Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-12-04 12-¥-72 December ~, 1972 which was hand delivered on November 28~ 1972~ Pursuant to the following .no~c~-~ the Board of County.Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia~ met in special Session at ~:30 P.M. on this date, in the County Office Building~ Charlottesvil-le~ Virginia~ with the following members present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile~ Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley~ Jr.~ William C. Thacker~ 1~ Gordon L. ~eeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.~ ~ ~nd'Mr.;?Wil%ihm C. Thacker, Jr. for the purpose of hearing ZMP=2~3 for Virginia Natmiona~l Bank and Others and'to also hold a public he~ring onthe proposed Scottsville annexation. "Messrs. Wheeler a-nd Thacker have asked that this meeting be held at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, December ~, 1972~ in the Board Room of the County Office Building." The Chairman called the meeting to orSer and called for further discussion of ZMP-2k3 for Virginia National Bank and Others. Action on this petition had been deferred on September 27 to allow for further study of sewage disposal and to allowfor a study to be made of the storm run-off problem. A public work session was also held on this matter on November 2~ 1972. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey~ County Engineer~ was present to give his report entitled "Watershed Study on Un.NamedStream Through Woodbrooke.. In his report~ Mr. Bailey thoroughly studie~ the problem of storm run'~ff by the following methods: (1.) Rainfall intensities at 10, 2~ 50 and lO0-year frequencies. (2) Present land. conditions-and future development~ relative to storm drainage. The theoretical capacity of existing channels anddrainage structures. (k)The history of flooding on the streams. (5)Evaluation of data-conclusions and recommendations. Mr. Bailey concluded his report by stating that he could see no great problem in assigning to the present developer his proper responsibility and cost in providing a drainage system adequate for the ultimate development of this drainage basin. There followed a lengthy discussion of this report~ in which the developer stated that he would follow the recommendations made by Mr. Bailey. Mr. Wood offered motion te approve the zoning request as presented~ excepting 150 feet be left on that side adjoining any R-1 and that final site p~an come to .this Board for approval. Motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher. Mr. Fisher stated that he felt the developer and the County Engineer had do~e an excellent job of checking the storm run-off problem and in finding a way to handle same~ however, he was concerned about the sewage problem which he did not feel had been resolved. Mr. Wheeler stated that this area will be serviced by the Service Authority. Mr. Ray_Jones~ Director of the Service Authority was prese~:t and stated that he had just received a letter from the State Water Control Board which stated in part: 12-q-- 72 '345 "In light of our findings, I see ne reason Why the county cannot resume making connections to these facilities (Woodbrook Lagoon).up to its design capacity.~" Following a lengthy discussion of this,the Chair.man c-alled for a vote on'the~metion; The vote was recorded as ~ollows: AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker~ Wheeler and Weed. NAYS: None. ABSTAINING: Mr. Carwile. The Chairman then called for a public hearing on the Town of ScettSville's proposal to annex a part of the County ef Albemarle. He stated that ~he' Board had met with Town Council and would now like to hear from those effected by this annexation: Following are a few brief comments: Mi~s Virginia Moore spoke in opposition stating that she did not-feel this annexation was necessarY.~ She asked several questions: (1) why should she have to be annexed when no land on the other side of the highway was asked for~ (2) ~h~ '. should she be burdened with replacing revenue of busines~;s,when businesses ne.arer to Scottsville are not in the proposed annexation area, (3) why should she be designated when a street in Scottsville en ~hich the library stands is Seottsville on one side and Albemarle County on the other, (~) wh¥~ should innocent home owners be penalized in when theychose to live/the county because they love same, (~) wh~j~ should she' be asked to subsidize a shopping center, not in the way of money, but in giving up something to held o~herso She also stated that her home needs to keep..its identity and she feels she has an obligation to protect it and said that some ef her arguments. against forcible annexat'ion where the same as the Board h~' used against annexation by the City of Charlottesville. Mrs. Pierson Scott stated that after seeing the ScottsVille business area under water three times in the last three year, it behooved the residents Of the area of to bow low to any kind/a solution. Mr. E. H. Parr stated that he did not want to pay anymore taxes. Mr. Russell Brill stated that he had been in favor but was now opposed to this annexatio~ He did not feel that he had anything to gain by being annexed and' stated through that Scottsville has thrived on adversity and will come/this adversity and survive. Mr. Campbell Holt stated that the To-~rn of Scottsville must have a tax base to survive as a prosperous and progressive town. He stated that as an individual he supports this annexation attempt. -~- Mr. John Williamson stated that he had feelings similar to those of Miss Moore, however, he is not opposed to annexation of the business area (proposed sheDDing center) but stated that there is a large business area which was skipped entirely and he felt this should be investigated. Mr. Wheeler replied that this request came from the Towllm.Counci~ of Scottsville and the Board of Supervisors did not help draw the lines or make this reqUest. 346 1 2-~- 7.;' Mrs. Jane Boggs stated that she lives .in the area under consideration and could understand the mcr'chants point of view, however, she asked why this pretty residential area had to be picked. She asked why the 'shopping center could no~ have been put in another location where there would not have been all of this objection and would still help the merchants. MrS. Ruby Cleveland stated 'that she owned two homes across from the proposed shopping center site on Route 726 and asked why another shopping csnter across Rt. 1726 was not in the proposed area. She stated that she would only be paying higher taxes. Mr. Wheeler restated his foregoing statement and said tha~ these questions should be directed to the Town Council. Mr. Thacker said that the Board had not agreed to any particular area at this time'. This area was chosen by National Bank for a shopping-center. They camato one the Board for a rezoning and no/from the public spoke against the petition. Mr. Hiram Cook asked why they could not incorporate one big area or mushroom at the end of a road. Mrs. H. COok asked why this area was picked for annexation when there were surrounding businesses that could contribute more tothe Town of Scottsville in the matter of taxes. Mr. Thacker stated ~hat the Board was concerned abeutth~e loss of revenue that would be suffered by the Town when businesses moved-to theshopping center. A committee was appointed to study this and made recommendations~to the Town Council, however, these ~eeommendations are not contained in the ordinance. He.stated that it was his feeling that there should be some continuity to the Town, n~t just go up a road.and-balloon out around the shopping center area. Mr. Pat Pitts, a member ef~the Town CoUncil, ~tated that when the shopping center idea was brought to Council~ the Council had proposed to take in a larger area. The liaison committee told the Council that their proposal ~as unreasonable and they had taken the smallest comprise to still-have reasonable bounds. Mrs. Kent Chapman said she could not a~ford to pay ~nymore taxes. Mrs. Cleveland asked What benefits she would get from the Town by ~a~ing additional ~axes. Mr. Forrest Paulett asked how many taxes the County would lose by letting this area go, to which Mr. Raymon Thacker, Mayor bf Scottsville, replied, $898.28. The Town would gain $876.~8, this through the combined personal property~ sales, utility, business license, real Property, vehicle taxes and AB~ distribution. Mr. Paulett asked that the Board object to all annexation. Mr. R~ymon Thacker spoke saying there had been many things said this night about Ecottsville surviving through adversities, however, each time Scottsville has come b~ck in a worse condition. It is now ~ecessary to do something or Scottsville will be a ghost town. He stated that of the complaints about historic homes, the Town now has an ordinance to protect such homes. If the Town is not 1 2-k-72 347 able to recover its revenue, 'the TownCouncil could drOp'the to~n charter and come back into the County; He stated that ef the people s.~eaki,~mg, againS~ thi~ annexation, none had been te Council meetings to see what it would cost them to be in-the town limits. - Mr. Robert Musselman stated that from the point of view of'county residents in general, he felt~it' was important to preserve integrity and notthrow the town back to general county keeping. Mr. Fisher stated that the Board has been sympathetic to-the problems of Scottsville and they knew when the rezoning came to the Board, it would probably be followed by this annexation procedure. The Board had decided that the Town of Seottsville should remain in existence, however, he could understand the feelings of people not wanting to go under new control and carry a higher tax burden. He stated that after hearing comments this night, the Board will have to decide how strongly they want-to oppose this annexation. Mr. Wood stated that after seeing the many years of flooding in Scottsville~ it was his concern to keep the town alive and he personally would like to see as smail am area as possible'annexed. a Mr. Wheeler expl~ained that after the June hurricane~and/me~ting in Washington, D.C., the Board and Town Council started considering ways to help Scottsville with the flood problem. After this public hearing the Board will have to make a decision that., hopefully, will .be acceptable to-all. Mr. George 0mohundro stated that he did not believe there would be as muc'h additional tax to pay as some people had stated. He also said~that the Town. COuncil as boundary lines had used highways/rathe2 than imaginarylines. Mrs. Margaret Will:lamson stated that all were concerned about the County-and Scot~svitle and hoped all would go home still being friends-. The Chairman declared the hearing closed. ~ The Chairman entertained a motion to adjourn into ex:ecutive-session, to discuss personnel matters._ Motio~ was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr.-Wood.and carried by the following.recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile~ Fisher~ Henley~ Thacker, Wheeler and Wood~ NAYS: None. The Boar~ reconvened. Upon proper~Tmotion, the meeting was adjourned. Chairman