Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-09September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) O007. L6 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on September 9, 1998, at 7:00 p.m., Room 241, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Ms. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Ms. Sally H. Thomals. ABSENT: Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis, and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., by the Vice-Chairman, Mr. Martin. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Public. There were none. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Ms. Humphris, seconded Ms. Thomas, to approve Items 5.1 through 5.4 and to accept Item 5.5 as information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. None. Mr. Marshall. Item No. 5.1. Set public hearing for October 7, 1998, to consider lease of Old Crozet School to Crossroads-Waldorf School. For the past six years, the County has leased the Old Crozet School to Crossroads-Waldorf School, most recently at an annual rent of $28,254. Crossroads-Waldorf is interested in executing a new lease to begin July 15, 1999 upon the expiration of the current agreement. A new lease being proposed is for a period of four years with the tenant having the option to renew the lease for two additional terms of one year each. The proposal stipulates that the tenant must exercise the option to renew the lease for the two additional terms by notifying the County on or before July 1, 2001. The County retains the right to terminate the lease by providing twelve months' written notice. The proposal stipulates that the annual rent paid by the tenant each year shall be increased by the CPI index plus an additional $3,000 for each year of the agreement. The tenant is responsible for maintenance and repairs to the property that cost less than $2,000 up to a maximum of $5,000 annually with the County being responsible for any repair costing more than $2,000. Additionally, the County agrees to undertake several projects which are scheduled in the County's CIP plan to include repairing or replacing the roof as necessary, repoint failing brick, paint the exterior of the building as necessary and replace windows as needed. The tenant further agrees to maintain an aggressive maintenance program acceptable to the County to assure that the premises are maintained in a good and safe order. State Statute requires that a public hearing be conducted prior to entering into a lease agreement of this nature. The Board's Property Committee has reviewed the elements of this lease and recommends it to the Board for its consideration. Staff recommends that a public hearing be conducted on Wednesday, October 7, 1998 to consider executing the lease. Item No. 5.2. Appropriation: Victim Witness Assistance Program Grant, $72,283 (Form #98022). This is the first renewal of the Victim Witness Grant. This grant funds personnel to provide quality service to victims particularly in the area of September 9, 1998 (Regular Nig~ ~a~ing) (page 2) property crime. It also assists with implementation of the Crime Victim Rights Act. The state grant totals $72,283.00. There is no local match. Staff recommends approval of appropriation 98022 in the amount of $72,283.00. 000217 By the above shown vote, the Board approved the following Resolution of Appropriation: FISCAL YEAR: 1998/99 NIIMBER: 98022 FUND: GRAi~T PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: VICTIM WITNESS GRANT FOR FY 98/99. EXPENDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 1225 31012 110000 1 1225 31012 210000 1 1225 31012 221000 1 1225 31012 231000 1 1225 31012 232000 1 1225 31012 550000 1 1225 31012 600100 SALARIES-REGULAR FICA VRS HEALTH INS DENTAL INS TRAVEL OFFICE SUPPLIES TOTAL $47,552 00 3,638 00 7,596 00 2,000 00 75 00 4,977 00 6,445 00 $72,283 00 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 1225 24000 240500 STATE GRAiT~ REVENUE $72,283.00 TOTAL $70,208.00 Item No. 5.3. Appropriation: Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Grant, $60,657 (Form ~98023) . The COPS MORE 96 grant was approved for the period June 1, 1997 through May 31, 1999. This appropriation requests expendi- ture approval for the balance of the grant period through May 31, 1999. The grant was originally approved to provide a digital mug shot imaging system and five computer workstations for officers. The mug shot imaging system will allow photographs to be captured and stored electronically. The officer workstations will upgrade older equipment so officers will have full access to the records management system. The remaining federal grant is $60,657.00. The local match was trans- ferred in 1997/98. There is no local match remaining to be transferred. Staff recommends approval of appropriation 98023 in the amount of $60,657.00. By the above show vote, the Board adopted the following resolution of appropriation: FISCAL YEAR: 1998/99 NUMBER 98023 F~: GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICE SERVICES GRANT. EXPENDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 1523 31010 310000 PROFESSIONLA SERVICES $ 2,000.00 1 1523 31010 800700 ADP EQUIPMENT 38,157.00 (Page 3) 1 1523 31010 800710 000218 JLDP sOFTwARE 20t 500.00 TOTAL $60,657.00 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 1523 33000 330001 FEDERAL GRANT REVENUE $60,657.00 TOTAL $60,657.00 Item No. 5.4. Appropriation: Crime Prevention Coordinator Grant 99- b9783, $40,043 (Form #98024). The Police Department has received a renewed grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services to fund a full time Crime Prevention Coordinator. This is the second year of the grant. A civilian employee will fill this position. The employee will coordinate and manage crime prevention initiatives within the department, as well as coordinate activities with the community and neighborhood team. A $30,032.00 Department of Criminal Justice Service's grant and $10,011.00 local match will fund the Crime Prevention Coordinator position. The local match is funded from current operations. Staff recommends approval of appropriation 98024 in the amount of $40,043.00. By the above shown vote, the Board approved the following resolution of appropriation: FISCAL YEAR: 1998/99 NUMBER 98024 FUND: GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: CRIME PREVENTION GRANT. EXPENDITURE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1 1525 31011 110000 1 1525 31011 210000 1 1525 31011 221000 1 1525 31011 231000 1 1525 31011 232000 1 1525 31011 550600 1 1525 31011 600100 WAGES $28,123.00 FICA 2,151.00 VRS 3,266.00 HEALTH INS 2,000.00 DENTAL INS 75.00 TRAVEL 1,388.00 OFFICE SUPPLIES 3,040.00 TOTAL $40,043.00 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 1525 33000 330001 FEDERAL GRANT REVENUE $30,032.00 2 1525 51000 512004 GENERAL FUND TRANSFER 10,011.00 TOTAL $40,043.00 Item No. 5.5. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for August 11, 1998, was received for information. (Note: The Board discussed Items 6 through 9 together.) Agenda Item No. 6. SP-98-18. South Fork Soccer Field (Sign #62). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to locate 5 soccer fields, an approx 2000 sq ft storage bldg & 216 parking spaces on approx 72 ac. Znd R3k. [This activity requires an SP in accord with § 10.2.2.4 of the Zoning Ord.] TM46, Ps22&22C. Located on S sd of Polo Grounds Rd (Rt 643) approx 1.1 mls E of Rt 29. (This site is not located within a designated growth area.) Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 27 and August 3, 1998.) Agenda Item No. 7. SP-98-22. South Fork Soccer Field (Sign $62) . PUBLIC HEARING on a request to locate 5 soccer fields, an approx 2000 sq ft storage bldg & 216 parking spaces on approx 72 acs. Znd RA. [This activity requires an SP in accord with § 30.3.5.2.2(3) of the Zoning Ordinance due to September 9, 1998 (Regular Night M~ting) 000~19 (Page 4) activity in the floodplain of the Rivanna River.] TM46, Ps22&22C. Same description as SP-98-18 above. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 27 and August 3, 1998.) Agenda Item No. 8. PUBLIC HEARING on a request to amend the service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority for sewer service to TM46, Ps22&22C for proposed soccer field complex (Hurt Investment and South Fork Land Trust). (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 27 and August 3, 1998.) Agenda Item No. 9. Appeal: SDP-98-55. South Fork Soccer Field Prelim Site Plan. Proposal to locate 5 soccer fields, an approx 2000 sq ft storage bldg & 216 parking spaces on approx 72 acs. Znd RA. TM46, Ps22&22C. Same description as SP-98-18 above. Mr. Cilimberg explained that the applicant proposes to construct five soccer fields and a 2,000 square foot building, as well as 216 parking spaces on the south side of Route 643, Polo Grounds Road, approximately 1.1 miles east of Route 29. He noted that the soccer fields and portions of the parking areas are located within the flood plain of the Rivanna River. He also pointed out that these improvements would be in addition to a previously approved 800-seat church, and although the church has not been constructed, the Zoning Administrator has determined that the special use permit is still valid. The site plan for this current proposal was denied by the Planning Commission, and it has been appealed to this Board by the applicant. He then noted that the Community Facilities Plan identifies the need to provide recreational opportunities in those geographic areas not effectively served, especially in or near growth areas. The Parks and Recreation Director has commented that the need for additional playing fields has been established, and this proposal would help reduce the overuse of existing County facilities. He also mentioned that the proposed Meadow Creek Parkway corridor lies within this general area, but based on current information, the alignment does not affect the proposed development. Since most of the proposed development will be located in or near the flood plain, it is not likely the ultimate road alignment will be in this location. He next reported that the proposed Rivanna Greenway is located on this property also, and staff has requested that the applicant make provision for the Greenway. The primary issue identified as detrimental to adjacent property for the athletic facility's special use permit is the increase in traffic. He added that there are a variety of generation estimates provided by the applicant, and the staff has also developed some estimates. He noted that the combination of the church and the soccer fields being developed on this property could create a significant increase in weekend traffic on Polo Grounds Road. The daily count of traffic, during soccer season, would be increased. VDoT has identified a desire for improvements to Route 643 from Route 29 to the entrance of this site, and the staff has recommended a condition requiring these proposed improvements due to the volume of traffic generated, if both the church and soccer fields are permitted on the property. The Planning Commission also recommended this condition. None of the area is visible from Route 29. However, the parking areas and building will be somewhat visible from Polo Grounds Road. The applicant has proposed the use of subsurface drainfields in the event his request for a jurisdictional boundary is not approved, and the drainfields would be located above the flood plain. He referred to the special use permit for activity in the flood plain, and he said the activity is intended to crown the fields for drainage, install drainage systems and provide for smooth playing surfaces. He noted that the Engineering Department has supported the request for fill in the flood plain. The Site Review Committee has determined that the site plan is approvable with standard conditions if the Planning Commission were to allow for modification of Section 4.2 to allow activity on critical slopes, and the Planning Commission actually approved activity on critical slopes at its meeting on this matter. The staff supported SP-98-18 with concurrent annulment of the prior church special use permit, and provided such a condition is imposed, staff can support the two special use permits for the soccer fields. He pointed out, though, that staff did not recommend approval of the soccer fields in addition to the church. The Planning Commission members recommended approval for the September 9, 1998 (Regular Nig~ ~ing) 000ZZ0 (Page 5) field development, but they did not feel it was necessary for the church special use permit to be annulled, if the ten conditions were included with the approval. Staff has had discussions with the County Attorney about these conditions, and he (Mr. Cilimberg) will provide the Board members a summary of provisions to the conditions that will further clarify intent. He said an eleventh condition has also been included, should the Board want to preserve the potential alignment for the Meadow Creek Parkway. He reiterated that as recommended by the Planning Commission there are ten conditions, and eight were recommended by staff. These conditions include the upgrading of Polo Grounds Road should both the soccer fields and the church be developed, and they also include condi- tions on reserved preservation of the Greenway area, as well as an archaeo- logical survey to be provided to the County and approved by the Planning staff. He is providing the Supervisors with the ten conditions, plus an eleventh condition which refers to the Meadow Creek Parkway. He noted that there is a slight wording change to Number Six and a more significant change to Number Nine that will speak more directly to what the area for the Rivanna Greenway entails. The area for dedication has been described for the Greenway, itself, and for access. He explained that the tenth condition also has a slight wording change. He reiterated that the Planning Commission recommended approval on the field area, but regarding the special use permit for filling the flood plain, the Planning Commission recommended denial. The Planning Commission also denied the site plan. The basis for denial of the site plan was because one of the special use permits had been denied. The request for the critical slopes waiver was approved by the Planning Commis- sion. Mr. Cilimberg next mentioned the jurisdictional area request. that currently public sewer and water are available to Parcel 22 for development of an 800-seat church. He said Mr. Martin inquired if the Board members would like to hear the jurisdictional area request together with the other requests, or whether they would like to hear it as a separate item. Mr. Bowerman wondered if there had to be another public hearing for the jurisdictional request. Ms. Thomas noted that all three requests can be heard at the same public hearing, so the Board members should hear all of the requests at the same time. She stated, though, that there will be a separate vote on the three matters. Mr. Cilimberg continued his remarks by saying that the request is to add public sewer to Parcels 22 and 22-C for soccer field development, which will alleviate the need to construct drain fields. He noted that the drain fields would need to be located in an elevation above the proposed building from which the sewage flow will come, and this will require pumping. He pointed out that this is not the most desirable design for an on site system, as it involves the use of pumps, which can fail. It has been noted that requests for jurisdictional area sewer service are not consistent with the recommenda- tions of the Comprehensive Plan since there is no existing health or safety issue. However, approval may be preferable from a public health perspective, because of the ultimate development of the site as a soccer complex, since there could be potential problems occurring with the pumping system to the drainfield. He next emphasized that the staff does not recommend the jurisdictional area be granted without approval of a soccer complex proposal. Should this Board approve the soccer complex, the request will need to be weighed to see if it is consistent with the jurisdictional area policy and the possible future health and safety issues associated with the private septic system it requires. He went on to say if the Board provides jurisdictional area for these two parcels, the staff recommends that sewer service only be provided to the soccer complex in addition to the current jurisdictional area allowance for the church for water and sewer. Mr. Bowerman referred to Condition Number 11 relating to the Meadow Creek alignment. He asked if the soccer fields were in place, and the Meadow Creek alignment conflicted with them, would the soccer fields have to be abandoned. Mr. Davis answered that if the final design showed that the Meadow Creek Parkway conflicted with the soccer fields, the permit would become void, and the soccer fields, upon notice by the County, would have to be eliminated. He added, though, that it appears unlikely this would occur. September 9, 1998 (Regular Nigh~ Meeting) (Page 6) Mr. Bowerman asked if this would be considered a taking of the property. He wondered if the County would have to compensate if improvements were made. Mr. Davis replied that special use permits can be limited in time, and there would still be reasonable use of the property, so there would be no taking by having the special use permit terminated. He went on to say if the road was built, though, there would be compensation for the property. Mr. Martin suggested that it would make more sense to word the condition in such a way that the County would have the option of voiding the special use permit. There at least would be discussion of the situation first, before the permit is just automatically voided. He wondered if there might be a clause where, if the special permit is voided, there is a period of time that discussions can be held. Ms. Thomas inquired if two of the fields were impacted by the road design, but three were not, how would such a wording affect the situation. Mr. Davis responded that the permit will not become void until the County gives notice. He explained that it could be a number of years from the point the design is approved until the property would be needed for the Parkway, so it will not immediately affect the use. He went on to say at such point in time when the highway property is going to be taken, there would be little choice, and the use would be terminated in one way or another. The condition is just a convenient way of putting people on notice that this could happen. He referred to Ms. Thomas' comments about the roadway not totally taking the area. If this should happen, an amended special use permit could be processed to continue the use of the portion of property that is not affected by the roadway. The intent of this condition is to make people aware that this is a potential path of the Meadow Creek Parkway, which is in accordance with the transportation element in Albemarle County's Transportation Plan, and that at such time the road is ready to be built, this could be inconsistent with the County's transportation planning and Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Martin stated that he would feel more comfortable if there was a statement indicating that the special permit would be void upon notice from the County after a public hearing, for example. He then wondered who needs to take action before the notice is sent. Mr. Davis responded that the word, ~County," could be changed to, ~Board of Supervisors,# if the Board feels more comfortable with this language. He noted, though, that typically neither the County Executive nor the County Attorney would act without consulting the Board of Supervisors. There were no further questions, so Mr. Martin opened the public hearing. Mr. Katurah Roell stated that he is representing the applicant, and in this case, he hopes the applicant will be the children in Albemarle County. He added that he would address the issues at hand, and traffic is obviously a concern of the neighborhood. He mentioned the property's proximity to Route 29, and he said the general location relating to the growth of neighborhoods in the area is fairly well represented by Forest Lakes, Woodbrook, Carrsbrook and the whole northern corridor. He remarked that there are five soccer fields at Darden Towe Park but something is also needed in the proposed area for Albemarle County's children. He then referred to paving the road. He said if and when the church is built, the applicant has agreed to the condition to pave the road. He reminded the Board members that Dr. Hurt is the landowner who is donating the land and the work to provide this service. He then remarked that he has studied VDoT road plans throughout the County, and he has been to several meetings and presentations with various levels in the state addressing some of these concerns. He noted that it appears the Meadow Creek Parkway will need to go through this area, but most VDoT representatives have expressed the desire to keep to the ridge and not to the flood plain. He said the possible alignments, at most, may affect the entrance, so he feels the Meadow Creek Parkway is not of great concern to the fields. He said, though, if it does affect the fields, then the fields will be adjusted to whatever impact there may be and would seek a relocation. He added that the applicant is happy to provide an archaeological study, and he will dedicate the Greenway along the river. He'emphasized that the applicant is in agreement with all of the requests made relating to the different issues. Mr. Roell said he is trying to find some additional field space, and he has examined various areas to find a place to build fields. He arrived at September 9, 1998 (Regular Night M~eting) (Page 7) this location because of its proximity to the various neighborhoods and Route 29. Dr. Hurt will even have the fields graded and the work done, and there will be no fill going into the flood plain. The dirt will just be moved, and this could almost be accomplished with a grading machine. He then mentioned the jurisdictional use, which he said makes more sense than a private sewer. He noted that the jurisdictional area is a public service and a public utility, and it crosses the property. The service will be used specifically for the soccer fields and concessions for the people to use. He pointed out that it avoids having to install a drain field and pump sewage uphill, and he asked the Supervisors to give this issue some consider- ation. He also mentioned that the septic fields would have to be put on the ridge, which is where the roadway is proposed to be built. The sewage jurisdiction is not for private use and this is not a private development. However, the project will be privately funded, and the applicant is not asking for any public funds. He also mentioned that the entrance crosses the frontage of Parcel 23C, and the road also crosses a portion of Parcel 22A but the bulk of it is on the lower flood plain. Other than that, the project involves approximately 16 acres of field area in the flood plain. He reminded Board members that the Comprehensive Plan designates green space for recrea- tional use. He said soccer fields are as close to green space as you can get, but parking for the participants has to be provided. There were no questions for Mr. Roell from Board members. Mr. Roell then introduced Mr. William Mueller, who is the applicant and also represents the SOCA organization. Mr. Mueller stated that he is Executive Director of the SOCA organiza- tion. The need for fields in Albemarle County is well documented, and he referred to the staff report, prepared by the Parks and Recreation Department, which indicates that soccer represents approximately half of all the athletes playing organized sports in Albemarle. He noted that there are approximately 3,100 players in Albemarle County this season, and probably 3,500 different players over the course of the year. He said taking on this type of project is a tremendous effort, as well as scheduling over 120 soccer games each weekend to provide for the people who want this activity. He is willing to undertake this effort, but he is asking for some assistance. He mentioned that about two years ago he was in this room, and he heard some members of this Board speak eloquently of the value of playing fields for the community's youth and citizens of this County. He couldn't agree more, and he hopes he and the Board members can pursue trying to provide some of these fields. The project does not include lights, loudspeakers, offices or a clubhouse, and it is not a stadium or the site of enormous events. He added that it includes playing fields, a parking area to accommodate the people coming to the playing fields and a storage and maintenance facility with toilets for the people who will be at the facility. The area and the adjoining roadways will be policed to make sure they are kept clean. He noted that the SOCA organization has been a part of the community for over 15 years, and it has been a good neighbor. The organization would not want to do anything to damage its reputation nor to cause ill will with the neighbors. He pointed out that a preliminary archaeological survey will be prepared, gates will be put on the site for security reasons, and an access will be provided for canoes to get to the river. He noted that the proposed Greenway along the banks of the river will be accommodated. He next talked about the advantages of this site for soccer. He said this area will provide playing space, greater flexibility for scheduling, and it allows the fields to be maintained to the SOCA organization's high standards. The Board members will need to consider the benefits included in this proposal for the citizens of Albemarle County. SOCA represents approxi- mately 3,500 soccer playing citizens, who are part of the citizenry and are looking for opportunities to play. He remarked that they should be able to play without fear of injury, and they should be able to play on fields that are not in a state Of decline because of their overuse. He thinks these fields will contribute to the overall quality of life in the County. He commented that one of the measures of quality of life is the quality and quantity of recreational activities and opportunities for citizenry. This plan provides for this in a constructive way. The use of this Property is ideal for recreational facilities because it is a flood plain. He has seen other projects of a similar nature in Roanoke, Manassas and elsewhere where playing facilities are put in a flood plain. When it flOods,' the fields September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) 000223 simply get wet, and there is no damage to anything of a permanent nature. He also noted that the County is not being asked to support this project financially. His organization is interested in taking on this endeavor at its expense and risk for the greater good of a large number of the County's popu- lation. He explained that these fields will not solve the County's shortage of field space, but it will be a start. He said it is important to understand that the project has been supported and endorsed by members of the lacrosse and football playing community because they understand that everybody is sharing a very limited resource. He added, though, that in doing so there is a constant state of trying to catch up with the maintenance of the fields, and at this point, it is a losing endeavor. He noted that the site is accessible to the County's major north and south artery, and it impacts a minimal number of homes. He emphasized that the amount of traffic coming to the proposed site over the eastern part of Polo Grounds Road would be minimal. He explained that the number of participants who live in the Stony Point area would be the likely users in that direction, and this is less than five percent of the enrollment. The vast majority of people are going to travel Route 29 and a portion of Polo Grounds Road that is just slightly over one mile. He remarked that the SOCA organization feels these fields will do a tremendous good for the community. His organization promotes healthy, constructive activity for citizens of all ages and all abilities, and he is seeking the Supervisors' assistance to allow the SOCA organization to further provide for these citizens and to serve the public interest and the public good. If a project of this nature cannot be built on this site, it is hard to imagine a better or more appropriate site, as well as one where there would be less impact or a more appropriate use of existing land with minimal disturbance. He is hopeful the Board of Supervisors will be able to endorse the project and allow it to proceed. Ms. Thomas asked what Mr. Mueller has in mind when he talks about maintaining the road. She asked if he is referring to the Adopt-A-Road program. Mr. Mueller responded that this question was also brought up at the Planning Commission meeting. Apparently there is a permit process, and his organization would be willing to do whatever can reasonably be done. He would certainly be willing to be a part of the Adopt-A-Road program, if necessary. Otherwise, he would undertake whatever efforts are permitted such as putting groups along public rights-of-way to keep them clean. Mr. Martin announced that 12 people have already signed up to speak about SP-98-18, SP-98-22 or the request to amend the service area boundaries for the proposed soccer field complex. He asked anyone else who wished to speak at tonight's public hearing to sign up with the clerk. He announced that he would call three people from the list, and those three people would need to come forward. He noted that each speaker is allotted three minutes, and individuals cannot relinquish their three minutes to another speaker. He said individuals can sign only one name to speak, and if anyone has written comments, they should be given to the Clerk, who will circulate them to the Board members. He then announced the first three names. Mr. Henry L. Martin, Jr., stated that he lives on Polo Grounds Road; he grew up on that road, and now he resides there. His primary objection to the soccer field is safety. The road from Route 29 North to the entrance to this area can be widened, but there is another problem that cannot be solved. The problem relates to the traffic coming from the east. There is an underpass that is approximately two miles down the road, and it is on a blind curve. He travels this road two or three times a day, and there is no way to see if a car is coming through the underpass. He commented that he has passed a car in this underpass, and he has had a wreck with another car. He said every morning seven times out of ten, he meets people who have their windows up and their radio playing. The only warning people have who are coming through the underpass is other people's horns blowing. He remarked that already the traffic there is bad because this road is used as a bypass to get around Forest Lakes, as well as the traffic congestion on Route 29, and it is used to get from Fashion Square to the Stony Point area. If the traffic increases on this road, his biggest concern will relate to accidents. It will not be i__~f an accident occurs, but instead, it will when there is an accident, and he wondered who will be held responsible for it. He knows of other people who have had accidents on that road, and one lady had a head-on collision. He said for years there was no speed limit posted, but now there is a 45-mile per hour speed limit there. However, it has helped very little. He said traffic goes through this area at 55 or 60 miles per hour because this is the speed to September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) 000Z24 which the traffic is accustomed. He added that drivers get to the underpass, and they put on their brakes, because there is a bottleneck situation there. Then they proceed through the underpass. His biggest concern relates to the underpass, if there is an increase in traffic of five percent, and a church is built there later. He will accept the propositions and arguments the appli- cant has made, but there is a safety concern. He would hate to see vans of children going to and from soccer games involved in a head-on collision, and he does not see how this is not going to happen. He commented that he has seen accidents happen there already, as a long time resident in that area. He then asked the Board members to address the underpass problem, if they are supportive of this project. He said Southern Railway is not going to shut down its line to fix the underpass, although this has been a plan for some time. He suggested that at least a traffic-signaling device could be put there so people would have something more than a horn on which to rely. Mr. F. A. Iachetta commented that his property is adjacent to the property in question. He finds himself in the position of being politically incorrect because to oppose this project would appear to be a sin and against motherhood, because soccer has become the rage for youngsters. Nevertheless, the need that exists is there because recreational areas have not been provided within development areas as they have been created in Albemarle County. He said now a few people who live in a sparsely populated area are being asked to put up with additional traffic. He pointed out that at the last count in 1992, there were 935 vehicle trips per day. There has been no count done during the last six years, but he suspects there are substantially more vehicle trips per day on this road, now. He noted the difficulty in getting from Route 643 onto Route 29, and he pointed out that there are two years more of construction on the two bridges on Route 29 which will produce a problem for anybody coming in and out of Route 643. This proposed use is far more intense than any use that could be there by right. It seems to him that this special use permit ought not to provide uses that are far more intense than those provided for by right. He referred to the Board's approval of the special use permit for the church, where a condition was set that there be only one entrance for any future development in this area. He remarked that this proposal creates still another entrance, and one without a particularly good sight distance, if traffic is going toward Route 29. He had a wreck there, so he is very sensitive about this particular curve. It is a narrow road with poor shoulders. He said property owners have to contend with ten-ton dump trucks that come periodically, and sometimes there are many of them, one behind the other. He hopes, if this special use permit is approved, it will not be such an intense use as five soccer fields. The special use permit in a rural area is too easily abused, and no consideration is given in this proposal to the quality of life for those people who live there. The citizens moved there because they wanted the kind of quiet they have now, and it is a rural area, despite the traffic. The residences overlooking this area are few in number, but that does not mean that they should not be considered. Mr. David Wilson, a City resident, past President and current Registrar for SOCA, reminded the Supervisors that he has appeared before them many times talking about fields for soccer. He noted that both of his children have graduated, so he has nothing to gain personally by this proposal. He referred to 1996 when the soccer registration figures of approximately 3,950 were presented to this Board, as well as to the Parks and Recreation Department, and the figure reached probably close to 7,000 participants during the year. At that time it was suggested that nine fields were needed to handle the immediate needs, and 19 were projected over the next five to ten years. Three years later, not one new field has been added, and registration for this year will probably reach 4,100 children and a total of 8,000 participants. He added that there has been a huge need over the last few years, and to handle this problem, the adult program practice space has been denied. He went on to say the recreational program has also been limited to one hour a week, instead of one and one-half hours twice a week, because there is simply not enough field space. He said playing space is about the same except the fields are in much worse condition. There is no time to maintain the existing fields because they are also in use by football, lacrosse, field hockey, after school programs and even baseball and T-ball sometimes use the same area. These five fields will only help the situation, but they will not solve the problem. He mentioned the traffic problem, and he said this is not an intense use. The staff has admitted at the Planning Commission meeting that the traffic estimates were overly exaggerated based on trips per acre because the September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 10) 000225 entire acreage of the two parcels were used. The figures submitted based on the five fields at Darden Towe Park represented half of this number, and the staff members admitted that these figures were probably more accurate. He does not think the traffic problem will be intensified significantly. However, if the church is built, Dr. Hurt has indicated he would handle this problem, and Mr. Wilson hopes the Supervisors will believe him. He said Dr. Hurt would fix the road with regard to the curve, which sounds as though it should be fixed with or without the soccer fields. Mr. Martin apologized to Mr. Iachetta and Mr. Wilson. The Clerk had informed him that the first beep was a 30-second warning, and each gentleman had a minute left in which to speak. Mr. Iachetta stated that he did not oppose the church because Sunday morning would not be considered a very intense use. The soccer fields would generate a lot more traffic during the week as well as Saturday and Sunday. He added that 700 to 800 people on this site in addition to the church do not strike him as not being too intense. He mentioned that the 50 percent increase in traffic might not be too intense by somebody's definition, but it is intense by his definition. Mr. Wilson said the traffic figures that were used indicated 100 vehicle trips a day, 300 vehicle trips on Sunday and 900 on Saturday. These figures were all exaggerated by more than half. Mr. Nat Howell remarked that he lives on Polo Grounds Road, and in the absence of the President of the Proffit Community Association, he has been asked to say a few words on this issue. He does not oppose playing fields, but the scale of this project is disturbing to the homeowners. He said if the proposal was to put one or two soccer fields there, he probably would not say anything. However, he reminded the Board members that they have heard about the roads, and in the six years he has lived there, the traffic has increased substantially. He mentioned that his nearest neighbors have lost three dogs on the road, which is indicative of the kind of traffic in this area. He said this problem has been compounded over the last several years by the introduction of a caravan of heavy trucks, as well as lowboys with bulldozers and other heavy equipment. He added that he does not know the traffic count on this road, but it is substantial and it is growing. If the Supervisors approve this project, he wants them to consider what they are going to have to do with the intersection of Route 29. It is a problem when traffic tries to go south on Route 29 from this intersection, and there is going to be a tragedy with this additional traffic. He also mentioned the added problem of the possibility of a church going in this area. He asked the Supervisors not to put five fields in this location, even if they feel there is a need for more fields, because the location is ill served by the road. He appreciates the willingness of the proponents of ~his proposal to try to work out accommodations, and they have agreed to police this road. The Proffitt Community Association has had the experience of policing the road twice each year. He asked that no children be used to police the road, because it is highly dangerous, and there are places where there are no shoulders. He emphasized that the Association members have to be quite careful when they perform this service. The solution to the traffic problem is not to put a bunch of children on the road with the current traffic, as well as the additional traffic that is contemplated. He asked that this not be permitted, and he said that adults must perform this service. Ms. Barbara Strain, a County resident and President of the Board of Directors of SOCA, remarked that she has stood before this Board many times to support other organizations' field initiatives, and it is a pleasure to support SOCA's own initiative this time. It is appropriate for this meeting to be held in the County Office building, not because it is the seat of County government nor because of its historical purposes, but because at one time it was the only high school in the area. She said a few weeks ago, the County opened its third high school, which is a commitment to spend millions of dollars because of the growth in the community. SOCA has also experienced this same growth over the years, but there have been no new field initiatives in order to put children on fields to play. As a nonprofit community service organization, one of SOCA's big missions is to provide soccer to all the youth and adults in the area regardless of race, sex, age, skills ability or financial ability to pay. She hopes the Supervisors will consider all of these facts very carefully, so SOCA can fulfill its mission and support the community's needs. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 11) 00022 Mr. Gary Owens commented that he is a County resident, the parent of three soccer players, and he is a soccer player himself. He is also Chairman of the Field Development Committee for the Soccer organization. There is complete agreement relative to the urgent need for soccer fields. He added that there is not a Saturday that goes by when soccer games are in progress, that children are not being injured by playing on substandard fields. He added that this is due not only to the lack of recreational facilities, but it is getting to the point where there are lots of children walking around on crutches, as a result of the failure of this community to provide for a very urgent public need. This proposal results from the generosity of a private citizen who is willing to help to begin to meet this need, so there is no question on that point. He remarked that the SOCA organization wants this to be a safe facility, and he thinks the local residents have pointed out that there are some considerations, which have to be given to building a soccer complex on this field. He then mentioned two points. First, he reiterated that the estimates of traffic and the total number of individuals on this field are far in excess of the reality. If one looks at the United States Soccer Federation estimates of the traffic volume generated by this non-spectator type sport, there are never going to be 700 or 800 people on these fields. It will more likely be 100 to 125 at any point in time, and he asked the Supervisors to please keep in mind that the numbers are much smaller than the estimates. There will be 20 to 24 vehicle trips per game, five games per field per day, so there will probably be 500 to 600 vehicle trips over a ten-hour period at the maximum. Secondly, he reminded the Supervisors that this is a wonderful opportunity, but the safety issues need to be addressed. He suggested that a traffic light be installed at the underpass, because it is terribly dangerous, and it needs to be corrected irrespective of the soccer fields. He also suggested that a traffic light be installed at the Route 29 intersection so cars can get in and out of the road there. He asked that this urgent need be met, because this is a great opportunity. He noted that across this entire County, many sites have been considered, and there are no other alternative sites that are as good as this one. Mr. Pat Mullaney, Director of Parks and Recreation for the County of Albemarle, noted that currently there are 7,000 field sports participants in the City and County. However, in the next five years, a 30 percent increase is expected, and there will be 9,000 participants. He explained that a study has been undertaken to determine the current and five-year needs of the different organizations that are offering field sports. He said, based on this study, the CIP Technical Committee is now reviewing his Department's CIP request for the next six years. This request includes $3,250,000 to upgrade existing fields, the lighting of fields and for providing new fields on County property. He added that given the other capital needs in the County, this money will not all be available for this purpose, but even if it is, it will not be enough to meet the field space needs. He said private efforts, such as this proposal, need to be encouraged because this is the only way to meet the County's needs. He pointed out that soccer is the single largest field user, and with about 3,400 participants, it is about half of the total figure. The SOCA organization listed its current needs in the study as nine fields, and in five years, it will increase to 16 fields. He remarked that because of the high participation, nature of the play and the year round schedule, soccer is probably the leading cause for the less satisfactory condition of the fields. The number one recommendation in the study is for the development of a large soccer complex of ten to twelve fields or several smaller complexes of four to five fields which would have the most immediate impact for improving field space for all sports Countywide. He said, as occurring in the other communities, these types of complexes need to be developed, supervised and maintained by organizations such as SOCA, with only as much assistance as is necessary from the City and County. He said that tonight there are some people ready to do this very thing. If the needs are ever going to be met, then the County needs to find ways to facilitate requests such as this. He noted that the County has a new Quality Improvement Program, and under the County Executive's leadership, the County representatives are being asked to look at things in a different way. In the past when a good idea was presented, it would be accepted as a good idea, but the bad points would be noted. Now good ideas are being considered as to how they can be made to'work. He said from the standpoint of meeting the field needs, this complex is a great idea, and he hopes County officials find a way to make it work. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 12) Mr. W. J. (Jim) Eddins stated that he lives at 2051 Polo Grounds Road, and he is ready to stipulate that the use of this area for soccer is a sensible one for a lot of reasons. He then recommended a balance between the desires of this community and the needs of the soccer program. He said it need not necessarily be five fields, and he does not know the real answer on the intensity of the traffic. He does not suspect anyone really knows, but he thinks a good many of the citizens along Polo Grounds Road and in the Proffitt community looks at 216 parking spaces and get nervous. They know that some of these vehicles are coming by the eastern route on Proffitt Road whether from Route 29 or Route 20, and they will go through the underpass. He reiterated that this may be a very good use for the area, but five fields may not be the real answer. He also endorsed the idea of an archaeological study in that particular area. He said most of the maps show that it was the general location of the Monacan village, and a good many artifacts have been found in there. He thinks this is an important aspect. Mr. John Maine, a resident of Earlysville, commented that he grew up in Albemarle County. He moved away to go to school, took his first job in Boston andthen moved back to Albemarle County, because he thinks it is a great place to raise his family. After living somewhere else for a while, he noticed that there is a big difference in the quality of the recreational fields available for the children. He has been a soccer coach for four years, and he has three children, one of whom is in a soccer program. He came to this meeting directly from his soccer practice, and he is most able to speak to the need for the soccer fields. He reminded the Board members that he sent them a letter last week about this matter. He just finished practicing at Broadus Wood Elementary School and, first of all, the conditions of the fields are very poor because they are heavily overused. He reported that there is no grass on the fields whatsoever, and there are lots of ruts and pits six to eight inches deep that are dangerous for children to run across, and they can twist their feet and get hurt. There are also rocks on these fields. He noted that today his group of children had to share the field with three separate teams. He added that the field is undersized and it has to be split into at least two halves. The children have to play crosswise, and they cannot even use the goals at the end. He would give a comparison for those people who do not understand the game of soccer. He remarked that if it was a baseball practice, one team would be practicing between first and second base and another team would practice between second and third. He said it does not work, so there is a definite need for fields in this community. He remarked that when he first heard about this, he was really excited. He pointed out that not only is this an ideal location, it is flat, no grading will have to be done, it can be kept green, and the developer is willing to donate the property for free. When he then heard the Planning Commission had denied this request, he could not figure out why, and after listening to Mr. Cilimberg, he still could not understand the objection. He said he finally understood more about the objection when he heard some of the people speak from Polo Grounds Road, but it seems to him the SOCA organization is leaning over backwards to alleviate some of these objections. He emphasized that according to some of the comments, the road should be fixed, anyway, whether or not there are soccer fields located there. He added that soccer fields are needed, and he thinks it is a great location. He noted that it is only one mile off of Route 29, and only seven houses will be passed by vehicles on their way into the soccer fields. It will have a minimal impact, and although it will impact some people and there will be more traffic, these things need to be dealt with. He hopes the Supervisors approve the soccer project because the fields are really needed. Mr. Dan Rosensweig, the Director of Player and Coaching Development of SOCA, stated that when he assumed his current position this summer, he immediately spent two days in closed session with Bill Mueller, SOCA's Executive Director, to develop a vision for the future. They first reflected on some of the many things the program does well, and he mentioned that the program has developed more top-level soccer players per capita than any program statewide. He noted that the program provides fun, safe and meaning- ful experiences for thousands of children on all levels, and it serves as a resource for other community services such as the Young Women Leaders Program run by the University Women's Center. The SOCA staff members then began turning their attention to the future and began planning programs targeting the least privileged of the area's population. He explained that in the next couple of years they want to expand opportunities so every child in the area who expresses an interest in playing this great, democratic game will be able 000228 September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 13) to do so, regardless of economic means, language problems and traditional institutional and community barriers. Additionally, they want to expand the program of coaching instruction and they want to offer more year round programs to serve children when they are most in need. They would like for soccer to be the most positive, pedagogically sound and accessible sport available, not just in the County, but in the state, as well. He is convinced they are doing things right, but they need County officials' help in a big way. He went on to say despite heroic efforts of volunteers and staff members who miraculously get things accomplished every weekend, they are limited in what they can do. Too much time is spent in finding fields, begging high school athletic directors, coordinating with other programs, altering schedules and notifying coaches, etc. He commented that too many games and practices are played on overused surfaces which makes participation much less fun and seriously increases the potential for injury. Fields are needed, and right now the Board of Supervisors has in its power the ability with a single vote to put into motion a rare instance of private initiative directly serving the public good. He remarked that the South Fork Soccer Field project is a sound proposal, and it has been endorsed by the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation staff, as well as by members of other sports organizations with which SOCA competes for fields. It is a valuable use of flood plain land, and green space will remain green space. He noted that it fits in with the Comprehensive Plan identifying the need to provide recreational opportunities, and it recognizes this particular site as a crucial buffer between the urban area and Hollymead. He said all of this has a minimal impact on vehicular traffic. He then added that during his eight years as a resident of this area, a few things have become expressly obvious to him. First, Albemarle County is a uniquely fine place for families, and it maintains standards rarely found in other American towns besieged by strip malls, gated communities and for profit soccer clubs. Secondly, soccer not only reflects values of the community, but also to a very large degree, teaches and enforces them. He said Albemarle County would not be what it is without soccer and without the 300 volunteer coaches guiding, teaching and inspiring the more than 3,500 children in the program. He also mentioned the opportunity for the more than 600 adults, many of them new to the area, to meet new people and bond. He remarked that scores of families enjoy crisp Saturday afternoons together on the soccer field. Mr. Bowerman asked Mr. Rosensweig to explain what he means by the term, "pedagogically sound," as it relates to children in the soccer program. Mr. Rosensweig answered that the SOCA staff members spend a lot of time thinking about how they teach children and how the children learn. He said not only are there people who are expert at soccer in the program, but there are also people involved who are experts in child development. They are trying to teach the children to become better thinkers and better citizens, etc. Mr. Paul Stephen informed Board members that he lives in Key West, and he has had children involved in the soccer program for the last 14 years. He said his two youngest c~ildren are playing now, and he has coached for the last two years. He does not have any official connection with SOCA, but he is a consumer. He is also one of the people who comes from the east, because the best access to Hollymead is through the eastern approach of Polo Grounds Road, and right now Hollymead is where his children play most of their games. He mentions this because there is already a problem, and without these fields, there is still significant traffic. He remarked that on Saturdays, he would be going to Hollymead, anyway, for the games there. He is also seriously concerned about the underpass, and he tries not to use it when he has children in his car. He added that it is possible the development of these fields might be an occasion for a creative response to what already is a serious problem, and it should be addressed. He said soccer has a good record of mobilizing its people and getting them to behave collectively and responsibly. One possibility would be to strongly encourage all parents to use the not too terribly inconvenient alternative by going out to Proffitt Road rather than taking the eastern approach for the small fraction of people who come from the east. He reminded the Board members that soccer is not just for soccer moms, and it is not just a fad in this country. He said Charlottesville happens to be the home of the foremost college program in the country, and the reason there are not as many children here tonight, is beCause they are at the UVa game. The inspiration of the college team works with the soccer program in providing players as well as coaches for training, and it creates a synergy that this Board has to help develop. 000 9 September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 14) Mr. Martin asked Mr. Stephen the route he would take if he was leaving his home in Key West to drop off a child at Darden Towe Park, and then he wanted to go to the proposed fields area at Polo Grounds Road. He wondered if he would travel Route 29. Mr. Stephen answered that the easiest way to go from Darden Towe Park to the proposed fields would be to go up the Bypass, take a right on Park Street and then cut through Carrsbrook. Mr. Fran Lavin, a resident of Forest Lakes, spoke in support of the soccer fields. The traffic to which people are referring on Polo Grounds Road is coming from the access road going into Forest Lakes South. During the next three or four years there will be another 400 to 500 families in Forest Lakes which will make this problem worse than it is today. He noted that the field at Forest Lakes is already overused, and it is probably two years away from needing to be restored, itself. He said Hollymead's field just went through a rehabilitation, which happened over the last couple of years, as a result of the usage. With the growth north of the river, some soccer fields are needed in this area in order to take care of the additional families and the children who are going to be living there soon. Mr. Richard Aust, a member of the Board of Directors of SOCA, a soccer coach, and the parent of two children in the program, stated that he is also a County resident. The County's children are playing on soccer fields that are really in bad shape, and the Supervisors have the opportunity to help make an improvement. He asked all of the children who were present to stand to show their support for the soccer program (approximately 12 children responded.) He then referred to the Planning Commission meeting when the vote was taken on this matter. He came away concerned that the Commissioners really did not understand how big a problem this is. In spite of the statistics, one Commissioner asked why supporters of this project wanted to build soccer fields instead of volley ball or baseball fields. This Commissioner said specifically that she did not believe five soccer fields were needed. He cannot speak to the need for any other sport, park or recreational need, but he has firsthand knowledge of the need for soccer fields. He next asked the Supervisors to consider the statistics they have been hearing. He remarked that there are 3,500 players on 200 teams who are going to be suiting up this fall for over 120 games every weekend. He said over 275 practice sessions have to be scheduled every week, and there are only 24 fields that can be used. No wonder the fields are in terrible shape. There are so many people in love with this sport that they are overwhelming the facilities, and the result of this is that a lot of the fields are hazardous. He added that now Dr. Hurt has volunteered to donate this site and do some work on it to allow the SOCA organization to develop five fields. It is a small step forward but it is an extremely important one. He has three different perspectives on this issue. As a parent, he sees this as an opportunity to start making the fields safer for the children. As an administrator of the soccer program, he sees this as an opportunity to finally start alleviating some of the overuse and congestion on the fields. As a taxpayer, he sees this as a fabulous opportunity to improve the recrea- tional facilities in the County at no cost to the taxpayers, and he asked what could be better. He emphasized that this is a fantastic opportunity for Albemarle County's children, and he asked the Supervisors to vote for approval of this plan. No one else came forward to speak, so Mr. Martin closed the public hearing. Mr. Bowerman mentioned the reference to the special permit for the church with the use of one access point to serve the residue parcel that went beyond the church use. He asked if there was any discussion of this by staff in terms of a joint access to serve the entire acreage. Mr. Cilimberg answered that he was not involved in any such discussion. He noted that the church plan has not come forward, but if it had, the opportunity for this discussion would have been during the site plan review. Mr. Bowerman said Dr. Iachetta mentioned that the location for the entrance for the proposed use could serve any potential use there and should be located in the best spot possible. Mr. Roell responded that the location of the entrance for the soccer field is approximately 35 feet lower in elevation, and it comes through a separate newly acquired parcel. He then pointed out the location of the entrance on a map. The overall site is 60 feet higher than the site for the fields, so the two entrances are involved September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 15) ~:~' ,< 000230 with completely different parcels, and they have completely different elevations. He added that if there is a problem with the location of the Meadow Creek Parkway, he would suspect it would pass through the upper site, rather than the lower one. Mr. Martin commented that to use the proposed entrance for the church, vehicles would have to enter the entrance and then immediately travel upward to get to the church. Mr. Roell answered affirmatively. Mr. Bowerman wondered if the entrance was on a parcel that Dr. Hurt did not own when the special permit for the church was before this Board. Mr. Roell replied that this is correct. He added that this entrance has commercial sight distance, and when the bridge is improved on Route 29, there is a traffic light slated for the Polo Grounds Road entrance. He also noted that Polo Grounds Road will be paved within the next two and one-half years after that according to VDoT's schedule. Ms. Humphris mentioned that the applicant's proposal was for Parcels 22 and 22C. She said, though, when Mr. Roell was speaking he mentioned that the road crosses Parcels 23C and 22A. Mr. Roell answered that there are three parcels involved. There is .67 of an acre at the entrance, as well as the tip of the church parcel, and then there is the major parcel. Ms. Humphris recalled a problem with another applicant where, because part of his parcel is in a jurisdictional area, he thought his building should be eligible for public water. She said she cannot figure out if this is a similar circumstance. Mr. Cilimberg responded that in the first special use permit, the jurisdictional area decision was based on Parcel 22 for the church. He said this current proposal involves development on Parcels 22 and 22C. The access to where the development will occur is crossing part of two parcels. However, the only jurisdictional decision made at this point is for Parcel 22. He reiterated that a portion of this development is on Parcel 22, as well as Parcel 22C. Mr. Bowerman asked Mr. Cilimberg to point out the parcels to which he is referring on the map. Mr. Cilimberg did so. He also pointed out Tax Map Parcel 26C-1. He said it appears, for access back into the parking area where the building and the field space are located, that part of this parcel will also be crossed. Mr. Bowerman asked if this parcel is also owned by the applicant. Mr. Roell replied affirmatively. Ms. Humphris inquired about the topography on Parcel 26C-1. Mr. Cilimberg responded that this is an area that is going to be cut back into the site. The topography at the entrance, according to VDoT, will require some sight distance up to 450 feet, because this is the requirement for a commercial entrance to exist. He mentioned that there is a rise on the hill where the church would be located. He believes, under the first special use permit, that a reference was made to Parcel 22, itself, as far as serving the residue beyond the church. He said, though, he will have to verify this, and he noted that the proposed development is primarily on Parcel 22C. Mr. Bowerman called attention to the prior special use permit where it indicated that property shall be limited to a joint entrance serving the church and.residue acreage. He asked to which parcel the residue acreage refers. Mr. Cilimberg answered that it would be Parcel 22C, and although some of the parking area and activities associated with the building are on Parcel 22, Parcel 22C is the one most affected by this proposal. Mr. Perkins asked Mr. Cilimberg to point out the public sewer line on the map, and he did so. Mr. Roell stated that, on behalf of Dr. Hurt, he is not asking for anything except a place to build the soccer fields. Mr. Bowerman asked if Mr. Roell took this plan to Dr. Hurt. Mr. Roell answered affirmatively. He said it took him a month to convince Dr. Hurt this project would work there. Mr. Roell stated that he has been a soccer coach for four years, and his children have played soccer for eight years. He explained that this is what prompted him to get involved with this project. Ms. Humphris stated that she knows who officially made the request for the addition of the property to the jurisdictional area. She asked, though, if this was Mr. Roell's idea or the organization's that there be public sewer to this site. Mr. Roell replied that it was his idea. He said if he could have had gravity feed there, he would not even have brought up the issue. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 16) O00Z3i However, sewage would have to be pumped uphill. It certainly makes a lot of sense to have a public sewer line. Mr. Bowerman asked how Mr. Roell decided on five fields. Mr. Roell said that five fields will fit in that area. However, if he could have fit seven fields there, he would have asked for seven. He explained that these fields can be rotated 90 degrees, and they can be slid from side to side, so the same spot is not worn down. He referred to the smallest field, which he said is to serve children from five to eight years old. A suggestion has been made to add a tot lot or playground, which he thinks is a good idea, for the younger children. Ms. Humphris emphasized that she understands the need for more fields, but she has some problems that do not necessarily have to do with the fields. She then referred to the Comprehensive Plan and the fact that this area is supposed to remain a buffer area and green space between the urban neighbor- hood development and the Hollymead line. She said County officials have been serious about maintaining thisl When this plan was proposed, she started to wonder what was going on there, and she went to the site. She then inquired about the purpose of the big area of fill that is flattened out and is still in the huge swale just to the east of the property. Mr. Roell answered that according to County restrictions and zoning ordinances, etc., the only place where a waste or borrow area can be located is in an RA district. He said that if it is not in a flood plain, and it is in an RA district, it is a matter of course to create a waste or borrow area. This area is close to Rio Road, and since Faulconer Construction is making all the improvements to Rio Road, personal arrangements have been made with the Engineering Department and Dr. Hurt for Faulconer Construction to use this spot to place their refuge, gravel and top soil, etc. Mr. Bowerman stated that no one can build on this area because it is not compacted. He said it is just a borrow and fill area. Mr. Roell said it can be a parking lot for a church site, but it cannot be a building site. Ms. Humphris mentioned that she has heard about a civil engineer intern from the University of Virginia Engineering School who is talking to residents about land in the proposed area for a possible retirement village. She asked if Mr. Roell can speak to this matter. Mr. Roell responded that there was a student intern from the Engineering Department at UVa who came to his office through the summer to do some studies. He looked at this site, as well as others, and his specific focus was on retirement. JABA has also come to his office and discussed the same site for retirement homes. Ms. Humphris said it is not zoned for retirement homes, and it is not shown that way in the Compre- hensive Plan. Mr. Roell concurred. Ms. Humphris wondered why Mr. Roell would be making overtures for a retirement home when the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance speci- fically state that this area is to be kept a green buffer and that there will be no development there other than allowed by right. Mr. Roell answered that he is not making such overtures, and he has not formally made this type of approach. He said a student has proceeded to do an ideological study. Ms. Humphris asked if the student was working for him and Dr. Hurt. Mr. Roell replied, "yes." He went on to say the student was doing an internship in his office, but he is no longer there, because he is back in school. The student also studied several sites, but this is a consideration that he undertook, and there is no formal application or consideration for it. Ms. Thomas asked about the timing for the traffic light to be installed at Route 29 and Polo Grounds Road. Mr. Roell answered that when VDoT does the bridge improvements, it is intended that a light be installed at the Polo Grounds Road and the Route 29 intersection. Ms. Thomas wondered if this traffic light would only be installed during the bridge construction, or would it be left there permanently. Mr. Roell responded that it will be a perma- nently installed traffic light. Mr. Perkins inquired as to how much grading will have to be done on the soccer fields. Mr. Roell answered that very little grading will have to be done. Mr. Perkins then wanted to know if the fields have to be perfectly flat. Mr. Roell replied, "no." There are a few deviations to the surface, and the land rises to the river. The buffer ridge will be maintained at the river. He noted that there are one foot lines which are almost negligible across the 1,000 feet of cross fill, so there is a total of five feet of fall September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 17) 000232 on 1,000 feet which is purely to shed some water. Ms. Thomas referred to the very dangerous underpass on Polo Grounds Road. She inquired if there are any plans to improve this underpass. Mr. Cilimberg replied that it is not currently in the Six Year Plan. He said at one time it was on the priority list, and it was being pursued. However, because of the combination of the cost of realigning Route 643 to bring it through the underpass, as well as some stringent property owner resistance on the key property to do the realignment, it was dropped. This goes back a number of years, because when he first came to the County, it was a project, which had been identified, and it was on the priority list. He is not aware of any discussions which have occurred on any kind of light control for the underpass, although, it is something that could be investigated with VDoT as to whether or not it might be a workable possibility. Mr. Martin asked if Mr. Cilimberg is referring to a flashing light. Mr. Cilimberg said this could be a consideration or there may be the possibility of a traffic light at each end of the underpass. Ms. Thomas pointed out that there are not many places in the County where drivers have to blow their horns before entering an area. Ms. Humphris noted that putting in a septic system in this location is not ideal, and she asked if it can be done. Mr. Cilimberg replied, "yes." Ms. Humphris commented that if it was a question of not having the fields at all or having the fields with a septic system, she would think people would rather have the soccer fields. Mr. Cilimberg stated that he would imagine this is true, although Ms. Humphris would need to ask the applicant this question. He went on to say the applicant has verified that the fields can be done. Ms. Humphris referred to the mention of offices in the 2,000 square foot building. She was surprised because she did not think an office use would be accessory to a soccer field. Mr. Cilimberg responded that the applicant might wish to speak to this, but he understood that the building would be a location for the officials to work from when there was game activity. Ms. Humphris wondered if office or indoor space is available at other field locations. Mr. Mueller remarked that the reference to offices was envisioned more or less as a place to have a telephone, and it would not be an office that would be occupied on a permanent basis. He mentioned that SOCA has its own offices on Greenbrier Drive, and the proposed office would not be something used on a daily or ongoing basis. He said if someone is operating maintenance equipment, the office would mainly be a place for a person to keep files and have a phone. He explained that it was not envisioned to be someone's working office space. Ms. Humphris next asked the County Attorney how an office space use would fit in this area. Mr. Davis replied that unless it was truly an accessory to the athletic fields, it would not be permitted. He went on to say it would have to be very limited in scope for it to be allowed. Mr. Bowerman inquired if the building in the plan is for office space or public concessions. Mr. Cilimberg replied that it is for such things as storage, concessions, etc. Ms. Thomas noted that the building is 32 by 60 feet. Mr. Cilimberg stated that he does not know for a fact, but he imagines the building will possibly be used for a changing room. Mr. Mueller stated that it was not envisioned as a changing facility. He noted that there will be bathroom facilities there, but the bulk of the building will be used for storage of maintenance equipment to be used for such things as lawn cutting. He said it is also large enough that a full size goal, which is 24 feet, can be taken into the building for repairs. He noted that these goals periodically need to be painted, welded and maintained. He then referred to the concessions, and he said a counter had been envisioned where refreshments can be sold. Mr. Martin mentioned the concession stand at Hollymead. Mr. Bowerman wondered if the concession stand is put up and taken down on a regular basis. Mr. Cilimberg explained that the concession stand is at Hollymead for the season, and it is opened and closed for each game event. Mr. Mueller pointed out that at Darden Towe Park, there are vendors such as Pepsi Cola and Coca Cola. These stands are shut during the week, but they are open on game days. This proposal puts the concession stand in a more permanent and protected environment. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 18) O00ZL 3 Mr. Cilimberg reported that the Lane Field operates in a similar manner with the building located next to it. These concessions also open and close for games. Mr. Martin inquired if it would be acceptable to have some type of condition that the concessions would only be open when the fields are open. Mr. Mueller answered affirmatively. Next, Mr. Martin asked if there are any accident reports for the roads in this area. Mr. Cilimberg replied that he has no such infOrmation, but he is sure the Police Department has this type of accident information. Mr. Tucker asked if the Board members are expecting the staff to move forward with examining the underpass situation with VDoT to see what can be done. Mr. Martin said this could be done if the Board approves this request. Mr. Bowerman disagreed. He suggested that the underpass situation be examined with VDoT, anyway. He has been on this road recently, and he does not like the idea of honking a horn as the only indication a car is coming through the underpass. The drivers may have their windows up, and they may not hear a horn blowing. Other Board members agreed. Mr. Bowerman mentioned the buffer area between the urban areas, and he recalled that the special permit for the church was passed by this Board on a vote of four to two. He said this permit still exists. He then noted a concern on his part about the request for the sewer connection for this proposal, and he mentioned the precedent set by a connection to the sewer line for another use. He also has some concern about the proposed structure to be put into place on the property. He would prefer the structure would be for restrooms and equipment storage. He added that if there are concessions available, then he thinks something such as a portable Pepsi stand would be sufficient. He noted that the concession stand could be left on the site, but it would be separate from the building. He also stated that the issue of the underpass should be dealt with separately, and it ought to be considered, anyway. He next referred to the Comprehensive Plan. The reason this proposal is attractive to him is because it serves two urban areas, in terms of a meeting ground for recreation, and it is in a place where the proposed use will not be detrimental to the land. It seems a logical use of an open space designed for this very purpose. It may technically be inconsistent, but the church was more inconsistent, although he supported the church application. Ms. Humphris pointed out that she did not support the church's request. Mr. Bowerman noted that he does not have a problem with interpreting the Comprehensive Plan in a more favorable light as far as the placement of the soccer fields in this area. He reiterated, though, that he is concerned about the structure and its use. Mr. Martin remarked that it seems to him the issue is not whether there are concessions. He added that it seems a little unreasonable to allow the applicant to have a concession stand out in the middle of a lot, but he cannot have something that looks a lot nicer in a building. However, he thinks the issue relates to the traffic problems, and the fact that this activity will increase the traffic. He does not think the traffic will increase from Polo Grounds Road to Route 29. When he went to visit the site, it never crossed his mind to go by way of Proffitt Road and Polo Grounds Road. He said it was so much easier to go via Route 29. He then referred to his question to Mr. Stephen, who lives in Key West about the direction he would take to the proposed fields from Darden Towe Park. He said Mr. Stephen answered that he would go the back way if he was coming from Key West. However, if he was two miles up the road at Darden Towe Park, he would go by way of the Bypass, Park Street and Route 29. Mr. Martin stated that he would do the same thing. He thinks there could be an increase in traffic on Polo Grounds Road, itself, and this is the issue. The issue is whether this Board wants to permit more traffic on Polo Grounds Road and in the Proffit Road area. He mentioned that in the past the people on Proffitt Road have had to deal with the fact that during a certain time in the morning and a certain time in the afternoon, there is rush hour traffic trying to get from Pantops to GE, as well as people from the northern area trying to get to State Farm. In the middle of the day it is not so bad and on Saturdays and Sundays it is a tolerable situation, but this proposal could make the situation intolerable on Saturday~ and Sundays. He added that if the concession stand is limited to the time the fields are open, he does not see it as a big issue. Mr. Bowerman concurred that traffic is a big issue with this proposal. He said, though, he believes the traffic counts were noted at the Planning Commission as being a lower number than the staff reported. He understands September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 19) 000234 that there will be a traffic light proposed for Polo Grounds Road and Route 29 with completion of the six laning and the bridge rebuilding. He is not sure if the special permit for the church triggers the improvements for Polo Grounds Road, or if it is in the County's secondary roads plan. Mr. Cilimberg responded that the Polo Grounds improvements were actually tied to Condition Number Eight, which was recommended by the Planning Commission, if the church and the soccer fields projects are actually done. Route 643, itself, is not in the Six Year Plan. Mr. Martin commented that the County is getting everything it possibly wants in this situation. Although, there is one thing County officials do not want, which is increased traffic, but it is impossible to have everything. A lot of people live near Proffitt, and he intends to be at the community picnic on September 27. He has the utmost respect for Mr. Iachetta and Mr. Evans, and they do not ask for something unless they are looking at both sides of the issue. Mr. Martin reiterated that traffic is his main concern, but when he looks at the overall scope of this and the overall picture, this is a perfect example of the private sector working together with local government and creating something that is needed. He noted that these fields are needed to the point that the County is going to have to pay to build and maintain such fields somewhere in the northern area. He said this way, not only will the fields be free, but also the County will not have to pay for the maintenance. He pointed out that the County has to maintain all of the other parks and recreational areas. He referred to one of the earlier comments that the County does not have fields for its children. He wanted to correct this statement, because there may not be enough fields, but Albemarle has a lot more fields than some of the other counties. This County believes in its children, and it believes in trying to promote athletics and the use of the body. Hopefully, County officials can continue along this line. In general, Mr. Martin stated that he will have to support this proposal, although he does have some real concerns about allowing the connection to the sewage system. Mr. Bowerman said he is trying to accommodate the use that has all of the benefits to which Mr. Martin referred. Yet, he wants to deal with the concerns he and other members of this Board may have, so this project will happen rather than not happen. Mr. Martin said if the applicant wants to have a concession stand that can only be open during the hours the fields are open, then he does not see a problem, although, he will be willing to entertain ideas from other Board members. Ms. Thomas said she is more attracted to the idea of having a condition that the stand is only open when the soccer activities are underway. The Supervisors are supposed to try to think of unintended consequences, and even though she does not believe it will happen, one idea is that this concession stand might become bigger than just a way to take care of the soccer players. Ms. Thomas remarked that she thinks this is a condition that should be added. Mr. Bowerman asked if Ms. Thomas is indicating that it is acceptable to have the concession as part of the structure. Ms. Thomas answered, "yes." Ms. Humphris concurred that this would also be acceptable to her. She thinks all of the Board members want to make this project possible, but there are other things to consider. She does not know if the Supervisors can do anything about the traffic, other than what will happen in the future when the church moves to the site, which will be an automatic upgrade. She can support this proposal, including the concession stand, with the condition indicating the times it will be open. She added, though, that she will never agree to adding this site to the jurisdictional area, which is her major reservation about this project. Ms. Thomas agreed that the jurisdictional area proposal was also her major concern. She went on to say she is intrigued with the idea of having SOCA join the Adopt-A-Road program. ~This program is verifiable, it has standards, it does not allow children to be involved, and it is either being done to the satisfaction of the Highway Department, or it will be taken away. She added that this program would make a verifiable condition as opposed to a well-meant, but not verifiable, promise that the road would be kept clean. Mr. Davis remarked that VDoT has very specific guidelines as to how the application process works. There could be a group of people who already have this segment of road, so it may be impossible for SOCA to do it. He noted September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 20) 0002.35 that the program is limited to one group per segment of road. Several people indicated that the Proffit Road Association is already involved with this portion of road. Mr. Cilimberg suggested that one way to approach the situation is to have the SOCA Association agree to assist the Proffit Road Association. Mr. Martin commented that he believes the Association members will be more than willing to work with the people from SOCA to figure out a way this program can be done jointly or increase the number of times the cleaning is done. Ms. Thomas indicated that she is unsure how to handle this situation with a condition, since she did not realize someone else had already adopted the road. She then recalled that when there was discussion of another soccer field complex, a tot lot was in the request by parents. She asked if this should be dealt with when the site plan is reviewed. Mr. Davis stated that he does not think this is something that could be required with a site plan. Mr. Cilimberg said if the Supervisors expect a tot lot to be a part of the project, this is the time to take care of it. Mr. Davis reiterated that unless a tot lot is required by the use, there is no site plan requirement for it. Mr. Martin remarked that he thinks it is an excellent idea. Ms. Thomas wondered if the tot lot can be done without the Board of Supervisors requiring it, if it is not on the site plan. Mr. Cilimberg answered affirmatively. If the applicant chooses to do it, he certainly could, although it would need to show on the site plan. This is something the applicant can choose to do during the site plan process, because there is nothing in the Site Plan Ordinance which prevents him from doing it. Ms. Thomas wondered if it is not shown on the site plan, would the applicants not be able to include the tot lot. Mr. Cilimberg replied that they could amend their site plan to include the tot lot at the point in time when they would be pursuing it. Mr. Roell suggested that administrative approval be granted for staff to review the final site plan to incorporate such a structure. Mr. Martin inquired if the tot lot would be stationary or would it be moved as the fields are rotated. Mr. Roell answered that the tot lot would be stationary, and it would probably be located at the very northern edge between the parking lot and fields. There is a broad open space 50 feet away from the stream, and the buffer could stay intact. The upper parking lot is a future parking lot so it is grassy, and there is ample space at the high end of the edge of the fields. He said people can watch small children while they observe the field play. He went on to say that the applicants cannot add the tot lot without administra- tive approval. However, when a spot has been located that is acceptable to staff, then it will be incorporated on the site. Mr. Cilimberg stated that this would be part of the final site plan, which the staff normally handles administratively, anyway. Ms. Thomas said this sounds as though the tot lot would not have to be added as a condition. Mr. Davis responded that the tot lot would need to be added as a condition to the special use permit, and then the site plan can be amended. Mr. Bowerman referred to the change in Condition Number 11 which indicates that the special permit shall be void upon notice by the Board of Supervisors. He said this specifies the entity that would actually issue this instruction. He next mentioned the reference to the structure in terms of equipment storage, restroom facilities and the limitation of the concession stand to be open only during field activities. He is unsure if this should be put zn now as a condition, or if it should be part of the site plan. Mr. Davis suggested that the reference to the structure be included as a condition. He said it should be Condition Number 12, and it would state that, "The use of the building shall be limited to restrooms, equipment storage and a concession counter." Condition Number 13 would indicate that, "The concession counter shall only be open during use of the soccer fields." He explained that Condition Number 14 would say, "A tot lot shall be provided." Ms. Thomas commented that she thinks the Board is arriving at the right conclusion, but she thinks the character of the area is being changed. She stated that in every aspect except the traffic, it is a good offer, and it September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 21) 000286 meets a desperate need. She said she thinks all of the Supervisors are thinking along the same lines. Motion was then offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Ms. Humphris, to approve SP-98-18, subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission, and the amended conditions presented at the Board meeting, with #11 amended to" ... notice by the Board of Supervisors that a road design..."; add #12 - ~ The use of the building shall be limited to restrooms, equipment storage and concession counter" ; add #13 - ~ The concession counter shall be open only during use of the soccer fields" ; and add #14 - "A tot lot shall be provided" . Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. (The conditions of approval are set out in full below:) 8o 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. No exterior lighting shall be installed; No loudspeakers or public address system shall be permitted; No portion of any field shall be located closer than seventy-five (75) feet to any lot line; Compliance with the provisions of Section 5.1.16; Entrance to the site shall be gated to prevent use of the site after hours and during flood events; The final site plan shall reflect any changes to the floodplain and floodway limits, and the applicant must provide computations supporting any such changes, as well as copies of the correspondence demonstrating approval by FEMA; Water quality measures shall be provided to achieve water quality at least equivalent to pre-development conditions, subject to the approval of the Water Resources Manager; Route 643, Polo Grounds Road shall be upgraded with a minimum of 1.5 inches of SM-2A from Route 29 to the entrance of the soccer fields. This work shall be completed prior to the applicant making use of both SP-98-18/SP-98-22 [Soccer Fields] and SP-90-35 [Church]. The applicant may make use of one of the special use permits without the need to upgrade Route 643, Polo Grounds Roads; The owner shall reserve a one hundred (100) foot wide strip of land the length of the property abutting the northern side of the Rivanna River for the Rivanna Greenway. The width of the reserved area shall be measured from the edge of the Rivanna River at its normal flow level. When the County decides to establish a public area or park, including canoe access, within the reserved area, upon the request of the County, the owner shall dedicate the reserved area to the County and such property necessary for ingress and egress to the reserved area; Phase I archeological survey shall be completed, followed by appropriate mitigation measures, as directed by Planning staff, prior to issuance of a grading permit; The special permit shall be void upon notice by the Board of Supervisors that a road design plan which conflicts with this use has been approved by VDOT encompassing this property; The use of the building shall be limited to restrooms, equipment storage and concession counter; The concession counter shall be open only during use of the soccer fields; and A tot lot shall be provided. Mr. Davis said action now needs to be taken on SP-98-22 relating to the flood plain. The staff is recommending the same conditions for this special use permit. Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve SP-98-22 subject to the same fourteen conditions of SP-98-18. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 22) 000237 (The conditions of approval are set out in full below:) 80 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. No exterior lighting shall be installed; No loudspeakers or public address system shall be permitted; No portion of any field shall be located closer than seventy-five (75) feet to any lot line; Compliance with the provisions of Section 5.1.16; Entrance to the site shall be gated to prevent use of the site after hours and during flood events; The final site plan shall reflect any changes to the floodplain and floodway limits, and the applicant must provide computations supporting any such changes, as well as copies of the correspondence demonstrating approval by FEMA; Water quality measures shall be provided to achieve water quality at least equivalent to pre-development conditions, subject to the approval of the Water Resources Manager; Route 643, Polo Grounds Road shall be upgraded with a minimum of 1.5 inches of SM-2A from Route 29 to the entrance of the soccer fields. This work shall be completed prior to the applicant making use of both SP-98-18/SP-98-22 [Soccer Fields] and SP-90-35 [Church]. The applicant may make use of one of the special use permits without the need to upgrade Route 643, Polo Grounds Roads; The owner shall reserve a one hundred (100) foot wide strip of land the length of the property abutting the northern side of the Rivanna River for the Rivanna Greenway. The width of the reserved area shall be measured from the edge of the Rivanna River at its normal flow level. When the County decides to establish a public area or park, including canoe access, within the reserved area, upon the request of the County, the owner shall dedicate the reserved area to the County and such property necessary for ingress and egress to the reserved area; Phase I archeological survey shall be completed, followed by appropriate mitigation measures, as directed by Planning staff, prior to issuance of a grading permit; The special permit shall be void upon notice by the Board of Supervisors that a road design plan which conflicts with this use has been approved by VDOT encompassing this property; The use of the building shall be limited to restrooms, equipment storage and concession counter; The concession counter shall be open only during use of the soccer fields; and A tot lot shall be provided. Mr. Davis explained that since the Planning Commission denied the preli- minary site plan, this Board will need to approve the site plan with a condition that a tot lot be added for approval with the final site plan. Motion was offered by Ms. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve SDP-98-055 subject to the four conditions of staff and a condition #5 - ~ A tot lot shall be provided on the final site plan" Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. (The conditions of approval are set out in full below:) Engineering Department approval to include: a. Approval of an Erosion Control Plan; and b. Approval of stormwater management BMP plans. This will include receipt of a completed facilities maintenance agreement. Health Department approval; Building Code and Zoning Services approval to include: a. Provision of one van-accessible barrier-free parking space with its adjacent access aisle and accessible route to the building entrance, at the storage and restrooms building. Planning Department approval to include: a. Landscape plan; and b. Notation to insure compliance with conditions of SP-98-18 and SP-98-22; and September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 23) 0002.,38 c. A tot lot shall be provided on the final site plan. Motion was offered by Ms. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to deny the jurisdictional area boundary request to add sewer service to Tax Map 46, Parcels 22 and 22C. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. None. Mr. Marshall. (The Board recessed at 9:00 p.m., and reconvened at 9:10 p.m.) Agenda Item No. 10. SP-98-38. Klm Rogers (Sign #50). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to construct professional offices on 0.794 acs. Loc on E sd of Hydraulic Rd (Rt 743) S of its inter w/Rio Road E (Rt 631). Znd R-10. TM61,P13A. Rio Dist. (This site is located in a designated growth area.) (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 24 and August 31, 1998). Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the Clerk's office and a permanent part of the record. He noted that this is a request to locate a maximum 8,000 square foot, two-story professional office building and approximately 24 parking spaces on a triangular shaped parcel which currently contains an abandoned gas station. This property is located on the east side of Hydraulic Road (Route 743) just south of its intersection with Rio Road West (Route 631). He pointed out that this property is less than an acre in size, and it is adjacent to Townwood townhouses and Garden Court townhouses. It is in an urban area of the County designated for urban density residential, and while this would sacrifice residential infill opportunities, there are two justifications for the proposal. The first relates to the former commercial use of the property, and the second involves the shape and dimensions of the parcel, which may be more conducive to an office rather than a residential use. He commented that the objectionable aspects are factors which could reasonably be anticipated to disrupt a residential atmosphere. However, the staff does not think the proposed office use will be of substantial detriment to adjacent property with proper screening and buffering. The issue seems to be the width of the setback/buffer from abutting residential properties to provide screening from the parking lot. He went on to say the staff feels that adequate area should be provided to allow for the landscape buffer, and there are existing trees along both property lines, although the trees adjacent to Garden Court are more substantial. The staff is recommending a minimum of 25 feet to be maintained along both property lines and, in addition, a fence would be placed between the parking lot and the Townwood units. He noted that there is an existing fence along the Garden Court property line. Mr. Cilimberg said the staff recommends approval of the request with three conditions. The Planning Commission has also recommended unanimously approval, but modified the staff's recommended conditions. First, the Commission recommended that a 15 foot buffer would be adequate because there is an opportunity within 15 feet to preserve existing vegetation as well as provide for additional screening. Secondly, the Commission changed Condition Number Three to indicate that the building should be no more than two stories in height, but did not make any reference to the design within the character of the area. He explained that the Commission discussed hours of operation for the offices, but decided not include this as a fourth condition. Mr. Bowerman inquired about this fourth condition. Mr. Cilimberg responded that Commission members discussed the possibility of the office use to hours of operation, but they did not include this as a condition. Mr. Martin asked the applicant for comments. Mr. James A. Morris stated that he and Ken Rogers are partners in business, and they hope to build an office building to accommodate their businesses. He noted that Ken Rogers has had an insurance and real estate business in this area for over 30 years and he, personally, has been in the area for over 20 years. Mr. Morris explained that he runs the administrative offices of a trucking company that is actually located in Tidewater. He also September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 24) 002 9 has worked with Mr. Rogers in real estate. The plan is for Mr. Rogers' son- in-law, who is associated with Kennedy and Associates Appraisal Group, to also have offices in the building. There could possibly be one other person's office in the building, such as an attorney, whose work would be complementary to the types of things they do. He added that most of their activities are fairly specific. He said Mr. Rogers' last project was an apartment complex in North Carolina, so most of the things they actually do are out of the area, but they want to maintain their administrative offices here. He then mentioned the 15-foot buffer which the Commission approved. The current site plan shows one-third of the total parcel in buffer, but if the project adheres to staff's recommendation, it would require that 50 percent of the parcel be included in buffer. This is because of the unique shape of the parcel. He pointed out that the parcel is currently zoned R-10, which would allow for a much denser use than he and his partner are requesting. He next mentioned that one of the things the Commission asked for is a concept of how the building will look. He said architects prepared such a concept, and he passed around a drawing to the Supervisors. He wants the parcel to be as harmonious as possible with the neighborhood. He noted that the parcel has been an eyesore for most of the time he has lived in Albemarle County, but he hopes to make it look better. He believes they can live with all the condi- tions recommended by the Commission, but he did argue against the nine to five office hours, since he has been known to work later in the evening. However, there are no customers coming in, so there would not be any traffic related to the customers. He said it would just be somebody working late in the office. Board members had no questions for Mr. Morris, so Mr. Martin opened the public hearing for SP-98-38. No one came forward to speak, so Mr. Martin closed the public hearing. Mr. Bowerman mentioned Jan Sprinkle's, Chief of Zoning Administration, letter of July 29, 1998 which indicates that she thinks the 20 foot undisturbed buffer would also be difficult on this site and suggested further measures to be incorporated into the condition such as opaque screening between the building and Townwood. Mr. Bowerman said he would like to be able to encourage infill that is consistent with what County officials desire without burdening the developer with unnecessary costs. He thinks the 15-foot buffer is reasonable, and he interprets Ms. Sprinkle's remarks in her letter to indicate the same thing. Ms. Sprinkle concurred that this is correct. Ms. Thomas commented that the applicant, during the Commission meeting, thought that it was probably only 15 feet to the tree line where the thicker trees are located. She has been to the site, paced it off, and she agrees. Mr. Bowerman noted that if oak trees are being used as a buffer, there will be no buffer in the wintertime. However, if the right plantings are used, there can be a buffer both winter and summer. He said an opaque fence also works well. He remarked that sometimes it is better to clear out what is there, and sometimes it is better to leave what is already planted, but he thinks it depends on the individual site. Ms. Thomas wondered if, when a condition states that a buffer strip is to be maintained, it really means that it will be maintained both winter and summer. Ms. Humphris concurred that this. is what the condition is stating. She also referred to Ms. Sprinkle's letter of July 29, 1998 where she mentioned that the applicant indicated his intention for the building to resemble the surrounding single family homes. She said Ms. Sprinkle stated in her letter that this should be a condition. Ms. Humphris then asked Mr. Morris and Mr. Rogers if the Supervisors can consider that the drawing will in fact resemble the actual building Mr. Morris answered that the style of the drawing is very similar to the plan, although they are not going to have a truss roof. The drawing does not resemble brick, but they would like to have a brick building. Ms. Humphris inquired if Ms. Sprinkle thinks this should be a condition. Ms. Sprinkle answered affirmatively. She suggested that the wording of the condition state that the project shall be in general conformance with the concept submitted by the applicant. Mr. Bowerman agreed that the word, "general," should be used. He explained that the Supervisors want to allow flexibility. Yet, the resemblance to a two-story house is what is desired. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 25) 000240 At this time, motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Ms. Humphris, to approve SP-98-38 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission, with a fourth condition: The building shall be in general accord with the residential structure depicted on the attached Exhibit A submitted (copy on file in the Clerk's office). Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. (The conditions of approval are set out in full below:) A buffer strip, a minimum fifteen (15) feet in width shall be maintained along both abutting property, lines, with landscaping and screening to be approved with the site plan in accordance with Section 32.7.9. The buffer strip abutting Garden Court shall be undisturbed, with existing trees within the buffer preserved and incorporated into the landscape plan. A six (6) foot high opaque fence shall be placed between the parking lot and the Townwood units; All exterior lighting shall be full cutoff lununaires if the lamps emit 3,000 or more lumens; The building shall be no more than two (2) stories in height; and The building shall be in general accord with the residential structure depicted on the attached ~Exhibit A" (on file in the Clerk's office), submitted by Jim Morris at the Board of Supervisors meeting on September 9, 1998. Agenda Item No. 11. SP-98-33. International Cold Storage (Sign #13). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to bring existing assembly of modular bldg units use into conformance w/zoning & to allow bldg & storage area expansion. 8.4 acs loc 0.1 mls W of Rt 29 on Heards Mountain Rd. Znd LI. TM109,P33. Scotts- ville Dist. (This site is not located in a designated growth area.) (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 24 and August 31, 1998.) Mr. Cilimber9 summarized the staff's report which is on file in the Clerk's office and a permanent part of the record. The International Cold Storage (ICS) assembles walk-in refrigeration units, and currently its lighting, wiring and testing work is conducted outdoors. ICS proposes building an expansion to house this portion of the operation, as well as an increase for the outdoor storage of finished goods. ICS is petitioning the Board to issue a special use permit to bring the existing assembly of modular building units use into conformance with the Zoning Ordinance and to allow building and storage area expansion. He discussed four factors which he said were favorable to the request, as well as two which were identified by staff as unfavorable. The staff has recommended approval of this request with five conditions. The Planning Commission has also recommended approval, but added a sixth condition regarding the shielding of lighting. Mr. Bowerman asked if the shielding of lighting will become a common condition now. Mr. Cilimberg responded that this activity would fall under the ordinance requirements, and he does not think it is absolutely necessary. Mr. Davis noted that the condition is more restrictive than the Lighting Ordinance. Ms. Thomas said it might be appropriate in this situation. There were no further questions from Board members, so Mr. Martin asked the applicant for comments. Mr. Gifford Childs, Operations Manager for ICS, stated that ICS has been operating in Covesville for 23 years making refrigerated storage buildings. It is a very clean, nonpolluting business and provides jobs for 80 employees. ICS has a nationwide reputation for its products in the food service industry, and it has a very good reputation locally as a good corporate citizen. He stated that his company loves Albemarle County, as well as Covesville, and company officials would like to continue their operation there. The process of trying to get a building permit began last February, and since that time, there has been the opportunity to talk to a lot of County employees and residents. He has very good support for the plans, and he shares the concerns for maintaining the rural character of Covesville. It is a unique community, and it is a unique site for a manufacturing location. There is quite a history associated with the community, and he would like to maintain it. September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 26) 000;g41 He added that it is his company's desire to meet all of the County requirements and recommended actions in the report, and he wants to work with any community citizens with their concerns, so the net result of this project will be a positive end result for everybody. The plan is for a small addition. Currently the storage buildings are being finished outside, the testing quality control inspection is being done outside, and it is desirable to enclose this operation. This would improve the working conditions for employees, and it would also be a significant improvement for the community. He pointed out that it will reduce the outdoor lighting that is needed when employees are working at night, and it will reduce the noise. It is also felt it would improve the appearance of the site. the would like to expand the company's finished goods inventory area that is basically just a paved lot where the finished products are stored. His company likes to build inventory in the winter, which is characteristic of this type of business, and it is a seasonal business. In the summer, enough products are sold that 90 people need to be employed, and in the winter, products are sold at a rate requiring approximately 40 people. He added that it is impossible to manage a business these days that way, so he would like to be able to continue to store products outside. He pointed out that originally the plan for a storage lot was for 1999 or 2000. However, this project has taken quite a bit of additional time, and company representatives encouraged public hearings as a part of the process, so the community would be fully aware of the plans even for the future. He said 1999 is coming quickly, so his company will probably want to start on this part of the project, too, if the Supervisors approve it. He wants to avoid any future delays, and he wants to be fully open with the community. He commented that he thinks the Planners have done an excellent job with their report and the presentation. He does not have anything to add, and he agrees with all of the recommended actions. He remarked that he and the ICS employees, as well as the majority of the community residents with whom he has spoken, will appreciate the Board of Supervisors' approval of the plan. Ms. Thomas noted that a business such as this one in a rural area is contrary to the County's Comprehensive Plan, but one of the reasons people often say it is good to have an employer such as this in the rural area, is that people who live in the rural area have a place to work and do not have to drive to Charlottesville or Route 29 North. She then asked if Mr. Childs can report any information as to where the ICS employees live. She inquired if they, in fact, come from nearby. Mr. Childs replied that there used to be an employee who came from Greene County, but he recently retired. He noted that one employee drives all the way from Staunton, but the majority of the employees are from the Charlottesville/Albemarle area. He said his business is in the very southern part of Albemarle County, so some employment is also drawn from Nelson County. At this time, Mr. Martin opened the public hearing for SP-98-33. No one came forward to speak, so Mr. Martin closed the public baring. Ms. Thomas noted that this request falls within the area next to her district, and since Mr. Marshall is not present, she will move approval of SP-98-33, subject to the six conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. (The conditions of approval are set out in full below:) 2 o Compliance with Section 32.7.9, Screening, of the Zoning Ordinance, to include extension of proposed screening fence across new storage area adjacent to Route. 633; Engineering Department approval of engineer's report as required by Section 4.14, Performance Standards, of the Zoning Ordinance; Virginia Department of Transportation approval of entrance upgrade to minimum commercial entrance standards; Building expansion and outdoor storage area expansion limited to those areas depicted on site plan prepared by Roudabush, Gale & Associates, revised July 8, 1998; September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 27) O00Z4Z 5o Only shipping/storage activities to be conducted outdoors; and All outdoor lighting shall be fully shielded. Agenda Item No. 12. ZMA-98-02. Airport Road Office Complex (Signs #84&85) .... ~ ........... rc~cst ............. ~ ......... (D~FER TO OCTOBER 14, 1998.) Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Ms. Humphris, to defer ZMA-98-02 until October 14, 1998. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. None. Mr. Marshall. Agenda Item No. 13. PUBLIC HEARING on an ordinance to amend and reenact Chapter 3, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, of The Code of The County of Albemarle, Virginia: Item No. 13a. §3-210, Carter's Bridge Agricultural/Forestal District, to continue the District of approx 12,007.893 acs for 10 years. Loc near Carter's Bridge, Blenheim, Woodridge & Keene. Znd RA. Scottsville Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 24 and August 31, 1998.) Item No. 13b. §3-221, Lanark Agricultural/Forestal District, to continue the District of approx 5,633.522 acs for 10 years. Loc near Carter Mountain, Overton & along Rt 627. Znd RA. Scottsville Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 24 and August 31, 1998.) Item No. 13c. §3-224, Panorama Agricultural/Forestal District, to continue the District of approx 1,107.422 acs for 10 years. Loc to the W of Rt 29N along the Rivanna River & Rt 661. Znd RA. Jack Jouett & Rio Dists. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 24 and August 31, 1998.) Item No. 13d. §3-213, Free Union Agricultural/Forestal District, to continue the District of approx 2,389.82 acs for 10 years. Loc near Free Union, Gibson Mountain & along Rts 671,601 & 687. Znd RA. White Hall Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 24 and August 31, 1998.) Mr. Cilimberg said there are four agricultural/forestal districts that are up for renewal, and they are Carter's Bridge, Lanark, Panorama and Free Union. He noted that at the Planning Commission meeting there were some changes in terms of the properties that are going to continue and those that have requested to withdraw. He then referred to the Carter's Bridge District where the owners of 3,002 acres are requesting withdrawal which would leave a continuance of just over 9,000 acres in that district. Ms. Thomas asked why Mount Pleasant Farm is withdrawing from the district. Mr. Cilimberg replied that he has asked this question, but did not get an answer. He said Ms. Scala, who works with these districts, has not had the opportunity to talk to anyone with this particular ownership. Mr. Cilimberg next discussed the Lanark District which has one Change. He stated that approximately two acres, which has become the Spring Hill Baptist Church property, are withdrawing from the district. In the Panorama District, there is a request for the Panorama Farms and the Murrays to withdraw approximately 841 acres from the District, which will leave about 265 acres in this District. The assumption is that they are still interested in a possible special use permit on the farm for some type of operations, such as bike paths. He then referred to the Free Union District and the request from two property owners for not continuing a little over 1,000 acres which will leave approximately 1,380 acres in this District. He said all of these would be September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 28) 000Z43 continued for approximately ten years. He noted that Mr. Davis has provided a draft of the ordinance which covers the properties still included in the districts, and their time period of continuance. There were no questions for Mr. Cilimberg from Board members, so Mr. Martin opened the public hearing. Ms. Katie Hobbs, a resident of Albemarle County, said she is alarmed that she is the only speaker. She is further alarmed that her district is losing such a large amount of acreage. She thinks the time for the Board of Supervisors to give these people more incentives and more reasons to stay in these districts is imperative. However, she thinks the time to do this was yesterday. No one else came forward to speak, so Mr. Martin closed the public hearing. Ms. Thomas commented that she does not think there is a question as to whether or not the Supervisors will adopt the ordinance. She read the note of the Agricultural/Forestal District Review Committee, and she recalled that Mr. Perkins is on the Committee, and he was present at that meeting. She has been trying to think how more people could be enticed into these districts. She said many people are in the districts because of the program which existed some years ago, but it does not exist anymore. It is in the Comprehensive Plan that special attention is supposed to be given to getting people into these districts. She remarked that the Supervisors are always asking far too much of the staff, but she wondered if a letter could be sent to people who are in the land use value taxation program, because they are already reaping the benefits. She does not know how the people could be enticed except for such things as partial protection, that an agricultural/forestal district can give from cellular towers and road projects. She does not know precisely how this would work, so she would not want to word the letter tonight. This is the only idea she has been able to come up with, and she wondered if the letter could go out in the tax bills. She emphasized that something needs to be done to get more people aware of and interested in the agricultural/ forestal districts. Mr. Bowerman commented that he thinks Ms. Hobbs is absolutely correct. He does not think a letter will do any good, but he thinks the DISC is going to have strategies and suggestions about ways that make urban areas more attractive and actually easier and less costly in which to build. There need to be other strategies to make it more difficult to build in a rural area and along with that there have to be incentives. He thinks this is an overall approach to what County officials are trying to do. He went on to say that a requirement could be added that any house built in the rural area, without public water availability, has to have a sprinkler system installed. There is an affordability question to deal with, but rural areas are supposed to receive less services, and that includes safety services. He said if every new house is constructed with a built-in sprinkler system, it raises the cost of the house and makes it less attractive to buy a less expensive lot. He emphasized that this encourages people to locate in an urban area. Mr. Martin stated that he understands Mr. Bowerman to be saying that County officials are going to discourage people from building a home in a rural area because they are going to make it more expensive for them to do it, and they are going to say it is because of safety reasons. Mr. Martin noted that no one has made an issue of fire safety, but sprinklers will be required, which will increase the price, and it will discourage people from building in rural areas. He does not think that is a good plan. Mr. Bowerman said the fact of the matter is that providing rural services to a disparate population outside of the rural areas is what is costing so much money. Mr. Martin stated that it amazes him how the Supervisors can say to people's faces that they favor affordable housing, but at the same time when the people are not looking, they can raise the price of a house just for the sake of it. Mr. Bowerman responded that it is a public safety concern because the house would have fire protection. The fire engines cannot get to these rural houses now, before they burn down. However, it is fine, if Mr. Martin wants to take this attitude toward his remarks. Mr. Martin commented that he has a home sitting' on an acre of property with no sprinkler system. Mr. Bowerman pointed out that Mr. Martin has public water. Mr. Martin agreed that he has public water, but no sprinkler system. 000,?.,44 September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 29) Mr. Bowerman explained that Mr. Martin would not have to have a sprinkler system because he can connect to public water. Mr. Martin stated that suppose he lived one mile further down the road, and he did not have public water. Mr. Bowerman said this would be an issue. Mr. Martin remarked that it would be different if fire department representatives, on their own without any encouragement from anyone else, came to the Supervisors indicating that they had a real problem. If they indicated they have had a certain number of fires last year, and the houses that burned down were not on public water, he could understand this suggestion, because the Supervisors would then be addressing something that has been presented as an issue. He cannot support the Supervisors having people join the agricul- tural districts in the context of having encouragements for them to join, but on the other side, the Supervisors will have to discourage certain things by requiring sprinkler systems. This is not why he came on this Board. He emphasized that he became a Supervisor to do the opposite. Mr. Perkins commented that County officials have done a lot to encourage people to build in the growth areas, and the numbers reflect this. On the other hand, there have been things to discourage people from building in rural areas. He does not think this can be accomplished through monetary avenues. Mr. Bowerman asked why should it be more expensive for people to build in the urban areas by requiring proffers that cost more to develop when that is the area County officials want growth to occur. The cost becomes so high, that the person might as well go to a 20-lot subdivision in the rural area. He asked how this helps the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Martin responded that he thinks this approach would make a good discussion. Mr. Bowerman stated that people should not be penalized because the County is providing them services. Mr. Martin agreed. He said, though, that he thinks the Board of Supervisors' objective should be to encourage growth in the development areas, and he has no problem with limiting growth in rural areas. However, he does not like using methods where County officials say one thing but have a completely different objective. Mr. Bowerman inquired why gravel roads are being paved in the rural area. Mr. Perkins answered that it is because there are agricultural and forestal products being moved from these areas, and the vehicles hauling them need good roads. Mr. Bowerman noted that this is not why the roads are paved. They are paved according to vehicle counts and the number of residents. He stated that it is just the opposite from what County officials are trying to get accomplished. All he is suggesting is that if the whole picture is considered, there may be different ways to accomplish the desired effect, that are more effective. Mr. Martin replied that he could agree with this statement. Mr. Perkins pointed out that there are people who have lived in these areas for a very long time, and he asked if this means they would be denied a paved road. These people pay the same gasoline taxes that everybody else pays. Mr. Bowerman commented that the Supervisors can work to make a policy make sense and be attractive for developers, as well as for people to build affordable homes, with incentives. Along with the incentives if the same number of lots are kept in the rural areas and it is cheaper to build there, it becomes a problem. He pointed out also that there is a land use program in the County which is just the reverse. At this time, Mr. Bowerman moved approval of an ordinance to amend and reenact Chapter 3, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, of the Code of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, which is outlined in the draft of September 9, 1998. Ms. Humphris seconded the motion. She went on to say there was a message on her machine which came in some time today from a resident of Ivy Farms Subdivision. This lady said in light of the burning of a house in that area, the neighborhood wanted to get public water extended to Ivy Farms Subdivision. She will have to tell this lady that the neighborhood is in a rural area, as well as in the watershed, and it cannot be done. She added that this will be coming up more and more, but she does not know what can be done. She wondered if the level of advertising should be raised so people will have a better understanding when they buy in a rural area. She said people do not want to understand these things, and they always think if they can go to a higher authority surely they can get something done one way or September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 30) 000245 another. Roll was then called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. (The adopted ordinance is set out below:) ORDINANCE NO. 98-3(1) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 3, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS, ARTICLE II, DISTRICTS OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 3, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, Article II, Districts of Statewide Significance, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 3-210, Carter's Bridge Agricultural and Forestal District; section 3-213, Free Union Agricultural and Forestal District; section 3-221, Lanark Agricultural and Forestal District and section 3-224, Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District, as follows: Sec. 3-210 Carter's Bridge Agricultural and Forestal District. The district known as the "Carter's Bridge Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 101, parcels 55A, 60; tax map 102, parcels 17A, 17B, 17B1, lTD, 18, 19, 19A, 19C, 20B; tax map 112, parcels 3, 15, 16, 16C, 16D, 16E, 16F, 17, 18H, 20, 21, 33A, and 37D; tax map 113, parcels 1, iA, 6A, 11, llA; tax map 114, parcels 25A, 30, 51, 55, 56, 69, 70; tax map 115, parcel 10; tax map 122, parcels 4, 4A, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 12N, 33, 33A, 36; tax map 124, parcel 11. This district, created on April 20, 1988 for not more than ten years and last reviewed on September 9, 1998, shall next be reviewed prior to April 20, 2008. (Code 1988, § 2.1-4(j); Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 98-3(1), 9-9-98) Sec. 3-213 Free Union Agricultural and Forestal District. The district known as the "Free Union Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 7, parcels 6, 7, 8A, 9, 9A, 9B, 9B1, 9C; tax map 16, parcels 4B, 4C, 13A, 13D, 15A, 15A3, 15C, 15E, 15G, 16B, 17, 26, 30B, 36, 37, 38, 39, 52B1, 52B2, 54; tax map 17, parcels 8, 8B, 8C, 17C, 18H, 20A2, 22; tax map 29, parcel iH (part). This district, created on September 21, 1988 for not more than 10 years and last reviewed on September 9, 1998, shall be next reviewed prior to September 21, 2008. (Code 1988, § 2.1-4(m); Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 98-3(1), 9-9-98) Sec. 3-221 Lanark Agricultural and Forestal District. The district known as the "Lanark Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 90B, parcel A-il; tax map 91, parcels 21, 2lA, 2lB, 31; tax map 92, parcels 64, 64A; tax map 102, parcels 33, 35B, 37, 40, 40A, 40B; tax map 103, parcels 1, IA, lB, lC, iD, 1E, iF, 1G, iH, 1J, 1K, 1L, 1M, 2A, 3, 5, 9, 10, 10A, 10B, 10C, 10D, 43. This district, created on April 20, 1988 for not more than 10 years and last reviewed on September 9, 1998, shall next be reviewed prior to April 20, 2008. (Code 1988, § 2.1-4(k); Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 98-3(1), 9-9-98) 000246 September 9, 1998 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 31) Sec. 3-224 Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District. The district known as the "Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 44, parcels 9A, 9C, 12, 12Q, 12X, 12Y, 12Z; tax map 45A, section 1, parcel 27. This district, created on April 20, 1988 for not more than 10 years and last reviewed on September 9, 1998, shall next be reviewed prior to April 20, 2008. (6-14-95; Code 1988, § 2.1-4(1); Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 98-3 (1), 9-9-98) Agenda Item No. 14. Approval of Minutes: March 13(A), 1995; September 4 and December 4, 1996; February 19, 1997; and June 10, 1998. Mr. Bowerman had read February 19, 1997, and found them to be in order with one correction. Ms. Thomas had read December 4, 1996, pages 1-20, and found them to be in order with one small change. She had also read June 10, 1998, pages 21 - end, and found them to be order with one small change. Mr. Bowerman moved approval of the minutes as read, seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Ms. Humphris. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Marshall. Agenda Item No. 15. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Ms. Thomas mentioned the memo from Bruce Crow, Assistant Fire Marshall, regarding the Ivy Landfill fire. There have been lots of questions circu- lating as to the origin and contents of the fire. She thinks this is a pretty concise memo, but she has a question about how well the Landfill Management had informed the various emergency responders about the process to be followed. There was a lot of water taken right from the pond on the Landfill, but apparently other trucks went to a nearby subdivision, which led folks to think that the people involved did not know what they were doing. She tends to suspect people knew what they were doing, but she would like to make sure that there is a good emergency response plan, and that it is shared with the fire departments. She noted that the North Garden Fire Department, the Crozet Fire Department and a truck from Charlottesville responded. She observed the fire for quite some time, and she was really impressed with the operators of the heavy equipment. She stated that one operator was working in the midst of the fire moving dirt to cover up the fire. If there is a way for the Supervisors to voice their appreciation, she thinks it would be appropriate. Mr. Martin said he would pass this along. Agenda Item No. 16. Adjourn. At 9:51 p.m., there being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was immediately adjourned. Approved by Board