1995-01-11January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting) 000349
(page 1)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on January 11, 1995, at 7:00 P.M., Room 7, County Office
Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Messrs.
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Charles S. Martin, 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.
Chairman, Mr. Walter F.
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 P.M., by the
Perkins.
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. There were no matters presented for discussion.
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mrs.
Humphris, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to approve Items 5.1 and 5.la and to accept
the remaining items for information. Roll was called, and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and Mrs.
Thomas.
NAYS: None.
Item 5.1. Borrowing resolution for purchase of election voting
machines. It was noted that on August 3, 1994, the Board directed staff to
procure financing for the purchase of electronic voting machines. The
machines were acquired from Sequoia Pacific Voting Equipment, Inc. and were
installed and used in the November, 1994 election. The County was recently
notified by Crestar Bank, the lending institution, that a borrowing resolution
is needed as part of the closing documents for this transaction.
(The following resolution was adopted by the vote set out above:)
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, The Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
in a regular meeting on the 3rd day of August, 1994, direct-
ed staff to procure financing for the purchase of electronic
voting machines; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
in a regular meeting on the llth day of January, 1995,
adopted the following:
BE IT RESOLVED, that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County
Executive, or Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance, is
authorized on behalf and in the name of the County of
Albemarle (the "County") (1) to release financial informa-
tion regarding the County; (2) to make application and
borrow from Crestar Bank (the "Bank") such sums of money and
on such terms as may be agreed upon between the Bank and
such authorized person or persons in connection with the
purchase of electronic voting machines; (3) to assign or
otherwise transfer and deliver to the Bank title to and
possession of the voting machines belonging to the County,
and to endorse or guarantee the same in the name of the
County all on such terms and conditions as may be agreed
upon by any such authorized persons and the Bank in connec-
tion with this transaction; (4) to make, execute and deliver
promissory notes or other obligations of the County, inclu-
ding, but not limited to, obligations under letters of
credit in form satisfactory to the Bank for any sums so ob-
tained in connectionwith this transaction; and (5) to
transact any other business with the Bank incidental to the
powers hereinabove granted in connection with this transac-
tion.
FURTHER, that this Resolution is in conformity with
the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia and that all
previous acts on behalf of the County as provided here are
approved and ratified.
Item 5.la. Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance,
Sheriff, Commonwealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk of the Circuit
000 $0
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 2 )
Court, for the month of December, 1994, were approved as presented, by the
vote set out above.
Item 5.2. Letter dated December 28, 1994, from Ms. Julie L. Vosmik,
Director, Division of Survey and Register, Department of Historic Resources,
addressed to Mr. Walter F. Perkins, Chairman, re: Longhouse, Albemarle
County, was received as information. Ms. Vosmik noted that the owner, Mr.
Robert W. Krogstad, has requested the Department to assist in deciding whether
to apply to have Longhouse nominated for the National Register and the
Virginia Landmarks Register.
Item 5.3. Letter dated December 29, 1994, from The Honorable Mitchell
Van Yahres, to Mr. Walter F. Perkins, Chairman, regarding the Governor's
proposal to eliminate the Business and Professional Occupation License (BPOL)
tax, was received as information. Mr. Van Yahres said he is a member of a
joint subcommittee studying the structure of this tax. He agrees with this
Board that if this tax is phased out, some other source of revenue, besides
increasing the real estate tax, should be provided to localities to make up
for the lost revenue. He will keep the Board informed of progress of the
model ordinance legislation.
Item 5.4. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for December 13, 1994,
was received as information.
Item 5.5. Memorandum dated January 9, 1995, from Mr. Patrick K.
Mullaney, Director of Parks and Recreation, to the Board of Supervisors
regarding the skateboard park, was received as information. He noted that on
January 3, 1995, City Council approved the use of property at Towe Park for
the stated purpose, subject to the following conditions:
1)
That there be a private fund-raising effort to construct the
skateboard park, without any public funding being necessary;
2)
That there be a concrete plan for the operations of the skateboard
park that includes how it will be supervised and a plan for
adequate private funding (of which some or all may be generated by
user fees) for those operating expenses including liability
insurance; and
3)
No construction work on the skateboard park can begin until an
appropriate legal agreement is developed between the City, County
and the Skateboard Association outlining the financial and operat-
ing requirements and how each will be met.
Mr. Mullaney suggested the Skateboard Association may decide whether it
is feasible for them to operate under the conditions approved by the City, and
if so, approach the County to seek approval of the use of Towe Park under
those conditions.
Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing on an Ordinance to amend and reenact
Chapter 6, etc. Elections, to change the name of the Charlottesville Magiste-
rial District to Rio Hill Magisterial District, to rename the Rio Hill
Precinct as the Agnor-Hurt Precinct and to rename the Berkeley Precinct as the
Commonwealth Precinct. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on December 26,
1994, and January 2, 1995.)
Mr. Tucker summarized the reason for this ordinance amendment.
Mr. Perkins opened the public hearing.
Ms. Joan Graves said it may be necessary to change the name of the Rio
Hill Precinct to Agnor-Hurt Precinct in order to have the Rio Hill name
available for the magisterial district, but the renaming of the Berkeley
Precinct to the Commonwealth Precinct is causing confusion. The renaming will
leave 55 houses with Commonwealth Drive addresses, and the part of Berkeley
subdivision being moved from the Berkeley Precinct will become part of the Rio
Hill Precinct. People are confused because they know where they live, and
think they should vote in the same place. She said renaming the Charlottes-
ville District as the Rio Hill District serves no constituency. She does not
understand why the County needs to honor the site of a skirmish which the
North lost in a war that both sides lost fighting, in part, for a way of life
that should never have happened. Now, this site is being honored by naming it
as a magisterial district. She said the Charlottesville District was named in
1870, and if the name Charlottesville needed to be changed, she suggested it
be changed to Rio District because that name would serve the larger constitu-
ency.
Mr. Cliff Anderson, Secretary of the County Electoral Board, favored the
name changes. He said the name Charlottesville should have been changed in
1888 when Charlottesville became a city, and then it would no longer have been
part of the magisterial district. He feels it is appropriate to commemorate
the Rio Hill skirmish. It is an historical event. He said the name change to
Agnor-Hurt is very appropriate. The Berkeley Precinct name change to Common-
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 3 )
wealth Precinct is also favorable. He said one reason
to identify the polling place; however, he dislikes na~
after something that might be changed. He believes tha
remain Commonwealth for the indefinite future. He strc
following name changes to the Board: the Charlottesvil
as the Rio Hill Magisterial District, the Rio Hill Prec
Precinct, and the Berkeley Precinct as the Commonwealth
Mrs. Thomas asked if other historical names were
proposed Commonwealth precinct. Mr. Anderson said no c
suggested. The only names considered were Turtle Creek
Thomas then asked if the Albemarle Historical Society c
committee were involved in the process. Mr. Anderson
There being no further comments, Mr. Perkins clo
Mr. Bowerman said during the past three or four y
various historical names for the Charlottesville distri
names would be perfect to everyone, and that the three
appropriate to eliminate any confusion about the distri
City of Charlottesville. Rio Hill is a historic place,
the district, and is an appropriate name. Agnor-Hurt,
called Rio Hill, is also appropriate because it is whez
place. He is satisfied with Commonwealth because it is
located, and that is not likely to change.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the Charlottesville District
Mill rather than Rio Hill due to all the things in the
the original mill. Mr. Bowerman said Rio Mill used to
general location where the reservoir dam is now located
mill was located. Mr. Martin suggested naming the dist
Bowerman said Rio would be acceptable. Mr. Bowerman as
another public hearing is necessary. Mr. Davis respor
hearing would not be necessary.
Mr. Marshall asked Mr. Martin if he had a reason
change. Mr. Martin said Ms. Graves made good basic poi
being named after a general that lost in a skirmish, b
part of history regardless of the outcome. Mr. Martin
000 5
[or naming precincts is
ing a polling place
t Commonwealth will
ngly recommended the
le Magisterial District
inct as the Agnor-Hurt
Precinct.
considered for the
ther names were
and Elder Care. Mrs.
r the Road Naming
aid "no".
ed the public hearing.
ears, he has thought of
ct. He said no set of
names presented were
ct being a part of the
is in the center of
for the precinct now
e voting will take
where the precinct is
could be named Rio
area being named after
have a bridge in the
and that is where the
rict just Rio. Mr.
ked Mr. Davis if
ded that another public
for suggesting a name
nts about the area
ir. Marshall said it was
said he does not think
io Hill as opposed to
there is a significant reason for naming the district ~
just Rio. Mr. Bowerman said Rio is perfectly acceptable to him, and he thinks
Rio would also be acceptable to the citizens of his district. Mrs. Humphris
suggested the district be named Rio. Mr. Marshall asked if everyone felt
comfortable with the name change because the name change would be permanent.
Mr. Martin said he feels it would be a reasonable compromise between the
people who are disagreeing. Ms. Humphris agreed with Hr. Martin. She said
many people might think the district is being named after the Rio Hill
Shopping Center. She said the name Rio is general, and it covers more
territory.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by ~
the following Ordinance to amend and reenact Chapter 6,
of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, by amending sectJ
of boundaries of magisterial and election districts, t¢
Charlottesville Magisterial District to Rio Magisterial
Voting precincts--Rio Magisterial District to rename ti
the Commonwealth Precinct, and the Rio Hill Precinct a~
Precinct. Roll was called, and the motion carried by
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
rs. Humphris, to adopt
Elections, of the Code
OhS 6.1, Establishment
change the name of the
District, and 6.2,
e Berkeley Precinct as
. the Agnor-Hurt
.he following recorded
!
Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and Mrs.
Thomas.
None.
ORDINANCE NO. 95-6(1)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 6, ELECTIONS, 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 6, Elections, is hereby amended
amending section 6.1, Establishment of boundaries of m~
districts, and section 6.2, Voting precincts -- Charlot
District, as follows:
Sec. 6-1. Establishment and boundaries of magisterial
The county shall be divided into six (6) magiste~
shall be named and bounded as described below, and whi(
districts for the county within the meaning of § 15.1-!
Virginia:
(a)
Rio Magisterial District, to be bounded as
Beginning at the northern city limit
and reordained by
~gisterial and election
~tesville Magisterial
and election districts.
;ial districts which
:h shall be the election
i71.1 of the Code of
!ollows:
~ of Charlottesville and
its intersection with State Route 631 and t~he Southern RailrOad
right-of-way; then meandering west with th~ city limits to its
intersection with State Route 743; then no~th on State Route 743
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 4 )
000;35Z
to its intersection with the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir;
then meandering north with the South Fork Rivanna River to its
intersection with State Route 660; then northeast on State Route
660 to its intersection with State Route 743; then southeast on
State Route 743 to its intersection with State Route 643; then
south on State Route 643 to its intersection with Schroeder
Branch; then south with Schroeder Branch to its confluence with
the South Fork Rivanna River; then meandering soUtheast with the
South Fork Rivanna River to its intersection with the Southern
Railroad right-of-way; then southwest with the Southern Railroad
right-of-way to its intersection with the northern city limits of
Charlottesville and State Route 631, the point of beginning.
Sec. 6-2. Voting precincts--Rio Magisterial District.
The Rio Magisterial District shall include four (4) voting precincts,
bounded as hereafter set out and named as follows:
(a) Commonwealth Precinct:
Beginning at the intersection of State Route 743 and U.S.
Route 29; then northwest on State Route 743 to its intersection
with State Route 631; then northeast on State Route 631 to its
intersection with Four Seasons Drive; then southeast on Four
Seasons Drive to its intersection with Commonwealth Drive; then
north on Commonwealth Drive to its intersection with Dominion
Drive; then southeast on Dominion Drive to its intersection with
U.S. Route 29; then south on U.S. Route 29 to its intersection
with State Route 743, the point of beginning.
(b) Woodbrook Precinct:
Beginning at the northern city limits of Charlottesville and
its intersection with State Route 631 and the Southern Railroad
right-of-way; then northeast with the Southern Railroad right-of-
way to its intersection with the South Fork Rivanna River; then
meandering northwest with the South Fork Rivanna River to its
intersection with U.S. Route 29; then south on U.S. Route 29 to
its intersection with State Route 631; then southeast on State
Route 631 to its intersection with the Southern Railroad right-of-
way and the northern city limits of Charlottesville, the point of
beginning.
(c) Branchlands Precinct:
Beginning at the northern city limits of Charlottesville and
its intersection with State Route 631 and the Southern Railroad
right-of-way; then northwest on State Route 631 to its intersec-
tion with U.S. Route 29; then south on U.S. Route 29 to the
northern city limits of Charlottesville; then east with the city
limits to its intersection with the Southern Railroad right-of-way
and State Route 631, the point of beginning.
(d) Agnor-Hurt Precinct:
Beginning at the intersection of Dominion Drive and U.S.
Route 29; then north on U.S. Route 29 to its intersection with the
South Fork Rivanna River; then northwest with the South Fork
Rivanna River to its confluence with Schroeder Branch; then north
with Schroeder Branch to its intersection with State Route 643;
then north on State Route 643 to its intersection with State Route
743; then northwest on State Route 743 to its intersection with
State Route 660; then southwest on State Route 660 to its inter-
section with the South Fork Rivanna River; then meandering south
with the South Fork Rivanna River to its intersection with State
Route 743; then south on State Route 743 to its intersection with
State Route 631; then northeast on State Route 631 to its inter-
section with Four Seasons Drive; then southeast on Four Seasons
Drive to its intersection with Commonwealth Drive; then north on
Commonwealth Drive to its intersection with Dominion Drive; then
southeast on Dominion Drive to its intersection with U.S. Route
29, the point of beginning.
Agenda Item No. 7. Public Hearing on the proposed tax-exempt financing
by East Rivanna Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., in the amount of $120,000, in
order to assist the Fire Company in the acquisition of a new fire truck.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on December 26, 1994, and January 2, 1995.)
Mr. Tucker noted that the East Rivanna Volunteer Fire Company, Inc., is
in the process of purchasing a new fire engine at a cost of $186,126. It
wishes to take advantage of tax-exempt financing provisions provided for
volunteer fire companies in the IRS regulations. Under these regulations it
can secure a loan at an interest rate below the prime rate. Jefferson
National Bank has committed to a 5.7625 percent rate for a $120,000, seven-
year, loan. East Rivanna qualifies under the applicable regulations, and the
Board approved an Agreement at its December 21, 1994, meeting, in which East
000353
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 5)
Rivanna is required to provide firefighting services in an area which is not
provided with any other firefighting services.
Mr. Tucker said the County will incur no liability and will have no
obligation to repay the loan, but for IRS purposes it is considered an
obligation of the County. The IRS regulations require the Board to hold a
public hearing prior to approving the borrowing by East Rivanna. In addition,
the County will have to certify that it will not borrow more than $10.0
million of tax-exempt bonds in 1995.
Mr. Perkins opened the public hearing. With no one coming forward to
speak, the public hearing was closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded bY Mrs. Thomas, to adopt the
following Resolution to Approve Tax-exempt Financing by East Rivanna Volunteer
Fire Company, Inc., and to authorize the Chairman to sign the following
Certificate as to Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. Roll was called, and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
RESOLUTION
TO APPROVE TAX-EXEMPT FINANCING BY
EAST RIVANNA VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY, INC.
WHEREAS, East Rivanna Volunteer Fire Company (hereafter ERVFC)
desires to secure $120,000 of tax-exempt financing in order to acquire a
new fire truck; and
WHEREAS, ERVFC has obtained a loan commitment from Jefferson
National Bank subject to ERVFC meeting all requirements of the Internal
Revenue Code; and
WHEREAS, under the Internal Revenue Code, if ERVFC is a qualified
volunteer department and the financing is approved by Albemarle County
after a public hearing, it may qualify for federal tax exemption
provided that the County does not issue more than $10.0 million of tax-
exempt bonds in 1995; and
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors did
properly advertise and conduct a public hearing on this proposed
financing on January 11, 1995; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County incurs no liability for and no obliga-
tion to repay the above described financing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors for
the County of Albemarle, Virginia, hereby approves the borrowing of
$120,000 by the East Rivanna Volunteer Fire Company, Inc. from Jeffer-
son National Bank under Internal Revenue Code provisions for tax-exempt
financing for the purpose of acquiring a fire truck; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman is authorized to execute
the Certificate as to Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations certifying that
the County will not issue more than $10.0 million of tax-exempt bonds in
1995.
CERTIFICATE AS TO QUALIFIED TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS
The undersigned Chairman of the Board of County Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia (the "County"), certifies as follows:
1. I understand that bonds, bond anticipation notes, installments
or lease purchase contracts and any other obligation to pay money
(excluding only current accounts payable, contractual obligations which
have been budgeted and funded, and contractual obligations to be paid
from the proceeds of prior note and bond issues, and Federal or State
grants) are treated as "obligations" within the meaning of Section
265(b) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, including
applicable regulations (the "Code").
2. The County, any of its "subordinate entities," within the
meaning of the Code Section 265(b) (3), and any entities that issue tax-
exempt obligations on behalf of the County and its subordinate entities
have together not issued in 1995 more than $10,000,000 of tax-exempt
obligations, not including "private activity bonds," within the meaning
of Code Section 141, other than "qualified 501(c) (3) bonds" within the
meaning of Code section 145.
3. I have no reason to believe that, barring circumstances
unforeseen as of the date hereof, the County will issue tax-exempt
obligations itself or approve the issuance of tax-exempt obligations of
any of such other entities if the issuance of such tax-exempt obliga-
tions would, when aggregated with all other tax-exempt obligations
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 6 )
OO0354
theretofore issued in 1995 by the County and such other entities, result
in the County and such other entities having issued in 1995, a total of
more than $10,000,000 of tax-exempt obligations in 1995, not including
private activity bonds other than qualified 501(c) (3) bonds.
Agenda Item No. 8. Public Hearing on the proposed Capital Improvement
Program for FY 1995-96 through FY 1999-2000. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on December 26, 1994, and January 2, 1995.)
Mrs. Roxanne White, Assistant County Executive, summarized the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) finances for Fiscal Years 1995-1996 to 1999-2000,
which is on file in the Clerk's office and made a part of the permanent
records of the Board.
Mrs. Thomas asked if there is.a reason why the Meadow Creek Parkway did
not appear in the Capital Improvement Program, given that there is no other
funding known for it. Mrs. White said large road projects used to be part of
the Capital Improvement Program, including the Meadow Creek Parkway, although
there was no funding allocated. They were shown in the CIP so the County
could take a proffer in the event one was offered. The County Attorney does
not think that is necessary. Mr. Davis said these projects did not need to be
included because it held up the process, overinflated the Capital Improvement
Program budget, and there were no revenues for these projects.
Mrs. Thomas said the Federal Highway plans are requiring that there be
road projects in the plan even if there is no funding for them. She said the
Board may need to revisit that policy if the County cannot continue to carry
Meadow Creek Parkway on the list of projects because the County has no funding
source and VDOT is not picking up that project. Mrs. White and Mr. Tucker
indicated that large road projects could be reinitiated in the Capital
Improvement Program, if needed, at a later date.
With no further questions from the Board members, Mr. Perkins opened the
public hearing.
Mr. Warren Naugh, a resident of Forest Lakes, said he is adamantly
opposed to construction of a road over the Hollymead Dam. He made an overview
presentation to the Board. He said Timberwood Parkway, which would connect to
the road over the dam, would carry more traffic. He said as of January 1,
1995, a computer model used by Albemarle County planners projected traffic
over the dam at a rate of 16,000 trips per day with the "TI" connector to the
Meadow Creek Parkway. Since the County's computer model does not project
traffic on a small scale without the "Ti" connector, he made his own analysis.
The analysis is based on the number of families, distances, speed limits and
traffic lights. According to his analysis, the traffic over the dam would
approximate current traffic on Greenbrier Drive. The increase in traffic on
Hollymead Drive is significant due to the new and existing school and will
only worsen. The increased amount of traffic would make it unsafe for
children of 100 households east of the road to walk to the recreational
facility. If Timberwood Parkway is connected to Proffit Road some day, this
number would increase to 270 househglds, and an additional 100 households
could be affected when Forest Lakes South is completed and the children must
cross Ashwood Boulevard to use the recreational facility that will be complet-
ed in the Spring.
Mr. Naugh said the residents chose to live in a well-designed, safe and
planned community and paid extra money for lots and homes for this opportuni-
ty. He said Forest Lakes North is designed to ensure safe, quiet residential
streets and that higher density housing and commercial areas are located next
to Route 29 North with quick easy access to a primary highway. He said the
road across the dam would make Timberwood Parkway and Powell Creek Drive,
along with Hollymead Drive and Ashwood Boulevard, one continuous road which
would bisect communities. This would negate one of the prime benefits of a
planned community. The potential for crime is also an issue. It seems
reasonable when a residential area has multiple outlets to other roads, that
crime will be higher than if the multiple outlets did not exist. He said
intelligent transportation planning can minimize crime and that law enforce-
ment resources can be concentrated where they are needed most. This could
also decrease law enforcement costs over the long run.
Mr. Naugh said the road over the Hollymead Dam is not just an issue for
the three communities north of Charlottesville. Tranquil, rural areas need to
be preserved, and urban and suburban communities must remain pleasant places
to live. He urged the Board to prevent residential streets from becoming
primary highways by deleting the $315,000 in the Capital Improvement Program
Budget for this project.
Mrs. Evelyn Meese said she lives in Scottsville. She said there were
members from the Scottsville Chamber of Commerce, Scottsville Parks Develop-
ment Association and the Scottsville Parent-Teacher Association with her
tonight. The Mayor was unable to attend. She requested that the Board
reincorporate in the 1995-1996 Capital Improvement Program budget, the
Scottsville Community Center Outdoor Facilities Improvements. Specifically,
$63,525 for basketball courts, picnic shelters, bathroom access and for tennis
courts. She said Scottsville was at the brink of extinction a few years ago
and through hard work, it is now a growing community. There are not any
public recreational facilities in the southern end of the county to accommo-
000855
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 7) ~
date families with small children, or for older people in the community. The
nearest public tennis courts (outside of Walton School) or basketball courts
are in Charlottesville, twenty miles away.
Mrs. Meese said in 1992, the Board initiated a five-year program setting
forth improvements in Scottsville for a park. The land was donated years ago
by the Dorrier family for recreational purposes. An agreement was made
between the Town and the County to develop the area as a park. She thanked
the Board for the playground facility that was built this past summer (She
passed pictures around to the Board). However, she suggested the Board needed
to finish what was started with the park. The playground facility is in a
large vacant lot that has become very muddy due to rain and construction. She
said effort is being made to raise additional funding. The Scottsville Parks
Development Association is in the process of incorporating and will be
applying for grant money for this project. She said the Town Council has not
committed to any financing yet, but expressed their support of the project.
Everyone has made a commitment and would like to see the young and old alike
bustling with activity in Scottsville, rather than having an empty, muddy
vacant lot. In addition, these facilities, if funded, can be used by summer
programs centered around libraries, gymnasiums and schools. She said children
must have activities to do or they will get into trouble. She requested the
Board take the children's needs into consideration and reestablish funding in
year 1995-1996 rather than 1997-1998. She noted in the Capital Improvement
Program, the only other project scheduled for the southern end of the county
is the improvements for the Walnut Creek Park. If Scottsville residents had
to choose one project for funding, it would be the park so that people in the
community can use it. She then presented a letter to Mr. Marshall from the
granddaughter of the Dorrier family.
Mr. John Carter of Earlysville said after reading the Capital Improve-
ment Program, the needs of the County are not being met, but, rather the wants
of a few being satisfied. He said State Revenue Sharing Road Projects with
the Virginia State Department of Transportation are scheduled to spend $2.5
million over the five-year life of the Capital Improvement Program. The
$500,000 for 1995-1996 involves eight road projects or $62,500 each. These
road projects were selected from a project list of 65 and he does not know why
these eight were chosen instead of others. These projects are not new. Their
construction dates range from two to fifteen years from now. The $500,000
does not replace other projects on the priority list. To say that without the
infusion of $500,000, the eight road projects would be done later is to say
the obvious.
Mr. Carter said he believes the citizens would not approve of how their
money will be spent. He believes revenue sharing with the state needs to be
canceled, and the County needs to return to the previous method of selecting
road projects that cost taxpayers nothing. He said he was prepared to
initiate a survey at no expense to the County. He asked that someone assist
him in formulating the questions to be asked in the survey, and that consider-
ation be given by the Board to their constituent's responses.
Mr. Charles Ward said he is the Western Albemarle High School (WAHS)
Parent-Teacher Organization (PTO) President. He informed the Board of what
was involved in the Capital Improvement Program request to renovate WAllS. The
school, although well cared for, is almost 20 years old. Since the 1970's,
the State has increased the number of electives required to graduate. This,
along with the general overcrowding, has resulted in WAllS not having enough
science labs and classrooms to accommodate students. Because of these
requirements, the overcrowding situation will continue even after the new high
school is opened if renovations are not funded. To delay the work will result
in severe continued overcrowding and will push renovations beyond the Capital
Improvement Plan on the new high school. The PTO feels that all high schools
should be ready together for the 21st Century. Additional work needed
includes more space for counselors and teachers, athletic facilities, confor-
mance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, an improved and safer bus
loading area, and the general networking of computers to prepare students to
be technically competent. Funds must be spent wisely, and the PTO has
requested the support of the School Board to work with the architects in order
to assist with renovation priorities. He hopes the Board's commitment to fund
school improvements will also be followed with a similar commitment to provide
for the best possible teachers to prepare the students for productive lives.
Mr. Paul Rittenhouse said he is a senior at Western Albemarle High
School. He said an auxiliary gym is needed. In the winter, six teams must
share space in one gymnasium and it is inadequate. Teams must also find space
to practice at other schools. It is hard to be competitive when looking for
space to practice. It is inconvenient to travel to and from other spaces, it
decreases the amount of time for practice, their locker space lacks privacy,
and it increases safety problems. A student was hit crossing Route 250 going
to practice at a neighboring school. He said tennis courts need to be im-
proved and redesigned because they have already been repaired and patched and
are still cracking. The current tennis courts face from east to west, which
for tennis players can be a problem facing the sun.
Ms. Stephanie Ingersoll said she is a student at Western Albemarle High
School. She expressed concern regarding the track. The current track is
deteriorated, unsafe, and athletes are being injured. The track was resur-
faced 11 years ago, and since that time, the Albemarle High School track has
been resurfaced twice. She said it is inconvenient to go to the University of
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 8)
Virginia and Albemarle High School tracks for training and that some of the
home meets are currently being rescheduled to away meets to decrease the risk
of athletes being injured. This high school track is the only track in the
district that is still measured in yards rather than meters. When visiting
teams run on the track, it is embarrassing to use a conversion table to
calculate how far athletes have run. There are approximately 73 members of
the indoor track team and this number will increase when the outdoor season
begins. Physical education classes and the community also use this track.
Ms. Ingersoll requested that the Board renovate the track.
Mr. Ashley Rothwell said he is a senior at Western Albemarle High
School. His main concern is parking. With the increase in school attendance,
trailers are being placed in the back of the school. This cuts down on the
number of parking spaces for students, faculty and visitors. The faculty lot
behind the building lost many of its parking spaces and faculty ended up
parking in student spaces, which in turn left students parking in the athletic
parking lot. The buses are blocking in cars trying to leave after school, and
the buses are causing unnecessary safety concerns. He said the Board needed
to investigate ways to redirect the buses or redevelop the parking lot to
increase parking spaces.
Mr. Aaron Dillon said he is a junior at Western Albemarle High School.
His concern is the student to teacher ratio. There are 13 people in his
physics class which is great for learning. However, in his chemistry class,
there are too many students and that hinders the learning process. He also
stated concern about the shortage of materials in art and science classrooms.
He feels the introduction of new materials and the lowering of the student to
teacher ratio would increase learning and would be more educational for
students.
Ms. Kai-me Fu said she is a junior at Western Albemarle High School.
She is concerned about the trailers. She said there are eight trailers behind
the school due to overcrowding. Although a student can go to class from the
trailers, if a student needs to go to a locker, bathroom, or a coatroom, it
cannot be done between classes or it makes the student late. The trailers
take up valuable parking spaces, and an extension to the high school is
needed. She said that a new computer curriculum requirement is needed by the
year 2000. Currently there is no such curriculum requirement now. What is
offered is basic keyboarding and word processing. She said if there was such
a curriculum requirement, it could be fulfilled with a computer science class
or a word processing class, which would allow students to obtain technical
skills.
Mr. John MacDonald said he is a resident of Forest Lakes. He made an
overview traffic analysis presentation to the Board. He calculates the
traffic flow over the dam in 1997 would be 5900 vehicles per day. Traffic
flow on Timberwood Boulevard, which is the connector road to Route 29, will
increase from 4970 to 9370 vehicles. This figure appears high especially
since the growth separates the athletic facilities from many of the residents
who live on the opposite side of Timberwood Boulevard. He said he agrees with
99 percent of the Charlottesville Transportation Study for 2015, and the
policies regarding the environment. He believes in the integration and
promotion of alternatives to the automobile and ensuring that transportation
plans are consistent with local land use and environmental preservation goals.
He said in Forest Lakes, there is already a transportation system that
enhances the natural environment and integrates and promotes alternatives to
the automobile, e.g., bicycles and walking. He said the proposal to construct
a road over the dam will destroy the quality of life as it is known today. He
urged the Board to delete this proposal from the Capital Improvement Program.
He suggested as an alternative that the developer fund an extension to the
existing four feet of walking path over the dam to eight feet in order to
accommodate joggers and walkers. He would also add eight to ten feet to the
bicycle path over the dam. He said these goals would meet the Charlottesville
Area Transportation Study for 2015, and would gain the complete support of the
Forest Lakes community and probably the Hollymead community.
Mr. Martin said the $350,000 that is shown for this project is not money
the County owns, but rather, is an in-kind contribution from the developer of
Forest Lakes. Mr. MacDonald said he understood this. He is suggesting that
the developer may wish to fund the alternative paths mentioned.
Mr. Robert Guy said he is a resident of Forest Lakes. He said when he
moved to Forest Lakes, the developer, Mr. Kessler, promised residents he would
not support the road project over the dam. Reasons given were that the dam
was too dangerous, it would not support the road, and a lack of public
interest. Now, Mr. Kessler is offering money to build the road, and the
residents of Forest Lakes oppose this.
Ms. Tammy Richie said she is a resident of Forest Lakes. She is opposed
to connecting the two neighborhoods of Forest Lakes and Hollymead. She said
she was a deputy real estate assessor for the City of Charlottesville for ten
years. She said this type of change to a neighborhood can adversely affect
property values. Any time there is a change in the physical environment
within a neighborhood, the desirability of the neighborhood is changed. She
said the developer would never have built Cove Point, which is very expensive
and near the dam, had this road been opened at the time of development.
People would have refused to pay the prices they paid. She requested that the
Board consult with the County Assessor, Mr. Bruce Woodzell, to determine the
000357
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 9)
impact this road would have on property Values in Forest Lakes. She said the
character of the neighborhood should not be changed simply to provide conve-
nience to motorists. Opening this road would also present a threat to the
safety of the children and the residents of Forest Lakes and Hollymead. She
would rather that the money for this project be used for the Scottsville
community and the Western Albemarle High School projects.
Mr. Bruce Rose said he is a concerned parent, and is opposed to there
being a road over the dam. He said increased traffic would put children at
risk walking and bicycling to and from school and playing. The sidewalks and
trails along Timberwood Parkway, leading past the school, are inadequate and
unsafe. He said an example of what increased traffic can do to a neighborhood
can be seen in Carrsbrook. Carrsbrook and other surrounding neighborhoods
have seen cars and trucks speeding through creating hazardous conditions for
their residents. He does not want this to happen to his neighborhood. He
said a bus crossing the dam during the winter months, with the icing, will
have a bigger chance of slipping off the road into the lake on one side, while
sliding down a 100 foot drop into the creek on the other side. Once the road
is built, the road will be wide and straight, making conditions perfect for
teenagers to drag race. He said there was a recent incident at Forest Lakes
when teenagers were drag racing on Timberwood Parkway and lost control of the
vehicle and demolished one of the transformers. Constructing this road will
only increase this type of incident.
Ms. Kim Fisher said she is a Hollymead resident and opposes the road
over the dam. She has been workiDg with Hollymead and Sutherland Schools
about safety issues and overcrowding. She said an increase in traffic has
already occurred with the new middle school, and the road over the dam will
only increase the traffic flow. There are over 200 children who walk to
school in Hollymead and cross at Powell Creek. She requested that the Board
consider safety issues before making a final decision.
Mr. Dave Wasulko said he is a resident of Cove Point at Forest Lakes.
His children go to Hollymead and Sutherland Schools. He is opposed to the
road crossing the dam. He said several years ago the Meadow Creek Parkway and
the "TI" connectors were discussed. At that time, the Planning Commission
decided to halt the plans and develop better alternatives to the Meadow Creek
Parkway and the "T" connectors. Discussion also occurred about increased
traffic flow, road safety over the dam, and the safety of children in front of
Hollymead School and now the Sutherland School. The student population has
increased from 700 students to 1200 students. Two hundred to 300 students
walk to school every day. After school, children have baseball, football,
soccer, etc. practice, and either walk along Powell Creek or Timberwood Boule-
vard. The dam is very narrow. People walk, jog and roller blade across the
bridge. If a road is built across the dam, there will not be enough room for
a jogging trail or a sidewalk on either side. Eventually, with the increased
projection in traffic, there will be an accident and someone's child will be
hit by an automobile. He said the amount of road being discussed is 1.3 miles
and will go across the breast of the dam. Increased police protection will be
needed to stop people from speeding because the road is a downhill grade from
both sides to the bottom of the dam, then the road straightens. There are
over 450 families, over 900 children and two schools with ten percent of the
County enrollment in this area. If the road is approved, it will be a danger-
ous situation and there will be accidents. He urged the Board to vote "no"
for construction of a road across the Hollymead dam.
Mr. Tom McGuire said he is the Greet Parent-Teachers Organization
President and a parent of two young children. He asked the other people who
came with him to stand. He expressed concern about the Greer Outdoor Recre-
ation Improvements which are scheduled for FY 1997. He said the Greer project
was initiated by the Parks Department in late 1993, and it was hoped it would
be completed by 1993 or 1994. However, the proposal was put into the 1995
Capital Improvement Program. He spoke to the Board on December 15, 1993,
about this project, and requested that it be rescheduled for 1994 but no later
than 1995. Instead, it is now scheduled for 1997. At present, Greer has four
old metal pieces of equipment that were installed when Greer was built 21
years ago. There is one older wooden unit, which was installed several years
later. There are three new pieces that the Parent Teacher Organization and
other donors purchased. There are two rusted basketball hoops. The asphalt
area is heavily cracked or broken on the edges. There is no Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance for access to the park. Many families go to
McIntire Park or Pen Park in the City to play due to the problems with Greer.
The Parks and Recreation department identified the need for two accessible
playground units; one for grades kindergarten through second (K-2), and one
for grades three through five (3-5). Currently, 700 school children are
served daily, of which, 475 children come from Greer school during the day.
Over 139 children are enrolled in the after-school education program as well
as local people. Greer playground is also used on weeknights, weekends and
evenings. The PTO Board researched building its own playground equipment, but
the liabilities were overwhelming. He said the PTO raises approximately $1500
a year that could be used for playground equipment. In December 1994, the PTO
had over 200 people attend its meeting to discuss the need for improvements.
There were petitions signed by 136 people supporting this project (he handed
in the petitions). He requested that the Board reschedule this project to
1995 due to safety and accessibility needs.
Ms. Karen Goodloe said she is a parent of a first grader at Greer
school. Her daughter spends much of her day on the playground in school
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 10) ~
000358
activities. Her daughter asked her.why Agnor-Hurt and Woodbrook schools have
nice playgrounds and Greet does not. When she told her daughter that there
was a need assessed for the playground in 1993, but it was moved to 1995 and
now moved again to 1997, her daughter wondered if the playground would be
fixed before she went to middle school. Ms. Goodloe said it is frustrating as
a taxpayer to see other schools have good, nice, safe and accessible play-
grounds and for Greer not to have anything. She requested that the playground
repairs be put back into the budget.
Mr. Franklin Micciche said he is a resident of Forest Lakes. He
expressed concern about the safety and value of his property, and the overall
effect on the community that a road across the Hollymead dam would have. He
thinks the relationship between the developer and the County needs to be
investigated. When he purchased his home, he knew about the connection
between Hollymead and Forest Lakes, and he addressed this connection to the
marketing team of the developers. He was assured emphatically that the road
was a dead issue. Now in direct contradiction to this, the developer is
offering to make the connection. He feels there was misrepresentation by the
developer and that legal action against the developer may be imminent. He
said the developer failed to disclose information about the Meadow Creek
Parkway to him. This omission is a violation of real estate law. He request-
ed that the Board not support the developer and vote to deny this project.
Ms. Catherine Laws said she is'a sixteen years old and lives in Forest
Lakes at Cove Point. She expressed concern about teenagers drag racing and
the safety of students walking to and from school.
Mr. Peader Little said he is the Burley Parent-Teacher Organization
Secretary. He expressed concern about the new high school. He said the
capital expenditure of $23.0 million is well worth planning for. This
expenditure represents one-half of the school expenditures in the Capital
Improvement Plan and one-third of the overall expenditures. He feels it is
incumbent on the Board to ensure that such an expenditure is used to the
maximum benefit of everyone in the County, such as the school being centrally
located. He said the Burley PTO is concerned that sufficient sites central to
the population density, specifically on the eastern side of Charlottesville,
are not being considered in the on-going site selection process. He asked the
Board to ensure that the $23.0 million is spent in the most beneficial way, so
that the sites are reasonably close to the City and available for review by
the citizens of Albemarle County at a later stage.
Mr. Eric Rose said he is a resident of Forest Lakes, and he expressed
concern about the road over the dam. He asked why this road is needed. He
said the developer was remiss in not informing his customers and asking them
what their feelings were about the road over the dam prior to offering this
gift, in-kind, to the County. He wanted to know why the developer was doing
this and to whose benefit.
Mr. Martin responded to Mr. Rose's question. He said before the new
Sutherland Middle School and the Forest Lakes subdivision were built, Holly-
mead Drive was a problem because of the amount of school traffic going back
and forth. The "T" connectors were supposed to alleviate traffic on Hollymead
Drive. He said he is on record strongly opposing the "T" connectors. The
main goal, however, is to alleviate traffic on Hollymead Drive. He supports
the road across the dam as a way to take traffic off of Hollymead Drive. Mr.
Rose said if the road across the dam is approved, he suggests that numerous
stop signs and significant speed bumps be built to control the speed and flow
of the traffic to alleviate possible hazards.
Members of the audience interrupted and Mr. Perkins said Board members
were not familiar enough with the road issue. He said it would not be settled
tonight, and that there were enough speakers commenting tonight to realize
there is a problem. The Board will deal with this issue at a later date. He
said other people needed to speak regarding the Capital Improvement Program.
Ms. Adele Creutz said she is a parent of two first graders at Greet
Elementary School. She said the playground is not just old, but disgraceful.
The community should be ashamed of it. There are places on the playground
that should be paved but instead there is bare earth that is hard and dusty
when dry, and muddy when wet. The older climbing equipment is poorly de-
signed. One of her children suffered minor injuries playing on it. The older
wooden equipment is splintering. She said it does not seem fair that new
schools get the absolutely best of everything and older schools get absolutely
nothing.
Mr. J. B. Agee said he is a resident of Forest Lakes at Cove Point. He
was shocked that the developer was paying money to open this road and asked if
this was true. He moved from the City to the County for privacy and safety
reasons to raise a family. He was looking for a place to build which was
designed with dead-end roads, little traffic, and an ideal place to raise a
family. His lot borders the road that will be affected by the bridge being
opened. He said he asked Mr. Frank Kessler, the developer, not indirectly,
but directly, if the road would be opened up. He said Mr. Kessler responded
"no", never. (Mr. Bowerman returned at 8:42 p.m.) Mr. Agee asked how this
could be guaranteed. He said Mr. Kessler said the dam is not at a weight
limit and will not support traffic based on the Department of Transportation's
specifications as well as being costly to build. He said it also defeated the
purpose of developing Forest Lakes with dead-end roads. Mr. Agee said there
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 11)
000359
is one main exit out of Forest Lakes and he would like to keep it that way for
safety reasons.
Mr. David Anholt said he represented the Crozet Park Board. He said the
pool replacement project at Crozet Park is very important not only to Crozet
but to western Albemarle County as a whole. The Park Board has managed the
pool as the only pool open to the public in Albemarle County for the past 40
years. The pool is an important recreational facility and may be the corner-
stone of recreation in Crozet. Crozet is a growth area in the County with the
possibility of 4000 houses being developed in the coming years. The pool is
in disrepair. It has structural problems which necessitate that the pool be
replaced. The pool cannot be economically patched any longer, that does not
make good financial sense. There is a Pool Replacement Fund of $100,000 which
the Park Board has raised over the last five years. The County has $100,000
in the CIP spread over the next five years for the Park as needed. Although
that is a generous amount, unfortunately, money is 'needed up front to pay for
the pool. If they must borrow an additional $100,000, the total project cost
is $300,000, then it is not a feasible project for the Crozet Park Board. He
requested that the Board consider allocating the $100,000 from the five-year
CIP as far up front as possible either this coming year or over the next
couple of years. He said they have talked with County staff, and they are
exploring options such as obtaining a low-interest loan from the County. He
asked that the Board continue to work with them on funding options.
Mr. Bob Sauer said he is a resident at Hotlymead, and he is opposed to
the road over the Hollymead Dam. He realizes that many of his neighbors,
especially on Hollymead Drive, may be in favor of the road over the dam. He
believes there is one aspect of the road that is not being considered. The
road over the dam would alleviate school traffic from having to drive on Route
29 for some distance. His northern neighbors would have a shorter commute to
downtown Charlottesville on Route 29. The majority of Forest Lakes North
traffic travelling down Powell Creek and Hollymead Drives would be able to
bypass a traffic light and some of the neighborhood to make a shorter drive.
Given that opportunity, he would probably choose the road over the dam. He
said school traffic would be reduced, but the road over the dam would not
reduce overall traffic. The environmental aspect to the lake may damage
wildlife if there is not a provision for safety. He expressed concern for
children's safety as well.
Mr. Steve Ayres said he is a resident of Forest Lakes at Cove Point.
When he purchased his lot, one of the considerations he made was that it was
on a dead-end street. He wanted a self-contained community with limited
access. He said he asked about the road over the dam. He was assured the
road would be closed, however, this did not occur for some time. Large gravel
was eventually brought in and the road was blocked off. He said the developer
has positive intentions, and that he has personally benefitted from the
developer's capabilities, but he requested that the road over the dam remain
closed, and his neighborhood remain as is.
Ms. Christina Waughs said she is a resident of Forest Lakes. She said
the wind in the winter blows from the west across the dam, icing it very
quickly. She expressed concern that a school bus might slide on the dam, even
with a guard rail, and may tip over into the water. She made an overhead
presentation. She is a teacher and has to drive Route 29 every day. She has
to stop at a traffic light at the corner of Route 29 and Timberwood Boulevard
and Hollymead Drive. She said it would be easier for her to have the road
across the dam to Hollymead Drive. She said, except for Gateway Village,
everybody would have better access by going across the dam.
Ms. Nina Fl?nan said she is an original resident of Forest Lakes. She
said when she bought her home, she was promised by Real Estate Three that
there would not be a connecting road from Hollymead to Forest Lakes. She has
a first grade student at Hollymead School and has to drive on Route 29 every
morning to take her son to school. She prefers to be on Route 29 than to have
everybody coming through her neighborhood making it unsafe for children.
Ms. Ann Messina said she is the mother of two, a T-ball coach, a former
child care provider, a soccer coach, PTO Vice-President, and an employee of
Albemarle County Schools. She is present as a North Garden resident and a
volunteer. She said the arguments presented for Scottsville and Greer for
community playgrounds and recreational facilities also apply to North Garden
and the Red Hill facilities as well. She said the County needs to remain on
its current 1996 Capital Improvement schedule for the Red Hill outdoor
recreational facility and the Walnut Creek picnic shelter and playground. She
read from the 1994 Capital Improvement Program, where it was stated that if
the Red Hill Elementary School project is not funded, the site will not
function as effectively as a community park and its service level will be
unequal to other sites in the County. Additionally, the County will not be in
compliance with the spirit of the law for the Americans with Disabilities Act.
She wonders why these projects are not joined with the mandated ADA projects
that are being funded. She said there are several handicapped children at her
school and their needs are not being met. She joins with Scottsville in
saying that southern Albemarle County is a diverse community and is large and
growing. She said North Garden serves as a center for services for areas as
far south as Yancey, Schuyler, Covesville, east of Batesville and west of
Route 20. As a resident of Albemarle County, she is grateful for the services
the County provides for her children, however, she said a sense of community
is lost when one has to drive ten or more miles to use adequate playgrounds
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Me~t['ngi
(page 12 )
000,360
and picnic shelters. She said the Walnut Creek facility is dangerous because
people are bringing in their own grills and setting them up on unequal ground
or in the main entrance to the Park's stairs, with children running around the
area. A picnic shelter is needed as soon as possible. As far as Red Hill
Elementary school is concerned, the updated equipment there has been purchased
and installed by the Parent-Teacher Organization and others. She said her
community is doing what it can to provide services for children. She hopes
the County will assist in this need.
Mr. Ken Clarry said he is a resident of the Stony Point area. As
Chairman of the North Charlottesville Business Council, he supports a line
item that is zero in the budget, but has been put back into the budget by the
Planning Commission. The line item is $18,000 for landscaping on Route 29
North. He said Route 29 North is the primary entrance to the community, and
it is important that this entrance be kept beautiful. The North Charlottes-
ville Business Council is committed to raising $100,000 to help with this
project. He said the Council is currently working with staff, the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT), the City and others to develop a plan.
He asked that the $18,000 be kept in the budget as the Planning Commission
recommended. He said as a parent of children who attend the Stony Point
Elementary School, he believes consideration must be given to basic education
such as reading, writing, arithmetic and technology. He said technology will
assist all children in obtaining jobs and will keep them competitive in a
world-wide economy. He supports an educational technology section in the
Capital Improvement Program.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
Agenda Item No. 9. Adopt FY 1995-96 Capital Improvements Program
Budget.
Mr. Tucker said this item was erroneously placed on the agenda. He
suggested the Board discuss the CIP and provide direction to staff so options
for funding can be made at the February 1, 1995, day meeting.
Mrs. Humphris said the Board heard a big "wish" list presented tonight.
One person alluded to what is happening in Richmond (in reference to state
revenues), and she asked if Mr. Tucker will provide the Board with an update
on revenue potentials since the picture is not as positive as it was when this
budget was proposed. Mr. Tucker said the gentleman was evidently referring to
the Governor's proposed elimination of the BPOL tax, and staff will not know
anything until after the General Assembly has acted on the State budget.
Mrs. Humphris said one person asked that the Board not match $500,000
for highway revenue sharing projects, and a lot of people asked that the Board
not agree to the road across the Hollymead dam. There were a lot of requests
for projects at schools and parks. Mr. Tucker said staff can estimate a cost
for all of these projects and let the Board know. If the Board members have
thoughts about what they wish to add or delete after hearing the public
tonight, that would be helpful for staff to know.
Mr. Martin said in last year's operating budget, he thought there were
school capital needs including improvements to the Western Albemarle High
School track. Mr. Tucker said he thought the track was included as well. Mr.
A1 Reaser said the track project is scheduled for this current fiscal year.
Mrs. Humphris said she clearly remembers the Board supporting requests for
playground improvements, and the Board requested that they not be put off any
longer. Mr. Marshall agreed.
Mr. Martin asked if, since the Board will not vote on this tonight,
there is any way between now and February 1, 1995, to have VDOT review the
traffic patterns that would take place on Hollymead Drive as a result of
Forest Lakes South connecting to it. Mr. Tucker said "yes". He said County
staff can look at that using the transportation model the County has devel-
oped. Mr. Martin said the road going across the dam was proposed as a way to
alleviate traffic on Hollymead Drive. He would like to see some projected
numbers as to how much traffic is being taken off by Hollymead Drive South and
the connection at Powetl Creek.
Mr. Martin said he remembers that when Forest Lakes North was originally
proposed, a person could cross the dam and travel to Proffit Road. The
developer, at that time, wanted to keep the dam open, but he wanted the County
to assume the expense of maintaining the road. The County refused to assume
the expense of maintaining the road, so the developer blocked it off instead.
Mr. Tucker said there were questions from the Virginia Department of Transpor-
tation (VDOT) as to whether the dam could handle the type of traffic expected
to be generated by development of another phase of Hollymead. VDOT was not
supportive of a road being built across the dam. VDOT will not maintain the
road across the dam and there is still a question as to whether the County may
be responsible for maintaining the road even if it is built to state stan-
dards.
Mrs. Humphris mentioned a memorandum from Mrs. Babs Huckle requesting
$250,000 for a drainage erosion correction and said it was carefully done.
She said she and Mr. Bowerman went with Mrs. Huckle and others to the Hills-
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 13 )
000. 61
dale Drive area and saw the potential problems. She said Mrs. Huckle's point
about expediting the revision of the County's Drainage Ordinance and looking
at urban ring management of the two-year to five-year storms by expanding the
ordinance and also continuing to complete the Development Design Manual, is
that the taxpayers are also subsidizing some developers because the County is
not acting enough to prevent erosion and drainage problems in the beginning.
Mrs. Humphris said she would like a response from the staff to Mrs. Huckle's
memo.
Mrs. Thomas said she would like to know when the priorities in the CIP
were set. She said the schools seem to be in need of the same sort of work,
yet some schools seem to be ahead of others in the priorities. She does not
understand why this is so. Although it was not mentioned tonight, she is not
enthusiastic about the Board becoming involved with the golf course study on
the Forloines property at the cost of $25,000. She said the Board needs more
evidence that the community really needs another golf course. She said the
City's Pen Park, for example, is not paying for itself at this point. Mr.
Tucker said the purpose of the study is to determine whether or not there is a
need for a golf course and not to design one.
Mrs. Humphris and Mrs. Thomas said there has to be another way to make
this determination. They said $25,000 is relevant when dealing with taxpayer
dollars. Mrs. Humphris suggested the experience and history at Pen Park
including financial, expansion, water and pollution should be reviewed before
this Board approves a $25,000 study. One thing she knows is that golf courses
need a tremendous amount of water and she does not know where that would come
from. Also, they cause pollution from nutrients and fertilizer.
Mr. Tucker said he thinks it is clear that this project should be pulled
from the CIP. The property was offered to the County with the caveat that it
be used for a golf course. The Board has to make a positive decision as to
whether or not to accept any gift of property. The staff felt that before
accepting the property, the Board would want to know if there were a need for
a golf course. That was the basis for recommending the study.
Mrs. Humphris asked if the golf course is the caveat of the gift. Mr.
Tucker said "yes" That is the way it was discussed with staff. Mrs.
Humphris asked if the current owner also owns a lot of property around the
property he proposes to give to the County. Mr. Tucker said "yes" Mr.
Bowerman said he did not want to spend $25,000 to find out how to spend $5.0
million. Mrs. Humphris said she is not enthusiastic about the proposal. Mr.
Tucker said he understands, and that is the answer staff can give Dr.
Forloines who has asked many times what the County is going to do. Mrs.
Humphris said there may be a time in the future when the County will have the
critical mass of population that would support a golf course, but she does not
believe it will be in the near future.
With no further discussion of this item, the Board recessed at 9:17 p.m
and reconvened the meeting at 9:33 p.m.
Agenda Item No. 10. ZMA-94-15. Philip A. Sansone. Public Hearing on a
request to rezone 7.87 ac from R-1 to R-10 with proffered plan showing 34
dwelling units. Located off Rt 20 & Garnett Center Drive N of Wilton Country
Homes. Site is recommended for low density residential (1-4 du/ac) in the
Comprehensive Plan. TM78,P58I. Rivanna Dist. (Deferred from December 21,
1994.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on December
6, 1994, unanimously recommended approval of ZMA-94-15 and approved the use of
private roads for the proposed development subject to a proffer which may be
revised for clarification.
Mrs. Humphris asked about the use of private roads. She said some
private roads have cars parked on both sides of the road, which can be
dangerous when cars have to swerve around parked cars. Mr. Cilimberg said
when the Engineering Department and VDOT review an application, the review is
geared more toward public road standards, which include this issue.
Mr. Perkins opened the public hearing.
Mr. Tom McCrystal represented Royer and McGavock's office as the
applicant for Dr. Phillip Sansone. He offered to answer any questions.
one had questions.
No
Mr. Howard Newlon said he is a resident of Key West and a civil engi-
neer. He wished to speak about a matter not directly related to this peti-
tion. He said that two years ago he spoke to the Board about the rezoning for
the apartment complex at Wilton. He asked the Board, at that time, to
consider a proffer from the developer for doing something to Route 20. He
said that was in the middle of getting the problems solved at Free Bridge on
Route 250. He understands this new development will exit onto Route 20
directly across from Elk Drive. He said there are now four car lanes to get
into McDonald's, and from there it is a two-lane road for 1500 feet to the Key
West entrance and at some point, there will be a need for a traffic light at
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 14)
000362
Elk Drive. He urged the Board to give consideration to that 1500 feet of
Route 20 that is now two lanes as part of the six-year road plan.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, Mr. Perkins closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Martin said he thinks the Board members had ample time to read the
Planning Commission minutes and the problems have mainly been solved by the
developer's proffer. He offered motion that ZMA-94-15 be approved with the
proffer recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Bowerman.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the Board has the ability to require the developer
to do anything on Route 20 when VDOT has not said there is a need for a
another lane. Mr. Cilimberg said he believes the request is to add two more
lanes to Route 20 from the four-lane section to the entrance to this project.
The developer could contribute toward such a project through a proffer, but
then there would have to be a mechanism in place to spend that proffered
money. At the moment, it is neither a highway project or a County capital
project.
Mr. Newlon spoke from the audience saying he believes the County lost
the chance for a proffer two years ago at the time of the Wilton rezoning. He
said there has been a lot of digging along the east side of the road, and he
asked that the Board realize that at some point that 1500 feet will have to be
developed, and the County should not let it be developed. He was not suggest-
ing that this person make such a proffer.
Mrs. Humphris said there were several comments made at the Planning
Commission meeting about there not being walking paths, buffering and night
lighting. She asked if there was anything that could be done about these
suggestions and where they would fit into the overall plan. Mr. Cilimberg
said walking paths have occasionally been a part of the plans for some larger
developments, as well as sidewalks. However, the County has no sidewalk
program. Although sidewalks have been proffered by some developers, staff has
not insisted on having sidewalks, particularly when there is an internalized
type of development such as this one. The applicant did not offer lighting
and the Planning Commission did not make its decision based on lighting or
buffering. He said that buffering associated with this development would best
be served by tree preservation because the site sets up hill from Route 20.
There is a berm along Route 20 next to the area that is being developed. All
of this property lays back off the road and up a hillside.
Mrs. Humphris asked if tree preservation is covered in the tree canopy
ordinance. Mr. Cilimberg said he does not believe it is for this type of
development.
Mrs. Humphris said she is always disappointed when something that would
add to the quality of life for the people living there is not part of the
plan, and then the Board does not do anything about it. Mr. Cilimberg said
the Board can either approve or not approve the rezoning based on what the
applicant has offered.
Mr. Martin asked Mrs. Humphris what she would like to do. Mrs. Humphris
said she does not know what the Board should do, or how it should be done.
She thinks the Board should be proactive and get developers to be more
responsible to the people that they are selling properties to. It seems to be
a one-way proposition. The Board gives them the rezoning and they do not give
anything. She said in order for the developers to earn all the profit they
will get from the rezoning, there should~ be some standards, in particular,
regarding buffering. She needs more information in order to make an informed
decision about night-lighting and other issues.
Mr. McCrystal said they are trying to make this affordable housing. He
said that anytime the developer provides amenities, it raises the price of the
product. Ms. Humphris then added, "or decreases the profit." Mr. McCrystal
said no one really wants to believe there is not a lot of profit in houses of
this size and vintage. He said Mrs. Humphris was right, however, if it
decreases the profit significantly, then development of the property is not
viable any more, so the developer walks a tight line. He said he asked their
financial advisor to look into the cost of sidewalks. He feels the cost of
the sidewalks would be expensive and would defeat the purpose of affordability
for these houses.
Mrs. Humphris asked what the price range of the houses will be. Mr.
McCrystal said the cash of the smallest unit would start at $89,900, and the
largest unit (four bedroom house) would cost approximately $106,000. He said
it would be difficult to maintain these prices if amenities are added.
Mrs. Humphris asked about the landscaping and night-lighting at the
Wilton apartments. Mr. McCrystal said lights were installed and there is a
lamp light outside of most houses.
With no further discussion, roll was called on the motion to approve
ZMA-94-15 to rezone 7.87 acres from R-1 to R-10 with proffer dated November
29, 1994, addressed to Ron Lilley, Senior Planner, plan showing 34 dwelling
units.
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 15)
000363
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
None.
(The proffer is as follows:)
"Date: November 29, 1994
ZMA~# 94-15
Tax Map and Parcel ~#: 78-581 dated October 31, 1994 and revised
November 28, 1995.
7.87 Acres to be rezoned R-1 to R-10
I hereby proffer to develop this parcel in accordance with the
preliminary subdivision plat, contingent upon approval of the
subdivision plat.
Site Data:
1. Owner/Developer: Wilton Country Homes, Philip Sansone
2. Setbacks: Front: 25 foot, Rear: 20 foot, Side: 10 foot end
reduced in accordance with section 4.11.3.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
3. Magisterial District: Rivanna
4. Proposed Roads: Private with curb and gutter
5. Use: Residential. Each lot shall contain a single family
attached dwelling to be further subdivided along the party
wall. The total maximum number of dwellings will be 38.
6. Source of Topography: Control by Roudabush, Gale & Associates
Aerial Topography by Jim Bell, Louisa, Virginia
General Notes:
1. No further subdivision without Planning Commission approval.
2. Only one dwelling per lot.
3. All lots enter onto a private road.
4. Dimensions shown are approximate only.
5. Building and driveway locations are conceptual only and are
subject to change.
(signed) Philip A. Sansone, M.D."
Agenda Item No. 11. ZMA-94-16. Charles W. Hurt. Public Hearing on a
request to amend existing Planned Residential Development agreements of
ZMA-88-04 to allow reconfiguration of access which is currently permitted
through the Franklin development; access is proposed through Ashcroft.
Property of. approx 89 ac located W of & adjacent to Ashcroft. TM78,P57
(part). Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on December 26, 1994,
and January 2, 1995.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on December
20, 1994, unanimously recommended approval of ZMA-94-16 subject to eight
agreements.
With no questions from the Board members, Mr. Perkins opened the public
hearing.
Mr. Katurah Roell represented Dr. Charles Hurt to answer questions.
There were no other presentations.
Mr. Perkins closed the public hearing.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to approve
ZMA-94-t6 subject to the eight agreements recommended by the Planning Commis-
sion. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
None.
(Note: The Agreements are set out in full below.)
Approval is for a maximum of 28 dwellings subject to conditions
contained herein. Locations and acreage of various land uses
shall comply with the Approval Application Plan. In the final
site plan and subdivision process, open space shall be dedicated
in proportion to the number of lots approved;
No grading or clearing for street construction shall occur within
any area until the final Stormwater Detention and drainage plans
for subject subdrainage basin have been approved for concurrent
construction;
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 16)
000364
No grading or construction on slopes of 25 percent or greater
except as necessary for road construction as approved by the
County Engineer;
4. Ail lots shall be served by public water;
Access may be provided through either the Franklin or Ashcroft
development subject to approval of road design for roads in the
affected development. Access connecting Franklin to Ashcroft may
occur subject to approval of road design by Virginia Department of
Transportation;
County Attorney approval of Homeowners Association agreements.
All property owners shall become members of the Ashcroft Homeown-
ers Association and shall be subject to all regulations governing
said association; ~ ~ -
Minimum yard regulations shall be as follows: front - 25 feet;
side - 15 feet; rear - 20 feet. A separation of 100 feet or more
between dwellings shall be maintained for fire protection provided
that such distance may be reduced by the Fire Official in accor-
dance with Section 4.11.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. (Yard regula-
tions shall not be reduced.) Fire Official approval of the fire
prevention system. Such system shall be provided prior to any
Certificate of Occupancy;
Virginia Department of Health approval of two septic field loca-
tions on each lot. The Health Department shall either supervise
or test each lot utilizing soil tests by a qualified soil scien-
tist and undertake or supervise percolation tests as they may be
required. Such tests must demonstrate that two septic drainfields
shall not be located on any slope of 25 percent or greater. Any
lot not having adequate septic system site shall be combined with
a building lot and/or added to the common open space.
Agenda Item No. 12. ZMA-94-18. Donald Robertson. Public Hearing on a
request to rezone 4.34 ac from RA to LI for purpose of establishing a mini-
warehouse facility. Located on S sd of Rt 250 W, about 2/3 mi E of Yancey
Mills at 1-64. TM55B,P17. White Hall Dist. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on December 26, 1994, and January 2, 1995.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board. He
noted that the major issue for this rezoning is its conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan. Closely related issues are the impacts of the proposed
zoning and use on the area, and the adequacy and viability of the present
zoning. This site lies outside of the designated growth area and is within
the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir watershed. While the immediate vicinity has
similar commercial and industrial type of uses with commercial and industrial
zoning designations, these existing designations are based on uses which
existed prior to current growth management approaches (existed before Decem-
ber, 1980). Unless there is a compelling distinction between this property
and other properties outside the designated growth areas and within the water
supply watershed, approving this rezoning may set a precedent that would make
similar rezoning requests difficult to deny, thus compromising the effective-
ness of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff feels there are distinctions between
this property and other properties outside the growth areas and within the
water supply watershed, but those distinctions are not compelling enough to
support this rezoning, and, therefore, recommend denial.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission did, at its meeting on
December 13, 1994, recommend approval by a vote of 4:2 subject to a written
proffer stating the light industrial uses proposed, and that the proffer would
be submitted prior to the Board's meeting tonight. That proffer was received
January 5, 1995, and reads as follows:
"Date: January 4, 1995
ZMA~ 94-18
Tax Map Parcel(s)~#: 55-B-17
4.34 Acres to be rezoned RA to LI
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the
owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the
conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if
rezoned. These conditions are proffered as part of the requested
rezoning and it is agreed that the limitations: (1) are required or
arise because of the nature of the property and the rezoning sought, and
(2) have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested.
(1) The use of the property shall be limited to those uses allowed
under the Albemarle County Zoning Sections 27.2.1, items 15 & 17. The
other uses by right under Section 27.2.1, items 1 through 14, and 16
will not be placed on the property.
(Signed) Donald R. Robertson
Dated: January 4, 1995"
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 17)
000365
Mrs. Humphris asked what type of 'warehouse facility this will be. Mr.
Cilimberg said Mr. Robertson needs to answer this question. No plan has been
submitted with a detailed description of the type of storage proposed. Mr.
Marshall asked if there would be any lights on the storage facility. Mr.
Cilimberg said the lighting would be internalized, primarily lighting for
security.
Mrs. Humphris said she did not understand the language of the proffer.
The sentence which begins: "These conditions are proffered as a part of the
requested rezoning and it is agreed..." She does not know who is agreeing and
does not understand that anything can be required.
Mr. Davis said that language was taken directly from the State Code. It
means that the nature of the rezoning requires the proffer, it is not being
required by the Board of Supervisors. The zoning itself demonstrate~ the need
for this condition and it has a reasonable relationship to the rezoning. He
said these are the two findings that are required in order to accept a
proffer. He suggested this format because he feels it places proffers in the
right perspective.
Mr. Marshall asked if Mr. Robertson dies and the property is sold to
another person, what happens. Mr. Davis said this proffer runs with the land,
and the only way the proffer could be changed would be to apply for a rezon-
ing, which would come before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervi-
sors. The Board would have the ability to accept the changes to the proffer,
otherwise the original proffer would continue.
Mr. Perkins asked if the Architectural Review Board (ARB) has to review
the proffer. Mr. Cilimberg said the ARB would have to review the plan of
development.
With no further questions from the Board, Mr. Perkins opened the public
hearing.
Mr. Donald Robertson said he is the applicant. He said he can offer the
County a win-win situation. Even though this use would be put into light
industrial, he has no employees such as those normally associated with an
industrial region. There are no traffic aspects, no heavy equipment moving
back and forth, little noise and wastes. He can offer the citizens of western
Albemarle County a place to store their personal belongings. He can take
dormant land, and with his facility, add it to the County's tax revenues by
improving it and without requiring any County services, utilities or affecting
the educational resources provided by the County. The facility which is
planned will provide no wastes, noise, or pollution to the area or to the
Rivanna watershed. He said they can control the water there so there is less
runoff than that from the property currently. He said people today move
constantly and homes are getting smaller, so storage space is needed. In
addition, small businesses need additional space to store records or seasonal
inventory. He said the facility will be self-storage and not a warehouse. He
said they are being thrust into industrial zoning because of the way the law
is written. He has offered to proffer the other uses away from this particu-
lar property.
Mr. Robertson said it is his intent to establish a self-storage service
facility with a dwelling unit for the person who operates the facility. He
said most of his customers are expected to be residential, storing their own
personal goods. He said in the Route 250 area, the speed limit is 45 miles
per hour, and Virginia Department of Transportation estimates approximately
10,000 cars travelling through the area each day. In reference to the traffic
count in his facility, he only expects about one car per hour per 100 units,
so there will be only four or five cars in an hour. Traffic congestion is not
a factor. The site will be surrounded by perimeter buildings with one, two-
way entrance. There will be emergency gates around the area should the main
gate not function. Berming and landscaping along Route 250 will make the
facility nearly invisible to through traffic, with only a sign to direct
people to the rental office. The hours of operation will be during daylight.
Security lighting will be inside of the compound and will produce no glare or
excessive lighting to the outside area.
In conclusion, Mr. Robertson asked the Board to approve the request for
rezoning (1) to provide a service to the citizens of western Albemarle County
for storage facilities, which are currently unavailable, (2) easy accessibil-
ity to the site, and (3) with the anticipated future development of Crozet,
this facility is a needed service. This facility will provide a clean,
modern, storage service for the citizens of Albemarle County.
Mr. Davis said he would like to respond to Mrs. Humphris' earlier
comments. There are some extra words in this proffer that do not mirror the
statute, that is the words, "are required, or". The words in the statute
merely say that the limitations arise because of the nature of the rezoning.
He wants the record to reflect that this proffer is not being required by the
County and it is being voluntarily offered and the wording has that meaning
and it is correct.
Mr. Robertson said he defers to Mr. Davis' judgement. He said if an
adjustment is needed in the proffer, he is willing to change it. Mr. Davis
said this is on the record as a voluntary proffer and it is acceptable. Mr.
Robertson said he made the proffer. Mrs. Humphris asked if instead of just
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 18)
000.366
being clear on the record, should not the words be deleted. Mr. Davis said
the words "are required, or" could be stricken and that would make it very
clear on the record.
Mr. Richard Brown said his land joins with Mr. Robertson's. He has a 38
year old pond at the bottom of the hill with fish in it. He is opposed to the
self-storage facility being proposed. He said if the facility is built,
runoff will drain into his pond. There is no way to stop the drainage. His
pond is located in the valley where Mr. Robertson plans to build the warehous-
es on the hill. His pond also feeds into Lickinghole Creek which then feeds
into the Rivanna Reservoir. He said there is a spring in the bottom that
feeds his pond. If the facility is built above there, the water must drain
down. He said Mr. Robertson said there would not be much runoff, but how do
you define "much run off" There is no way the runoff can be stopped, because
water runs down hill, and he does not want his fish killed. He said once
construction begins, sand will fill up his pond due to the sand bed which is
located between Mr. Robertson's property and his property.
Mr. Robert Johnson said he is a resident of the Samuel Miller District.
He strongly opposes this rezoning. He said the project is bad plgnning and
the Planning staff voted in opposition to it. Strip zoning on through
highways is bad planning. He said 20 to 25 years ago, he talked to the Board
of Supervisors about Route 29 when there were only three traffic lights
between the Greene County line and the University. Now, look at what has
happened to Route 29 North. He said the same thing will happen on Route 250
West. Route 250 West is a scenic highway and this kind of rezoning is in
opposition to the Comprehensive Plan. Crozet is ideally set up with Route
240, which is a bypass, with Route 250 coming through. He said this is the
kind of facility that should be built on Route 240 and not on Route 250. He
said he could not find any compelling reasons in favor of building this
development in this particular location.
Mr. Richard Sturdevant said he spoke to the Planning Commission about
the water flow out of the property Mr. Robertson wishes to build on. He said
the water system that feeds Mr. Brown's property also feeds his property, and
the water travels on to the watershed. He said if someone is going to rezone
and try to exempt something from the Comprehensive Plan, it should not be done
next to a subdivision. He is an adjacent property owner and he bought a
wooded area on which to build. He does not want to walk outside of his house
and have these industrial buildings in view. He said Mr. Robertson is going
to build a berm to protect it from Route 250, but the berm does not protect
Forest Glen from it. He cannot help but see the facility.
Mr. Scott Peyton said he lives in Greenwood. His source of income is
derived from horticultural enterprises on his family's farm approximately two
miles from the proposed location. He does not take exception to the desir-
ability or need for storage facilities, however, he opposes the conversion of
rural area property to industrial property. He said this creates an
undesirable precedent for a pattern of encroachment on land that is available
for legitimate agricultural uses. He is not suggesting this particular parcel
of land is suitable for agriculture, but it is the precedent that is of
concern to him. He does not think this rezoning is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. He said the property proposed for rezoning is outside of
the growth area, and he is concerned about traffic implications.
Mr. John Marston said he is a life-long resident of western Albemarle
County. He grew up in Greenwood. He asked Mr. Davis how binding the proffer
is. Mr. Davis said the proffer is a binding commitment that goes with the
property and is the same as a zoning restriction. Mr. Marston asked if the
applicant had the property rezoned for a specific use, could he not come back
to the Board of Supervisors at a later date and say that it did not work.
Would it open the door for future zoning? Mr. Davis said his answer would be
speculative. Uses are always subject to the discretion of the board of
supervisors in office at that time.
Mr. Marston asked Mr. Cilimberg if the area had already been developed,
'if this area was not grandfathered. Mr. Cilimberg said not all the uses for
the area were researched. He thinks a number of uses were grandfathered. He
said there are some commercial zonings in the area that occurred before 1980
with the general rezoning of the County and adoption of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Mr. Marston said he thinks this project is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Since the Comprehensive Plan is being reviewed now, he
thinks it is inappropriate to change things before the review is complete. He
said the proposed project is outside of the Crozet growth area, it is in the
watershed, flowing to Stockton Creek which flows to the Mechum River and then
to the South Fork Rivanna, and that it would affect the water supply. He said
this project will set a precedent for development along Route 250 West. With
the predicted growth in Crozet, this project makes Route 250 vulnerable to
growth outside of the designated areas. The property can be used now, with a
special use permit, like the surrounding area is being used. The property
could be used for residential uses. He asked why the Board should rezone
agricultural to industry when there is other land that could be used in the
Crozet area. Mr. Marston requested that the Board deny the rezoning for this
project.
00036'7
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 19)
With no one else from the public rising to speak, Mr. Perkins closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Perkins said this property is in the White Hall district. He said
at first he thought the self-storage facility was a good idea. The facility
would be adjacent to the Brownsville Market, which is one of the busiest
highway spots in western Albemarle County. On the west side, there is a
heating and air conditioning business, a large garage and a cemetery. There
are lots behind the cemetery and it is close to Newtown. This area is also
close to Western Albemarle High School. He said if there is concern about
runoff, then Western Albemarle High School should not have been built where it
is now. The school is certainly located in the watershed. He said there may
be better uses for this property, but there are worse things that could be put
on this property by-right. He asked Mr. Cilimberg to point out uses which
could be more detrimental in nature.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Rural Areas district has 19 by-right uses and
another 44 plus by special use permit. He said some of the by-right uses, in
addition to dwellings and agricultural uses, include wayside stands, temporary
saw mill, agricultural service occupations, tourist lodging, farm winery,
mobile homes on individual lots, borrow areas and borrow pit. These are all
uses by-right.
Mrs. Humphris said she started out as Mr. Perkins did thinking this
project was a good idea. She talked to Mr. Robertson about his proposal
before she read the staff report and the Planning Commission minutes and
before she visited the site. She thinks there is a need for storage facili-
ties, but the proposed location is not the place to build. She will pay close
attention to what staff reported because unless there is a compelling distinc-
tion between this property and other properties outside the designated growth
areas and within the water supply watershed, allowing this rezoning may set a
precedent. It would make similar rezoning requests difficult to deny, thus
compromising the effectiveness of the Comprehensive Plan. She said this is a
serious situation. It has never been done since the 1980 downzoning of the
entire watershed. She does not want to set a precedent, which could compro-
mise the entire Comprehensive Plan. She hopes that Mr. Robertson will do this
for the people in the area because she feels there is a need for these
facilities, but not on the proposed property located in a rural area and in
the water supply watershed.
Mr. Bowerman asked Mrs. Humphris if she were saying there had never been
a rezoning of a residential or an RA area in a watershed area, to a commercial
use. Mrs. Humphris replied "no". Mrs. Thomas said the only rezoning requests
that have been approved were preexisting uses in the Rivanna watershed. She
said approval of this request would break a precedent that has existed since
1980, but has also been so well known in the community that no one has even
tried it since 1989.
Mr. Marshall asked Mr. Robertson if he had any plans with what to do
with the runoff. Mr. Robertson said he plans to use a heavy gravel which
gives a 25 percent void, and with four inches of water, it will hold about one
inch of direct rainfall on the site. Grass areas would slow the runoff and
with a holding facility at the base of the property, they could actually slow
the runoff to the point where there would be less runoff than in the current
situation. It would alleviate Mr. Brown's concerns about runoff into his pond
because there would be less running into the pond, as rapidly, than at present
on a normal rainfall basis.
Mr. Marshall asked Mr. Robertson about his plans for runoff control
while the facilities were under construction. Mr. Robertson said there would
be a holding area of silt fence that would eliminate any wash into the pond.
He said this might require several areas of silt fence to eliminate the
possibility of runoff. He said this would be part of the overall plan if this
proposal is approved by the Board. Mr. Marshall asked Mr. Ciliraberg if this
could be done. Mr. Cilimberg said the site is subject to erosion control
provisions and runoff control ordinance provisions because the property is
located in a water supply watershed.
Mr. Marshall asked Mr. Cilimberg if he thought the watershed was not a
problem. Mr. Cilimberg said the question of whether or not this would be a
problem, he could not answer. He said the Planning Commission was looking at
this as a situation where there would be a rezoning into a nonrural use in an
area of the water supply watershed.
Mr. Marshall said when the zoning ordinance was done in 1980, he does
not believe there were any self-storage type facilities known in the area.
Mrs. Humphris said this does not deal with a self-storage type area, but with
adding an urban use in the rural area in the water supply watershed. She said
that is a very strict and carefully guarded policy that has existed for 14
years. If the Board sets a precedent by approving this proposal to move a
nonurban to an urban designation on a property outside of the growth area in
the water supply watershed, there would be no turning back, and the Comprehen-
sive Plan would be affected.
Mr. Perkins asked Mr. Robertson if he had done any preliminary engineer-
ing to determine what the cut and fill would be on this site. Mr. Robertson
said there has been no formal engineering done on the site. They do not feel
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 20)
O00 G8
there will be a tremendous cut. He said the perimeter building could be done
around the tier situation so there would be minimal cutting.
Mrs. Thomas said this is a much needed service to residents and busi-
nesses in a growth area, however, and for this very reason she feels it should
be built in the nearby growth area. She said when the Board allows businesses
to locate on Route 250, the Board is weakening plans to have Crozet as an
attractive place for people to live and to own businesses. She is concerned
about the precedent that would be set. She said the Rivanna Reservoir has
lost one-fifth of its capacity. The only reason the reservoir has not lost
more than this is because of the strong control of what happens in the
watershed. Even though this one use might be innocuous, the precedent set
would make it difficult to maintain control over this one watershed. She said
the watershed is the basis of a major section of the Comprehensive Plan. For
this reason, she is opposed to this project.
Mr. Bowerman said he would like to support this request because he
thinks it is a benign use. However, he said this type of approval would be a
major precedent setting concept. That reason alone is sufficient not to
support this project.
Mr. Marshall said he had planned on supporting this project because he
feels it is the best use of the land. However, after listening to the
arguments about precedent setting, he is leery about supporting this after
turning down a plumbing outfit in Scottsville for the same reason. He said it~
would place him in a precarious position to support this project at this time.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to deny
ZMA-94-18. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
None.
Agenda Item No. 13. SP-94-31. George Hall. Public Hearing on a
request for public garage on 0.676 ac zoned RA & EC. Located on N sd of Rt
250 E approx 150 ft W of Albemarle/Fluvanna county line. TM95,P12B1. Rivanna
Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on December 26, 1994, and January 2,
1995.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 3,
1995, unanimously recommended approval of SP-94-31 subject to eight condi-
tions.
There being no questions from Board members, Mr. Perkins opened the
public hearing.
Mr. George Hall, applicant, said he did not have anything to say. He
encouraged questions to be asked.
Mr. Marshall asked if differences were worked out with the adjacent
property owner as mentioned in the Planning Commission minutes. Mr. Hall said
the differences had been worked out. He said the adjacent property owner was
concerned about junk being left outside. Mr. Hall said he would also notify
the adjacent property owner before installing a fence or a dumpster. As for
keeping parts outside, he has a 3000 square foot building and the two-stall
garage is only 50 percent of the building, so he has plenty of storage area
inside.
Mrs. Thomas asked about waste, such as oil runoff, and if Mr. Hall has a
collection system. Mr. Hall said he will have a collection system once the
Board approves this project. He said tanks and a pit with drainage coming
into the garage will be done. Mrs. Thomas asked about the pit. Mr. Hall said
it will be a concrete pit sealed in with the drain going from inside the
building. If there is a spillage, it goes into the drain. Water is heavy so
oil or anti-freeze will sit on top, and he will have a company come in and
pump the oil and antifreeze out for recycling.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, Mr. Perkins closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Martin said he thinks it is admirable that Mr. Hall and the adjaCent
landowner were able to work out their differences. He then offered motion,
which was seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve SP-94-31 with the eight condi-
tions recommended by the Planning Commission. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
None.
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
January tl, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 21)
000369
The public garage use shall be limited to the repairing and
equipping of vehicles. No body work or spray-painting of
vehicles shall be permitted. No sale of gasoline or sale or
rental of vehicles shall be permitted;
All work shall be conducted within the existing building;
No outside storage of parts including junk parts or inopera-
ble vehicles except those awaiting repair. Refuse awaiting
disposal shall be stored in appropriate containers;
Fire and Building Official approval;
Virginia Department of Transportation approval of commercial
entrance;
Hours of operation shall be limited from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30
p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on
Saturday and no operation of the garage on Sunday;
Engineering Department approval of waste collection and
disposal methods;
Not more than four vehicles awaiting repair shall be parked
on the property outdoors at any time.
Agenda Item No. 14. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
Board.
Mr. Tucker asked if Board members had any thoughts concerning Mr. John
Carter's suggestion for a survey. Mr. Marshall said he did not understand
what Mr. Carter wanted. Mr. Tucker said it was to obtain comments from
citizens on the highway revenue sharing projects in the CIP. Mrs. Humphris
said, as a representative for her district, she feels this is her job. Mr.
Perkins said he thinks it is a good suggestion, and he wishes it could be done
on each item, but it cannot. This is a representative form of government, so
it is up to the individual board member and citizens to gather information.
Mrs. Thomas said she had gotten several angry calls from people whose
addresses have been changed once again. She, personally, called the vendor
working on the E-9tl system and was assured that things will get better. She
does not know what to do. Mr. Marshall said Mr. Maynard Sipe had given him
two numbers to use to obtain information. He carries them in his billfold
since he has had to use them several times to get answers. Mrs. Thomas said
if people have already had checks printed, they are simply angry. Mr.
Marshall said it is going to be 90 days before all of this is solved. Mrs.
Thomas asked if the consultants are still being paid. Mr. Tucker said Mr.
Marshall is talking about street signs and the E-911 system. Addresses are
also a part of it.
Mrs. Thomas said County staff needs to be careful about replies to these
angry people. Some people run a business from their home, so it not just a
slight inconvenience. Mrs. Thomas said she thinks the consultant should
express a little more remorse.
Mrs. Humphris asked for an update on the Berkmar Drive project and the
Mountain Protection Ordinance for the February 1, 1995, meeting.
Agenda Item No. 14a. Executive Session: Legal Matters. At 11:09 p.m.,
a motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, for an execu-
tive session under Virginia Code § 2.1-344A.7 to discuss a legal matter
pertaining to a certificate of appropriateness. Roll was called, and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 14b. Certify Executive Session. The Board reconvened
into open session at 11:45 p.m.
Motion was made immediately by Mr. Bowerman, seconded Mrs. Humphris, to
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 require-
ments 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:
Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins and
Mrs. Thomas.
None.
January 11, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting)
(page 22)
000870
Agenda Item No. 15' With no further business to come before the Board,
the meeting was adjourned at 11:46 p.m.
Chairman