Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-10-05AOctober 5, 1977 (Afternoon Meeting--Adjourned from 0ctober~3, 1977) ) 398 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held at 3:00 P,M. on October 5, 1977, in the Board Room of th~ County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia; said meeting being adjourned from October 3, 1977. Present: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J. T Henley, Jr. and'F. Anthony Iachetta. Absent: Mr. W. S. Roudabush. Officers Present: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; County Attorney, George R. St. John; and Deputy County Attorney, Frederick W. Payne. Agenda Ztem No. 1. 3:08 P.M. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Mr. Fisher, at Agenda Item No. 2. Board of Directors. Discussion with members of Albemarle County Service Authority The following members of the Albemarle County Service Authority Bo~d of Directors were present: Messrs. Myron E. Tremain, L. A. Lacy and Robert P. Englander. Mr. Fisher said the purpose of this meeting was to review conflicts which the Board discovered when reviewing rezoning application ZMA-77-18 for.Liberia Development Corporation. The request is for an RPN/RS-1 area just outside of the designated jurisdictional boundaries of the Service Authority. Apparently, the land in question has some common ownership with Oakhill Water Company, Incorporated, which is located on the opposite side of Route 631 from the proposed Whittington Subdivision. Oakhill Water Company is within the Service Authority's jurisdictional areas and apparently is operating without a permit from either the State or the County. Mr. Agnor said that the Planning Commission had recommended as a condition of approval on the Liberia application that all of the lots be served by a public water supply if same is deemed to be reasonably available. Otherwise all lots are.to be served by a central water system. Because of the size of this deve!opm~nt, and taking into consideration that there is a potential for development in the area, the Board is hesitant to approve this request to be served by a central water system. The applicant objects to connection to the public water supply because they would have to extend the line for approximately a mile. Therefore, the Board asked the Service Authority to meet today to discuss the interpretation of "reasonably available." Second, if the Board votes to approveilthe petition and conditions this on connection to the public water supply, this property is outside of the jurisdictional boundaries of the Service Authorities.so the boundaries would have to be extended in order to serve the property. The Board ~lso wants to discuss the general concept of private water systems being permitted within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Service Authority. Mr. E. E. Thompson, Executive Director of the Service Authority, said they have no written policy to determine when off-site extension of water and/or sewer lines would be reasonably available. In the past, when a developer wanted to hook to the water line, costs were estimatad and it was left to the developer to decide whether it was economically feasible. Usually, the first developer in an area pays all of the cost for extension of a water line and thereafter, adjacent property owners pay only for connections. Mr. Henley asked if the Service Authority could pay all of the costs~ilof extension of the water line and then bill each developer his proportionate share. Mr. Thompson said that would cause the Service Authority financial problems because the present users of the system would have to pay off that debt. Mr. Agnor said if this development is not required to connect to the public water supply, then any future development further along the road would have even less of an opportunity to connect to the public water. Mr. Fisher said there are implications in these ques~ms that bear on the County's goals for development as set out in the Comprehensive Plan. He asked the Director of Planning ~ow extension of water lines affects the way the Plan is to be implemented. Mr. Tucker said for the most part the Service Authority's jurisdictional boundaries follow the recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan except for the Biscuit Run area. In that area, t are conflicting goals. Dr. Iachetta said if public water is not required there will be numerous developments served by.individual wells that cannot provide water for fire~protectio When the AWT plant is completed, the Biscuit Run. area is going to develop. It is a serious mistake to allow continuation of private water systems in an area where it is known there will be high density development at some time in the future. Mr. Fisher said this area is designated for conservation zoning in the Comprehensive Plan. It is presently zoned agricult and he ~a~n~in favor of extending water lines into areas that are zoned A-!. Dr. Iachetta said the ComPrehensive Plan calls for an urban ring. Within that ring, the amenities that are needed for higher densities should be provided. Mr. Myron E. Tremain, Chairman of the Service Authority Board of Directors, said the Authority feels very strongly that any development within their jurisdictional area should be a part of the publ±c water system and that private water systems should not be permitted. Also, the Authority feels that their Jurisdictional~ boundariSs need to be reviewed against what is recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. They would certainly like to have jurisdictio over the Whittington planned Mr. Fisher said the Board is on the verge of adopting a new Comprehensive Plan where basically three urban areas are being delineated. He felt that all of the high denSity areas should be reviewed to make sure that they are included in the jurisdictional areas. However, the present Biscuit Run jurisdictional area is much larger than what the Comprehensi Plan recommends for any major growth. He felt the planning function and the utility function must coincide. Dr. Iachetta suggested as a way to fund extension of water lines, that the County set up a revolving fund ~p~ss~y~.~s~g~?~,~d~r~l~n~e sharing monies), with the developers, paying their pro rata share of the cost of water li~nes back into the ~und. 2Mr. Fisher said he did not care very much for that idea. Mr.~i~A~Or?i~suggested that a study be made of ~ae Service Authority~!s financial resources since he felt that a utility system should be 397 October 5, 1977 (Afternoon Meeting-Adjourned from October Fisher asked if the Service Authority has looked at future needs such as expansion of water lines which are too small to serve the population. Mr. Thompson said there is no study going on at this time. Thi~omn~y~'~s'~Comprehensive Plan calls for growth in certain areas and in order to encourage that growth, utilities should be made available. However, he did not know where the Service Authority would get the funds to encourage growth where it should go. If they must provide the funds, the only place to get them is through the rate charges. Mr. Fisher suggested that the Board review the questions set out for this meeting. Numb~ one is a definition of "reasonably available~" Mr. Thompson s~id his office has not made a determination of this for this petition, but extension of a twelve-inch line for about 5,.800 feet would probably cost $80,000. Mr. L. A. Lacy asked about the 456 units proposed for a central well permit in this area. Mr.~David Kudravetz, attorney for Liberia Corporation, said the 456 connections are already on existing wells owned by Oakhill Water .Company. This includes Oakhi!l Subdivision~ Southwood Mobile Homes, and other connections. Mr. Fisher said the Service Authority has said they do not want any.new private water systems, or expansion of such systems, within their jurisdictional boundaries. Mr. Thompson has said they have not' made a finding on the Liberia Corporation petition. Aside from that, a question has been raised as to whether jurisdictional boundaries should be expanded for water service. If the County wants to have public water for developments that occur around the fringes of the jurisdictional boundaries, the Board will have to make some concessions. Mr. Fred Payne, Deputy County Attorney, said that Hs the reason the Planning Commission had worded the condition in this way. The Service Authority cannot serve this area because it is outside of their jurisdictional boundaries. If the Board is unwilling to expand the jurisdictional boundaries, then this developer cannot hook onto the public water system. Therefore, expansion of the jurisdictional boundary is a legal prerequisite for requiring this developer to hook to the public water suppIy. Dr. Iachetta asked if there were any way the Board could require the Oakhill Water Syste~ which is in violation of State statutes, to become a part of the Service Authority's service area. Mr. Payne said this is a very complex situation and he is not sure that anyone knows to what extent the system is unlawful. However, he felt it would be difficult to require this without buying the system. Mr. Agnor said if fire protection is considered to be essential, then connection to the public water system would be necessary and probably cheaper than putting in storage far an adequate fire system. Mr. Dorrier said he also had a question about fire protection. He asked if the Service Authority is requiring developers to consider fire protection in their plans. Mr. Thompson said fire protection has generally not been a condition. For the Liberia petition, this would be an extension of a twelve-inch line. The cost of extension'~of this twelve-inch line, which would provide fire protection, can be compared against the cost of putting in a well system with adequate storage for fire protection. M~ Agnor said many weeks ago an opinion was given by the County Attorney as to who had the responsibility for ~a~taining fir~ protection facilities. He read one paragraph which said:~ii~In my judgment, whatever Authorit~ or agency is providing the water for a given jurisdictional area has a responsibility also for providing hydrants, lines to the hydrants, and sufficient pressure for fire protection, if such service is to be approved by anyone." Mr. Agnor said he does not feel those responsi~ have ever been designated and he feels it is important that they are. At this time, the County Attorney arrived~ He said the Board has the power to require that the developer, at his own expense, pay whatever amount is needed to provide public water to this development. The only difference would be if the Board required the developer to put in a line bigger than was needed for his development in order to serve future development in the area. In that case, the Service Authority would have to bear the expense of having a large? line. Mr. Tremain asked if this area coincides with the County's Comprehe~ Plan. Mr. Fisher said no. If the area is to be considered for expansion, it should be considered for water service only. He.suggested that this issue be referred to the staff and the Planning Commission to study whether present jurisdictional boundaries conform with the Comprehensive Plan in the urban area and also to study other areas in the urban circle. He ~id not feel any action should be taken until that questio~ has been studied. Mr. Henley said he did not think the Board could rule out the expansion of the sewer service if the area has a potential for growth. MotiO~ was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, to request the plannin~ staff and the Planning Commission to make such a study. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Iachetta. None. Mr. Roudabush. Mr. Dorrier asked what plans, if any, the Service Authority has for maintaining and upgrading existing systems. It has been approximately a year and a half since the fires in Scottsville and the problems with the pipes have not been corrected. Mr. Thompson said a question arose as to what level of fire protection would be maintained on an existing system. This determination has never been made. .In the absence of such a determination, the Service Authority is ill-equipped to deal with the question. Most of the problems w~ich have occurred are with pipes already in the ground. The water lines in the Town of Scottsville are adequate to supply potable water to the Town. However, there is a problem with fire pro~tection. Before the Service Authority considers any replacement to lines in Scottsville, they have authorized the "pigging" of the line, hoping this wi~! alleviate the muddy water and the pressure fluctuations. Mr. Agnor said there is another question about fire protection and that is responsibilitl for the testing and maintenance of fire hydrants o~ce the hydrants are in place and the Service Authority has assumed the responsibility to see that the water is there. It has never been clearly defined as to who will serve this function. Mr. Thompson said in their fiscal year '78 budget, they have funded a new employee who will be a fire hydrant maintenanc man. He wiI1 test hydrants twice a year. Llities ~ive October ~, 1977 (Afternoon Meeting-Adjourned from October 3, 1977) 398 Agenda Item No. 3. September 21, 1977.) ZMA-?7-18. Liberia Development Corporation. (Deferred from Mr. Fisher said this petition was deferred in order to obtain answers to questions which have just been discussed With the Service Authority. Now that the matter has been referred to the Planning Commission and the Planning Staff for study, he felt no action could be taken today. Mr. David Kudravetz, attorney for Liberia Development Corporation, was present. He felt that some type of policy should be drafted that would allow the developer to know what to expect in such situations, therefore, alleviating this time lag. Since extension of this line by the developer would run through undeveloped land, which at a later time might become developed and hook onto this water line, he felt alternate methods of financing such extension could be discussed during this time delay. Mr. Fisher agreed that alternatives for financing should be considered by both the staff of the County and the Service Authority. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to defer action on ZMA-77-18 to November 16, 1977. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Dawid and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Iachetta. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Roudabush. Not Docketed. Mr. Agnor requested an executive session to discuss matters of land acquisition. Motion to this effect was offered by Mrs. David and seconded by Mr. Dorrier. Mr. Henley said the owner of Brookwood Subdivision in Crozet has a recorded plat that was approved by the County in 1975. He has building permit approval, the footings are already in and the house is scheduled to arrive Friday. This morning the applicant was told he could not build his house because the septic tank would be closer than two hundred feet to a stream. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer, was present and aware of the problem. He said the application for the septic tank permit was made on September 23 but was not processed before adoption of the Runoff Control Ordinance which states that "No septic system shall be less than 200 feet from a stream, either free-flowing or intermittent, flowing directly or indirectly into the reservoir." Mr. Bailey said when he received the septic tank permit application from the zoning department yesterday, he contacted the County Attorney's office for a decision as to when to process such applications in light of the new ordinance. Mr. Fred ?ayne said the ordinance does apply in this case because the development was not completed before adoption of the Runoff COntrol Ordinance. Nothing can be done administratively, since the ordinance does not contain any provisions for relief. The ordinance would have to be amended to allow some type of variance procedure or a grandfat clause would have to be included. Dr. Iachetta felt the solution would be to have a grandfather clause. After some discussion by the Board, Mr. Fisher requested that the executive session include legal matters in order to discuss this matter further. At 5:37 P.M., Mrs. David amended her previous motion to include legal matters in executive session. Mr. Dorrier accepted the amendment and the motion carried by the followin recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Iachetta. None. Mr. Roudabush. - - C~RMAN