Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-12-14December 14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) A regular meet±ng of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on December 14, 1977, at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Charlottesvill Virginia. Present: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. (Arrived at 9:10 A.M.), G~rald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta (Arrived at 9:40 A.M.) and W. S. Roudabush. '~Absent: None. Officers Present: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; County Attorney, George R. St.~Joh and County Planner, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Agenda Item No. 1. Fisher. The meeting was called to order at 9:09 A.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Agenda Item No. 2. Approval of Minutes: July 7, 1976; December 15, 1976 (Night), January 12, 1977, January 19, 1977 (Night), February 2, 1977, February 9, 1977, February 16, 1977, March 2, 1977 (Afternoon), March 2, 1977 (Night), March 16, 1977 (Afternoon), March 16, 1977 (Night) and March 23, 1977. Mrs. David noted the following corrections for July 7, 1976: Page 293, second paragraph, last sentence, add "%" after "25"; and page 294, first paragraph, seventh sentence from the end, change "scarry" to "scary". Motion was then offered by.Mrs. David to approve the minutes for July 7, 1976, with the above corrections. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iachetta. The remainder of the minutes are to be on the December 21, 1977, agenda. "Agenda Item No. 3b. Highway Matters: Report on Key West Roads. Mr. St. John said he wrote to Mr. Jack Schwab, the developer of Key West Subdivision, on November 14, 1977, informing him that the County holds $6,750 in negotiable instruments to secure the completion of the Key West roads. He requested Mr. Schwab to apprise him within seven days of when the roads would be brought up to State standards. If no response was received, it would be assumed that he did not intend to complete the roads and action would be taken to liquidate the negotiable instruments. Mr. St. John said response has not been received; therefore, he requested authorization from the Board to liquidate the funds. Mr. Roudabush said he understood when Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, was present in June that only minor corrections were needed in order for the roads to be accepted. On June 8, 1977, Mr. Schwab assured the Board that the necessary work would be done. (See Minutes of June 8, 1977.) Mr. St. John agreed Mr. Schwab should have another chance to state the arrangements he has made to do the work. Mrs. David then offered motion to defer this matter to December 21, 1977. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 3c. Running Deer Subdivision-Take roads into the State System. Mr. Agnor noted request dated September 16, 1977, from Mr. Robert H. Blodinger, for a road in Running Deer Subdivision, to be accepted into the State Secondary System. Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush 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 Running Deer Subdivision: Beginning at station 1+90 of Running Deer Lane, a point common to the centerline intersection of the present end of State Route 808 and Running Deer Lane; thence with Running Deer Lane in a south- westerly direction 3,416 feet to station 36+06, the end of Running Deer Lane in Running Deer 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 easements, along this requested addition as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 562, p~ge 385, Deed Book 579, page 118, Deed Book 581, page 473, Deed Book 592, pages 3~2 and 363 and Deed Book 568, page 73. Mrs'.~ David seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: &YES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 3d. Logan Village Subdivision-Take roads into the State System. December 14~ 1977 (Reg~ular-Da~ Meeting~) Agenda Item No. 3e. Sourwood Place-Take road into the State System. ~- Mr~ Agnor said at the November 9, 1977, meeting this road was not r~ady to be considered for acceptance into the State Secondary System but all the necessary ~or.k~'oha~n~w.~be~h~o~plet Mrs. David 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 Hollymead Subdivision: Beginning at station 0+12 of Sourwood Place, a point common to the north edge of Hollymead Drive, State Route 1520 and the center- line of Sourwood Place; thence with Sourwood Place in a northeasterly direction 1,145.87 feet to station 11+57.87 the end of Sourwood Place in Section 3 o~ Hollymead. 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 easements along this. requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 531, page 313, and Deed Book 639, page 195. Mr. Roudabush seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher', Henley and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 3f. Deer Run Drive~ake~r~ad~nto~t~e State System. Mr. Agnor noted request dated December 2, 1977, from Mr. M. O. Whyte, for a road in Deer Run Subdivision to be accepted into the State Secondary System. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, ¥irginia, 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 Deer Run Subdivision: Beginning at station 0-15 of Deer Run Drive, a point common to the northern edge of State Route 743 and the centerline of Deer Run Drive; thence with Deer Run Drive in a northeasterly and northwesterly direction 773 feet to station 7+57 the end of Deer Run Drive in Deer Run 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 easements along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the 0ffi~e of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 461, page 642. Mrs. David seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 3g. Deer Run Subdivision-Removal of Building Permit Moratorium. A building permit moratorium was imposed on Deer Run Subdivision on January 21, 1976 until the road was constructed to State standards or additional bond was posted to insure completion of the work. Mr. Agnor requested the moratorium be lifted with the action just taken. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. None .... ~ Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 3h. Contract for inspection of subdivision roads. Mr. Agnor said the subdivision inspection agreement has been accepted by the Highway Department. The agreement originally stated the Highway Department would be paid $500.00 per mile to do inspection of subdivision roads; the Highway Department has now agreed to a fee equal to the cost of inspection for construction of any such road. (Dr. Iachetta arrived at 9:40 A.M.) With this agreement, he recommends the approval of the contract. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to approve the following contract and that same be executed by the County Engineer. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle, Virginia, is responsible for the control OO3 WHEREAS, under the terms of the Albemarle County Land Subdivision and Development Ordinance, it is intended that subdivision streets be constructed for acceptance i~to the Virginia Secondary Highway System; and WHERE~S~7~_ Chunty of Albemarle has neither the financial resources nor the manpower to undertake a full time subdivision street inspection program at this time; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation has personnel currently available who are trained in carrying out such inspections and is willing to aid the County in carrying out such inspections as aforesaid; NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement by and between the County of Albemarle, Virginia, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth (hereinafter referred to as "the County"), of the first part, and the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, an agency of the Commonwealth (hereinafter known as "the department"), of the second part, WITNES SETH : That for and in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived herefrom and the mutual covenants contained herein, the County and the Department hereby agree as follows: The Department shall, from time to time, upon initial request of the County, review and inspect the construction of specific sub- division streets in Albemarle County. Such inspections shall be made within a reasonable time after such request in light of the regular duties of the Department's personnel and the Department's limitations of manpower. Such inspection shall be for purposes of insuring that the construction is in accord with the relevant standards of the Department and the County for the construction of secondary highways in subdivisions. The Department shall have the authority and responsibility to schedule the review of the individual items on inspection as it may see fit in order to accommodate itself and the convenience of the County and the developer. '' The County agrees to pay to the Department the actual cost incurred in performing subdivision street inspection which will be billed to the County on a quarterly basis. For purposes of this agreement, the term "inspection" shall include each and every review carried out by the Department in accordance with paragraph 1 hereof relating to the streets in any one subdivision. It is mutually understood and agreed that the individual inspectors of the Department shall remain under the supervision of the Department but shall act with the authority of the County. The findings of these inspections carried out hereunder shall be reported jointly to the Department and the County. Variations of plans or standards will be mutually reviewed and approved by the Department and County. Either party shall have the right to terminate this agreemen't at any time, which termination shall be effective immediately upon receipt by the other party of written notice of such termination; provided, however, that, as to any inspection requested prior to the date of the receipt of such notice of termination, such termination shall be effective upon the completion of such inspection. This agreement in no way changes any substantive requirement of any statute, ordinance or regulation, including, but not limited to, standards of construction and provisions of performance or maintenance bonds for subdivision streets to be added to the Virginia Secondary Highway System. The Department's Resident Engineer for Albemarle County and the County Engineer, or their respective duly designated agents, are hereby constituted the agents of the Department and of the County, respectively,, for purposes of effectuating this agreement. Agenda Item No. 3a. Pizza Inn/Mr. Donut Site Plan. (Site and Landscaping Plan for commercial buildings in Albemarle County, Virginia, for Dave and Joe Wood, drawn by Sy Richard~ Atlanta, Georgia, and marked received in the Albemarle County Planning Office on September 21, 1977.) Mr. Robert Tucker, read the following staff report into the record: "September 27, 1977 - The Planning Commission approved the site plan subject .to nine conditions one of which required the installation of a traffic signal at.Dominion Drive and Route 29 North. October 12, 1977 - On appeal, the Board of Supervisors reviewed the site plan and requested that this item be reconsidered by the Planning Commission as soon as possible. At that time the Board requested that the plan be reconsidered assuming no traffic light would be provided.-. October 25, 1977 - The Planning Commission deferred the item in order that a representative of the Virginia Department .of Highways and Tr~.~o~~ OO4 December 14, 1977 (Regular-DaY Meeting) November 1, 1977 - The Planning Commission deferred the item in order that a Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation study of the intersection be completed in order to determine if Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation would allow a traffic signal at the intersection of Dominion and Route 29 North. November 15, 1977 - The Planning Commission resolved to forward the item to the Board of Supervisors for their consideration. The resolution came about as a result of a stalemate in the voting after various motions failed. The voting deadlock came about as a result of divided .opinion regarding the location of the entrance to the site. At the November 15 meeting, half of the Commissioners (eight were.present) felt that an entrance on Dominion Drive was justified, and the other half felt that access should be by way of either Shopper's World, Route 29 North, or both. Staff opinion is that: the impact on Route 29 North should be minimized by reducing the number of curb cuts on Route 29 North; the amount of traffic through both the Shopper's~World and the Pizza Inn/Mr. Donut sites should be minimized; and that the entrance facilities constructed be such that the safety factors of the affected intersections are not reduced." Mr. Tucker then briefed the Board on the alternative entrance sites. The residents in Four Seasons and Berkeley favor the alternative of an entrance only off of Route 29 with access through Shopper's World. The staff recommendations at this point are as follows: County Engineering Department approval of storm sewer plans; County Engineering Department approval of water line plans; Staff approval of landscape plan; Add a mountable curb, 3" in height, Painted yellow, and directional sign at corner of Pizza Inn building; Access easements along travel aisles must be platted and recorded; The trees along Dominion Drive must have all limbs 7' in height and lower cut in order to aid the sight distance at entrance; Provide full frontage turn lane from Shopper's World entrance t° the entrance on Dominion Drive - 12 feet wide with curb and gutter. Mr. Tucker said a traffic study was conducted by the Highway Department at the intersecti of Route 29 and Dominion Drive for a traffic signal. Mr. W. B. Coburn, Jr., Assistant Residen Highway Engineer, reported on November 15, 1977, that the study conducted does not indicate that installation of a traffic signal is necessary at this time. Therefore, he could not recommend the installation regardless of who would pay the cost. (COPY OF LETTER DATED OCTOBER 14, 1977, IS ON FILE IN OFFICE OF CLERK TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.) Mr. Dave Ashworth, representing Pizza Inn/Mr. Donut Man, said the entrance off of 29 only would create a problem getting people in and out of the site. He noted that the mountabl curve would be four inches high and felt that it would be difficult to get over. He said the only entrance the applicant favors is off of Dominion Drive with access to Shoppers World. Mr. Ashworth said the other alternatives would create traffic problems. Mr. James Cosby, representing the Berkeley Community Association, was present. He summarized the history of Shoppers World and noted the decision of the Board at that time was that Dominion Drive was intended for a residential entrance. The residents in the area are not opposed to this use of the property but are opposed to using Dominion Drive as an entrance because of problems currently experienced with crossing 29 North. He said the homeowners favor entrance and exit through Shoppers World. The homeowners in the area are very concerned with the safety and attractiveness of Dominion Drive. Mr. Dave Wood said Shoppers World has entrances both from Route 29 North and Berkmar Drive. This property has no entrance from any private road. He felt this property was entitled to access on a public road. He said the traffic from this site will not change the existing traffic situation during the peak hour traffic flows. He felt the public should have safe access to the property. Since the Highway Department has stated that they are trying to keep Route 29 North free from any additional exits and entrances, Dominion Drive is the more appropriate entrance. Mr. St. John disagreed with Mr. Wood that the property has a legal right to access on a public road. He did not think the Highway Department can accept extraordinary circumstances to deny someone access from a public road, but, he felt this authority is contained in the Board's land use planning powers. Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, was present and said the Highway Department does not have the power to deny someone access to a public highway. In line with past practic~ of the Highway Department to limit the number of curb cuts on Route 29, the Highway Department supports the entrance being on Dominion Drive. Dr. Iachetta felt if an entrance from Dominion Drive is opened, which would give access to Sh~ppers World, traffic would use this driveway with no intention of going to Pizza Inn/Mr. Donut Man. He then offered motion to allow an entrance from 29 only. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion. Mrs. David felt the Board should ask for another proposal from the staff. Mr. Roudabush was hesistant to require a owner, with no obligations towards maintenance, to depend entirely on using someone else's property for which he may just have an easement. He felt the traffic situation at Shoppers World will worsen if this site is to rely on an entrance through Shopper World. Mr. Henley could not support another entrance onto Route 29. Mrs. David agreed. Dr. Iachetta withdrew his motion and Mr. Dorrier his second. Mrs. David then offered motion requesting the Planning Staff to submit a sketch with in and out access limited to Shoppers World; same to be on the agenda of December 21, 1977. Mr. Henley seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. n ~s s December 14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) OO5 Agenda Item No. 3j. Request for Street Signs. Mr. Agnor noted request received from Mr. John McGetrick for street signs to identify Franklin.Court. Mrs. David offered motion to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify the following roads: Franklin Court (State Route 1470) at its intersection with Woodhurst Road (State Road 1468); Woodhurst Court (State Route 146~9) at its intersection with Woodhurst Road (State Route 1468); and WHEREAS a citizen 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: NOW, 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 hereby is requested to install and maintain the above mentioned street signs. Mr. Dorrier seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iachetta. Mr. Agnor noted-request received from Colonel F. R. Blaisdell for street signs to identif Woodhurst Road. Motion was then offered by Mrs. David to adopt the following resolution' WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify the following road: Woodhurst ROad (State Route 1468) at the northwest corner of its intersection with Westminster Road (State Route 1404); and WHEREAS, a citizen 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; NOW, 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. Mr. Dorrier secOnded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 3k. Letter Accepting Roads into the State Secondary System. Mr. Agnor then read the following letter from the Department of Highways and Transportati¢ into the record: "November 21, 1977 As requested in resolution by your Board on September 14, 1977, the following addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved, effective November 1, 1977. ADDITION MILTON HILLS SUBDIVISION ~ilton Hills Drive-From: Rte. 729 northwesterly LENGTH 0.43 Mi." Agenda Item No. 3L. Other Highway Matters. Mr. Dorrier asked about the speed signs for Chestnut Grove road. the road is to be reviewed for same today. Mr. Roosevelt said Mr. Roudabush asked if white lines could be put along the edge of Rio Road from the Technical School to the City limits. Mr. Roosevelt said he did not think edge lines are feasible a~ong this section but he would check into the matter. Mr. Henley said a drainage problem exists on the left hand side of the road going north to White Hall from Crozet at the juncture of Buck Mountain Road. It is dangerous in the winter when the water freezes. OO6 December I4, 1977 (Regular-Da~ Agenda Item No. 3i. Public Hearing: A~d Section 18-43(b)(3) to the County Code~(Subdivi~ Ordinance) to require a fee for the inspection of roadway construction. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 30 and December 7, 1977.) Mr. Fisher asked that "notwithstanding the foregoing" between "road" and "such" be deleted. Since it referred to the preceding paragraph, Mr. St. John said it could be deleted. The public hearing was opened. the public hearing was closed. With no one present to speak for or against the matter, Motion was offered by Mrs. David to adopt the following ordinance deleting the above language: BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Chapter 18, Article 4, Division l~of the Albemarle County Code, be amended and reenacted by the addition of the following section: Section 18-43. Fees. (b) Final Plat. (3) In addition to the foregoing, in the case of any plat on which is shown any road to be dedicated to public use, the subdivider shall pay to the County a fee equal to the cost of the inspection of the construction of any such road. Such fee shall be paid upon completion of all necessary inspections, and shall be deemed a part of the cost of construction of such road for purposes of Section 18-19 of this chapter. Mr. Henley seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta. Mr. Tucker said the following report from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, for subdivision street inspection has been received: "To justify a full-time man on my staff, whose primary duty is subdivision inspection, I believe we must be able to indicate that at least 50% of his time is spent in subdivision inspection. Therefore, over a year's period the cost would be: Inspector's yearly pay Additives for social security, insurance, etc. (31.9%) Cost for pickup truck (1.10/hr.) Total $12,000.00 3,828.00 2,288.00 $18,116.00 Therefore minimum total cost per year would be $9,058. Although road construction has fluctuated . . I believe we can assume that seven miles of road will be completed each year. This is based upon a backlog of 22 miles of streets now approved for construction and the approval of 7.25 miles of roadway in 1977. If seven miles are added each year in the future, this would become the mileage passing through the inspection cycle each year. Therefore the average cost per mile of subdivision street inspected would become~ $9058 7 Miles = $1,300/Mi!e I believe this is the minimum figure Albemarle County should expect to pay-each year for subdivision street inspection." Based on this recommendation, Mr. Tucker felt the board should adopt a resolution to this effect. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to adopt a policy of $.25 per foot for the fee to be charged for subdivision inspection until it can be determined if such amount is sufficient. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 4. Albemarle County Service Authority: systems within their jurisdictional areas. Discussion of policy on well The Board discussed the policy which was presented by the Albemarle County Service Authority on November 16, 1977. (See Minute Book 15, Page 461.) The concern of the Board and the Service Authority was the County Engineering Department using Health Department regulations which are lower than the Service Authority's and also the number of connections that should be allowed on a well system. After some discussion, Mr. Roudabush offered motion requesting the Service AUthority and the CoUnty Engineering Office to determine the number of connections for a well system within the jurisdictional areas of the Service Authority before ion December 14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) 007 bY the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. NAYS: None. t ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 5. Request from the Planning Commission: Requiring public water within the jurisdictional areas of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Tucker discussed the following letter: "November 29, 1977 Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr. County Executive County Office Building Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Re: BOARD POLICY ON PUBLIC WATER Dear Guy: The Planning Commission on November 22, 1977, deferred action on a subdivision plat in Ivy where the question of requiring public water was raised and recommended by the staff. The Commission has requested some guidance from the Board of Supervisors concerning their policy on requiring public water: specifically, should the county require public water within the jurisdictional areas of the service authority, where it is reasonably available. This of course raises the question as to what is "reasonably available". It is my opinion that "reasonably available" must be determined on a case-by-case basis and no specific distance between existing public water and a development site should be stated as policy since this distance may vary with the nature of the project in question. The Commission was also concerned about requiring public water on two acre lots, as this particular development proposes. As I indicated to the Board a couple of weeks ago, pressure to rezone properties to higher densities may be felt when requiring public water. This was mainly in reference to areas that were not proposed for growth in our Comprehensive Plan. This is not necessarily a problem in this situation, since this area of Ivy is proposed as a Village growth center plus this area already lies within the Service Authority's jurisdictional area. The Commission deferred this matter until December 31, 1977, in order to obtain some guidance from the Board. If you have any questions concerning this, do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, (SIGNED) Robert W. Tucker, Jr." Mr. St. John referred to Section 18-25 of the Albemarle County Code: "Where public water or sewer service is reasonably accessible, such service shall be extended by the developc to all lots within a subdivision; and specifications, easements, and dedications shall be in conformity with requirements of the Albemarle County Service Authority." Mr. St. John said that means it is not an option of the Board or the Planning Commission. As long as public services are reasonably accessible the developer is bound to go that way. He said the main question is a definition of "reasonably accessible." His judgment of that definition is: 1) Property located within the jurisdictional areas of the Albemarle County Service Authority; and 2) It is economically feasible and not a hardship for the developer to use the facilities. That has to be decided on a case by case basis. Mr. St. John said the size of the lot and the distance from the pipes of the Service Authority would be a determining factor. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer, said the criteria for determining economic feasibil does not hinge on whether the developer could develop his own well system for less cost than he could run a line to tap onto the existing line of the Service Authority where no change in rate is charged to the customer for connecting to the line, then it would be reasonably economical. Mr. Fisher requested that a drafted proposal of what is reasonably available for providing public water within the Service Authority's Jurisdictional area be submitted to the Board. 'Agenda Item No. 6. Request for Approval of Fire Hydrant Installation Program. The following letter from the County Engineer was discussed: "November 30, 1977 RE: Fire Hydrant Installation Program Pursuant to your request, we have identified and located the fire hydrants which are scheduled to be installed during the current fiscal year. These hydrants are in conformity with the Comprehensive Fire Hydrant Systems and the County's Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan, with two exceptions. We have rescheduted a hydrant in the Orchard Acres Subdivision, reducing it to Priority II, and advanced one hydrant in Westmoreland to Priority I. There are twenty hydrants scheduled for installation in subdivisions and four in apartment complexes. The average cost per unit is estimated to be $1,200.00. Please note that the staff has recommended that hydrants which serve apartments should only be installed at the cost of the owner. The Board mav H~v~ ~ OO8 December 14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) Our tabulation of hydrants includes four priorities. locations are shown for Priority I only. Specific hydrant Occasionally, the County has inquiries from individuals who are willing to defray hydrant costs in order to advance the schedule. We think such offers should be accepted whenever the request is in agreement with the County's Fire Hydrant Program. The Engineering staff recommends that in such cases the County offer to pay the cost of installation whenever the individual will pay the cost of the materials needed." The following list of fire hydrant priorities for a period of four years were offered for approval. (The roman numerals I through IV represent the fiscal years.) "SUBDIVISION I II III IV TOTAL Berkeley 1 1 Camelot 2 2 Colthurst 2 4 1 7 Deerwood 2 2 Westmoreland 8 1 9 Woodbrook 5 5 Carrsbrook 3 8 11 Canterbury Hills 1 1 Georgetown Green 5 5 Hessian Hills 5 5 Orchard Acres 1 1 Barterbrook 1 t Four Seasons 2 2 Montvue 1 1 Northfields 15 3 18 Penn Park 1 1 Ednam Forest i 1 Greenfield 1 ! Laurel Hills 2 2 Springfield 2 2 Westfield 1 1 20 20 20 19 79 HRARTMENT I II III IV TOTAL ~Berkshire 1 1 2 Four Seasons t 1 Ivy Gardens ! 1 Jefferson Towne 1 1 Fountain Court 1 1 Old Salem 1 1 Westfield Club 2 2 Greenfields 1 1 Whitewood ! 1 Country Green 1 1 4 4 3 1 12" Mr. Agnor said requested is approval of the subdivision priorities for a four year span of time. Twelve hydrants for apartments are to be paid for at the owner's expense and the county providing installation and higher priority for individuals willing to incur the cost of hydrants. It is intended that the fire hydrant program be turned over to the Service Authority who will handle the installation. If the schedule of the Service Authority does not adapt readily to the deadline of the program, the funds would be utilized by them to~ contract the installation. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to approve the fire hydrant installation program as requested by Mr. Agnor. Mr. Henley seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 7. Emergency Medical Services Reorganization Plan. Mr. Thomas Leitch, President of the Thomas Jefferson Emergency Medical Services Council, was present. The Council has served as an advisory subcommittee of the Thomas Jefferson .Planning District and now desires to become a nonstock, nonprofit corporation. Being incorpor will enable the Council to receive and request funds for implementing an Emergency Medical Services system. The additional money will go directly to public safety agencies in the Planning District for equipment and services rendered as providers of emergency medical service. By incorporation of this Council, the money which in the past has gone to the University of Virginia as overhead will be directly applied to purchase of equipment.and training of rescue squad personnel. Directors of the corporation will be responsible for establishing, operating, maintaining and administering the program of a coordinated delivery of emergency health care in the Planning District instead of the University of Virginia. The proposed incorporation is designed so that all political subdivisions in Planning District 10 will have members. These members will be responsible for progra~ management. This group will represent consumers, providers and local governments. Mr. Leitch said no funding is being requested from the localities in the Planning District. He also note~d endorsement of this reorganization by the Planning District Commission on December 6, 1977. In conclusion, Mr. Leitch requested the Board's endorsement of this reorganization. Motion was then offered by Mr. Henley to endorse the reorganization of the Emergency Medical Services Council to become a nonstock, nonprofit corporation. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: Lted December 14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) 009 Agenda Item No. 8. Dr. Richard Prindle, Charlottesville-Albemarle Health Department. Dr. Richard Prindle, new Director of the Thomas Jefferson Health Department, presented a check in the amount of $26,604.00 representing the County's pro-rated share of unexpended 1976-77 budget monies. As a consequence of returning this money, Dr. Prindle requested $1,76~'~00~to purchase a microscope and an electric cardiograph machine to replace one that is currently useless. Motion was~then offered by Mrs. David to adopt the following resolution BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $1,769.00 be, and the same hereby is transferred from the General Fund and coded to 18B.1 for a microscope and an electric cardiograph machine for the Thomas Jefferson Health Department. Mr. Dorrier seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. N6~a. Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 9. Report of Citizens Task Force on Abused Women. Ms. Kathy Roston, Social Worker for the Albemarle County Social Services Department, was present. She said a work shop was held on the problems of abused women and it was determined that Planning District 10 has a definite problem. This task force would deal with physical and mental abuse to women. Ms. Roston informed the Board that such a task force is being set up in the Planning District to study the problems of abuse to women. would also serve as a referral service to other sources available in the community. No action was needed~ ~th~Boar~ It Agenda Item No. 25a. Appointment: over to the next meeting.) Health Systems Agency, Subarea Council. (Carried (Dr. Iachetta returned at 12:26 P.M.) Agenda Item No. 25b. Appointment: Jail Board. Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush to reappoint Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr., to the Jail Board for a term to expire on December 31, 1979. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 25c. Agenda Item No. 25d. Agenda Item No. 25e. Agenda Item NO. 25f. Appointment: Appointment: Appointment: Planning District Commission. Mental Health & Retardation Services Board. Fire Prevention Appeals Board. Appointment: BOCA Code Board of Appeals. These items were deferred. At 12:37 P.M., the Board recessed for lunch and reconvened at 1:40 P.M. Agenda Item No. 10. Discussion of Virginia Litter Control Plan. Mr. David Rothwell, Jr., speaking on behalf of area businessmen, was present. The Virginia Litter Control Act was passed by the 1976 General Assembly. The purpose of the Act was to accomplish litter control throughout the State by delegating to and vesting in the Department of Conservation and Economic Development, authority to conduct a continous program to control, prevent and eliminate litter from the State to the maximum practical extent. The General Assembly requested a survey be conducted of the problem which confronts the state. This survey was conducted by the Highway Department in the fall of 1976 and was reported to the General Assembly in 1977 which resulted in funding of 1.2 million dollars. The minimum amount of money available to Albemarle County for implementation of such a program is $5,714.00. A plan has to be written and sent to Mr. R. W. Slocum, Commissioner of the Department of Conservation and Economic Development, for approval. The solution is a Clean Community is designed to change people's behavior and attitude toward disposal of litter. The system works through four basic components: 1) Updating and reviewing current laws that deal with litter; 2) Using modern technology and equipment; 3) Enforcing the revised law; and 4) Educating the entire population through workshops, presentations and news media. Mr. Rothwell encouraged the approval of the Litter Control Plan and noted it has been endorsed by the legislators. He would like to have the opportunity to work with people in the Richmond area to get an idea of how their plan was written and then write the plan according to the guidelines established by the Department of Conservation and Economic Development. Mr. Roudabush suggested the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission assist in the administration of the plan and write the grant application. Mr. Fisher requeste submittal of the make up of the committee and a time table for submitting the guidelines as well as the charge to the Committee. 010 IZe~~~L l~-Da - Meet Sn_-:, _Agenda Item No. 11. SP-77-70. Dr. Charles W. Hurt. Public Hearing: To amend SP-156 (Hollymead Planned Community) to include 14.6 acres zoned PUD for residential, commercial and opan space. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 30 and December 7, 1977.) This item was not advertised for the public hearing which was held on November 16, 1977; the'refore, this item had to be rescheduted. The staff report and conditions approved by the Planning Commission are set out in Minute Book 15, pages 463 and 464. The public hearing was opened. and the public hearing was closed. No one was present to speak for or against the matter Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to approve SP-77-70 with the conditions of approval as set out on page 464 of Minute Book 15. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 12. Public Hearing: To amend Section 18~2f~Of the~Code~Of Albemarle regarding the general language and definition of "subdivision." (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 30 and December 7, 1977.) This item was not advertised for the public hearing which was held on November 16, 1977; therefore, it was rescheduled. (See Minute Book 15, pages 464 and 465 for the staff report.) The public hearing was opened. Speaking first was Mr. Mike Boggs, noting that when this part of the subdivision ordinance was discussed in the spring, discussions took place on conditions under which private roads would be allowed. He presented to the Board a drawing of a parcel of land and how the proposed change in the ordinance would affect subdivision of the parcel. The owner could divide it into five acre or larger parcels under the existing ordinance and this presents a form of private roads. If the ordinance is changed outlawing this type of development without planning commission approval, people will immediately go to pipe stem development. He felt the choice of the Board is to allow in the ordinance some guidelines for private roads. Mr. Boggs suggested a committee be established to study this possibility. Mr. Frank O'Neill was present. He agreed with Mr. Boggs. He felt people should be encouraged to develop larger lots but this is difficult if state roads are required. Since the Highway Department has limited funds to maintain roads, private roads could eliminate a lot of the expense. Speaking next was Mr. Ronnie Morris. He agreed with Mr. Boggs and felt a group should be established to study the matter further. Mr. Ed,Bain was present and asked what the Planning staff's recommendation would be if this ordinance is passed and someone comes in with two acre lots on an existing access easement. Mr. Tucker said the staff is not in favor of private roads for lots of two acres, but that would have to be decided on a case by case basis. Mr. Roudabush felt that under this amendment people will not know what will be approved until they have spent a sum of money. Mr. Tucker agreed. He did not object to private roads for large lot subdivisions, but the smaller the lot size the more intensified the traffic volume. An unidentified gentlemen, representing the Burruss Land Company, said he put a plat of a pipe stem lot to record this morning. The reason for doing this was fear of what would be done today. These easements are the only thing that allow him to sell land at a low price. He was in favor of private roads. Mr. Bill Clover spoke next in support of Mr. Bogg's statement but felt that five-acre sales (with trade-backs) should be stopped as well as platting pipe stems lots. Mr. Tucker felt a committee was the. solution. Mr. Roudabush and Mr. Henley expressed their concern for requiring all exchanges of land being submitted for approval due to all of the incidential costs involved. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to defer this matter to February 8, 1978; appoint a committee to draft specific amendments to permit private roads for some large lot subdivisions and review the language under "exemptions" from the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. Dorrier seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henlay, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 13. Public Hearing: To repeal Section ll-8-A, Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control provisions of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance; same now being carried as Sections 7-1 through 7-16 of the Albemarle County Code. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 30 and December 7, 1977.) This item was not advertised for the public hearing which was held on NOvember 16, 1977; therefore, it was rescheduled. (See Minute Book 15,.page 466.) The public hearing was opened. With no one present to speak for or against the matter, the public hearing was closed. Motion was then offered by Mr. Roudabush to adopt the following resolution: BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Section ll-8-A of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, consisting of December 14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) Dr. Iachetta seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, !achetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14. Public Hearing: To amend Article 3, Article 4, Article 5, Article 7, Article 7.1, Article 8 and Article 9 of the Zoning Ordina$~ as each of these relate to minimum area requirements. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 30 and December 7, 1977.) This item was not advertised for the public hearing held on November 16, 1977; therefore, this item was advertised for this hearing. (See Minute Book 15, page 466 for the staff report.) The public hearing was opened. the public hearing was closed. With no one present to speak for or against the amendment~ Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the amendments as advertised. (See Minute Book 15, pages 466-468 for the wording of these amendments as previously set out.) Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, !achetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 20. Murray. Legislative Matters. Discussion of with Delegates Michie and The Board held a work session with Delegates Thomas J. Michie, Jr. and James B. Murray. The resolutions which were adopted by the Board and sent to the Virginia Association of Counties for the annual legislative meeting in November were discussed. Agenda Item No. 21. Monticello Area Community Action Agency, Vivian Gordon. Mr. Ken Ackerman of the Monticello Area Community Action Agency, was present to speak for Dr. Vivian Gordon. He noted a contract has been signed for the Nutrition Program for one year between the Community Action Agency and the Jefferson Area Board on Aging. He said two issues raised during the discussion of renewing the program were misuse of funding of .the program by the Community Action Agency and the extent of supportive services at the program sites. In answers to these issues a study was conducted of the finances of the program and nothing was found out of order. The Virginia Office on Aging reviewed the latest audit and could find no errors. Mr. Ackerman said supportive activities are funded by other resources, not by Title VII. Agenda Item No. 22. District, Discussion of. Runoff Control Ordinance as related to proposed Reservoir Protective This item was deferred from December 7, 1977, in order to have members of City Council present. Messrs. Francis Fife and Lawrence Brunton, were present. Mr. Fife commended the staff for the excellent job. He concurred in the staff's recommendation to Withdraw action to adopt an ordinance for reservoir protective districts. He also agreed that an additional ordinance would be an additional burden without any real advantage. Mr. Fisher asked how the consultants working on the revision of the Zoning Ordinance will make the zoning map comply with the comprehensive plan. Mr. Tucker said within the next six months the entire area around the reservoir will be studied. He felt the ordinance is effectively implementing the Betz study and the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Roudabush asked if that meant the zoning map will either Upzone the property to'make it comparable to the plan or downzone it as long as the intent of the comprehensive plan is being carried out in land use. Mr. Tucker f~lt it was too early to say, but the zoning map may have to be changed to directly follow what the plan recommends in terms of what density is advocated around the impoundment. The zoning map is at the present time in conflict with the goals of the comprehensive plan. Mr. Fisher was concerned about the inconsistency. He asked if in the interim period while the zoning map is being revised if there is any legal difficulty because the zoning map shows different densities from those recommended in the comprehensive plan. Mr. St. John did not feel it is desirable to have a zoning map disagree with the comprehensive plan but the best way to alleviate the situation would be to have the Committee assigned to review the Zoning Ordinance also review this question. He felt the committee assigned to review the zoning ordinance would be much stronger than treating situations piecemeal. Mrs. David said her request was to identify the area needing protection and the reply was to do the entire watershed. With this understanding, she offered motion to withdraw the resolution of intent. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion. Dr. Iachetta could not support the motion unless something was going to take its place. Mrs. David said a steering committee .has been established to work with the consultants on the Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. David felt with the Runoff Control Ordinance controlling the situation, there was no need to rezone any land to protect the area. Dr. Iachetta said the ordinance suggests that lower density is a cure. There are lands already zoned for high density with site plans before the commission which will have to be considered on some logical basis during this period. Mr. Tucker said a policy on subdivisions which would ba affected by the Runoff Control Ordinance was brought to the Planning Commission last night. This was the minimum area requirement that would have to be located outside the two hundred foot setback from the stream. Also involving the Runoff Control Ordinance was a resolution of intent re that the site plan ordinance be amended to require preliminary site plans that could be reviewed with the applicant. This way there could be some preliminary work on how the Runoff Control Ordinance would affect the site. Dr. Iachetta was concerned about this procedure. He felt the next step would be to take out of those categories, lands which will put people through a lot of expense. Mr. Timothy L±ndstrom was present and suggested that the Board ask KDA for their recommendations after viewing the Betz report. He agreed with Dr. Iachetta and did not feel this matter should be delayed. Discussion then followed on requesting KDA to review the entire Betz report and make comments on its effects with the Comprehensive Plan. Roll was then called on Mrs. David's motion to withdraw the resolution of intent and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 23. Reservoir Protection District. Public Hearing on proposed Ordinance to establish same. (Deferred from December 7, 1977.) With the previous action taken, this matter died. Agenda Item No. 24. Watershed Management Plan, Discussion of. Mr. Agnor read the following memorandum into the record: "December 8, 1977 The administration of the runoff control ordinance has been in place for more than sixty days now, which is sufficient time to have a sense of the workload it requires. The development of other aspects of the watershed management plan proposed in the Betz report should therefore proceed. These aspects include: 3. 4. 5. 6. Reservoir management (chemical addition and aeration). Treatment plan operations. Monitoring of streams and reservoirs. Point source loadings. Highways, rights-of-way, and drainage ditch erosion. Agricultural practices. The first three are clearly responsibilities of the Rivanna Authority, and are already in process of implementation. The fourth and fifth are County staff functions though responsibilities of State agencies, namely Highway Department and State Water Control Board. The sixth will require a concerted effort of several State and Federal agencies. To combine these six items with stormwater runoff controls from development, a composite written plan should be prepared. It is recommended that the preparation of this plan be accomplished through a task force of affected citizens and employees of responsible agencies supported by the County's Engineering and Planning staffs. This task force could be composed of: 5. 6. 7. 8. Citizens representing the agriculture industry. Representative(-s) of the forestry industry. Citizens representing the community of Crozet and the villages of Ivy and Earlysville. Citizens representing consumers of the water system (City and County). Citizens representing environmental interests. Representatives from the Soil Conservation District. Representatives from the Albemarle County Farm Bureau. Appointees from: (1) Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service. (2) VPI & SU Extension Service. (3) Highway Department. (4) Soil Conservation Service. (5) State Forestry Service. It is further recommended that Dr. Frank Browne be engaged to meet .with the task force at their first meeting to outline the scope of the management plan, and to review the draft of the plan when it is completed, prior to its submittal to the Board for adoption. The task 'force should be formed in early January, and commence work soon thereafter. Due to the zoning ordinance revisions planned for 'the same time period, it is recommended that the County Engineer carry primary responsibility for the coordination of the watershed management plan project, with the Planning Director serving a secondary role. Consideration of this proposal, and adoption, of these recommendations, modified as deemed necessary, is requested." After discussion by the Board on the composition of the committee, this matter was deferred to December 21, 1977. NOT DOCKETED. After this morning's discussion on the policy definition of providing public water within the Service Authority's jurisdictional areas when public water is reasonably accessible or available, Mr. Tucker and Mr. Bailey submitted the the following: 1) The proposed site plan or subdivision plat must be within the Albemarle County Service Authority's jurisdictional area; 2) Public system provided by the Albemarle County Service Authority must have adequate supply, flow, and pressure for the proposed project; and 3) Provision of public water must be economically feasible, i.-e., the difference between the costs of providing water from the Albemarle County Service Authority and central or individual wells can be absorbed in the cost of the lot. Motion was then offered by Mr. Dorrier to adopt the foregoing policy definition. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Eachetta and Roudabush. December-~14, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting) 013 Agenda Item No. 15. Reports of the County Executive for October and November, 1977 were presented as information. Agenda Item No. 16. Report of the Department of Social Services for the month of October, 1977, was received in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52. Agenda Item No. 17. Statements of Expenses for the Director of Finance, Commonwealth's Attorney and Sheriff's Department were received for November, 1977. The statements were presented by Mr. Agnor and motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to approve the statements as presented. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 18. Statement of Expenses for the Regional Jail for the month of November 1977 was presented. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, to approve the statement as presented. The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 19. Regional Jail Report (State Department of Corrections), November, 1977. Statement of expenses for operation and maintenance of the Regional Jail, along with summary statement of prisoner days, statement of jail physician, paramedic salaries and salary of the classification officer, were presented. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Henley to approve the statements as presented. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 25a. Discussion: Amend Section 2-1 of the Albemarle County Code regarding appointments to School Board. Earlier in the year it was suggested that terms of the school board be clarified since the Board of Supervisors now serve staggered year terms. Motion was offered by Mr Roudabush to advertise such an amendment for a public hearing on January 4, 1978. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 26. The County Audit for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1977, was received. Letter dated November 4, 1977 from the Commonwealth of Virginia, Auditor of Public Accounts, was received stating that the audit has been accepted by that office. Agenda Item No. 27. Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Audit for Fiscal Year ending June 30, 1977, was received. Agenda Item No. 27a. Appropriation. Mr. Agnor said the Department of Education received a Federal Grant in the amount of $1,500.00 during Fiscal Year 1975-76 for the Indochinese Children Refugee Program. Expenditur ~for the program were $1,198.03. Since the program has been completed, it is necessary to refund $301.97 from the School Operating Fund. Mr. Roud.abush then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $301.97 be, and the same hereby is, transferred from the School Operating Fund to code 17Y Indochinese Children Refugee Program. Dr Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote- AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Dorrier. (Left at 5:18 P.M.) Agenda Item No. 28. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Fisher requested the organizational meeting for the Board of Supervisors be held on January 4, 1978, at 7:00 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse with adoption of the Rules of Proaedure at the same time. He also noted that appointments to the School Board and the Planning Commission should be discussed as ~soon as possible. Mr. Ron Carter was present and felt the Runoff Control Ordingnce should be examined more. Mr. Roudabush 'noted the Comprehensive Plan steering committee Will meet December 15, 1977 to make a decision on the publication of the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. David felt some of the'materials contained in the Comprehensive Plan should be rearranged in order to make the plan more readable. She suggested changing the figures on the tables to letters. Mr. St. John said the plan can be recodified without public hearin~ as lon~ as the substance of Decembe_r 14 1': '-7 (Re. ular-Day~ Meeting) Dr. Iachetta said the Office of Housing has inquired about the County adopting a Solar Energy Ordinance for tax relief. Mr. St. John requested the qualifying definitions in order to draft an ordinance. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:45 P.M. ~'~fA IR~AN