Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-09-2432 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgini. a, was held on September 24, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile (Arriving at 8:12 P.M.), Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henl'ey, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. (arriving at 7:42 P.M.). Absent: None. Officers present: County Executive, J. Harvey Bailey; County Attorney, George R. Assistant County Planner, Robert Tucker. St. John; and (1) The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. The first item on the agenda was continuation of public hearing on SP-466, Dr. Char'les W. Hurt, continued from August 13, 1975. Mr. Tucker said this matter had been deferred to await the results of the 90-day test on the Moore's Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. A letter from the State Water Control Board under date of September 18, 1975, and addressed to George W. Williams, Executive Director, Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, now gives the following items which must be completed: Forwarding of the request to BAT and review of the request by the Regional Office for completeness. e Preparation of a draft of affected permit pages by the Regional Office 'and forwarding of such pages to the Regional Administrator for comment and/or objection. The Regional Administration has 30 days after receipt of the draft amended pages to respond. Any comments and/or objections will require a longer period since resolution will be required before processing can be continued. Assuming the Regional Administrator does not comment or object in the allotted time, the Regional Office will forward to the owner an appropriate Public Notice to be published in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for two consecutive weeks. This advertisement is performed at the owner's expense and the owner shall provide proof that the Public Notice has been accomplished. A period of 30 days following the first day of publication will be allowed for public response. Assuming public response is not significant enough to warrant a public hearing, the Regional Office will make final determinations on the proposed amendment and submit a memorandum to the Board recommending approval or disapproval and stating grounds for any conditional approval or disapproval. Notification of Board action will be supplied the owner by BAT. Mr. Tucker said the four steps outlined assume that the procedure progresses without occurrence. Any objections by EPA or the public will delay the process-to varying degrees. Also, this procedure covers only those cases where the owner submits an amendment request. It now appears that it will be 60 days before any word is received on the recertification of the plant. Mr. Bailey said this is required procedure and gives the State Water Control Board a 90-day period in which the plant must operate within the proposed certification. Mr. Wheeler asked if this would mean excess capacity in the plant. Mr. Bailey said no. This recertificati~n will only mean that the plant is functioning and turning out no more solids and no more oxygen is being added to the streams. Capacity is a criteria, but ms not the real thrust. The real thrust is how much water, how much oxygen demand and how many settleable solids in pounds goes into the water that goes out into the streams. Work is still being conducted on infiltration and flow into the plant. Mr. Bailey said that one major break in an 18 inch terra cotta line was discovered by the City and temporarily repair- ed. Beginning on that day, the amount of water being registered at the plant dropped. Mr. Henley said the last time this application was discussed by the Board, he could not vote for it unless there was sewer capacity and there does not seem to have been a change. Mr. Wood said one of the conditions imposed on this permit by the Planning Commission is that there be no building until sewer capacity is available. Since there will be capacity at some time in the future, he does not think the County will be accepting any liability by approving the permit. The developer spends his time and money at his own risk knowing that this condition exists at the beginning. Mr. Thacker said he has never understood if this condition means "no road work", "no occupancy of structures", or "no work of any kind." Mr. Tucker said t~e condition says '.'no development". Mr. Thacker asked if that meant no work of any kind. Mr. Henley said he understood if the Board gave approval to this petition that the applicant could proceed to install sewer lines. br. Hurt was present. He said it is his understanding that there would be no building, however he does want to do the earth moving, planting and all underground work during this slack time in the building season. Mr. Wheeler felt the condition would be clarified by changing it to read that there be "no construction of buildings until there is sewer capacity available." Mr. Henley said he feels that if lines are installed, and then the Boar~ adds a condition that no buildings be erected, that the applicant will take the Board to Court and the condition .may be overriden by the Judge. Mr. Thacker asked Mr. St. John if the Board can impose, a condition such as "no building be begun until sewer capacity is available in the Moore's Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant." Mr. St. John said if the developer agrees to such a condition. If it is imposed and he does not agree, Mr. St. John did not feel the condition could be enforced since only the occupancy of a structure has any- thing to da with the effluent going into the sewer plant. Mr. St. John said if the' Board has any question about the wisdom of doing that, it would be best not to approve the plan until the capacity is available. Mr. St. John said if the plan is approved with a condition that no occupancy take plance until sewer is available, this is a commitment that sewer capacity will be available within a reasonable time. Although the Board cannot commit the Rivanna Water and-Sewer Authority or the Albemarle County Service Authority, he felt there is a danger that the COurt might pierce the separation between the Authority and the ~overnmental body. 328 9-24-75 Dr. Hurt said he cannot build a building with approval of a site plan by the governing body.~ He could not image how a building could be put up with this approval being obtained first. M~. Wheeler said he is willing to wait to take action on this petition after the recertification ~s received.. Dr. Hurt then requested that the matter be deferred. Mr. Thacker said he has felt all ~he time that this request is premature because of the unavailability of sewer capacity. Since it now appears that it will be 60+ days before any word is received on the recertification, he offered motion to defer any f~rthe~ action on SP-466 until such time as the Moore's Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant receives recertification. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood~and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: 'NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and W~od. None. Mr. Carwile. (2) Request for restricted road: Mary White Estate.~ (Deferred from August 13, 1975). Since the applicant was not present, motion was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Wood, to defer this matter until November 12, 1975. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Carwile. (3) Public hearing to amend the Albemarle County Code by the inclusion of a new section 15-6.1 entitled "Removal of trash, etc. from property when same might endanger the health or safety of other residents of the County." Notice of this public hearing was published in the Daily Progress on September 10 and September 17, 1975. The discussion of this matter began with a reading of the ordinance as proposed. 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 or safety of other residents of 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~substance~ 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. Bailey said the Engineering Department receives many complaints from citizens asking that the County stop other citizens from dumping materials on their land. It does not sound fair for the County to then charge ~that person $10.00 or $20.00 to have this trash removed. Mr. Thackem said there is also another problem with the ordinance. There must be a determination that the substance, of whatever nature, constitutes a health or safety hazard. Mr. Henley asked if the Health Department can require that a person remove this trash. Mr. Wheeler said the reason this matter is being heard is.because the zoning administrator has found instances where the trash was in violation and he has been unsuccessful in having same removed. Mr. Bailey said the present ordinance speaks to. the size of a trash pile that can be privately maintained. It does not speak to this particular matter. This ordinance was requested by Mr. Hartwelt Clarke because of the problems his department has had with the present ordinance. Mr. St. John said the ordinance is taken from State Code. The section has been in enabling legislation for many years but has never been implemented in Albemarle County. Mr. Fisher asked if the ordinances now on the books are enforceable in those situations where the property owner is maintaining his own landfill and it is greater than 100 square feet. He said if they are, it would seem that moving against the property owner and causing him~to remove debris placed there by others is unnecessary. Mr. Carwile said some type of policy should be established because the ~County has attempted to enforce the standing ordinances against citizens and have lost in .court. He said if the offense is a health hazard, he thinks the County should be able to enforce the ordinance. Mr. St. John said under existing ordinances, if a landowner says he did not make the pile of trash on his property, there is nothing the County can do about the situation unless there ms a building on the property. This section applies to lots where there is no occupied dwelling. Mr. Thacker asked if the owner of a vacant lot can be forced, under this new section, to remove the trash. Mr. Henley said this section will not give the County any power in the situation unless it is found that the trash is dangerous to the health of the general public. He Belt the Health Depart- ment could have the trash removed in such a situation. Mr. Carwile said if that is the case, there is no problem with this proPosed ordinance. Mr.. Wheeler said the Board has this ordinance b~fore them because the zoning administrator has said he cannot enforce removal of trash under the existing ordinance. Mr. Thacker asked if the County Executive could designate th~ Health Department as his agent in this ordinance. Mr. St. John said they could agree to be the County's agent in this matter,~ but they do not have to do this by statute. Mr. Thacker said he is concerned because he does not feel any member of the CountMstaff is qualified to say what is or is not a health hazard. Mr. Wood said there have been numerous violations in the County. He felt this ordinance is a logical remedy to the violations. Mr. Thacker felt there might be misuse of the ordinance. Mr. Wheeler said he has received many calls from his constitutents asking that junk piles be cleaned up. --~--~ ~ +~^ ~oo~ ~ ~~ ~mn~ which are hazardous to the health. Mr. 32 Mr. Wood offered motion to adopt the ordinance as set out above. ? Carwile. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mr. Fisher said he agrees with the concept of cleaning up trash piles, or dumps that nOw exist. However, he knows of instances where trash dumps that exist ar,e not the fault of the property owner. He said calling out the Sheriff seldom has any effect on this type of situation, He felt there should be a better way of getting rid of the solid waste in the County that would alleviate the situation and said this ordinance seems punative to people who cannot protect their property from other citizens. . Mr. Wheeler said if there is a better way to solve this problem, he is willing to listen, but he did not think the County has been too succeSsful with landfills. Mr. Henley asked~if any property owner had ever tried stopping the dumping of trash on his property. Mr, Carwile said that in one instance, the owner installed a chain. Mr. Wood said where a Property owner has let this trash accumulate for a long time, if it is removed and the owner is' sent a bill, he will know that it is his responsibility to keep it removed. The owner will then take adequate measures by either a fence or something else. The reason people dump their trash in these places is because it is convenient-. Mr. Thacker said he did not think anybody is.against cleaning up trash, b~tx;;he feels the ordinance as written is too broad and it imposes a burden. Mr'. Wheeler requested that.this matter be deferred until the staff prepared a report on the background of the request and that Mr. Hartwell Clarke, Zoning Administrator be present. Mr.~ St. John said his offiae has the background of the request and although not advocating passage of this ordinance, they feel there is a gap in present county law that can be filled by this ordinance. Mr. Thacker said he is concerned about the portion of the second sentence that reads "the county executive, or his designated agent, shall, upon complaint of any c%tiZ'en that a violiation of the ordinance exists..." He felt this language was too broad and the county would be harassed by complaints. Mr. Wood then withdrew his first motion and offered motion that this matter be continued to October 1, and that Mr. Clarke be present at that time to make explanation for the requested ordi- nance. 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. At this time, the Board continued with public hearings on zoning matters as advertised in the Daily Progress on September 3, and September 10, 1975: (4) UP-75-08. Charles C.~MQtley. To amend the following sections of the county Zoning Ordinance: Section 15A-l, Signs Permitted (Agricultural) to permit under 15A-1-15, Temporary Portable Signs; Section~A-6, Signs Permitted (Business) to permit under Section 15A-6-9, Temporary Portable Signs; Section 15A-7, Signs Permitted (Manufacturing M-i)-to permit under Section 15A-7-9, Temporary Port- able Signs; Section 15A-8, Signs Permitted (Manufacturing M-2) to permit under Section 15A-8-9 Tem- porary Portable Signs. It was ascertained that the applicant was not present. Motion was then offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Carwile, to defer this public hearing until November 12, 1975. The.motion carried by the following recorded vote. AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. (5) SP-513. Eugene E. Brown. To locate a central well on 2.222 acres zoned R-2 Residential. Property on the north side of.Route 702 and described as County Tax Map 76, Parcel 15. Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Mr. Tucker said the area is semi-rural, located on the western portion of the urban area. Two single-family residences are located to the east of subject property as well as a restaurant and motel. Five single-family residences are located to the northwest. The land on the south side of Route 702 is woOded. Balmoral Heights which is located north of the property is subdivided into small lots but is undeveloped. There are two duplexes on the property and the applicant proposes an additional single-family unit. The staff recomended approval with the following.conditions: Output of central well shall yield one (1) gallon/minute/unit, after a 48-hour testing; Health Department approval of the water; and County Engineering Department approval of the sizing of the water lines which serve the units. Mr. Tucker said after meeting.with the Planning Commission, the applicant presented the . Commission with some evidence and/~ satisfied that Conditio~ #1 had been met. The Planning Com- mission then recommended .approval of the petition with ~staff ,conditions #2 and #3 and added another that "any additional units to be served by this well will require an addtional special use permit." Mr. Tucker read a memo from the County Engineer dated September 23, 1975: "I have reviewed the well system for Eugene Brown's central well. His w~ll, as reported by C. R. Moore, is producing approximately twenty (20) gallons per minute. This flow was-not taken from any pump tests. With the ten (10) gallon per minute pump he has in the well and one and one-quarter inch (1~") water line to the ~two (2) duplexes, I approve this system and the new connection of a single-family unit." Mr. Fisher said that this is a rather unusual change in a proposal. Two or three years ago the applicant came to the Board after having built one duplex in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board changed the zoning so the duplex would be conforming, but now to attempt to increase the density to use that R-2 zoning creates questions in his mind. Mr. Tucker said the applicant has also requested a subdivision of the lot, however the lots will be in excess of 40,000 square feet and do meet Subdivision Ordinance requirements. Although it is not a desireable arrangement, it is also permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Fisher said in trying to solve one problem the Board may have created others. This is in a rural part of the County and did constitute spot zoning at the time of the zoning request. 328 9-24-75 to have the land subdivided so as to make settlement of his estate, in the future, easier. from the public spoke for or against the request. No one Mr. Fisher said apparently the request does conform to County ordinances and the water supply is available. He then offered motion to approve SP-513, with conditions #2, 3 and 4 as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. (6) SP-514. Woodsmen of the World Fraternal Insurance Society. To locate a fraternal lodge and summer camp on part of 38.0 acres zoned A-1 Agricultural. Property on the northwest side of Route 604 and the northeast side of Route 817. Also described as County Tax Map 19, Parcel 46A (part thereof). White Hall Magisterial District. It was ascertained that the applicant was not present. Motion was then offered by Mr. Carwile. seconded by Mr. Thacker to defer this public hearing to November 12, 1975. The motion carried by the vote~which follows: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwi!e, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. (7) CETA Funds. Mr. Michael Carroll, Acting Personnel Director, said the County has received a grant of $66,738 under Title II of the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 (CETA). The grant is for public service employment for the period September, 1975, to June 30, 1976. Salaries, fringe benefits and related costs are 100% reinbursable. The County is not required to retain participants; however, a goal of 50% placement in permanent jobs has been suggested. The jobs to be funded under this program should be new positions; that is, vacancies on the current staff may not be filled using CETA funds. The following positions has been requested by various department heads for funding under CETA: (The dollar amounts include all benefit costs): Be Maintenance Laborers (2) for the County Landfill. Laborers are needed to dispose of surplus of discarded auto tires. ($4,415) Groundskeeper, Parks. An additional maintenance laborer can help reduce costs associated with Totier Creek facility construction and general park maintenance not included in the contract. ($4,790) Planning Aide. A temporary employee in this department can assist in review of the Comprehensive Plan as well as carry additional workload associated with the zoning ordinance. ($7,07~0) glerk-Typist, Social Services. This position was originally requested in the Fiscal Year 75-76 budget. Expanding caseload requirements and new.telephone services have generated an increased need for clerical help. The State has agreed that there ms a need for this position. ($4,336) e Clerk II, Finance. An additional clerical worker would make it possible for the staff to implement computerization of NADA values for personal property taxation. ($4,336) Department of Education: Reading Teacher. A half-time position in second grade to assist with_the teaching of reading in two classes which have grown to 34 students each. There is no additional classroom so a half-time position would appear to be the best solution to this problem. ($4,823) Social Studies Teacher. Several social studies teachers at Albemarle High School have an access of 150 students or more than 30 for each of five classes per day. It is the intention of the Education Department to add a social studies teacher and redistribute some of the students to reduce these heavy class loads. ($9,083) Physicial Education Teacher. There are three elementary schools which have very high pupil-physical education teacher ratios. A full-time position would permit .the solving of two of the worst situations and possibly all three. ($9,083) 10. Custodian. Mr. McClure has said that requests for maintenance service seems never to be oaught up to date. He would therefore like to add one general maintenance worker to the force. ($4,890) 11. Night Watchman/Custodian, McIntire School. This person might help avoid problems with vandalism~as well as ~help with upkeep of the empty building~ ($4,890) 12. Personnel Aide. Thereis a need to add to personnel files a record on all classified employees. Personnel files have never been kept on secretaries, aides, custodians and maintenance workers. This would add greatly to the effeciency of the Education Department. ($8,920) SecretaryBookkeeper, Joint Security Complex. This position is needed to help with the workload in several areas: 1) receiptionist-visitor's window; 2) record keeping and administration; and 3) purchasing-bookkeeping liason with the County Office Building ($4,942) 9-24-75 14. Maintenance Person, Albemarle County Service Authority, One additional laborer cfn be used to help meet requirements of an increased workload. ($5.494) 15.VPI-~SU Extension Office, Program Assistant. Vastly increased demand for services might be partially met by a program aide to assist with 4H Club activites as w~ll as agricultural and home economics programs. The assistant might also take soil samples. ($5,003) Mr. Carroll said several additional requests were received from outside agencies, including the Virginia Employment Commission, the Chamber of Commerce, Workshop V and the Community Action Agency. However, other funds have recently been made available to these agencies through the local Manpower Board and they have been advised to apply for funds through the CAMPS structure. The positions requested total about $86,975 which is $20,000 more than the grant, therefore at least three positions must be cuu from the list. Mr. McClure has said that in terms of priorities, he considers the personnel aide of lea~t importance and would consent to only one custodian. Mr. Carroll said the county was allocated this money because this area was designated by Planning District f0 Commission as a high unemployment area with more than 6.5% unemployment for a three-month period. Present to speak for departmental requests were Ray Jones, Director of Finance; E. E. Thompson, Albemarle County Service Authority and Margaret Wood, County Extension Service. After a short discussion, motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Wood, to approve positions liSted with the exception of #3, #11 and #12. The motion carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Henley, Wheeler and Wood. Mr. Fisher (stating he understands the goal is to provide employment and he feels that is good. But, since the County is now operating with space problems and he is not sure of other costs which may be involved, he was not ready to vote for the requests) and Mr. Thacker (stating that he has always been concerned about spending such funds, just because the money is there. He felt more justification should have been presented, especially on #10). (8) Landfill Maintenance Shed (Acceptance of bids, deferred from September 18, 1975). Mr. Thacker said he hasreviewed the plans and he feels the building is too elaborately designed. He suggested that the bids he-rejected and that a simpler structure be rebid. He suggested that a pole shed would be adequate for this type of operation. Mr. Wood was satisfied with the plans and pricing and said the building of this structure is long over due. Mr. Henley felt the building was too fancy. After a short discussion, it was the concensus that Mr. Thacker's recommendation be followed and that new plans for another type of structure be submitted for bid. Mr. Bailey brought to the Board's attention that the staff may have to employ outside help for the drafting of such plans. (9) Appointment: Deputy Zoning Administrator. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Thacker, appointing Miss Patricia L. Fleshman, as Deputy Zoning Administrator, and at the same time rescinding appointment of Mr. Robert Tucker to this position. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. (9b) Appointment: Advisory Council on Aging. On motion by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Wood, Mr. Donn Bent, a retired attorney, was appointed to a term expiring on June 1, 1976. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Not Docketed,~/Wheeler noted for the record that the following letter had been received from Mrs. Betty Scott, President, League of Women Voters: "The Board of Supervisors has recently shown its concern for the protection of the Rivanna Reservoir by adopting an emergency ordinance setting new regulations for development in the watershed. On October 22, the Board will consider making this ordinance permanent. The League of Women Voters believes that members of the Board should have as much information as possible to make this crucial decision. We, therefore, urge ~you to request that site plans for development in the watershed be brought to the Board for careful study. We are aware of at least three site plans for projects in the watershed that are currently under consideration. How is the new ordinance being applied in each case? Are there any problems in its implementation? Are the planning staff, planning commission and soil erosion advisory committee coordinating properly to protect the water supply? We believe the Board must be able to answer these questions when it meets on October 22. The best way to answer these questions would be to review the effects of the emergency ordinance as it is applied during the period it is in effect." Mr. Wheeler-said the Board has previously discussed advertising for a County Executive so ..... applications may be presented to the Board after November 5, 2~975. ;2~-~ He asked that the Board be furnished with a job description so that applications may be taken. Claims against the County,were presented, examined, allowed and certified to the Director of Finance and charged to the following funds] General Fund General Operating Fund School Operating Fund $ 185.50 340,741.92 824,651.91 330 9-2~-75 10-1-75 Cafeteria Fund Textbook Fund General Operating-~apit~% Outlay Fund School Opera?ting-Capital Outlay Fund (Construction) Joint Security Complex Fund Commonwealth of Virginia-Current Credit Account Town of Scottsville (1% local sales tax) Total $ ~.0~ 10,135.95 250.00 308,691.92 39,284.26 1,142.40 84.56 $%,525,168.42 At 9:45 P.M. motion was offered by Mrs. Carwile, seconded by Mr..Wood, to adjourn this meeting to October 1, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse. The motion 'carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheele~r and' Wood. Chairman 10-1-75 An adjourned meeting of the Boardof Supervisors_ of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 1, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia;. said meeting being adjourned from Sept.emher 24, 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. (Mr. Wood arriving at 7:,45 P.M.). · Absent: None. Officers present: County Executive, J. Harvey Bailey; County Attorney, George R. St'. John; Deputy County Attorney, Frederick Pa)me; andAssistant County Planner, Robert Tucker. No. 1. Continuation of public hearing .on Section 1~-6.1 of the AtbemarleCounty Code to be known as "Removal of Trash, etc. from property.when same might endanger the health or-safety of other residents of~the County.'! Publichearing ~continued from September 24~ 1975. Mr. Hartwell Clarke, Zoning Administrator, was present to answer questions, of the Board. Mr. Fisher said since the last meeting it has come to the~attention or.the Board that there is a provision in the Fire Prevention Code that speaks to accumulation of waste, paper,:wood, hay, straw, weeds, litter or combustible or. flammable wastes or rubbish of any kind. This section states that storage shall not produce conditions which in the opinion and judgment of the Fire Official will create a nuisance or hazard to the public health, safety and/or welfare. .He asked if this section covers the kind ~of problems that Mr. Clarke has recently encountered. Mr. Clarke said the Fire Marshal does not have an inspector on his staff to help e~force this section. If this sectionwere used, the Fire Marshal would have to makea determination And then be a witness in court. Mr. Fisher said this section does give the Fire Marshal the power to determine what creates a nuiaance~or a hazard to the public health and it does define rubbish of any kind, and seems to cover the matterunder.discussion. Mr.. Clarke said that was true and a lot of the complaints,received by his office are for eyesores rather than matters relating to health and safety. Mr. Fisher said both the ordinance, under discussion and the Fire Code were written to deal with public safety, but neither was written~to cover visual problems. The only difference in the two ordinances is the fact that they are enforcedby different departments'of the C6unty. Mr. Bailey said he had discussed thisproblem with Dr. George Moore of the Health Department. Dr. Moore said at one time. he had an offender brought in~and~forced to close an 6pen dump that he was operating. The neighbors who made complaints were as concerned with the appearance of the yard as with the health.hazard. Certifying trash as a fire hazard may be easier to enforce than certifying trash as a health hazard.. Mr. Bailey asked if the zoning inspectorscould be empowered to act for the Fire Marshal in this matte~;~however, remarked that he did not know if the inspector's "judgment" could be substituted for that of the Fire Marshal. ~ Mr. Fisher said both ordinances~seem to deal with the. same problem~on the basis of public health, although neither is designed to have a citizens yard cleaned .up according to. some other citizens taste. Mr. Bailey noted that the. City of Charlottesville does police vacant properties. Mr. Henley said he did not think the County can go that far. Mr.~ Thacker said the ordinance considered.by the Boardon September 24stated that the County Executive or his designated agent made determinations under the ordinance.. The ordinance~has been redrafted to state that the governing body makes this determination. Mr. Wheeler said the governing bodywill still need someone to act. in its behalf. Mr.. Thacker said he felt this redraft would eliminate the possibility of complainta from citizens getting .out of hand. He is concerned about who actually decidesWhat endangers the health or safety of the residents of the County~and asked Mr. Clarke if this would give his office anyproblems. Mr. Clarke.said most complaints received by his office are from people who find .people dumping trash rather.than taking the trash to the County landfill. Mr. Carwile said the ordinance under discussion will ~give the County a mechanism whereby a property owner can be put on notice that if the trash, etc. is not removed within 10 days that the County will cause this to be done and. charge that expenseto the property owner. The Fire Prevention Code states that~"if the notice of violation is not complied with within the rime'specified by the fire official,- he stfall request the legal counsel in the jurisdiction to institute the appropriate legal proceedings to restrain, correct, or 'abate~such violation which will require removal or termination ofany .~l~f~lause of the building or structure in violation of the provisions of this code or of any order or direction made pursuant thereto," Mr. Carwile said the proposed ordinance provides a more workable, procedure for .correcting such violations in the County. Mr. Henley saidhe still could not support the proposed ordinance. Mr. Fisher said he would prefer trying enforcement under the FirePrevention Code before adopting ~hat seems to be a parallel ordinance. 13. Mr. Carwile then offeredmotion to adopt the ordinance as set out on Page 326, Minute Book The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood.