1990-03-21March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 1)
267
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia,~was held on March 21, 1990, at 7:30 P.M., Auditorium, County Office
Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., David P. Bowerman,
F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Charlotte Humphris, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Mr.
Peter T. Way.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive; Mr. George R.
St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
and Community Development.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at
7:30 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Bowie.
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
Agenda Item No. 4. Consent Agenda.
Motion was offered by Mr. Way and seconded by Mr. Bain to accept the
items on the Consent Agenda as information. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Item 4.1. Notice dated February 22, 1990, from the State Corporation
Con~nission enclosing application of Automart Limousine Service for a certifi-
cate as a limousine carrier, received as information.
Item 4.2. Notice dated March 13, 1990, from Mr. H. W. Mills, Maintenance
Manager, Virginia Department of Transportation, noting that the Department
intends to repair the existing superstructure over the South Fork Hardware
River, on Route 692, between March 26 and March 30, 1990, received as
information.
Not Docketed: Mr. Bowie announced that the Board wishes to recognize the
service of several individuals to Albemarle County. He then presented a
certificate of appreciation to Mrs. Katherine Burton, who served for over
seven years on the Social Services Board, the last two as Chairman.
Mr. Bowie also presented a certificate of appreciation to Mr. David
Bowerman in gratitude for his ten years of service on the Planning Commission
as the representative of the Charlottesville District. Mr. Bowerman served as
Chairman of the Commission from 1983 to 1987 and then again from 1987 to 1989.
Mr. Bowie then presented a certificate of appreciation to Mrs. Norma
Diehl for her 12 years of service on the Planning Commission as the represen-
tative of the Samuel Miller District. Ms. Diehl served as Chairman of the
Commission from 1981 to 1983.
Mr. Bowie also presented a certificate of appreciation to Mr. Tim Michel
in gratitude for his seven years of service as the At-large representative on
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Bowie then presented a certificate of appreciation to Mr. Peter
Stark, who served for four years on the Planning Commission as the representa-
tive of the Jack 3ouett District.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 2)
268
Agenda Item No. 5. To receive public comments on the proposed 1990-91
County Budget before starting work sessions.
Mr. Bowie asked Mr. Agnor to provide an overview of the operating budget
for FY 1990-91.
Mr. Agnor said staff has prepared the budget within the allocation of
revenues adopted by the Board in November, 1989. That allocation included
funds for operational expenses, the Revenue Sharing Agreement with the City
and existing debt service on school bonds. The allocation of revenues allowed
a $2.0 million increase in local funds over the appropriations for the current
fiscal year. The Board held in reserve $1.4 million in anticipated revenues
to fund two programs: the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) and the new debt
service on 1989 school bond issue. Since the CIP was estimated to require
$1.0 million and the debt service, $1.4 million, the budget process began with
a shortage of $1.0 million. Mr. Agnor said the budget is now short $600,0001,
in order for it to be balanced.
Since last November, there have been several changes in the amount of
revenues anticipated by the County. The Board has-approved a pro rata
ment program for vehicles, which will begin in 1991. The Solid Waste Task
Force has proposed that the County start charging user fees at the landfill.
Revenues from these two innovations have been estimated in the 1990-91 o
ing budget. Mr. Agnor said that staff has also included revenues from the
state, which are being revised according to the final actions of the Genera]
Assembly just ten days ago. He said these three changes in revenues have
resulted in a recommended operating budget for FY 1990-91 of $80.62 million
seven percent increase of this year's budget.
Mr. Agnor said the Board has also approved the collection of personal
property taxes twice a year, beginning in June, 1991. This measure will ra
a one-time revenue of $5.07 million, which was allocated in January, 1990 t¢
the CIP to reduce the amount of money which must be borrowed for next year'
CIP. Mr. Agnor said the CIP is also recommended to receive an additional
million, an annual allocation of current revenues to the CIP.
Mr. Agnor then highlighted some of the recommended appropriations for FY
1990-91. The departments listed under the category of "Administration" are
recommended to receive $3.69 million, an increase of 12.27 percent, or
$400,000 over FY 89-90. Of this amount, $320,000 represents the costs
associated with the new pro rata assessment program and the change to
collecting personal property taxes twice a year. The departments listed under
"Public Works" are recommended to receive an increase of 13.03 percent, or
$240,000, which will cover the cost of changes in the operation of the Ivy
Landfill and the opening of the Keene Transfer Station. The Parks and
Recreation Department is recommended to receive an 'increase of 10.53 percent,
or $200,000, to meet the cost of opening and beginning operations at the
Southern Regional Park. Mr. Agnor also pointed out that there is a reserve of
$100,000 in the budget for the divisions listed for "Public Safety" so
recommendations listed in the recent report by the Jefferson County Fire and
Rescue Association may be funded later.
Mr. Agnor said the recommended allocation for the Schools Division is
$56.28 million, a 6.91 percent increase, or $3.64 million, over last year's
appropriation. Of this amount, $1.5 million is int, ended for enrollment
growth; $2.0 million for an increase in the current base operation and the
operation of two new schools; and $480,000 for improvements to the math and
science curricula, expansion of computer instruction, guidance counselors in
the elementary schools, after-school programs in middle schools and some
increases in staff in the Schools' Departments of Personnel, Transportation
and Building Maintenance. When the new Debt Service is added to the Schools'
budget, the budget increases by 9.58 percent over that of FY 89-90.
Mr. Agnor said the costs of General Government'equal 24.41 percent of the
operating budget; the costs of the School Division equal 69.81 percent. About
one percent of the total operating budget (.99 percent) is recommended to be
placed in a reserve fund for the Board's use during the year.
Mr. Agnor then summarized the revenues available to the County for FY
90-91. Local revenues provide 67.58 percent of theCounty's income. He said
that staff anticipates an increase of $1.92 million in the amount of revenue
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 3)
269
generated by property taxes. Of this amount, $450~000 result from the pro
rata assessment of vehicles and the balance comes from the expanding tax base.
Other local revenues will increase by $2.14 million, with landfill user fees
comprising about $500,000 of this amount. Revenues from the state, which
provide about 29.91 percent of the County's income, are decreasing by $500,000
for the General Fund and increasing by $2.22 million for the School Fund.
Unfortunately, Mr. Agnor said, school funds from the state can be used only
for the Schools' operating budget, not for building new schools.
Mr. Agnor said the news media has reported that the recommended budget
includes a tax increase of two cents per hundred dollars on real property. He
said this claim is not completely accurate. However, if the entire $800,000
recommended for the reserve fund is applied toward the new debt service of
$1.4 million, and nothing else in the budget changes, this would still leave a
shortfall of $600,000 requiring a new source of revenue. This shortfall
equates to an increase of about two cents per one hundred dollars in the real
property tax rate. Mr. Agnor said it is also inaccurate to assume that the
budget-before the Board this evening will not change at some point during the
four work sessions and another public hearing. Mr~ Agnor said the staff is
still waiting for the latest decisions from Richmond on state revenues.
Depending on these changes and adjustments, an increase in the tax rate may be
needed.
Mr. Bowie opened the public hearing.
Mr. Herman Key of the Independent Resource Center addressed the Board.
He asked that the Board fund the Jefferson Area United Transportation Network
(3AUNT) at a level that would not require an increase in the fare. He said
that most of the people who use JAUNT are old and/Or disabled, have no other
means of transportation, and have gross household incomes of under $10,000 per
year. Many of these people must spend ten percent of their take-home pay on
transportation to and from work. Mr. Key said that JAUNT has experienced a 90
percent increase in ridership; a significant portion of this increase is due
to people traveling to and from work on a daily basis. He said these working
people will be the ones most affected by an increase in the fares. Given the
recommended 60 percent increase in fares, someone who works and earns $600 a
month would spend $100 each month, or one-sixth of'~his or her income, on
transportation to and from work alone. He said the people who use JAUNT are
trying to take care of themselves and provide a decent life for themselves
without asking government to do it for them.
Ms. Annette Littner addressed the Board and said she is a part-time
student at Piedmont Virginia Community College. She also works part-time and
lives in the Heritage Hall Nursing Home on Rio Road. Since she is unable to
get herself and her wheelchair into a car alone and cannot afford a van
customized for use by the handicapped, JAUNT is her only means of transporta-
tion to and from work, school and doctor appointments. She said she uses
JAUNT about twice a day, which costs between $60 and $90 a month. She said
she cannot afford an increase in the fares and she~does not want to have give
up either work or school.
Mr. John Gallant addressed the Board and said ~he uses JAUNT about four
times a week and spends about $50 each month on fares. He said'he depends on
JAUNT for transportation and asked that the Board not raise the fares.
Mr. Way asked Ms. Linda Wilson, Executive Director of JAUNT, if JAUNT
would be forced to raise its fares for handicapped riders if the Board ap-
proved the allocation recommended by the County Executive. He asked if the
Board of Directors of JAUNT anticipated an increase in the fares. Ms. Wilson
said it costs about $6.70 per trip for each rider in the urban area. The fare
costs $1.50; the County has subsidized the balance. If the Board were to
approve the County Executive's recommendation, the County's subsidy will
decrease and the fare must increase as a result.
Mr. Way said that JAUNT requested about $58,888; the County Executive
recommended funding $45,000 of this request. If the shortfall of $7,000 were
restored, Mr. Way asked, would that solve the problem. Ms. Wilson said,
"yes".
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 4)
270
Mr. Bowie said he is sure the BOard of Directors for JAUNT has other ways
of dealing with the proposed shortfall than raising the fare for handicapped
riders.
Mr. Eric Harper addressed the Board and said he uses JAUNT. He said he
works, but does not even earn minimum wage. He said an increase in the fares
for handicapped riders would really hurt him.
Ms. Beulah Naylor addressed the Board and said that JAUNT allows her to
go to her doctors, do volunteer work and attend recreational facilities. She
said there is no other way for her to get around.
Mr. James Ray addressed the Board and said he is speaking on behalf of
handicapped residents in the rural areas, particularly the White Hall area
near Innisfree. He said JAUNT is too expensive for handicapped people in the
rural areas, since it costs about $10.00 to go to and from Charlottesville.
He would like to see fares lowered for the elderly and the handicapped riders
in the rural areas.
Ms. Rachel Collier, President of the Crozet Elementary School Parents
Teachers Organization (PTO), addressed the Board. She thanked the Board for
its decision to install wooden gymnasium floors in the new Crozet Elementary
School. She said the County has a tradition, reaching back to Mr. Thomas
Jefferson, of excellence in education. She said she is not sure the budget
presented by the School Board can meet this commitment to education. She said
that parents are concerned that the County is not paying teachers, bus
drivers, custodians and principals the salaries necessary to attract and
retain people in this area. She said that only 20 people have applied for the
job of principal of the new Crozet Elementary School, far less than the
expected number of applicants. Ms. Collier attributed this shortage of
applicants to the less than competitive salary offered for the position. She
said she is glad that the recommended school budget includes funding for the
elementary school guidance program and she hopes the Board realizes the
importance of this program. She asked the Board to consider carefully other
needs as well, such as the textbook funding program, which loses money every
year; and the teacher-student ratios, which must remain low. She asked that
the Board fund the budget recommended by Mr. Overstreet and, if there is any
surplus available to the County, pass that on to the schools as well.
Mr. Roger Flint, President of the Board of the Charlottesville-Albemarle
Clean Community Commission (CAC3), spoke. Currently, CAC3 has only one
part-time employee but, as a result of State mandates that localitiees must
recycle 25 percent by 1995, the demands made upon the Commission have tripled.
Mr. Flint said the Commission now works full-time, ~with funding and personnel
for half-time operation only. He said the City has provided property for one
of the Commission's recycling centers and the County has provided office space
for the part-time employee. In return, CAC3 has saved the City and County
approximately $15,000 yearly by removing 1,500,000 pounds from the amount of
solid waste that would have gone into the area's l~ndfills.
Mr. Flint said he understands that the City an~d County are considering
establishing a Solid Waste Authority and hiring a Recycling Coordinator,
beginning July 1, 1990. He said that CAC3 supports this action and it
recommends that the City and County hire its part-time executive director to
work full-time under the Recycling Coordinator. This move would insure that
existing recycling programs are coordinated with any new efforts. Mr. Flint
also recommended that a volunteer commission be formed under the direction of
the Recycling Office and that it include among others the present volunteer
board members of the CAC3.
Ms. Kay Wright, President of the Charlottesvilie-Albemarle Chapter of the
Literacy Volunteers of America, spoke next. She urged the Board to consider
funding the position of Librarian Assistant, so that the Literacy Volunteers
may continue to coordinate its volunteer tutoring program. She said this
community needs basic tutoring for adults who read from a zero to Grade 5
level. Although the Adult Basic Education Program serves all adults, it does
not offer the individual tutoring provided by the Literacy Volunteers of
America. According to the 1980 census, 18 percent of the County's residents
have less than an eighth grade education. She said~that tutors in the
Literacy Volunteers program have made it possible for some adults to vote for
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 5)
271
the first time, to obtain drivers' licenses and to find better jobs. Helping
these adults get better jobs increases the tax base and lowers the amount the
County would have to spend through the Department of Social Services.
Mr. John Hood, President of the Jefferson Country Fire and Rescue Associ-
ation (JCFRA), addressed the Board. He said the JCFRA is requesting a five
percent increase, based on a 15 percent annual increase in the number of
calls. While the County Executive has recommended that the Board approve the
five percent increase, Mr. Hood said, he is concerned about the funding for
rescue squads. JCFRA had requested that funding for two of the rescue squads,
Western Albemarle and Scottsville, equal the appropriation to the fire depart-
ments, or $42,000 each. The County Executive recommended that these two
rescue squads receive $30,800. Mr. Hood said the Board asked the firefighters
and the rescue squad workers to combine into one organization, which they did.
He is now asking that the funding be equal.
Mr. Hood then introduced the authors of the Jefferson Country Fire and
Rescue Association System Study: Mr. David Hunter and Mr. Alan Norford. Mr.
Hood said the third author, Mr. Raymond James, could not be at tonight's
meeting. Mr. Hood said that one of the ways to recruit more volunteers is to
lower the cost incurred by the volunteer. He said it currently costs a
volunteer between $500 and $1000 to answer the calls he or she responds to in
one year. He asked the Board to consider exempting one car for each volunteer
from personal property taxes. He also asked that the Board consider granting
rescue squad workers and firefighters free admission to the local parks and
recreation facilities to show these volunteers that local government cares
about their services. He asked that the Board continue to give these
volunteers free County stickers for their vehicles.~ He also asked that the
Board fund the Volunteer Resource position and continue funding the basic life
support coordinator.
Mr. Hood said he believes that the Board should also consider making
funds available in the future for aerial firefighting and rescue service. He
said the volunteers and County residents face an unacceptable level of risk of
both life and property, because conventional firefighting and rescue equipment
is often ineffective in the case of large buildings with many stories. Mr.
Hood said the JCFRA recommends that aerial service he provided initially by
extending the contract with the City of Charlottesville. He said he will have
more details on this measure after meeting with staff. Mr. Hood asked that
members of the JCFRA stand. About 20 members stood.
Mr. Bowie said the Board will schedule a work ,session to discuss the
recommendations of the JCFRA System Study after members have read the report.
Ms. Martha Wood, President of the Albemarle Educational Association
(AEA), addressed the Board. She said the AEA believes that the schools budget
should reflect the growth in enrollment anticipated during 1990-91 and cost of
living increases. After these imperatives are met, Ms. Wood said, she hopes
there will be money left for some much-needed initiatives.
Ms. Wood said the Board has received a report from Dr. Carole A.
Hastings, Director of Personnel, concerning the status of classified employees
in the schools division. She said the report is thorough and well-prepared
and is backed up by testimony from members of the business community. Ms.
Wood said she thinks the salaries recommended in this report for classified
employees should be considered a minimum guideline. Ms. Wood said she has
watched these employees receive pitifully small increases in salary over the
years, which have resulted in these employees earning much smaller salaries
than their counterparts in surrounding localities. She said that classified
employees who are members of the AEA have said they would prefer to have all
of their increase in vested salary. She said the merit increases are not
vested and do not suffice to keep experienced, trained employees working for
the County. She told of one classified employee who received a merit increase
last year of only fifty cents a month. Ms. Wood said the County often loses
trained employees to private industry or surrounding localities. She said the
rate of attrition is 16 percent and the best way to halt this trend is to
raise the salary scale for classified personnel, as recommended in Dr.
Hastings' report.
Ms. Helen Lockwood, President of the Meriwether-Lewis Elementary School
PTO, addressed the Board. She said that education and the economy are con-
nected: uneducated, illiterate people often cannot find or hold jobs, costing
272
21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 6)
the state and localities money in social services, lost revenues, welfare and
prisons. ~She said many local businesses are concerned about the quality of
education received by those seeking employment. She quoted several local
businessmen who expressed concern about the quality of education in the
County. Ms. Lockwood said the quality of the schoOl system is crucial to
attracting technology and industry to the County. She then read the following
statement from Mr. David Parrish, Jr., President of the Michie Company:
"Improving our public school system and thus improving the competency of our
graduates would be of immense help to local business. Certainly, money spent
on schools will provide handsome dividends in the future".
Ms. Lockwood said quality education depends on good teachers and adminis-
trators. If salaries are not competitive, the County will not be able to
attract and retain qualified professionals. She said the attrition rate among
County teachers is frightening. She said the salaries of administrators have
not kept pace with the increases in teachers' salaries: there are some
teachers who earn more than administrators.
Ms. Linda Broadbent, First Vice-President of the Charlottesville-Albe-
marle Chapter of the League of Women Voters, addressed the Board. She said
the League appreciates being able to express its views early in the budget
process; however, she asked that the Board try to allow at least three days
between the presentation of the budget and the first public hearing in next
year's budget schedule. She said the League is also pleased that the budgets
for four departments are presented as zero-based budgets, so that the Board
and public can immediately discern the level of service that results from
varying expenditures. She thanked the County's staff, particularly Management
Analyst Ms. Roxanne White, for their assistance.
Ms. Broadbent said that members of the League,believe the Board should
set its budget priorities at the very beginning oflthe budget process. These
priorities should be explicitly related to the goa!s in the Comprehensive
Plan. She said the League welcomes the Board's decision to make the Fiscal
Resource Advisory Committee a standing committee, at least until December 31,
1990. The League also supports the Committee's recommendations that the
County develop a five year financial plan and long~term financial forecasting.
She said the League also supports the recommendations of the Solid Waste Task
Force.
Ms. Broadbent said the members of the League believe that the County will
have to raise the real property tax rate by at least two cents in order to
meet the needs of the County, including the payment of $1.4 million debt on
the School bonds. Even with an increase of two cents in the tax rate, there
would be no reserve contingency fund and many worthy items could not be
funded. She suggested that the Board consider holding another referendum on
the meals tax in November.
Ms. Broadbent said there are many items in the proposed budget that
appear to be underfunded. Based on the League's recent study of the regional
library system, she would like to see the Library's request fully funded. The
League also strongly supports a full-time staff Person for the Literacy
Volunteers of America. The League is also concerned that no funding is
recommended for United Way Child Care Scholarships, the Children and Youth
Commission and for an intern to complete the ground water mapping project on
which League members and others have spent so many hours in the past year.
Ms. Broadbent said the members of the League are also concerned about the
heavy workload placed upon staff in several County departments and the lack of
funding for additional personnel. She said the League believes that County
employees are often overworked and underpaid, and important County functions
such as enforcing the Zoning Ordinance cannot be accomplished because of
insufficient personnel.
Ms. Broadbent said the League is grateful for the increased funding of
the school system. While it may seem responsible of the School Board not to
exceed the funding limit set by the Board, the League would prefer that the
School Board advocate adequate funding to educate children, rather than settle
for what seems politically necessary. Ms. Broadbent said the League is
concerned about the lack of funding for principals' pay raises and guidance
counselors in the elementary schools.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 7)
273
Ms. Ann Causey, a representative of the Charlottesville-Albemarle chapter
of the National Organization for Women (NOW), addressed the Board. She does
not think that citizens have had enough time to review the budget and make
responsible comments. She said that NOW supports an increase of two cents per
one hundred dollars in the real property tax rate to cover the expansion of
the school system. She said the quality of life in the County can be
maintained only by imposing an adequate level of taxation. She said that
members of NOW are pleased that the Outreach Counseling Services are
recommended to be funded nearly at the requested level. She said that NOW is
concerned that the County Executive has recommended that the United Way Child
Care Scholarships not be funded. She urged the Board to fund fully the
request from the Sexual Assault Resource Agency (SARA) in order to expand the
education coordinator services to full-time and the victim services program.
She also asked that the Board fund, to the highest level possible, the
requests of the Shelter for Help in Emergency (SHE), the Central Virginia
Child Development Agency (CVCDA), the Monticello Area Community Action Agency
(MACAA), Region Ten Community Services, JAUNT, the~Albemarle Housing
Improvement Program (AHIP) and JABA.
Ms. Betty Newell, a resident of the Samuel Miller District, addressed the
Board. She suggested that the Board consider sharing some services with the
City, instead of limiting services because of limited revenues. She cited
several examples of successful shared services, sudh as the Regional Library,
the Health Department and JAUNT. She also asked the Board to consider sharing
school services with the City.
Mr. Doug Harris, a local educator and County property owner, addressed
the Board. He said the County is obligated to provide the highest possible
level of education for its children, without regard for race, gender, class,
or physical condition. He said the County must educate its children so that
they will be ready to take leadership positions in the technologically ad-
vanced industry that the University of Virginia plans to bring to this area.
Mr. Dave Moss, a human resources manager with Sperry Marine, addressed
the Board. As the work force shrinks in the next ten years, he said, workers
in all levels of industry will be asked to bring critical thinking skills and
creativity to their jobs. These skills can be provided by a good system of
education. Mr. Moss asked that the Board be as generous as possible to the
system of education. He asked that the Board also,attend to vocational
education.
Ms. Joanne Grivey, former director of the Charlottesville-Albemarle
chapter of the Literacy Volunteers of America, addressed the Board. She said
that there are three levels of literacy services provided at the local level:
Level 1 includes those adults reading at a fourth grade level; Level 2, adults
reading at fifth through eighth grade levels; Level 3, adults with the reading
skills necessary to begin preparing for the Graduation Equivalency Degree
(GED). The mandate for teaching adults at Level 1 has been given by the State
to private, volunteer organizations, such as the Literacy Volunteers of
America. However, the State does not provide funding for services offered to
Level 1 adults, while services for adults in Levels 2 and 3 receive funding
from the state under the adult basic education program. She asked the Board
to consider this shortage during the review of the budget.
Ms. Angela Glomm, a representative of the Charlottesville-Albemarle
Recycle Together Coalition, addressed the Board. She said the Coalition
supports the recommendations of the Solid Waste Task Force. She asked that
the Board approve the funding necessary to act upon these recommendations.
Ms. Susan Brandley addressed the Board and said she has three children
enrolled in public schools in the County and one child in private school. She
said that nearly 100 people who appeared at the public hearing held by the
School Board on the school budget supported an increase in taxes to fund an
additional $2 million for education. She urged the Board to ask the School
Board what the schools really need in the County.
Since no one else wished to speak concerning the budget, Mr. Bowie closed
the public hearing.
(Note: The Board recessed at 9:06 P.M. and reconvened at 9:19 P.M.)
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 8)
274
Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing: To take public comments on the sale
of Surplus Public Property known as the Old Greenwood Elementary School.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 13, 1990.)
Mr. Perkins said the School Board declared Greenwood School surplus
property in April, 1987, after the building had been empty for several years.
This action transferred the ownership to the Board of Supervisors, which asked
staff to consider uses for the property. Staff pointed out that the property
could be considered for a housing facility, which would meet a public need.
The property, however, lies in the rural areas and would require an amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan and approval for rezoning, if it were to be used for
a housing project. The lack of available public water and sewer would also
hamper the property's use for multi-family housing. Mr. Perkins said the
Board decided that it would seek public comments at a public hearing for ideas
of the future use of the Greenwood School.
Mr. Perkins said about 15 citizens spoke at this public hearing, held
July 1, 1987. Most of the speakers asked that the rural character of the
community be considered. Several speakers felt that housing for the elderly
would be a satisfactory use for this property if the rural character could be
preserved.
The Board then asked the Building Committee to review the situation and
recommend a use for the School. After having the property appraised, the
Building Committee had the property advertised forlthirty days. Bids were
taken on August 28, 1987, and all three bids fell Under the appraised value.
Each bidder asked that the County guarantee such things as asbestos removal,
zoning changes, expansion beyond the current building area and financial
assistance. Since 1987 and during the latter part of 1988 and 1989, there
were several efforts to market the property directly, which were complicated
by changes in the federal income tax laws pertaining to the renovation of
the building for housing.
Finally, in October, 1989, a group showed interest in purchasing the
school and renovating the building to house a private school. After several
sessions with staff and the Building Committee, this group made an offer to
purchase the School. The group has also requested leasing from four to eight
classrooms at another school, either Rose Hill or Crozet Elementary, while the
Greenwood School is being renovated. The group's offer met the legal require-
ments and appears to be compatible with the rural community; therefore, the
Building Committee has recommended that the County accept the offer. Because
this sale is a disposal of publicly owned property, the Board is conducting a
public hearing tonight.
Mr. Perkins then outlined the contract, which is set out in full below.
Mr. Bowie opened the public hearing.
Mr. George Ellinger, a resident of Greenwood, ~said he supports the sale
of the Greenwood School, and he knows of many residents in the area who feel
the same way he does.
Since no one else wished to speak concerning the sale of the Greenwood
School, Mr. Bowie closed the public hearing and placed the matter before the
Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Perkins and seconded by Mrs.
Humphris to authorize the Chairman to sign the following contract with the
Marthe Robin Catholic School. Roll was called and .the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Mr. James Desmond, a representative of the Marthe Robin Catholic School,
addressed the Board. He thanked members of the Board and staff for their help
and said he hoped to make the School a cornerstone of Albemarle County.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 9)
275
THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 1990, by and between
MARTHE ROBIN CATHOLIC SCHOOL, a Virginia non-profit tax-exempt
corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Buyer" of the first part,
and the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, hereinafter referred to as
"Seller" of the second part,
WITNES SETH:
That the Buyer agrees to buy and the Seller agrees to sell the
hereinafter described real property upon the terms and conditions
set out below:
1. Property. Ail that certain lot or parcel of land in
Albemarle County, with all improvements and appurtenances, shown as
Parcel 54 on Tax Map 54, and known as Greenwood School Property, and
being the same property which was subject to a resolution of the
County School Board of Albemarle County under date of March 24, 1987
and of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 930, page 712, which resolution
declared the subject property surplus, and which resolution under
the terms of Virginia Code Section 22.1-129 vested title to the
subject property in the County of Albemarle, Virginia. The subject
property is also the same property which was conveyed to the School
Board of Samuel Miller District of the County of Albemarle by deed
of Wills Johnson, dated January 17, 1920 and recorded in the Clerk's
Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 172,
page 459. Such property will be conveyed by special warranty
together with all appurtenances and rights pertaining thereto, and
along with all furniture and equipment located on the premises at
the time of execution of this contract. The property will be
conveyed subject to any easements or conditions presently of record
and affecting the same, provided such do not prohibit the improve-
ment of the property for purposes of a school~
2. Consideration. Buyer agrees to pay $150,000 for the
above-described property, payable as follows: the sum of $15,000 to
be paid in cash at delivery of deed; the balance of $135,000 to be
evidenced by a promissory note of the Buyer, secured by a first lien
deed of trust, payable as follows: $15,000 one year from delivery
of deed, and $40,000 per year thereafter for three years with the
entire unpaid balance due on the fourth annual anniversary after
delivery of deed. There shall be no interest on the deferred
purchase money.
3. Condition of Premises. The subject ~property is sold as
is, with no warranty whatever as to the condition of the premises.
The cost, if any, of removal of asbestos shal~ be borne by the
Buyer.
4. Buyer's Obligation to Purchase. The property is subject
to Buyer's ability to obtain zoning clearance !for use of the
property as a private school.
5. Risk of Loss. Risk of loss shall be on the Seller until
transfer of title. After transfer of title, Buyer shall provide
Seller with evidence of hazard insurance in effect, which shall
adequately protect Seller's interest as long as there is any unpaid
balance of deferred purchase money.
6. Closing. Delivery of the deed, note and deed of trust and
the cash payment shall take place at the County Office Building, 401
McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22901, on or before sixty
(60) days from execution of this contract, or at such other time and
place as may be agreed to by the parties.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 10)
276
7. Special Conditions.
a. No earnest money is being required at the execution
of this contract, but in the event Buyer is unable to close within
sixty (60) days from the execution hereof, due to factors beyond
control of Seller such as, but not limited to, delay in Buyer's
obtaining tax exempt status or delay in Buyer's obtaining financing,
then at its option, Seller may declare this contract null and void
or may require a deposition of earnest money from Buyer in such
amount as Seller in its sole discretion may deed reasonable, and in
the latter event the time of performance shall be extended to such
later closing date as may be mutually agreeable to the parties.
b. Buyer shall have forty-five (45) days after execution
of contract, to obtain assurance from a certified architect that the
building is structurally sound so as to be feasible for a private
school, and that the well and septic systems are sound. If such
assurance cannot be obtained, Buyers shall have the option to
rescind this contract.
c. If the estimated costs to remove asbestos in the
building exceed $50,000.00, the Buyers shall have the option to
rescind the contract.
8. Seller agrees to make available four (4) to eight (8)
classrooms in either Rose Hill Elementary or Crozet Elementary
School until the renovation of Greenwood is completed; however, the
parties recognize that final decision as to the availability of
these rooms must be made by the School Board Of Albemarle County.
Agenda Item No. 7. SP-90-01. Michelle Mattiole. To allow a day care to
be located on 1.775 acres, zoned R-4, Residential. Property, described as Tax
Map 76, Parcel 15A is located on the north side of Rt. 702, three-tenths of a
mile west of the U.S. Route 29 Bypass. Samuel Miller District. (Advertised
in the Daily Progress on March 6 and March 13, 1990.)
Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows:
"Applicant's Proposal: The applicant has submitted a letter describ-
ing the request and justifications. The center will operate from
Monday thru Friday. A total of 37 children will be enrolled from
September through May. A summer program will operate from mid-June to
mid-August and will provide care for 25 children. A more complete
description of enrollment is provided on page three of Attachment A
(on file).
Summary: Staff has reviewed this site for compliance with Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff opinion is that with condi-
tions, this request will be in compliance with the purpose and intent
of the Ordinance and that the character of the district will not be
changed. Therefore, staff recommends approval of SP-90-01.
Staff Comment: The site is currently developed with two dwellings.
The applicant intends to utilize the dwelling nearest Route 702 as a
day care. The second unit will be a rental un'it. While not located
within an established subdivision, this petition does represent
conversion of a dwelling to a purely commercial use within a resi-
dential area. Commercially zoned properties are located in proximity
to this site.
Staff has reviewed the sketch plan submitted by the applicant. The
Virginia Department of Transportation has stated that the existing
entrance does not have adequate sight distanceI. Obtaining adequate
sight distance will require the clearing of vegetation, some of which
is not controlled by the applicant. For that reason, staff will
recommend that the applicant obtain and plat sight easements prior to
the commencement of the day care activity. In addition, staff will
recommend that adequate sight distance be obtained prior to the
commencement of activities on the site. Route 702 is currently
non-tolerable. The applicant has proposed additional plantings
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 11)
277
adjacent to the property to the east. During review of the final
plan, staff may recommend additional plantings. Review of the plan
has indicated that while the application plan does not meet the
minimum requirements for a preliminary plan, the plan does provide
sufficient information for review. Staff will request administrative
review of the final plan based on the level of review conducted on the
sketch plan.
The Fire Official, after review of this site, has noted some items
which must be addressed and has made recommendations on other items of
concern. Staff will recommend that all requirements and recommenda-
tions included in Attachment B be complied with prior to the commence-
ment of activities on this site.
This site is currently served by private well'and septic system.
Verbal discussions with the Health Department have indicated that
suitable area exists for the establishment of.septic drainfields to
serve the proposed use. However, the Health Department will require
connection to public water. The distance to the nearest public sewer
line'is approximately400 feet. The Planning~Commission must deter-
mine if public sewer is reasonably available (reference Section
32.7.5.1). If the Commission determines that~public sewer is reasona-
bly available, staff will require that the site be connected to public
sewer.
Staff opinion is that this request complies with Section 31.2.4.1 of
the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, staff recommends approval of
SP-90-01 for Michele Mattioli subject to the following conditions:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
Enrollment will be limited to 12 children in the two-year old
class and 25 children in the 3-6 class from September thru May.
Mid-June to mid-August enrollment shall be limited to 25 chil-
dren;
Not fewer than two employees shall be present at all times during
operation of day care center;
Fire Office approval to include compliance with all requirements
and recommendations listed in the December 22, 1989 letter to
Michele Mattioli from Jay Schlothauer;
Compliance with Virginia Department of Transportation comments of
February 20, 1990;
5. Staff approval of plat showing required Sight easements;
6. Health Department approval of septic system;
7. Connection to public water;
Compliance with Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance which
states:
No such use shall operate without licensure by the Virginia
Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be
the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the
Zoning Administrator a copy of the original license and all
renewals thereafter and to notify the Zoning Administrator
of any license expiration, suspension, or revocation within
three (3) days of such event. Failure to do so shall be
deemed willful non-compliance of this ordinance;
Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the
Albemarle County Fire Official at his discretion. Failure
to promptly admit the fire official for such inspection
shall be deemed willful non-compliance with the provisions
of this ordinance;
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 12)
278
These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated herein
shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements
of the Virginia Department of Welfare, Virginia Department
of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local,
state, or federal agency.
Staff approval of final site plan to be in general accord with
sketch plan prepared by Frederick Schneider dated January 18,
1990. Staff may recommend additional plantings and relocation of
recreation area at the time of final site plan review."
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 6,
1990, recommended by a vote of five to two to approve SP-90-01 subject to the
conditions set out in the staff's report, amending the first condition to
read: "Enrollment shall be limited to 37 children"
Mrs. Humphris noted that the staff report states: "Review of this plan
has indicated that while the application plan does not meet the minimum
requirements for a preliminary plan, the plan does provide sufficient informa-
tion for review". She asked Mr. Cilimberg to exp!ain this statement. Mr.
Cilimberg said that this application does not meet all the requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance, but staff believes the application does meet the intent of
the preliminary plan requirements. Rather than require the applicant to
submit another preliminary plan, Mr. Cilimberg said, this application could be
accepted as basically meeting the preliminary plan requirements, if the Board
approves the special use permit.
Mrs. Humphris asked if this property would revert to its original zoning
if the school were to close down and vacate the property. Mr. Cilimberg said
the special use permit applies to the property, not the owner: another
property owner could use this special use permit, if it is approved, for a
school. The conditions of the special use permit would apply as well.
Mr. Bain asked how close the nearest public sewer line is to this prop-
erty. Mr. Cilimberg said there are two possible p~oints of connection for the
sewer line, one of which will not become available for 18 months. It is not
certain yet which alignment will be used. The existing septic system cannot
be used by the school. Ms. Mattioli does not want to have a new drainfield
built because that would involve destroying a large, wooded area. Mr.
Cilimberg said that connecting to the existing public sewer, rather than
waiting 18 months for the new connection, would be expensive forthe appli-
cant.
Mr. Bain asked if the rental unit on the property would be used as a
single-family dwelling. Mr. Cilimberg said "yes" and suggested that a condi-
tion be added to insure that this is how the building would be used.
Mr. Bowie opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to speak.
Ms. Michelle Mattioli, Director of University Montessori School,
addressed the Board. She said the School was founded in 1978 to provide the
highest possible quality education for children from two to six years old.
For the past 12 years, the School has been leasing space from the Wesley
Memorial Methodist Church in Charlottesville. This lease will expire 3une 1,
1990. She said she has tried to comply with the COunty's land use regula-
tions, because she believes that they are important. She also believes in
the importance of a good education. She said that 28 people supported the
request for the School at the Planning Commission's meeting. She asked
everyone present tonight who supported the request to raise their hands.
About 24 people did so.
Mr. Bain asked if the applicant would object to a condition restricting
the use of the second unit to single-family, residential use. Ms. Mattioli
said "no".
Mr. Bain asked if both buildings would be connected to public water. Ms.
Mattioli said that both buildings would have to be connected to public water,
because the size of the septic field she has to build will take up the space
currently used by the well.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 13)
279
Mr. Bowie said he thought there was some question about whether the
applicant would have a septic field built or connect to the public sewer. Ms.
Mattioli said she would now prefer to have the septic field built. She said
she has met with representatives of the Albemarle County Service Authority
several times, and has learned that the nearest sewer line is 1000 feet from
the property. At $8.00 per foot, plus the $919 hookup fee, the cost of
connecting to the sewer line would be $10,000, which Ms. Mattioli said is far
more than she can pay. She said she is not happy about having to cut down the
trees for a septic field, but she plans to replant.them.
Ms. Cindy Burchier addressed the Board and said she has had children
enrolled in this Montessori School for the past five years. She urged the
Board to grant the special use permit and said the School has always been a
responsible member of the community. She said this is an opportunity for the
Board to show its support for good and affordable Pre-school education.
Mr. Herbert Braun, Associate Professor of History at the University of
Virginia and father of two children enrolled in the Montessori School, ad-
dressed the Board. He said the Montessori system teaches children self-
motivation and to have confidence in themselves.
Since no one else wished to speak concerning this special use permit, Mr.
Bowie closed the public hearing and placed the matter before the Board.
Mr. Bain said he thinks a condition should be]added stating that "the
A-frame be limited to single-family, residential use". He then offered
motion to approve SP-90-01 subject to the conditions recox~ended by the
Planning Commission, with the tenth condition just mentioned. Mrs. Humphris
seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. HumphriS, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
The conditions of approval are as follows:
1. Enrollment shall be limited to 37 children;
Not fewer than two employees shall be present at all times
during operation of day care center;
Fire Office approval to include compliance with all require-
ments and recommendations listed in the December 22, 1989
letter to Michele Mattioli from Jay Schlothauer (copy on file);
Compliance with Virginia Department of Transportation comments
of February 20, 1990;
5. Staff approval of plat showing required sight easements;
6. Health Department approval of septic system;
7. Connection to public water;
Compliance with Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance which
states:
No such use shall operate without ii,ensure by the
Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care
center. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/
operator to transmit to the Zoning Administrator a copy of
the original license and all renewals thereafter and to
notify the Zoning Administrator of any license expiration,
suspension, or revocation within three (3) days of such
event. Failure to do so shall be deemed willful non-
compliance of this ordinance;
21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 14)
280
Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the
Albemarle County Fire Official at his discretion. Failure
to promptly admit the fire official for such inspection
shall be deemed willful non-compliance with the provisions
of this ordinance;
These provisions are supplementary and. nothing stated
herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the
requirements of the Virginia Department of Welfare,
Virginia Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Mar-
shal, or any other local, state, or federal agency;
Staff approval of final site plan to be in general accord with
sketch plan prepared by Frederick Schneider dated January 18,
1990. Staff may recommend additional plantings and relocation
of recreat'ion area at the time of final Site plan review;
1-0. The A-frame is limited to single-family, residential use."
Agenda Item No. 8. SP-90-~3. William A. Davis. To locate a single wide
mobile home on property described as Tax Map 81, Parcel 24. Property located
approximately one-fourth mile on a private easement off of the west side of
Rt. 799, approximately three miles from the intersection of Rt. 250 East and
Rt. 799. Rivanna District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on March 6 and
March 13, 1990.)
Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows:
"Character of the Area: The property, described as Tax Map 81, Parcel
24, is located approximately one-fourth mile on a private easement off
of the west side of Route 799 and approximately three miles from the
intersection of Route 250 East and Route 799 in the Rivanna District.
The site is zoned RA, Rural Areas, as are the surrounding properties.
There is one other mobile home within a one mile radius. No dwellings
are visible from the property.
Staff Comment: The proposed mobile home is to be located~approxi-
mately 150 feet from the existing easement and is screened from the
easement by existing deciduous vegetation and topography. The mobile
home is to be located at the edge of the existing woods.
One letter of objection has been received whidh states in part that
the property owned by the applicant serves largely as a rubbish dump.
A zoning inspection concluded that the property in question is not
controlled by the applicant and is located in Louisa County.
A second concern noted is in regard to legal access to the property.
The attached plat indicates that the property does have a deeded
access. The issue of the legality of access applies to the property
and not the nature of the use of the property and should be resolved
by the disputants. (This statement is reflective of the Planning
Commission's position in the past).
The applicant has stated that the proposed mobile home is to be used
by William Davis as a permanent residence.
Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors choose to
approve this petition, staff recommends the following conditions:
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. Albemarle County Building Official approval;
o
Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable requirements
for district in which it is located;
Skirting around the mobile home from ground level to base of
mobile home to be completed within thirty (30) days of the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 15)
281
Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the
satisfaction of the zoning administrator and approval by the
local office of the Virginia Department of Health, if applicable
under current regulations;
Maintenance of existing vegetation. Landscaping and/or screening
to be provided to the satisfaction of the zoning administrator.
Required screening shall be maintained in good condition and
replaced if it should die;
6. Mobile home is not to be rented;
Special use permit is to be issued for use by William Davis and
his family only."
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 6,
1990, unanimously recommended approval subject to the conditions set out in
the staff report.
Mr. Bowie opened the public hearing. Mr. William Davis, the applicant,
addressed the Board. He said he agrees with the conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission and offered to answer any questions.
Since no one else wished to speak concerning this request, Mr. Bowie
closed the public hearing and placed the matter before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Perkins to
approve SP-90-03, subject to the conditions set forth below. Roll was called
and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
1. Albemarle County Building Official approval;
Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable requirements
for district in which it is located;
Skirting around the mobile home from ground level to base of
mobile home to be completed within thirty (30) days of the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy;
Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to
the satisfaction of the zoning administrator and approval by
the local office of the Virginia Department of Health, if
applicable under current regulations;
Maintenance of existing vegetation. Landscaping and/or screen-
ing to be provided to the satisfaction oC the zoning adminis-
trator. Required screening shall be maintained in good condi-
tion and replaced if it should die;
6. Mobile home is not to be rented;
Special use permit is to be issued for us~ by William Davis and
his family only.
Agenda Item No. 9. SP-90-08. Riverbend Limited Partnership. The
applicant is proposing to locate a veterinary clinic in the Pantops Shopping
Center. Property, described as Tax Map 78, parcel 17D, is zoned PD-SC,
Planned Development-Shopping Center. Rivanna District. (Advertised in the
Daily Progress on March 6 and March 13, 1990.)
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 16)
282
Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows:
"Summary: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and is of the opinion that this
request is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning
Ordinance and that the character of the district will not be changed.
Staff Comment: Section 5.1.11 of the Zoning Ordinance provides for
certain measures to protect the public health and welfare. These
specific conditions are:
Separate building entrance and exit to avoid animal conflicts.
Area for outside exercise to be exclusive from access by the
public by fencing or other means.
The applicant has submitted information concerning the above regula-
tions (on file). The applicant is not proposing an outside exercise
area at this time. Staff would require additional information in
order to determine the suitability of the exercise area mentioned in
the applicant's letter. Staff recommends that any outside exercise
area be reviewed as an amendment of this special use permit.
The applicant has addressed the issue of separate entrance and exits.
Staff opinion is that the building design is such that adequate
visibility exists to prevent animal conflicts. Therefore, staff does
not recommend a condition requiring a separate entrance and exit.
Staff has reviewed this proposal for compliance with Section 31.2.4.1
of the Zoning Ordinance and is of the opinion that this request is
consistent with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and
that the character of the district will not be changed. Therefore,
staff recommends approval of SP-90-08, Riverbend Limited Partnership,
subject to the following conditions: ~
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
There shall be no outside exercise area without amendment of this
special use permit;
2. Use shall be limited to 388 Pantops Center;
Noise measured at the nearest agricultural or residential lot
line shall not exceed forty (40) decibels;
4. No animals are to be confined outside."
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 6,
1990, unanimously recommended approval of SP-90-08 subject to the staff's
conditions, amending #1 to read: "There shall be no outside exercise area".
Mr. Bowie said he remembers that a fifth condition was required in the
case of another veterinary clinic, which prohibited the clinic from boarding
animals overnight, unless the animals were being treated. He asked why this
condition was not recommended for this veterinary clinic. Mr. Cilimberg said
that staff simply did not consider such a condition in this case.
Mr. Bowie opened the public hearing. Mr. Don Wagner was present to
represent the applicant. He offered to answer any questions from members of
the Board and the public.
Mr. Bowie asked Mr. Wagner if the applicant planned to board animals at
the clinic. Mr. Wagner said he thinks the office is too small to make board-
ing animals likely. Mr. Bowie asked if Mr. Wagner would object to a condition
prohibiting the boarding of animals, except for medical treatment. Mr. Wagner
said "no".
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 17)
283
Dr. Charles Wood, a veterinarian in the City of Charlottesville, ad-
dresses the Board. He said he supports the idea of having veterinary clinics
in shopping centers. However, since there is no veterinarian prepared to set
up practice in the office in the Riverbend Shopping Center, Dr. Wood said, he
thinks this request for a special use permit is speculatory. He said that
veterinarian clinics vary and each has special problems that require special
attention. He listed the following types of small-animal clinics: cat
clinics, exotic animal practices, spay clinics, emergency clinics, out-patient
clinics and full-service clinics. He thinks it would be unwarranted at this
time to approve a special use permit without knowing more about the
veterinarian practice that will occupy this office.
Dr. Wood said that radiation from the X-Ray machines used by veterinari-
ans presents a risk to pedestrians and neighboring businesses in a shopping
mall. He said he was required to shield his X-Ray, machine from the business
beneath his office with four inches of concrete, a layer of lead, and then
another four inches of concrete. He said the walls surrounding the X-Ray
machine in his office must also be lined with lead to protect his employees.
Dr. Wood said the Board should also consider how the proposed clinic
would dispose of dead animals. He said the SPCA will pick up dead animals
until 2:00 P.M, after that, the bodies must be kept at the clinic overnight.
Me said there are ways to solve this problem and he thinks the applicant
should address them.
Dr. Wood said there are also requirements for~isolation rooms in veteri-
nary hospitals. He read the following from the Veterinary Board of Medicine
Requirements: "accommodations allowed for the effective separation of conta-
gious and non-contagious patients by July 1, 1989. As a minimum, there shall
be a room that can be accessed without the animal passing through another
animal ward or holding area". For this reason, Dr. Wood said, he was asked to
submit a site plan and a floor plan to show how contagious animals would be
kept apart from non-contagious animals.
Dr. Wood then referred to the third condition recommended by the Planning
Commission, which limits the noise at the nearest ~esidential or agricultural
lot to 40 decibels. Dr. Wood said the noise level,at adjacent offices should
also be considered. He said a dog's bark measureslabout 96 decibels. If the
Only barrier to this noise is an eight-inch cinderblock and a layer of
sheetrock, about 46 decibels will pass through to the adjacent office.
Dr. Wood then quickly summarized the following points he believes should
also be addressed in the application for the special use permit: adequate air
flow to keep the animals from overheating; the treatment of animals outside;
the proximity of the proposed clinic to a pet shop and the possibility for the
spread of infectious diseases; urination and defecation on sidewalks and the
effect this may have on the restaurant next-door; sewage requirements; water
supply requirements; disposal of X-Ray chemicals, tissue, and sharp instru-
ments; and a place to walk the animals, since there are no outside runs.
Dr. Wood reiterated that he supports locating veterinarian clinics in
shopping centers. But, he said, the special use permit should be approved for
a specific veterinarian and clinic and the areas he mentioned should be
addressed.
Mr. Wagner quoted a statement made earlier by Mr. Cilimberg, that "spe-
cial use permits go with properties, not with individuals". He said he has
not had any experience with veterinary clinics, but he has worked with chiro-
practor clinics and other medical clinics. He said!there are regulations that
govern the operation of veterinary clinics and he is sure the Board does not
wish to handle something that is already handled by another agency.
Since no one else wished to speak concerning this application, Mr. Bowie
closed the public hearing and placed the matter befOre the Board.
Mr. Bowie asked Mr. Cilimberg if the County's regulations take care of
the problems mentioned by Dr. Wood, such as the emission of radiation. Mr.
Cilimberg said he does not know what the Building Inspector would require
before issuing a certificate of occupancy.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 18)
284
Mrs. Humphris asked if it is customary to approve special use permits in
the absence of the person who would be conducting the business. Mr. Cilimberg
said the Riverbend Limited Partnership has been the applicant since this
process began, however, The Partnership no longer has a specific veterinarian
as tenant for the building.
Mrs. Humphris asked if staff considered any of the problems mentioned by
Dr. Wood. Mr. Cilimberg said the staff addressed the problem of where to
exercise the animals. If the veterinarian requires an outside exercise area,
he or she could ask for an amendment to the special use permit.
Mr. Bain said some of the areas mentioned by Dr. Wood should be addressed
in agreements between the landlord and tenant and the regulations of the
Health Department and the County's Department of Inspections. He does not
believe the special use permit, which is concerned!with the issue of land use,
should deal with some of these details. Mr. Bain ~aid he will support defer-
ring action on this request, but he does not think~any special use permit will
address all the problems mentioned by Dr. Wood.
Mr. Bowie said he supports deferring this request, because he would like
to know which agency will handle the problems outlined by Dr. Wood.
Mr. Bowerman said the circumstances of this request are the same as other
requests approved by the Board, except possibly the proximity of the pet store
to the proposed clinic. He said the Health Department and the Albemarle
County Service Authority also set regulations that the proposed clinic would
have to satisfy. He said the problems associated with the proposed clinic are
shared by other medical practices, such as the offices of physicians, podia-
trists and chiropractors. He supports deferring action on this request and
suggested that staff consider these problems as pact of the medical practice
as a whole and determine whether these problems are addressed by County
regulations.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mr. Bain to defer
action on this request until April 18, 1990. Roll,was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 10. ZMA-90-01. Greenbrier Square Limited Partnership.
Proffered request to amend ZMA-84-32 and ZMA-85-18 in order to allow a Fast
Food Restaurant. Property, zoned HC, Highway Commercial, described as Tax Map
61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 5, is located on the north side of Greenbrier
Drive in Greenbrier Square. Charlottesville District. (Advertised in the
Daily Progress on March 6 and March 13, 1990.)
Mr. Cilimberg gave the staff report as follows:
"Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is propasing to locate a pizza
delivery service in the Greenbrier Square site. No seating will be
provided, however, customer carry-out will be accommodated. A more
complete description of the request has been Provided by the appli-
cant. The applicant's proffers limit the uses: to those approved with
ZMA-85-18 and fast food restaurant with limits as to use.
Summary: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the
purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, and recommends approval of
ZMA-90-O1 with acceptance of the applicants proffers.
Staff Comment: During earlier rezonings of this property (ZMA-84-32
and ZMA-85-18) uses were limited by applicant's proffers. Those uses
currently allowed are found in Attachment B (on file). The uses
retained were designed to limit heavy traffic uses so as not to
substantially increase traffic on/and turning movements from Route 29
to Greenbrier Drive. The proposed fast food restaurant is a high
traffic generator. The applicant has submitted a description of the
traffic generated by the previous occupant of the site. The previous
applicant generated a substantial amount of delivery traffic which is
in some respects similar to the applicant's traffic patterns. There-
fore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed use will not generate
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 19)
285
substantially more traffic than the previous user. This site is
reCommended in the Comprehensive Plan for Community Service. The
purpose and intent of this designation is to provide durable goods,
general retail and service.
The Zoning of this property prior to ZMA-84-32 was C-i, Commercial.
This zoning designation allowed for Eating Establishments 22.2.1b.14.
This request is proffered so as to limit its use to off-site consump-
tion only. The applicant has proffered the following:
Used for food distribution off premises 0nly.
Ancillary use of retail pick-up or carryrout only.
No consumption of food on premises.
No seating on premises.
Staff opinion is that the applicant's proffers limit the use in a
manner so as to provide more adequate parking and maintain a similar
level of traffic as the previous occupant. Therefore, staff recom-
mends approval of ZMA-90-01 Greenbrier Square with the addition of
Fast Food Restaurants to the list of permitted uses approved with
ZMA-84-32 and ZMA-85-18 and the acceptance of the applicant's proffers
to govern fast food restaurant:
Used for food distribution off premises Only.
Ancillary use of retail pick-up or carry-out only.
No consumption of food on premises.
No seating on premises." ~
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 6,
1990, unanimously recommended approval subject to proffers as set out in the
staff report.
Mr. Bowie opened the public hearing. Ms. Bruce Murray, Manager of
Greenbrier Square, addressed the Board. She said she has worked with staff to
develop a plan she thinks is acceptable to all parties. She said she agrees
with the recommendations in the staff's report and offered to answer any
questions.
Since no one else wished to speak concerning this request, Mr. Bowie
closed the public hearing and placed the matter before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mrs.
Humphris to approve ZMA-90-01, subject to the four proffers listed in the
staff's report. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None. ~
Agenda Item No. 11. Presentation of the JefferSon Country Fire and
Rescue Association Reports.
Mr. Bowie said this item would be be taken up at a later date.
Agenda Item No. 12. Report on Recommendations of the Solid Waste Task
Force.
Mr. Tucker gave the following report:
"In December of 1989, the Charlottesville/Albemarle Solid Waste Task
Force presented its findings and recommendations to the City Council
and Board of Supervisors. Since that time the staffs have been
working to develop an implementation plan for the recommendations.
The following is a status report on that work.
TIPPING FEES - The City and County solicited proposals for the devel-
opment of a tipping fee structure to cover all components of the waste
stream. In addition, the jurisdictions desired to have an independent
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 20)
286
evaluation of the current cost allocation for operating and capital
costs between the City and the County. Proposals have been received
and are under review, and the proposed fee study should be completed
by the end of May. For purposes of budget development for Fiscal Year
1990-91, some preliminary estimates have been made by the staff for
the currently charged fees for inert materials and tires. The
proposed budget also recommends a new chipping fee be established to
cover the costs of operating the new wood chipping program. The new
computerized scale equipment was placed into service in December.
This equipment is capable of handling a complete tipping fee billing
system with varying fees for each element of the waste stream.
SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY - The task force recommended either the expan-
sion of an existing authority or creation of a new authority to assume
responsibility for all waste management activities except collection.
The staff is recommending that a Rivanna Solid Waste Authority be
established that duplicates the current Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority (RWSA) Board and administrative structure. We think this
proposal will allow better administrative coordination of the solid
waste disposal programs as they move from the City and County to the
Authority. We also are convinced that a Rivanna Solid Waste Author-
ity, as is being proposed, would result in administrative savings, and
avoid the costly creation of a totally new authority. It is also
suggested that a Solid Waste Advisory Committee be established (could
be the recent Solid Waste Task Force members, and/or others) to act as
an advisory committee to the Authority on Solid Waste issues. The
Solid Waste Advisory Committee could work much like the Planning
Commissions do in both jurisdictions to provide advice and review
recommendations for the governing body. We believe the City Council
and the Board of Supervisors ought to make a decision in the near
future to create an authority. If Rivanna is selected, the new
recycling education program proposed in the b~dget could be supervised
by the Rivanna Authority beginning July 1.
OFFICE OF RECYCLING - The Task Force recommended the establishment of
an Office of Recycling to develop and implement an educational program
for the entire community and provide technicai assistance to large
waste generators and commercial establishments. Funds to hire the
first personnel for this office are included ~n the budget submission
for the Ivy Landfill, with funding to be shared equally by the City
and County. If approved during the budgeting ~process in April,
preliminary advertising, interviewing and hiring could proceed during
May and June with the program actually beginning in July.
RECYCLING PROGRAM - The task force recommended instituting a mandatory
recycling program for all residential, commercial and institutional
establishments. The City staff has developed a proposed model curb-
side recycling program, which, if funded, could begin in the summer of
1990, serving 1000 households. This will be ~ demonstration project
to begin a neighborhood recycling effort that reflects the Solid Waste
Task Force approach to recycle through a curbside comingled program.
This begins the process of educating our citizens on separation of
trash for curbside recycling. A draft copy of the proposed program is
attached.
WOOD CHIPPING OPERATION - The task force recommended establishing a
wood chipping operation to reduce the volume of inerts going into the
landfill. Specifically, the proposal is to reduce the volume of wood
logs and stumps going into the landfill, which is estimated to be more
than 20 of the total landfill volume each year~ By chipping, the
volume the wood is reduced by half and creates wood chips that have
the potential for use in a number of ways. Funds to implement the
program were included in the budget submission for the Ivy Landfill.
If approved during the budgeting process, the program could begin as
soon as the necessary equipment is obtained.
NON-REGULATED INERT LANDFILL - The task force recommended creation of
a non-regulated inert landfill for appropriate materials to decrease
the volume of inert material being received at the Ivy Landfill. The
staffs continue to investigate possible sites for this operation. A
suitable site has not been found.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 21)
287
PURCHASE ADDITIONAL LANDFILL SPACE - The task force recommended
purchasing additional landfill space for future needs. The staffs
have examined the County's current zoning regulations to determine
those locations which have the appropriate zoning for a landfill.
Several possible sites are currently under investigation.
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - The task force recommended
developing and implementing a comprehensive hazardous waste management
program. The City has received proposals fora Household Hazardous
Waste Disposal Day, and the City is planning for a collection day.
Funds for a joint City/County Household Hazardous Waste Disposal Day
were included in the budget submission for the Ivy Landfill for next
fiscal year, so that a community-wide cOllection program would be
held.
LANDFILL REGULATORY MANDATES - A recent engineering study for the Ivy
Landfill operation has been conducted to determine the future landfill
expenditures to meet state regulatory requirements. These are re-
quirements which under the current regulations require that we meet
the new state solid waste regulations by 1992~ The cost for con-
struction and closUre of the cells at the Ivy!landfill, as the state
regulations now exist, are projected to be over $10 million over the
next two to three years. Significant new funds will be required to
meet the regulatory requirements, prior to the initiation of other
solid waste programs such as recycling. A copy of the future landfill
expenditures is attached.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND STRATEGY: The staffs are recommending that the
City and County proceed with the recommendations of the Solid Waste
Task Force as follows:
1. April - June, 1990 Actively pursue the establishment of the
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority, to be responsible for the disposal and
material recovery programs of the City and County. The City and
County will continue to work towards a collection philosophy that
includes recycling. The program costs will be paid by a fee structure
charged to the users of the programs. Once the Rivanna Solid Waste
Authority is established, appoint a Solid WasCe Advisory Committee to
work with the authority in developing the solid waste recycling and
disposal program for the community.
City/County consider approval of Ivy landfill~budget to include
recycling education program, wood chipping program, new solid waste
fees, household hazardous waste collection program, meeting state
regulations, etc.
2. July 1, 1990 - City and County will implement the Ivy Landfill
budget recommendations (if approved by the Council and Board) which
provides for the establishment of the following Solid Waste Task Force
recommendations: Recycling Education Program; Wood chipping
operation, new fee proposed; and the Household hazardous waste
collection program.
3. July 1, 1990 (or as soon as legally practical) - Rivanna Solid
Waste Authority established
4. Summer, 1990 - Volunteer curbside recycling demonstration pro-
gram(s) developed and implemented. The city proposal includes 1000
homes in a curbside recycling collection program.
5. Fall, 1990 Spring, 1991 Recycling education program to the
community. The Authority would be charged with the development of an
implementation plan and financing package for future solid waste
efforts. The implementation would include the second phase of the
recycling programs including: development of a city/county full-scale
recycling program, investigation of the potential for a local material
recovery facility (MRF), plan to meet state solid waste regulations,
etc.
6. Summer, 1991 - Implement the Authority's solid waste plan.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 22)
STATUS REPORT ON SPECIFIC SOLID WASTE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
(as per December, 1989 Report, page 15, "recommendations")
Summary
288
Recommendation
Status
1. Apply tip fees
Fee study underway with
April - May completion date
2. Authority created or
expand existing authority
Staff recommendation to
create Rivanna Solid Waste
Authority out of existing
Rivanna Authority
3. Establish Office of Recycling
Recycling education program
proposed to begin July, 1990
4. Mandatory collection committee Would await creation of a
in each locality mandatory recycling program
5. Build MRF
Need to have community-wide
mandatory recycling program
established to make MRF
feasible (public-vs. private)
6. Institute mandatory
recycling program
Authority to develop the
plan for implementing and
financing
7. Authority illegal dumping
County legal issue
8. Expand leaf and yard waste
composting capability new
City currently has program,
Authority to evaluate
community-wide program
9. Establish wood chipping
operation
Proposed in budget, July 1
10. Create inert landfill
Sites being explored, none yet
located
11. Purchase additional
landfill space
City and County staffs
exploring Possible sites
12. Develop hazardous waste
management program
Authority to explore
13. Authority monitor new solid
waste technologies yearly
report
Authority to be responsible
14. Solid Waste Task Force
remain in existence
Staff recommending that the
Task Force members be
considered for appointment
to the Rivanna Authority
Solid Waste~Advisory Group
15. Continuing the landfill
operation to be environ-
mentally responsible and to
continue to meet state solid
waste recommendations
Staff recommending this 15th
item be added to the list of
recommendations, and be pursued
by the City/County
Mr. Bain said he has many questions about modifying the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority to serve as the Rivanna Solid Waste.Authority and how the
University of Virginia will work with the established authority. He suggested
that staff meet with the Solid Waste Task Force to discuss the details of
implementing these recommendations. Then the Board could discuss this subject
in detail at a work session with the Solid Waste Task Force.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 23)
289
Mr. Bowie said he believes that it is necessary to create a Solid Waste
Authority in order to implement the Task Force's recommendations. He said he
would prefer that the Board authorize the creation of such an Authority now,
rather than delay any longer. He thinks staff should be allowed to proceed
with the first steps in creating this Authority.
Mr. Bain said he thinks the Board should discuss the structure of this
new Authority.
Mr. Bowerman said he agrees with the concepts presented in Solid Waste
Task Force report; however, he would like to reserve judgment until there are
implementation plans for each recommendation. He suggested that staff gather
some information on the formation of a Solid Waste Authority and the
advantages and disadvantages to the various ways this Authority might be
organized. Staff could then meet with the Board during the meeting on April
11, 1990, to discuss the alternatives. This could'be coordinated with the
City.
Mr. Bowerman added that he is pleased with the recommendation that the
City and County hold a Hazardous Waste Clean-up Day. He said hazardous waste
has been often overlooked and he is glad the County and City are trying to
remedy the problem.
Agenda Item No. 13. Draft Statement for the Highway Preallocation
Hearing on the Interstate and Primary Systems.
Mr. Bowie handed out copies of a statement he had drafted for the Highway
Preallocation Hearing on the Interstate and Primary Systems, to be held on
April 9, 1990. He asked that Board members reserve any comments and sugges-
tions until the budget work session on March 26, 1990. Mr. Bowie asked
members of the Board to consider including in this statement a policy about
the replacement of bridges.
Agenda Item No. 14. Staff Report on the Route 631 (Old Lynchburg
Road/Stagecoach Road) Reconstruction Project.
Mr. Cilimberg said staff presented the project to the Planning Commission
at its meeting on March 20, 1990. He said the Planning Commission supports
the project and road plans as presented at the Highway Department's public
hearing on March 8, 1990, with the following recommendations:
All crossovers should be designed with left turn lanes in both
directions to facilitate all turning movements, including
necessary u-turns.
Sidewalks should be constructed of concrete along sections of
road with an urban design (curb and gutter). Asphalt pathways
should be used along sections of road with a rural design
(shoulder and ditch construction).
Improve the overall visual quality of the new alignment by:
maintaining significant vegetation along the alignment and/or
providing street trees and other landscaPing; locating utility
transmission lines underground where possible or otherwise
consolidating above ground lines on a single set of poles; and,
using aesthetically pleasing appurtenant structures including
mast/arm signal and street light poles. The County would like
continued involvement during project development and field
inspections, including the review of utility placement and
other design elements.
Reconsideration should be given to proposed entrances for
several existing homes at the northern end of the project.
Plans indicate three driveways to have grades in excess of
twenty percent. Such entrances will be difficult for home-
owners to use and would create a potential traffic hazard along
this segment of road.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 24)
290
Mr. Cilimberg said that one member of the Planning COmmission was partic-
ularly concerned about the proposed entrancesto several existing homes at the
northern end of the reconstructed Route 631. This Commissioner was concerned
that the speed of travel, combined with the steep grade of the driveways,
could make this section of the road hazardous.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission also supported several recom-
mendations by Mr. Dan S. Roosevelt, Resident Engineer for the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDoT). Mr. Cilimberg then asked Mr. Roosevelt
to speak concerning this recommendation.
Mr. Roosevelt recommended that the Board support the need for the im-
provement of Route 631 from 1.35 miles south of Interstate 64 to 0.16 miles
south of Interstate 64. He also suggested that the Board recommend that VDoT
consider the cost and environmental effects of any requests for realignment.
He said that VDoT has received one request for a realignment and the deadline
for receiving these requests, except from the Board, has passed. Pending such
review, Mr. Roosevelt continued, he recommends that the Board support the
location recommendation of the Department. He suggested that the Board
indicate its support for the design presented at the public hearing held on
March 8, 1990, with one exception: that the Board~ask VDoT to consider
placing a crossover with left-turn lanes at the intersection of Route 631 with
Pinehurst Court. Mr. Roosevelt said he has received eight letters and a
petition signed by 50 citizens asking that VDoT consider, building a crossover
with left turn lanes at the entrance to Pinehurst Court.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Way to adopt the
following resolution approving the Route 631 reconstruction project (Project
0631-002-224, C502), with the exceptions noted in the resolution. Roll was
called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
WHEREAS the Virginia Department of TransPortation proposed a
highway project for Route 631 (Old Lynchburg Road/Stagecoach Road)
in Albemarle County, Virginia; and
WHEREAS the Virginia Department of Transportation held a public
hearing on this project (Project 0631-002-224,~ C502) on March 8,
1990;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby support the need for the
improvement of Route 631 from 1.35 miles south of Interstate 64 to
0.16 mile south of Interstate 64; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board does recommend that the
Virginia Department of Transportation conside~ the cost and envi-
ronmental effects of any realignment requests. Pending such review,
the Board supports the location recommended by the Department; and
FURTHER that this Board supports the design presented at the
public hearing with the following exceptions:
o The Department should consider a crossover with left turn lanes
at the entrance to Pinehurst Court.
o Ail crossovers should be designed with left turn lanes in both
directions to facilitate all turning movements, including
necessary U-turns.
o Sidewalks should be constructed of concrete along sections of
road with an urban design (curb and gutter). Asphalt pathways
should be used along sections of road with a rural design
(shoulder and ditch construction).
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 25)
291
o Improve the overall visual quality of the new alignment by:
~maintaining significant vegetation along the alignment and/or
providing street trees and other landscaping; locating utility
transmission lines underground where possible or otherwise
consolidating above ground lines on a single set-of poles; and,
using aesthetically pleasing appurtenant structures including
mast/arm signal and street light poles.
o Reconsideration should be given to proposed entrances to
several existing homes at the northern end of the project.
Plans indicate three driveways to have grades in excess of
twenty percent. Such access will be difficult for home-
owners to use and would create a potential traffic hazard
along this segment of road.
Agenda Item No. 15. Appointments.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris and seconded by Mr. Bowerman to
reappoint Dr. Robert R. Humphris to represent the Jack Jouett District on the
Albemarle County Service Authority, for a term to expire on April 16, 1994.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Bowie said the remaining appointments will be advertised and decided
during the meeting on April 11, 1990.
Agenda Item No. 16. Approval of Minutes: September 6(A), Septem-
ber 6(N), November 8, December 6 (A), December 6(N) and December 13, 1989.
Mr. Bain said he read the minutes for September 6(A), pages one to 13 of
the minutes for September 6(N), pages one to 14 of the minutes for November 8,
all of December 6(A), and pages 15 to 29 of the minutes for December 13, 1989.
He said these minutes are in order, except for the following corrections: on
page 11 of September 6(N), fifth paragraph, fifth sentence, add the word
"spent" between "just" and "time"; on page 8 of November 8, fifth paragraph,
fourth sentence, add the word "asked" between "Lindstrom" and "the"; on page
24 of December 13, seventh paragraph, third sentence, change "$52,000" to
"$452,000"
Mr. Bowie had read pages one to 15 of the minutes for December 13, 1989,
and found them to be in order with the exception of one typographical error
which he passed to the Clerk.
Mr. Perkins had read page 36 to the End of the minutes for November 8,
1989, and found them to be in order.
Motion was offered by Mr. Way and seconded by Mr. Bain to approve the
minutes as read. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Perkins and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAINING: Mr. Bowerman and Mrs. Humphris.
Agenda Item No. 17. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
Public and Board.
Mr. Bowie said that Mr. Charles Martin, Chairman of the School Board, has
asked the joint meeting of the Board and School Board not be held on March 28,
since Mr. Martin will be out of town. Mr. Bowie suggested that the joint
meeting be rescheduled to 4:00 P. M., April 2, 1990. To date, he Said, the
only item on the agenda is a discussion of the drug-free workplace policy.
March 21, 1990 (Regular Meeting)
(Page 26)
292
Mr. Bowie asked for a member of the Board to participate in the wreath-
laying ceremony at Monticello at 11:30 P.M., April 13, the anniversary of Mr.
Jefferson's birthday. Mrs. Humphris said she would be happy to take part in
this ceremony.
Mr. Bowie said the annual conference of Virginia soil and water conserva-
tion districts will be held in Culpeper on April 5. He asked any interested
members of the Board to let the Clerk know if they wished to attend.
Mr. Way said that a citizen has applied for a zoning text amendment to
allow a towing operation in areas zoned LI, Light Industrial. Mr. Way said
the Zoning Ordinance currently makes no provision for towing operations. Mr.
Way said the applicant discussed his intentions with Mr. Way and the Planning
staff, but the written application was received too late to be heard during
the meeting in 3une devoted to zoning text amendments. Mr. Way asked that the
Board ~allow this application to be processed according to the regular sched-
ule, which would allow the applicatiOn to be heard by the Planning Commission
in May and the Board in June.
Mr. Bowie asked if any members of the Board objected to Mr. Way's sugges-
tion. Since no one objected, Mr. Bowie said this application will be appear
before the Board in June.
Agenda Item No. 18. Adjourn to March 26, 1990, at 1:00 P.M. for the
first budget work session. At 11:01 P.M., with no further business to come
before the Board, motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Way to
adjourn to March 26, 1990, at 1:00 P.M. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
CHAIRMAN