Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-06-11June 11, 1997 (Regu]'ar Night Meeting) (Page 1) 000 .$2 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on June 11, 1997, at 7:00 p.m., Room 241, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Mrs. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: None. 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 7:03 p.m., by the Chairman, Mrs. Humphris. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public. Mr. Charles Trachta said last Tuesday night, the Planning Commission voted to deny Still Meadows (ZMA-97-01). At that meeting many residents asked that the land speculators be stopped from plundering Albemarle. It is the general consensus that land speculators would not be opposed if they worked within the County's zoning regulations. He believes that land speculators think they should be allowed to have these regulations changed at any time for their benefit, no matter how it affects the community or the whole County. There is no reason the County should change any zoning unless that change will provide for the greater good of the County. If a land speculator requests a rezoning from R-1 or R-2, he should be required to show how that change will benefit the County. He believes that for every acre of land the Board approves for rezoning, it should require the land speculator to down zone that same amount of land he owns from commercial or whatever the zoning to R-1 or R-2. This could be done through proffers. He thinks the County Attorney should be prepared to go to court and fight this issue. He is constantly hearing the buzz words "affordable housing", "the Comprehensive Plan" and "job opportunities". The County is still fighting the same battles it was fighting 20 years ago. He asked where in 20 years are the affordable houses the developers are always talking about and, unless someone works in the home building field, where are the jobs. The question that needs to be answered is "does the County really need this development?" The County cannot ban people from moving here, but it does not have to make it so easy for developers to bus them here. The County should only continue its growth at this rate when County schools can accept more children without becoming day care centers, when the police and safety forces can protect the citizens and provide the services they are entitled, when the County can guarantee water to every citizen, when a five minute commute does not turn into one-half hour ride and when infrastructure is up to par. Mr. Trachta said next year the Board will be forced to raise property taxes or by some other manner need to raise more revenue to pay for the basic services. Since it is the public who pays the bills and taxes, the public should have a say in how its money is spent. New developments costs the County money; money which it does not have. He asked the Board to stop the unwanted spending. Ms. Deborah Wyatt said she is present to ask the Board to reconsider and not pass the resolution concerning the legal fees for George Knight (Item 5.2 on the consent agenda). George Knight served the County in law enforce- ment for over 20 years with never a blemish in his entire career. She provided to the Board a copy of a letter written by Sheriff Hawkins, on Mr. Knight's behalf, nominating him for Deputy of the Year because of his service to the County. Mr. Knight would have retired from the County, if it had not been for the events that unfolded last October when he was charged. Mr. Knight was tried for aiding and abetting another and for conspiring with another. This was a fairly unique case. She said she would provide a copy of her time tickets to Mr. Davis for his review. She only charged her regular June 11, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 2) 000:1.53 hourly rate; she did not increase the rate for any contingency. She recog- nizes that relatively speaking, this is a lot of money, but the trial lasted more than 50 hours. It was necessary for her to expend these hours to defend Mr. Knight's honor. She felt she was also somewhat defending Albemarle County because this charge was instigated because a certain individual, while in the Sheriff's office, threatened to sue Albemarle County and these people. Ms. Wyatt said at worst, this was poor judgement on the part of Mr. Knight and the other officers involved, not the kind of thing she thinks her client should have lost his career over. Because this is an unusual case, she thinks it would be appropriate for the Board to reconsider and pay the attorney fees so that none of it has to come from Mr. Knight's pockets. Mr. Steve Rosenfield said he represents George Swingler. Mr. Rosenfield said these were historic cases to Central Virginia. Never before has law enforcement officers in Central Virginia been charged with a felony offense. Also, never before has such a criminal trial lasted five days. This caused the lawyers to do an incredible amount of work, well above what is normally required in an embezzlement case. The cases were complex, complicated and confusing. He told the Board about the number of witnesses subpoenaed, the time and all the preparation that went into preparing for the cases by the Commonwealth and the attorneys. The first case, George Knight, took the most time. Each subsequent case took less than one-half the time of the previous case. He hopes Board members believe that these three loyal and dedicated law enforcement officers should be compensated for the expenses they incurred to defend themselves from these wrongful charges. Mr. Davis said today he had telephone conversations with Mr. Steve Deaton and Mr. Rosenfield and they have asked, with the concurrence of Ms. Wyatt, that the Board consider all of these matters after they have an opportunity to meet with him next Tuesday, and further explain their position. He has agreed that he is available for a meeting with them, but the ultimate decision would be the Board of Supervisors as to whether or not it wanted to go forward with the denial of Mr. Knight's claim tonight or wait until after that meeting. Mr. Rosenfield submitted his claim today; but that is not before the Board at this time. Mr. Deaton has not yet submitted his claim on behalf of his client. If the Board wants to it can go forward with the resolution on Mr. Knight, but he sees no problem with deferring that decision until all the matters are before the Board for a decision at one time. Mr. Martin asked if this is an appropriate issue for executive session. Mr. Davis replied, ~yes". Mr. Martin said he would like to pull Item 5.2 and discuss it during the executive session. Board members concurred. Mr. Davis suggested that, if it is the pleasure of the Board, this item be discussed during executive session, but that it take action at the June 18th Board meeting. Board members concurred. Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to approve Item 5.1, to defer Item 5.2 until June 18th, and to accept the remaining items on the consent agenda as information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. None. Item No. 5.1. Appropriation: Emergency Communications Center, $48,235 (Forms #96077 and #96078). The Executive Summary states that based on an Attorney General's opinion, it has been determined that certain adjustments need to be made in the funding of the Emergency Communications Center. This opinion concluded that the construction of the planned ECC building could not be funded with Egll surcharge funds, however, a large portion of the operating cost can be funded from the surcharge. In addition, the current year's budget failed to include the full cost of the E911 phone charges which will require additional funding in the amount of $48,235 to be shared by the City and County. The net result of these adjustments and additional funding will require the allocation of an additional $12,094.90 in County funds. This amount can be funded from the General Fund Balance. Staff recommends approval of the June 11, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) 000'1 $4 adjustments and additional funding as detailed on appropriation forms 96077 and 96078. The Board adopted the following resolution of appropriation by the above shown vote: FISCAL YEAR: 1996/97 NUMBER: 96077 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL FUND: ECC PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION CENTER. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1410031040110000 1410031040210000 1410031040221000 1410031040241000 1410031040270000 1410031040520300 SALARIES-REGULAR FICA VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYS. VRS GROUP LIFE INSURANCE WORKER'S COMPENSATION TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOTAL ($12,550 00) (1,568 00) (1,836 00) (20 00) 44 00 64,165 00 $48,235.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2410016000160502 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE $20,259.00 2410016000160503 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE 27,976.00 TOTAL $48,235.00 FISCAL YEAR: 1996/97 NUMBER: 96078 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL FUND: ECC/CIP/GEN'L PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ADJUSTMENT OF FUNDING FOR EMERGENCY COMMUNICA TION CENTER. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1410131042312703 E-911 LOCATOR SYSTEM $159,032.23 1410131042930000 TRANSFER TO G/F 660,078.00 1410131042950085 E-911 JOINT CITY/COUNTY 530,343.12 1901031040312703 1901031040950085 E-911 LOCATOR SYSTEM E-911 JOINT CITY/COUNTY (159,032.23) (530,343.12) 1100031040700001 1100031040930010 EMERGENCY COMM. CENTER 155,108.00 ECC-TR3~NSFER TO CIP 339,978.90 TOTAL $1,155,164.90 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2410112000120605 E-911 SURCHARGE $600,000.00 2410115000150101 INTEREST ON BA/~K ACCOUNTS 70,000.00 2410151000510100 FUlkrD BALANCE 679,453.35 2901051000512023 2901051000512004 TR3~NS FROM E-911 TRANSFER FROM GEN'L FUND (1,029,354.25) 339,978.90 2100019000190211 2100019000190212 2100019000190230 2100051000510100 RECOVERED COST-E911-ENGINEERING RECOVERED COST-E911-PLANNING RECOVERED COST-E911-OPERATIONS GENERAL FUND BALANCE TOTAL 1,846.00 7,417.00 473,729.00 12,094.90 $1,155,164.90 Item No. 5.2. Resolution to Deny Claim for Legal Fees, George Knight. By the above recorded vote, the Board deferred action on this item until June 18, 1997. June 11, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 4) Item No. 5.3. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for May 27, 1997, was received for information. Item No. 5.4. April, 1997 Financial Report, was received for informa- tion. Item No. 5.5. Comparative Report of Local Government Revenues and Expenditures, for the year ended June 30, 1996, as prepared by the Auditor of Public Accounts, was received for information. Agenda Item No. 6. SP-97-7. James W & Edith M Love (Sign #65). Public Hearing on a request to display vehicles for sale on parcel currently used for mobile radio installation & repair business. Portion of pcl adj to Avon St Ext znd HC; rear portion znd RA. Located on W sd of Avon St Ext (Rt 742) N of 1-64 w/in EC Dist. TM77, Pll. (Property recom for Industrial Service in Urban Neighborhood 4 in Comp Plan.) Scottsville Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on May 26 and June 2, 1997.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the Clerk's office and a permanent part of the record. The Architectural Review Board has reviewed the request and based on the Entrance Corridor guidelines, do not have any objections to the request. The ARB has recommended conditions which are reflected in the staff's recommendation for approval. Based on the comments of the ARB, staff opinion is that this use is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the EC District. Staff recommends approval of SP-97-97 subject to two conditions. Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 27, 1997, unanimously recommended approval of SP-97-07 subject to the two condi- tions recommended by the staff and an additional third condition. Referring to the first condition, Mrs. Humphris did not that display of elevated vehicles were allowed for auto sales in the County. Mr. Cilimberg said this has consistently been a condition on special use permits. Mr. Tucker said staff could look into it. Mrs. Thomas asked if the second condition means the applicant cannot have vehicles displayed behind the building. Mr. Cilimberg said the intent is to limit the number of vehicles on the front side of the site. Mr. Cilimberg said there are other areas on the site visible from the Entrance Corridor that also do not allow for display of vehicles. At this time, the Chairman opened the public hearing. Mr. James Love, the applicant, said he has no additional information. He has no problem with the recommendations. He thinks his plans will make the site look nicer. They do have vehicles for service on the site that are in conjunction with the radio equipment business. There will be some vehicles around the site, but the ones for sale will be in the display area on the front. There being no other comments, the public hearing was closed. Motion was then offered by Mr. Marshall, seconded by Mr. Martin, to approve SP-97-07 subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. None. (The conditions of approval are set out below:) No elevated vehicle display; Vehicle sales and display shall be limited to a maximum of eleven (11) vehicles and only in the area designated on the applicant's sketch plan (Attachment D [copy on file]); June 11, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) 000156 3 o Submittal of a landscape plan which shall be acceptable to the agent and approved by the Architectural Review Board. Agenda Item No. 7. ZMA-96-25. River Heights Assoc Ltd (Sign ~25). , ............... ~ ..... , . cant requests deferral. Mrs. Humphris said the Board has received a request from the applicant to defer this petition. Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to defer ZMA-96-25 until September 17, 1997. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. None. Agenda Item No. 8. Approval of Minutes: February 12, 1997. Mrs. Humphris had read February 12, 1997, pages 1 - 13 (Item #10), and found them to be in order with some typographical errors. Mr. Bowerman had read February 12, 1997, pages 13 (Item #10) - end, and found them to be in order with one typographical error. Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to approve the minutes as read. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. None. Agenda Item No. 9. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Mrs. Thomas asked if anyone was interested in finding out if there had been comments from any of the persons/organizations listed in the flyer regarding the dog issue. No one expressed any interest. Mrs. Humphris noted that the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conserva- tion District has been named Virginia's Conservation Education District of the Year for 1997. Mrs. Humphris commented that once again this entire metropolitan area has been named the most livable area in the state. The area includes the counties of Albemarle and Fluvanna and the City of Charlottesville. Agenda Item No. 10. Executive Session: Legal Matters. At 7:37 p.m., motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, that the Board go into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A) of the Code of Virginia under subsection (1) to discuss personnel matters regarding a grievance; and under subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding specific legal matters relating to reversion, probable litigation relating to a law enforcement incident and probable litigation regarding claims for attorneys' fees, and a Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) decision. Mrs. Thomas seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: ~proved BOard Date Initials{~ June 11, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 6) AYES: Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 11. Certify Executive Session. At 9:35 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session. Mr. Bowerman offered motion, seconded by Mr. Martin, that the Board certify by a recorded vote that to the best of each Board member's knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the executive session were heard, discussed or considered in the executive session. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. None. Agenda Item No. 12. Adjourn. With no other business to come before the Board, the meeting was immediately adjourned.