conduct this survey. The CSR has a national reputation for its careful approach to research, its level of innovation in survey methods and the quality of their reports. CSR has years of experience conducting citizen satisfaction surveys. For example, the CSR has conducted the 1997, 1998, 1999 and the 2000 DMV Customer Satisfaction Surveys, nine annual citizen surveys for Prince William County, and the 2000 Citizen Survey for the City of Charlottesville. Kate Wood, the Associate Director of the CSR, will attend the November 7th Board meeting and will provide information to the BOS regarding the citizen survey direction, research process and methodology. CSR will conduct this research by randomly interviewing 700 County residents by telephone in January. The survey will focus its questions in the following general categories: · Importance of various countywide goals · Value of various county-funded services and programs · Policy direction on growth management-related issues · Satisfaction with public safety services · Satisfaction with overall county services · Level of trust in government A more detailed outline and timeline for the survey process has been attached for your benefit. Results of this survey will be provided to the Board of Supervisors in April to assist in the establishment of the County's strategic priorities. RECOMMENDATION: The preliminary survey material is presented to the Board for information and input purposes only and does not require formal approval. 01.209 t'~-01~-01 P03:'~4 iN CSR Center for Survey Research Albemarle County 2002 Citizen Survey Questionnaire Outline Draft GENERAL TOPIC DETAILS Comprehensive goals (Subset of t994 Survey) Rate Level of Importance Selected services Rate need for improvement and/er additional resources Growth and transportation Policy direction · High quality education in the public schools · Bringing more jobs to area · Improving quality of housing · Making housing more affordable for Iow/moderate income people · Preserving natural resources and open space · Promoting economic growth · Providing more parks and recreation facilities · Making the area's neighborhoods and streets safer · Expanding cultural/entertainment opportunities · Extending and improving water and sewer services · Reducing traffic congestion · Providing better public transportation · Expanding social services offered by govt · Improving medical and public health services in the area · Creating more regional cooperation between tVA, C-ville, and Albemarle County · Keeping future growth of tVA focused within tVA grounds · Preserving historic buildings and places · Preserving farmland and forested areas · Promoting tourism in the area · Protecting water quality and quantity in reservoirs, streams, and wells Selected list of specific: · social services · educational services · health services · recreation services · utilities · public safety services Managing growth: rate of growth, direction of growth etc. Quality of neighborhoods Managing "getting around' issues: bike paths, green ways, sidewalks, public transportation Public safety questions · Satisfaction with neighborhood safety · Satisfaction with police and rescue and fire services Rate level of satisfaction General County government issues Rate level of satisfaction Trust in government Open-ended questions · Overall satisfaction with all services · Last contact with the County · Satisfaction with courtesy, etc. of county employees · Satisfaction with information about services, issues · Source of information · County website use · Opinion about decentralization of county offices · Satisfaction with opportunities for input · Value for tax dollar · Trust government to "do what's right" · Interaction of services and taxes ALBEMARLE COUNTY 2002 CITIZEN SURVEY TIMELINE TASK START END DATE OUTCOME DATE CSR prepares document in October 17 November 7 Draft survey outline is coordination with County prepared Team Share Plan with BOS November 7 November 7 Receive BOS input Survey Design'completed and November 10 December 15 Vendor ready to approved begin pre-testing Pre-testing January 1 January 15 Final survey ready Survey conducted January 15 February 15 Survey completed Team decides on January 15 February 15 Communication plan communication plan with in place staff, BOS, and citizens CSR prepares preliminary February 15 March 1 Initial results used for results planning Analysis completed, report March 1 April 1 Report completed prepared CSR submits findings to staff April 15 April 15 Findings received by and BOS County Results used by County for April 15 ongoing strategic planning COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of County Executive 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5841 FAX (804) 296-5800 November 16, 2001 The HonorabLe Members of the Board-of~S-a'pervisors County of Albemarle 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Dear Board Members: At the November 7th Board meeting, Kate Wood from UVA's Center for Survey Research (CSR) spoke to you about Albemarle County's upcomi.ng citizen survey. At that meeting, many of you raised questions related to the survey design, the ways the survey questions will be asked, and the subjects that would be included in the survey. To give you an idea of how CSR designs questionnaires and prepares reports, I have enclosed ists of survey questions CSR recently used in Charlottesville and Prince William County as well as the questionnaire CSR designed and used for Albemarle County's 1994 Comprehensive Plan survey. I have also enclosed copies of the Executive Summary that CSR prepared for Charlottesville and the one prepared for Albemarle County back in 1994. CSR plans to conduct Albemarle County's survey by randomly interviewing 700 County residents by telephone beginning January 15th after pre-testing the survey instrument in early January. The results of the survey will be provided to county staff and the Board of Supervisors to assist us to assess citizen's satisfaction with county services and to get some feedback on our policy direction for the upcoming years. I will contact each of you by telephone the week of November 26th to find out if you have further questions or suggestions after you review these materials. And if you would like, will schedule a time for you to meet with me the week of December 3rd to review the draft questionnaire CSR will have prepared based on staff recommendations and the information you provided at the November 7th Board meeting. Thank you for your interest in the County's upcoming citizen survey. Sincerely, Lori S. Spencer Executive Assistant LSS\ 01.007 Attachment cc: Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive Ms.. Roxanne W. White, Assistant County Executive Cs. Ella W. Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors Agenda Item No. 14. 2002 County-wide Customer Survey The survey can be found under Financial Reports 2001 COUNTY OF,ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 0-24-0 P04:22 IN AGENDA TITLE: Proposed FY02 Budget Amendment SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Public Hearing on the Proposed FY02 Budget Amendment in the amount of $777,125.66 requested approval for the amendment and Appropriations #2001029 and 2001031 for various school and local government programs. STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Breeden; White; Hildebeidel AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: × INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes BACKGROUND: REVIEWED BY: INFORMATION: The Code of Virginia §15.2-2507 stipulates that the County must hold a public hearing to amend its current budget if the additional appropriated amounts exceed 1% of the original budget or $500,000, whichever is the lesser. The Code section applies to all funds, i.e., Capital, E-911, School Self-Sustaining, etc., not just the General Fund or County's adopted operating budget. DISCUSSION: This proposed FY02 Budget Amendment totals $771,125.66. amendment of the expenses and revenues in the funds. The chart below breaks out the estimated ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES Education Operating Fund $ 15,522.32 Capital Improvement Fund Education 674,000.00 Grants/Programs/Project Funds Education Programs/Projects $ 87,603.34 TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES $ 777,125.66 ESTIMATED REVENUE Education Funds Local Revenues Total Revenues- Education Funds Capital Improvement Fund Education State Revenues Total Revenues- Capital Improvement Fund $ 15,522.32 $ 15,522.32 $ 674,000.00 $ 674,000.00 Grants/Programs/Project Funds State Revenues Total Revenues - Other Funds Total Estimated Revenue- All Funds $ 87,603.34 $ 87,603.34 $ 777,125.66 This budget amendment consists of two appropriations that will need approval subsequent to the public hearing. A detailed description of the appropriations is provided on Attachment A. RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests approval of the FY02 Budget Amendment in the amount of $777,125.66 and approval of Appropriations #2001029 and 2001031 as detailed on the appropriation forms. 01.197 APPROPRIATION #2001029 Appropriations Attachment A $680,253.32 Murray Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $1,500.00 from Dr. Barbara and Dr. John Post and a donation in the amount of $1,000.00 from Victor and Rachel Carew. These donations will assist in the purchase of laptop computers for use by teachers and staff. Stone Robinson Elementary School received an anonymous donation in the amount of $3,100.32. This donation will be used to pay the salary for the school nurse to work two extra hours per day for the school year. Monticello High School received a donation in the amount of $505.00 from Scott Jamison and a donation in the amount of $148.00 from Daniel and Lolanda Loyne. These donations will be used for the gifted program at the school. VPSA School Educational Technology Notes Series I funds to be used in support of Virignia's Web-based SOL Technology Initiative were not expended in FY00/01, as state minimum computer and infrastructure standards for the initiative were not released until after the end of FY 00/01. The carryover amount of $674,000.00 retained by the state is available to be appropriated for FY01/02. These funds will be used to purchase computer and infrastructure hardware and software in support of Virginia's Web-based SOL Technology Initiative. APPROPRIATION #2001031 $96,872,34 Monticello High School received a donation in the amount of $269.00 from Michael and Mary Woloski. This donation will be used for the gifted program at the school. Walton Middle School received a donation from the Walton Middle School PTO in the amount of $8,000.00. This donation will be used to purchase equipment for the computer lab at the school. Western Albemarle High School received a donation in the amount of $1,000.00 from the Pfizer Foundation Volunteer Program. This donation will be used for the band program. The Goals 2000 Award was not fully expended in FY00/01. The award carryover amount of $85,703.34 retained by the State is available to be appropriated for FY01/02. These funds will be used to purchase classroom computers and related technologies and provide technology staff development opportunities for instructional staff. The Virginia Commission for the Arts made two grant awards to Albemarle County Public Schools. An Artist-in Education Residency Program Grant was made to Crozet Elementary School in the amount of $1,400.00, and a Toudng Assistance Grant to Broadus Wood Elementary School in the amount of $500.00. These grant programs will involve interactive activities to include hands on learning experience for students with performing, visual, and musical arts. APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 01/02 NUMBER 2001029 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO FUND: SCHOOL/CAPITAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: DONATION TO SCHOOLS AND STATE TECHNOLOGY GRANT. .~ E~,~NDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 2215 61101 800700 ADP Equipment $ 2,500.00 1 2100 62220 113100 Salary-Health Clinician 2 863.15 1 2100 62220 210000 FICA 237.17 1 2304 61104 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies 653.00 1 9000 61101 800707 Technology Grant Equip 674,000.00 TOTAL $ 680,253.32 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 2000 18100 181109Donation $ 6,253.32 2 9000 24000 240265 VPSA Technology Note 674000.00 TOTAL $ 680,253.32 TRANSFERS REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE DATE OCT. 3. 2001 //-/¢ - ¢/ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 01/02 NUMBER 2001031 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO FUND: EDUCATION PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION ON DONATIONS AND GRANT AWARDS. CODE -BXPENDITURE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT I 2304 61104 601300Ed/RecSupplies $ 269.00 1 2254 61101 800701 ADP Equip-Rpl 8,000.00 1 2302 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies 1,000.00 1 3135 60605 800100 Mach/Equip 84,257.62 1 3135 60605 580500 Staff Dev 1,445.72 I 3104 60203 312700 ProfSvclnst 1,400.00 1 3104 60201 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies 500.00 TOTAL $ 96,872.34 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 2000 18100 181109Donation $ 9,269.00 2 3135 24000 250324 Goals 2000 Award 85,703.34 2 3104 24000 240300VA. Comm.-Crozet 1,400.00 2 3104 24000 240362 Va.Comm.-Broadus Wood 500.00 TOTAL $ 96,872.34 TRANSFERS REQUESTING COST CENTER: COUNTY EXECUTIVE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE BOARD OF SUPERVISO ~-"'/' (' ~ DATE OCT. 12,2001 ,//-/5- / COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .AGENDA TITLE: Whole Foods Sign SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Appeal of ARB decision STAFF CONTACT(S): Wayne Cilimberg, Margaret Maliszewski; Bob Tucker AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: Background: On September 17, 2001 the Architectural Review Board reviewed an application to replace the freestanding Whole Foods sign that stands at the entrance to the Shopper's World Shopping Center on the west side of Route 29 North. The replacement sign was proposed .as a single internally illuminated cabinet displaying white letters on a green background and dark green letters on a white band. The green background of the sign was not proposed as opaque. In keeping with the ARB's practice of requiring that the backgrounds of internally illuminated cabinet signs be opaque, so that only the message portion of the cabinet sign would be illuminated ~"""~nd visible at night, the ARB voted unanimously to approve the proposal with the condition that the green background portion of the sign shall be opaque. Discussion: The purpose of ARB review is to ensure that new development in the Entrance Corridors is compatible with the historic architecture of the County. There is no historical precedent for internally illuminated signs; however, the ARB recognizes the need to identify businesses to help the traveling public find their destination and exit the highway safely. The preferred solution is to externally illuminate the sign; in other words, to shine a light on the sign. Since this solution does not fit every case, the ARB has also approved individual channel letters as a type of internally illuminated sign that has a reduced impact on the EC by limiting visual clutter. Because channel letters also do not fit every case, the ARB has also approved internally illuminated cabinet signs, but the ARB has consistently required that the backgrounds of such signs be made opaque such that when the sign is lit, only the message portion of the sign is illuminated. This solution is intended to reduce glare, to reduce visual clutter and distraction, to provide for coordinated appearances along the EC, to increase visual continuity, and to limit negative impacts along the County's Entrance Corridors. Recommendation: The ARB recommends that the application, as presented, be denied. The ARB can recommend approval of the application with the condition that the green background of the sign be made opaque. Attachments: A - Staff report for ARB review C - Draft minutes from ARB meeting E - Photos of Existing Sign B - Action letter from ARB meeting D - Proposed Sign Design F - Photos of Other EC Signs 10-31-01 P05:35 iN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAg REPORT ATTACHMENT A APPLICATION NAME: WHOLE FOODS MARKET- SHOPPERS WORLD FREESTANDING SIGN APPLICATION TYPE: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS - SIGN Project # ARB-F(SIGN)-2001-16 ..! Location Shopper's World Shopping Center, west side of Route 29 North Parcel Identification Tax Map 61M, Parcel lC Zoned planned Development Shopping Center (PDSC) and Entrance Corridor (EC) Magisterial District Rio Proposal Review for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace an existing sign in the shopping center I ARB Meeting Date September 17,2001 Staff Contact Dan Mahon EXISTING CONDITION: The sign at the entrance to the Shoppers World Shopping Center has two pans. Each part stands on a separate, but adjacent, parcel. Both parts are composed of internally illuminated cabinets installed on wooden support frames, surrounded by a low curving brick wall landscaped with slxmbs and perennials, The sign proposed for replacement is composed of two side-by-side square cabinets that read "Whole FOODS" and "SHOPPERS WORLD" with black letters on a white background. The adjacent sign is composed of two rectangular cabinets. The "STAPLES" cabinet has white lettering on a red background and is located above the "ADVANCED AUTO PARTS" cabinet, which has white letters on a black background. PROJECT HISTORY: In 1996, administrative ARB approval was granted for the existing sign structure and landscaped Foundation. In 1997 administrative ARB approval was granted for a replacement sign panel. On July 17, 2000 the ARB approved a Certificate Appropriateness [ARB-F (SIGN)-2000-25] for future wall signage in the shopping center. PROJECT DETAILS: The applicant proposes to replace the two internally lit "Whole FOODS" and SHOPPERS WORLD" cabinets with a single internally lit cabinet sign. Simon type: Monument - cabinet supported by two posts. Illumination: Internally lit florescent, no opaque backgrounds. Cabinet Size: 3' high x 10' long Overall Height: 12' Colors: White letters on a dark green background with dark green letters on a white band. Location: This sign is located at the left-hand side of the entrance to the Shoppers World Shopping Center. Text: "WHOLE FOOODS MARKET" at "SHOPPERS WORLD" ANALYSIS: · The new single panel will relieve the cluttered, unbalanced appearance of the two existing panels. · The landscaped brick base and the sign frame use materials and forms that reference local historical architecture. · To meet the ARB guidelines, so that only the message portion of the sign is visible at night, the background portions of the sign must be opaque. · The proposed sign has an appearance that is more compatible with the adjacent "STAPLES" sign. · The proposed sign is different, but compatible with, the Whole Foods sign installed on the building. The sign on the building is composed of internally lit white channel letters and a lOng cabinet with white lettering on green background. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staffrecommends approval with the following condition: 1. The green background portion of the sign shall be opaque. ARB 9/17/2001 Whole Foods Market- Shoppers World Freestanding Sign - · David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dottier, Jr. Charlotte Y. Hurnphds Jack dou,tt COUNTY OF ALBEMARI_E office of Board of Sul~a-viso~ 401 Mclnti~ Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkins Whit~ Hall Sally H. Thomas S~nuel Miller October 9, 2001 Mr. Chip Hughes Assistant Store Team Leader Whole Foods Market 300 Shoppers World Court Charlottesville, VA 22901 Re: Appeal: ARB-F (Sign)-2001-16. Whole Foods Market Freestanding Sign Dear Mr. Hughes: This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 25,2001, appealing the decision of the Architectural Review Board on September 17, 2001. This appeal has been scheduled to be heard by the Board of Supervisors on November 7, 200 i, at 11:30 a.m. The Board meets in Meeting Room #241, on the Second Floor of the County Office Building. The applicant or his representative must be present at this meeting. Any additional materials you wish mailed to the Board on this request should be in the hands of the Clerk by 12:00 noon, October 24, 2001. If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact me. S~cerely, // , Ella W. Carey, CMC, Clerk /';~ /ewc cc: V. Wayne Cilimberg Margaret Maliszewski Robbie Morris, Performance Signs Printed on recycled paper ATTACHMENT B COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE- Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296 - 5823 Fax (804) 972 - 4012 September 21. 2001 Robert Morris Performance Signs 87 Victory Lane Ruckersville. VA 22968 RE: ARB-F(SIGN)-2001-016 Whole Foods Market--Shoppers World Freestanding Sign Tax Map 61M, Section 2, Parcel lC Dear Mr. Morris: The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above noted item at its meeting on Monday, September 17, 2001 The Board approved the above-noted sign subject to the following condition: 1. The green background portion of the s~gn shall be opaque. Please provide rev,sed drawings or other information addressing these conditions at your earliest convenience. When staffs review of this information indicates that all conditions of approval have been met. a Certificate of Appropriateness may be issued. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, I Margaret Maliszewski Design Planner MM/jcf Cc: File 3 ATTACHMENT C ARB-F(SIGN)-2001-16: Whole FoodS Shoppers World Sign - Review for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace an existing sign in the shopping center. Ms. Maliszewski presented the staff report, noting the following: · This is a review for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace a part of the freestanding sign at the entrance to the shopping center. · The sign at the entrance to the Shoppers World Shopping Center has two parts. · Both parts are com posed of internally illuminated cabinets installed on wooden frames, surrounded by a Iow curving brick wall landscaped with shrubs and perennials. · The sign proposed for replacement ~s composed of two side-by-side square cabinets that read "Whole FOODS" and "SHOPPERS WORLD" with dark letters on a white background. · The applicant proposes to replace the two square cabinets with a single internally lit rectangular cabinet sign, measuring 3' high x 10' long. · The proposed sign has white letters on a dark green background with dark green letters on a white band. · The background, as proposed, is not opaque. This does not meet the standard ARB guidelines. Robert Morris, representing Whole Food Markets, stated that it was their goal to present a less cluttered, more efficient sign that is consistent with Whole Foods Market image. He stated that it is his understanding that translucent backgrounds is a concern of this Board. They currently have two white translucent signs and they are proposing a translucent green sign, which is darker than the current sign. Whole Foods has two signs on their building that have white and translucent green. He pointed out that it is very important for Whole Foods to be able to be identified by new families and students in the area. He asked that the Board consider the request for translucent backgrounds. Ms. Smith asked if the Staples sign at Shoppers World had a translucent background. Ms. Maliszewski stated that this sign does have a translucent background, pointing out that-this pre-dates this Board. Ms. Hobbs stated that she could not support the translucent background. She pointed out that the ARB guidelines require the background portion of the sign to be opaque. She also stated that the name "Whole Foods" would identify the business, not the "translucent sign." Ms. Smith questioned how much the sign would "glow" at night. Would it really be a sore thumb or would it have just a little bit of illumination? Ms. Hobbs pointed out that allowing a "little illumination" here and there goes against the ARB guidelines. Mr. Train stated that the proposed sign is larger and a better design. Ms. Smith ascertained that Whole Foods is not open 24 hours. Architectural Review Board - DRAFT MINUTES September 17, 2001 4 ATTACHMENT C Ms. Joseph stated that there is plenty of white on the sign and they will not be limiting the visibility of the sign because the entire sign is not illuminated. She also noted that it has been the goal of this Board to require background portions of the sign to be opaque. Mr. Train asked if the relative intensity of the letters increase if the sign is opaque. Ms. Joseph stated that she did not feel this was measurable, but because of the contrast it is easier to read. Mr. Morris stated that the current sign has a translucent white background with black letters. This would not be the case with the Whole Food Market sign, because the green is dark-- almost black. He stated that he did not feel the client would change the sign if they could not get their colors. Currently, there are signs with translucent green letters and translucent white backgrounds. Mr. Train pointed out that the question is opaque versus translucent when the sign is lit. Mrs. Hobbs reiterated that she could not support the translucent background. She would rather keep the current sign. Ms. Smith stated that overall the proposed sign is a better design. She pointed out that Whole Foods would be opened for business more during daylight hours than dark hours: therefore lighting would not be an issue. She felt the applicant would gain tremendously by replacing the sign. Ms. Joseph also pointed out that because this is on an Entrance Corridor there is a lot of visibility. Ms. Hobbs moved for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace an existing sign in the shopping center subject to the following condition: 1. The green background portion of the sign shall be opaque. Mr. Train seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Architectural Review Board - DRAFT MINUTES September 17, 2001 5 CURRENT SIGN 4ft 10ft ATTACHMENT D PROPOSED SIGN 10ft ALL MATERIALS, CONSTRUCTION, AND MOUNTING WILL BE THE SAME AS THE CURRENT SIGN. -METAL FRAME -BACKLIT PLASTIC FACES THE COLORS PRINTED ARE ACCURATE. ATTACHMENT E Existing Whole FOods sign to be replaced. The existing WhOle Foods sign is part of a lm-ger monument sign that stands at the entrance to the Shoppers' World Shopping Center. 7 ATTACHMENT F Staples monument s hopPers' World, Internally illuminated cabinet w/translucent red background. staPles monument sign at Shoppers' World. Daytime view. sign. f illuminated cabinet with translucent white background. illUminated cabinet with translucent blue background. illuminated. monument sign. Externally LoWe's pYl°n sign. Internally illuminated cabinet with opaque blue background. Whole Foods wall sign. Internally illuminated xvhite channel letters above internally illuminated cabinet with white letters on an opaque green background Whole FOods/Staples monument sign. Daytime view. Examples of existing signs on the 29N Entrance Corridor, illustrating various backgrounds and types of illumination. 8 SIMULATED VIEW OF SIGN AT NIGHT WITH AN OPAQUE BACKGROUND. (AS APPROVED BY THE ARB) SIMULATED VIEW OF SIGN AT NIGHT WITH A TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUND TO MATCH EXISTING AND SURROUNDING SIGNS.. EXISTING SINGS - ALL OF THESE SIGNS HAVE TRANSLUCENT BACKGROUNDS PROPOSED SIGN ¸10 ALL MATERIALS, CONSTRUCTION, AND MOUNTING WILL BE THE SAME AS THE CURRENT SIGN. -METAL FRAME -BACKLIT PLASTIC FACES THE COLORS PRINTED ARE ACCURATE. CURRENT SIGN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: TJPDC Legislative Pregram SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Approval of the draft TJPDC Legislative Pregrem STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White, Spencer, Blount AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes / The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission works with the County and other Planning District members each year to develop a legislative program for the General Assembly session. The attached draft of the 2002 TJPDC Legislative Program is before the Board for appreval and will form the basis of the county's future discussions with our local legislators. DISCUSSION: The Draft 2002 Legislative Program follows the same format as in prior years, with five priority "action items" and a section highlighting some of the most important ongoing concerns and other legislative requests. The County's major issues recommended to VACO are included in the draft program. (A copy of the County's VACO submittal is also attached for reference.) The presentation of this year's "action items" differs from the past in that an attempt-has been made to make them more informative (containing supporting data, documentation and anecdotes) so as to better educate and influence our existing and new legislators. The approved TJPDC Legislative Program will be sent to our local legislators pdor to the Board of Supervisors' meeting with them in December. At this meeting, the BOS will have the opportunity to request sponsorship and/ or support of specific legislation. Specific legislative items the Board may want to consider requesting legislators to support or sponsor during the 2002 session could include: 1) Legislation that would include Albemarle County in the "Photo-red" traffic light program. The program would allow Albemarle County to establish. "photo-red" traffic light signal enforcement programs. 2) Legislation for Albemarle County to serve as a pilot jurisdiction in the adoption of ordinances to protect areas where the visual impact of buildings and development can be significant to the scenic attributes of the community. 3) A budget amendment to reimburse alternative space costs for the Albemarle County Social Services Department (submitted last year, but not approved). 4) Legislation that would grant Albemarle County greater flexibility in administration of affordable dwelling programs by placing the County's authority under the broader enabling provisions currently applying only to Fairfax, Loudoun, and Arlington Counties. 10-26-0't A09:50 iN AGENDA TITLE: TJPDC Legislative Program November 7, 2001 Page 2 5) Legislation to direct VDOT to work with urbanizing counties to create separate and distinct classifications and standards for urban streets in the secondary road system, as well as standards associated with amenities such as the location of utilities, sidewalks, bike lanes, and street trees. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: 1) 2) The Board approve the attached Draft 2002 TJPDC Legislative Program, with the understanding that suggested changes from the Board will be reflected in the final version of the regional legislative program. The Board consider what other specific legislative-related sponsorship requests they would like to request during the December meeting with our local legislators. 01.198 DRAFT 2002 Thomas Jefferson Planning District Legislative Program Representing the Local Governments of: Albemarle County City of Charlottesville Fluvanna Countv Louisa County Nelson County November 2001 Harry S. Harris, Chairman Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Director David C. Blount, Legislative Liaison DRAt:T STANDARDS OF QUALITY FUNDING Legislative Position of TJPDC, Charlottesville, and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities believe the state should fund its share of the realistic costs of meeting the Standards of Quality (SOQ) and the actual educational needs and practices employed by school divisions across Virginia. Funding from all sources (local/state/federal) for public education in Virginia, including capital outlay and debt service, totals approximately $8 billion/year. The majority (57%) is paid by local governments (well above the national average of 43% paid by localities). Virginia localities spend approximately $1.8 billion of their local discretionarydollars on education above the amount required by. the state. Virginia ranks 44th among the states in providing financial support to public schools, and the public school share of the state' s general fund revenue has fallen from 51% to 32% over the past 30 years. What are our localities doing? First, all exceed the state's minimum required local funding effort by wide margins. Especially of note: Charlottesville's local contribution to education constitutes 60% of the school budget. Without approximately $2 million additional local dollars, there would be 41 fewer teachers and teaching assistants in Charlottesville's middle and high schools instructing students on Standards of Learning content. Likewise, in Albemarle, $2.3 million is locally provided for more than 50 additional elementary teachers. In fact, without additional local money, Atbemarle's Greer Elementary would have 10 fewer teachers and no assistant principal. Nelson gave its teachers a 5% pay raise this past year (when the state did not provide a teacher pay hike) at a local cost of $350,000. Fluvanna has spent $500,000/year the past five years to lower class sizes to 22:1; 48 resource, teachers are employed for remediation, special education and gifted education. While the state has provided new funding in recent years for implementing the Standards of Learning (SOL) and for meeting the Standards of Accreditation's (SOA) new graduation req. uirements, localities also have responded with additional dollars. Three-quarters of local school divisions, in response to a statewide survey, reported that over a three-year period (1998-2000) localities had spent more than $500 million on state and local initiatives related to the revised SOA. Albemarle reported spending more than $17 million, most of which was reprogrammed from other areas, while nearly $4 million were new expenditures. Fluvanna's expenditures totalled $11.4 million, including approximately $380,000 in new local dollars. The biggest chunks of money in Albemarle and Fluvanna were targeted for remediation programs. Statewide, divisions reported spending the most money ($90 million) in the instructional area and about $77 million in the area of technology. ITRANSPORTATION Legislative Position of TJPDC, Charlottesville, and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities urge the state to fully fund existing transportation obligations, programs and plans, without creating competition for dollars among different transportation modes, and without incurring increased or unjustifiable debt. We believe the state should establish additional revenues for the state's transportation infrastructure, including consideration of increases in state transportation-related taxes and fees, without heavy reliance on the general fund. The Virginia Transportation Act (VTA) of 2000 accelerated $3 billion for state transportation projects over six years, and represented a good first step toward funding transportation needs. However, it relies heavily on debt, and commits $345 million in general fund revenues for various projects over the next four years. While the state develOped this long-range plan, reliable and long-term funding solutions have not been realized, thus increasing the need for additional transportation funding sources. Early projections are thai urban and secondary construction funding will decline for the second year in a row (as expected), while city street maintenance funding is projected to increase slightly. This has the potential to negatively affect our counties. We believe than any funding shortfalls for priority projects at the state level should not shortchange funding for our 47,000 miles of secondary roads or needed street maintenance funding. (Locality Transportation Priorities to be attached). Public transportation continues to be very important in our area. Ridership has increased 60% the past two years in Charlottesville and the urban ring. Charlottesville has put more than $700,000 into its Transit Development Plan that, over five years, seeks to expand transit and trolley service in the urban area (thus, also requiring new local money from Albemarle). Costs to do this could add 5 cents to the city tax rate. Yet the city has been prohibited from using its urban road funds for transit development. Specifically it would like to use $250,000 from its urban allocation for the Downtown/UVA trolley route, which transports 30,000 passengers monthly. As localities strive to meet increasing demands, transportation systems become more than just infrastructure projects. In many cases, they define land use strategies. Accordingly, we support the creation of a new funding classification and street standards for urbanizing areas, which could provide more options for planning and designing transportation models that support land use priorities. The so-called "Neighborhood Model," as envisioned in Albemarle's Development Areas Initiative Project, proposes narrower neighborhood streets with Iow-design speeds, pedestrian access and street trees as an integral part of its compact, neighborhood communities. Finally, we support funding of the TransDominion Express with stops at Oak Ridge and Charlottesville, and request funds to study economic tie-ins to communities along the way. Nelson already has received a planning grant for renovations at the Oak Ridge station. ICOMPREHENSIVE SERVICES ACT Legislative Position of TJPDC, Charlottesville, and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and i~s member localities support 1) full funding, on a biennial basis, of the state pool for the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA), with allocations based on realistic anticipated levels of need; 2) a cap on local expenditures for serving a child through CSA and a contingency fund to help pay for high-cost cases;, and 3) increased state funding for local CSA administration and for early intervention and prevention projects. From 1994-2000, the state and local costs of residential and non-residential mandated services nearly doubled, from approximately $104 million to $204 million Initial state appropriations for CSA have fallen short each year, forcing the state to search for its share of funding and localities to request supplemental state appropriations. The driving factors behind these increases: 1) the average cost of serving each youth increased by more than $3,500 during this period, and 2) dramatically increased caseloads with challenging serx/ices demands. ~Albernarle's local CSA costs jumped 268% in 7 years to nearly $2 million/year ~Louisa's local CSA costs jumped nearly 50% between 1999 and 2000 ~Nelson will request $200,000 more in state CSA funds this year ~Fluvanna spent just over atA million dollars in FY00 ~CharIottesville spent $1.3 million in FY00 Consider the following recent cases: 1) A 10-year old Albemarle boy.., twice placed in foster homes (one disrupted after he set fire to carpet in the home, the other when he attempted to attack his foster sister)...hospitalized in a psychiatric facility, then recommended for treatment center care at a cost of $5500/month. 2) A 13-year old Charlottesville girl...in a residential treatment program for two months...discharged, then held on a probation violation, was awaiting hospitalization for a court-ordered evaluation...$13,000/month for services. Louisa reports more children with severe mental health problems being placed in increasingly-difficult-to-secure foster care settings. Two foster care placements there cost $8,O00/month each. Without Medicaid reimbursement for one, the pricetag would be $16,000/month. Services for disabled students are straining Nelson's CSA budget, 97% of which is for special education. Fluvanna reports the number of children entering foster care nearly tripled this past year, to a total of 21.They have found family foster homes unable to meet needs, so more costly therapeutic foster homes and residential placements have become the norm. Service costs range from $2,100 to $13,000/month. One way to help reduce high costs for specialized services is to funnel more efforts to prevention and early intervention projects, including more funds for the state's program for at-risk four-year-olds, so that grants are available for 100%, rather than 60%, of unserved children. For example, Albemarle's "Bright Stars" program provides consistent and comprehensive interventions for more than 60 students and their families, successfully addressing risk factors leading to early academic failures. ITAX STRUCTURE AND REFORM Legislative Position of TJPDC, Charlottesville, and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities believe the state should broaden the revenue sources available to local governments, including sharing a portion of the state income tax with localities as net new revenue, rather than capping, removing or restricting any local revenue sources, taxing authority or user fees. Localities were frustrated and shortchanged by the lack of a budget agreement in 2001 and believe it is imperative that such an impasse not happen again. We believe that the governor and General Assembly should truly budget on a biennial basis, funding the likes of salary increases, student enrollment increases, additional CSA dollars and local jail per diem reimbursements, that past budgets have shown to be expected in the second year of the two-year budget cycle. To do otherwise serves to increase concern among localities about the stability of their revenue streams. Statewide, local governments generate almost two-thirds (62%) of the funds for needed services, with the largest share coming from the real property tax. The real property tax generated 28% to 49% of local revenues in FY00 as follows: Albemarle (42%); Charlottesville (30%); Fluvanna (39%); Louisa (28%); and Nelson (49%). We recognize that financing government projects and programs should be a partnership between the state and localities. However, with our limited ability to raise funds and sometimes-stagnant revenue streams, we strain to meet services required by residents and those mandated by the state and federal governments. Our localities say it is increasingly difficult to meet operating expenses, that necessary services face limitations and infrastructure and capital projects are being delayed. Cons ider the following: ,Albemarle: Debt service is one of the fasting growing budget items (totals $8.5 million/year) , Charlottsville: 5-year capital needs pro,am = $190 million ,Fluvanna: Lack of funds delays new human services building and community center renovation ,Louisa: Schools' security system among projects delayed due to lack of funds ,Nelson: Real property tax increased 5 cents in 2000 to help finance new middle school/high school renovation project; new social services space desperately needed. Concerning income tax revenue sharing, if 10% of income tax revenues was returned through a formula that considers a base amount, where taxpayers reside and where wages are earned, our localities would realize the following amounts: Charlottesville $5,576,700 Albemarle $10,496,024 Fluvanna $1,547,678 Louisa $2,044,599 Nelson $1,308,995 LAND USE AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT Legislative Position of TJPDC, Charlottesville, and the Counties of Albemarle, Ftuvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities oppose any preemption or circumvention of existing local authority to regulate land use, as has been done in recent years through legislative action. Local governments have been limited in their efforts to manage growth by Various legislative actions in the 1990's which reduced local authority to enforce the comprehensive plan or to regulate land use. These actions included vesting of proffered rezonings, final approved site plans, and subdivision plats (1990), vesting of preliminary subdivision plats and site plans (1998), and removal of local government authority to use special exceptions or use permits' in residenti'al districts (1999). We believe that balanced, sustainable growth is essential to maintaining quality of life. Public infrastructure costs associated with new developments are borne by ail taxpayers, rather than by those bringing about the need for the expenditure, thus straining our ability to pay for these costs'of growth in a time of uncertain revenue pictures. Specific Recommendations: The General Assembly should preserve existing authority for localities to regul ate land use, and should approve legislation to 1) preclude VDOT from allowing the construction of commercial, mobile, and land-based telecommunications facilities, such as monopoles or towers, without prior approval of the affected locality's governing body; and 2) enable localities to enact scenic protection and tourist enhancement districts. Further, the legislature should resist bills to mandate a specific plan for clustering residential development and to make changes to the Uniform Statewide Building Code that hinder the implementation of local ordinances. We support enabling legislation that would provide local governments with various additional tools (such as impact fees, adequate public facilities ordinances and transfer and purchase of development rights) to manage growth. The legislature should join many of its neighboring states in maintaining a dedicated funding source for land preservation and related measures to acquire, preserve and maintain open space and recreation lands, including directing the bulk of any available federal funding to localities. State transportation planning must be better coordinated and conformto local land use planning, especially in rapidly growing areas. Again, we support relaxing state standards to give localities more flexibility regarding road construction m neighborhoods and traffic calming measures. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The Planning District and its member localities recognize economic development and workforce training as essential to the continued viability of the Commonwealth. We support policies that closely link the goals of economic development and workforce- development and that result in an increased standard of living for all residents. The state needs to clarify its positions on growth and development by enhancing the state economic development plan t0 more clearly define the responsibilities of the state and of local governments. We support development of the Economic Development Strategic Plan for the Commonwealth that includes new tools for local governments to use in attracting economic development opportunities such as a capital pool to construct improvements for new or expanding businesses, tax increment financing, a grant or loan program dedicated to enhancing local infrastructure systems and an expanded Enterprise Zone Program. · The state needs to recognize the disparity in rewards of economic development between the state and localities,' as well as between host locality and surrounding areas. · We support legislation that would allow localities within the Planning District to take part in regional industrial facility authorities. · We support additional funding for the Regional Competitiveness Act to provide meaningful opportunities for regional projects to move forward. Fair and proportional funding should be provided to all regions of the state. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION~OTHER EDUCATION The Planning District and it member localities appreciate recent state efforts to funnel money to school construction. However, the state's contribution to local school capital needs comprise only 12% of the total costs incurred and localities statewide still face a backlog of facility needs totaling several billion dollars. · The state should increase funding for school construction costs and establish a permanent funding formula for the Virginia Public School Construction Grants and lottery proceeds programs. · We encourage efforts by the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) to stabilize employer contribution ratek for school employe~s' retirement. · We request that a mechanism for appealing the Local Composite Index (LCI) to the state be established. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The Planning District and its.member localities are committed to the protection and enhancement of the environment. This commitment.recognizes, however, the need to achieve a proper balance between environmental regulation and the socio-economic health of. our communities. Environmental quality should be promoted through a comprehensive approach and address issues of air and water quality, solid waste management, protection of sensitive lands and sound land use policies. Such an approach requires regional cooperation due to the interjurisdicational nature of many environmental resources and adequate funding to match local efforts. · The state should be a partner and advocate for localities in water supply development. The state should undertake water supply planning which encompasses water conservation, a determination of needs and how they can be met, including emerging technologies. We oppose legislation that would mandate expansion of the area covered under the Chesapeake Bay PreservatiOn Act without legal, financial and technical support from .the state to comply with any new requirements. Further, localities should be allowed to use other practices to achieve obiectives toward improving water quality. · The state should '~ .... ~ ..... ;,h ,~,~.~, .......... ~; .... ~ ...... ~ ~'~ ~,-~ ~,~,~,,~ ............ ~, ......................................... ensure that the closure schedules for landfills/reasonably and realistically reflects both the closure cost-fundin g plan of the locality and' the site-specific risk analysis. Further, the state should work with local governments to establish a comprehensive waste reduction strategy rather than hastily requiring a statewide tipping fee or increasing required recycling rates. The state should appropriate adequate funding to implement strategies for restoring impaired waters and for the Water Quality Improvement Fund. · We support state action to restore local authority to regulate sewage sludge (biosolids). HEALTH AND HUMAN SER VICES The Planning District and its member localities recognize that special attention must be given to developing circumstances under which people, especially the disabled, the poor, the young and the elderly, can achieve their full potential. In achieving this end, however, the limits of government must be recognized. The delivery of health and human services must be a collaborative effort from federal, state and local agencies. ° We oppose any changes in state funding or policies that result in an increase of the local share of costs for human services, including changes that would require additional local contributions for indigent care. We oppose any new state or federal entitlement programs that require additional local funding. We support additional state funding for local social services facilities and for local departments to maintain adequate office space to deliver services. We support state funding for local Disability Services Boards. We support the state assuming 100% responsibility for funding the auxiliary grant program. · We support the expanded operation and enhancement of early intervention and prevention programs that can make a difference in children's lives, such as the Child Health Partnership and Healthy Families programs. The state should not use Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) monies to fund such programs, as localities cannot use federal TANF funds as match for other federally-funded prevention programs. We support Virginia's welfare reform program and encourage efforts to promote family preservation and work requirements. We support initiatives and funding to help former VIEW participants maintain continuity in childcare and oppose any initiatives to shift traditional federal and state childcare administrative responsibility and costs to local governments. We support state efforts to expand access to education and training needed by welfare recipients to become employed and self-supporting. We also support a TANF plan that takes into account and. fully funds state and local implementation and support services costs. I HOUSING The Planning District and its member localities believe that every citizen should have an opportunity to afford decent, safe and sanitary housing. The state and local governments should work toward expanding and preserving the supply and improving the quality of affordable housing for the elderly, the disabled and low-income and moderate-income households. Regional housing solutions and planning should be implemented whenever possible. · We support renewed funding of the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund from both the general fund and VHDA. · We support changes to the Code o£ Virginia to allow local flexibility in the operation of affordable housing programs. ° We support state-enacted incentives that encourage rehabilitation and preservation of historic structures. · In addressing the lack of input that local governments have concerning housing issues, we support local government notice provisions for all proposed !ow and moderate income housing projects seeking federal tax credits, including VHDA. ° We support VHDA criteria for funding which encourages rehabilitation of existing housing and discourages new construction in close proximity to existing subsidized housing. ILOCAL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND LA WS The Planning District and its member localities believe that since so many governmental actions take place at the local level, a strong local government system is essential. Local governments must have the freedom and tools to carry out their responsibilities. We support legislation to enhance the ability of local governments to provide services required by citizens and to allow local governments to meet their responsibilities in state/local partnerships. The state should not limit local government authority to install and pro~/i'de telecommunications facilities as an economic development tool, when the locality determines that private industry is not providing such services. We oppose intrusive legislation involving purchasing procedures, local government authority to establish hours of work, salaries and working conditions for local employees, matters that can be adopted by resolution Or ordinance and procedures for adopting ordinances. We oppose Virginia Freedom of Information Act provisions which further limit a local governing body's ability to meet in closed session or to confer privately with its counsel on probable litigationl We also oppose limiting the list of records currently exempt from disclosure under F,OIA and requiring creation of customized computer records for commercial and other uses. We support enabling legislation that authorizes localities to require contractors, as a condition of public contracts awarded through the procurement process, to pay employees a living wage. · We oppose.additional disclosure requirements on local governing bodies in land use proceedings. · We support legislative or budget action that reduces the costs to localities for conducting elections. · The state must ensure that implementation of electric utility restructuring is revenue neutral to localities and that any necessary stopgap appropriations to adversely affected localities are fully funded. PUBLIC SAFETY The Planning District and its member localities recognize that the prime responsibility for law enforcement, criminal justice activities, emergency medical care and fire services rests at the local level. However, these needs can be met only with continued state and federal support. ° We support continued state funding for the HB 599 law enforcement program~ and urge the state to clarify this law so that local ~overnments are more certain of their funding levels from year to year.. · We support increased state funding to assist with the capital costs associated with establishing E911 services. 9 We oppose legislation that reduces or removes the authority for local governments to limit the carrying of weapons in public buildings and other public facilities. We support state assistance for programs that provide increased workforce training, an~ substance abuse treatment and mental health services for local jail inmates. We support legislation to increase court fees to pay for courthouse maintenance, renovation and construction. These costs should not be placed on the general population. The state should pay 50% of the costs to construct regional jails and should also increase its share of the operational costs of such facilities. The state should not adopt languag_e_that would disallow exemptions from the federal prisoner offset: and should increase the per diem payment to localities for housing state-responsible prisoners. · We oppose having the state assume the operation of local and regional jails. · We support centinue~ increases ~.n increased funding for services required under the Community Corrections and Pretrial Services Acts:, and for Community Criminal Justice Boards. We support legislation that will enable additional localities to install and operate traffic light signal photo-monitoring systems. · We support the planned delay (until July, 2002) of the state's revised EMS regulations. 10 Southern Environmental Law Center MEMORANDUM 201 West Main Street, Sui~: 14 Charlot~avflle, VA 434-977-4090 Se [cva~sg~gva.o~ TO: Charlottesville City Council cc: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Charlottesville City Manager Albemarle County Executive Katherine E. Slaught0r O~obor 29, 2001 Brownsfields & Revitalization Subcommittee FROM: DATE: Craig Brown Aubmy Watts Larry Davis Delegate Mitch Van Yahres I am serving on the "Brownfields & Revitalization Subcommittee" of the General Assembly's Commission on Growth and Development, Over the past two meetings we have heard from a varioty of speakers, including fellow committee member Connie Baw'etun of First Cities and officials from the Dopartment of Environmental Quality and state economic development officials. At our next meeting on November 9, we will discuss issues that could be addressed by state policy changes. I enclose a list of such initiatives that Connie and I compiled. We believe that proposals involving funding are the most problematic. You will note that we have included the Van Yahres bill authorizing local historic preservation loan funds, I would appreciate feedback from the City and County elected officials and staffon proposal, and any others you may wish as to consider. Enclosure C_~rolina~ Of)q~¢: 200 West Franklin St,, Suite 330 * Chapel Hill, NC 27316-2320 · 919-967-1430 Det, p Scott. lo Office', Tb.~ Candler Building * 127 Peachtree St., Sake 603 · Atlanta, GA 30303-1f100 · 4tM-32i-9900 100% ra~yd*d paper ~O'd Ag:gl I0, 0£ laO £SPI-ZA6-¢08:x~3 a±3 ~U~ q±HNO~I~N3 05 REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS For Growth Commission Work Group 2 State fiscal and transportation policies are contributing to and even hastening the decline of older cities and urban areas while encouraging new suburban growth. There are many cosily consequences resulting from these policies. Farmland, natural areas, rural tourist attractions and rural quality of life are threatened. New waves of suburban growth requires expensive new infrastructure: schools, roads and utilities. This places enormous pressure on both state and local budgets, especial!y in education and transportation, as they strain to keep up with demands of growth. Meanwhile cities with highly deveioped existing infrastructure are losing population and lag significantly behind the rest of the state in economic growth.. State funding policies should be rebalanccd to encourage growth where infrastructure already exists. Redevelopment incentives can help level the playing field and make redevelopment attractive and economically viable. The state has many good programs in place. But most are either not funded, are under-funded or are too constrained. Adequately funding the following programs and changing key state policies and regulations can help rebalance the sprawl equation~ allowing Virginia cities to join the nationwide trend of urban economic and cultural renewal Adopt an Urban,,Rede elopment Polio... 1. Adopt a poUcy for redeveloping urban areas challenged by fiscal stre~s, blight and lagging economic investment. 2. Adopt specific goals for job growth, business investment and housing revitalization in these localities and report on progress annually. 3. Amend the State*s economic developmentstrategies to aggressively market environmentally challenged sites in fiscally stressed areas. 4. Realign current programs and fund new ones to achieve these specific goals in addition to economic growth elsewhere in the Commonwealth. Fund Autkoriged R ali ation Programs 1. Housing Revitalization Zone Program (Authorized in 2000; Patrons Sen. Watkins and Del. Reid) 2. Urban Public-Private Partnership Redevelopment' Fund (Authorized in 2000; Patron Del. Ingram) 3. Derelict Structures Fund (-Funding minimal) £O'a ZSi~' ~0, 0£ ~o0 £8~-ZZ6-~OS:XeJ ~±D ~q ~±NNO~I~N~ OS Enhance Existing Programs ~rownfields 1. Provide extensive information and assistance on how to "navigate" the brownfields process. 2. Use Governor's Opportunity Fund For hrownfield sites in addition to greenfields. 3. Complete the MOU with EPA to accept DEQ Letter of Compliance on sites. 4. Increase DEQ outreach to brownfleld site owners to create an inventory of sites and assist in the clean up. $. Provide innocent party liability immunity, including third par~y claims. 6. Provide incentive for brownfield site owners to voluntarily clean up, e.g. suspension of fines, tax credits, liability caps, etc. (Should not apply to grossly negligent owners) 7. Provide state fllllding for environmental insurance for brownfields sites in order to quantify the financial risk. 8. ]Provide additional funds for site assessment, either staff resources or third party (currently the delay is approximately 6-12 months). 9. Improve turnaround time for lab analysis (currently 6*8 months) 10. Provide site remecliation grants. Low interest loans do not adequately eliminate the cost differential between developing greenfields vs. brownfields. 11. Shorten the site assessment and remediation processes in order to minimize the time delay in developing a brownfieid site (and thereby reducing the development cost.) Enter, prise .Zones 1. Remove the State's fiscal limit of $16 million. (36 other states with enterprise zones do not have this cap. In addition to expanding thc benefits of the program, this would allow for submittals at anytime during the year.) 2. Reduce the minimum size for areas considered for enterprise zones from ½ square mile to allow localities more opportunities to target key areas. The Secretary of Commerce should be allowed to wa!ye this minimum requirement. 3. Eliminate the cap of 60 enterprise zones. 4. Allow enterprise zone incentives in single mixed-use buildings with up to 80% residential. (For example, a multi-story building where 80% of space is residential and only the 1~ is floor retail). 5. In the event that benefits are prorated, allow smaller businesses (less than $100 million investment) to carry forward and claim the unused tax credits the next year so that they can receive the full benefit. 6. Expand the criteria from poverty and vacancy rates to include a fiscal stress component. 7, Incorporate the percentage of developable area in a locality as a criterion - less than 10% developable green space suggested. 8. Remove the requirement for owner occupancy for real property improvement tax credits on redeveloped properties. 9. Change the "equal to the assessed value" provision to improvements of 50% or greater of the assessed value of the building or have a base minimum investment of $50,000 to qualify. 2 10. Increase the real property improvement credit for rehabilitation from $125,000 to $250,000 in specific cases where the locality can demonstrate that the business investment would not occur without such incentive~ Main Street Program Expand the State Department of Housing and Community Development's Main Street Program to allow commercial districts in large urban areas to become eligible. Add financial incentives for business investment to the package of State assistance provided by this program. Historic Tax Credi_t~ 1. Broaden the historic tax credits or create another credit for the rehabilitation of older commercial buildings that do not have historic significance. A reduction in the age requirement to 15 years to qualify forthe historic tax credit in areas that meet the conservation district criteria is suggested. 2. Amend the historic tax credits 'to allow investment to take place over several years rather than requiring a substantial dollar investment in one year. Other Polic_v and Code Change_s 1. Remove (or leave at local option) the state residential rehabilitation tax abatement rules limiting structure size. A locality, might want to replace a small Iow tax structure with a larger, more marketable structure. 2. Increase property owr~er accountability for derelict and abandoned structures, e.g. provide that corporate officers with direct knowledge property conditions and responsibility 'for property maintenance are personally liable* 3. Site State office facilities, owned or leased, in redevelopment areas. 4. Authorize localities to provide loans for preservation of historic property (2001 SB 959 Patrons Sen. Couric and Del. Van Yahres) Transportatio~ Increase funding for public transportation and roadway maintenance. Provide maximum flexibility to localities in the use of state street maintenance and construction funding. a. Change VDOT policies to allow localities to allocate funds between maintenance and construction as needed. b. Change VDOT policies to allow funds to be used for transit, bike, pedestrian, rail and other mode~ of surface transportation to suit community needs and objectives. SO'd ..... ~"~'~ ....... ~0, 0£'~50 £SP~-ZZ6-POS:Xe~ ~±3 ~Uq ~±NNO~ZnN] OS e~ Reduce VDOT standards for the minimum street width eligible for state maintenance payments. This change would allow older, narrower city streets and newer "skinny" city friendly streets to be eligible for funding. Change the VDOT street maintenance payments policy by replacing formula based payments to payments based on road usage levels, age, weather, etc. This is the same standard VDOT uses for county road maintenance. 4 VIRGINIA I~IUNICIPAL LEAGUE OFFICERS PRESIDENZ EMPORIA VICE [~[AYOR F. WOODROW HARRIS PRESIDENT-ELEcT BLACKSBURG COUNCIL I~IEI~IBER JOYCE K. LEWIS VICE PRESIDENT HAMPTON COUNCIL MEMBER TURNER ]~[. SPENCER. ED.D. IlVI~EDIATE PAST PRESIDENT WYTNEVILLE MAYOR TRENTON G. CREWE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR R. MICHAEL AM'tX !A~AGAZlNE VIRGINIA TOWN ~ CITY P.O. Box I2164 EAST FRANKLIN STREET RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 2324I 804/649-8471 · FAx: 804/343-3758 E-mAIL: e-mail~vml.org www.~l.org 11-06-01 P06:42 IN November 1, 2001 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Key Officials VML Executive Committee ! R. Michael Amyx ~~;:~ Executive Director ,~ VML 2002 Legislative Program Enclosed is the Virginia Municipal League's final 2002 Legislative Program adopted by the membership at its annual business meeting Oct. 16 in Virginia Beach. I know that many of you are in the midst of developing your own legislative packages for the upcoming session, and I thought this might be of use to you. At a later date we will send you the Legislative Program in a more portable brochure format, so that it is easier to refer to when you meet with members of the General Assembly. The 2002 Legislative Program and the final versions of VML's Policy Statements can also be found on our web site (www.vml.org). If you have any questions about either the Legislative Program or the policy statements, feel free to contact the following staff: Legislative Program (Mike Amyx or Betty Long) Environmental Quality Policy Statement (Mike Edwards) Finance Policy Statement (Betty Long or Janet Areson) General Laws Policy Statement (Mark Flvnn or Mary Jo Fields) Human Development and Education Policy Statement (Janet Areson or Mary Jo Fields) Transportation Policy Statement (Mike Edwards) cc: Legislative Liaisons (via email) LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WORKING TOGETHER SINCE I905 Legislative Priorities Virginia Municipal League 2002 Legislative Program 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 !5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Education Funding The SOQ should be broad enough to include the major components of what is required for a quality educational program. VML supports full funding of the state's share of the actual costs of the SOQ based on prevailing practices, and full funding of the state's share of categorical educational mandates in areas such as special education, alternative education and gifted education. The state should provide a predictable and meaningful source of funding for construction, including funding for new construction, renovation, maintenance and land purchase. The state should provide a predictable and reliable source of funding for technology, including personnel, support and infrastructure costs. Further, the state should provide funding to initiate and continue to enable school systems to address school safety issues. The state should not require any maintenance of local effort other than that associated with the SOQ. Transportation and Transit Funding VML urges thestate to fully fund existing obligations without creating competing interests among advocates of different modes. Additionally, the state must begin to address future and documented funding shortfalls. In the short term, state leaders have an obligation to fully fund existing programs and plans (including the Transportation Development Plans of 2001 and 2002 and the Virginia Transportation Act of 2000) without incurring increased and/or unjustifiable debt. In the long term, state leaders must begin to address documented and future corridor and project deficiencies and needs. VML is concerned about the state's undue reliance on state general funds to support transportation solutions. While the use of state general funds may help the state's leaders to address short term plans and support necessary and project-specific debt, its leaders must identify new and dedicated revenues that make it unnecessary to use limited state general funds needed for other vital programs. VML urges the state to achieve greater funding equity for various transportation modes, especially public transit, in order to produce a balanced transportation system. VML strongly encourages increased federal and state funding for transit systems provided that funding for other transportation modes is not reduced. A larger, dedicated source of federal and_state funding for transit -- including funds for existing operating and capital needs as well as start-ups -- remains a critical priority, particularly as local participation (local match) increases. VML also encourages the state to aggressively promote transit alternatives. Greater public awareness will help to increase transit ridership. HB 599 Funding VML supports l) revising the state code and the appropriations act to clarify that the annual growth in total HB 599 funding will be based upon the most recent official revenue forecast available when the General Assembly sets its budget for the biennium, and 2) requiring that when the governor submits his biennial budget, that HB 599 funding be based upon the official state revenue forecast used to develop his budget. VML further supports adding language setting the HB 599 funding rate once for an entire biennium. Recommendations of the Citizens' Tax Commission The Commission on Virginia's State and Local Tax Structure for the 21 st Century was broad-based and non-partisan, and consisted of business and finance experts. VML strongly supports the commission's findings that: · The state increase substantially its support for both the operational and capital costs of local school divisions; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 t6 · The state assume the full operational cost for the provision of all mandated services provided through the Comprehensive Services Act, the public health departments, the Community Services Boards, the local and regional jails, and the local social services departments. · The state return a Share of the state income tax to localities for the purpose of broadening their revenue base and reducing their dependence on the real estate tax; · The st.ate,participate in the Streamlined Sales Tax project, an interstate effort designed to standardize state sales and us~:tax. Provisi~o~is in order to overcome federal Opposition tO ihterstate use taX Collection, review all curreiit exemptions tothe sales and uge tax, and extend the tax to sei-vices; .... · The taxing authority of counties be made commensurate with that of cities; - · The state review the tax-exempt status granted to all non-governmental property and the restrictions that limit the service charges that may be applied to tax-exempt, property; · Localities retain their authority to imposed the merchants' capital and business, prOfessional and occupational license taxes; and · Localities be granted increased opportunity to collaborate in regional economic development activities. 17 Other Legisiati~ve pOsitions 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Tax Restructuring In addition to existing state aid to localities, a portion of the state income tax should be returned to localities as net new revenue for their unrestricted use based on a three-part distribution formula. The amount of income tax returned to each city, and county would be calculated as follows: · fifty percent would be returned based on each locality's relative Share of the state income tax paid by the taxpayers filing returns in each jurisdiction; · forty percent would be returned based on each locality's relative share.of where wages are earned; and ~ ' · · ten percent would be divided.equally among ali. cities and counties.. The amount of each county'.s income tax-distribution would be shared with its respective town(s) based on the town's relative share of total county population. Specifically, half of the county's share of the income tax would be divided among the county and its town(s) based on population data. Intergovernmental Revenue Communities throughout Virginia benefit greatly from increased intergOvernmental revenue fi.om the Commonwealth for programs including public education, local law enforcement, health services, behavioral health services and transportation. VML urges the Governor and the General Assembly to assign a high priority to these programs in thek budget deliberations for the 2002 session. Urban Redevelopment VML supports enhanced redevelopment opportunities through the adoption of an urban policy for the commonwealth, and implementation of %mart ~rowm pohc~es that ei~courage growth and economic development in urban areas. Provision of Telecommunications Services by Local Governments The state should not impede the authority of local governments to install and provide modem telecommunications facilities as an important economic development tool when a locality determines that private industry is not providing such services consistent with community needs. Telecommunications Towers in Public Rights-of-Way State agencies must comply with local comprehensive plans and local land use regulation in the siting of telecommunication facilities such as towers and antennas. Mandatory Clustering Provisions in Zoning Ordinances The General Assembly ShOuld not require clustering provisions in any locality, nor should it require a specific type of clustering in those localities that use it. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 t9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Dangerous Weapons on Public Property The League supports legislation to clarify that local governments have the authority to prohibit the carrying of dangerous weapons in anY Publicly owned or leased building or property, as defined by their locality. Photo-Red Traffic Enforcement Er0grams VML supports legislation to permit all localities ~6 enact photo-red traffic enfOr~erhent' programs as'h m~anS:of ?: improving public safety by reducing the number Of accidents and fatalities caused by funning' red lights;.,~ VML~-alSo supports elimination of the statute's sunset .provision. Solid Waste Management VML urges the state to advocate for and enact a comprehensive waste reduction strategy in cooperation with local governments. Prior to the adoption of such a strategy, the state should evaluate the effectiveness of current strategies, including the local recycling mandate, and assess the economics of recycled materials and Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). The strategy should preclude the state's continued reliance on unfunded mandates, and reward (rather than penalize through the enactment of noncompetitive state fees) localities that have implemented progressive waste reduction and reuse strategies such as waste-to-energy facilities. Additionally, the strategy should promote diversion goals, pollution prevention and reuse strategies as well as other management and economic initiatives intended to reduce total and deposited waste. The state should also explore new and undeveloped markets for reused and recycled materials. VML advises the state against imprudently increasing the recycling mandate. Further, VML advises the state against imposing a MSW tipping fee or surcharge without first developing reasonable and equitable allocation formUlas and without first examining and understanding the impact such a fee will have on local governments. Water Quality VML urges the Commonwealth in its role as a financial and environmental trustee to develop and adequately fund, in consultation with local governments, a comprehensive and statewide water quality improvement funding strategy for point and non-point source controls. At a minimum, the strategy should address the following issues: Total Maximum Daily Loads. Continued reliance on voluntary efforts for nutrient control by non-point sources is insufficient to achieve comp liance with water quality standards and does not treat all responsible parties equitably. Water Quality Improvement Fund. VML supports dedicated and adequate appropriations to the Water Quality Improvement Fund of not less than $30 million annually. Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs). Local governments managing combined sewer overflows (CSOs) require adequate federal and state grant resources, Land Conservation VML recognizes the vital need to preserve special lands including open spaces, parks, natural areas, historic areas, farmlands, forests and recreational areas. VML therefore supports the dedication of a stable source of long-term state funding, but not more than $40 million annually, to assist agencies, localities, public bodies and specific and registered (taxrexempt) nonprofit organizations in acquiring, preserving, developing and maintaining such areas. In-Home Services for the Elderly The state should revise its Medicaid requirements and orientation and greater funding for the Department of Aging for area agencies on aging to allow for greater use of, and increased reimbursements for, in-home care. In-home care should be considered a viable and economical alternative to the current Medicaid emphasis on institutional care. Quality and Funding of Behavioral Health Services VML urges the state to sufficiently fund a comprehensive array of behavioral health care and treatment at the state and community level for consumers whether or not they are eligible for Medicaid. VML urges the state to improve the forecasting and funding [or the mental retardation waiver program to address the waiting list of more than 1,000 consumers and plan for future needs. State Funding o f Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services in Jails and Detention Facilities VML supports full state funding of substance abuse and mental health services in local jails and juve~nile detenti0n:- homes, including transitional services in the community, to keep offenders from relapsing. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Affordable Housing VML urges the state to restore funding for the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund to at least the levels appropriated in the mid-1990s in order to help low and moderate income individuals and families find safe and decent housing at prices they can afford. VML further urges the Virginia Housing Development Authority to establish innovative financing programs, such as guaranteeing Section 8 home loans with private banks, to allow more low-income individuals and families the opportunity to purchase homes and build stronger communities. Programs for Residents with Limited English Proficiency VML supports a pilot acculturation program for new residents with limited English proficiency. The primary service offered would be English language instruction, as well as information on citizenship, community resources, employment, health, domestic Violence and other appropriate topics. VML requests $1 million in. state funding to provide up to $125,000 each for 8 or more pilot grant programs for non-profit agencies, selected through public procurement procedures by interested local governments. Local match may also be needed to fully cover costs. Outreach for State Children's Health Insurance Program VML requests $1 million in state funding to provide up to $100,000 each for 10 or more outreach programs to give information about FAMIS, the state health insurance program for chiidren, to residents with limited English proficiency. Virginia Sickness and Disability Program VML supports the'introduction of legislation to allow the Virginia Retirement System to offer political subdivisions, at their option, the opportunity of participating in the Virginia Sickness and.Disability Program. Because of the intensive administrative requirements associated with the transition to the VSDP, the opportunity to participate in the program would have to be phased in over a number of years. Commission to Study the Virginia Retirement System VML supports the creation of a legislative study commission to undertake a comprehensive examination of issues associated with the Virginia Retirement System. The commission should seek the input of local officials through creation of a local advisory group. E-Communities Task Force VML urges the creation of a task force that will further the development of e-communities across the commonwealth. E-communities provide a way for citizens to not only conduct business electronically with their local governments, but also enable citizens to engage in a variety of other electronic uses and transactions that enhance the community. Sufficient funding should be provided to the task force to study the need for electronic infi:astructure which can be made available to communities that would otherwise not be able to afford it. Subject: Reading List for November 7, 2001 Date: November I, 200 t September 5, 2001 September 19, 200 I September 27(A), 2001 October 1 O, 2001 pages I- I 6 (end at Item 14) - Mr. Bowerman pages 16 (be~nning with Item 14) - end- Mr. Perkins Mr. Dottier Ms. Thomas Mr. Martin /ewc NOVEMBER 7, 2001 CLOSED SESSION MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GO INTO CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2-3711 (A) OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA UNDER SUBSECTION (1) TO CONSIDER APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Members of the Board of Supervisors Laurie Bentley, C.M.C/~~ Senior Deputy Clerk ~ November 1, 2001 Vacancies on Boards and Commissions Cc: I have updated the list of vacancies on boards and commissions through February 28, 2002. Thank you. Bob Tucker Larry Davis Chamber of Commerce David R Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, ,Jr. Scotfsville Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouctt COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 40I Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Walter E Perkins White Hall Sall~ H. Thomas Samuel Miller November 8, 2001 Mr. Raymond E. East 3340 Rosedell Ln. Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Mr. East: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on November 7, 2001, the Board appointed you to the JAUNT Board, with said term to run from November 7, 2001 through ~, 2004. I have enclosed a roster for your convenience. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Sally H. Thomas Chairman SHT/lab Enclosure cc: James Camblos Donna Shaunesey Printed on recycled paper County of Albemarle ]0-23-0] A~O:02 IN Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 MC~tbe Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMlVlITlW. R (Please ~ o~ print Boa~I/Commission/Committee ~'/~(JA.)'T . ¢0~) Futl HomeAddress 5~¢O ~g~fE~L ¢/~ Z'~'f ~stefi~l ~s~ct ~ w~& yo~ ho~ tesidmce is locatea Y~ Re~dmt b ~e Co~ ~' ~ '~ous Residence ~)XFAX ~~ Education ~e=ees md Gra~afio= ~tes~ A~~ O M~tsNos ~ V=t~. Bu~ess, ~a md/or S~ ~oups ~~ DateofEmployment¢/:~f~)' ~}-/-' ~ Spo e' Public, Civic and Chazitabte Office and/or Other Activities or Interests D¢~'"'~(~- ~/~.6fl//~,',A~ /~-)s'r~ 6-- Reason(s) for Wishing to Serve on this Soard/Commission/Committee ~))~{Jdl'~ f~'d~[//~_5 . / sig ¢ / ' rote Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401' McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY ATTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, ,Jr. Scottsville -~, Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Walter F. Perkins White Hall Sally H. Thomas Samuel Mill~ November 14, 200J .Mr. Raymond E. East 3340 Rosedell Ln. Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Mr. East: Please note that the JAUNT agpointment letter sent to you last week contains an error. Your term will expire on September 30, 2004 (not in November) in order to be consistent with the terms of the other members. I have enclosed a revised roster for your convenience. Should you have any questions, please feel free to con[act me Sincerely, Laurel A. Bentley Sr. Deputy Clerk Enclosure CC; James Camblos Donna Shaunesey Printed on rec~)cled paper BOARD OR COMMISSION NEW TERM APPLICANT INTERVIEW, EXPIRE DATE ~ ~ SCHEDULEDIF Richard R. Abidin 1' 10 Charles T. Lebo 1:00 Chris Gensic ..... ~ ........ ~ .... ~:,~ ~ 30 o~. Diane LaSauce Raymond E. East County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902- 4596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type or print.) Board/Commission/Committee Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Citizen Advisory Committee Applicant's Name Chris Gensic Home Phone 434-296-3579 Full Home Address 1115 Elliott Avenue, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Magisterial District in which your home residence is located Employer Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Business Address 300 East Main Street, PO Box 1505 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Phone 434-979-7310 Occupation/Title Regional Planner Years Resident in A'[tsEttlltlt~in~ 10 Date of Employment Spouse's Name rea 12/1/2000 Previous Residence King George County, Virginia Number of Children 0 Education .(Degrees and Graduation Dates) Master of Urban and Environmental Planning & Bachelor, Eniwonmental Science, UVA Memberships in Fraternal. Business, Church ancL/or Social Groups Public. Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests I work to improve pedestrian conditions in the City/urban area Reason(s) for Wishing to Serve on this Board/Commission/Committee To help guide the community to the best solid waste management system possible. The information provided on this application will be released to the public upon request. Signature Date Retumto: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FA>fi (804)296-5800 I&l Z 0 0 0 I.-~- 0 0 0 County of Albemarle Office of Board of County Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, 'VA. 22902.-4596 (804) 296-5843 -APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMrITEE (Please type Futl Home Address ./ ~!~ O [d 0 VC.~e~ ~50e~, ~?_.e tl~ , 'o ,.,x ,, ~_/,~, 2.2_? 4~) 1V~sterial District in which your home residence is located Business Address ~2~[214A ~ Phone 1 Occupation/Tide d~) LID ~q 0~ Years Resident in Albemarle County Previous Residence Education (D%~ees and Graduation Dates) Date of Employment Spouse's Name Number of Children ) Memberships in Fraternal Business Church md/or Social Grout)'- ~.~ Public Civic and Char4mble Office md/or OtherrACl~ivities or Interests: Q-~A~'[V'0~ o-- Date Return to: Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 MeIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 Pl..EASE RESTRICT ANY A TTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE ?04:22 IN Diane LaSauce 1813 Old Orchard Road P.O Box 32 Free Union, Virginia 22940-0032 434-964-0816 Home Key'word Profile: Management. Marketing. Administration. Merchandise Buyer. Inventory control. Cash Control. Staff management. Copywr{ter. Editor. Product development. Museum retail management. Mail-order management. Web management. Mail-order catalogUe design. Computerized order-entry. Merchandising. Licensing. Microsoft Office 98 and NT 2000. Outlook 2000. POS systems. BFA Interior Design--Virginia Commonwealth University. Summary: More than eighteen years experience in management, marketing and administration, supervisory management, inventory control, product development, web site management, licensing, catalogue design, copy writing; and mail order. Organized, accurate, and detail oriented. Ability to perform multiple tasks under deadlines. Work independently as well as within a team environment. Professional Experience Just Desserts-Cakes, Crepes and Morel April 2000-present Free Union, Virginia 22940 Owner and Cheil Small custom baking company specializing in heirloom cake recipes, both savory and sweet crepes, soups, New Mexico Cuisine, seasonal variety, chutneys, party planning, and catering. French Country Living, Inc. Catalogue Headquarters Sterling, Virginia October 1999-February 2000 Associate Merchant: Included all aspects of product selection, vendor relations, coordinating sample orders, resolving issues and administration within a catalogue environment. Relocated to Charlottesville in April of 2000. Folger Shakespeare Library July 1993 to October 1999 201 East Capitol Street, SE Washington, D.C. 20003-1094 Museum Store Manager: Successfully administered business plans, budgets, and maintained budgetary control. Supervised sales staff: screen, interview, select, directed training, scheduled, and conducted mid-year and annual performance evaluations. Formulated training manuals. Accountable for store inventory, and assets, including cash and equipment. Produced daily accounting reports. Managed monthly Excel spreadsheets. Forecasted merchandising and marketing trends. Developed budget and marketing strategies. Reported programs' financial .accomplishments to administration. Managed retail sales, mail order, and web site operations. Produced annual store catalogue and marketing mail. Created and maintained a web site (www.shakespeare-etc.org) promoting the shop's 100 most popular products. Supervised fulfillment. Product Development: Researched the Folger collection; conferred with curators and conservationists. Designed products, selected vendors, negotiated licensing agreements, and supervised all stages of development. Produced provenance information, and augmented marketing strategies in both the United States and abroad. Coordinated merchandise with the institution's collection, current exhibitions, programs, and special events. Created licensed and custom textiles, jewelry, paper, and gifts for home and garden. Licensed and custom products produced significant revenue. Buyer: Selected and purchased books, textiles, paper, food, recordings, ceramics, glass, jewelry, gifts and seasonal merchandise for retail, web site, and mail order operations. Maintained product levels using POS system. Average SKU is six hundred. Maintained monthly and annual MS Excel spreadsheets that reflected shop's performance. Determined price strategies. Attended buyer markets. Designed store merchandise displa~vs. Cultivated and maintained two hundred healthy vendor relationships. ~ Diane LaSauce Page Two Gunston Hall Plantation April 1992 to May 1993 Mason Neck Lorton, Virginia Museum Shop Manager: Conducted all aspects of daily sales transactions. Calculated and processed payroll. Managed accounts payable, accounts receivable, credit card processing, deposits, and monthly state sales tax forms. Maintained records and filing system. Drafted monthly chairperson report. Directed shops staff; conducted sales training, and set goals for the orientation of the museum shop. Supervised part-time and volunteer staff. Redesigned the shop's interior. Reorganized shop operation. Buyer: Purchased appropriate merchandise spec/ftc to the eighteenth century. Attended vendor markets, seminars, and meetings. Processed special orders, shipping, receiving, and damage control. Maintained valued vendor relationships and cultivated new sources. Established ali pricing and markdowns. Gross sales increased by 20% percent and the shop's mission and museum related merchandise strengthened. Product Development: Designed licensed and custom jewelry, textiles, paper products, historical foods, provenance, and souvenir items. Diane LaSauce Consultations 1984-1991 Arlington, Virginia 22206 Independent consultant: Owned and operated a full service, detail oriented, residential interior design firm. Directed and managed all aspects of interior design projects. Coordinated with architects, construction and electrical contractors, manufacturers, installers, workrooms, and sound technicians to 'insure completion, client satisfaction, and contractual agreements. Handled all phases of projects' financial requirements, i.e., budget, purchasing, accounting and administration. Supervised up to thirty contractors at one time. Professional Achievements · Subject of feature article, '~The Complete Designer," Fall issue, 1988, my home magazine. · Listed in the 1988-t990 editions of Baron's Who's Who in InteriorDe$ign. · Award of Excellence-Graphics Communication Competition for Folger Museum Shop Catalogue 1998, 1999. Education · Bachelor of Fine Arts--Interior Design, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia Affiliations · Freelance columnist for In The Kitchen and Morel Monthly publications · Virginia Master Gardener Community Service The Arlington Condominium Recycling Committee 1989-1995 Education Coordinator: Researched recycling, water conservation, and hazardous waste issues. Consulted with solid waste executives, provided interface bet~veen committee members, condominium manageCent, staff, local county administrators, and legislators. Lobbied for local retail business recycling. Donated civic presentations, held press interviews, scribed environmental articles for newsletters and newspapers, and wrote recycling instructions for community use. The Arlington Condominium was the first multi-family residence in Arlington County to implement curbside recycling. This program was adopted by thousands of area residents. In 1995, the Arlington Condominium was awarded the Metropolitan Council of Governments Business Recycling Award. Since 1991, the Committee evolved into landscape issues and is renamed the Buildings and Grounds Committee. Buildings and Grounds Committee Chairman 1991-1995 Environmental and Energy Conservation Commission 1991-1993 Appointed by the Arlington County Board to rewew various environmental and energy conservation issues and make recommendations on legislation. The Arlington Animal Welfare League Volunteered for special events and fund raising projects. 1989-2000 County of Albemarle ~0-23-0~ A70:02 IN Office of Board of Cotmty Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Cha,!ottesville, VA 229024596 (804) 296-5843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMrlWF. F. (Please type or print.) -Applicant's Name R~ ~./rff-(~ffX_/r) ~''' E/~. ,5-7~ Home Phone Futl Home Address 5~7q0 /~fSZ~/~/--/-- ~ Magisterial District in which your home residence, is located Business Address 0~J/~-S~[4J(yT~A/0 ~ Years Resident in Albeznmde County Previous Residence F//~ )/~"4~ Spouse's Name~_/~)~/r/7' Number of Children /' Public Civic and Cho~table Office and/or O~er ¢~_'~/ti0? or In~e~7 R=smO) rot Wi~hi~ to S.e on this ~o=d/Commi~sion/Committee The i~on udll be rekased to the public upon request. /o,/?- Signa~ur~ Date Return to: Clerk. Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County 401 MeIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 PLEASE RESTRICT ANY A TTACHMENTS TO ONE PAGE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Members of the Board of Supervisors Laurie Bentley, C.M.C(';~ ,/ Senior Deputy Clerk ~ DATE: November 2, 2001 RE: Applications for Boards and Commissions I have attached all new applications received for current vacancies on various boards and commissions. Thank you. Attachments cc: Bob Tucker Larry Davis David P. Bowerman Rio Lindsay G. Dorrier, ..Ir. Scottsville Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Walter E Perkins White Hail Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller November 8, 2001 Mr. Charles T. Lebo 370 Mallard Ln. Earlysville, VA 22636 Dear Mr. Lebo: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on November 7, 2001, the Board appointed you to complete Mr. Frank Kessler's term on the Architectural Review Board, effective November 7, 2001, and to run through November 14, 2002. Duties of this Board are set out in Section 30.6. Entrance Corridor Overlay District, of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Members are paid $45.00 per meeting (Albemarle Code Section 15.1 ). I have enclosed an updated roster for your convenience. If you have any questions about the duties of this Board, please call Mr. Wayne Cilimberg at 296-5823. Sincerely, Chairman CSM/lab Enclosure CC: Wayne Cilimberg Commonwealth's Attorney Printed on recycled paper Board/Commission / Committee Applicanfs Name Charles T. Lebo Home Phone FullHomeAddress 370 Mallard Lane; Earlysville, Va. 22936 County of Albemarle Office of Board o£ County Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902~4596 (804) 2965843 APPLICATION TO SERVE ON BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE (Please type or print.) Architectural Review Board 975-391 5 Rio Magisterial District in which your home residence is located EmpByer Lebo Commercial Properties e Inc. Phone 973-1977 BuhnessAddress 684 Berkmar Circle; Charlottesville, Va. 22901 O~upation/Tide Commercial Real Estate Broker/Owner Da~ofEmployment . .1987 14 Robin G. Lebo Years Resident in Albemarle County Spouse's Name Previous Residence 2133 Timber Pointe Rd. Chville, VA .Number of Cl~dmn 2 F,&mafinn(De~eesandGraduafionDates) Major: Political Science - 2 years at Edinboro State Univ. and 2 years at Univ. of Pittsburgh 1969-1973 Past board member Skyline Council, of Mem. herships in Fraternal Business. Cb. rob and/or Social Groups Va. Girl Scouts;. Member National Wildlife Fed.; (Continued ....... on. ..... addenduml~... _ Public. Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other Activities or Interests Cha i rman No rth Char 1 o t t e sv i 1 1 e Business Council; Past Pres. Blue Ridge Home Builders Assoc.; (Cont.) Reason(s) for Wi~hingto Serve on this Board/Cnrnmi~sion/Commkree See attached addendum The infoglmfion provided 9a-~.s application will be released to the public upon request. Signature Date Remm to: Clerk, Board of County Superdsots Albemarle County 401 Mclntire Road O.~ott~alte, VA 229024596 FAX: (804) 296-5800 Charles T. Lebo 370 Mallard Lane Earlysville, Va. 22936 July 16, 2001 Addendum to application Architectural Review Board Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Memberships in Fraternal, Business, Church and/or Social Groups: Past Religion Education Director Church of the Incarnation, member World Wildlife Fund, member of National Wildlife Federation, member Charlottesville area Chamber of Commerce, member US Chamber of Commerce, member of International Council of Shopping Centers. Public, Civic and Charitable Office and/or Other activities or Interests: Past Virginia National Representative to National Association of Home Builders, past chairman Parade of Homes Blue Ridge Home Builders Assoc., past Board member Charlottesville- Albemarle Chamber of Commerce, Chairman Trees for Rt 29, Co-founded Charlottesville-Albemarle Clean Community Commission (C-AC3), Co-directed Gulf War appreciation parade. Also assisted fund drives for the following organizations: Toylift, Focus, SPCA, Albemarle County Police, Cfid Scouts, Boy Scouts, United Way, American Heart Assoc. and the Senior Center. Reasons for Wishing to Serve on this Board: I have been an active member of this community since moving here over 25 years ago. Having also lived on Hilton Head Island for about 3 years I have come to appreciate the advantages and rewards of living in locales where development with aesthetics can be a balanced aspect ora community. I have managed the Rio Hill Shopping Center since it was built 13 years ago and take pride in its appearance. I also manage the Berkmar Crossing business park for its owners and consider it to be one of the best maintained complexes in the County. 'My wife and I own several properties in Albemarle County, hence, I have a vested interest in preserving the charming ambience offered here. I am a firm believer in giving back to the commumty and am confident that I can make a solid contribution to the ARB given my experience and background. Thank you for your consideration. COUNTY OF ALBEMARI,E MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Albemarle County Board of Supervisor- /,//~,/'"'"'~ Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executi November 7, 2001 Presentation on Various Landfill Options Attached you will finda memorandum from the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority which summarizes five different options, including cost scenarios for a five (5) year period, that may be considered for the Ivy Landfill. The least expensive option you will note is to close the Ivy Landfill operations as a receiving center for any refuse or solid waste. I do not believe that this option is a viable one for us to consider. The next least expensive option is to maintain our current operations at the Ivy Landfill as has been provided since September of this year. This option does not envision any new cell development but all CDD and MSW is transferred or transported to other landfills within the state. Our current operation at the Ivy Landfill also includes: grinding wood pallets and other vegetative waste, accepting tires and white goods, recycling convenience center including the Encore Shop, continuing to receive clean fill material, continuing water and gas remediation efforts, and providing the MSW transfer station. As you know, the Ivy Landfill would continue to be open six days per week. The other options basically envisioned the building of cell 5 with either a single liner or a double liner system or one which would provide for a CDD transfer station to be maintained at the Ivy Landfill. All of these options also include the same services we currently provide to our citizens at the Ivy Landfill. Cole Hendrix will be attending your November 7th Board meeting and providing a brief presentation concerning these various options. I would appreciate your review and consideration of these options and your direction on which option or scenario you would suggest that Mr. Graham and I support as your representatives on the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Board. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Graham or me. RWT,Jr/dbm 00.160 Attachment pc: Mr. Mark B. Graham MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: RSWA BOARD OF DIRECTORS COLE HENDRIX CONSULTANT OCTOBER 17, 2001 LANDFILL OPTIONS PRESENTATION At Monday's board meeting I will present to you and the public the estimated costs of the various options available to the Board concerning the future of the Ivy Landfill. The presentation will begin with a recalling of the history of the landfill lawsuit settlement agreement and the expectations thereof. This explanation will show that the Authority expected to continue receiving only a slightly smaller amount of profit from the CDD operations from which many of the Authority's programs were financed. The Authority had been achieving a $26 per ton "profif' fi:om CDD operations and expected that figure to be reduced slightly because the Authority would be paying debt service on the new Cell 5. In the spring of this year it become evident that the anticipated scenario could not be achieved because a double liner in the new cell was being required instead of the single liner with an increased cost of aboUt $800,000. In addition the permitting process slowed down and it became evident that the new cell could not be opened concurrently with the closing of the existing Cell 2, unless a 90-day extension could be obtained. Three separate efforts to obtain the extension failed. The result was that a significant amount of regular CDD business would be lost, estimated as much as 35 - 40 %. Therefore, the increased cost of construction and the toss of business combined to make the financial consequences of the new cell less than desirable. In addition to the cost situation just described, the need for additional remediation efforts was being discussed at the regul.atory level, There was a strong push by a small local group to convince regulators that extensive additional remediation projects should be required; all of whom collectively have a sizeable price tag ($3.5 million plus). There was also the threat of another lawsuit, which would have generated a sigrdficant cost to defend. New financial assurance regulations would also require the Authority to place large sums of money in escrow. S:\Letters & Memos\Cole\Memo to Board regarding Landfill Options Presentation.doc The staff also examined the possibility of constructing a CDD transfer station at the landfill. This option would have allowed haulers to continue to use the Ivy facility. A study revealed that while capital costs were much less than a new cell, the project would suffer from the same'loss of business and operating costs were much higher. The staff has developed a series of options for the Board to consider regarding the future of the Ivy Landfill (Materials Utilization Center). Part of that study has been the development of anticipated costs for each of the possible options. These costs include both operational and capital costs. Four possibilities are presented for your consideration: 1) maintain the status quo, 2) construct Cell 5, 3) construct a CDD transfer station and 4)closing the entire.facility. We estimate that all of these options will require a financial contribUtion by the City and County. No attempt has been made to determine how much each political subdivision should pay of the total subsidy requited. Attached hereto are the financial numbers developed for each of the options presented. The next page enumerates the basis for each option. Please note that we believe the financial figures contained in the attachments are as accurate as possible, but they do consist of cost estimates, assumptions of future regulatory actions, predictions of business conditions and future policy decisions by the RSWA Board, City Council of Charlottesville and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Financial Analyses Schedule 1 Schedule 2 This schedule is the current estimate based on the current operations of using. the BFI contract for the majority of MSW and CDD disposal. All other operations are intact. This option is to build Cell 5 with a double liner. Only the financial items affecting .this option are presented with the various levels of CDD returning to Ivy. The total net effect must be added to the bottom line on Schedule 1 to get the full financial picture. All other operations are intact. Schedule 3 This option is to build Cell 5 with a single liner. Only the financial items affecting this option are presented with the various levels of CDD returning to Ivy. The total net effect must be added to the bottom line on Schedule 1 to get the full financial picture. All other operations are intact. Schedule 4 This option shows the financial estimates of building a transfer station at the various level of CDD returning to Ivy. All other operations are intact. Schedule 5 Schedule 6 This is the financial estimate of shutting down all operations at Ivy other than required closure and post-closure activities. This summarizes all of the above options. We have used a 35% of CDD loss in our earlier estimations; therefore, this summary is using this percentage for comparison purposes. All other operations are intact. Schedule I Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Financial Analysis IAssumptions: The authority is contracts with BFI to take CDD under the existing MSW contract. All other services are continued. Ail I revenues are based on adopted tipping fees. Tipping fees for MSW are increased $5 per ton each year which could affect I marketability. REVENUES Tipping Fees: MSW-IVY MSW-BFI CDD as MSW-BFI Clean Fill Vegetative Waste Ash Pallet Tires & White Goods Contract Load-MSW Other Tipping Fees Other Revenues: Mulch & Chips Metals Other Sales Paper Sort-Recycle Hauling Paper Sort Interest Keene-County Other Total Revenues FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 $ 414,000 $ 459,000 $ 504,000 $ 549,000 $ 594,000 1,512,000 1,692,000 1,872,000 2,052;000 2,232,000 1,051,050 1,176,175 1.301,300 1,426,425 1,551,550 50,000 56,500 56.500 57,000 57,000 377,440 383,102 388,848 394,681 400,601 11,585 11,759 11,935 12,114 12,296 9,439 9,581 9,724 9,870 10,018 29,950 30,399 30,855 31,318 31.788 36,625 37,174 37,732 38,298 38,872 28,665 29.095 29,531 29,974 30,424 $ 16,000 $ 16,240 $ 16,484 $ 16,731 $ 16,982 13,500 13,703 13,908 14,117 14,328 228,000 231,420 234,891 238,415 241.991 45,000 45,675 46,360 47,056 47,761 190,000 192,850 195,743 198,679 201,659 10.000 10,150 10.302 10,457 10,614 27,000 27,405 27,816 28,233 28,657 $ 4,050,254 $ 4,422,227 $ 4,787,930 $ 5,154,367 $ 5,520,541 Five Year Total 2,520,000 9,360,000 6.506,500 277,000 1,944,672 59,689 48,632 154.310 188,702 147,690 82,436 69.556 1,174,717 231,852 978,931 51,523 139,111 $ 23,935,320 EXPENSES Yearly Operations: Ivy Transfer Contract $ 299,160 $ 309.631 $ 320,468 $ 331,684 $ 343,293 BFI MSW Transfer Contract 1,195,560 1,237,405 1,280,714 1,325,539 1,371,933 BFI CDD Transfer Contract 831,080 860.168 890,274 921,434 953.684 Ivy Operations * 1,170,994 1,211,979 1,254,398 1,298,302 1,343,743 Household Hazardous Waste 40,000 41.400 42,849 44,349 45.901 Recycling Operations 403,653 417,781 432,403 447.537 463,201 Administration 527.549 546,013 565,124 584,903 605,375 Education 12,000 12,420 12,855 13,305 13,770 Debt Service 300,000 310,000 310,000 310,000 310,000 Additional Monitoring 40,000 41,400 42,849 44,349 45,901 Additional Financial Assurance 40,000 40,000 40,000 60,000 60.000 Contingencies 100,000 100,000 100.000 100,000 100,000 Total YearlyExpenses $ 4,959,996 $ 5,128,196 $ 5,291,933 $ 5,481,401 $ 5,656,800 NETINCOMEI LOSS $ (909,742) $ (705,969) $ (504,003) $ (327,033) $ (136,258) $ 1,604,235 6,411,150 4,456,639 6,279,415 214,499 2,164,575 2,828,964 64,350 1,640,000 214,499 240,000 500,000 $ 26 518,326 $ (2,583,006)] CAPITAL EXPENSES Paint Pit Study $ 75,000 Paint Pit Remediati0n ACM Close Cell 2 1.841,0O0 Ground Water Remediation Cell 5 Permitting Payables 75,000 Total Capital Expense $ 1,991,000 1,000,000 2,400,000 $ $ 1,000,000 $ 2,400,000 $ $ 75,000 1,000,000 2.400,000 1,841 .O00 75,O0O $ 5,391,000 Other Source of Funding Use of Financial Assurance Funds Use of Reserves $ 1,441.000 $ $ $ $ 300,000 300,000 100,000 DEFICIT $ (1,159,742) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) ,441,000 700.000 (5,833,00~ Ivy operations includes: Grinding pallets and vegetative waste, taking in tires and white goods, convenient center, clean fill, water and gas remediation efforts, running the transfer station. IVy is open 6 days per week. 10/9/2001 RSWA Finances October 2001 versions xls Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Analysis of CDD Cell 5 Financial Information L DOUBLE LINER OPTION FY2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY2005 FY 2006 IF t00% OF ALL CDD RETURNS TO IVY Schedule 2 Five Year Total Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues Savings on BFI Contract Costs Cell Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Build up Cash for Closure Costs Cell 5 New Financial AssuranCe Costs Net estimated operational results Other possible costs: Law suit ($200.000 - $500,000) (250,000) Additional Settlement Costs (160~000) Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 $ (410,000) All other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1,159,742) Total financial estimated results $ (1,569,742) $ 363.825 $ 431,200 $ 498.575 860.168 890.274 921.434 $ 565,950 953,684 $ 1,859,550 3.625,559 (250,000) (257,500) (265,225) (273,182) (1,045,907) (384.000) (384.000) (384.000) (384.000) (1.536.000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (600,000) (125,000) (125,000) (125,000) (125,000) (500,000) $ 314,993 $ 404,974 $ 495,784 $ (250,000) $ 587.452 $ 1.803,202 (500,000) (160,000) $ 64,993 $ 404, 974 $ 495,784 $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (340,976) $ (999,029) $ (2,231,250) IF 75% OF ALL CDD RETURNS TO IVY $ 587,452 $ 1,143,202 $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006) $ 451,194 $ (4,689,803) Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues Savings on BFI Contract Costs Cell Operations .Costs New Debt Service Costs Buildup Cash t'or Closure Costs Cell 5 New Financial Assurance Costs Net estimated operational results Other possible costs: Law suit ($200.000 - $500.000) Additional Settlement Costs (250.000) (160,000) Net Financiai lmpact of Cell 5 $ (410,000) All other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1,159,742) Total financial estimated results $ (1,569,742) $ (21,175) $ (1,925) $ 17,325 860,168 890,274 921,434 (250.000) (257.500) (265,225} (384,000) (384.000) (384,000) (150.000) (150.000) (150,000) (125,000) ~ (125,000) $ (70.007) $ (28,151) $ 14,534 $ (250,000) $ (=320,007) $ (28,151) S 14,534 $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (725,976) $ (1,432,154) $ (2,712,500) $ 36,575 $ 30.800 953,684 3,625,559 (273,182) (1,045,907) (384,000) (1,536,000) (150,000) (600,0OO) (125,000) (500,000) $ 58.077 $ (25,548) (5oo,o(x)) · (16o,ooo) IF 50% OF ALL CDD RETURNS TO IVY $ 58,o77 $ (665,548), $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006). $ (76,181) $ (6,518,553) Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues Savings on BFI Contract Costs Ceil Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Build up Cash for Closure Costs Cell 5 New ·Financial Assurance Costs Net estimated operational results $ Other possible costs: Law suit ($200,000 - $500.000) Additional Settlement Costs (250.000) (160,000) Net Financial lmpact of Cell 5 $ (410;000) All other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1;159,742) Total financial estimated results $ (1,569,742) $ (406.175) $ (435,050) $ (463,925) 860.168 890.274 921.434 (250,000) (257,500) (265,225) (384,000) (384,000) (384,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (125,000) (125,000) (125,000) $ (455,007) $ (461,276) $ (466,716) $ (250,000) $ (705,007) $ (461,276) $ (466,716) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (1,110,976) $ (1,865,279) $ (3,193,750) $ (492.800) $ (1.797,950) 953.684 3,625.559 (273,182) (1.045.907) (384.000) (1.536.000) (150,000) (600,OOO) (125,000) (500,000). $ (471,298) $ (1,854,298) (500,000) (160.0C01 (471,298) S (2,514,298) (136,258) $ (5,833,006) (607,556), $ (8,347,303) 10/9,'2001 RSWA Finances October 2(301 ve~ns.xls Schedule 3 Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Analysis of CDD Cell 5 Financial Information Iconstruction costs were adjusted down to the original costs of putting in a single liner. The constructions costs savings were $860.000 and the annual related debl secvice costs savings were $89.000 per year. SINGLE LINER Five Year FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Total Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues Savings on BFI Contract Costs Cell Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Build up Cash for Closure Costs Cell 5 New Financial Assurance Costs Net estimated operational results $ $ 363,825 $ 431,200 $ 498,575 $ 565,950 $ 1,859,550 860,168 890,274 921.434 953,684 3,625,559 (250,000) (257,500) (265,225) (273,182) (1,045,907) (295.000) (295,000) (295.000) (295,000) (1.770.000) (150,000) (150.000) (150,000) (150.000) (600,000) (125,Q00) (125,000) (125,000) (125,000) (500,000) 403,993 $ 493,974 $ 584,784 $ 676,452 $ 1,864,202 Other possible costs: Law suit ($200.000 - $500.000) Additional Settlement Costs Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 $ (250,000) $ (250,000) (500.000) (160,000) (160,000) (4f0,000) $ 153,993 $ 493,974 $ 584,784 $ 676,452 $ 1,499,202 All other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1,159,742) Total financial estimated results $ (1,569,742) (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006) (25t,976) $ (910,029) $ (2,142,250) $ 540,194 $ (4,333,803) Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues Savings on BFI Contract Costs $ $ (21,175) $ (1.925) $ 17.325 $ 36,575 $ 30,800 860.168 890,274 921,434 953,684 3,625,559 Cell Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs' Build up Cash for Closure Costs Cell 5 New Financial Assurance Costs Net estimated operational results $ (250,000) (257,500) (265,225) (273.182) (%045,907) (295,000) (295;000) (295,000) (295,000) (1.962,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (600,000) (125,000) (125.000) (125,000) (125,000) (500.000) $ 18.993 $ 60.849 $ 103.534 $ 147,077 $ (156.548) Other possible costs: Law suit ($200.000 - $500.000) Additional Settlement Costs Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 (250,000) $ (250,000) (500,000) (160,000) (t60 000) $ (410,000) $ (231,007) S 60,849 $ t03,534 $ 147,077 $ (329,548), All other operations(Schedule1) $ (1, t59,742) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006) Total financialestimatedresults $ (1,569,742) $ (636,976) $ (1,343,154) $ (2,623,500) $ 10,819 $ (6,162,553) Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues Savings on BFI Contract Costs $ $ (406,175) $ (435,050) $ (463,925) $ (492,800) $ (1,797.950) 860,168 890,274 921,434 953,684 3,625,559 Cell Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Build up Cash [or Closure Costs Cell 5 New Financial Assurance Costs Net estimated operational results $ (250,000) (257.500) (265,225) (273.182) (1.045.907) (295.000) (295,000) (295,000) (295,000) (2.065.000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (150,000) (600,000) (125,000) (125,000) (125,000) (125,000~ (500~ $ (366,007) $ (372,276) $ (377,716) $ (382,298) $ (2108~.298} Other possible costs: Law suit ($200,000 - $500,000) Additional Settlement Costs Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 $ (250,000) (160,000) (410,000) All other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1,159,742) Total financial estimated results $ (1,569,742) (5C0.000; $ (250.000) (160.000,~ $ (616,007) $ (372,276) S (377,716) $ (382,298) $ (2,158,298) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006)_ $ (1,021,976) $ (1,776,279) $ (3,104,750) $ (5f8,556) $ (7,991,303)~ 10'9./20Ol RSWA Finances Octol3e¢ 2001 versions Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Analysis of CDD Cell 5 Financial Information TRANSFER STATION OPTION 1 Schedule 4 Five Year FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Total Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues $ Savings on BFI Contract Costs Transfer Station Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Costs for Disposal and Transportation Net estimated operational results Other possible costs: New equipment 363,825 $ 431,200 $ 498,575 $ 565,950 $ 1,859.550 860,168 890,274 921,434 953,684 3,625,559 (250,000) (257,500) (265,225) (273,182) (1,045,907) (105,000) (105,000) (105,000) (1 O5,0OO ) (42O,OOO) (885,500) (912.065) (939,427) (967.610) (3.704.602) (16,507) $ 46,909 $ 110,357 $ 173,842 $ 314,601 (150,000) (150,000) Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 $ (150,000) $ (16,507) $ 46,909 $ 110,357 $ 173,842 $ 164,601 All other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1,15g, 742) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006) Total financial estimated results $ (1,309,742) $ (422,476) $ (1,357,094) $ (2,616,677) $ 37,584 $ (5,668,405) Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues $ Savings on BFI Contract Costs Transfer Station Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Costs for Disposal and Transportation Net estimated operational results $ Other possible costs: New equipment $ (21,175) $ (1,925) $ 17,325 $ 36,575 $ 30,800 860,168 890,274 921,434 .953,684 3,625,559 (250,000) (257,500) (265,225) (273,182) ( 1,045,907) (105,000) (105,000) (105,000) (105,000) (420,000) (664,125) (684,049) (704,570) (725,707) (2,778,451'~ $ (180,132) $ ' (158,200) $ (136,037) $ (113,630) $ (587,999) (150,000) (150,000) Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 $ (150,000) $ (180,132) $ (158,200) $ (136,037) $ (113,630) $ (737,999) All other operations (Schedule ~) $ (1,159,742) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) $ (5,833,006) Total financial estimated results $ (1,309,742) $ (586,101) $ (1,562,202) $ (2,863,070) $ (249,889) $ ,~.(6,571,004) Operational: Adjusted CDD related Tipping Revenues $ Savings on BFI Contract Costs Transfer Station Operations Costs New Debt Service Costs Costs for Disposal and Transportation Net estimated operational results $ Other possible costs: New equipment $ (406,175) $ (435,050) $ 860.168 890.274 (250,000) (257,500) (105,000) (105,000) (442.750) (456,033) $ (343,757) $ (363,309) $ (463,925) $ (492.800) $ (1.797,950) 921.434. 953.684 3.625.559 (265,225) (273,182) (1,045.90T} (105,000} (105,000) (420,000} (469,713} (483,805) (1,852,301} (382,430) $ (401,103) $ (1,490,598) (150.000) (150,00G) Net Financial Impact of Cell 5 $ (150,000) $ (343,757) $ (363,309) $ (382,430) $ (401,103) $ (1,64~ Ali other operations (Schedule 1) $ (1,159,742) $ (405,969) $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) S (136,258) $ (5,833,006). Total financial estimated results $ (1,309,742) $ (749,726) $ (1,767,311) $ (3,109,463) $ (537,361) .? (7,473,6044 Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Close Ivy Financial Analysis IAssumptions: All services at Ivy are stopped July 1, except monitoring and post-closure care. Tipping fees at BFI are increased $5 per year which may affect marketability and volume. REVENUES FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 $ $ $ - $ $ 2,021,000 2,236,000 2,451,000 2,666,000 1,176,175 1,301,300 1,426,425 1,551,550 Schedule 5 Tipping Fees: MSW-Pf¢ 414,000 MSW-BFI 1,512,000 CDD as MSW-BFI 1,051,050 Clean Fill 50,000 Vegetative Waste 377,440 Ash 11,585 Pallet 9,439 Tires & White Goods 29,950 Contract Load:MSW 36,625 Other Tipping Fees 28,665 Other Revenues: Mulch & Chips $ 16,000 $ $ Metals - Other Sales 13,500 - Paper Sort-Recycle 228,000 231,420 234,891 Hauling Paper Sort 45,000 45,675 46,360 Interest 190,000 50,000 50,750 Keene-County 10,000 10,150 10,302 Other 27,000 27,405 27,816 $ $ Five Year Total $ 414,000 10,886,000 6,506.500 50,000 377,440 11.585 9.439 29,950 36,625 28,665 $ 16,000 13.500 238,415 241,991 1,174.717 47,056 47,761 231,852 51,511 52,284 394,545 10,457 10,614 51,523 28,233 28~57 139,111 Total Revenues $ 4,050,254 $ 3,561,825 $ 3,907,420 $ 4,253,097 $ 4,598,857 EXPENSES $ 299,160 $ $ $ $ 1,195,560 1,478,011 1,529,741 1,583,282 1,638,697 831,080 860,168 890,274 921,434 953,684 1,170,994 379,500 392,783 406,530 420,758 40,000 41,400 42,849 44,349 45,901 403,653 417,781 -432,403 447,537 463,201 527,549 436.100 394,822 408,641 422,943 12,000 12,420 12,855 13,305 13,770 300,000 310,000 310,000 310,000 310,000 40,000 41,400 42,849 44,349 45,901 40,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 $ 20,371,452 $ 299,160 7,425,292 4,456,639 2,770,565 214,499 2.164,575 2,190,055 64,350 1,540,000 214,499 120.000 500,000 Yearly Operations: Ivy Transfer Contract BF1 MSW Transfer Contract BFI CDD Transfer Contract Ivy Operations Household Hazardous Waste Recycling Operations Administration Education Debt Service Additional Monitoring Additional Financial Assurance Contingencies Total Yearly Expenses $ 4,959,996 NET INCOME I LOSS $ (909,742) $ 4,096,780 $ 4,168,576 $ 4,299,426 $ 4,434,856 $ 21,959,634 $ {534,955) $ (261,156) $ (46,329) $ 164,001 $ (1,588,182)i CAPITAL EXPENSES Paint Pit Study $ 75,000 Paint Pit Remediation ACM Close Cell 2' 1 ~841,000 Ground Water Remediation Cell 5 Permitting Payables 75,000 1,000,000 2,400,000 75,000 1.000,000 2.400,000 1.841,0CO 75,000 Total Capital Expense $ 1,991,000 $ $ 1,000,000 $ 2,400,000 $ $ 5,391,000,. Other Source of Funding Use of Financial Assurance Funds Use of Reserves $ 1,441,000 $ $ $ $ 300,000 300.000 100,000 DEFICIT $ (1,159,742) $ (234,955) $ (1,161,156) $ (2~446,329) $ 164,001 S 1,441,000 700,0C0 $ (4,838,182)~ 10118/2001 RSWA Finances October 2001 versions.xIs Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Net Financial Results Various options for Ivy Schedule Summary Options No New Cell, All CDD to BFI (Cu,-rent) FY 2002 FY 2003 FY2004 FY 2005 FY 200~ $ (1,404,003) $ (2,727,033) $ (136,258) Five Year .Total $ (5,833,006~ Cell 5 is built, Double Liner System $ (1,569,742) $ (879,976) $ (1,605,404) .$ (2,905,000) $ (289,931) ..$ (7,250,053)] Cell 6 is built, Single Liner System $ (1,569,742) $~(790,976) $ (1,516,404) _.$ (2,816,000)" ~$ (200,931) $ (6,894,053)~ CDD transfer station is Built at IVY $ (1,309,742) ~ $ (1,644,246) $ (2,961,627) $ (364,878 $ (6,932,044)~ Ivy Operation are shut down .$ (1,159,742) $ (234,955T $ (1,161,156)_ $ (2,446,329 $ 164,00 $ (4,838,182)1 Schedule 6 Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Financial analysis Summary of Scenarios SCENARIOS 5 year Operating Costs 5 year Operating and Capital Costs Current Status Quo (2,583,000) (5,833,OOO) Build Cell # 5 100% Business Returns 75% Business Returns 50% Business Returns (780,000) (2,609,000) (4,437,000) (469,OOO) (6,519,000) (8,347,000) Build Transfer Station 100% Business Returns 75% Business Returns 50% Business Returns (2,268,000) (3,171,000) (4,074,000) (5,668,OOO) (6,571,000) (7,'474,000) Close Down Ivy (only Ivy operations) (1,588,OO0) (4,838,000) Capital Costs Status Quo Build Cell 5 Build Transfer Station 3,250,000 3,910,000 3,400,000 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Development Department Improvement Efforts SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Overview of improvement efforts. STAFF CONTACT(S): AGENDA DATE: ITEM NUMBER: November 7, 2001 ACTION: INFORMATION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: IN FORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, UcCulley, Graham REVIEWED BY: / Attached is a copy of the presentation recently given to the staff of the three Development Departments. The presentation outlines changes that will be implemented over the next two years to improve operations and address suggestions made for a number of years by committees of citizens and staff. These new initiatives represent direction from the three Development Department Heads and County Executive's Office based on this previous ~nput and are designed to achieve long-standing organizational goals. While a Clear direction has been established, staff teams will determine how best to implement the changes. Structured teams with clear timelines and targeted outcomes will work together with the rest of staff and Department Heads to ensure that the goals are achieved and the three Departments work more as a coordinated unit. This will be particularly important in addressing current challenges and ensuring we are prepared to deal with future changes the County faces. This item was placed on the agenda to provide the Board with a brief overview of the improvement efforts underway. RECOMMENDATION: No action is required. 01.207 ~'i-0'l-U'i 703:'i5 tN 4 6 7 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Restructuring of Fire/Rescue Division SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Restructure the current Division into a Department and hire a Director of Fire/Rescue STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Foley, Pumphrey AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: Albemarle County continues to face significant challenges created by the population growth and increasing urbanization of our community. Local government services, and the organizational structure necessary to manage these services, have required alteration and innovation over the past several years to allow us to respond successfully to these changing circumstances. This restructuring has occurred in departments across local government, from Planning and Community Development to Social Services. Nowhere is the need for respons ~veness and adaptability more critical than in the provision of public safety services to our citizens. The County is currently facing many significant challenges in providing effective Fire/Rescue services for our community. These challenges are not unusual for a County of our size with a growing population and urban density. However, effectively addressing these challenges will require us to rethink how we manage and coordinate services and will be critical to ensuring that the County has an effective system in place to meet the growing expectation of our citizens. In addition to the changes which have taken place in the past 5-8 years (see attachment), more significant changes are planned over the next 5-8 years (see attachment). Both past and planned changes have led to the need to reconsider how we manage and coordinate Fire/Rescue services DISCUSSION: Effectively dealing with these challenges will require a continued evolution in our current structure. Specifically, consideration needs to be given to restructuring the current Fire/Rescue Division into a Department of Fire/Rescue. This restructuring will require the establishment of a Director of Fire & Rescue position to provide the leadership and coordination necessary in the County's changing system. This leadership and coordination is particularly critical because of the important role our volunteers play in providing service. Also, the recently adopted City/County fire contract requires a much more significant role for the County in ensuring adequate service. Additional changes in our community and system over the next 5-10 years and beyond will also req u~re considerable attention and leadership. Most localities our size have established Department status to handle the administrative and planning functions which are so critical to managing the provision of emergency services and planning to meet future challenges. The current "Division" long ago exceeded the typical responsibilities of a division (see attachment). The current responSibilities include the areas of prevention, training, volunteer coordination, supervision of field staff and other general administrative duties. The financial oversight of the Division includes five separate division budgets totaling over $2,026,262. The current Division Chief position is paid 2 to 3 grades below any department head in the County and on par with other Division Chiefs who work under Department Heads for other County functions. The current Fire/Rescue Division was cleady not established and is not structured to address the functions which are now most important to the future of our system and its effectiveness. Leadership from a department head qualified to handle a higher and more critical level of responsibility is necessary to deal with what the division has become and to effectively deal with the changes taking place. Some of the responsibilities of this new leadership role which are different then those typically handled by a division include: Thinking strategically about the future of the Fire/Rescue response "system", including coordination with our volunteer system, City service contract and growing career force; 11-01-01 A1'~1:06 IN AG EN DA TITLE: Restructuring of Fire/Rescue Department November 7, 2001 page 2 · . Developing an effective working relationship and ongoing communication model with the volunteer agencies and the City; · Managing a changing County role in ensuring an effective emergency response system; · Facilitating effective decision making and building consensus regarding needed programs and policies among the players in the system; · Managing the City/County Fire contract to include the evaluation of regional opportunities and the monitoring of the City call load and County costs; · Overseeing the process for the planning and construction of two to three planned County Fire/Rescue stations; · Managing an increased number of career staff to supplement the volunteer system; · Developing and proposing improvements in the system in a well thought out and effectively communicated way to decision makers; · Ensuring the development of standard operational policies and procedures; and · General management and leadership of a true "Department" made up of several divisions. The significant changes occurring in our system cannot be effectively handled under the current structure. The responsibilities noted above and the effective management of the Department that is needed, will require leadership and resources beyond what the Division was established to provide. The current effort to keep up with the demands placed on the Division in the areas of prevention, training, volunteer coordination, supervision of field staff and other general administrative duties leave little or no time for the strategic thinking and planning critically needed at this time. Staff has reviewed this information with the Fire/Rescue Advisory Board and they unanimously approved a motion supporting staff's recommendation to the Board of Supervisors that the Division be restr, uctured into a Department and that a Director of Fire/Rescue be hire& Should this recommendation be approved, the Advisory Board will be involved in the selection process as well. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: 1. 2. 3. Restructuring the current Division of Fire/Rescue into a Department of Fire/Rescue; Approval of a new position titled Director of Fire/Rescue at paygrade 22, equivalent with other Department Heads; Authodzation to advertise for the position. 01.205 Reasons to Consider Changes Changes in the provision of Fire/Rescue services over the past 5-8years to address service demands: · Attachment Fire/Rescue expenses in total have increased from $1,419,890 in FY95 to a projected $3,338,491 in FY02 - an increase of 135%. This includes support of the volunteer system and the City fire contract. · Fire/Rescue expenses which the Division has direct supervision of have increase from $832,170 in FY95 to a projected $2,323,435 in FY02 - an increase of 179%. This includes the addition of career staff to supplement volunteer response to emergencies. · Addition of County owned fire apparatus · The addition of 12 career fireflghters to supplement the volunteer system. · Commitment to construct 2 to 3 County Fire/Rescue statio ns over next 5 years · Approval to hire 8 additional firefighters to staff the Monticello Station located south of the City · The addition of a Training Captain · Addition of Recruitment & Retention Coordinator · Addition of 2 fire prevention staff · A¢option of new 10 year fire agreement with City of Charlottesville which has created a greater role for the County in managing service _ Issues to be addressed over the next 5-10 years in the provision of Fire/Rescue services: Emergency Response Coveraqe · Addressing the lack of coverage to meet County response goals during at least part of the day, particularly in response to EMS calls. · -lhe reduction in service from the City to County EMS calls outside of the Automatic Response District (ARD) beginning in 6J ly of 2003. · Tl~e need to establish response areas to ensure response from the closest station to meet County response goals. This is needed to address the reduction in City response to the County and because of the establishment of new Fire/Rescue stations over the next 5- 10 years. These changes are necessary to control the cost of the City contract and ensure timely service and will require effective coordination with volunteer agencies · Tl~e changes planned by the County to further urbanize will add to the challenges identified above and are significant in how riley will require us to rethink the way we provide fire/rescue services. Increased urban density requires more immediate reSponse with highly trained staff to ensure adequate protection of life and property. Operational and Capital Costs · T~e call by volunteer organizations for additional operational funding to reduce reliance on fundraising. / · Tine rising cost of the City fire contract due to the increased volume. / · The construction of three new fire/rescue stations over the next three to eight years and the resulting additional operating cOsts. · Tine expected request from our volunteers for a greater role by the County in capital funding for vehicles, equipment and volunteer station ~;onstruction. Staffinq The supervision of an estimated 20 - 32 additional career staff over the next three to eight years to partially staff newly constructed stations, resulting in a total in-field career force of 32 - 40 paid firefighters. This assumes the addition of 4-'12 firefighters for the Monticello, Northern and Western Fire/Rescue stations, depending on volunteer support. This excludes any additional staffing which may be requested from current volunteer stations. The expected call for additional career staff by some volunteer organizations to provide support in running calls from their stations during certain times of the day. The increased coordination effort needed to maintain a positive working relationship between volunteer and career staff with the addition of new career staff to supplement the volunteer system in the future. Current structure of the Fire/Rescue "Division": Administrative Staff · Chief of Fire/Rescue Division · Assistant Chief of Fire/Rescue - Administration Administrative Support Positions · Fire Prevention Office · Assistant Chief of Prevention · 3 Inspectodlnvestigators Field Operations Staff · 3 Fire Captains · 9 Firefighters · 8 Additional Firefighters budgeted for Monticello Station Other Staff · Training Captain · Recruitment & Retention Coordinator DRAFT COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE POSITION DESCRTPTTON 3OB TZTLE: Director of Fire/Rescue TMMEDZATE SUPERVTSOR: ~ssistant County Executive LOCATZON: Fire/Rescue Department JOB CLASS CODE: PAYGRADE: 22 FLSA STATUS: Exempt General Definition of Work: Performs difficult administrative and complex protective service work in planning and directing the full activities of the Fire/Rescue Department; does related Work as required. Ability to develop, and manage a budget, interact with County Officials and other employees along with the general public. Directly supervises departmental employees. Directs and coordinates the Work of three major divisions, deals with personnel issues, citizens complaints, policy development and review, budget control. Conducts long and short range planning. Essential Functions: · Oversees the provision of quality fire and rescue related services through contracted services, staff involvement, and a coordinated volunteer delivery system; · Acts as the County's contact point for emergency services issues and makes recommendations to Assistant County Executive for needed improvements; · Maintains iaison with federal, state, and local officials to promote the provision of efficient emergency services. · Ultimately responsible for the preparation and administration of the Department budget and is accountable for on-going review of related contracts, expenditures, and reports; · Actively pursues activities which will promote the viability of volunteer emergency services; · Develops regular communications, both orally and in writing, with internal and external client groups; · Formulates and implements department policy, procedures, rules, regulations, and programs; · Prepares and reviews operational and administrative reports; · Promotes, assigns, and disciplines all personnel; · Makes public addresses; · Meets with the news media for interviews and press releases; · Attends meetings and serves on committees, boards, and agencies related to promoting fire prevention and improving public safety; · Evaluates work of subordinates; · Develops community programs. Knowledqe, Skills and Abilities Thorough knowledge of the principles and practices of providing emergency services; experience in governmental and community development activities providing emergency service; ability to coordinate activities of multiple independent agencies; ability to plan, direct, and develop new emergency services; ability to maintain harmonious working relationships with multiple agencies and unit personnel; thorough working knowledge of the technical and administrative aspects of fire prevention code enforcement, building safety, and materials storage practices; ability to present facts and recommendations effectively in oral and written form; ability to motivate and lead volunteers to operate efficient service delivery system and ability to handle difficult situations using well developed conflict management skills, Strong leadership, administrative, supervisory and interpersonal skills required. Team-oriented, innovative, open, and motivating style essential. Emphasis placed on excellent communication skills. Education and Experience: Requires Bachelors Degree and 15 years exp (5 yrs Sr. Management level) or Associate's degree and minimum 15 years progressively responsible exp in related field w/additional training and/or certification preferred: Graduate degree in related field desirable; graduate of National Fire Academy Executive Fire Officer Development program and/or Paramedic field experience. Major(s) in Business Administration, Management, Public Administration, Fire Science. Certified Firefighter, EMT or Paramedic. Must possess ability to function within a paid/volunteer Fire Rescue and Emergency Medical Services delivery system with ability to maintain coordination and cooperation between all involved agencies. Must have record of success in managing a combined volunteer/career system. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Possession of, or eligibility for, a valid appropriate driver's permit issued by the Commonwealth of Virginia. Physical Conditions and Nature of Work Contacts: Work is typically performed in both office and field settings; sitting for extended periods of time; Frequent night and weekend duties are necessary. Frequent exposure to physical stress, fire, adverse weather and hazardous substances is required. Regular contact with external civic and volunteer organizations; volunteer fire chiefs; and various government agencies for the purpose of dissemination of information is required. Evaluation: Performance will be evaluated on the ability and effectiveness in carrying out the above responsibilities. Date Approved: Date (s) Amended: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMAR _o2_o o: N AGENDA TITLE: Quarterly Financial Report SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REQUEST: Presentation of Year to Date Quarterly Financial Report for Three Months Ended September 30th. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Walters, Hildebeidel, Ms. White AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2001 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: A'I-rACH MENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: X INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: The attached quarterly financial report provides information on the county's general fund and the fund balance as of September 30, 2001. Also included is a bar-chart based report that compares this year's revenue and expenditure data with data from the previous year. DISCUSSION: ($ in millions) A. Attachment A: General Fund End-of-Year Financial Report: 1. Revenues: The Department of Finance is projecting that current year revenues will increase slightly over budget by approximately $1.2 million (1%). This is a result of increased tax revenues from real estate and personal property taxes, however, much of these increases are offset by projected reductions in sales tax, business licenses, other local taxes and revenues, as well as state and federal revenues. Real estate taxes are projected to exceed budgeted revenues by $0.874 million mainly due to an 11% estimated reassessment rate used for budgeting last January compared to the actual reassessment rate of 12.59%. Personal Property revenues are expected to be over budget in the current year by approximately $1.7 million due to better sales than anticipated and higher collections in the 1st half of the year. Second - half of 2001 sales, however, reflect more of a declining market and are not expected to increase as significantly when compared to the 2"~ half of the prior year Sales tax revenues are expected to be below budgeted estimates by $0.380 million reflecting the general economic slowdown at the national, state and local level. Business License collections are also expected to be down by $0.203 million. A projected $0.256 million decrease in Other Local Taxes is due to reduced business license fees, mainly in retail merchants. Other Local Revenues show a $1.023 million decrease, mainly due to the reclassification of approximately $0.920 million in E-911 revenues from Other Local Revenues to a Transfer in from the E-911 Fund, a requirement from GASB 34. The corresponding change is seen in the increase in the Use of Other Funds of $1.035 million. Other Local Revenues have also decreased due to lower interest on bank deposits State and Federal revenues are also anticipated to be less than budgeted by approximately $0.427 million in a number of categories, including compensation board reimbursement, social services, recordation fees, etc. AGENDA TITLE: Quarterly Financial Report November 7, 2001 Page 2 Expenditures: Expenditures are within appropriate levels (25%) for the first quarter of the fiscal year. · Departmental expenditures are at 23.9% of current budget Since the July 1 appropriation, additional appropriations in the amount of $46,000 have been approved by the Board in the public safety category. 3. Revised Revenues less Revised Expenditures (yellow boxes in right hand corner) · Revised revenues less expenditures show $1.169 million in unobligated revenues by the end of this current fiscal year (June 30, 2002) based on staff estimates as of September 30th Available Fund Balance as of 9/30/01 is $0.048 million as a result of the full allocation of FY01 end- of the-year revenues and expenditure savings approved by the Board at the October 3~d meeting, which brought the fund balance down to $0, plus a subsequent audit adjustment of $48,000 to the 6/30/01 fund balance (see the Fund Balance report for details) If projected revenues are realized, $1.169 million in "Projected Unobligated Funds" could be available at the end of the current fiscal year for contingencies, capital projects or other one-time needs which might be identified in upcoming budget worksessions. Attachment B: Annual Budget Comparison Report as of September 30, 2001 This bar-chart-based report tracks changes in revenue and expenditure changes over time: Revenues: · Revenues from real estate property taxes are anticipated to increase over last year. Personal property taxes are shown to decrease from last year by approximately $5 million, which reflects the transfer of local PPRT revenues to the state revenue category. · Revenues from sales taxes, utility taxes, and the meals tax remain fairly level, while business licenses, other local taxes and other local revenues show a decline over the prior year. · State revenues show an increase over the prior year due to PPTR, while federal revenues show only a slight increase. Expenditures: This report shows increases in FY01/02 over FYO0/01 in administration, public safety, public works, human development and community development, while the judicial and parks and recreational areas reflect fairly level funding. The non-departmental increase reflects the increased transfers to the capital and debt service functions. Only the public safety area shows a very slight increase in the FY02 revised funding due to several appropriated grants. Attachment C: Fund Balance Report This report indicates that the County: 1. Has a preliminary unaudited FY01 balance of $18.525 million; 2. Appropriated $2.069 million in approved projects for FY02 for a preliminary fund balance available of $16.456 million; Has committed $1.405 million in appropriations approved by the Board in October. These appropriations consist of $0.254 million in outstanding purchase orders, $0.997 in FY01 uncompleted projects and $0.153 million in FY01 expenditure savings for FY02 requested projects in the operating and capital budgets. AGENDA TITLE: Quarterly Financial Report November 7, 2001 Page 3 Has committed $2.003 million in FY01 revenue and expenditure savings to two reserve funds: $1.557 million to the capital reserve fund and $0.446 million to a landfill reserve leaving a net fund balance of $13.048 million. Has committed to maintain a minimum fund balance of $13 mil on for cash liquidity purposes. The $13 million remains within the County's financial policy of maintaining a fund balance "equal to or no less than 8% of the County's General Fund plus School Fund." Fiscal Impact Discussion 1. Current Year Revenue Estimates are based on an October 25th Department of Finance report, which looks at FY01actual revenue collections, as well as any trend indicators gleaned from the first quarter collections. Current year revenue projections will again be updated in January based on the December tax collection. Due to the downward economic forecasts at the national and state levels, the Projected Unobligated Funds should always be viewed as subject to change as the fiscal year unfolds, particularly since the revenue revisions rely heavily on only three months of data from the first quarter of the current fiscal year Use of Proiected Unobligated Funds: As indicated on the Fund Balance Report, the available fund balance is $0.048 million after subtracting all the Board approved commitments from FY01 revenue and expenditure savings. This amount combined with the $1.169 million in the higher than estimated revenue growth in the current year will be available to the Board for any unanticipated one-time needs. If and when additional appropriations are approved during the year using these anticipated revenues, the bottom line Projected Unobligated Funds (highlighted in yellow on the report) will be reduced. The Board also has a budgeted contingency fund of $0.597 million, which can be used for unanticipated one-time needs. Use of the Board's budgeted contingency fund will not impact the bottom line on this report, since those funds have already been appropriated in the FY02 budget. Future Commitments for the Unobligated Funds: If the revised revenue estimates continue to hold, the $1.217 million in Unobligated Funds may also be used by the Board during the FY03 budget worksessions to fund identified one-time projects or capital needs. The ACE program has been funded in the Capital Improvement Program using one-time only funds and, therefore, has no ongoing funding programmed for FY03. If these one-time funds were used to fund the ACE program in FY03, the bottom line Projected Unobligated Funds would be reduced to $0.567 million. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the First Quarter Financial Report for FY01/02. 01.212 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a lack of adequate rainfall has created a shortage in the public water supply which serves the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville; and WHEREAS, the capacities of the reservoirs serving the area have continued to decrease even after calls for voluntary conservation measures; and WHEREAS, Section 16-500 of the Albemarle County Code provides that should the Board of Supervisors declare there to be an emergency in the County arising wholly or substantially out of a shortage of water supply, then the Albemarle County Service Authority and its Executive Director are authorized during the continuation of the water emergency to order the restriction or prohibition of certain uses of the water supply as set forth in the County Code; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authority adopted a Resolution on November 5, 2001 declaring a water shortage emergency in the urban service area of Albemarle County and requesting that the Board of Supervisors also declare such a water emergency to enable the imposition of appropriate restrictions on water use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby declares that there is an emergency arising out of a shortage of water supply in the urban service area of Albemarle County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Service Authority and its Executive Director are authorized during the continuation of the water emergency to implement mandatory restrictions on water usage within the urban service area, as set forth in Section 16.02 of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations and in Section 16-500 of the Albemarle County Code, when the Authority or its Executive Director deem such restrictions are necessary. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of five to zero, as recorded below, at a meeting held on November 7, 2001. CI~, Board of County Supervisors U Aye Nay Mr. Bowerman X Mr. Dorder X Ms. Humphds X Mr. Martin (Absent) Mr. Perkins X Ms. Thomas X Albemarle County Service Serving & Conserving November 6, 2001 Robert W. Tucker, Jr County Executive Albemarle County Office Building 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Bob: Yesterday the Board of Directors met in special session to declare a water emergency in the urban area and authorize the Executive Director to impose restrictions on water use when deemed necessary. The Board seeks a similar declaration from the Board of Supervisors and the imposition of water use restrictions when initiated by the Executive Director. The Charlottesville City Council took identical action last night. The actions of City Council and the Board of Directors do not immediately impose restrictions but authorize the restrictions when deemed necessary by the City Manager and the Executive Director, respectively. The actions of the Service Authority and the City were not prompted by a sudden drop in our water supply levels, but by the calendar. It is the opinion of the City and Service Authority staffs that we may need to impose water restrictic ns within the next several weeks. City Council met last night and will not meet again for two weeks. The Service Authority's regular monthly meeting falls on November 15, 2001 and the next meeting of the Board of Supervisors would be December 5, 2001. Therefore the Service Authority held a special session to allow the Board of Supervisors to consider this action in a regular meeting on either November 7 or 14, 2001. Enclosed is a resolution of the Board of Directors seeking action by the Board of Supervisors. Ver~.~ yours, J.W. Brent Executive Director JWBIsirb Enclosure cc: Board of Directors James M. Bowling, IV 168 Spotnap Road * P.O. Box 2738 * Charlottesville, VA 22902 * Tel (804) 977-4511 * Fax (804) 979-0698 www. acsanet.com RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a lack of adequate rainfall has created a shortage in the public water supply which serves the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville; and WHEREAS, the capacities of the reservoirs serving the area have continued to decrease even after calls for voluntary conservation measures; and WHEREAS, Section 16-500 of the Albemarle County Code provides that should the Board of Supervisors declare there to be an emergency in the County arising wholly or substantially out of a shortage of water supply, then the Albemarle County Service Authority and its Executive Director are authorized during the continuation of the water emergency to order the restriction or prohibition of certain uses of the water supply as set forth in the County Code; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authority adopted a Resolution on November 5, 2001 declaring a water shortage emergency in the urban service area of Albemarle County and requesting that the Board of Supervisors also declare such a water emergency to enable the imposition of appropriate restrictions on water use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby declares that there is an emergency arising out of a shortage of water supply in the urban service area of Albemarle County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Service Authority and its Executive Director are authorized during the continuation of the water emergency to implement mandatory restrictions on water usage within the urban service area, as set forth in Section 16.02 of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Rules and Regulations and in Section 16-500 of the Albemarle County Code, when the Authority or its Executive Director deem such restrictions as necessary. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a tree, correct copy ora Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of to , as recorded below, at a meeting held on Mr. Bowerman Mr. Dorrier Ms. Humphris Mr. Martin Mr. Perkins Ms. Thomas Aye Nay Clerk, Board of County Supervisors RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a lack of adequate rainfall has created a shortage in the public water supply which serves the City of Charlottesville - Albemarle County community; and WHEREAS, while the City and the Albemarle County Service Authority have called for voluntary conservation measures on the part of their respective customers, the capacities of the reservoirs serving the area have continued to decrease; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority that there is hereby declared to be an emergency in the urban service area of Albemarle County arising out ora shortage of water supply; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority is duly authorized, for the duration of the water emergency, to implement the restrictions on water usage within the urban service area, as set forth in Section 16.02 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, when he and the Charlottesville City Manager agree that such restrictions become necessary; and BE IT FURTI-IER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County is hereby requested to make a declaration of a water emergency and imposition of the restrictions on water use. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and exact copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Se~ Autho~ in special session on November 5, 2001 by avote of 6 to 0. // / · / J. W. ,.~ rent, Secretary-Treasure