Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-02-13February 1___~3 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, on. February 13, 1.980, at 9:00 A.M. in.the Board Room of the Albemarle County Offi¢ Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony I~ (arrived at 9:15 A.M.), C. Timothy Lindstrom and Miss Ellen V. Nash and Mr. W. S. OFFICERS PRESENT: Messrs. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive; and George R. St. County Attorney. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 9:10 Chairman, Gerald E. Fisher. Agenda Item No. 2. Minutes. August l, 1979 (Night): Mr. Henley reported no errors, er additions were necessa~ August 15, 1979 (Afternoon): Mr. Fisher reported no errors, or additions were nec September 5, 1979 (Afternoon): Mr. Fisher reported no errors, or additions neces~ September 19, 1979 (Night): Mr. Lindstrom said he had not yet read those minutes October 3, 1979 (Night): Mr. Roudabush reported one correction on the first page bottom, it is reported that the public hearing was closed because no one was pres~ speak for or against... Mr. Roudabush said the word or must be added. October 8, 1979: Mr. Roudabush reported no errors, or additions necessary. October 16, 1979: Mr. FiSher reported no errors, or additions necessary. October 17, 1979 (Night): Dr. Iachetta was scheduled to review these minutes, an¢ present ~o repotS. November 7, 1979: Dr. Iachetta was scheduled to review these minutes and was not to report. Novembsr 21, 1979: Mr. Roudabush said he had not yet read those minutes. December 5, 1979: Mr. Roudabush said he had not yet read those minutes. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, to approve t! as amended of August l, August 15, September 5, October 3, October 8, and October 1979. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dr. Iachet~a. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a memorandum from Lettie E. Neher, Clerk to the t Supervisors, regarding minute corrections to August 8 and October l~, 1979 meeting~ mam~Da=dum, she requests the following corrections to minutes, already approved by Board: February l~, 1~80 (Regular Day Meeting) in the~offices of the Clerk to the Circuit Court. Mr. Fisher said it seemed memorandum, that costs would be 'a prohibitive factor in implementing Mr. Lindstrom's suggested the County Executive look into the matter further to see if there are sibilities for improving the process of preparing minutes. da Item No. 5. Highway Matters: Mr. Fisher said he wished to discuss legis- tters before regular highway matters, regarding a resolution adopted by the Board- meeting on January 14, 1980 relative to road improvements in connection with ons and site plans. He said Mr. St. John has worked very closely with Delegate chie, who submitted a bill at the Board's request which was exactly what the uld like to see adopted. Another bill was also submitted which was more narrow with roads only. He said the delegates from Prince William County also sub- bill which deals specifically with the "Hylton" case. Mr. Fisher said the bills fred to a subcommittee for further study, several members of which were unaware Supreme Court rulings which affect rural counties. He. reported that subcom- mbers are going to review court decisions regarding land use, and suggested to trom that the VACO Land Use Task Force meet with members of that subcommittee and his matter further. da Item No. 3a) Request to vacate portion of Devon Road. Mr. Agnor reported f a request from Frank and Sarah TaylOr and Robert and Peggy Rutland, regarding n Drive, asking that a dedicated right of way (described as being off Devon Road Forest between their two properties) be vacated~ Although this road does not exist, they have requested it be closed to all future possible access to the "property. Mr. Agnor said all the~necessary elements were submitted, and it was Board to set a public hearing date to decide this matter. Motion was then y Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to set a public hearing to vacate a f Devon Road for March 12, 1~80. Roll was called and the motion carried by the recorded vote: ssrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mro Roudabush. ne. da Item No. Bb) Request for improvements to Reservoir Road (Route ?02). Mr. id he has received numerous phone calls, a petition, and Mr. C. Woodson Baker of day Trails was present to request road improvements, Mr. Fisher said there is a as to the improvements the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation necessary and those the users and residents of the road are requesting. Mr. d the road is very narrow and has approximately eleven blind curves, nine of only wide enough to allow one vehicle through at a time. He added that in many e road is angled in such a way that it is easy to. loose control of a vehicle and. o a ditch on the side of the road. He requested that the road-be improved, but as suggested by the Highway Department, because he felt it would destroy the of the road. Mr. Baker said the road is used by many joggers,-bikers and hikers f its scenic beauty. Dan Roosevelt of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation spoke ing that Route 702 is in the Six-Year plan as a priority two road. Mr. Roosevelt .t right of way has not been offered for improvements to this road, and without urves cannot be corrected. Mr. Roosevelt said to improve this as a gravel road against' the philosophy of the Highway Department. Mr. Fisher said with the in funds for road improvements, it would seem more realistic to only improve the a safety precaution rather than hope to hard surface and improve the road at the Eebruary 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 3d) Discussion: Commonwealth Drive; flooding. County Engineer, presented the following letter to the Board: Mr. J. Harve "Pursuant to the request of the County Board of Supervisors at its December 12, 1979, meeting, the County Engineering Department has consulted the Resident Highway Engineer relative to the division of costs for drainage provements on Commonwealth Drive (St. Rt. 8.52). This was one of the matters dressed by Mr. Roosevelt in his letter of October 30, 1979, which was directe Miss Neher, Clerk of the Board. We caloulate that the Department of Highways bear 32.75% of the total cost of the drainage improvements and thej~ounty 67. This division is in accordance with the Department of Highway's policy of ass the responsibility for all the stormwater runoff from the highway right of w~ 255 of the stormwater runoff from areas other than the highway right of way. work to be done is described in a report on flooding in Berkeley and on High~ which accompanied a memo to Mr. Agnor, dated September 21, 1979. The estimat is $30,000. The final cost would be divided between the County and the High~ Department, 67.25% to County, 32.75% to Highway. Copies of relative correspondence are attached. By letter of February 4, 19~ Roosevelt has agreed to the division of costs." Mr. Agnor said if the Board authorizes these improvements, the Capital Impro~ Program will be revised to incorporate this expenditure. Mr. Roosevelt said there not be enough Highway money to finance this project in 1980. If the Board is will have this project taken from the first year of the recently adopted Six-Year plan~ is a category for undesignated expenditures which presently has $50,000 available. was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, for the Highway depa~ earmark the appropriate funds in the 1981 budget for this project, and incorporat~ in the Capital Improvements Program for 1981 expenditure. Mr. Bailey said the $3( figure was only an estimate, and Mr. Roosevelt added that he would suggest adding that figure. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the~following recorded ye AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabus~ None. Regarding the flooding in this area, Dr. Iachetta said he and Mr. Bailey dra~ letter to Mr. Harold C. King, Highway Commissioner, requesting that the size of t~ culvert be increased ao the same time as improvements to Route 29 NorthJ~ Dr. Iac~ requested permission of the Board to forward this letter. Mr. Fisher said as a m~ the Board he already had the authority. Agenda Item No. 3e) Request to take roads into the State System. Mr. Agnor letter had been received on January~.16, 1980, from Mr. Forrest R. Marshal represez that Forrest Road in Marshall Manor~ Subdivision be taken into the Stata System. was offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom~ to adopt the following resol~ BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgini~ ~the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be, and is hereby req~ accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection an~ prOval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Marshall Maz Subdivision: Beginning at station 7+75 of Forrest Road, a point common to the end of maintenance of Forrest Road (State Route 1801): ~thence with Forrest Ro~ southwesterly direction 709.26 feet to station 14+8~.26 the end of the ~ February 13~1980 (Regular Day Meeting) luary 10, 1980 Performance Bond - Key West Subdivision: Vincennes Road, George Rogers Road ~nded, Wildflower Drive, Chestnut Ridge Road, and Randolph Court Lse be advised that the above named roads have performed satisfactorily for ~a .od of one (1) year since their date of acceptance. Accordingly, the County's l as~described~-in your letter-of December 14, 1978 has been released. ~her additional road, Vincennes Court has three (3) months remaining during its ~anteed bond. We will continue to hold the County's bond for this road until ~h 15, 1980. ~ ~ou should,~have any further questions concerning this~matter, please advise our ~ned) W. B. Coburn, Jr., Assistant Resident Engineer" Roosevelt said the following letter was mailed to the Board regarding 197~-80 ~econdary Construction Budgets: ~uary ~l, 1~80 to a shortfall in revenue to date in comparison with projeCtions utilized in the '.inal 1~?~-80 allocations, the-Highway~ and ~Transportation Co~]nission at ~its ~ing on January l?, 1980 adopted a~revised budget that ~reflects the updated ~nue for fiscal 1979-80. The distribution of these funds has been made in ac- .ance with appropriate Acts of the General Assembly~. Accordingly, we are pro- ~ng a copy of the revised Secondary construction allocations that are applicable ~ach of the several counties and the City of Suffolk which comprise the State ,ndary System. statewide Secondary construction allocation for direct distribution now amounts 64,890,720, which is $15,578,284 less than the $80,469,004 contained in the ~inal budget. While this represents a statewide average decrease of some l~, ratio does not necessarily hold'~.true in an assessment of individual counties. is'because of the peculiar fluctuation effect of the new 'surface treatment ~funds ~r Section ~3.1'23.1:1 upon the distributions. Thus, those counties with a high ~o of unpaved roads in the fifty plus vehicle-per-day category will ~not-~experience ~ctions that are quite as drastic as those counties with a low ratio in that ~gory. reduction in revenue precipitating these revised allocations is entirely attri-~ oble to a shortfall in State funds, and the anticipated-Federal ~funds ~remain ~anged. Consequently, it is necessary to continue with a Federal program of the magnitude as explained in my letter of April 2?, l~?~. resident.~engineer is being furnished with a copy of these tabulations ~and will 'tly be discussing witch you the impact of this development upon each of your ,ectiVe county Secondary construction programs. ~sh to thank each of you for your past cooperation and to request your indulgence ',his unavoidable dilemma, ~erely, Februar~y 1_~3~ 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) budget as it is; the Highway Department wii1 then allocate funds to projects'in or their priority; this will automatically take funds away from the Hydraulic Road pz with the Six-Year plan being revised in the 1980-81 fiscal year. Motion was offez Mr. Henley, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to accept the recommendation of Mr. Rooseve] was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta,. Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabusk None. Agenda Item No 3g) Other Highway Matters. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Roosevelt if received any additional information on the Hollymead Dam (ZMA-79-33, Albemarle Lar Corporation). Mr. Roosevelt said he had not. Mr. Tucker said his staff is workir study of the project, but the study is still not complete. Mr. Fisher asked that status of this work be checked, and the information forwarded to Mr. Roosevelt up¢ completion. Mr. Agnor requested an appropriation in the amount of $50.00 to pay the maint fee on the Meadows through the end of the fiscal year,, and a letter guaranteeing performance of the road for The Meadows road in the amount of $1,250 be approved. was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom$~owrite a letter guars the performance of the Meadows roadway for a period of one year after the road has accepted into the SeCondary System, in the amount up to $1,250.00, and to adopt t~ following resolution for an appropriation to cover maintenance fees: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginis $50.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and trs to Code 18C.10--Repairs and Construction. Roll was then Called and the motion carried by the'following re¢orded~vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachett'a, Lindstrom and Miss Nash, and Mr. Roudabus NAYS: None. - '~ Mr. Agnor presented ~a m~emorandum dated February 12, 1980, from Messrs. J. Haz Bailey and Robert W. Tucker regarding a walkway on Georgetown Road ('State-Route 6-5 Agnor said the memorandum was a status report on the project, and noted that a suz would have to be made before the project can proceed further. .-He also reported t~ additional right-of-way will be required for the walkway, and he felt certain that right-Of-way will have to be purchased from landowners. Mr. Lindstrom said he wot tO.see this project go forward as quickly as possib'le, as a very dangerous situati presently exists along that road for pedestrians. Mr. Lindstrom~asked Mr. Rooseve the survey of the curve on Georgetown Road. Mr. Roosevelt said it has not yet ta~ place, and he would find out the exact dates for the survey and report back to the Dr. Iachetta asked Mr. Roosevelt if there were any way t'o prohibit oversized from crossing the Park Street Bridge. He said he had received a number of teleph¢ about large trucks using this bridge, which has an eight ton weight limit. Mr. Re said signs are posted at the bridge and on Rio Road indicating the weight limit of bridge, but that enforcement of the weight limit is strictly up to the Sheriff and Police Departments. Dr. Iachetta suggested the Sheriff be requested to patrol thd more frequently, and to enforce the weight limit laws on the Park Street Bridge. Februar~ 13~_ l~r Da~ Meeting~ da Item NO. 5. Committee Report: Utilities and Zoning. Mr. Tucker read the ich follOws- s report outlines the recommendation 6f the Utilities and 'Zoning Committee for ning and financing the extension'0f 'U$ilities in bhe County's growth areas. The' c assumption used in generating the following report is that the ~County is to ogram of "front-end" financing for extensions., and that the major share of the en of such a program should be borne 'b~y those who directly benefit from its rate projects. Therefore, the intent of the Committee was to detail a "revolving "" approach to capital improvements where revenue from each project would be used future extensions. The actions necessary for the implementation of the extension ram are given below 'ih rough' chronological order. NING The committee reconnnends that the County set 'aside the period between now and the completion date of the Advanced Wastewater Treatment plant as a "planning" period. During this period, a comprehensive survey of existing facilities should be undertaken, along With an engineering design plan which wOuld comprehensively detail deSirable and necessary imprbvements to the existing system, as well as possible extensions into adjacent grOwth areas. In conjunction with the necessary engineering work, the County-,should develop a comprehensive utilities plan, oUtlining and ranking potential ~project areas according to certain expliCit criteria (s~e Programming, No. B below). RAMMING program itself would consist of the following elements: Once the engineering and utilities~ plans have been completed, and the prime project areas within the growth areas identified, the County Should solicit, by nonbinding petitions, the intent of the private sector concerning the disposi- tion of the parcels within each project area. These Petitions would be included in the final review of project feasibility, yet would not constrain either the County or the private individual to development of a proposed project. With all the necessary information available, the County would proceed to .designate projects for implementation, either individually or under a five or ten year plan~ The highest priority project or projects would be sent to bid, and all costs would be determined (priorities would be based on such things as adequacy or scheduled improvements of roads, schools, recreational facilities, treatment facilities and proximity to major water and sewer lineS, shopping areas, and employment plus the readiness of the project owners to proceed with development)'. The~costs would then be assigned to the parcels in ~he project area by means of the following formula: TC = Total Project Cost PA = Individual Parcel Acreage RD = Maximum Allowable Parcel Density in Units Per Acre n TC .X (PAi x PDi) (PAi x PDi) = pro-rata share per parcel two reasons: (1) they can .potentially be included under the health, safety an welfare provisions of public responsibility; and (2) theywOuld appear 't~be~ sirable enough to the developer to encourage his participation in the above p Due to the fact~that effective projects can ~vary greatly' in Size and cost, th Committee has not included such data with this report-. However, during the' r various alternatives, it appeared that the cost of projects that would'be e'ff in achieving the goal of directed growth were not overly prohibitive within t capital funding framework. The five-year bond retirement scheme was adopted replenish the fund within a reasonable time period, and not place too great s on the developer. It should be st.ressed that the petition clause in the program is no9 an atten react to developmental pressures in the private sector,'~but simply an ~ttempt further predict the success of any project in achieving directed groWth. All relevant criteria would be taken into account before a project area is define project implemented." Mr. Fisher asked if densities recommended in the Comprehensive Plan would be in this project. Mr. Tucker said it would be strictly followed, and it would be E to develop land at its maximum allowable density to obtain full potential use of ~ ities,-~nd~tb avoid running out of urban area land. Mr.-Fisher asked if this will self-sustaining project. Mr. Tucker said it may be required from~time to time fo~ County to supplement this project. Mr. Fisher said he did not feel this would be table to the taxpayers of the County. Dr. Iachetta and Mr. Agnor said historical] cities have shown a profit on their water systems, and used these funds to supplen other projects. Dr. Iachetta said he felt an inflation factor should be added int formula shown in the report to insure the County does not have to add to this proj financially. Mr. Fisher then asked how it would be handled if land were transfer~ project completed prior to the five year time limit placed on bonds by the County. Tucker said if the land were transferred or comPleted in less than the five year ~ then the bond would be collected at that time; in no instance would it be allowed beyond five years. Mr. Agnor said the areas being considered for this project are Hollymead, th~ Area and Crozet. He said in order to accomplish this project, the Service Author~ first map the existing~water and sewer system. This mapping is necessary not onl~ success of this project, but also for use in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Agnor s~ did not know if sUch a map was being prepared by the Service Authority, but reconm that the Board of Supervisors request a map be prepared of the urban area. Motioz offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to request the Service Author~ begin mapping existing water and sewer facilities in the urban area for use by th~ in channeling growth into areas recommended for some in the Comprehensive Plan, az use in determining Capital Improvement Programs. Mr. Agnor noted that other areas of the County must also be mapped, but he f~ urban area is the first priority. Roll was then Called, and the motion carried b~ following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabus~ None. Mr. Fisher said it might be a good idea to meet witk builders, developers, e~ the County to get an idea of how they view this project. Mr. Fisher said it woul~ to know if it would ben-useful before more work goes into develoPing the plan furt~ Roudabush asked if a bond held by the County would constitute a lien on the prope~ February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) that a study~'had~'~een conducted with the aid of the Charlottesville City Police $ to'work up s~a~istics on domestic violence, and the program had received in grant money from the Federal Government. Miss Cobb said this is a crime a program worked in cooperation with various police departments, judicial sys- iai service organizations and Various other agencies. Mr. Fisher said the Board of this program, but as stated to the Family Service request just prior to this, aot enough money-in the proposed budget to fund any new projects. Nash asked if this program would aid the police in preventing spouse or child iss CObb said there is a mutual education program between the police departments er workers to try and prevent abuse before it occurs. Mrs. Karen Morris com- at this is a serious problem. She noted that in cases she has seen, almost 50% abuse cases'indicate an equal number~of battered spouses as well. Mrs. Morris shelter has saved the Social Services department money by housing many of these families rather than having 'the social Services department house them on a basis. Cobb said this is a delegate agency of the Monticello Area Community Action ad funding would run through that agency, but policies are made by the Shelter ~. Agnor noted that this request for funds was not 'included with that fortha o Area Community Action Agency. Mr. Fisher said he appreciated the presentation ~rvices of the agency-, but could not at this time commit financial support until 81 buHget is presented and worked out.~ ~ da Item No. 10. Request from Jack Jouett 1981 Commemorative Committee. Mr. Due, III, presented a request for $3,517.00 in funding of a commemorative cele- ~ the 200th anniversary of Jack Jouett's ride; the celebration to take place June Mr. McCUe said members of the General Assembly, local Boards of Supervisors, and ~e Committee members will be invited to participate in the even~, beginning with n and program at Castle Hill, then to the Albemarle County Courthouse, and then ~ ' ~nton for a buffet and conclusion of the ceremonies. Dr. Iachetta asked if the ~ested would be used in part to pay for the luncheon. Mr. McCue said it would be [ally for this purpose, and partially for printing of brochures and other liter- ~rding this event. He also noted that~the Virginia Independence Bicentennial ~ has agreed to pay 50% of the budget and CharlottesVille,-Fluvanna, Louisa and '~ ~re being requested to pay their proportionate share. Mr. Fisher asked if this ~d been submitted as part of the regula~ 1980-81 budget to Mr. Agnor. Mr. McCue ~d not. Mr. Agnor said this could be added to th~ budget during the first work ~nd the Board could decide on funding at that time if t~ey desired. Mr. Fisher ~t this was the best procedure to follow, and informed Mr. McCue that he would be of the work session date and time. ~:36 P.M. Mr. Fisher adjourned the meeting for lunch. The meeting reconvened at ia Item No. 11. Albemarle Housing Improvement Program Quarterly Report. Miss ~as present to give'the quarterly report. She first introduced three new VISTA ~, then said after completion of AHIP's annual independent audit. AHIP was able $15,819.51 to the County. in unused funds for Fiscal Year 1978-1979. This money sed of $13,950.07 in operating funds andS1,869.41 in unused grants to families. ~HIP is searching for Federal funds to help defer expenses, but that money from ~ces is getting tight. February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) At 2:10 P.M. Mr. Fisher requested a brief recess. Meeting reconvened at 2:1 Agenda Item No. 12. Greater Charlottesville Area Development Corporation. M~ Wood, Chairman, Greater Charlottesville Area Development Corporation, was present, with Mrs. Grace Carpenter, Secretary-Treasurer of the Corporation and Board member Garret and Leigh Middleditch. He said over the last six months a group of active di.viduals have been planning and working to establish the Greater Charlottesv±lle Development Corporation. On November 27, 1979, the State Corporation Commission g~ charter to the GCADC. This Corporation was established to aid and support economi social, cultural and human development of the greater Charlottesville area. The s' of the GCADC is to be based on the premise that the Charlottesville area, which is desirable to many people is not restricted to county boundaries and that a regiona development strategy can be undertaken that would both benefit Charlottesville and marle County and those other counties which are immediately within the Charlottesv sphere of influence. Mr. Wood said to carry out the strategy, it will be necessary to develop apl. takes full advantage of the resources available in the area and to identify the be possible mix of those resources. The prime objectives of the GCADC are to: 1) aggressively seek regional and ~ headquarters to locate in Charlottesville and Albemarle County; 2) to aggressively research centers which will compliment the University of Virginia to locate in Cha~ ville and Albemarle County; 3) to work closely with designated individuals or groul neighboring Central Virginia counties (Nelson, Fluvanna, Orange, Louisa and Greene place manufacturing industry interested in locating in this area; and 4) to assist light manufacturing facilities in locating in Charlottesville or Albemarle County. In order to accomplish these objectives, the GCADC will identify and catalogu available sites in the city and county and determine which, if-any, of the sites a zones properly, are not suitable because of terrain or access. The GCADC will the as the liaison between the local government and the property owner in efforts to d that property in exchange for rezoning more suitable property for development. The GCADC will analyze the labor force in Planning District 10 (Charlottesvil Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa and Nelson Counties) to determine what type pe are in the labor market and what type new business or industry would be most compa with providing that work force with jobs. In undertaking a plan to market the Greater Charlottesville Area to prospecti' business the restrictive requirements of the city-county area will be stressed in positive sense, following the approach that "not just any business" can come to Ch vii!e-Albemarle. The GCADC will stress such things as: (a) the limited number of new firms wh be allowed to enter the area, (b) the requirement to develop and submit site plans are compatible with the environmentally conscious area, (c) the fact that both pre former corporate executives have chosen Charlottesville and Albemarle for their ho~ because it is such a desirable place to live, (d) the area has a rich historic tra that will be protected, (c) that the University of Virginia provides a great resou business, (f) the many leisure activities available here - snow skiing, golf on ou courses, hunting, horseback riding, fishing, etc., (g) the many cultural advantage normally associated with a small city - drama, nationally known speakers, concert museums, art galleries, etc., (h) daily flights from Charlottesville to New York a _ ~ebruar~ 1980_~e~l~r__D_a~v M~e~i~ important to show when talking to prospective businesses. Fisher said he has been very concerned in recent months by public institutions roperty thereby removing that property from the tax base. He asked that in g for research institutions, the Corporation try to seek those institutions which take property from the tax base so the County may receive any benefit to be from that business. Mr. Wood said the Corporation is also concerned about the tax has discussed this problem. Fisher asked what results had been obtained in talking to the rural counties. said the Corporation has been endorsed by Fluvanna County and Charlottesville. ve been set for this presentation to be made in the other counties. The Corpor- . also asking that each locality appoint a liasion person to w.ork with the Corpor- Mr. Fisher said about four years ago, he had suggested this concept to the Chamber rce as the way to handle industrial development in the area. He was severely ed for the recommendation, and does want to support ~he concept at this time. as then offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Miss Nash to adopt the following on of endorsement. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin'ia, agrees with the cepts, strategies, and existence of the Greater Charlottesville Area Development potation; and, WHEREAS, no financial support has been requested in support of this private poration; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors s hereby endorse'the activities of the Greater Charlottesville Area Development poration, and hereby names Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., as liaison between said cor- ation and the Board of Supervisors. Henley said he never supported the Economic Development Commission, but would the motion as he has always felt this was the proper way to handle economic ent. Mr. Lindstrom said he had serious reservations about the whole concept of Corporation has outlined. He said he feels growth is not always good for the y, adding that the tax base new industry brings to the community does not always he requirement for services to the additional population. Mr. Lindstrom said he pport this motion only because he did agree that economic development should be by the private sector and should not b~ government sponsored. The roll was called time and the resolution was adopted by the following recorded vote: essrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. one. nda Item No. t3. Public Hearing To Amend and Reenact Chapter 2, Article I, 2-4 of the Albemarle County Code relating the number of members serving on the Commission. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 30, 1980 and February Fisher read the ordinance with the proposed changes: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE I, SECTION 2-4 OF THE ALBEMARE COUNTY CODE Mee~in~L ~ ~ Agenda Item No. 9. Request from York County Board of Supervisors, re: 1981 ~ Bicentennial. Mr. Fisher said he had received a letter from the York County Board Supervisors requesting support for their petition to the General Assembly for finar assistance and other state aid to the 1981 Yorktown Bicentennial Celebration. Dr. said he found it very hard to support this request for funding, when there are so n other more pressing needs. There was no motion of support offered and the matter dropped. Agenda Item No. 14. Public Hearing to Amend and Reenact Chapter 2, Article I: Section 2-1 of the Albemarle County Code relating to the term of the member servin~ large on the School Board. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 30, and Fc 6, 1980.) Mr. Fisher read the ordinance with the proposed changes: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE I, SECTION 2-1 OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia: Chapter 2, Article I, Section 2-1 of the Albemarle County Code be amended and enacted to read as follows: Sec. 2-1. Number~ appointment~ etc.~ of members of School Board. The school board of the county shall be composed of seven trustees appoi~ the board of supervisors. One trustee shall be appointed from each magisteri~ district and one trustee shall be appointed from the county at large. Such ti shall serve at the pleasure of the board of supervisors, provided that absent action to the contrary by the supervisors, the term of the member at large she expire on De,em~e~-$~ June 30 of the second year of his appointment and the t~ each member appointed according to magisterial district shall be coterminous that of the supervisor placing his name in nomination. Vacancies resulting fi resignation, death or removal for cause shall be filled in the same manner as original appointments. Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing. declared the public hearing closed. No one was present to speak, and Mr. F~ Motion for adoption of the ordinance was offered by Mr. Henley, who said he sl supports this concept, as it gives the Board of Supervisors a chance to work togett before they have to decide on the at-large member. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mr. Lindstrom said this also should aid in the transition of the new School Board disturb continuity during work on the School budget. Dr. Iachetta said he would n~ support the motion as it was his feeling that the Board of Supervisors should reta~ power to change the entire School Board at one time if that should become necessar2 this change is enacted, that can no longer be done. There being no other comments was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 15. Report from Marilyn Posten, re: Facilities for Handicap] Parks. Mrs. Posten presented a report entitled "Leisure Service Needs of Disabled of Albemarle Count~ - A Preliminar~ Study". dated February. lq80 (CLERKS NOTE: Th~ February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) Fisher thanked the committee for the report, saying that it meets a real need, although the County is struggling to support new programs financially, it is this could be accomplished without a great deal of money. There were no further da Item No. 16. Resolution from Airport Board, re: Parking Regulations at Mr. Agnor read the following resolution adopted by the Charlottesville-Albemarle oard at their regular meeting held on February 6, 1980: WHEREAS, the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Board was created by an agreement d July 15, 1974 between the City of Charlottesville and the County of Albemarle; WHEREAS, one of the powers conferred on said Board was to operate the Char- esville-Albemarle Airport located within the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle in the said agreement agreed to enact such nances as may be necessary to regulate vehicle parking; and WHEREAS, the increased usage of the airport facilities has resulted in an ease in motor vehicle and other vehicular traffic and parking; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Board by requests that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, t an ordinance regulating the parking of motor vehicles and all other vehicles on roads, streets, alleys, grounds, and other areas within such portions of the daries of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport. Agnor said such an ordinance has not yet been drafted. Mr. Fisher said he would he drafting of the ordinance and have the Board review it at its March 12, 1980 nd then possibly set a date for public hearing. Motion was then offered by Dr. seconded by Mr. Roudabush, to have the County Attorney draft an ordinance for the Board at its March 12th meeting. Roll was called and the motion carried by wing recorded vote: ssrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. ~e. da Item No. 6. Discussion: JAUNT's Federal Funds. Mr. Agnor said the County's onal delegation has been contacted to try and resolve the dispute regarding the ection 13(c) Labor Warranty and JAUNT's request for Federal funding. Mr. Agnor poke to Mr. Jessee Noel, Acting Director of JAUNT, regarding their financial the next several weeks while the matter of the Labor Warranty is worked out. indicated he would like to have the Board authorize funds from which JAUNT can Agnor said $24,000 was appropriated for JAUNT to draw on during the last six 1979 to offset the deficit incurred in their operations in Albemarle County; not require that amount. Mr. Agnor noted that JAUNT does not require action on st immediately, but will require action on or before the Board's March 12, 1980 Draw-down would be based on financial reports furnished the County's Director of Mr. Fisher said this request has not been to the JAUNT Board, but JAUNT's pro- significant. Mr. Fisher said he feels the request for $24,000 is too high, ing the last six months in 1979 JAUNT could not justify that much of a deficit tions just in the County. He suggested $20,000 be authorized until the City says hey will join the County in attacking the waiver problem. Motion was then offered chetta to disperse $20,000 to JAUNT between the months of January 1, 1980 and February 13,1980 (Regular Day Meeting) Since the bearing wall at the rear of the stage is structurally unsafe, stage walls must be demolished, however; a savings can be realized by r structing a temporary roof only over the stage area, not rebuilding the closing the proscenium opening and ignoring the stage until some time i future. Under these contract documents, the stage is to be only~ a shel no lighting or rigging that make it a useful stage. The continued use of the gym area by the YMCA will add $40,000 to $50,0 because temporary parking, utilities ans safe-passage must be provided. cost could be deleted by asking the YMCA to move. Ail auditorium work can be deleted. The auditorium is to be developed meeting room for those meetings where more than 125 persons are expecte attend. The work in the auditorium will mainly consist of a new podium boards and commissions, a non-sophisticated sound system, rearrangement seats and development of some ancillary spaces. The contract drawings provide for two elevators. Mr. Sample suggested shaft and plunger holes be retained for both, but one cab can be instal later. 5) Light fixtures can be changed. The present plans call for energy conse fixtures, but these are two-year, pay-off items. 6) Heating and air-conditioning systems have been designed for comfort and howev.er the whole HACV could be installed on the roof. This would mean maintenance and a shorter life for the equipment, but would result in a savings. Mr. Sample said this is one change he would not recommend. J7) Ail carpeting in the building could be Changed to vinyl-asbestos. 8) The drive-up window could be deleted. Mr. Sample completed ~his presentation by stating that there are no "frills" job. Ail materials are of good quality, but are not expensive. He said he feels prices quoted are current. Mr. Roudabush asked what the total savings would be if all items which could be eliminated were removed. Mr. Sample Said approximately $200,000. He said he has advised bo~h contractors, that without a penalty clause, the time estimate is relavant as it could be. He also did not feel that the unit costs are an importa as he did not feel there would be much additional work needed. He said it would recommendation to accept the bidding procedures and go with the low bidder. Mr. said before any cost estimates can be made on reductions, the Board must first de they wish to give:up the possibility of moving the County Office Building to anot or if the Board decides to go with the Lane site, sign a letter of intent with th bidder to review the bid for price reductions. Mr. Fisher said he feels the Boar to know the intentions of the Charlottesville City Council with regard to McInti~ improvements. He said the County agreed to donate all of the required right-of-~ the Lane site at no cost, when the building was purchased. At the request of the lottesville-Albemarle Rescue Squad, the County purchased property on Berkmar Dr±~ relocation of the rescue squad should that become necessary. Mr. Fisher then sts concern aboutl the time frame of construction as estimated by the two low bidders, there is no penalty clause involved, but he felt the Board should pursue the ques reductions in the bid with the low bidder. ,~ February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) ~ample said the cost estimate would be possible, and he then asked if it would be o get the YMCA to leave the building while construction is taking place. Mr. . he has had several meetings with Mr. O'Neill of the YMCA. Mr. O'Neill spoke icClure and found that the McIntire Building would be usable, but the cost savings ~nty of $10,000 would not be enough to offset the cost of moving the YMCA facility. the cost to retain the YMCA in the building is estimated at $50,000, he felt ~MCA would agree to move. ~isher asked if all Board members were in agreement that the County go with the .ow bidder, prices to see if there is some way to save the County money, and then ~ savings be reviewed again before the end of February. Mr. Fisher then suggested adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, through negotiations with ~ity of Charlottesville, did purchase from Charlottesville the property known as High School in 1978 for the sum of $800,000; and WHEREAS, as one of the conditions of that purchase contract, Albemarle County ~ommit itself to donate, at no cost to the City of Charlottesville, all of the ~-of-way required for construction of improvements to McIntire Road as planned by lity of Charlottesville along the frontage of the property in order to avoid ~e to privately-owned properties across McIntire Road; and WHEREAS, Albemarle County has received bids for renovation of said building as a ~y Office Building to serve County citizens from all parts of the County; said due to expire on February 29, 1980; and WHEREAS, Albemarle County has determined that the timely construction of McIntire improvements to connect with a similar project in the County is essential to the ~icia! use of the proposed County Office Building; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors does hereby mem- .ize the City Council of Charlottesville to provide the County with a firm and .ng commitment to proceed with the design and construction of said road improve- within the City limits without further delay; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County states its final decision to sign any contract for the renovation of a County Office ling in the existing Lane High School Building will await the receipt of a firm ~inding commitment to construct said road by the City Council of the City of .ottesville. ~n was offered by Mr. Henley to adopt the resolution presented. The motion was ~y Mr. Roudabush. Dr. Iachetta said he reluctantly voted to go with the Lane and did so only because of its central location and accessibility created by toad. Mr. Roudabush said he felt this was the basis of the Lane selection, the that the road would be built, creating better accessibility. Dr. Iachetta said ~n more reluctant about Lane now that he has seen the price tag on the project. ~alled and the motion was carried by the following recorded vote: ~srs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta (clarifiedt his vote by stating that an aye vote not mean that he will vote to continue with this project.) and Miss Nash and Mr. ir. Lindstrom Februar~m1980~(Re~ular Day Meeti~! these statements were approved as read. vote: The motion carried by the following record AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush None. Agenda Item No. 22. Statement of Expenses for the Regional Jail, January, 198 presented along with salary statements for November and December, 1979. On motion Henley, seconded by Mr. Rodabush, these statements were approved as read. The moti carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 23. Report of the Social Services Department for November, 19 present-ed in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52. Agenda Item No. 24. Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance and ope of the Regional Jail for the month of January, 1980 along with summary statement of prisoner days and salary of the jail physician and paramedics, were presented. On by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, these statements were approved as ~present The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 25. Report of the County Executive for January, 1980, was pre for the Board's information. Claims against the County, which had been examined, allowed and certified for by the Director of Finance and charged to the following funds for the month of Sept 1979, which were presented to the Board on October 10, 1979, but previously unliste the Clerk, are set ou~ below: Commonwealth of Virginia-Current Credit Account General Fund School Operating Fund School Construction Capital Outlay Fund Textbook Fund Joint Security Complex Fund Town of Scottsville 1% Local Sales Tax Federal Revenue Sharing Fund Grant Project Fund Mental Health Fund $ 1,255.15 547,953.53 1,388,311.63 55,347.96 98,802.81 51,149.39 208.03 2,481.90 13,932.27 139,982.55 $2',299,425.22 Claims against the County, which had been examined, allowed and certified for by the Director of Finance and charged to the following funds for the month of 0ct¢ 1979, which were presented to the Board on November 14, 1979, but previously unlist the Clerk, are set out below: February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting .ms against the County, which had been examined, allowed and certified for payment .rector of Finance and charged to the following funds for the month of December, .ch were presented to the Board on February 6, 1980, but previously unlisted by ~, are set out below: ~onwealth of Virginia-Current Credit Account ~ral Fund ,ol Operating Fund ~teria Fund ,ol Construction Capital Outlay Fund book Rental Fund .t Security Complex Fund · of Scottsvitle 1% Local Sales Tax ral Revenue Sharing Trust Fund ral Operating Capital Outlay Fund Service Fund ~t Project Fund al Health Fund $ 395.51 1,615,313~99 1,316,414.16 53,934.55 14,202.29 1,716.47 58,293.26 233.16 85,501.09 20,154.25 196,257.00 30,229.95 132,546.25 $3~525~191.93 ms against the County, which had been examined, allowed and certified for payment rector of Finance and charged to the following funds for the month of January, e also presented as information: .onwealth of Virginia-Current Credit Account ral Fund ol Operating Fund teria Fund ol Construction Capital Outlay Fund book Rental Fund t Security Complex Fund of Scottsville 1% Local Sales Tax ral Revenue Sharing Fund ral Operating Capital Outlay Fund Service Fund t Project Fund al Health Fund $ 19,440.52 657,639.47 1,416,709.70 86,060.49 107,596.44 924.32 60,679.25 215.84 34,289.36 65,566.28 1,020,048.45 55,478.22 137,144.81 $3,661.791.15 da Item No. 18. ~Vepco Easement. Mr. Agnor said this request for a Vepco ease- or installation of electrical facilities to serve the Seminole Trail Volunteer rtment on Berkmar Drive. Since the County owns the land, it has been recommended unty Attorney that the Chairman sign the agreement of easement. Mr. Agnor then the following resolution: ~BE IT RESOLVED that the Chairman and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of marle County, Virginia, be and they are hereby authorized to execute a certain ement of easement to bear date of February 13, 1980., conveying to the Virginia tric and Power Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of State of Virginia, a right of way across the property of the County of Albemarle hown by plat bearing Number CH-l-80, exhibited to the Board of Supervisors, same e signed by the Chairman on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle ty and attested and seal affixed by its Clerk. February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) AYES: NAYS: 5C103 - Compensation - Commonwealth's Attorney $2,500.00 5C109 - Compensation - Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney 2,500.00 5C109a - Compensation - Secretary 1,250.00 $6,250.00 Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush None. Mr. Agnor said an additional amount of $9,400 is needed to pay Planning Commi members. This[~am~.s~-~about from the recent changes in the Planning Commission ordi: whereby their compensation rate was changed from $!00 a month to $200.00 per month Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to adopt the following ution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia $9,400.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and~ ferred to code 10El00, Compensation of Members. AYES: NAYS: Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush None. Agenda Item No. 20 Appointments: BOCA Code Board of App.eals. Mr. Roudabush offered the name of Mr. Kenneth O. Smitl replace Mr. Joseph Birckhead; said term expiring on August 21, 1982. Motion was to appoint Mr. Smith to the BOCA Code Board of Appeals by Mr. Roudabush, seconded ] Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush NAYS: None. Equalization Board. Mr. Roudabush offered motion to reappoint Mr. T. Ryland Moore the Equalization Board, with said term scheduled to expire on December 31, 1980. motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush None. Jordan Development Corporation. Mr. Fisher explained that Albemarle County should two appointed members to the Board of this corporation; one position has never beet filled, and Mrs. Ann Frank has resigned. Mr. Fisher suggested that Mr. Henley loo] replacing his original appointee, and that Miss Nash find a qualified person to se~ lives in the Scottsville area. Library Board. Mr. Fisher noted that Mr. Paul David is moving out of the area and resigned. No nominations were made. Region X Mental Health Board. Mr. Fisher noted that the terms of Messrs. C. Harmo~ February 13, 1980 (Regular Day Meeting) .ssion. Miss Nash requested these positions be left vacant since the Sign l's work is almost completed and since no new appointees seem to come to the ~ard. Mr. ~Fisher said he has spoken to a citizen who is presently considering .s appointment. He said an answer should be received in time for the February .ng. Ia Item No. 26. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Wisher reported receiving a report from Mr. Linds~y G. Dorrier, Commonwealth's stating the activities of that office for the month of January, 1980. Wisher reported receiving a letter from Mrs. Sally Thomas, Chairman, the City/ ~peration Study Committee, regarding a proposal for a study of the joint Manage- ~creation services and facilities. Mrs. Thomas states that Mr. Jim Skove of the )istrict Commission staff will make the study'with the Committee oversee±ng the ~tosed with the letter was an outline of the work to be performed. Mrs~ Thomas ~tudy is estimated to cost $2,000. Mr. Agnor said the report was in good order Lt there should be a response from the Board. Dr. Iachetta said he thought the ~al of this committee was to examine ways of improving cooperation where merged ~lready exist instead of merging departments. Mr. Agnor said he thought the was to study both. In fact, this is the reason he had deferred hiring a re- for the late Earl Sudduth, Parks Director, in the event the Committee recom- ~ging departments and the recommendation was accepted by the Board. Mr. Fisher ~d that the Board to acknowledge receipt of this proposal and request that the proceed with its investigation. Motion to this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, ~y Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote: ~srs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Miss Nash and Mr. Roudabush. )ocketed: Mr. Fisher r~ported receiving a memorandum from Mr. Cole Hendrix that the City of Charlottesville has executed the contr~act which establishes ion of the Watershed Management official. Mr. Agnor said the job description is ~ted and then the position will be advertised. ~isher presented a memo from the Virginia Association of Counties regarding the discontinuation of General Revenue Sharing Funds. Mr. Agnor said the request ~ssociation is for the County to adopt a resolution requesting the Senators and an to support revenue sharing on behalf of local governments. Mr. Fisher said has used Revenue Sharing Funds for a number of projects in the County. Without ~s, the money would have come from an ±ncrease in the property tax rate. Mr. ~ sented the following resolution for adoption by the Board: WHEREAS localities depend on revenue sharing dollars to supplement local funds minimal red tape and Federal restrictions; and WHEREAS monies from revenue sharing have funded needed local programs and ects since 1972 thereby preventing an increase of approximately four cents in the t property tax rate for Albemarle County; and ~'