Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-08-21254 8-21-Z5 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on August 21, 1975, at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Room-of the County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. Officers Present: T. M. Batchelor, Jr. County Executive; Robert Sampson, Assistant to the County Executive; James Bowling and Frederick Payne, Deputy County Attornies;~and John Humphrey, County Planner. The meeting was called to order at 9:15 A.M. and began with The Lord's Prayer led by Mr. Wheeler. No. 3. Approval of Minutes: On motion by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Henley, the minutes of the meetings of January 29, February 5, April 9, April 16, June 11 (afternoon), June 11 (night), June 18, August 7 and August 18, 1975, were approved as presented. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler. None. Mr. Carwile and Mr. Wood. No. 4b. Highway Matters: Woodbrook Roads and Bond. This matter was brought to the Board's attention by recent notice that Claude Cotten, developer of Woodbrook Subdivision, was in a bankruptcy proceeding. Mr. Humphrey noted receipt of a letter dated April 17, 1975, from the Department of Highways, in which they stated that roads in Sections 9 and 10 of Woodbrook which are presently not part of the State Highway system had been inspected. In Section 9 aggregate base, curb and gutter, drainage structures and pavement have been provided for Berkmar Road and Eastbrook Drive and the roads are basically in good condition. However, the Highway Department was unable to determine the quality of work in Section 10 because of building materials and other things which litter the roads. Mr. Humphrey said the County presently holds a $5,000 certified check as bond for uncompleted work and Mr. Charles Perry of the Highway Department has said this amount should be sufficient for the completion of the roads if no drastic repairs are hidden by building materials presently on the roadway. Ms.,. Kathy Tompkins, President, Woodbrook Homeowners Association, said she has talked with Mr. Cotten~ He said he has done everything possible and the only recourse for the homeowners is through the County. Mr. Wheeler said the trustees for the bankruptcy have been told to complete the subdivision (including the roads). The County does hold a bond, but it would be better if the trustees proceededv- with the work. The Clerk was ordered to carry this item over to the September 18th meeting. No. 4a. Hessian Hills Roads. The following communications were read into the record: "August 12, 1975 Mr. Gordon Wheeler, Chairman,Albemarle County Board of Supervisors,County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia 2290i Re: Roads Dear Mr. Wheeler: As per your request, we indicated by letter of March 20th that we expected to have the Hessian Hills Sections 5 and 6 roads acceptable for adoption by the Virginia Department of Highways by July 31st. This letter is intended to provide you a report of the current status of the road completion as follows: (1) The property owners adjacent to the cul-de-sac on Sturbridge Road have signed the revised plat showing a permanent turn-around. (2) The property owners of lots 6 and 7, Block E have agreed to each sign a 6' drainage easement. (3) The ditch along Cannon Place has been shaped. (a) The owner of lot 7, Block A has agreed to a pipe under the driveway. (5) The gutters on Old Forge Road are being cleaned. (6) The County Planning Department and Virginia°Highway Department have reviewed a preliminary plan to make a temporary turn-around on Old Forge Road permanent. The preliminary plan together with review comments, has been delivered to William S. Roudabush, Inc. for final plat preparation, which they estimate will be complete about August 18th. (7) The concrete curb and gutter has been extended in front of lot 17, Block C, on 01d Forge Road. (8) Faulconer Construction Company has contracted to install the curb and gutter at the end of Sturbridge Road. They have already been paid for this work and originally scheduled to do it simultaneous with (7) above but were delayed by the refusal of one adjoining lot owner to sign the plat. NOw that he has signed it, Faulconer Construction Company has rescheduled the work. It is my under- standing that they expect to complete it by August 20th. (9) The last item, patch and seal roads, cannot be performed prior to completion of the cul-de-sac on Sturbridge Road, scheduled for August 20th. It is our desire and intention to do so as quickly as possible. I believe the foregoing to be complete to the best of my knowledge.. Anything 8-21-75 255 DALEY CRAIG, INCORPORATED (Signed) Daley Craig, President" "August 15, 1975 Mr. Daley Craig, President Daley Craig Incorporated 400 Four Seasons Drive Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Dear Mr. Craig: With reference to your letter of August 12, 1975, regarding roads in Hessian Hills Subdivision, this seems to be a very clear and concise update of the program as has been agreed to by you and the Board of Supervisors. I feel that if you can get a letter to the Board before Thurdsay, August 21, 1975, stating that the work will be completed by August 30, 1975, weather permitting, along with a copy of the contract to do the work by that date, the Board will be satisfied not to take any further action at that time. I am sure that you want to meet this deadline and get this work finished. If you can have such a letter before Thursday, August 21st, this matter should be handled without much difficulty. Sincerely yours, (Signed) T. M. Batchelor, Jr. County Executive" Mr. Batchelor said Daley Craig had answered his letter by telephone and said he is unable to furnish any further information until a contract is consummated with Stirling Williamson, the paving contractor. Mr. Carwi!e said he had checked yesterday to see that work is being done and he does not want to take any legal action that will stop the progress that is being made. However, the Board cannot permit time to slip by month after month without getting these roads into the State system. Mr. Carwile then offered motion to the effect that if work is not completed to Highway Department plans and specifications by September 15, 1975, that the County Attorney be authorized to take any steps necessary to collect on the bond and if necessary to go against the principles involved for any deficiency. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following record, ed vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. No. 4c. Letters accepting certain streets into the State Secondary System of Highways; "July 15, 1975 As requested in resolution of your Board on March 20, 1975, the following addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved, effective July 1, 1975: ADDITION LENGTH Sherwood Manor Subdivision Mountainwood Road: From Intersection Route 780 to end. 0.25 Mi." "July 15, 1975 As requested in resolution by your Board on June 20, 1974, the following additions to the Secondary System of Albemarle County are hereby approved, effective J~ly 1, 1975. ORCHARD ACRES SUBDIVISION Peach Tree Drive: of Route 1219 From Route 1219 to 0.10 Mi. NW 0.10 Mi. Orchard Drive: Route 1219. From Route 1219 to 0.08 Mi. NW of 0.08 Mi. Winesap Lane: From Peach Tree Drive to Orchard Drive. 0.08 Mi." "July 28, 1975 As r~equested in resolution by your Board on May 15, 1975, the following addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved, effective July 1, 1975. LEXINGTON SUBDIVISION Lexington Lane: From Route 604 northwest to cul-de-sac. 0.19 Mi." "July 28-, 1975 As requested in resolution of your Board on June 19, 1975, the following addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County is hereby approved, effective July 1, 1975. FAIRGROVE SUBDIVISION 256 8-21-75 No. 4f. the record: Highway matters not on the agenda from the Board. The following letter was read into "July 7, 1975 Ms. Lettie E. Neher Clerk, Board of Supervisors County of Albemarle County Office Building Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Dear Ms. Neher: This is in reply to your inquiry on Hydraulic Road. The City hopes to make certain minor improvements to Hydraulic Road sometime this fall or next spring. These improvements are funded for the current fiscal year and are now in the preliminary design stage. The plan is to have both a left turn lane and a right turn lane on the east Hydraulic Road approach. The signal and the west Hydraulic Road approach are under the jurisdiction of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation. However, we plan to approach them for improvements to the signal and to the west approach after our plans have been finalized. The changes, if approved, will probably include protected left turn phases from Hydraulic and independent operation of the left turns from Route 29. Additional signalization is also planned for the intersection of Route 29 and Angus Road. However, this action is not funded for the current year. If we may be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us. Yours very truly, (Signed) Cole Hendrix City Manager" Mr. Wood asked if the City has contacted the Highway Department about the signal light on Hydraulic Road. Mr. Perry said they have talked to the Culpeper District Office. If the City goes ahead with construction, he can see no problem with a change in signalization. It was noted for the record that a copy of the Department of Highways and Transporation budget, 1975-76 Final Allocations for Interstate, Primary and Urban Construction had been received and was on file in the Clerk's Office. No. 4d. Restricted Roads Committee report. (Deferred from July 17, 1975). Mr. William S. Roudabush was present. He said this matter was deferred so the Board members would have time to study the report given on July 17. Mr. Carwile said he highly recommends the recommended standards to the Board. This will be a means of getting roads into the State system. If adopted, the Board would only receive~requests for restricted roads where roads would not be acceptable because they are for totally commercial use or because they do not connect to an existing State road. The standards for construction of the road base, the surface treatment, and the road bed will be the same as the existing Highway Department standards. However, approval of these roads will be limited to roads where the vehicular count per day will be 210 or less. Mr. Carwile said the Board would be in a better position in asking the Highway Department for approval of these standards if the Board endorsed this change in policy. Mr. Fisher asked what would happen if a property owner came before the Board with a request for a restricted road, the Board denied that request, and the Highway Department had not yet committed itself to accept roads under these standards. Mr. St. John said if that happened, the Board would have to return to their policy of approving restricted roads. Mr. Carwile said it would be advisable to revise the restricted road standards upwards in the interim to the standards recommended by the committee. If the Highway Department eventually approves these standards, that road could then be taken into the State system. Mr. Roudabush said he did not think the Highway Department will object to these standards. They are taken directly from Highway Department criteria. In some localities, the Highway Department has permitted changes and then concurred in those changes. Mr. Wheeler said he feels strongly about this matter. He has been hesitant, from the beginning, to approve restricted roads. He said the standards recommended by the committee should be adopted as the standards for the county or he is ready to vote to eliminate restricted roads altogether. Mr. Carwile then offered motion to make the Class A Standards contained in the report of the restricted Roads Committee (and set out in full in the minutes of July 17) the standards for restricted roads in Albemarle County; also that the Board request the Highway Department to Concur ~in the standards set forth in the Appendix for roads up to a vehicular count of 210 per day. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker. Mr. Fisher asked if this change had to be advertised as an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance. Mr. St. John said the Subdivision Ordinance contains the statement that the standards may be changed from time to time by resolution of this Board. The standards can be changed by resolution, but there is still the question of what happens in the interim. Does the Board still want owners to form a homeowners association and have deed restrictions put to record. (No reply). Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. No. 4e. Highway matters not on the agenda. (Mr. Wheeler abstaining during the following discussion). ~,7 ~ ~n~ ~ ~nn~ ~n~ ~ ~nl~t~o~ for abandonment, discontinuance, and additions 8a21-75 257 WHEREAS, certain changes have resulted in the Secondary System due to relocation and construction of Route 729 (Project 0729-002-132,C501); and 'WHEREAS, a new road has been constructed in lieu of the old which serves the same citizens and no public hearing was necessary on this matter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following sections, as indicated on sketch presented to this meeting and made a part of the Board's permanent file, be abandoned pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia: Section 2 - 0.15 miles and Section 3 - 0.10 miles, further described as that por'tion of Route 729 lying on the westerly side of the Rivanna River between the centerline thereof (Station 43+50) and the intersection of Route 732 (Station 52+80); and Section 4 - 0.13 miles - further described as that portion of Route 732 lying between Connecting.Station 16+10 ~ and Connecting Station 22+80; FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways is requested to accept for maintenance the newly constructed portions of Route 729: · Section 5 - 0.25 miles described as that section lying between Station 31+00 and Station 44+20.52; and Section 6 - 0.13 miles described as that section of new Route 732 lying between Connecting Station 16+10 and Connecting Station 22+80; AND, FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways is requested to discontinue maintenance on the following section: Section 1 - 0.15 miles, further described as that portion of old Rout.e 729 lying on the easterly side of the Rivanna River between the c~nt~rline therof (Station 43+50) and the newly constructed portion of Route 729 (Station 31+00), but that such road be continued as a public road. Mr. Carwi!e's motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:. AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wood. NAYS: None. ABSTAINING: Mr. Wheeler. At this time, the Board took a short recess. N6~. 4f. Highway Matters not on the Agenda. Mr. Carwile noted that there are several undeveloped lots in Sections 5 and 6 of Hessian Hills (also known as Old Forge Subdivision) which are still owned by the developer. He said the bond being held by the County against completion of the roads is probably not adequate because of the inflation that has occurred over the last eight or nine years. He said it is not right for the developer to continue construction of homes on these roads when the Board is unable to get the roads into the State system. Mr. Carwile then offered motion to impose a building permit moratorium on the undeveloped lots, owned by the developer as of this date, in Sections 5 and 6 of Hessian Hills Subdivision until such time as the roads are accepted into the State Highway System; a total of nine lots. Mr. Wood said he thought this was the proper procedure, however, knowing the history of these roads, and also knowing that some work is being done, he feels that legal action taken by the Board may cause-a further delay since the developer will probably turn the matter over to his attorney. Mr. Carwile said the developer also owns property at the end of Old Forge Road which he is currently trying to develop. There is a subdivision plat pending before the Planning Commission. (At this time, the matter was delayed for a few minutes in order for the Clerk to check minutes of a previous meeting.) No. 4f. Mr. Carwile noted that the Hop-In Store at the Intersection of Georgetown Road and Hydraulic Road has a substantial amount of water standing on the property. Mr. Perry said a drainage easement had been worked up and~sent to Culpeper for signature a month ago. He said this may create some problem back of the store in Georgetown Green, but that is the way the water went before this lot was filled in. No. 5. Plat for Anne M. Carpenter. Mr. James Murray, Jr. was present on behalf of the petitioner. He sa~d~t~at ~Ju~e~l!, 1975, the Board approved a division, in half, of the Anne Carpenter property in Ivy. The plat was signed by the Planning Commission and the agent for the Board. The plat was ready to record when the buyer and seller decided to make a minor change in the lot line so as to include a pump house. The change was made and approved by the Planning Commission. Mrs. Carpenter was out of state at the time and when she returned the moratorium (South Rivanna River Reservoir) was in effect. Tha property is under contract of sale. There are realtors, the buyer and the seller all waiting to close. Ail that is needed is a signature on the plat by the agent for the Board. Mr. Thacker said it was not his intention to create a hardship of this nature when the original 14-day moratorium was imposed. He then offered motion to exempt these two parcels from the freeze and to authorize the agent for the Board to execute the plat. The motion was seconded, by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote: ~ AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. ' ~Not .Docketed: Mr. Batchelor said a person in similar circumstances had spoken to him at last night's meeting. Apparently there was a plat for Mr. Walter Cushman that was approved by~ everyone, but not.~igned by all parties prior to the moratorium. At the request of the Planning Staff, Mr. Cushman was forced to wait a few days before they would sign the plat. In the interim, the moratorium was imposed. Mr. Batchelor asked if the Board intended that items delayed because of staff conditions, could proceed. 8-21-75 type. He felt that anything that had received full'approval should be allowed. Mr. Batchelor said this particular plat was for a road to serve single-family dwellings. If the staff could sign the plat, it would alleviate one hardship. Mr. Wheeler asked if Mr. Batchelor was talking specifically about a road or a plat.. Mr.'Humphrey said he understood this was the road itse!f~ Mr. Wood asked if this request were from James Gerke. Mr. Batchelor replied yes. Mr. St. John asked hoW the road could have been graded before the plat was signed, Mr. Batchelor said he did not know, however, he was told that the road has already been graded. Mr. Wheeler said he thought the request was only to sign a plat so it could be recorded. Mr. Henley asked if a subdivision plat had been submitted. Mr. Humphrey said he did not know. Mr. Wheeler suggested that Mr. Humphrey get his file on thi~ matter and return to this meeting later in the day. ~ Mr. Wood said the matter under discussion was not properly before the Board. If Mr. Gerke has that type of hardship, he has ample time to come before tha Board. Mr. Batchelor said he brought this matter up because of the action taken by the Board on the Carpenter plat~ Mr. Henley said this request sounds different from the one just approved. Mr. Wood said Mr. Gerke is talking about a road and ten lots. The request just approved by the Board was only for the division of two acres. Mr. Humphrey was requested to return to this meeting with further information. No. 4f. Mr. Thacker asked the progress of repairs to the roads in Four Seasons._ Several residents of that subdivision have spoken to him and complained that the work which has been completed was left in a hazardous condition. It seems as though,the developer is trying to get part of his bond released and has said he will do nothing else until it is released. Mr. Perry said that work has been completed on one section and the bond covering that section has been released so the contractor could be paid. The Highway Department is receiving almost no cooperation from the developer. The job is being done, but only enough work to get by with. Mr. St. John said this portion of the bond was released per the agreement approved by the Board. There were only two alternatives available to the County. One was to have the bond money put in the bank and have an assurance that this money would be paid to a given contractor. Two, the County could have forfeited the entire bond, taken the money into an account and proceeded to do the work themselves. Mr. Payne said it took over two months to work out this procedure. United Virginia Bank stands as the County's surety in this matter. Partial releases of the money will be made as sections of the work are completed. There were five parts to the agreement. One section has been completed to the satisfaction of the Highway Department. Once the work is completed, United Virginia Bank can require the County to release that portion of the funds. The developer is not released from his obligation ~n~it-att-of the work is done. Mr. Wood said this was one of the reasons for delay. No contractor would undertake the work until he was assured of receiving payment. The part of the bond which has been released is only about 25% of the total amount of work to be completed. Mr. Thacker said he-does not feel the developer is acting in good faith. Mr. Payne said there is one advantage to this agreement. There was a question about the prior, existing bond. There is no question about this procedure. If the work is not completed by December 31, 1975, there will be a certain amount of money that can be called. Mr. Thacker said the Board would have to live with this procedure, however, he felt the County could require both a performance and payment bond for surety. This would assure that the work would be completed. Mr. St. John said the ordinances do not allow the Board to do this. Mr. Thacker asked if it were allowed under enabling legislation. Mr. St. John said it does not speak to this matter. The County's bonding procedures allow developers to use as security, cash or a certified check. Mr. Carwile said there are a lot of people who cannot get a corporate surety performance bond although they are able to put up cash. Mr. Thacker said he feels if someone is able to put up cash, they can work out an arrangement to put up a performance and payment bond with the cash serving as security to the surety company. No. 4f. (Mr. Carwile abstaining during ~the following discussion.) Mr. Thacker asked if the Highway Department has received an answer from Richmond concerning the Board's request for industrial access funds for the upgrading of Greenbrier and Peyton Drives. He said Mr. Jim Hill had written him a letter in which he said that after talking to Mr. Brown at the Highway Department it seems unlikely that such funds will be forthcoming. The County is presently holding a bond for completion of work on Greenbrier as well as some funds in escrow for Dr. Hurt's portion of work to be performed with industrial access funds. The escrow money is apparently in the form of cash and it seems unfair to have the money tied up if industrial access funds are not available. Mr. Perry said Mr. Hill had discussed this matter with him and indicated that Dr. Hurt will complete the work on Greenbrier Drive and forget about the industrial access funds. Mr. Wheeler suggested that this be carried over to the September agenda. No; 4f. Mr. Wood asked about a water problem on Proffit Road. Mr. Perry said a Mr. Price had been sent an agreement to sign, but he has had no reply at this date. No. 4f. Mr. Henley said there is a spot on Route 810 near Claude Cotten's packing shed that has settled about one foot below road level. He asked that this be repaired. No. 4a. (Hessian Hills Roads.) Mr. Carwile returned to discussion of roads in Sections 5 and 6 of Hessian Hills Subdivision. He said the Board passed a resolution on March 20, 1975, imposing a moratorium against issuance of building permits on lots owned by Daley Craig. He has ~o~ulted with the County Attorney, and so there will be no misunderstanding or ambiguity, the motion should state specific ownership. Mr. Carwile then offered motion that the Board impose a moratorium on the issuance of building permits on all undeveloped lots in Sections 5 and 6 of Hessian Hills Subdivision owned by Woodlake Corporation, Daley Craig and Daley Craig, Incorporated; further, that this building permit moratorium shall also apply to any lands owned by the above owners at the end of Old Forge Road. Mr. Carwile said he has been informed that Mr. Craig is Planning to further subdivide residential lots and perhaps even extend the streets in the subdivision. He does hht think this should be permitted u~til the County has an adequate bond to insure that the roads will be completed and accepted into the State system. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded vote: 8-21-75 259 No. 10. Leave Pay - Jail Personnel. Sheriff George Bailey was present. He said that in 1973 Mr. Lewis Dunn, the jailor, was in the hospital for about two months. During that time, Sheriff Bailey advised the personnel at the jail that they would have to cancel all leave time and probably have to work seven days a week. This they did, often working double shifts. They were promised leave time for this when new personnel were hired for the new jail. Sheriff Bailey said that in 1974, additional personnel were hired but he still had to have experienced men working at the jail. At that time, there were between 35 and 50 prisoners, with only four full-time men working at the jail. After the jail was moved to the new Joint Security Complex, several of his personnel approached Mr. S'~ank, the Jail Administrator, asking for the compensatory time which they had not received. Mr. Shank was unable to grant their request, since if they were allowed time off, someone had to work overtime to cover their shifts. Sheriff Bailey requested that the following personnel be paid the amounts listed below: Hastings Hall, $545.25; Charles Kingrea, $545.25; Charles Riker, $116.60; and Lewis Dunn, $606.75. Mr. Wheeler asked if this request would have to be sent to the State Compensation Board as a supplemental request. Mr. Batchelor said yes; Mrs. Marian Rabinowitz and Mr. Shank concur in this request. Mr. Henley said if the Board compared the size of the new jail staff with that at the old county jail, they would agree to the payment. He then offered motion to approve the payment of leave time for the personnel as set out above and to adopt the following resolutions: BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby concur in request of the Sheriff of Albemarle, George W. Bailey, that the Compensation Board participate in cost of leave pay paid to certain personnel employed at the Albemarle County Jail during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1974. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $1,813.85 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to the General Operating Fund for payment of compensatory and leave pay to certain employees of the old Albemarle County Jail. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. No. 18. Designate additional banks as depository for County funds. (Mr. Carwile Rbstaining)~ Mr. Batchelor Said it has been an unwritten policy of the Board that only banks physically located in the City of Charlottesville or the County of Albemarle would be designated as depositories for county funds. This has been a good policy since it keeps funds fluid within the community. The staff has received requests from two Richmond-based banks that they be considered as depositories. Mr. Thacker asked if these two banks ha~erany interest in Albemarle County. Mr. Ray Jones, Director of Finance, said United Virginia Bank has a branch office here and that branch is on the County's bid list. Bank of Virginia purchased the bonds recently sold by the County. Mr. Jones said past relationships with the local banks has been very good. However, since official requests have been received, there should be some policy of record. Mr. W. A. Pace, Jr., National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville, was present. He said one of the requests came about because the bank purchased county bonds. He personally feels that purchasing county bonds and the amount of money the County has to deposit are two different things. County funds are usually deposited for short terms. Banks can loan those funds back into the neighborho where those funds do good for the community. The four banks in Charlottesville who are presently bidding on County monies are giving top interest to the County. If the Board decides to go out~ide of Albemarle County for bidders, they are opening the door for trouble. In the past, National Bank has only requested that they b~ allowed to bid on county funds. If this request is approved, there are four or five other banks which National Bank would request be added to the list. If the door is opened to Richmond, this would also open the door to banks in other cities and maybe in other states. He said the Board's present policy is a good one. Mr. Wheeler asked if Mr. Jones had any information on the rate of interest other counties are receiving. Mr. Jones said he has talked to the Treasurer of the University of Virginia, since the University does go state-wide for bids. This gentlemen said that to the best of his knowledge, this does not offer any advantages from an "interest" standpoint. Also, if the Board allows banks in Richmond to bid, it complicates the bidding procedures. At the present time, bids are received at 11:00 A.M and the money is in the bank on deposit drawing interest by 2:00 P.M. Mr. Thacker said he felt it was a good idea to keep funds fluid within the community. He then offered motion that the Board of Supervisors designate only banking facilities physically located with~the County of Albemarle or the City of Charlottesville as depositories for County funds. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. ABSTAINING: Mr. Carwile. No. 17a. resolution: Business License Tax Refund. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood to adopt the following WHERE~S,thhe e Director of Finance of Albemarle County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and certified that Lawrence B. Crenshaw has sold Ridgewood Mobile Home Park located on Route 29 North and the new operators have purchased a pro-rated license for one-half year on 72 trailer spaces, thereby making a refund of $720,00 due Mr. Crenshaw; and WHEREAS, the Director of Finance has further certified that Mr. Crenshaw is delinquent on 1973 and 1974 personal property taxes and that the Albemarle County Code Section 11-38 and the Code of Virginia, Section 58-1010 give him the authority to apply this refund against unpaid personal property taxes; and 260 WHEREAS, the County Attorney has examined the supporting evidence and consents that the Director of Finance's assessment of the matter is correct; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors hereby directs a refund of $720.00 be issued to Mr. Crenshaw and further asks that this~efund be applied against unpaid 1973 and 1974 delinquent personal property taxes. FURTHER, all supporting papers verifying this request are to be filed in the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. 8-21-75 No. 17b. Personal Property Tax Refunds. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote to adopt the resolution which follows' AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. WHEREAS, the Director of Finance of Albemarle County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and certified that Albert B. Butler was erroneously assessed on a 1974 personal property ticket Number 101670; and WHEREAS, the County Attorney has examined supporting evidence and consents that such assessment was erroneous; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby direct a refund of $151.70 be issued to Mr. Butler. FURTHER, all supporting papers verifying this request are to be filed in the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors. No. 17b. Personal Property Tax Refund. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded vote to adopt the resolution which follows: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. WHEREAS, the Director of Finance of Albemarle County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and certified that a double assessment was made on 1974 personal property owned by Grover Forloines and Son, Incorporated; and WHEREAS, the County Attorney has examined supporting evidence and consents that such. assessment was erroneous; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the Code of Virgina, Section 58-1142, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby direct a refund of $372.22 be issued to Grover Forloines and Son, Incorporated. FURTHER, all supporting papers verifying this request are to be filed in the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors. Not Docketed. Mr. Thacker asked how the problem had occurred that occasioned the Butler refund. Mr. Jones said that handwriting often causes a problem. When this particular make and model of automobile were checked back against the State Motor Vehicle list, it was found that the assessment was erroneous. Mr. Carwile said this problem would not occur if the County used the computer tape furnished by the State Department of Motor Vehicles. Use of the computer tape would also save the CoUnty several months of clerical time. Mr. WJheeler said he remembered that this request had been made to the Board. previously. Mr. Jones said it is possible to take the computer tape and apply a declining balance type of depreciation. There is now also available a tape from N.A.D.A. which carries by year the values on different makes and models of vehicles. The N.A.D.A. Book shows approximately 50 different models of one automobile. It has been a problem in the past to get~-adgquate information in order to deter- mine the value of an automobile. This work is done manually by clerks in the Finance Department valuing automobiles by year and identification number. Last spring, the staff requested that the Board approve the use of the computer tape, thus eliminating about three months of manual work. The staff has now found that there is a N.A.D.A. tape available which can be matched with the tape from the Virginia Department of Motor Vehic~les. Mr. Wheeler said he objected at the time because the County would have been using a declining balance and at the same time the N.A.D.A. (Blue Book) showed that certain models of automobiles had appreciated instead of depreciating. At that time, there was nothing in the tape that would have taken care of this problem. Mr. Carwile said the N.A.D.A. tape can now be matched against the St'ate tape of vehicle ownership and a declining balance does not have to be used. Mr. Wheeler said if this tape can be used in conjunction with Blue Book values he would drop his objection. Mr. Jones said the matching of two computer tapes is a complicated process. He would like to have time to talk with the County's computer service and make a report at a later date. (Request granted). No. 19. Appropriation from Revenue Sharing Funds: Fire Truck. Mr. Jones said the Board had assigned purchase of a fire truck (to replace the existing truck housed at the City Fire Station on Ridge Street) as a high priority item during the January public hearing on revenue sharing. Since that time, the County's purchasing ageng~and the City's Fire Chief, Julian Taliaferro, have written specifications and taken bids on the truck. In order to proceed, the Board must make an appropriation. The low bidder was Ward-LaFrance with a bid of $67,579.87 for the truck, equipment at $13,348.13, making a total cost of $80,928.00. Mr. Wheeler said he has received numerous telephone calls about this truck. He has been told that the specifications were not approved by Mr Taliaferro. Mr. Jones said the purchasing agent, 8-21-75 Mr. Wood said the Fire Station Committee had discussed specifications for this fire truck. It was found that American LaFrance already has equipment in Charlottesville and Ward LaFrances does not. Ward LaFrance's hoses were a different size and they have agreed to make the proper adaptors for a price of $1,542.00 so their hoses will work and be placed on the proper part of the truck. The difference in the two bids was only $1,300 and Ward LaFrance has agreed to reduce their bid by an amount to make the proper adaptors. He also has received calls. He checked this with the committee and found that the purchasing agent purchased the best piece of equipment at the best price and only with the recommendation of Mr. Taliaferro. Motion to adopt the following resolution was offered by Mr. Wood: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $80,928.00 be and the same hereby is appropriated from the General Fund and trans- ferred to the General Operatin~Fund~or the purchase of a fire truck, (Code 7-215c.1) said funds to be taken from Revenue Sharing Funds at the time of actual expenditure. Mr. Wood's motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said he would like to explain to the Board the situation mentioned earlier by Mr. Batchelor about Mr. Gerke. Mr. Wheeler said it was probably his fault that Mr. Gerke was not at this meeting. Mr. James Murray had personally called Mr. Wheeler and explained his problem. Mr. Wheeler felt it was a reasonable request and had asked that it be placed on the agenda. Mr. Gerke has discussed his problem with Mr. Wheeler two or three times, however, Mr. Wheeler did not realize the request was for just the signing of a plat and he did not suggest that Mr. Gerke appear before the Board. Mr. Thacker said he also has spoken with Mr. Gerke and did not understand the request was only for the signing of a plat. M~. Humphrey said the request involves a restricted road and a division of land. The pre- liminary plat was approved by the Board some six months ago, prior to the moratorium. The plat is to be known as Lewis Hill West. The final plat will not be presented to the Planning Commission until Tuesday of next week. Mr. Wheeler asked if any of the road work had been completed. Mr. Humphrey said not to his knowledge. Mr. Henley asked if the applicant could proceed with grading prior to approval of the final plat. Mr. Humphrey said based on preliminary plat approval, he could. Mr. Wheeler asked if he could obtain a building permit before he received a grading permit. Mr. Humphrey said the plat would first have to be signed and the road plans approved by the County Engineer's Office. Mr. Wheeler said he did not mind approving the plat, but would not approve a grading permit. Mr. Humphrey said there may be other preliminary plats approved in the last six months where the applicant's have similar problems. Mr. Payne said the moratorium ordinance by its terms precludes the Board or Planning Commission taking action on any subdivision plat that has not received final approval. If the Board does this without amending the interim moratorium ordinance, they will open the way to every subdivision. Mr. Wheeler suggested that Mr. Humphrey notify the affected persons on the Lewis Hill West plat that the Board will discuss the problem at the Wednesday night meeting next week if that %s their pleasure. At this time, the Board took a short recess. When they reconvened, Mr. Wheeler said he would like to report to the Board that if you get a complete report, you know what is going on. He called Mr.-Taliaferro during the recess and was told that originally the specifications put out to bid were approved by Mr. Taliaferro. After the bids were received, it was thought the bids were too high. Mr. Kelly Reynolds, County Fire Marshall tried to sell the committee on the idea of buying a mini- pumper, but was not successful. It was from this that all the rumors started. No. 9. Public Hearing: Charlottesville-Albemarle Jaycees request to approve a carnival to be held from August 25, 1975, through August 30, 1975, to be located on Route 250 East. Property zoned B-1 Business is described as County Tax Map 78, Parcel 17D. Rivanna Magisterial District. (Notice of this public hearing was advertised in the Daily Progress on August 13 and August 19, 1975). No one from the public spoke for or against the request. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by-Mr. Henley to grant the request with the following conditions: (1) There is to be no parking on Route 250.East, and (2) a deputy is to be hired to help control traffic. The motion carried by the folio'wing recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. ABSTAINING: Mr. Carwile. No. 11. Audit relating to damages resulting from the Flood of June 21-25, 1972, Project Application OEP-339-DR-38, for the period June 22, 1972 through December 23, 1973, as prepared by the Auditor of Public Accounts, Richmond, Virginia, was received for the record. No. 12. Report of the County Executive for the month of June, 1975, was received as information. No. 13. Statements of Expenses of the Director of Finance, the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney and the Sheriff's Office for the month of July, 1975, were received. On motion by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher, these statements were approved as presented. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. No. 14. Statement of Expenses of the Joint Security Complex for the month of July, 1975, was presented. On motion by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Henley, this statement was approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. 262 8-21-75 No. 15. Statements of expenses incurred in the maintenance and operation of the Joint Security Complex, along with statement of prisoner days, statement of Jail Physician and statement of paramedic salaries, for the month of July, 1975, were presented. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Carwile, these statements were approved as presented. The motion passed by the vote which follows: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. No. 7. Discussion of a Trash Control Ordinance (New Section 15-6.1 of the Albemarle County , Code). Mr. Batchelor said this new section had been drafted at the request of the Zoning Administrator ~ Mr. Hartwell Clarke, and relates to removal of trash from_vacant lots. Section 15-6.1 Removal of trash, etc. from property when same might endanger the health or safety of other residents of the_County. Every owner of property in the County shall remove from such property at regular intervals, not to exceed sixty (60) days, any and all trash, garbage, refuse, litter and other substances which might endanger the health of safety of other residents_off, the County. The County Executive, or his designated agent, shall, upon complaint of any citizen that a violation of this ordinance exists, provide written notice to the owner of the property in. question to abate such violation by removing such trash, garbage, refuse, litter and other like substances which might endanger the health of other residents of the County. If such violation be not so abated within ten (10) days after the receipt Of such notice, the County Executive, or his designated agent, shall cause the same to be removed and shall cause the expenses of such removal to be charged to the owner of the property, such charges to be collected as are taxes and levies. Failure to comply with this ordinance after receipt of notice as herein provided shall, constitute a misdemeanor. Mr. Clarke said his office has tried to prosecute cases under the existing Zoning Ordinance. The Judge has ruled that since trash is only mentioned in the defintions of the ordinance (which is proper under a premissive ordinance) and not mentioned elsewhere in ~he~ordinance, he would not convict on a defintion and d±smissed the case. Later, he tried to get a conviction on another case where there was no doubt about the violation but the County also lost that case because the trash was dumped on land where there were no buildings or structures. Present Section 15-6 of the Albemarle County Code states that .an owner is not allowed to dump trash around a building but makes no mention of vacant lots. Mr. Batchelor said enactment of this section might cause problems for the innocent landowner because in most instances this problem occurs from people dumping trash on anothers property. Mr. Carwile said he agrees to that basic premise, but this new section states there must be a positive finding that the trash endangers the health of the citizens in the County. Mr. Wheeler agreed that the Board needs an ordinance which gives Mr. Clarke the authority to take care of such problems. Mr. Henley asked who would determine when trash is a health hazard. He said he would not support this ordinance until this is made clearer. Mr. payne said this ordinance reads almost word for word as the state enabling legislation, however, is a little different. The County already has statutes covering trash on public highways, dumping on private property without permission and prosecution of a landowner who permits an ~ accumulation of trash on premises where there is an occupied building. This ordinance would cover an accumulation of trash on unoccupied premises. There are two differences in this statute; 1) it does involve higher standards because there must be a health hazard involved and not just an accumulation of trash; and 2) the ordinance, because of its enforcement provisions, is not exclusively dependent on criminal sanctions. Under this ordinance, Mr. Clarke would notify a property owner that trash must be removed and give that property owner a specified time in which to comply. If this is not done, the property owner can be prosecuted for a misdemeanor. The County could also remove the trash and charge the property owner for that removal. There is no court determination needed for this. The County would charge for this removal in the same manner as taxes are charged. It is then a question of collecting the money. Mr. Thacker asked if the determination of a health hazard is made by the Health Department. Mr. Payne said under the terms of this ordinance, it is made by the County Executive or his agent. Mr. Thacker asked what would give the County Executive the qualifications for this determination and suggested that the ordinLance be changed to read "a health hazard as defined by the Health Department." Mr. St. John said the words.-in this ordinance are self-explanatory. Whether someth±ng fits within these words may be the subject of expert testimony by the Health Department. He did not th~nk the defintiion should be changed from that found in Webster's Dictionary. Mr. Wheeler suggested that the ordinance be set for a public hearing in order to receive comments from the public. Motion to set September 25, 197~, at 7:30 P.M. for a public hearing to amend the Albemarle County Code by the addition of Section 15-6.1 was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Wood, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. No. 21. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Frances V. Thurston for eight (8) chickens killed by dogs on August 2, 1975. On motion by Mr. Henley, Ms. Thurston was allowed $20.50 for this claim. The mot~lon was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the fol!owing~re¢orded vote: A SS: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. No. 21. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Jeffrey T. Cotten for eighteen (18) chickens killed by dogs on June 19, 1975. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Thacker, Mr. Cotten was allowed $36.00 for this claim. The motion c~rried by the follow~ng recorded vote': AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwi!e, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. '~ At 12:05 P.M. the Chairman requested the Board adjourn into executive session to discuss legal matters with the County Attorney and also a personnel matter. Motion to this effect was offered by 8-21-75 263 AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. The Board reconvened at 2:10 P.M. No. 16a. Appointment: No. 16b. Appointment: Library Board. Passed over. Land Use Classification Appeals Board. Carried over to August 27, 1975. No. 16c. Appointment: BOCA Building Code Appeals Board. Mr. Wheeler recommended the following persons for appointment: Henry J. Browne, Architect; R. Allen Gay, Contractor; and Robert Rutshaw, Attorney and Engineer. Mr. Thacker recommended the following persons: Bland Wade, Architect; Fred McCormick, Construction Engineer and Professor; Joe Birckhead, Electrical Contractor; and L. A. Lacy, Plumbing Contractor. Since only five persons were needed to serve on this Board, Mr. Thacker offered motion to appoint Messrs. McCormick, (five years), Gay, (four years) Wade, (three years) Birckhead (two years) and Lacy (one year) to this Board. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and WoOd. None. Mr. Fisher. No. 16d. Appointment: Advisory Council on Aging. Mr. Wheeler noted that Ms. Nancy D. Joyner had written a letter stating that she is unable to accept reappointment to the Advisory Council on Aging. She has accepted a position on the faculty of the Department of Political Science at the University of North Carolina. Mr. Carwite then offered motion to accept the resignation of Ms. Joyner and to send her a letter of appreciation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Fisher. No. 16e. Appointment: Chief Assessing Officer. Mr. Batchelor noted that since the resignation of Hugh F. Simms, Mr. William S. Bra~shaw has been serving as Acting Director of the Department of Real Estate Assessments and also as Chief Assessing Officer for Albemarle County. Mr. Bradshaw has worked with the Equalization Board and has recently returned from a school in Chicago on computerizatio~ of assessments. Mr. B~dshaw has been a member of the County staff for ten years, beginning as deed reader-mapper, then appraiser, then senior appraiser in the Real Estate Department. Mr. Batchelor recommended that Mr. Bradshaw be appointed as Supervisor of Assessments (Virginia Code Sections 15.1~59'8 and 15.1-605(d)) and Chief Assessing Officer (Section 15.1-605(j~effective upon approval by the State Tax Commissioner. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Fisher. No. 20. Branchlands Settlement. Motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Wood, and carried by the following recorded vote authorizing the Chairman and the Clerk to sign the agreement set out below. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Fisher. THIS AGREEMENT~ made-this 15th day of August~ 1975, by and between THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY, hereinafter called the Authority, WALTER F. SULLIVAN, BISHDP OF RICHMOND, hereinafter called the Bishop, THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, hereinafter called the County, and THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE~ VIRGINIA, hereinafter called the City. W I T N!SE S S E T H : WHEREAS, the Bishop, as such, is the titleholder of a certain tract of land situated in Albemarle County, Virginia, shown as Parcel 135B on the Albemarle County Tax Map Sheet 61, and known as Branchlands; and WHEREAS, on September 30, 1972, Bishop, the City, and the Albemarle Development Corporation entered into an agreement in which Bishop agreed to convey to Development a non-exclusive easement through property in Albemarle County, Virginia, known as ,Branchlands" to accommodate a sewer line connecting the property owned by Albemarle Development CorporatiOn with City sewage lines on property adjacent to the said trac~ of land owned by Bishop, in consideration of which the City granted to Bishop, his assigns or successors in interest the right to 100 residential sewer connections to said sewer line upon payment of the actual cost of such connections, and at such time as sewage treatment p the Bishop: his assigns, etc. 800 additional reside equivalent in volume, also at actual cost, and furt line across the tract owned by Bishop, the City agr permitted by an existing contract, on the same ter~ other customers outside the corporate limits of the lant capacity was available, granted ntial connections or their commercial her upon installation by Bishop of a wabeg ced to provide water to Bishop, as soon as s and conditions as water supplied to City, which agreement is recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 522, page 622; and WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville water an~ sewer connection fees at the time of said agreement and at present include only the actual physical hookup cost of water and sewer connections and do not include an availability fee, which the Albemarle County Service Authority now charges in addition to ~h~OD~al phys~cat cost of water and sewer connections; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authori%y on June 12, 1973, entered into an agreement with Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville to form the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, wherein the City in Part agreed to offer to the Service Authority all 264 8-21-75 WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authority and Albemarle County initiated litigation in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County against~Bishop and others contesting in part the legality of the agreement between the City of Charlottesville, Bishop, and Albemarle Development Corporation, whereby the City agreed to grant Bishop 900 individual sewer connections or their commercial equivalent in volume at actual cost and agreed to provide water to Bishop pursuant to City ordinances pertaining to City utility connections and use; and WHEREAS, on April 29, 19~75, the.Judge of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a hearing on the caze of County of Albemarle and Albemarle County Service Authority v. City of Charlottesville, et al., granted defendants' motion to strike the plaintiffs' evidence; and WHEREAS, the paDties have negotiated a settlement of the said case as between the ~arties to this agreement and they desire to set forth ~heir settlement agreement in writing. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises, and the settlement of the case of County of Albemarle and Albemarle County Service Authority v. City of Charlottesville, et al., and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of .all of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties thereto, the Albemarle County Service Authority hereby agrees, as set forth herein, to waive for a maximu~ period of ten years from the date of this agreement one-half of the fees which would otherwise be charged at the time any given connection or connections are made, for water and sewer connections, including availability and connection fees, on that tra~t of land shown as parcel 135B on the Albemarle County Tax Map Sheet 61, amdl~nown as Branchlands. Such fees are'to be calculated according to the Authority's current rates prevailing at the time of such connections. The waiver of one-half the prevailing fees at the time any given sewer connection or connections are made shall apply only to a total of 900 individual sewer connections o~ their commercial equivalent in volume. The paDties hereby agree that any water or sewer 'connection on the Branchlands tract made after ten years from the date of this agreement and any individual sewer connections or their commercial equivalent in volume in excess of 900 connections, whether made before or after ten years from the date of this agreement, shall be subject to all water and sewer fees, including all connection, availability and other fees of the Albem~arle County Service Authority, at the prevailing rate at the time any given connection Or connections are made. The parties hereto further agree that the matters set out herein in no way relieve all users of water and sewer services on the Branchlands tract of the obligation to pay all water and sewer rents at the full prevailing rates of the Albemarle County Service Authority at the time of use. The parties hereto agree that the matters set out herein in no way grant a priority for or an obligation to provide water and sewer services to the Br~nchlands tract. The priority for water and sewer services is controlled entirely by the rules and politices ~dopted by the Albemarle County Service Authority. Upon the execution of this agreement, an order will be offered ~or entry in the Circuit Court for Albemarle County setting forth that the parties hereto have arrived at a negotiated settlement of all controversies in the above styled and the suit shall be ended agreed with prejudice. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: ATTEST: E. E. Thompa0n, Jrl ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY By: MyroD.~P. Tremain 'Chairman ATTEST: L. E. Neher~ Clerk ATTEST: J- .$- Rush, Jr. Walter F. Sullivan Bishop of Richmond COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE By:~ Gordon L~ Wheeler Chairman, Board of Supervisors CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE ~y: Charles L. Barbour Mayor Motion was then offered by Mr. Carwite, seconded by Mr. Thacker and c~rried by the following recorded vote authorizing the Chairman to execut~ agreement with Albemarle Development Corporation and Weinstein Associates after said agreement is approved by the County Attorney's Office. The ~o~!~ was a~afo~l,ows: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Hemley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NOM~. Mr. Fisher. (THE AGREEMENT AS SIGNED IS SET OUT BELOW). THIS AGREEMENT made this day of , 1975, ~Y and between THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY, hereinafter called the A~h~ity, PERCY MONTAGUE, III, HARRY F. LAN~HORNE, BEN MINOR MILLES, and CHARLOTESVILLE OIL-CO., INCORPORATED, hereinafter called the Developers, WEINSTEIN ASSOCIATES, ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, and THE CITY OF CHARLOTTES- VILLE, VIRGINIA. WI TNE SEETH : WHEREAS, Albemarle Development Corporation formerly owned certain tracts of land in the Route 29 North and State Route 631 (Rio Road) area of Albe~rle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, Albemarle Development Corporation entered into an agreement with the City of Charlottesville whereby the City agreed to supply Albemarle Development CorporatiOn with water and sewer service to those tracts of land owned by Albemarle DevelOpment cerporation in Albemarle County, pursuant to City ordinances pertaining to City utility 8onnections and 265 use, which document was recorded on October t9,x!-t971, in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle Cou~ty in De~d Book 495, page 608; and WHEREAS, Albemarle Development Corporation conveyed 9..12 acres o.f land to Weinstein ~'Assoeiates on June 30,-1972, as set forth inssaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 509, page 354; and WHEREAS, Developers conveyed 23.06 acres~of land to Weinstein Associates on February 28, 1973, as set forth in said Clerk's Office in Deed Book 528, page 3822 and WHEREAS, at the time Albemarle Development Corporation and Developers conveyed said tracts of land to Weinstein Associates, part of the consideration for the sale of the land included water and sewer connections previously granted ~bemarle Development Corporation by the City of CharlotSesville, -pursuant to City ordinances pertaining to City utility connections&and use; and WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesvilte's water an~ sewer connecti6n~fees at the time of said agreement and at present include only the actual physical-hoOkup costs of water and sewer connections and do not include an availability fee which the Albemarle County Service Authority now charges in addition to the actual physical hookup costs of water and sewer connestion.s; and WHEREAS, Albemarle Development Corporation was dissolved on January 31, 1973, and has no legal existence, all of its assets, right and liabilities having been transferred and assumed by its stockholders; and WHEREAS, Developers and Weinstein Associates are successors in interest to those certain tracts of land in Albemarle Cbunty formerly o~n~8<by Albemarle Development Corporation, by virtue of purchase,~and/or as-former stockholders of Albemarle Development Corporation; and WHEREAS, on December 29, 1972, the parties hereto and others extered into an agreement establishing an escrow fund to provide for the difference in water and sewer connectimn fees between the City of Charlottesville's and the Albemarle.County Service Authority's rates until the issue of whether the City or the Service Authority had the right to provide water and sewer services to customers on tracts of land in the Route 29 North (Rio Road) area of Albemarle County, including that tract of land conve~ed by Albemarle Development Corporation to Weinstein Associates, had been resolved by agreement or litigation; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authority on June 12, 1973, entered into an agreement with Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville to form the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority,~ha~i~.~th~ C~ty in part agreed to offer to the Service.~uthority all existing water and sewer customers of the City located in the County and all of its facilities in the County which provide services with respect to customers to be transferred, which offer the Service Authority intended to accept and has now accepted; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Service Authority and Albemarle County initiated litigation in the Circuit Court of Albemarle County against Developers and others contesting in part the legality of the agreement beDween the City of Charlotaes~il&e and Albemarle Development Corporation, whereby the City agreed to provide water and sewer services to Albemarle Development Corporation pursuant to City ordinances pertaining to City utility connections and use; and WHEREAS, on April 29, 1975, the Judge of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, at a hearing on the case of County of Albemarle and Albemarle County Service Authority~. City of CharlottesVille, et al., granted defendants' motion to strike plaintiffs' evidence; and WHEREAS, the parties, have negotiated a settlement of the said cas~ as be~weeh the parties to this agreement and they ~esire to set forth their settlement agreement in writing: NOW, THEREFORE, F~ and in sonsideration of the premises and the settlement of the case of County of Albemarle and Albemarle County Service Authority v. City of Charlottesville, et al., and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of all of which is hereby acknowledge, the Albemarle County Service Authority hereby agrees, as set forth herein, to waive for a period of ten years from the date of ~his agreement water and sewer connection and availability fees and charges, except for the actual physical labor and equipment costs, if any, of wat&r and sewer connections, on that portion of the Albemarle Development Corporation tract, consisting fo 32.18 acres, which was conveyed to Weinstein Associates on June 30, 1972, and February 28, 1973, and to which 'free water and sewer connectimns were legally committed to Weinstein Associates as part of the consideration for said sale of property by the ~bemarle ~D~v~0pment Corporation and Developers. Said waiver of water and sewer connection and availability fees and charges shall apply only for so long as the pre~ent-R-3 zoning blassifiaation of the Weinstein Associates' tract, or a sub~stantially comp~able zoning classification, if a new zoning ordinance is adopted, remains in effect, provided that rezoning on the part of Albemarle ~?~nty not instigated or requested by Weinstein Associates or its successors in interest shall not affect this agreement. Any water and sewer connections on the Weinstein Associates[ tract made after ten years from the date of this agreemen~ wi-1 be subject to all water and sewer fees, including all connection, availability and other fees of the Albemarle County Service Authority, its he~s and assigns, at the prevailing rate at the time when the connection is made. The parties hereto agree that all other land or portiOns of land formerly'owned b~ the Albemarle Development Corporation are subject to all water and sewer fees, including all connection, availability, and other fees and charges, including water and sexer rents, of the Albemarle County Service Auth6rity~iits heirs and assigns, at the prevailing rate at the time any given co. nnection or connections are made. The parties hereto further agree that the matters set out herein, in no way relieve all users of water and sewer services on the Weinstein Associates' tract of the obligation to pay all water and sewer rents at the fu!l.pre~ailing rates of the Albemarle County Service Authority at the time of the use. The parties hereto agree that the matters set out herein in no way grant a priority for or an obligation to provide water and sewer service to that portion of the Albemarle Development Corporation tract conveyed to Weinstein Associates, or any other portion of the Albemarle Development Corporation tract. The priority for water and sewer service is controlled entirely by the rules and policies adopted by the Albemarle County Service Authority. 266 8-21-75 All money presently held in the escrow fund established on December 29, 1972, shall be refunded to Developers by the Albemarle County Service Authority. Upon the execution of this agreement, an order will, be offered for entry in the Circuit Court for Albemarle County setting forth that the parties hereto have arrived at a negotiated settlement of all controversies in the above styled suit and the suit shall be ended agreed with prejudice. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: ATTEST: E. E. Thompson, Jr. ATTEST: Edward McCue, III, .Secretary ATTEST: J. S. Rush, Jr. ATTEST: B~rbara J. F!ammia THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY By Myron E. Tremain Percy Montague, III Harry F. Langhorne Ben Minor Miller CHARLOTTESVILLE OIL CO., INCORPORATED By: J. F. Dulaney, Jr., President WEINSTEIN ASSOCIATES ~.y: Melvin Weinstein THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE By: Charles L. Barbour ALBEMARLE COUNTY By: Gordon L. Wheeler Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler read the following letter from the Charlottesville-Albemarle Rescue Squad into the record. "August 11, 1975 On behalf of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Rescue Squad as well as myself, I would like to thank you and the County Officials for the $2,500.00 contribution to the Rescue Squad fund drive. This will help greatly towards reaching our $75,000.00 goal for this year and it also makes us feel mighty happy to know you all think enough of us to contribute. Again ma~y-%Aanks. Sincerely yours, ~Signed) Joel M. Cochran" Mr. Wheeler noted that the League of Women Voters and the Farm Bureau have requested that a survey be made of the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir in regards to sedimentation and pollution. The State Water Control Board and representatives of the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation District will make that survey on August 26 beginning at 9:30 A.M. and they have requested that a representative of the Board be present. It was suggested that Mr. Wood represent the Board. At the request of the Clerk, motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Wood to amend the minutes of February 20, 1975, to include the expenditures for that~month. Motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Fisher. General Fund General Operating Fund School Operating Fund Cafeteria Fund School Construction-Capital Outlay Fund General Operating-Capital Outlay Fund Textbook Rental Fund McIntire Trust Fund Joint Security Complex Fund Commonwealth of Virginia: Current Credit Account Town of Scottsvi!le: Local Sales Tax Total $ 270.62 394,311.86 899,482.01 25,857.43 46,969.50 25O.OO 864.69 4,187.69 34,246.97 2,271.57 219.89 $1,408,932.23 Mr. Wheeler said it has been brought to his attention that the County owns a piece of property near Milton shown on County Tax Map 93 as Parcel 3. He asked that the staff check to see if this were correct and to make a recommendation as to whether or not this property should be sold. Mr. Wheeler noted that the Governor has asked that a workshop be held in Blacksburg for the western area of Virginia, on September 22, 1975, in regards to the Bicentennial. He recommended that Mr. Wood attend this meeting since he is a member of the local Bicentennial Commission. Mr. Wheeler noted that the 24th Annual, Local Government Officials Conference, starts at the University of Virginia on Monday, August 25, 1975. Mr. Wheeler said he has received one application for the position of County Executive. Another letter has been received from an advisory group who would like to help the County in the selection 8-21-75 8-27-75 (afternoon) 267 Mr. Wheeler noted that he had received a letter from Rountrey and Associates offering the County assistance in the assessment of non-taxable property as now required by State legislation passed in 1975. (Section 58-14.1) Mr. Wheeler asked that the Clerk notify Rountrey that this work will be completed with County forces. Mr. Wheeler read the following letter into the record' "August 14, 1975 Mr. Gordon L. Wheeler Chairman Albemarle Board of Supervisors County Office Building Charlottesville, Virginia Dear Mr. Wheeler: In the midst of the one-sided, adverse criticism of Mr. Batchelor it was refreshing to read the balanced and objective appraisal of Mr. Batchelor's contribution to the read the balanced and objective appraisal of Mr. Batchelor's contribution to the progress and welfare of Albemarle County by Ray Cary in the Daily Progress of AugUst 11. It is an impressive record and one that I believe few administrative officers have equalled or surpassed. Mr. Cary's appraisal was particularly refreshing to me because I was Dean of the School of Public Administration at Florida State University when Tom Batchelor and Otis Brown received their degrees. I rate them on the same level as one of my earlier students, Governor Reuben Askew of Florida. I think it will be hard for the Board to find a replacement as good as Mr. Batchelor. Many highly qualified people will not be interested in serving a Board which forces or accepts the resignation of a man with Mr. Batchelor's record of achievement; and many people simply will not recommend their best people to the Board. I think this is one of the more serious aspects of the Board's action from the standpoint of the future progress and welfare of Albemarle County. I should also like to remind the Board that a chief administrator who is not involved in controversy from time to time is usually the one who is not providing strong and farsighted leadership. Some controversy is an inevitable part of the governmental process when there are many conflicting interests and desires among the people being served. Sincerely yours, (Signed) Wilson K. Doyle Greenwood, Virginia 22943" At 3:05 P.M. motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Thacker, to adjourn this meeting until 4:00 P.M., Wednesday, August 27, 1975, in the Board Room of the County Office Building. Motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Fisher. Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. Chairman 8-27-75 (afternoon)~ An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on August 27, 1975 at 4:00 P.M. in the Albemarle County Office Building Board Room; this meeting being adjourned from August 18, 1975. PRESENT: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J.T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr. Gordon L. Wheeler, and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. OFFICERS PRESENT: Messrs. T. M. Batchelor, County Executive; Robert Sampson, Assistant to the County Executive; and George R. St. John, County Attorney. Meeting was called to order at 4:10 P.M. Mr. Wheeler requested a resolution of appreciation for services performed by Mr. Brian Donato, in rendering a decision as to possible conflict of interest by Mr. Lloyd Wood and Mr. Stuart Carwile in relation to the South Rivanna River Reservoir Moratorium. Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker to adopt a resolution of appreciation. Mr. St. John, said he felt such a resolution was not in order, and offered the example of not thanking a Judge or the Attorney General for a similar decision. Mr. Thacker withdrew his motion, and subject was dropped from discussion. Mr. Wheeler said that on Thursday, August 28, 1975, ~the Emergency Medical Service Council of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission will be holding a meeting at 8:00 P.M. to discuss a regional communication system. Mr. Carwile said he would be able to attend in Mr. Wheeler's absence. At 4:20 P.M. Mr. Wheeler requested the Board go into Executive Session to discuss a personnel matter, a legal matter, and land acquisition. He stated to the press that any statements from the executive session would be made at the 7:30 P.M. meeting. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Fisher, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None