HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-10-101'30
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held
on October 10, 1979 at 9:00 A.M. in the Albemarle County Office Building Board Room.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J.T. Henley, Jr.,
F. Anthony Iachetta, C. Timothy Lindstrom (arriving at 9:30 A.M.) and W. S. Roudabush.
OFFICERS PRESENT:
Attorney.
Guy B. Agnor, County Executive, and George R. St. John, County
Agenda Item No. 1.
the Chairman, Mr. Fisher.
the unusually heavy snow
Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 9:19 A.M., by
(NOTE: The meeting was late being called to order because of
storm.)
Agenda Item No. 2.
1979.
Approval of Minutes for April 18, June 13, June 20, and July 11,
June 13, 1979: Mr. Henley reported no corrections or additions.
June 20, 1979:
July 11, 1979:
words.
Dr. Iachetta reported no corrections or additions.
Mr. Fisher reported that "Meadow Creek Parkway" should be three
Mr. Roudabush reported the following errors in the July llth meeting, page 389, last
paragraph, insert the word remains in the sentence "36 feet of line remains to be com-
pleted''; page 394, 5th paragraph should read Mr. Morris "Foster".
Motion for appoval of minutes for June 13, June 20 and July 11, 1979 as amended was
offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS:
ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom.
None.
Agenda Item No.3a. Highway Matters: State Farm Insurance -- Request for Industrial
Access Funds. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of the following letter:
"September 27, 1979
State Farm Insurance Companies is making formal application for industrial access
funds to improve the access roads to our new site on Pantops, east of Charlottesville.
As you know, construction began on this new building approximately 18 months ago and
we are looking forward to a completion date and occupancy of the building during
December of this year. It is our understanding that you need the following informa-
tion in order for you to take favorable action recommending the upgrading of the
access roads - namely State Farm Boulevard - to our new site.
Access road usage. State Farm Boulevard will be used by our employees, visitors,
and people seeking service at our new drive-in claim center. Additionally,
people connected with serving the various equipment needs in our office will
also make extensive use of this road. As a result of our size, considerable
usage will be made by mail trucks, contract trash haulers and tractors and
trailers delivering supplies. At the present time, based on our employment, we
expect that we will have close to 500 cars a day entering and leaving our
property. This is in addition to the mail trucks, contract haulers, tractors
and trailers and service people. The latter categories all will make numerous
trips daily depending upon their various activities. Inasmuch as our supplies
come from many locations, almost daily usage of the road will be made by tractors
and trailers.
Employment at site. At the present time, we have 647 employees working in our
Regional Office at Emmet Street. This employment is expected to climb annually
to a level of over 1,000 by the late 80's. We have space to accommodate the
transfer of personnel from other contiguous areas if the need arises which would
further add to our expected growth in Virginia and North Carolina. Our parking
lot is built today to park 934 cars, and when the building is enlarged we have
plans to park up to 1165 cars.
e
Cost of facility. This facility when completed will have resulted in a cash
outlay by our organization in excess of $10,000,000. This $10,000,000 would be
all inclusive of land, building, equipment, furnishings, etc., but does not
include company-owned IBM equipment which would add several million more dollars.
Use of new building. Our new location will continue to process application~ and
claims and serve State Farm policyholders in the states of Virginia and North
Carolina. Our need for new facilities came about because of our growth and lack
of space in our present location. Before this decision to move was made, con-
sideration was given to other locations which could have served our geographic
area. The final determination was made to stay in the Charlottesville-Albemarle
area because of the excellent business conditions and employment market we have
experienced since moving here in 1951. Our insurance operation can be broken
into these basic operations: 1) Approximately 129,293 square feet of our
building is set aside to process insurance applications, claim reports, and
other related matters as they pertain to auto, life and fire insurance. 2)
35,289 square feet for support services including general office operations. 3)
Another 2,841 square feet is used as a service center for the purpose of settling
claims for automobile policyholders. 4) 24,581 square feet represents ware-
housing and storage for supplies and dead records as they pertain to our business
and for fulfilling the needs of our 29 Field Claim locations throughout the
131
October !0, 1979 (R.e~ular Day Meetinx)
563 agents in Virginia and North Carolina. 5) 1,964 square feet is devoted to
printing, fabrication, reproduction and other internal uses in the preparation
of forms, stationery and supplies for both the office here in Charlottesville,
our 29 Field Claim locations throughout the region, and our agents.
Dedication of roads. By the attached plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of
Albemarle County Circuit Court - Deed Book 669, page 13 State Farm Boulevard ha's
been dedicated to public use. This dedication will grant control over such
roads to the Department of Highways and Transporta'tion.
We~would appreciate the support of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors in-
helping us to obtain a favorable resolution for upgrading the access roads to this
site through the use of industrial access funds.
Sincerely,
(signed) D. T. Zimmerman"
Mr. Don Zimmerman was present in support of this request. He felt his ietter contained
sufficient information on which to request Board action. He said hisltraffic count figures
are conservative since there is space in the new building for an an additional State Farm
facility.
Mr. Jim Hill, representing the developer, was also present.
request is for the top paving on the road only (riding surface).
State specifications.
He explained that.this
The road is built to
Mr. F±sher said he was surprised to see this request since he had assumed that since
this is a new industry in the County, the property would have been bought with a road
built to State specifications. Mr. Zimmerman said when State Farm purchased this site,
the contract required that State Farm Boulevard be bUilt to State standards and accepted
into the State System. (Mr. Lindstrom arrived at the meeting at 9:30 A.M.) Mr. Hill said
he had talked with Mr. Sandy Brown at the Richmond Office of the Highway Department, and
was advised that State Farm could apply for industrial access funds for the surfacing of
this road. He was told that the Highway Commission would not consider the request until
the proper base had been built and the road was ready for the final surfacing.
Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, said he has not been a party to any
conversations regarding this request, but his office had supplied State Farm with a copy
of industrial access regulations. In the past, it has been the Department's policy to use
industrial access funds for industries which actually manufacture something; so the road
would be used for a true industrial use. Yesterday, Mr. Brown informed Mr. Roosevelt that
the Department's philosophy is changing, but he also said that industrial access funds
could not be used to lift any responsibility put on a developer by a county's subdivision
ordinance. State Farm Boulevard is to be a Category V Road, however there is a problem by
the fact that the developer's master plan (Pantops Properties Master Development Plan)
indicates that State Farm Boulevard could carry 30,000 cars a day. If that is the case,
with no control over the number of access points on State Farm Boulevard, he would recom-
mend that this request for industrial access funds be rejected.
Mr. Fisher asked if State Farm Boulevard was constructed to standards the County
requires under its subdivision ordinance. Mr. Roosevelt said yes and this additional
surface will bring the road to a Category V. Mr. Roudabush asked if the road is~to be
accepted into the State System,, what sort of improvements will be necessary. Mr. Roosevelt
said one requirement is that the base and surface be brought up to a Category V. Beyond
that, there is still the question of the maximum traffic to be generated by proPerties
shown on the Pantops Master Plan. Without accurate traffic estimates, definite access
points to the various properties, and without additional frontage improvements, if 30,000
cars a day use this roadway, it will be similar to the existing Route 29 North.
Dr. Iachetta asked if Mr. Roosevelt was referring only to State Farm Boulevard. Mr.
Roosevelt said based only on traffic figures for State Farm Insurance, a Category IV road
might be sufficient. The problems arise when vehicles from other properties start using
this road. Dr. Iachetta asked if Mr. Roosevelt was saying that the Highway Department
will not accept State Farm Boulevard into the State System as it is presently constructed.
Mr. Roosevelt said that was correct. Mr. Dorrier asked if the 30,000 estimated v.t.p.d.
is based on full development of all the properties shown on the Pantops Master Plan. Mr.
Roosevelt said yes. Mr. Dorrier said this seems unfair to State Farm, Mr. Roosevelt said
if the developer will tell the Highway Department how he expects to actually use the
property, or if the County can guarantee the limits of development on the property, the
problem might be resolved.
Mr. Hill said in planning for State Farm Boulevard, the developer was told that the
road must be built to State standards with a four-inch base, etc. The developer also
posted a bond for $116,000 to insure completion of the road to the proper standard. The
developer was advised by the Highway Department in Richmond to follow this procedure
before requesting industrial access funds. Mr. Zimmerman s~,id the local Highway Depart-
ment has had a copy of the estimated traffic counts for the State Farm operation for seven
months. His request to this Board is simple. He considers the use to be in compliance
with regulations for industrial access funds published by the Highway Commission. Mr.
Zimmerman said he considers this as a new business in the County which will add to the
economic development of the community. Even though it is not a manufacturing operation,
there will be many trucks bringing supplies to the building. There is also the possibility
that the computer part of State Farm Insurance will move into this building. Mr. Fisher
said he did not disagree with what had been said, but the Board~was only apprised of this
request when the agenda was published last week. 'He asked if there was a guarantee in the
contract for purchase of the property that the road would be built to State standards.
.Mr. Zimmerman said yes, but at the same time, State Farm was advised that they could apply
for industrial access funds. Mr. Lindstrom felt this use of industrial access funds would
accrue to the benefit of Virginia Land Company (the developers). Mr. Zimmerman disagreed,
saying State Farm will be the principal user of the road. Dr. Iachetta said with the
undefined condition of the rest of the property, and with the statement that the Highway
132
October 10, 1979 (~gu!ar Day Meeting)
build what State Farm needed to begin their operation on this site. Mr. Lindstrom said if
the developer has obligated himself to build the road to State standards~ it seems that
recourse to State Farm is through the courts. Mr. Henley said he could see ~no problem in
passing this request to the Highway CommissiOn.~ Mr. Dorrier a~r~ed~ saying the money is
available to Albemarle County and if the application is ~~~~e approved.
Mr. Roudabush said if State Farm had bought this parcel of land wit~'~§~ ~arrow tract~
of land for access ~o Route 250 and built a road to State standards, the developers could
subdivide properties on either side of that road and use same. Mr. Lindstrom said if
there is a valid contractual obligation for the developer to build a road to State standards,
he is not inclined to recommend that industrial access funds be used for this purpose.
Mr. Roudabush suggested that all of these facts be passed to the Highway Commission for
their consideration of this application.
Dr. Iachetta said he had a problem with Mr. Roosevett's statement that even if the
road is built to State standards and bonded, Mr. Roosevelt does not feel the planning £or
the properties shown on the Pantops Master Plan is adequate and the road will not be taken
into the State system. Mr. Roosevelt said the 30,000 figure was calculated by a member of
the Planning staff based on the zoning of the land. Mr. Roosevelt said he does not
believe the land can be developed to that potential, but until someone furnishes figures
on traffic counts to bring that figure down, the road will not be accepted. Also, there
have already been subdivision plats presented to the Planning Commission for lots on State
Farm Boulevard, and the Planning C~mmission has not seen fit to require the frontage
improvements recommended by his office. Mr. Roudabush asked if this application w~ll go
to the Highway Commission whether or not this Board favors the request. Mr. Roosevelt
said he did not feel the application would be considered seriously without a recommendation
from the County.
Mr. Lindstrom asked someone to clarify why State Farm Boulevard will not be taken
into the State system. Dr. Iachetta said the County required a bond with the intent that
the requirements placed on the developer would put the road into the system. He asked why
a bond should be required for a road that will not be accepted. Mr. Ashley Williams,
Assistant County Engineer, said the County holds Sufficient bond to complete the road to
the approved plans. If State Farm Insurance was to be the only user of the road, the road
could be surfaced and accepted into the system. Mr. Roosevelt said the question of the
traffic count on this road and access points must be resolved.
Mr. Fisher said there are two questions involved.
will s~ppo~t the request for industrial access funds.
traffic count.
Number one is whether the County
Number two is the question of the
At this point, Mr. Roudabush offered motion to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, a request has been received from the State Farm Insurance Companies for
improvements to State Farm Boulevard in Albemarle County, Virginia, as access to
their development under the Industrial Access Law (Section 33.1-221 of the Code of
Virginia); and
WHEREAS, State Farm Insurance Companies has constructed a building containing
more than 190,000 square feet~of space which will be used to house over 650 employees
and service customers and visitors; and
WHEREAS, State Farm estimates that the facility has resulted in a cash outlay in
excess of $10,000~000 inclusive of land, building, equipment and furnishings, and
this facility has also been planned for future expansion; and
WHEREAS, State Farm Boulevard will be used daily by automobiles carrying employees
and customers, and by trucks and tractor trailers delivering mail and supplies; and
WHEREAS, all but the surface of State Farm Boulevard has been completed to State
Specifications, and has been dedicated to public use by plat recorded in the Office
of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and hereby
is requested to grant Industrial Access Funds in the amount of $116,000 for the final
surfacing of State Farm Boulevard.
The foreEoing motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta. Mr. Fisher said he would support
the motion, but requested that details of this discussion be made available to the Highway
Commission, along with a copy of the plat for State Farm Boulevard and other pertinent
materials. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: ~
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Highway Department was saying that the width of the road
will not be adequate if the tand ~ both sides develops. Mr. Roosevelt suggested that~the
use of the road be budgeted as p~jects are approved. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion
that the Planning Staff and Planning Commission develop a budget which will keep State
Farm Boulevard within a Category V in the future. Mr. Henley and Mr. Roudabush did no~
feel a motion was necessary. Dlr. Iachetta said the Staff and Planning Commission have
spent a good deal of time detailing small areas in the Urban Area of the Comprehensive
Plan and he feels what is expected for this area should also be penciled in. Since the
Board has voted for this resolution, he feels the Board has an obligation to see that the
road does not become overloade~
Mr. Fisher asked the staff for suggestions on how to resolve Mr. Roosevelt's concerns.
Mr. Robert Tucker, Director Of Planning, said any solution will depend on the ultimate
development of the land, but he did not feel the land will ever develop to its maximum
potential. Mr. Henley noted that the Board had recently seen a copy of the Pantops Master
Plan. Mr. Tucker said the developer could proffer that plan as his proposal. Mr. Roosevelt
said if the Highway Commission acts favorably on this request for industrial access funds,
it is the same as requesting that State Farm Boulevard be taken into the State ~eqondar~
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Agenda Item 3b. Request for street sign and naming of street. Mr. Roudabush reported
receipt of a request from Mr. Harry van Beek, President of Klockner-Pentaplast dated
October 3, 1979 for an appropriate street sign naming Route 860 in Albemarle County from
Route 231 to the Louisa County boundary "Kloeckner Road". He reported Klockner-Pentaplast
would pay the cost of the signs and their installation. Mr. Roudabush offered motion for
adoption of the following resolution:
WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify State Secondary
Road 860 in Albemarle County from Route 231 to the Louisa County Boundary Line and be
designated K!oeckner Road:
WHEREAS Kloeckner-Pen~aplast of America, Incorporated, has agreed to purchase
these signs through the Office of the County Executive and to conform to standards
set by the State Department of Highways and Transportation:
~OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and the_same
is hereby requested to install and maintain the above mentioned street signs.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item 3c. Report: Flooding of Route 29 North. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County
Engineer, presented a verbal report to the Board regarding the flooding problem on Route
29 North near the entrance to Berkeley Subdivision. H~ said shortly after the flood on
June 2, 1979, he was approached by several of the affected people ~from the area. He said
in his study he tried to identify the frequency of the storm which caused the flooding and
the capacity of the. two culverts, one on Commonwealth Drive and one on Route 29 near Pizza
Inn. Mr. Bailey reported the capacity of the culvert on Commonwealth Drive was for a
storm frequency of every 2~ years, and for the culvert on Route 29 of every 10 years. Mr.
Bailey said the design recommended by the Highway Department would provide 10 year service
under secondary roads and 50 year service under Route 29. Costs for such service would be
approximately $30,000 for the traditional culvert and $200,000 for the specially requested
culverts.
Mr. Fisher asked where funds for such a project would come from. Mr. Bailey said
they would have to come from Highway funds, and he would assume that such a project would
be done at the same time as improvements are made to Route 29.
Dr~ Iachetta said something must be done as soon as possible, as the last flooding
washed away property and almost killed one family trying to escape from their home. He
said there was $50,000 damage to property on Berkmar Drive and the Pizza Inn, reported two~
feet of water in the building. He added that the flooding problem would worsen as the
development of the Berkeley/Four Seasons/ Berkmar Drive area progressed unless something
is done now. He then offered motion requesting the Highway Department to design a cor-
rection to Commonwealth Drive and recommend improvements and a time frame to correct Route
29 North. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom. Roll was called and motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Bailey about a statement in his report: "current county
drainage policy is inadequate to protect personal property and human life." Mr. Bailey
said the person who prepared that aspect of the report was no longer with the County
staff, but it was his opinion that only-traffic was considered in road decisions. Mr.
Lindstrom felt this should be investigated further by Mr. Bailey and Mr. Agnor, and
reported back to the Board.
Agenda Item No. 3d. Request' for Sign to Designate Clearview Community. Mr. Fisher
read a request from Mr. Robert Busby requesting Clearview be designated a Community, and
signs be placed on Route 660 to identify it as such. Mrs. Jacqueline Huckle, a resident
of the area was present and said there are people in the area who own large acreages and
they do not feel the area should be identified by the name of one subdivision.
Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department had been asked to put up signs designating
this area as "Clearview". If this request is approved by the Board, signs would be
erected at the expense of the Highway Department and Clearview would be noted on County
road maps.
Mr. Lindstrom requested this item be deferred to November 14, 1979 and made motion to
this effect. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 3e. Request to have roads taken into the State Secondary System.
Mr. Agnor presented the following requests for roads:
1)
Mr. Agnor presented letter dated September 27, 1979 from Mr. James M. Hill, requesting
that Cardinal Ridge Road in Whippoorwill Hollow Subdivision be taken into the State
Secondary System.
Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to adopt the following resolution:
R~ T~ RESOT~ED hv the RoR~ of S]]oerv~sors of Albemarle County. Virminia.
October 1G, 1979 (Regular ~ay Meeting)
2)
3)
4)
requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final
inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road
in Whippoorwill HollOw Subdivision:
Cardinal Ridge Road: - Beginning at the station 0+10 of Cardinal Ridge Road, a
point common to the centerline intersection of Cardinal Ridge Road and the edge
of pavement of Whippoorwill Hollow Road (State Route 839); thence with Cardinal
Ridge Road in a southwesterly direction 1,598.63 feet~ to station 16+08.63, the
end of the cul-de-sac of Cardinal Ridge Road in Whippoorwill Hollow Subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Trans-
portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and
drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the
Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 646,
Page 220, Deed Book 646, Page 221 and Deed Book 657, Page 790.
Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded~vote:
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS:
None.
Mr. Agnor presented letter dated September 27, 1979 from Mr. James M. Hill, requesting
that Pinedale Road in Westwoods Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System.
Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to
accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval
by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Westwoods Subdivision:
Pinedale Road: Beginning at station 0+10 of Pinedale Road a point common to the
centerline intersection of Pinedale Road and the edge of pavement of West Pines Drive
(State Route 1610); thence with Pinedale Road in a southeasterly direction 1,202.86
feet to station 12+12.86, the end of the cul-de-sac of Pinedale Road in Westwoods
Subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement
along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office o~ the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 617, page 510.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
None.
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS:
Mr. Agnor presented letter dated August 13, 1979 from Mr. James G. Cosby requesting
thatroads in Oak Forest Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System.
Dr. Iachetta offered motion for approval of the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to
accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval
by the Resident Highway Department, the following roads in Oak Forest Subdivision:
Oak Forest Drive: Beginning at station 016 of Oak Forest Drive, a point common to
the centerline intersection of Oak Forest Drive and the edge of pavement of Whitewood
Road (State Route 1455); thence with Oak Forest Drive in a southwesterly direction
329.81 feet to station 3+13.81, a point common to the intersection of Oak Forest
Circle station 3+13.81 and station 30+25.84.
Oak Forest Circle: Beginning at station 3+13.81 of Oak Forest Circle, a point common
to the centerline intersection of station 3+13.81 of Oak Forest Circle; thence with
Oak Forest Circle in a clockwise direction marking a full circle 2,712.02 feet to
station 30+25.84, the end of Oak Forest Circle.
Oak Tree Lane: Beginning at station 0+15 of Oak Tree Lane, a point common to the
centerline intersection of Oak Tree Lane and the edge of pavement of Oak Forest
Circle (Station 18+62.17); thence with Oak Tree Lane in a northeasterly direction.
529.75 feet to station 5+44.75, a point common to the centerline intersection of Oak
Tree Lane and the edge of pavement, of Oak Forest Circle (Station 28+32.17).
Pin Oak Court: Beginning at station 0+15 of Pin Oak Court, a point common to the
centerline intersection of Pin Oak Court and the edge of pavement of Oak Forest
Circle (Station 14+71.45); thence with Pin Oak Circle in a northeasterly direction
225.00 feet to station 2+40.00, the end of the cul-de-sac of Pin Oak CourT.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed rightofway and drainage easements
along these requested additions as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 658, page 796.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom ~and carried by t. he following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, and Lindstrom.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Mr. Roudabush.
Mr. A~nor~ presented letter dated September 19, 1979 from Mr. James J.S. Lee, requesting
Greentree Park Road in Greentree Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System.
__ October 10, 1979 ~(~e~_,~ m_ ~.i ' _ ].
5)
6)
1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to
accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to-final inspection and approval
by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Greentree Subdivision.
Greentree Park Road: Beginning at station 0+00 of Greentree Park, a point common to
the centerline intersection of Greentree Park and the edge of pavement of Georgetown
Road (State Route 656); thence with Greentree Park in a northwesterly direction
182~-60 feet to station 1+82.60, the end of the culdesac of Greentree Park in Green-
tree Subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia DePartment of Highways and Transportation
be and is hereby guaranteed a 40 foot unobstructe~ right-rOf-way and drainage easement
along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 670, Page 717 and Deed Book 678 Page
387.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Agnor presented letter dated October 9, 1979 from Mr. John A. Dezio, attorney for
Mr. Harold Davis, requesting Springfield Road located in Block B of Springfield
Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System.
Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to
accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval
by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Springfield Subdivision:
Sp~i.n.gfield Road: Beginning at station 0+I0 of Springfield Road, a point common to
the centerline intersection of Springfield Road and the edge of pavement of State
Route 649; thence with Springfield Road in a northeasterly direction 705.15 feet to
station 7+15.15 the end of the cul-de-sac of Springfield Road in Springfield Sub-
division.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement
along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk.of the
Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 394, page 371; Deed Book 645, page 87
and Deed Book 683 page 589.
Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Mr. Agnor presented letter dated October 1, 1979 from Mr. Garrett W. Kirksey requesting
Milton Hills, Section 3 roads be taken into the State Secondary System.
Mr. Lindstrom offered motion for approval of the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that
the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to
accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval
by the Resident Highway Department, the following roads in Milton Hills, Section 3.
Mil~on~H~.lls Drive: Beginning at station 0+00 of Milton Hills Drive in Section 3 of
Milton Hills, a point common to station 22+26.17 of Milton Hills Drive (State Route
1120) in Section 2 of Milton Hills; thence with Milton Hills Drive in a northwesterly
direction 1,574.95 feet to station 15+74.95, the end of the cul-de-sac of Milton
Hills Drive in Section 3 of Milton Hills.
Deer Valley Court: Beginning at station 0+00 of Deer Valley Court in Section 3 of
Milton Hills, a point common to the centerline intersection of Deer Valley Court and
the edge of pavement of Milton Hills Drive (station 3+58.82); thence with Deer Valley
Court in a southwesterly direction 883.09 feet to stat±on 8+93.09, the end of the
cul-de-sac of Deer Valley Court in Milton Hills, Sect±on 3.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement
along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of-Albemarle County in Deed Book 625, page 85.
Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Lindstrom.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Mr. Roudabush.
Agenda Item No. 3f. Other Highway Matters.
Mr. Dorrier said he met with Mr. Roosevelt of the Highway Department regarding the
unsafe intersection at Routes 627 and 6 near Yancey School. Mr. Dorrier said he wrote
a letter to Dr. McClure, Superintendent of Schools, regarding the possibility of a
blinking signal at this intersection, and said he would also forward a copy of this
letter to the-Highway Department.
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
3)
Complex" on Barracks Road. He said many residents use the exit as a~ entrance. As
there is no deceleration lane (or possibility to build one) at this point, it causes
sudden stops in traffic. Mr. Lindstrom asked the Highway Department if they could
erect .a "Wrong Way -- Do Not Enter" sign at the beginning of that driveway. Mr.
Roosevelt said that he would erect the sign, but would like to see someone other than
the Highway Department bear the cost, as this problem was the fault of the Board and
Planning Commission when the apartment site was approved. Mr. Tucker said it was not
the responsibility of the owner to erect further signs, as he has done all that is
necessary to comply with the site approval.
Dr. Iachetta asked if trash dumped at the corner of Routes 643 and 29 could be
removed, as it was the site of a small fire. Mr. Roosevelt said there have been
problems with trash being dumped at this site before, but he would see that it was
removed.
Agenda Item No. 4. Final Plat Appeal: Richard DeButts. Mr. Fisher said this appeal
was requested by Mrs. Emma Baber and Mr. Robert Louis Baber. Mr. Fisher noted that Mrs.
Baber was not able to attend the meeting today due to the snow.
Mr. Tucker reviewed the staff report with conditions as approved by the Planning
Commission as follows:
Location: EaSt of Mount Alto, south of intersection of Route 626 and 735, Tax Map
134, Parcel 9 in the Scottsville District. ~.~~ ~
Z.oni~g: A-i, Agricultural
Proposal: Division of one ~-acre parcel leaving 29 acres residue.
Reason for 'Planning Commission Review: Parcel is served by an easement.
Topography of Area: No severe slopes.
Condition of Roads Serving Proposal: Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation recommends pavement improvements for the existing
commercial entrance. Sight distance is adequate for the commercial
entrance. Between Route 602 South and Route 723, Route 626 is accommodating
567 vehicle trips per day and is currently listed as tolerable.
Comprehensive Plan Recommendation: Other rural land.
School Impact: Slight with one total' student projected enroIlment.
Type Utilities.: No public facilities are available.
Staff Comment: This plat meets the Land Subdivision and Development Ordinance
~a~re~ui~emants and Staff recommends approval subject to: Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met:
a. Health Department approval;
b. Compliance with the private roads provisions including: 1. County Engineer approval of road;
2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement;
c. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial
entrance approval as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979;
d. Owners' notarized signatures.
Additional Conditions Set By Planning Commission:
e. Note on the plat "no further subdivision without Planning
Commission approval;
f. Note property line in the center line of the right-of-way.
Mr. Richard DeButts was present, and said he purchased the property three years ago
as a recreational facility for his family. He said there are 1t0 acres with a house in
the center of three acres which he would like to cut off and market before the house is
destroyed by vandals.
Mr. Robert Baber was present, and said he felt the plat presented by Mr. DeButts was
misleading. He presented copies of a different plat to the Board for observation, and he
noted the following letters of appeal sent to the Planning Department:
"September 25, .1979 M
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Director of Planning
Re: Richard DeButts final plat
On behalf o~ Robert Louis Baber, who is an adjoining land owner and as
such a party in interest, this letter is to request appeal of the action
of the Planning Commission taken September 18, 1979 with respect to the
Richard DeButts final plat to the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia.
Robert Louis Baber appeals the action of the Planning Commission in
approving the final plat on the grounds that the approval constitutes a
variance from the requirements of the County Ordinances, that no
particular hardship is shown as ground therefor, that the interests of
the adjoining land owners are adversely affected thereby, and that the
action of the Planning Commission is arbitrary and results in a denial
of equal protection of the laws to other land owners similarly situated.
For the reasons stated Robert Louis Baber respectfully requests appeal
to the Board of Supervisors from the decision of the Planning Commission
rendered September 18, 1979.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) 'James P. Baber for Robert Louis Baber"
"September 26, 1979
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Director of Planning
Re: Subdivision by Richard H. DeButts, James B. & Stephen H. Helvin
I wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Board approving subdivision
request of a parcel containing 2.8 acres.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Robert L. Baber"
Mr. Tucker or Mrs. Kimsey The Planning Board of Albemarle County
I wish to express my opposition and also the opposition of Robert L. Baber, at his
request, to the subdivision of a plat of 2.8+ acres and the house of the property of
DeButts and Helvin.
Therefore we will appeal the recent decision of the Planning Board of Albemarle
County which allows the plat to be so divided.
From the enclosed rough drawing you will see how closely involved we lie. We need
more time to study the situation and its implications. The road 626 and Route 735,
also the road to the subdivision are infested with hunters day and night, 365 days of
the year and I am shot across from all four sides. (today Sept. 24, 1979, there has
been a stream of cars and running of deer dogs through the area, intersPersed with
gunfire and speeding cars.)
This supposedly quiet residential area has become a hunters paradise and at times a
dangerous thoroughfare. We do not need more of the same.
Most respectfully,
(signed) Emma Frances Baber Robert L. Baber (per EFB)"
Mr. Fisher asked if there was any variance granted by the Planning Commission. Mr.
Tucker said there were no variances, and that the private roads involved .can be allowed in
this instance. Mr. Lindstrom aSked the County Attorney if there were any grounds for
denial of this requested subdivision. Mr. St. John said this request complies with all
the necessary requirements set by the County. He said the private road was allowed at the
judgment of the Planning Commission. Mr. St. John added that he had not looked at Mr.
Baber's copy of the plat, but if there were an error, it would not be binding on the owner
as long as an easement exists.
Board members agreed this request for a subdivision met all requirements set by the
Planning Commission, and that there were no legal grounds for reversal of the approval set
by the Planning Commission. No motion was offered, and Planning Commission approval
remained.
Agenda ~em No. 5. Request for Supplementary Appropriation for the Scottsville
Library. Mx. ~Christopher Devan said the use of the Scottsville library has increased, but
staff hours and hours of operation have not. He then requested a supplementary appro-
priation of $1,500 to increase hours from 24 to 28 hours weekly and to increase staff
hours to the same amount. He said this could be accomplished by remaining open all day on
Wednesdays rather than just half a day.
Dr. Iachetta said this was a reasonable request, and offered the following motion for
approval:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia that
$1,500 be, and the same hereby is appropriate from the General Fund and transferred
to Code 18B.3--Regional Library. This is a supplementary appropriation for the
Scottsville Branch Library.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 6. Request from the Crozet Library. Mrs. Maria Thompson and Mr.
Christopher Devan said the circulation at the Crozet Library has increased 50% in the last
year, and they have outgrown their present location. Mr. Devan said an offer was made to
them by Mr. Stanley Wilcox to construct a new building for use by the library at a rent of
$2.00/square foot. Mr. Devan said construction could be completed by May and that the
library could use temporary quarters until that time. He then requested the Board's
financial support for such a venture.
Mr. Fisher said he did not feel the Board could deal with this question on such short
notice even though it seems a reasonable request. Dr. Iachetta asked how much additional
money this would require from the County. Mr. Devan said $3~000 per year increase in rent
and $10,000 for capital outlay. Mr. Fisher said he would like a recommendation from the
Library Board and Mr. Agnor, and suggested deferral of this item. Motion was offered by
Dr. Iachetta to defer this item until October 24, 1979. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom
and carried by the following recorded vote:
October 10, 1979 (R~gular Day Meeting)
138
Agenda Item No. 7. ~SP-79-53. Ernestine B. Witherspoon. (Deferred from October
1979.) Mr. Fisher noted receipt of the following letters objecting to approval of a
mobile home to be located on Mrs. Witherspoon's property.
"September 18, 1979
We wish to show strong objection to the proposal to locate a mobile home on ParceI
27, Tax Map 19. We as adjacent owners will be directly and adversely affected by
allowing a mobile home to be placed in the immediate area.
My wife and I have owned our rural home for 30 years. Our intentions are to keep it
as a farm of 13.13 acres. We also have a lot of 2.614 acres joining the property in
question.
The immediate area is composed of active farms of various sizes and quality built
homes and permitting such a development to be placed in the area would lower the
values of newly built homes, change the out look of the area and depreciate presently
existing values.~ For many years there has only been single family home developments
in accordance with County regulations. Therefore, has not been any mobile homes
placed in the immediate area. Hopefully, there will not in the near future. We
firmly object to such a development which will change the appearance of the area.
Sincerely,
(Signed) Amon P. Williams, Sr. and Maxine L. Williams"
"September 11, 1979
We wish to register a strong objection to the proposal to locate a mobile home on
Parcel 27, Tax Map 19, as described in a letter to adjacent owners by the Department
of Planning on August 20, 1979. We are adjacent owners who would be directly and
adversely affected by a variance to regulations that would allow a mobile ~home in the
immediate area.
My wife and I purchased our rural home a little over a year ago. Our intention is to
improve our 23 acre farm, and keep it as a farm. We examined the immediate area
before we bought; we found it to be active farms of various sizes and tastefully
built homes of sound and lasting values. We expected some continuing single family
home development, but in keeping with past development of the area and in accord with
County regulations. There are no mobile homes within the immediate area.
A mobile home exception in the area will turn new develOpment to loWer values, change
the character of the area, and depreciate existing values. We object to such a
development which is not in keeping with the area or its orderly development.
Sincerely,
(Signed) Neil H. Borden, Jr. and Beverly B. Borden"
"August 29, 1979
As an adjacent property owner, I am opposed to special permit #97-53 to locat~ a
mobile home on property described as County Tax Map 19, Parcel 27, Rivanna Magisterial
District. This property is located on the southwest side of the intersection of
Routes 664 and 743. '
My husband and I feel this proposed trailer would seriously devaluate our property
which is on Route 664 near the intersection of 7'43 Lot 1; Subdivision Plat showing
lots 1, 2 and 3 being the southwest portion of Property owned by Amon P. Wi!liams.
We own and live on Lot #1 as purchased December, 1978.
Sincerely,
(
Signed) Linda H. Browning and Robe.rt N. Browning III"A ~ ~
Mr. Tucker said the home presently ±oca~em on the property is aeveriora~ing, and that
Mrs. Witherspoon wished to remove that structure and temporarily replace it with a mobile
home. '
Mr. Robert Browning was present, and said he objected to the mobile home, as it would
lower his property values. He also said the area was presently developed in small farms,
and that Mrs. Witherspoon's intended us.e was out of character.
Mrs. Witherspoon was present, and she said that although they still resides mainly in
Washington, D. C., she comes to Charlottesville at least two weekends a month and needs a
place to live.
Mr. Fisher and Mr. Roudabush asked if this would be her primary home, or a vacation
home. Mrs. Witherspoon said it was used only on her trips to Charlottesville on w~ekends.
Mr. Roudabush, Dr. Iachetta and Mr. Dorrier all felt that there was a definite need for
housing for Mrs. Witherspoon, and that the request for a mobile home on her land should
not be denied.
Mr. Eugene Miller, an adjacent property owner, said he tried to purchase Mrs. Withers
property to enlarge his farm. Mr. Miller said she was not interested in selling her "old
homestead", but wished to develop a sma/ll farm herself when her husband retired.
.Mr. Fisher voiced some concern about setting a precedent in granting a mobile home
for the purpose of using it for vacations only and not as a primary residence. There being
139
October 10~1979'(Re~ular Day Me~ti~
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Fisher reminded Mrs. Witherspoon that the old structure must be removed, that
trees must remain, and that under no circumstances is she to rent out the mobile home.
Agenda Item No. 8. Gordon Yager -- Report on Soil Map.
Mr. Yager of S.C.S. was present, and-presented to the Board a copy of the "Interim
Soil Survey Report". Mr. Yager said this report covers 180,000 acres of the County, and
that the report includes copies of field sheets, key sheet of mapped areas, soil names and
information about the various types of soils. He noted that copies of this report have
been given to about 90 other people, such as land surveyors, real estate people, engineers,
etc. Mr. Yager reported that there are still approximately 143,000 acres in the County
remaining to be surveyed, and that his office anticiPates completion of this report some-
time in June, 1981. Mr. Yager said the survey was made by soil scientists who observed the
steepness, length and shape of slopes, the size of Streams and the general pattern of
drainage; the kinds of native plants or crops; the kinds of rock; and many facts about the
soils. Holes were dug to expose soil profiles, which are the natural sequence of layers
or horizons in the soil. Profiles were recorded and compared to those in other counties
nearby and in places more distant, in accordance with uniform procedures used throughout
the nation.
Mr. Roudabush said this type survey is most useful to land surveyors such as himself,
and was anxious for the completed report to be issued. 'Other Board members were equally
enthusiastic about the possible uses of this report. Mr. Fisher thanked Mr. Yager on
behalf of the Board for his presentation.
Agenda Item No. 8a. At 12:25 P.M., Motion was offered by Mr. Roudab~sh, seconded by
Mr. Lindstrom, to adjourn into executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel
matters. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
The Board reconvened into open session at 1:42 P.M.
Agenda Item No. 9. Public Hearing: Community Development Block Grant Program.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 7, 1979). This public hearing was requested
by the H~s~ Coordinator's Off~ce. The r~quest is for approval to Submit a proposed grant
application to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. This grant
program will provide funding for housing rehabilitation for low income families in Albemarle
County. The funding is available through the Community Development Block Grant/Small
Cities Program. This application process is a competitive one in that the Department of
HUD does not have funding for all localities that apply. No one from the public was
present to speak, and Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Motion tO approve
the application for funds was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, L~ndstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 10. Discussion of Lease for Meadows Community Center Building.
St. John presented the following lease for the Board's consideration.
Mr.
THIS LEASE, made this 10th day of October, 1979, by and between the County of
Albemarle, Virginia, hereinafter called the Landlord, and The Jefferson Area Board
for Aging, hereinafter called the Tenant,
W I TNE S SETH:
1. Description of Leased Property.
That in consideration of the rents herein reserved and the mutual promises
herein made, the Landlord hereby leases unto the Tenant the following described
property:
Ail that certain lot or parcel of land, with improvements thereon and
appurtenances thereunto pertaining, consisting of a cummunity center, a
narrow strip of land around the community center, and a roadway from the
community center to Route 240, being approximately 1.050 acres, more or
less, located off Route 2~0, south of the Town of Crozet, Virginia, designated
as Parcel B on a plat of R. O. Snow and Associates, dated April 14, 197~,
and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of
Albemarle in Deed Book 595, page 449.
2. Term of Lease.
The term of this lease shall be for a period commencing on October 1, ~979,
and shall expire on September 30, 1980. Unless terminated by either party hereto at
the end of the term by notice in writing to the other at least ninety (90) days prior
thereto, this lease shall continue thereafter, on a year-to-year basis, upon the same
terms and conditions and at the same rent, as this lease, until terminated at the end
of some such term by either party be giving to the other written notice at least
ninety (90) days prior to such termination.
October 10, 1979 (R~gular Day Meeting)
to be undertaken by the Tenant, as set forth in this lease.
4. Use of Premises.
The Tenant shall use the premises as a public facility for recreational,
social, civic and other public activities and services oriented primarily toward
benefitting the elderly citizens of the community under the direction of the Board of
Directors of the Tenant and an Executive Director appointed by the Board of Directors.
5. Obligations of the Parties.
(a) Obligations of the Tenant.
The Tenant will maintain the premises, keeping the premises in good repair
except for ordinary wear and tear, pay for all utilities and other services, provide
all furnishings and furbishments, see to the proper management of the facility in
such a manner as to accomplish the public purposes set out above at the most economical
cost practicable in keeping with the fulfillment of the purposes. The Tenant at all
times during~the term of this lease will provide tenant's hazard insurance and liability
insurance for its employees.
(b) Obligations of the Landlord.
The Landlord will provide fire and casualty insurance on the premises and
Will undertake major repairs of exceptional nature other than ordinary wear and tear,
due to mechanical failure, design failure, or act of God. The Landlord shall have no
duty to make ordinary day-to-day repairs or provide custodial service or maintenance.
~ 6. Sublease.
The Tenant shall not assign this lease or sublet the whole or any part of
the premises leased hereunder without the prior written consent of the Landlord.
This assignment restrict±on is not intended to prohibit use by public or private
groups, agencies, or organizations on an occasional basis under the supervision of
the Tenant.
WITNESS the~following signatures and seals:
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
(Signed) Gerald E. Fisher
THE JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING
(Signed) James H. Elmore, Executive Director
With Mr. Agnor's recommendation for approval, motion to authorize the Chairman to
sign the above lease was offered by Mr. Lindstrom and 'seconded by Mr. Dorrier. Roll was
called, and motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 11. Request from Region X Mental Health to increase the FY 80
appropriation. Mr. James R. Peterson, Executive Director of the Region X Mental Health
and Retardation Services Board was present, and read his letter written to Mr. Agnor dated
September 14, 1979:
"Two years ago the Region Ten Community Services Board adopted a new formula for
apportioning the local tax share among the six participating localities. For
Our current year, FY 80, the total local increase actually granted was less than
one percent (from $148,092 to $149,322). The Virginia Department of Mental
Health and Mental Retardation is withholding $25,000 in state mental health
dollars previously allocated to our Board because of the shortfall in local
match.
The apportionment formula is based on three equal factors: population; ~alue of
services received by the locality; and revenue capacity. The Region Ten Board
has reexamined this formula in light of the unfavorable local response and has
decided to resubmit the FY 80 requests based on a revised apportionment formula.
The revised formula retains the elements of population and valu~e of services but
drops the "revenue capacity" factor.
The philosophical rationale for including a measure of revenue capacity originally
was that federal and state grants were determined in part according to the
relative economic standing of our area and therefore this should be reflected in
turn within our formula in establishing the relative levels of local partici-
pation. Experience now reveals that the relative wealth of our area has not
been a determinig factor in state or federal funding.
The Region Ten Boa-rd respectfully requests that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors increase its FY 80 appropriation from $55,199 to $55,606 based on
the revised apportionment formula. The revised request represents a total
increase over the FY 79 level of 5.91 percent (.0591).
We wish to emphasize the urgency of this request in that staff positions are
being held open pending the outcome of our local appeals.
Sincerely,
(signed) James R. Peterson, ACSW
Executive Director"
Mr. Fisher said the amount was almost too small to waste the Board's time. Mr. Peterson
said it was not just the $407.00 that he was interested in, but the formula change, because
that will affect apportionment for the years to come.
Following a brief discussion by Board members, it was the consensus of opinion to
approve Mr. Peterson's request, as it created little effect on Albemarle County. Mr.
Henley then offered th~ fn]]nw~ m~ em~ ~~-
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
AYES:
NAYS:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia that
$407.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred
to Code 18B.2--Region X Mental Health and Retardation; this amount due under the
revised apportionment formula.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier and carried by the following recorded vote:
Messrs. Dorrier, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
Mr. Fisher.
Agenda Item No. 15. Request from the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. Mr. Agnor
presented cop~ies of Senate and House bills which amend the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act to provide additional allotment of funds to Virginia. The Rivanna Authority Board
requested the County and City to seek support of congressional representatives for this
legislation, to improve the funding available to complete the Crozet interce.ptor. Mr.
Agnor requested the Board to review the following resolution and consider forwarding same
to Virginia's representatives in the House and Senate:
WHEREAS, the State Water Control Board of the Commonwealth of Virginia in its
efforta to comply with the provisions of Public Law 95-217 (the Clean Water Act) has
identified the need for Municipal Wastewater treatment projects in Virginia and has
developed a priority process for the funding of said projects, and
WHEREAS, the State Water Control Board has been able to obligate its share of
federal funds by May 31 of the succeeding fiscal year, and
WHEREAS, 'the County of Albemarle believes the federal government should recognize
the timely actions of Virginia as being one of the few states wh'ich promptly obligates
available funds, and
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle believes the federal government should respond
to the needs identified by the State Water Control Board, now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED, that the County of Albemarle requests the passage of House Bill
4113 and Senate Bill 1328 if amended to substitute "May 31" for "March 31" so that
the two similar bills would read as follows:
"Additional Allotment"
"Section 218.~(a) If on May 31 of any fiscal year a State which has obligated 90
per centum or more of the funds allotted to such State for the preceding fiscal year
under section 205 of this title, the Administrator shall allot to such state for
obligation after the first day of the fiscal year which begins after such May 31 an
amount equal to the difference between the amount allotted to such State for such
fiscal year under section 205-and the amount appropriated under section 207 of this
title for such fiscal year and attributable to such State."
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that our congressional delegation and other appro-
priate individuals be informed of this action.
Mr. Fisher asked about HR 4020, and Mr. Agnor said this was an amendment to bill
#4113. Mr. Agnor noted that it was not spoken to in a resolution adopted by the Thomas
Jefferson Planning District Commission, and should not be considered by this Boar~.
Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adopt the resolution
as presented. Roll was called, and motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Lindstrom.
None
Mr. Roudabush.
Agenda Item No. 16. Report and request for an appropriation for Land Use Task Force.
Mr. Timothy Lindstrom reported that he and Mr. St. John attended a'meeting set up by the
Virginia Municipal League and the Virginia Association of Counties to deal with the trend
in courts to substitute decisions for legislation in zoning matters. He said the task
force is trying to approach the problem by studying procedures and decisions in land use
cases.~w~He s~d ~ ~ w'~[m~~~. ~, ~ ~ t_s~ o s ~y certain, circuit court cases to determine if there has
been an ero~mon f~m . ~s evmously discussed during the August 15, 1979 meeting
of the Board, Mr. Lindstrom reported the Task Force hoped to raise $19,000 to conduct the
study, and asked the Board to consider making their "commitment", ~ ~,olid aDDr. oDriation of
$1,500 towards this goal. He concluded by saymng the County, ~"-.'-~ .[~-~,~ou!d have
little chance in'affecting change; that it needed the support of most of the counties and
municipalities to build a foundation.
Mr. Fisher asked if the' $1,500 was a contribution. Mr. Lindstrom said money was
being collected on a voluntary basis, and that many of the more populated northern counties
have already contributed large sums to the study. Mr. Dorrier felt this study was a good
idea, and asked how long it would take to complete. Mr. Lindstrom said approximately nine
months to a year. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia that
$1,500.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and trans-
ferred to Code 18A.Ib--Virginia Association of Counties Land Use Task Force. The
purpose is to study judicial decisions in zoning matters.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, and Lindstrom.
None.
Mr. Roudabush.
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 17. Legislative Matters. Mr. Fisher said these proposed resolutions
were discussed at last weeks meeting, and that a final decision by the Board was neces-
sary. Motion to approve the following five resolutions to amend the State code regarding
bingo laws was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
RESOLUTION PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO AMEND
SECTION 18.2-340.9(H) TO AUTHORIZE THE
GOVERNING BODY OF ANY COUNTY, CITY OR TOWN
TO ADOPT A LOCAL ORDINANCE CONTROLLING THE
PLACING OF SIGNS ADVERTISING ANY BINGO GAME
WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems
to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations
authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and
WHEREAS, efforts of the General .Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its
1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct
problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for
or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of
Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or
lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia be memorialized
to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.9(H) as ~follows:
Section 18.2-340.9. Prohibited practices.-- In addition to_those other practices
prohibited by this article, the following acts or practices shall also be pro-
hibited under the provisions of this article:
H. The governing body of any county~ city or town is ~hereby
authorized to adopt a local ordinance regulating the placement
of any sign or signs advertising any bingo game. No organization
shall place or cause to be placed any sign or signs advertising
any bingo game in violation of the requirements of such ordinance.
~&~&~-e~e-~e~-~e-eg-~e-e~e~&e~-e~-~e-~em~eee-~e~e
~e~-~&~e-~ame-Ae-~e-~e-~a~e~
RESOLUTION PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA~TO AMEND VIRGINIA
CODE SECTION 18.2-340.5 TO AUTHORIZE LOCAL
GOVERNING BODIES TO SET THE PERCENTAGE OF AN
ORGANIZATION'S BINGO OPERATION RECEIVED FROM
"INSTANT BINGO."
WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems
to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations
authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and
WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its
1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct
problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for
or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of
Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or
lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is memorialized
to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.5 to authorize the governing body of any
county, city, or town to set the percentage of gross receipts of an organization's
bingo operation received from the playing of "instant bingo."
In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends
changing Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.5 to read as follows:
Section 18.2-340.5. "Instant bingo".-- A. Any organization qualified to conduct
bingo games pursuant to the provisions of this article is authorized to play
"instant bingo" as a part of such bingo game; provided however, that "instant
bingo" may be conducted only at' such times as a regular bingo game as defined in
Section 18.2-340.1 2 is in progress and only at such location and at such times
as are specified in the bingo application permit.
B. The gross receipts in the course of a reporting year from the playing of
"instant bingo" shall not exceed thirty-three and one-third per centum of the
gross receipts of an organization's bingo operation;
Provided however~ that the governing body of any county, city or town
is hereby authorized to adopt a local ordinance allowing gross receipts
in the course of a reporting year for the playing of "instant binEo"
to be that percentage of the ~total gross receipts of an organization's
bingo operation that the local governing body considers appropriate.
t43
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
D. Any organization playing "instant bingo" shall maintain a record of the
date, quantity and ~card value of instant bingo supplies purchased as well as the
name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies. The organization
shall also maintain a written invoice or receipt from a nonmember of the organ-
ization verifying any information required by this subsection.
E. No organization shall sell an "instant bingo" card to any individual below
sixteen years of age.
RESOLUTION PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO AMEND VIRGINIA CODE
SECTION !8.2-340.6(D) TO SIMPLIFY RECORD-KEEPING
REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems
to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations
authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and
WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its
1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct
problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for
or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of
Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or
lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia be memorialized
to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.6(D) to simplify the record-keeping require-
ments set forth in that section for organizations authorized to conduct bingo' games
and authorize as a local option more detailed record-keeping requirements.
In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends
changing Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.6(D) as follows:
Section 18.2-340.6. Reports of gross receipts and disbursements required; form
of reports; failure to file; certificate of compliance; right of entry upon
premises; records.--
D. ~Ae-e~a&Rea~&eR-e~a&~-ma&R~a&R-a-~eee~-&R-w~&~-e$-~e-~a%ee
e~-w~&e~-~&~e-&s-~a~e~?-~e-R~m~e~-e~-~ee~e-&~-a~e~ee-e~-eae~
~a~e-a~-~e-ame~-e¢-~e-~eee&~e-a~-~&eee-~a&~-e~-eae~-e~e~-~a~.
ame~R~-e¢-e~e~-awa~ The organization playing bingo shall
maintain an itemized record of all receipts and disbursements; including
operating costs and use of proceeds incurred in operating bingo games.
The governing, body of any county~ city or town is hereby authorized to
adopt a local ordinance requiring the organization to maintain a
record in writing of the dates on which bingo is played, the number of
people in attendance on each date and the amount of the receipts and
prizes paid on each such day. The governing body of any county~ city
or town is further authorized to adopt a local ordinance requiring the
organization to maintain a record of the name and address of each
individual to whom a door prize~ regular or special bingo game prize
or jackpot from the playing of bingo is awarded~ as well as the amount
of such award.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO AMEND VIRGINIA CODE
SECTION 18.2-340.7 TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENT OF AUDIT
OF REPORTS FOR BINGO GAMES AND RAFFLES OPTIONAL
WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems
to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations
authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and
WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its
1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct
problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for
or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of
Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or
lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia be memorialized
to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.7 to provide that the requirement of audit of
reports of bingo games and raffles is optional.
In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends
changing Virgini~ Code Section 18.2-340.7 to read as follows:
Section 18.2-340.7. Audit of reports; fee.--A. AA~-e~e~-~epe~e-$&&e~
~a~-~e-See~&e~-~8~-8~-~a~-~e-a~&~e~-~-e~e~-~eea~-e~e&a~
as-~e-Be~e~R&~-~e~-e~a~-~ee&~a~e. The governing body of any county.~,
city or town is hereby authorized to adopt a local ordinance~requiring
'that ail such reports 'filed pursuant to Section 18.2-3~0.6 shall be
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
B. If such an ordinance is adopted~ the local governing body shall
establish a reasonable audit fee not to exceed one percentum of the gross
receipts which an organization reports pursuant to Section 18.2-340.6.
The local governing body may establish a graduated scale to determine
such audit fee. Such audit fee shall accompany each such annual report;
provided, however, that if the gross receipts of an organization are
less than two thousand dollars for the designated reporting period, such
audit fee may be waived by the local governing body.
C. Such audit fee shall be payable to the local designated
official who is responsible for the performance of such audit.
RESOLUTION TO AMEND ARTICLE 1.1 OF TITLE 18.2 OF
THE CODE OF VIRGINIA (BINGO AND RAFFLES) SECTION 18.2-340.4
TO AUTHORIZE THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY TO SET THE HOURS
PER DAY AND THE DAYS PER WEEK THAT BINGO GAMES WILL BE CONDUCTED
WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major
problems to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organ-
izations authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle;
and
WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its
1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct
problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not Suited for
or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of Virginia
is best able to-determine what controls are needed for bingo games or lotteries
conducted in their respective jurisdictions;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is memorialized
to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.4 to provide that the governing body of each
city or county in which a bingo game is conducted shall set the frequency of conduct
of such bingo games.
In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends
changing Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.4 to read as follows:
Section 18.2-340.4. Frequency of conduct of bingo games~-e~ee&a~-~e~m&%T
~e-e~a~&~a~&e~-ma~-~e~-~&~e-~amee-me~e-~eg~e~-~a~-~we-ea~e~a~
&a~-&~-aR~-e~e-ea~e~a~-wee~-e~ee~-~a~-a-e~eeAa&-~e~m&~-ma~-~e-~a~e~
a~-e~a~&~a~&e~-w~&e~-w&~-e~%&~e~aR-e~a~&ea~e~-%e-ee~e~-me~e
&e-~e~-&R-~&e~a%&eR-e$-a~-&eea~-ee~&R~-e~&Ra~ee~ The governingbod¥
of any County~ city or town is hereby authorized to 'adopt a local
ordinance Setting the frequency of conduct and the hours per day that-
an organization may hold bingo games.
Mr. Agnor next presented a resolution requesting the Jefferson Area United
Transportation, Inc. be eligible for exemption from personal property taxes. Motion was
offered for approval of~the following resolution,by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom,
and carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom-and Roudabush.
None.
RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE CODE OF VIRGINIA-BY ADDING
A SECTION RELATING TO PROPERTY OF JEFFERSON AREA UNITED
TRANSPORTATION, INC. EXEMPT FROM TAXATION
WHEREAS, the Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc., a charitable, nonprofit
organization, is presently providing transportation services to the citizens of the
County of Albemarle ena nonprofit basis; and
WHEREAS, the transportation vehicles of Jefferson Area United Transportation,
Inc. are presently taxes by the County of Albemarle; and such taxation reduces services
that would otherwise be provided the citizens of the County-of Albemarle;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of
Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is memorialized
to amend the Code of Virginia to provide that property owned by the Jefferson Area
United Transportation, Inc., and used by it exclusively for charitable purposes on a
nonprofit basis, be exempt from taxation.
In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends
adding a section to the Code of Virginia to read as follows:
-Section
Property of Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc.--
A. The Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc., a nonprofit organization, is
hereby classified and designated as a charitable organization within the context
of Section 6(a)(6) of Article X of the Constitution of-Virginia.
B. Property owned by the Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc. and used by
it exclusively for charitable purposes on a nonprofit basis, as set forth in
subsection A of this section, is hereby determined to be exempt from taxation,
State and local, including inheritance taxes.
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Boards and Commissions, and that Board members must look for qualified people to fill them
as soon as possible.
Agenda Item No. 12. Site Plan Appeal: Church of the Incarnation. Dr. Iachetta said
he wished to abstain from discussion and vote on this matter, as he had done engineering
work on the design plans for this site.
Mr. Tucker read the following staff report:
Location: Property described as part of parcel IA on'tax map 61Z, Charlottesville
Magisterial District; located off the east side of Route 29 North at
Branchtands.
Acreage: 10 acres
Zoning: PUD
History: On August 7, 1978, the Board of Supervisors approved a special permit
(SP-78-31) for the development of 80+ acres of this property.
~roposal: A 7,000 square foot addition to the existing church. Topography of Area: Level.
Soils: The Soil Conservation Service reports no particular soil problems with
proper erosion control measures.
Compr~h~si~e~Plan Recommendation: Urban area/low, medium and high residential
densities recommended.
Type Utilities: Public facilities are available.
Staff Comment: The Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commented
that the existing access on Route 29 North is adequate at this time.
The Albemarle County Service Authority and the Fire Prevention Officer
have recommended that the applicant connect to public water at this
time. The applicant, however, does not feel that water is reasonably
available for the church addition. This site plan complies with
Article 17 of the Zoning Ordinance and Staff recommends approval
subject to:
R~b~mmended Conditions of Approval:
1. A building permit will not be issued until the following
conditions have been met:
a. Compliance with conditions C. 1-3 of SP-78-3t;
b. County Engineer approval of pavement specifications and
drainage facilities;
c. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations;
d. Show on plan general intersection and alignment of approved
collector road as shown on approved "plan 3 amended" under SP-78-31
(Board of Supervisors approval August 7, 1978);
2. A Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until the following
conditions have been met:
a. Compliance with condition number D-3 of SP-78-31 within the
area shown on the site plan dated 9-19-79 NMC.
Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission-approved this site plan on September
27, 1979. M~. Tucker said h~ received the following letter requesting this appeal hearing
by the Board:
"September 28, 1979
Re: Incarnation Church Site Plan
Dear Ms. Neher:
As I discussed with you on the telephone today, Father William Gardner of the
Church of the Incarnation wishes to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission at
its September 25, 1979, meeting with respect to the condit±on regarding water imposed
by the Planning Commission in the approval of the site plan for the church expansion.
Accordingly, I am filing this appeal on behalf of the church.
As we discussed, this will be placed on the October 10, 1979, agenda.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) M. E. Gibson, Jr."
Mr. Tucker said the Fire Marshal felt this was an appropriate time to have water for
fire protection. Mr. Roudabush said he thought this area was already on public water and
sewer lines. Mr. Fisher said the approval of a PUD such as Branchlands, required water
improvements to the site. Mr. Tucker said this was something the Board needed to decide,
and he noted that the church intends to maintain twelve acres, separate from the PUD.
Mr. M. E. Gibson, Jr., of the law office of Tremblay and Smith, representing the
applicant, said the membership of the church would be the same, only the building space
would be enlarged. He said the water requirement by the Fire Marshal would make them
construct a 12 inch water line the distance of 2,000 feet, which represents a cost equal
to 10% of the total construction costs for the new building. He said it was his goal to
eliminate this requirement for water which would cost them approximately $50,000; and also
to eliminate this as a requirement for their certificate of occupancy. He said this
waterline would service a temporary structure, and that there would be no way for them to
regain their loss.
Mr. Dan deBettencourt illustrated to the Board how the water line would have to be
laid initially in order to furnish fire hydrant service to the present structures (a
distance of 2,000 feet), he then showed the Board the final entrance road, and that the
location of the hydrant and length of the water line would be shortened to only about 50
feet. He said this would cause the church to lay about 1,950 feet of line for a temporary
use.
/?
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Mr. Fisher said it would be up to the Board to determine what length of water line
would be considered reasonable. He asked if the church would be willing to hook onto the
public water line as soon as it is within approximately 200 feet of their buildings. Mr.
Gibson said they were very interested in getting hooked up to the public water, as the
well system they are presently on is inadequate and of poor quality. Mr. Roudabush suggested
that a temporary dry hydrant system be installed, which would allow a pumper truck to pump
water to the structure, and would meet the fire protection requirement set by the Fire
Marshal. Mr. Gibson said this possibility was investigated, but the nearest fire company
(Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Company) does not have a pumper truck.
Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Henley said they could support an amendment of the conditions.
Mr. Fisher asked for an opinion from Mr. St. John regarding the church being a part of the
PUD. Mr. St. John said it was his opinion that according to the plans approved in SP-78-
31, the land for the church facility was reserved apart and separate from the area to be
developed.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to approve the site plan with the Planning
Commission conditions, but changing conditions iA and lC to read as follows:
IA. Mandatory connection to water line and placement of hydrants to requirements of
the County Fire Official as provided in Condition "C" at such time as a water line
shall be available within 200 feet of any required fire hydrant or building.
lC. Fire Official approval of future hydrant locations.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote:
,Henley
AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher,/Lindstrom and Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 13.
12, 1979).
Site Plan Appeal:
Christian Mission.
(Deferred from September
Mr. Fisher said this item was deferred so the applicant could set up a meeting with
the adjoining property owners, and see if they would be interested in participating in the
cost of laying 3,000 feet of water line. Mr. W. G. Landes said letters were sent to
property owners to find out their interest in laying this public water line over their
property. He said four answers were received of the seven letters mailed. Two of the
letters indicated interest in the project. Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr., said an estimate of
cost was~obtained from Mr. Rives Gentry, who said it would cost approximately $15.00
/linear foot including the boring under Route 250, plus additional for five hydrants for a
total of approximately $50,000. He also noted that this would not affect the insurance
coverage for this property , as they are still four miles from the nearest fire station.
Dr. R. V. Finley, President of the Christian Mission, said they did want the water
line there, but that it would be contingent on the sewer line from Crozet passing their
property.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to approve the site plan as recommended by
the Planning Commission with the following conditions:
1. A building permit will not be issued for the guest house until the following
conditions have been met:
a. Written Health Department approval;
b. Note building information for the guest house on the plan, i.e. square
footage, number of floors, number of rooms, etc.;
c. Compliance with the Runoff Control Ordinance;
d. No buildings shall be constructed on slopes greater than 25%;
e. ApProval of future hydrant locations by the County Fire Official.
f. Mandatory connection to the water lines and placement of hydrants to
requirements of the County Fire Official at such time as appropriate water
lines shall be available within 200 feet of either the building or any
required hydrant site.
2. Water diversion and seeding specifications for the athletic field to
be approved by the County Engineer;
3. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a
commercial entrance for the intersection of Old Route 250 and Route 677, if
required;
2. Maintenance agreement for 01d Route 250 between landowners using the road,
to be approved by the County Attorney.
5. Five parking spaces shall be provided at the proposed guest house. If the
guest house should be rented at any time in the future, the site plan shall be
amended prior to any rental of u~its, to provide an appropriate number of parking
spaces.
AYES:
NAYS:
The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Not Docketed. Mr. Tucker asked the Board to adopt a resolution of intent to allow
the planning staff to begin studying ordinance amendments (Subdivision and Zoning)' to
allow for implementation of the Route 29 North corridor study.
Mr. ~isher asked if this would interfere with the rewriting of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Tucker said no. Mr. St. John said he would recommend adopting a resolution of intent
to allow the planning staff to move forward. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta,
Seconded by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution of intent:
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
~BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does
hereby state its intent to amend both tha Albemarle County Land Subdivision and
Development Ordinance and the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in appropriate
sections in order to implement the adopted Route 29 North Corridor Study; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Commission is hereby directed
to draft appropriate amendments to these ordinances, hold public hearings on said
amendments, and return their recommendations to this Board at the earliest possible
date.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 14. Carnival License. Mr. J. Ashley Williams, President of the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Jaycees, referred to his letter dated September 27, 1979 re-
garding the payment of a $100/day license fee for the operation of a carnival or circus
under Albemarle County Code Section 11-49. He said they operated a "Fun Fair" the first
week in July this year, and after payment of license fees totaling $748, they only netted
a profit of $835. He asked if the Board could eliminate or reduce the County's license
fee to allow charitable organizations to at least see a profit for their efforts and have
more funds to effectively help the needy in the community.
Mr. Fisher asked how much of the gross receipts of the carnival they received. Mr.
Williams said they received 20% of the total receipts. Mr. Fisher then asked how the
Board could determine the difference between a charitable, non-profit organization and
some other type group. Mr. St. John said the charter of the organization could be re-
viewed and that also the Federal Internal Revenue Service keeps a master list of all non-
profit organizations. Mr. Ray Jones said there are only about six applications made each
year for carnivals under this code section.
Debate ensued regarding the possibility of too many carnivals coming into the County
because of a reduced license fee, and also the problem of the charitable organization
having to pay that license fee from their net receipts. Mr. Jones and Mr. Agnor said the
license fee should be taken from the gross receipts and the cost shared by the carnival
management and the charitable organization. Mr. Bruce Duncan of the Seminole Trail
Volunteer Fire Department asked if the license money could be refunded at the conclusion
of the carnival. Mr. Fisher said that would be impossible. Mr. Jones and Mr. St. John
suggested wording be placed in the ordinance that the license fee be paid by the operator
of the carnival.
Mr. Henley suggested the County parallel the State's ordinance. Dr. Iachetta then
offered motion to advertise for a public hearing to reduce the County's license fee from
$t00 per day to $25 per day in Section 11-49, and hold that public hearing on Wednesday,
November 14, 1979.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iache~ta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Mr. Fisher asked that a list be made up beginning July 1, 1979 as to how much money
was collected for carnival licenses, and how much it would equal if collected at the new
proposed fee.
Agenda Item No. 19._ Affirmative Action Plan. Mr. Agnor summarized a memorandum from
Mrs. June Moon, Administrative Assistant, regarding adoption and implementation of an
affirmative action plan for the County. Mr. Agnor said many of the practices in this plan
are already in use by the personnel department of the County. Mr. Agnor said this would
not apply to the School system, unless adopted by the School Board. Dr. Iachetta said job
classifications are the same whether the person is a typist in the County office or in a
school office, and it should be handled the same under this plan. Mr. Agnor said he
agreed; that when the offices moved into their neW facilities at Lane, a central personnel
office will be used to serve both county and school personnel.
Mr. Agnor requested adoption of the proposed plan, with two changes: those being on
page 3 the target completion date should read NoVember, 1979 instead of "immediately", and
on page 6 the target completion date should read October, 1979 instead of "immediately".
Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to accept the recommendation of the County Executive
and adopt the following affirmative action plan:
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN FOR ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
PURPOSE:
This Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) is designed to aid the Board of Supervisors
and Department Heads of Albemarle County in handling the requirements of effective
personnel management. The plan will provide directions for administration, job
structuring, recruitment, selection, evaluation, training and reporting in order to
insure fair and equal treatment of all employees of Albemarle County.
POLICY:
It is the policy of Albemarle County that discrimination against any person in
recruitment, examination, appointment, training, promotion, retention, discipline or
any other aspect of personnel administration because of political or religious opinions
or affiliations, or because of race, national origin, or other non-merit factors will
be prohibited. Discrimination on the basis of age, sex, or physical disability will
be prohibited except in cases where specific ages sex, or physical requirements would
constitute a bona fide occupational qualification.
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
'148
I. EVALUATION OF CURRENT PROGRAMS:
The Board of Supervisors employs approximately 260 persons. This number varies
depending on seasonal and temporary employment. There is a centralized personnel
office but no personnel director Therefore, the responsibility for hiring ulti-
mately rests with the Board of S~
pervisors and the County Executive. Accordingly,
this Affirmative Action Plan must be understood an the context of a small organization
with limited staff and time to commit to specialization in the affirmative action
program.
The County Executive is delegated responsibility for supervising the Affirmative
Action Plan and for insuring its proper administration. While it is obvious that a
tremendous time commitment cannot be made, nevertheless every practical and possible
effort will be devoted to the tasks assigned hereunder. Evaluations will be made
periodically and will take into consideration such major problems as limited staff
resources and time constraints.
The Board of Supervisors authorized the preparation of a personnel management
system for Albemarle County. This was prepared by an independent management co-
nsultant firm and takes into consideration discriminatory issues in the titling,
content and requirements for a particular job. Job titles have been selected to
remove sexist connotations. Educational and experience qualifications have been
reviewed to assure their relevancy to a particular job itself~ There are no re-
ferences to any issues other than merit in the installation and management policies
governing the personnel management system.
The Personnel office will periodically prepare an analysis of the local labor
market based on data available through the Virginia Employment Commission to deter-
mine population makeup, skills available, and the availability of individuals for
employment. These will be compared to the jurisdiction's present profile and eval-
uated to determine areas of improvement and areas where adjustments can be made to
eliminate sex or racial imbalance where it appears that they may exist. Record
keeping will be undertaken as necessary to peoperly prepare the EEO-4 and to isolate
helpful information to assist in evaluating and administering the AAP.
On-going evaluation of every aspect of the AAP will be undertaken by or at the
direction of the County Executive.
It should be noted that Albemarle County has been complying with EEO requirements
and has been in the process of developing this AAP for some months. Many objectives
have already been completed and are in force. It was hoped that final adoption could
be delayed until all offices are again centralized under one roof with a personnel
department headed by a director who would act as our EEO person. However, since
centralization is running behind schedule, it has become urgent to finalize this plan
in order to continue eligibility for certain funding. When offices are centralized
and an EEO person is appointed, this plan will be amended to change many of the
action steps now assigned to the County Executive to the EEO person.
The following action steps are established for Section I of the AAP:
Action Steps
Labor Market Survey
Comparison of EEO-4 to Labor Market Survey
and identification of employment areas
where weaknesses may exist preparation
of final report
Evaluation of on-going programs
As.signed to
Personnel Office
Personnel Clerk
County Executive
II. PLAN~ DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNICATION AND ADMINISTRATION:
Target
Completion
Date
Nov., 1979
Nov., 1979
Quarterly
beginning
Jan., 1980
The Affirmative Action Plan will be managed by the County Executive with the
assistance of an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Advisory Committee composed of 4
members chosen by him and representing minority groups within the County staff. The
County Executive will act as Chairman of the Advisory Committee and shall vote. The
Committee shall evaluate various aspects of the program, participate in communications
and training activities, and advise the County Executive concerning the conduct of
the AAP. Meetings shall be held no less than quarterly and minutes will be taken and
circulated as the Committee may see fit. The Committee shall establish its own by-
laws as may be deemed appropriate. The County Executive may work with all other
employees and individuals as he may deem appropriate in the execution of the AAP.
The grievance procedure established as a part of the County's Personnel-Management
System shall be followed by employees who wish to file complaints of alleged dis
crimination.
'The County'S policy concerning equal employment opportunity as embodied herein
shall be communicated to all employees and others with an interest in the County as a
possible employer. Efforts will be made to help all concerned employees in under-
standing the policy.
The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section II of the AAP:
149
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Action Steps.
Adoption of AAP and Policy Statement
Assigned to
Bd. of Supervisor~
Target
Completion
Date
Oct., 1979
Appointment of EEO Advisory Committee and ~.~-,~i.,~L~,~,;~ ~;~ ~-~'~J ..
orientation and organization of EEO Advisory
Committee County Exec.
Nov., 1979
Publication of Policy Statement on
discrimination to employees.; Placement
on bulletin boards, notification to
following groups: ~ VEC
Minority Organizations
Voc. Rehabilitation Agencies
Employee Associations
Local High Schools
Personnel Clerk
Nov., 1979
Meetings with department heads to discuss
EEO issues and to resolve these as they
develop - to isolate recurring problems
for attention.
County Exec.
Quarterly
III. JOB STRUCTURING AND UPWARD MOBILITY:
The County's Classification Plan makes every effort to eliminate any factors
which do not relate to merit criteria in employment. The County Executive will
assure that there is developed an on-going review process with regard to any new
class specifications to insure that they properly address EEO issues.
Efforts will be made to encourage supervisory personnel to evaluate their
employees to determine those who are capable and might logically move into more
responsible positions. They will then be counselled concerning needed skills and
education and efforts will be made to assist where possible. However, such employees
must compete with the open labor market for any vacant position to insure that all
qualified applicants are given an equal opportunity.
The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section III of the AAP:
Action Plan
Assigned to
Target
Completion
Date
Establishment of a policy requiring review of
class specifications periodically and prepara-
tion of new specifications when vacancies occur.
County Exec.
and
Department Heads
Annually
Identification of promising employees suitable
for eventual promotion
Department Heads
As needed
Development of counseling programs for above
employees and selection of training alternatives
County Executive
with Dept. Heads
Feb., 1980
IV. RECRUITMENT, SELECTION AND PLACEMENT:
Albemarle County recruitment efforts are directed toward local newspapers
with areawide readership and occasionally professional publications and metropolitan
newspapers are utilized. As part of the AAP, the County will actively recruit among
those organizations which may have specialized knowledge of minority, female and
handicapped individuals qualified for employment. Referrals will be requested from
the local co~mmunity college, the vocational-technical school, VEC, community action
agencies and similar resources. The statement "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" shall
appear on all recruitment literature.
To insure relevance and equity in selection and placement, employees who normally
are involved in the interview process will be trained in interview methods and pr-
ocedures. After an employee has been selected, the County Executive will determine
whether any discrimination has taken place because of matters not related to merit.
The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section IV of the AAP:
Action Steps
Assigned to
Target
Completion
Date
Publication of vacancies among organizations
familiar with minority employment potentialities
Personnel Clerk
Oct., 1979
"An Equal Opportunity Employer" shall
appear on all recruitment material
Personnel Clerk
Oct., 1979
Evaluation of need to train employees who
conduct~interviews and scheduling of such
training~ County Executive Jan., 1980
V. TRAINING:
TA~' Affirmative Action Plan will require training from the very beginning.
Individuals must be briefed on what the AAP is and hopes to accomplish. They must
understand their roles and responsibilities and realize that their own job eval-
uations will be affected by their own ability to deal effectively with their re-
sponsibilities.
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Training programs will be needed to facilitate upward mobility within employee
ranks. Such programs will be developed or researched and provided as appropriate.
Ail training activities will be evaluated to insure the participation of the appro-
priate individuals.
The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section V of the AAP:
Action Steps
Assigned to
Target
Completion
Date
Orientation of all employees concerning AAP
County Executive Jan., 1980
Orientation of EEO Advisory Committee
County Executive Nov., 1979
Training of department heads and all employee
supervisors concerning the policy statements
and its implications, the AAP, and the
individual roles in carrying out the AAP
County Executive
Jan., 1980
and thereafter
as needed
Periodic meetings with department heads to
discuss and solve EEO problems
County Executive
Continuous
Motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 20. Report of the County Executive for September, 1979 was presented
for the Board's information.
Agenda Item No. 21. Report of Social Services Department for August, 1979 was
presented in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52.
Agenda Item No. 22. Statement of Expenses - Director of Finance, Sheriff and Common-
wealth's Attorney for September, 1979. Statement of expenses for September, 1979 was
presented along with salary statements for August, 1979. On motion by Dr. Iachetta,
seconded by Mr. Dorrier, these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 23. Statement of Expenses, Regional Jail for the month of September,
1979 was presented along with salary statement for August, 1979. On motion by Dr. Iachetta,
seconded by Mr. Roudabush, these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 24. Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance and operation
of the Regional Jail for the month of September, 1979 along with summary statement of
prisoner days and salary of the jail physician and paramedics, were presented. On motion
by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, these statements were approved as presented.
The motion carried by the following recorded' vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 25. Lottery Permit. Mr. Agnor presented a lottery permit appli-~
cation from the Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company for the~calendar year 1979. Motion was
offered by Mr. Lindstrom to approve the lottery permit for the year 1979 in accordance
with the Board's adopted rules for issuance of such permits. Mr. Roudabush seconded the
motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 26. Other Matters:
Mr. Fisher read a letter of thanks from Mr. Joe Teague of the Charlottesville/Albemarle
Rescue Squad for the County's contribution to the resque squad's annual fund drive. Mr.
Fisher noted this money was a budgeted amount in the County's 1979 budget.
Oakhill Water System: Mr. Fisher requested a status report on this matter. Mr.
Agnor reported that progress has been made in the negotiations for acqu.isition of the
Oakhill Water System by the Albemarle County Service Authority. He said Mr. Thompson,
Director of the Service Authority, felt this matter will be ready to be placed back on the
Board's agenda some time in late November.
October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting)
Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from Mrs. Susie Sherwood, President of the
League of Women Voters, dated September 26, 1979 regarding the continued problem of trash
being dumped in southern Albema.rle County. The letter reminded the Board of the funds
appropriated by the Board for a solid waste collection system in 1979. It was suggested
that dumpsters or containers be placed in the problem dumping areas to help control the
problem. Mr. Dorrier said he felt it was a good area to try such a container system.' Dr.
Iachetta said container systems have run into many problems in other counties, and he felt
they would cause more problems than they solved. Mr.~Dorrier said he felt the citizens
would support it's use based on requests he had received and photos of roadside garbage he
has seen. Mr. Agnor said he would rather study the whole county to try and locate a site
for a pilot program to be conducted. Dr. Iachetta suggested the staff bring back a report
on where in the county a study of this type should be conducted. No vote was taken on
this item, and discussion ended.
Mr. Agnor reported that the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority yesterday authorized
the sale of their bond issue. These bonds will fund the local share of the fire. year
pollution abatement program, which includes all local funds except the Crozet Interceptor.
$13,250,000 until the year 2009 is being borrowed.
Mr. Agnor said an invitation had been received for the Board to tour Western Albemarle
High School during the week of November l~th. Mr. Fisher said that the Virginia Assoc-
iation of Counties meets that week but he would try to take the tour.
Mr. Agnor reported approvals had been received for three transportation g~ant pro-
grams; the Route 29 North corridor transportation system, the ride-sharing program, and
$1,000 for administrative costs for JAUNT.
Agenda Item No. 2 Minutes (continued) Mr. Lindstrom (who was not present at the
beginning of the meeting), said he had read the minutes of April 18, 1979. He offered
approval of the minutes with the following correc~tions:
2)
3)
Page 264, next to the last paragraph, the word "and" is duplicated.
" .contract has been ~exlao~ted~. "
Page 266, center page, . .
" restrictions that ~i-~0therwise be ~**~
Page 266, last paragraph, ..
applicable."
Motion for approval of the minutes was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier,. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 27. Adjournment. At 4:48 P.M. motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta,
seconded by Mr. Dorri~r, to adjourn to 11:30 A.M..~n October 11, 1979 in the Board Room of
the County Office Building. Roll was called and/~o~ion-carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Dorrier,~ Fisher, Henl'ey,
None.
Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.