Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-11-02NNovember 2; 1977 (Regular-Night Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on November 2, 1977, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta, and W. S. Roudabush. Officers present: Messrs. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive; George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Planner. Agenda Item No. 1. Gerald E. Fisher. Meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M., by the Chairman, Not Docketed: Dr. Iachetta announced that a grant in the amount of $15,000 was receiv- ed for funding of a Driver Education course at Western Albemarle High School, and a grant in the amount of $1,400 for purchase of additional radar equipment for the Sheriff's Department. Agenda Item No. 2. October 5, 1977. zM^-77-17. Dr. Charles W. Hurt. (Shadwell Heights) Deferred from Mr. Tucker reviewed the staff report for the public and the Board, and Mr. Fisher reviewed the change in density created by the proposed rezoning. Mr. Roudabush commented that he had reviewed the tapes and documents from the October 5th meeting. Mr. Roudabush felt the entrance of the road onto Route 250 ~hou!d be given further consideration, he also felt the possibility of a private road connecting to Route 729 should be further considered. He noted that there are no setback requirements shown on the plan, and that the "open-space" is almost entirely restricted to the lake itself, which is available for use by adjoining properties. Mr. Roudabush concluded that the largest single concern held by himself and the adjoining property owners vas the proposed density. Mr. Fisher asked other Board members if they felt the public hearing should be reopened, and it was the consensus that all pertinent data had been presented. Mr. Roudabush offered motion to deny the requested~rezoning on the basis that the density is too great for the location. He added that he would like to see another plan submitted with a lower density. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta. Mr. Fisher commented that he would like to see~septic systems located more than the proposed 50 feet from the lake. Roll was called, and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 3. Dance Hall Permit. approval. Floyd Bates. Appeal of conditions placed on it was noted that the hours of operation on the original permit were from 7:00 P.M. to 1:00 A.M. Mr. St. John stated that even if the building were hired for a private party and there were dancing on the premises, State statutes pertaining to the permit would apply. Mr. BatOs was present and requested permission to open at 12:00 noon and close at 2:00 A.M. Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush to extend the hours of operation from 2:00 P.M. (ex- plaining that a 12-hour operating day seemed long enough) to 2:00 A.M., with all other conditions as originally set to remain. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 4. ZMA-77-21. Joseph W. Wright, Jr. & Frank A. Kessler. To rezone 2.5 acres from R-2 to CO. Property on south ~ide of Route 250 West about 0.6 mile from intersection of Routes 250 and the Route 29 By-pass. County Tax Map 59D(2), Section 1, Parcel 10 part thereof. Samuel Miller District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 19 and October 26, 1977.) Mr. Tucker read the planning staff's report: "R~quested Zoning: CO Commercial Office Acreage: 2.5 acres of a 6.678 parcel Existing Zoning: R-2 Residential Location: Property, described as Tax Map 59D(2), Section 1, Parcel I0 (part thereof), is located on the south side of Route 250 West across from the Institute of Textile Technology. Character of the Area This property is undeveloped as are adjacent properties to the south, and west. Several campus-type office complexes are on the north side of Route 250 West.. Property to the east is Birdwood and proper~y to the west has been designated Ednam RPN (zoning map to be presented)., Route 250 West has been designated a scenic highway. Comprehensive Plin This portiDn of the Urban Area is recommended for low and medium density residential, commercial, and institutional uses. This site is recommended as low density residential. November 27 1977 (Regular-Night Meeting) Staff Comment This is the second petition for commercial zoning on this property by the appli- cants ( ZMA-331:R-2 to B-1 on 0.68 acres; staff recommended approval; withdrawn from Commission September 2, 1975 ). Several changes have occurred since that petition: 1. Route 250 West designated scenic highway ( therefore, application is for greater acreage due to increased setback ); 2. Adoption of Commercial Office district; 3. Approval of Ednam RPN ( open space and roadway are adjacent to this property; 4. Reduced speed limit to 45 mph on Route 250 West. The two major areas of concern in the previous application were sight distance on Route 250 West and the request was for B-1 General Business ( CO was not available at that time ). Staff opinion is that the Commercial Office use would be compatible with existing and future uses in this area as well as with use proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval of this petition." Mr. Tucker noted that the Planning Commission at it's meeting of October 18, 1977, voted unanimously to recommend approval of the rezoning. Mr. Tucker then read a letter received 'rOm~Mr. W. B. Coburn, Jr., Assistant Eesident Engineer for the Department of Highways and T~ansportation: "October 17, 1977 The above rezoning application has been reviewed on site with the appli- cant and Mr. Tucker from your office. Since the time of the previous application the speed limit in this area has been reduced to 45 mph, thereby decreasing the sight distance requirement to 500 feet. It appears that this distance is avail- able through some minor clearing. The Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation would therefore not object to this rezoninE provided the proper entrance requirements can be accommodated." Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing, and first to speak was Mr. Jim Murray, Jr., repre- senling the applicants. Mr. Murray said that this rezoning was unique because of a private agreement made between the applicants and the residents of Ednam Village approving and restricting the construction of the proposed commercial office building to a particular use and design. He added that although this contract was not binding on the County in any way, it would be binding on the applicants once the Board gave its approval. Mr. Max Evans, landscape architect, using detailed maps, described the proposed build. Lng sites. Mr. Fisher noted that there were no entrances from the CO property into Ednam Village and added he thought this was a requirement in the CO zoning. Mr. Murray said no through- streets were placed in the plan specifically to keep through traffic from continuing on to the Boars Head Sports Club and Inn. Mr. Charles Barham, President of the Ednam Village Homeowners Association, and Vice President, Mrs. D. Ashworth: said that a 60-foot buffer easement has been deeded to the Homeowners Association to prevent any through street from being constructed. A resident of Farmington (her name was inaudible) said she was in favor of the proposed plan. Mr. Jason Eckford, Ednam Forest resident, said he felt the plan was well conceived and he would be in favor of approval as outlined. .Mr. Nelson Yarborough, Ednam Forest resident, said'he hoped for approval of the plan as a resident and also as a potential tenant, as he is a dentist. Ms. Martha Se!don, spoke for the Scenic Roads Committee of Citizens for Albemarle. She said this plan was an improvement over the first submitted, but still felt the sight distance at the entrance on Route 250 West was not adequate for safety. A Bellair resident felt this was a beautiful location for an office building. No one else from the public, either for or against this Petition, wished to speak, and Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Mr.~ Fisher noted that although there are many sites in the County for commercial office space, there seemed to be no opposition to the plan by area residents. Mrs. David read portions of the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting, indicating that other property owners (not present at tonight's meeting) were also not Qpposed. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, to approve ZMA-77-21 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion was carried by the following recorded Vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. At 8:50 P.M., Mr. Fisher declared a two minute recess. P.M. Meeting was reconvened at 8:56 Agenda Item No. 5. Subdivision Ordinance - Amendment to Albemarle County Code rega-rding Gordonsville Subdivision Review. Mr. St. John said the proposed ordinance amendment would give the Town of Gordonsville equal rights as.an adjoining land owner, and he felt sure the agreement was satisfactory to both parties involved. He further noted that it has been reviewed by the Town of Gordonsville. November 2, 1977 (Regular-Night Meeting) The Honorable Mayor Arlie C. Payne of Gordonsville was present. He said the ordinance amendment has been approved by Mr. Ulysses P. Joyner, Jr. (Town Attorney) and the Town Council, and that they were in full agreement. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, to adopt the following resolution of intent: "BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby states its intent to amend the Albemarle County Code by the addition of the following section: Section 18-6.1. Review by Town of Gordonsville (a) In the case of any subdivision any part of which lies within one mile of the corporate limits of the Town of Gordonsville, the commission shall take no action thereon until the proposed plat of such subdivision shall have been submitted to the subdivision agent for the Town for review as hereinafter provided. (b) Within three business days of the receipt of any such proposed plat, the planning department of the county shall transmit the same to the agent of the Town. Thereafter, the agent of the Town shall have ten days in which to review such plat; provided, however, that the agent of the Town may, in his discretion, refer such plat to the Town Planning Commission for its review within twenty-one days of transmission by the planning department of the county; and provided further that the sub- divider shall have the right, but shall in no event be required, to appear before the Town Planning Commission during its review of such plat. Upon completion of the review as herein provided~ the agent of the Town may make such comments regarding such plat as he may deem appropriate, within thirty-one days after transmission by the planning department of the county. (c) Upon receipt of the results of the Town's review, or upon the expiration of the time period aforesaid, the commission shall review such plat as otherwise provided by law. The Town shall have the right to appear before the commission and make such comments as it may deem appropriate. In addition, the Town shall be conclusively presumed to have standing to prosecute appeals pursuant to Section 18-~ of this article as to any plat subject to the provisions of this section. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Commission is hereby directed to hold public hearings on this proposed amendment and to return its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors at the earliest possible date." Roll was called and motion adopted by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 6. Dog Ordinance - Request to have Country Green Apartments included under the dog leash law. Mr. Agnor noted receipt of a letter dated October 24, 1977, from the Property Manager, Mr. ~ichael G. Barnett, who requested "On behalf of the owners of the property known as Country Green Apartments, (shown on Albemarle County records as a portion of that property recorded on a plat on Deed Book 453, page 553, as surveyed by Aubrey Hugfman and Associates) we respectfully request that the Albemarle County Board of Super- visors enact an ordinance making it unlawful for an owner to permit a dog to run loose at any time within this area, even though the dog be lawfully licensed and vaccinated." Mr. Agnor noted that Country Green Apartments are asking to be incorporated under a leash law currently in effect over nsighboring Sherwood Manor. Mr. Dorrier said he spoke with Mr. Barnett, and advised him to request this hearing through the Clerk. Mr. Dorrier added that his only concern was that Mr. Barnett was applying for the dog leash law without signatures from the apartment owners, and he felt they needed adequate warning, if the law were enacted, to control their dogs. Motion was then offered by Mr. Dorrier, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to set a public hear- ing for December 7, 1977, at 7:30 P.M. in the County Courthouse. Roll was called and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Motion was offered by Mr. Dorrier, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, requesting a letter be sent by the Clerk t6 the Property Manager of Country Green Apartments, requesting he post notices throughout the apartment complex stating date, place and time of this public hearing. Roll was called and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 7. Lottery Permit: Incarnation Catholic Church. Mr. Agnor said appli- cation has been received from the pastor of the church, William L. Gardner, requesting the lottery permit. Noted on the application as the intended use for collected funds, was to help support the educational, social and community ministries of the church. November 2, 1977 (Regular-Night Meeting) Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, to approve the lottery permit in accordance with the Board's rules for issuance of such permits, for the calendar year 1977 only. Roll was called, and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 8. Zoning around reservoir Update On Mrs. David's proposal for. (A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THIS AGENDA ITEM, IS ON PERMANENT RECORD IN THE FILES OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.) Mr. ~isher requested Mr. Tucker to present a brief report of recommendations to be pre- sented to the Planning Commission on November 15, 1977. Mr. Tucker said he consulted with the County Attorney's Office, the County Executive, and Mrs. David, to be sure the Board's intent was correctly interpreted. He then presented a map covering the same five-mile area as that covered by the moratorium ordinance. Mr. Tucker said his department has been analyz- ing slopes in order to be able to tell property owners what they will be allowed to do on their property. He gave an example; 0% to 14% slopes, developed according to present zoning regulations; 15% to 25% slopes, one dwelling units per two acres; and 25% to 40% slopes, one dwelling unit per five acres. Dr. Iachetta was concerned how to distinguish between areas in the immediate vicinity of the impoundment and areas far back. Mr. Tucker said they will incorporate all slopes within the five-mile area and zone according to the percentage of the slope on each parcel. Mr. Tucker added that if all work proceeded according to schedule, this matter could be brought before the Board for public hearing by the first of the new year. Dr. Iachetta said it was his observation that unless the Board is willing to downzone properties around the reservoir, that Mr. Tucker and his staff's time was being wasted on this project. It was the consensus of the Board that they would be willing to downzone~ only after a through analysis of the properties involved, and that is what Mr. Tucker had been assigned to do. Mr. Dorrier asked Mr. St. John the interim status~ between now and the time the Board takes action~with properties that gain certain approvals such as building permits, con- struction, etc; at what point does the County no longer have any options on those properties as far as being able to arrest development on those slopes. Mr. St. John said a permit, plus substantial expenditures in pursurance of the rights obtained under that permit, gives a vested right whether those expenditures are on actual construction or on having someone go out and draw up final plans. Mr. St. John aSded that it was his opinion that the Board should be able to prove the necessity to downzone with scientific evidence, substantial enough to support their actions. Following a brief discussion, ~ was the consensus of the Board members (with the exception of Dr. Iachetta and Mr. Fisher) not to adopt a moratorium on building or take any action toward downzoning tonight. Agenda Item No. 9. SP-77-67. Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority, discussion of. Mr. J. Benjamin Dick, Zoning Administrator, was present, and summarized his memorandum as follows: "RE: Rivanna Authority River Crossings in the Floodway of the Flood Plain, SP-20-76, and Zoning Ordinance Enforcement DATE: October 17, 1977 Request The Zoning Administrator, as the zoning ordinance enforcement official, discovered that section 9A-4~2 and its pertinent provisions apparently were not considered or addressed in any way by the required public hearing process mandated by that section. The conclusion reached is that the Flood Plain non-compliance was "a mere oversight" by both the Rivanna Authority and the County Staff. In my opinion, a mistake cannot be cured by overlooking it and therefore it should be addressed accordingly. Thus, in a good faith effort to enforce the ordinance through another permit and having been advised against such a process by the County Attorney, the Zoning Administrator respectfully requests the Board to weigh the follow- ing information and proceed as it feels it should pursuant to its legislative function under the Zoning Ordinance. In your deliberations, this information may be of importance to you. Several permits in the Flood Plain by citizens of the County are pending for the Board's review in the forthcoming months ahead and these citizens must comply with the requirements under the Flood Plain provisions. (e.g., Dr. Charles Hurt and Mr. Evernghim Blake). Background From a review of existing county records and past administrative processes pertaining to SP-20-76, the present Zoning Administrator believes it is very clear that an unintentional oversight occurred not only by the Rivanna Authority but also by county staff and by the previous Zoning Administrator in not requiring compliance with the intent and requirements of section 9A-4-2 of the Flood Plain zoning provisions. This section mandates a special permit public hearing and review of all pertinent information relating to river crossings of transmission lines of any kind in the floodway. No such ~evidence or other pertinent engineering data was submitted to the Board for their appropriate review at an open public hearing. November 2, 1977 (Regular-Night Meeting) e The Zoning Administrator found this purported oversight through a two- fold discovery process. First, through the soil erosion control plan review process on August 1, 1977, and secondly, on August 4, 1977, by an inquiry from Mr. George Cason, a citizen of Albemarle County. The Deputy County Attorney's advisory opinion of August 8, 1977, that S?-20-76 appeared to "substantially satisfy section 9A-~-2" was, ~fter considerable research and discussion with the Director of Planning and the County Engineer, rejected by the Zoning Administrator as totally contrary to the evidence in the county records. An additional permit was requested by the Zoning Administrator on August 26, 1977, as a good faith and responsible attempt to enforce the Zoning Ordinance. While making application for the permit, the Rivanna Authority on parallel tracks appealed the Zoning Administrator's decision on August 29, 1977, to the Board of Zoning Appeals. On September 13, 1977, after the proper legal notices to the public and property owners, the Board of Zoning Appeals heard the appeal and unanimously affirmed the Zoning Administrator's research and decision. The attorney for the Rivanna Authority, Mr. Harry Marshall, appealed this decision to the Circuit Court and a hearing was set for October 7, 1977, in Judge Pickford's Court. On October 3, 1977, the County Attorney informed the Zoning Administrator he personally would not advocate the Zoning Administrator and Board of Zoning Appeals decisions pending before the court. Mr. St. John reasoned that both lacked the proper jurisdictional grounds to review and make a decision that another permit was required because in his opinion this "in effect" challenged the prior legislative act of SP-20-76. The Zoning Administrator disagreed that no such challenge was being made. Neverthe- less~ Mr. St. John felt the proper procedure would be for the Zoning Administrator to ask the Board to review SP-20-76 and decide whether they, as the legislative body, wanted to recall the special permit and require a hearing on the pertinent Flood Plain effects and data pertain- ing to it that ~ere not considered. The other only procedural alternative suggested by Mr. St. John was either that a citizen or the Zoning Administrator could possibly sue the Board of Supervisors and challenge the issuing of SP-20-76band the activity the Rivanna Authority feels that permit authorized. Since the Zoning Administrator could not have the County Attorney's support and zealous representation in court~ I sgreed to have the pending case dismissed before Judge Pickford on purely jurisdictional grounds as argued by the County Attorney. Mr. Marshall indicated on October 6, 1977, at that juncture that to be safe he would go ahead with the permit process to avoid any attack on SP-20-76 by Mr. Cason. On October 10, 1977, he felt, based on the County Attorney's case, and research as well as his own, that the Authority was in a stronger position ~legally and therefore he advised Mr. George Williams and the ~uthority Board Chairman to with- draw the permit application. On October 10, 1977, the Planning Department was informed by Mr. Marshall that the permit application was officially to be withdrawn by the applicant. On October 10, 1977, pursuant to the County Attorney's recommendation, the Zoning Administrator informed Mr. Marshall that he would submit a request of review of SP-20-7~ to the Board of Supervisors." Mr. St. John said it was his opinion that aithough Mr. Dick was effectively doing his jo~ by requesting the Board of Supervisors to recall this special permit, he felt it would be a sham~ to hold a public hearing at this point in time, as the Rivanna Authority was already committed to doing the work. After a brief discussion, the consensus was that u~less the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority were directly in violation of the Flood Plain Ordinance, no action would be taken by the Board. Agenda Item No. t0. Water Conservation Ordinance. Mr. Agnor presented an amendment to the Ordinance to substantially change the County's water conservation ordinance to read the same as that adopted by the Charlottesville City Council on October 24, 1977. Mr. Agnor said although it seemed inconsistent to allow businesses greater water uses and still require the private citizen to conserve, it would drastically hurt certain businesses in the County not to allow then to operate. Mr. Fisher asked what type of business, and Mr. Agnor replied mainly car washes. Mr. Agnor then presented the proposed recommended amendment to Section ~, Sub-section (a): "(a) The washing of automobiles, trucks, trailers or any other types of mobile equipment except in commercial vehicle wash facilities w&~-a-wa~e~-~eeFe~-e~e~e~-a~e~e~-~-~e-A~e~-w~-a-~e~e~ ~&e~a~e~-e&~-~-~&e-~e~-~e-e~a~&~ using pressurized water systems; provided that such facilities shall be limited in water consumption for any month to seventy percent of their consumption in the corresponding. month of the previous year." Motion to adopt the ordinance amendment as presented, on an emergency ~asis, was offered by Mr. Dorrier, seconded by Dr. Iachetta. Mr. Fisher requested this be placed on the agenda for the November 9, 1977, meeting for possible extension beyond the emergency time limit. ~Roll was called and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dottier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. November 2, 1977 (RegUlar-Night Meeting) Agenda Item No. 11. Leave of Absence Without pay.~ Mr. Agnor presented the request of Mrs. Beckie Baker, an employee of the Social Services Department under supervision of Mrs. Karen Morris, Department Head. He said no specific date could be Set for her to return to work, but it would be following the birth of her child. Motion to allow the requested leave of~iabsence without pay was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by. Mr. Henley, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher~ Henley, Iachetta and Rou~abush. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 12. Pay/Classification Plan - Accept proposal for revision. Mr. Agnor recommended the hiring of Municipal Advisors, Inc., of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to ~onduct a review of the Pay and Classification Plan, Fringe Benefits, Hiring Procedures and the Employee's Handbook. He said the Board had appropriated $5,000 in the budget for this purpose, and the quoted cost by the firm is $5,966.00, thereby requiring an additional amount of $966.00 to be absorbed from the Personnel ~.udget. Motion approving the hiring of Municipal Advisors, Inc. and expenditure of the additional $966.00 was offered by Mrs. David and second- ed by Dr. Iachetta. Roll was called and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 13. Appropriation: Western Albemarle High School Turning Lane. Mr. Agnor said the Board authorized the project to proceed, ~but did not appropriate the funds. He added that the contract is going to be let on Friday, and he requested authorization for the County Executive to sign the contract and the Board to make an appropriation.~ Motion to adopt the following resolution was offered by Mr. Roudabush: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $16,500 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Operat- ing Capital OUtlay Fund and~ed to 19.15 for expenditures incurred in the construction of a left-turn~rf of Route 250 West at the entrance to Western Albemarle High School. The foregoing motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. NoT ON THE AGENDA. Mr. Fisher presented several pieces of correspondence which he felt should be brought to the Board's attention: From the Department of Corrections in Harrisonburg, inviting the BOard members to an open house at their new offices to be held on Thursday, November 10. Department of Corrections forwarded a bromhure inviting County's to investigate the possibility of building a new correctional facility in their county. Jefferson-Madison Regional Library sent notice of a meeting to be held on ~November 10th at 3:00 P.M. Purpose of the meeting is to discuss financial and other considerations which will go into the preparation of the 1978-79 budget and to secure co~ents from participating jurisdictions before the budget is prepared. Messrs. Fisher, Iachetta and Agnor voiced interest in attending this meeting. Mr. Fisher requested the Clerk to respond to the invitation. D) Notice was received that the Coordinator of Emergency Services (Marcia Mashaw) has re- signed. Mr. Agnor and Mr. Cole Hendrix of the City are presently searching for a replace- ment. Notice of a regional meeting on Beverage Container Ordinances has been rescheduled to Monday night,~ November 7, 1977, at 7:30 P.M. at the Shenandoah County Courthouse. Mr. Dorrier said he had been contacted by a local beer distributor requesting the Board hear his point of view before taking a final stand. Mr. Fisher said the Board has already gone on record as being in favor of State-wide adoption of an "Oregon type" bottle bill, State Corporation Commission application notice received for J. Meak Barton, t/a Virginia Inspired Personalized Tours (VIP) to change its route. Public hearing to be held on ~ November 22, 1977, at 2:00 P.M. in Richmond. State Corporation Commission application notice received for Virginia Pipe Line Company, Citizens Gas Company, and Lynchburg Gas Company for an increase in rates for gas service. Meeting to be held December 8, 1977 at 10:00 A.M. in Richmond. Mr. Fisher reported on a discussion at the Planning District Commission meeting held last night.- The Economic Development Administration (U.S. Department of Commerce) has notified this area that it is now eligible to applF for designation as an Economic Development area. This would include five of the Counties in this Planning District. Albemarle's eligibility will expire on December 31, 1977, and if the Board wishes to try and become designated as an eligible area, an O.E.D.P. document must be submitted by a committee made up of representative members of the jurisdiction. Mr. Fisher added that eight re- presentatives of Albemarle County must be appointed (at least five Board members and others from the community) and be present at a meeting to be held on November 18, 1977, at 1:00 P.M. in the Planning District Commission's office, it was the consensus of the Board that they did wish to retain eligibility, and motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to appo~n~ Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush to the Committee, representing the Board of Supervisors, and Mr. Agnor, Mr. Vest of the Jail Board, and Dr. Gordon of the Community Action Agency. Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier, and c~rried by the following November 2, 1977 (Regular-Night Meeting) ~ecorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Mes~rs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley,Iachetta~and Roudabush. None. Report on House Document #17. Mr. Fisher said the document has been drastically revised from what was originally presented to the Committee, but that he did not have a copy of the revisions. He hoped that the effective date would be 1981, and, if enacted, that a legislative history would be written explaining to counties why this legislation was enacted. Mrs. David requested the Board's presence at a public meeting of the Charlottesville- Albemarle Transportation Restudy Committee, scheduled for November 17, t~77, at 7:30 P.M. at Walker School. Agenda Item No. 14..~At 10:55 P.M., motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, to adjourn into executive session to discuss legal matters. Roll was called and motion carried by the following recOrded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Davi~ and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 15. At 11:59 P.M., meeting reconvened from executive session and was adjourned by Chairman Fisher. Chairman