Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1984-11-14
NoYembor 7~ 1984 6Regular N~ght,Meet~g) Agenda Item No. 11. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. · Mr. Fisher said he-had been advised that there are no scheduled agenda items for November 21, 1984, the night before Thanksgiving. Mr. Bowie made motion to cancel that meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Way and carried by the following recorded vote: A~ES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke. Agenda Item No. 12. Adjournment There being no other business to transact, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. N~m~USr L~;~884 (Regular Day Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia was held on November 14, 1984, at ~:00 a.m., Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, 410 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Present: Messrs. F. R. BoWie, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., C. Timothy Lindstrom and Peter T. Way. Absent: Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke. Officers Present: Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr, Deputy County Executive; Mr. Ray B. Jones, Deputy County Executive; Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney; Mr. James R. Donnelly, Dir- ector of Planning and Community Development. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The Chairman, Mr. Fisher, called the meeting to orde~ at 9:05 a.m. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Alliegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Not Docketed. Mr Fisher noted that Mrs. Cooke would arrive later in the day due to an illness in her family. He also brought to the Board's attention the fact that Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive, is still hospitalized but doing well. Agenda Item No. 4. Consent Agenda; Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Henley, to accept and approve the consent agenda. Roll was ca~lled and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. Item No. 4.1. Statements of Expenses for the Director of Finance, Sheriff, Commonwealth' Attorney, and Jail for October, 1984; also for the Jail for September 1984, were approved as presented. Item No. 4.2 Street signs - Dorrier Drive and Gasoline Alley. Item No, 4.2~.~ Street. Name $ign Resolution. On request of Mr. John R. Dorrier, who has agreed to purchase the sign, a street sign was approved for State Route 1422 identifying it a~ Dorrier Drive. The following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify the following roads: Dorrier Drive (State Route 1422) at the southwest corner of U. S. Route 20 at its northern intersection. Dorrier Drive (State Route 1422) at the southwest corner of U. S. 20 at its southern intersection. WHEREAS a citizen has agreed to purchase these signs through the County Executive an~ to conform to standards set by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and the same is hereby requested to install and maintain the above mentioned street signs. 527 November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Item No. 4.2b. Street Name Sign Resolution. On request of Mr. George A. Ragsdale, who has agreed to purchase the sign, a street sign was approved for State Route 650 (Gasoline Alley) by the following resolution. WHEREAS request has been received for street sign to identify the following road: Gasoline Alley (State Route 650) and Rio Road (State Route 631) at the northeast corner of its intersection. WHEREAS a citizen has agreed to purchase this sign through the Office of the County Executive and to conform to standards set by the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albe- marle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Trans- portation be and the same is hereby requested to install and maintain the above men$ioned street sign. Item No. 4.3. Letters from the Highway Department. Item No. 4.3a. Proposed Additions: The Board received the following letter from the Secondary Roads Engineer concerning proposed additions using Section 33.1-72.1 of Lthe Code of Virginia (The Rural Addition Law): "October 2, 1984 Proposed Additions ~~ Secondary System Section 33.1-72.1 Code of Virginia Boards of Supervisors of all Counties in the Secondary System and City Council of Suffolk Ladies and Gentlemen: As you know, Section 33.1-72.1 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, permits local governing.bodies who have adopted a suitable subdivision control ordinance as prescribed by the statute, to recommend the addition of certain streets to the Secondary System. The latest revision to this statute was approved by the i984 session of the General Assembly, a copy of which is a~Ei~ed~ From time to time questions arise pertaining to specula.tive interest in considering additions pursuant to this statute. It is the Department's position that the local governing body shares the responsibility to assure any additions requested under this program fully comply with the requirements of this section of the Code. Additionally, the local officials are in the best position to determine the ownership of properties abutting the proposed addition and make the determination if speculative interest is involved. Accordingly, when requesting additions under this section of the code, your resolution must clearly identify the applicable paragraph under which the addition is-proposed. When either Paragraph C or C1 is indicated, a statement to the effect that a determination has been made by the governing body that speculative interest is not involved should also be included. This assurance will permit our engineers to process the request for acceptance without the delay that has sometimes been necessitated by their review to determine any involvement by such interests in the proposed addition. Proposed additions involving specu- lative interest and where the governing body deems that extenuating, circumstances exist, must be requested pursuant to Paragraph D. The resolution should reflect this to be the case in such instances. Our Resident Engineers will, of course, furnish you with an estimate of cost to bring the addition to the appropriate ~ standard. You may then determine the pro rata participation as set forth in the Code. Your continuing cooperation in matters pertaining to the Secondary System is greatly appreciated and I am confident the above procedure will be beneficial to all concerned by permitting addition requests to be expedited to the degree possible. Sincerely. (SIGNEO) D. E. Keith Secondary Roads Engineer" Mr. Fisher asked if the County will be able to take raads into the system using the rural additions law since this change has occurred. Mr. Tucker was not sure. Mr. St. John said a new Attorney General's opinion on this point gives good guidelines and he would forward same t¢ the Board. Item No. 4.3b. A copy of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation Commis~ ion's 76th Biennial Report was received. 528 November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Item No. 4.3c. A copy of the Approved Secondary Roads SixYear Plan for Albemarle County 1984-1990, was received from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt, Resident Engineer. The plan is set out in full in the minutes of April 11, 1984. Item No. 4.4. Audits. The Board received copies of the Albemarle County Service Author- ity Financial Report for the year ended June 30; 1984 (copy on file); and the same for Shelby J. Marshall, Clerk of the Circuit Court, for year ended June 30, 1983 and for the period Jan- uary 1, 1982 through June 30, 1982 (copy on file). Item No. 4.5. Reports. Item No. 4.5a. Monthly Building Activity Report for-October, 1984, from the Albemarle County Planning Department. Mr. Lindstrom noted that on the sixth page of the report under Item No. 5, Inglecress Subdivision is located in the Samuel Miller District and not in the Jack Jouett District as listed in the report. "'~' Item No. 4.5b. Report on Offer of Volunteer Help for Local FmHA Office from Albemarle County Housing Coalition. "The Albemarle County Housing Coalitiion, at its meeting on October 16, 1984, agreed to arrange for l0 volunteers to be trained by the local FmHA office. These volunteers will aid in counseling applicants regarding programs, eligibility and the application process and wilt also assist applicants in completing applications and tracking applications through the process. With the use of such volunteers it is hoped that more a~P. ii~a~mns can be successfully processed utilizing a minimum of FmHA staff time. As of November 7, 1984, five volunteers had signed up for training. A status report on the number of persons trained and implementation of this volunteer program will be available after the Housing Coalition's meeting on November 20, 1984." Mr. Way said he was very pleased about the use of volunteers in the program, and then asked if FmHA had set up joint meetings between contractors and the persons who might use FmHA loans to bUild their homes to discuss the stipulations that might arise during construction. Mr. Tucker said that he would find out if the meetings have been planned Item No. 4.5c. Trash and Litter. Mr. Tucker reported that he had received the followin~ memorandum from Mr. Patrick K. Mullaney, Director of Parks and Recreation, on the subject of trash and litter, dated October 12, 1-984: "Attached please find a copy of a memo from the Clerk of the Board following an April Bdard meeting during which the subject of highway trash was discussed. In response to this request for ~help or suggestions,· Mr. Agnor and I discussed the problem with the CAC3 and requested that the CAC3 present a report on their activities to the Board. While CAC3's main thrust is the operation of the recycling center and educating the public about litter control, we suggested that they also become involved in coordinating a trash clean-up effort, as suggested by one of the Board members. As you know, the committees's efforts have been handicapped by a:lack of office space and secretarial help. Now that our office has become a temporary home for CAC3, a trash clean-up effort may be coordinated. I must say that I am somewhat confused by the Clerk's memo to you on October 11, which seems to imply that this office did not comply with a directive-from the Board. This is simply not the-case. I did not interpret this request for ~help or suggestions' as a directive from the Board to initiate a trash clean-up =ffom~ffo~t'.~a~t~,..~a~;~:~y understanding that the Board was aware that our help was through our assistance to the CAC3 committee. Please let me know if you would like me to clarify this further. Thanks." 'Mr. Binds~mdasked if some effort could be made to have a spring, rather than a fall clean-up, since many local festivals are ~eld in the spring and this seems to be the logical time to do such a clean-up. He askSd if the Board had not made such-a request to the Parks Department before. Mr. Tucker said the clean-up, which would probably extend into 'the spring, is part of CAC3's program and is timely for that reason. He said he would speak with Parks Department Staff and see what can be coordinated.. Mr. Dowie said there is a meeting in th~s building tomorrow night.on this very subject. November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Item No. 4.6. Other Items. Item No. 4.6a. Notice of Grant Award to Albemarle County Schools for Pilot Study: Evaluation of LOGO instruction. Notice received from Department of Education showing grant in the amount of $5,500 for Fiscal Year 1984-85. Mr. Way asked what the LOGO program is. ~r. Charles Tolbert, School Board Member, said LOGO is a language used by elementary school children to become familiar with computers. Mr. Way then requested more information on the program and the grant, which will be provided a' the December 12 meeting. Item No. 4.6b. Request to Appoint a Tie-Breaker for local Welfare Board from Karen Director, letter dated October 16, 1984: "Because of your action taken on Octover 10, 1984, to increase the size of the Welfare Board in order to have each magisterial district represented, the number of members will be, naturally, six. Section 63,1-40 of the Virginia Code requires that if '. . . there are an even number of such districts, the governing body shall appoint a tie-breaker to resolve any questions in conflict in case of a tie vote.' Therefore, as you move to the appointment of a sixth member, you will also need to designate a seventh person as a tie-breaker." Mr. Way asked if the Welfare Board could not operate as the Board of Supervisors does, by allowing a tie vote to defeat the motion. Mr. St. John was requested to check the state code on this question. Item No. 4.6c. Letter from William K. Norris, Watershed Management Official concerning permit reissuance to Del Monte Frozen Foods/Mortons; dated November 13, 1984: "Since August 13, 1976, Del Monte/Morions has operated under a Special Consent Order from the State Water Control Board. The issuance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Number VAO0 04626 was necessitated by the discharge of waste products from the plant into state waters. The effluent from the plant's waste treatment facility is discharged with imposed limitations into Howell's Branch, which is a tributary to Lickinghole Creek,_which is a trib- utary to Mechums River, which is a tributary to the South Fork Rivanna River and Reservoir. In an effort to comply with the requirements of the consent order, an agree- ment was signed by and between Morton Frozen Foods and the Albemarle County Service Authority obligating Del Monte/Mortons to connect to the Crozet Interceptor not later than six months after the date of the completion of the Interceptor. The Crozet Interceptor Project is currently projected to be completed in March of 1986. The NPDES permit for Del Monte/Mortons is scheduled to expire on January 12, 1985. A public notice of the reissuance of this permit was run by the State Water Control Board in the Wednesday, November 7, 1984, issue of the Charlottesville Daily Progress (copy on file). The permit reissuance is presently scheduled to be for a minimum five year period. Due to the pending completion of the Crozet Interceptor and the obligation of Del Monte/Mortons to connect to the interceptor within six months of its completion, it would seem more appropriate to issue a permit conditioned by the terms of the contract between Del Monte/Mortons and the Albemarle County Service Authority. The Albemarle County Service Authority plans to discuss this issue at its meeting of November 15, 1984, with possible comments regarding this reissuance being sent to the State Water Control Board. Should the Board of Supervisors deem it appropriate to comment on this reissuance, with recommendation that the permit be conditioned upon the terms of the con- tract between Del Monte/Mortons and the Albemarle County Service Authority, I will be happy to draft a letter for the Chairman's signature." Item No. 4.6d. Report of the Department of Social Services for the month of. September, 1984, was received in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52, along with a memo from Karen Morris, Director,~ giving an overview of department activities, to wit: "Along with the more routine functions of the Department in administering seven benefit programs (financial assistance) and eleven service programs, the Department started this year with the 'new~ arrangement of contracting f.or foster care parent recruitment and training, along with Greene County, with the City of Charlottesville DSS. Known as Tri-Area Foster Families (TAFF), staff are employed by the City and each of the three participating localities pay a proportionate share of the monthly costs, based on foster care caseload size. These first four months since moving out of our contract with the Central Virginia Child Development Association for similar services have been very smooth and positive. 'St'ruc't'u'r~l''Fami'l'Y~T'he'rapy Training for our Social Work Staff has been very successful. Several social workers have started taping their interviews which are also being used in the training. Nav~mber 14~ 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Parent Group started this month spearheaded by K.C. Keogh and Judy Randle from our staff. This is our third year of having Parent Group and it currently has nine participants. Adolescent Group started this month staffed by Cheryl Lewis and Sue Heflin. There are currently six participants. We again have two graduate interns with Vicki Moore providing consultationisupervision. We are still involved in three pilot programs for the State: 1) VACIS - Statewide computer system; 2) UA - known as Universal Access, this tests the viability/ advisability of eliminating financial eligibility requirements for services provided directly by our social work staff; 3) Adult Family Care - The least successful pilot for us.; this tests the feasibility of recruiting homes to take in disabled or elderly persons, much like Foster Care for children. In order to conduct a valid, worthwhile evaluation of our Structural Family Therapy Training, Kathy Ralston is taking a course in evaluation at U.Va. That includes a "practicum" of an actual evaluation under Professor Bob Covert's supervision. This way, for approximately one-third of the financial investment of employing outside evaluators, we feel we can achieve a professional evaluation and have a staff member trained to conduct evaluations in other areas. Kathy will also be compiling the formal Transportation Report from the statistics gathered during our four test months. As you know, we consider this an important effort and one which may play into our budget requests for 1985-86. An on-going effort not mentioned above is that of-Volunteer recruitment, training and placement. Although this has taken a lower profile than in the past two years, we still consider it important and a supportive service for staff. This fiscal year begins the committment of an Eligibility Worker, Marianne' Shanaberger on a part-time basis, to fraud investigations and prosecutions and payment error recoupments. Sometime after the first of the year, she will be making a report to the Board on her activities. The Management Team (made up of all Supervisors and Administrative Staff of the Department) has been developing agency-wide goals and objectives -- a project long overdue. Following the completion of these, each unit will be doing the same on a unit-specific basis. The intent is to clarify and-commit to - on paper - clear statements of purpose and direction which can be measured and recognized. Bob Tucker, Deputy County Executive for Physical and Human Development, has asked each Department Head to do the same (coincidently occurring after we began our work), which has added another incentive for us. The distribuition of commodity foods -- cheese and milk -- continues. This year also marks the-move of the Fuel Assistance Program from the third floor to the first floor - immediately after entering the North Wing. The advantages for clients and staff alike are obvious, and we look forward to not having some of the physical problems we have had in the past. This year case staffings have been formalized and become a routine function of the Service Units. They have proven to be beneficial and helped to improve the service provision of our workers. As I think you will agree, we are not letting too much grass grow under our feet. At the same time, you need to be aware of some additional areas that we are con- sidering: 1) The development of a group for' foster care children going to Independent Living situations to help them to learn to cope with everyday living in a non-dependent environment. 2) The initiation of training for staff in safety/security. 3) The expansion of training, etc., for Eligibility Workers to help them be more rounded (for lack of a better word) and more involved in service community and/or agency activities. 4) Training targeted specifically to Social Work Supervisors in the supervision of Structural Family Therapy. 5) An Open House (perhaps Workshop) for the general public on Social Services in Albemarle County. 6) The development of an awards program, initiated by staff - probably once a year -- to recognize the work of an individual or individuals. If there are other areas the Board wants to work on/develop, we welcome your comments." Agenda Item No. 5. Approval of Minutes, May 30 (Afternoon), June 6 (Afternoon), June 6 (Night), June 13 (partial), and October 17,. 1984. .On motion by Mr. Bowie, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, the minutes from May. 30, June 6 and October 17 were approved with the correction of a typographical error in the June 6 minutes. Mr. Henley had not read the June 13 minutes and they were deferred to December '12. The roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cook~. November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Lindstrom said that when the Board approVed SP-84-19, Free Union Country School, a condition was imposed to limit the permit to the applicant, but since the applicant is a corp- oration, the condition really has no effect. He said staff might remember this on future applications. Mr. Bowie noted that Mr. W. M. Jeffries was present on June 13 to explain the Piedmont Corridor proposal. In reading the minutes of that meeting, he noticed that the idea for this road was conceived in i983; by March of 1984 the proposal was presented to Commissioner King who liked the idea,~and by June, 1984, there were a~rial photos of the route. That whole procedure took less than a year and he just wanted to mention that fact. Mr. Bowie remarked to the Board and staff that he is concerned about questions the Board members ask in meetings and never receive an answer. As~a case in point, he said he had through a Clerk's Note in the minutes that Ipswich Place was added to the secondary highway system several months ago. A question was asked about this road recently, and this is the first notification of any action to the Board, even though there had been lengthy discussion when the issue first arose. Mr. Lindstrom said he concurred with Mr. Bowie and said the Board needs to receive more follow-up information. Agenda Item No. 6a. Highway Matters: Request for Street Name: Route 787. Mrs. Cindy Pack requested the Board, by petition, to name Route 787 Giilums Ridge Road. her petition s~e stated that the name was chosen in conjunction with the Albemarle County Historical Society. The landowners in the area want a street name to put an end to the con- fusion caused when the Post Office changes the addresses in the area. This has happened several times in this neighborhood. Mr. Donnelly presented the following staff report: "State Route 787 serves approximately 25 parcels and is 0.8 miles in length. The proposed name, Gillums Ridge Road, does not duplicate any existing street name in Albemarle County, although the name is somewhat similar to Gilliams Mountain Road and Gilliams Mountain Lane, Dresently used in the Peacock Hill subdivision, located approximately 2.5 miles from the intersection of Route 787 and Route 708. Historically (1932 Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation Map), Route 787 was known as Bailey Road, a name which is presently in use in the City of Charlottesville. Gillums Ridge Road does not duplicate any existing street name in the County or the City and the staff recommends approval of the name." Mr. Ronald H. Pack was present to speak in favor of the pe~i~nn. He and a neighbor, Mr. Bill Gray said the U. S. Postal Service has changed their address three times recently and the hope a street name will give them a permanent address. Mr. Pack asked the procedure for havin signs erected if the petition is approved and was told by Mr. Tucker that he should speak to Engineering Department and it would direct him to the proper procedure. Mr. Fisher said he thought the Board should grant the request, even though some confusion may result from it because of the similarity between "~illums"~d "Gilliams". On motion by Mr. Way, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, the Board approved the following by the f~~g¥~e: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Route 787 be named Giltums Ridge Road. Agenda Item 6b. Other Highway Matters. Mr. Bowie thanked Mr. Dan Roosevelt of the Virginia Department of Highways and Trans- portation for the completed status report on Route 777. · Moorman s River at White Hall Mr Henley asked if the weight limit on a bridge across the ' ~n Route 810 can be increased from the 16,000 pound limit. Mr. Roosevelt said the limits are based on how much load the bridge will carry, but added that he will look into the matter. Mr. Lindstrom said the Highway Department had done a prompt job in filling in ditches along Route 676, but they did not fill in the one his request mainly concerned. He asked that the Department check the ditch on the inside of the curge opposite the Ivy Creek Methodist Church. Mr. Henley gave Mr. Roosevelt a petition si~ned by residents of Route 674 near Route 61~ asking for repairs to said road. Mr. Henley said he had informed these people that this requ&st would probably have to be included in the next update of the Six-Year Highway Plan. 532 m November 14~ 198~ (Resular Day Meeting) Mr. Fisher told Mr. Roosevelt that traveling south on Hydraulic Road at the Lamb's Road intersection the road suddenly turns from one lane to three lanes. He asked if there is any reason why the right-turn-only lane cannot be used as a stacking lane for through traffic. Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department had looked at this intersection and found that a lot of people are getting in the through lane with the idea of immediately pulling over and going into the entrance of Albemarle High School, which actually has its own turn lane. While there have been no accidents at the spot, Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department had a number of calls and developed the turn lane. He said that if this turn lane is discontinued~ those turning right will have a more serious problem with people very close behind them; there would be an increased potential for accidents. Another problem is that people making a right turn on red a~.~that~i~e~ection could not do so if the person in the lead car intends to drive straight through. That, in turn, would increase the traffic backup at an already busy intersection. Mr. Roosevelt said the fact that people are using the right turn taneaasaathh~m~h]&~nd2is unfortunately, an enforcement problem. Mr. Lindstrom said traffic stacks up quite a distance back down on Hydraulic behind that intersection, although it moves fairly quickly. He said he uses the intersection frequently and he has not noticed much of a problem with people pulling straight through from the right turn lane. Mr. Roosevelt said he had gotten some calls abou~ the traffic light and his office checked and found that the timing was off. It has been change. Mr. Lindstrom said it takes only about a minute to get through the light, and he said he goes through the intersection at about the busiest time each day. Mr. Roosevelt noted that he now has copies of the most recent t~affic counts taken in the County,.Augu~, 198~. ]~.~ Mr. Roosevelt volunteered to bring Mr. Fisher up to date on the Barracks Road/ Georgetown Road intersection. He said his staff had checked the timing on that signal and found that it was correct. The only reason, he can find for traffic flow problems in that area is that traf- fic on Barracks Road has increased considerably more than the traffic on Georgetown Road. He said he will ask the traffic engineer to study the location during rush hour to see if the Highway Department should extend the cycle lane on Barracks Road. As far as improvements are concerned at that intersection, Mr. Roosevelt said the only funding for secondary roads must come through the six-year plan. The County staff, he said, is currently studying a number of locations in the County for Traffic Safety Improwements (TSM), and one of the suggestions he would make is that the Board place a priority on the items contained in that staff report. He said that a turn lane and some improvements at this intersection are items on the list for TSM funding, which includes some sixteen or seventeen items. The TSM, he said, will be a planning tool for the Board to use in the allocation of secondary road funds. Mr. Tucker said the TSM is part of the overall MPO study and the Planning Commission has looked at the preliminary work. Mr. Lindstrom said the Georgetown Road/Barracks Road intersection is definitely a problem. There is a problem with getting off the U.S. 250/29 Bypass at rush hour, and there is a problem coming into Charlottesville on Barracks Road and trying to travel east on the Bypass. The problem, he fears, will not be a cheap one to solve. Mr. Fisher said a right turn lane from Barracks Road onto Georgetown Road would solve some of the long stacking that is going on there, and that would seem cheaper than building another full lane there. Mr. Lindstrom requested that the Highway Department paint a line on the right side of Route 676 near the entrance to Rivenwood. He said the present deceleration lane is not marked Well, so drivers think it is part of the main road. Agenda Item No. 7. Airport Board. Resolution and Agreement to DiSsolve the Charlottesville-Albemarle. Mr. Tucker said these items were submitted to the Board last month, but the Board had several questions about the legislation establishing the Airport Authority. He feels those questions have been resolved. The Airport Authority is functioning properly. The resolution to dissolve the Airport Board, he said, is really just a housekeeping amendment. It authorizes the Chairman to sign the agreement concurrently with City Council. Mr. Lindstrom made motion to adopt the resolution, set out in full below, seconded by Mr. Way; the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. Mr. Lindstrom said he. would like to state for whatever members of the news media might be present, that he had supported the creation of the Airport Authority and the dissolution of the Airport Board because it relieves the county's taxpayers from the financial responsibility for capital improvements at the airport. Whether or not county citizens used the airport in the past, they have had to share in the cost for upgrading the facilities. Under the present scheme the Authority assesses the cost of expansion against the users of the airport only, and he feels this a much more equitable approach. He said the Board has no legal responsibility or moral obligation to bail the Authority out of any financial problems that might occur. He said the public is protected from an overly agressive Authority by the fact tha~ it does not have the power of eminent domain. They will have to come to the Board and City Council for that, and Mr. Lindstrom said he did not feel that a lot can occur without cooperation from the City and the County. 533 November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) A RESOLUTION TO DISSOLVE THE CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE AIRPORT BOARD BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle. County, Virginia: There being no further business for the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Board to conduct, the ownership and operation of the Charlottesville- Albemarle Airport having been assumed by the recently created Charlottesville- Albemarle Airport Authority, the Chairman of the Board is hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the County an agreement, a copy of which shall be kept with the minutes of this meeting, with the City of Charlottesville, which agreement dissolves the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Board and provides for the orderly winding up of its affairs. _. THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 19th day of November, 1984, by and between the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE and the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 5.1-35 and 5.1-36 of the Code of Virginia (1950) as amended. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the parties heretofore entered into an agreement dated July 15, 1974 ~nd~;amended January 11, 1984, creating the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Board: to own and operate the Charlottesville-Albemarle AirPort; WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly having created the Charlottesville- Albemarle Airport Authority effective July l, 1984 (Acts of Assembly, Ch. 390, 1984) for the purpose of acquiring the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport from the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Board; WHERE~ the Board and the Authority having heretofore joined in the execution of a deed dated October 3, 1984, conveying all airport property from the Airport Board to the Airport Authority; WHERE~t-?~h~AI~port Board and the Airport Authority having applied for all necessary approvals from affected state and federal agencies for the transfer of ownership of the airport; and WHEREAS, there appears no further business for the Airport Board to conduct; NOW THEREFORE, the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville do agree hereby to dissolve the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport BOard, effect- ive immediately. Its members shall retain authority to provide any documentation _ in its name which is necessary or convenient to the winding up of the affairs of the Airport Board in a prompt and efficient manner. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the County of Albemarle, pursuant to a resolution duly adopted by its Board of Supervisors on November 14, 1984, has caused this agree- ment to be exectuted on its behalf by Gerald E. Fisher, Chairman, and attested by Lettie E. Neher, Clerk of the Board, and the City of Charlottesville, pursuant to a resolution duly adopted by its City Council on October 15, 1984, has caused this agreemen~ to be executed on its behalf by Francis L. Buck, Mayor, and attes- ted by Jeanne Cox, Clerk of the Council. Agenda Item No. 8. Italian Student Exchange Program -- Request for Approval. A ~ummary report and recommendations of the committee that planned and carried out the CASA Italia Student Exchange Program in 1983 was received. The report stressed the excellent relationships the program had fostered between both individuals involved and the communities. Dr. Charles Tolbert was present to urge the Board, saying he wanted to encourage support of the program. He said it was very successful and benefited not only the students but also the committee members and the community. D~. TB~TOlbart said one of the reasons the program was so successful was the fact that Count and City staff actually ran the day-to-day details. The committee that coordinated the last exchange program has recommended that for any future programs, a coordinator be hired to over- see the project on a daily basis. Dr~ Tolbert said he did not know whether the position should be a staff person from the City or County made available for this purpose or someone hired part-time to do the job; that would be the Board's decision. Also, in 1983 the Committee o~tained a large amount of private financing, but Dr. Tolbert said it would be very nice to have some public financing to fall back on if nec~essary. Mr. Fisher asked if, the program is going to be continued on a biennial basis, its cost should be placed in the regular school budget. Dr. Tolbert said that if the program becomes a regular one, there would be an advantage in having it as part of a regular budget. His only concern in having such funds in the school budget is ~hat by its biennial nature, the program would tend to distort the budget. Dr. Tolbert said if the program is to have a budget, it should be separate from the school budget, something that could not be cut when the School Board is trying to find money to raise teachers' salaries, etc. Mr. Fisher said he and Mrs. Cooke have discussed the program and both support it. He asked the other Board members for comment. Mr. Bowie said that while he had no problem with the student exchange program, he does not agree that it is of benefit to the community, since the average citizen probably does not even see anyone involved. He said that what bothered 534 November 14¢ 1984 -(R:e~ular Da~.Meeti~g)~ is that it began as a rather successful volunteer program, and now is to be institutionalized with part-time help and a budget double the amount the Board contributed in 1983. Mr. Bowie said he fears by the time the program comes up again in two years it will require a full-time staff position. He said he supports this program as a volunteer effort. He said that if-the exchange program belongs in the County budget, then it runs a risk of being weighed against other programs as what is the best use of the tax dollar of Albemarle CoUnty citizens. Mr. Lindstrom asked where the paperwork shows that the budget had doubled since the-last program. Mr. Bowie pointed out a $10,000 cost estimate in a memorandum fromthe program com- mittee. Mr. Lindstrom said that if this amount is the total appropriation from the City and County, it would be about the same amount as was contributed by the localities Zast year. Dr. Tolbert said he assumed that this amount was not directed toward the Board of Supervisors specifically, but the committee would be glad to get that much. He said the Committee ·fears problems in fund raising because there are a lot of valuble causes competing for do~ti~n~ in 8 tough environment. Mr. Fisher said fundraising was difficult last time and the Chamber of Commerce, which did a good deal of the fundraising, found itself doing much more work than it had planned. Mr. Fisher suggested that host families pick up more of the costs for students who are housed in their homes. Dr. Tolbert said no money was used to subsidize the students last year. Instead, it was used for trips to Washington, D,C., Virginia Beach, and other places. He said the committee did not feel it could ask the hos~ families for funds for those trips when they were already paying the expenses of the students' stay in their homes. Mr. Fisher told the Board members that the reason this request is before them at the moment is to make a decision on whether or not to have such a program for 1985. City Council and the City School Board have endorsed the concept, as has the County School Board. T~he Board's action, Mr, Fisher said, will determine whether or not an invitation can be issued to our sister cities in Italy so the planning can begin.- Mr. Way commented that he was very impressed·by-the amount of private funds that were raised, but that he is also concerned, that the private funding was sort of a one-shot deal and now it appears the governing body is being requested to take over the management of the progrsm He said his feelings are mixed. He could support paying about the same amount as the County paid last year, but not a $10,000 request. Mr. Lindstrom said he felt the program was pri- marily a private program with some small public ·support. He said he could suport that kind of approach. He said he is not certain that the Board should support the program if the private sector was not willing to support it. He said he would agree to facilitate the program but would not agree to become its primary supporter. Mr. Lindstrom said the Board's support should probably be as much as it has been in the past. -Mr.. Bowie said he agreed. · Mr. Fisher said the program had some staff support last time. He said the intent of the staffing request is to provide one person for coordination of programs rather than three or :- four people with the attendent confusion that causes. Mr. Bowie said he felt a part-time - person would be the most efficient of the alternatives discussed. Mr. Lindstrom wondered if·someone at the Visitors' Bureau might be able to take on the task of coordinating the program. Mr. Tucker said the staff can explore that possibility. He and Mr. Jones, he said, have discussed finding a staff person with time to coordinate the program without having to hire someone, Mr. Lindstrom said the County supports the Visitors' Burea~ with a fairly substantial contribution and it might not be unreasonable to expect that staff to help with the program. With that suggestion, Mr. Lindstrom made motion to endorse the concept without endorsing any specific details until the Board knows more about the program. Mr. Lindstrom said he would personally be willing to vote for an amount of funding not exceeding what the Board has done i~ the past. Mr. Henley seconded the motion, which passed by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT:~ Mrs. Cooke. Agenda Item No. 9. Endowed Chairs for the Public School System. The Board~received a letter from Mr. Lane Kneedler suggesting that the County adopt a system of endowing certain teaching positions with an extra stipend each year for excellence, in the manner that,'many colleges and universities do. -Mr. Fisher said he had intended to notify Mr. Kneedle~of the Board meeting on this sub- ject, but he had not, and felt the Board could go ahead on the basis of the letter. He then asked Dr. Tolbert if he had seen the letter. D~. Tolbert said no. Mr. Way pointed out that the main question he had on the proposal was what the Albemarle County School Board's reaction to the suggestion would be, and since the Board does not have that ~formation, he was not willing to act on the request at this time. Mr. Lindstrom said that in view of the fact that Mr. Kneedler was not present to speak for the idea and tha%School Board had not formally reacted to-it, he would move that the sugges- tion be deferred until such time as the School. Board can react to the proposal. 'Mr. Way seconded the motion which passed with the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke. NovemBer 14: t984 (Regular Day MeetinK) Agenda Item No. 10. Public Hearing: To consider an amendment to the projects areas of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include six parcels (Tax Map 60A, Parcels 09-6A, 09- 6B, 09-6C, 09-5, 09-6 and 09-7) located off of Georgetown Road in the water service only area. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 6, 1984.) Mr. Donnetly presented the staff's report: "Request: Several property owners have filed a petition requesting to amend the project areas map of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include water service to Parcels 09-6A, 09-6B, 09-6C, 09-5, 09-6, and 09-7, Tax Map 60A. Zoning and Current Utility Service: The properties in question are currently zoned RA, Rural Areas, and are located within the South Fork Rivanna River Watershed. Lot sizes consist of: Lot Acreage. 09---Z'"EA 0.25 09-6B 0.27 09-6C 0.33 09-5 1.433 09-6 0.40 09-7 0.50 All lots, with the exception of lot 09-6, which is vacant, are currently developed for residential purposes and utilize wells for water supply. Recommendation: Staff recommends the amendment of the Service Authority's water boundaries to include the six lots within the 'Water to Existing Structures' service area." Following ths staff report, Mr. Tucker explained, using a map, the location of the properties. He said the Board decided a couple of years ago that if the property was not exactly contiguous to a water line, or if there was no existing dwelling on the prop- erty being served by water, such properties would be removed from the service area boundaries for the water service. Mr. Tucker said that left some "islands" like the Gibson property (the current petitioners), surrounded by the service area yet not served by public water. Mr. Tucker said the Gibsons presently use wells and in one instance a single well serves two dwellings. He said the families are concerned about their future water supply and. the sal- ~ili~y,aCf~th~$r homes. Mr-. Lindstrom asked if all the lots have houses and was told that all do except one. In pointing out the exact location, Mr. Tucker noted that the properties are down a lane behind a new duplex unit located directly on Georgetown Road. Mr. Fisher asked ho~ a duplex could be constructed on property zoned RA and was told a special use permit ~a~ been approved by the Board some months ago. Mr. Fisher then opened the public hearing. Mr. Carl Gibson came before the Board and said he has lived on Georgetown Road for some thirty years beside his brother. He said the well for their house supplies three houses and fairly expensive to keep up. He said the families would like to connect to the public water supply. Several couplings are.already present on the property. He said it would only be a matter of a hundred feet or so from the existing waterline to the property. He added that the nature of a well is such that, with the additional development, it could go bad and leave the families with no water supply at all. After hearing Mr. Gibson's commen~s, Mr.. Fisher closed the public hearing since no one else was present to speak for or against the petition. Mr. Lindstrom said he has had SEo~ht~agpR'Eo~i~E~e~endinE~w~e~lihe~ &nethe watershed are ~~$~ in this case, with the location of these parcels, and the fact that all the ing land isbbasically developed, inclusion will not have any influence on the size of the lots or the number of dwelling units that can be built. .With those considerations, moved to approve the request to include the above.noted.six parcels in the "water'only"~.Droj areas of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Way seconded the motion, which passed with the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley., Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. Agenda Item No. 11. Request from Mrs. Blanche Steppe to include a parcel on the S.P.C.A. Road (Route 649) in the water service area of the Albemarle County Service Authority. A letter from Mrs. Blanche Steppe, dated October 29, t984, addressed to the Board of Supervisors, had been received requesting that herolo~,kk~e~n as Parcei 29A, Tax Map 45, be included for water service. Mrs. Steppe noted that she had purchased her parcel of land on Woodburn Road in November of 1979. At that time, the subdivision plat put to record showed that "Parcel A to be served by public water." Mrs. Steppe said she obtained a building permit in December 1983 and it was not until after house framing was constructed that she found that her parcel had been removed from the A.S.C.A.'s service areas. Mrs. Steppe now requests approval to have her parcel put back in the water service area, as she wants to move into the house within the next four weeks. Mr. Fisher asked if the request today is just to set a public hearing. Mr. Tucker said the Board can take action on this request today without an advertised public hearing. He said the area involved is less than 40,000 square feet so could not be seen on the large-scale service area map. He recommended that the Board take action today. November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Donnelly presented the following staff report: "Request: To include Parcel 29A, Tax Map 45, located on Route 649 (S,P.C.A. Road) in the Water Service Area of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Current Zoning: RA, Rural Areas. Acreage: 40,896 square feet or .94 acre. Parcel History: The Albemarle County Planning Commission approved the plat for this parcel July 17, 1979, subject to the provision of public water. At that time, this property was included within the jursidictional (service) area of the Albemarle County Service Authority for both water and sewer service. Although sewer connections were not available, the service area included both sides of Route 649. This parcel was zoned R-2 Residential at that time. Subsequently, the Board of Supervisors adopted a new zoning ordinance (December 10, 1980) and a corresponding rezoning of the entire County. The Steppe property was rezoned from R-2 to RA. On September 10, 1980, the Albemarle County Service Authority service areas for water and sewer were altered to exclude properties which drained into the watershed impoundment area, a primary objective of the then-proposed zoning ordinance. Under the Board of Supervisors' direction, in October 1983, the Albemarle County Service Authority service areas were further amended to include parcels with existing structures which were contiguous to waterlines to provide for future connections. Parcels vacant at that time were not included within the proposed service areas. The Steppe property was vacant at that time. Recommendation: This (0.94 acre) parcel is a non-conforming parcel in the RA district. It does not meet the minimum area requirements for a private well and septic system (at least 60,000 square feet required). Although ordinances and regulations have changed, this lot was required to have a public water connection at the time of approval by the Plan- ning Commission and a subsequent building permit was issued contingent upon this condition. Additionally, all adjacent properties on the western side of Route 649 are designated for water service by the Albemarle County Service Authority. Due to its size and history, staff regards this parcel as a hardship and recommends inclusion in the service areas for public water." Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing. Mrs. Blanche Steppe said the main thing about the petition is that she was issued a build- in~FPeDmit and was never told that her property had been taken off' of the water map. She said sh~. kept getting the runaround from the Water Service Authority and only found out the first of October that she had to come before the Board. She said her house lacks only a little more work inside before she can move in. Mr. Fisher asked if the house was based on a building permit which requires that public water be available. Mrs. Steppe said that is correct. Mr. Lindstrom asked if she has been given a certificate of occupancy, and was told that the house is not yet complete. She said she did not find out that the property was not on the water map until long after the building permit had been issued. Mr. Lindstrom said he hoped that problems of this kind can be elimi- nated after the land use procedures study he had proposed at the November 7 meeting with the Planning Commission. Mrs. Steppe said she had gotten no notification of the changes in the water service area. Mr. Bowie said he felt the Board should apologize for the misinformation Mrs. Steppe had received. He said he felt the petition should be approved. With no one else present to speak for or against the petition, Mr. Fisher closed the public hearing. Mr. Tucker, asked by Mr. Fisher for his reaction to Mrs. Steppe's comments, said the issuance of the building permit was a mistake on the part of the County. Mrs. Steppe should have been notified and the building permit held until the matter could be cleared up. Mr. Lindstrom made motion to approve the request to include the Steppe property (Parcel 29A, Tax Map 45) in the Water Service area of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Way seconded the motion, which passed with the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke. Agenda Item No. 12. Public Hearing: Establish a Central Absentee Voter Election District in the Albemarle County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. (Notice of this public hearing was published in the Daily Progress on October 20 and November 6, 1984.) Mr. Tucker said the Board adopted this ordinance as an emergency measure last month, and this hearing will make the ordinance permanent. November 14, 1984 (Resular Day Meeting) 537 Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing. He closed it when no one was present to speak for ~r against the ordinance. Mr. Way made motion to readopt the ordinance adopted on October l0 as a permanent ordi- nance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bowie (text follows) and carried by the following recorde( vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A CENTRAL ABSENTEE VOTER ELECTION DISTRICT IN THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir- ginia, that there is hereby established a central absentee voter election district in the Electoral Board Room on the First Floor of the Albemarle County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottes- ville, for the purpose of counting and recording absentee ballots in all elections. For S~aDe~Author.ity, see Virginia Code Section 24.1-233.1 Agenda Item No. 13. Newtown Community Action - Request for Funding. The Board received a letter from Mr. Donald L. Nobles, President of Newtown Community ~ction, dated March 22, 1984. and one dated September 19, 1984, addressed to Mr. Fisher as Chairman. Mr. Fisher said he had asked that the request be studied by the staff and that a report be brought to the Board. Mr. Tucker presented the staff report: "Request: The Newtown Community Center recently completed installation of a well, septic drainfield and a variety of electrical and physical build- ing improvements. To date approximately $11,600 has been expended; of this total amount approximattey $3,000 is yet unpaid. The Newtown Commun- ity Center is requesting assistance to make up this financial shortfall. Histor.y:. The Newtown Community Center was built originally in 1923 as a school for the black population. It was used as a school unitl the 1950' Presently the building is owned by an area church with a fifty year lease to the Newtown Community Center. The building has been a focal point of the community but has been difficult to utilize due to a lack of running water and septic facilities. In 1981 a Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA) community reso~ ce specialist working in this area of the County undertook coordination with residents of the area to organize improvements to the structure and to me~t the needs of the community. Initial meetings were held and as a result of those meetings it was decided that a recreation area was needed initially to meet the needs of young people in the area. During the summer of 1982, a Youth Employment work crew sponsored by MACAA cleared the field across from the Newtown Community Center. There- after, the field was used for softball games and fund raising began to occur as a result of those games. With the fundraising activities, community interest in improving the old school structure increased. The community became interested in utilizing the building for a local food bank, senior nutrition program and after school activities. Therefore, in the summer of 1983, the MACAA Youth Employment Program began to concentrate on rehabilitating the structure. It became apparent that broader utilization of the building required the provision of water and septic facilities. In November of 1983 MACAA applied to the virginia Water Project on Newtown's behalf for funding for a well. The Newtown Project was successful in receiving initially a $3,000 grant for a well. Progress to Date: The well has been completed and water is now running in the building although final inspection has not yet occurred. Installation of the well was more expensive than estimated due to the difficulty in locating a well site due to underlying bedrock. The Virginia Water Project agreed to support the Newtown Center Project by an addi~ion~tZ$~0~ bringing the total grant amount up to $3,400. The septic drainfietd had to be located across State Route 690 from the Community Center. This entailed obtaining a permit from the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation and drilling under the road. Consequently, installation of the septic drainfield was more costly than anticipated. The field has been installed, however, and is functional. Presently, two bathrooms are being completed in the structure. 538 November 14~ 1984 ~Regular Day. Meeting) Other expenses have included rewiring the entire structure. While under- taking the water and septic improvements, it was discovered that the entire building required rewiring (this cost approximately $1,800). This was an additional unanticipated expense. Other improvements performed to date and noted on the attached financial data sheet submitted by Newtown include installation of three new doors. Two of these doors were replace- ments for front doors and additional work was required on the deteriorated door frames. These two doors can be reached only by steep stairs. The third door was cut into the rear of the building providing both on-grade access and an additional fire escape avenue. The Newtown Community Center plans to eventually construct a ramp to this rear door in order to better serve the handicapped. The Center is also in the process of install- ing a hot water heater; all but the electrical work has been completed. The Newtown Community Center plans in the future to winterize the building, seeking aid from the Community Energy Conservation Program. Additional work on the structure's windows is also planned. Funding is not being requested, however, for these projects. Programs Offered at the Center: Presently the Jefferson Area Board for Aging (JABA) utilizes the Newtown Community Genter one day a week for the Meals- On-Wheels Program. This program serves nineteen low income and elderly residents by delivering a week's worth of packaged meals. The Center is also utilized for food bank storage from the Blue Ridge Food Bank. Pres- ently two green-thumb workers, provided under, the Older Americans Act, are assigned to the Center and provide part-time work such as paneling, maintenance, community organization, etc. The Newtown Community Center may be able to have a third green-thumb worker assigned to the center if a congregate meal site is eventually established at Newtown. The Newtown Community Center is also utilized for community events such as dances, fundraisers, etc. With water and septic facilities, the type of activities held will be able to expand, as well as increasing frequency of the Center's use. Funding: As stated above $3,400 was raised for the Newtown Community Center through the Virginia Water Project for the well. For the septic drain- field, $1,350 was contributed by an adjacent owner for his proportional use of the drainfield. In addition, the Newtown Community Center raised $3,810 through individual contributions. Therefore, the Newtown Commun- ity Center is short approximately $3,000. This funding is needed to pay for work on the drainfield (approximately $2,300), for the electrician's labor (approximately $700 presently, a portion has been repaid), for material and installation of doors (approximately.S500) and final plumbing work (estimated previously at approximately $300). Again, the Newtown Community Center is continuing to pay, as funding becomes available, a portion of all its outstanding accounts. Action: The Newtown Community Center has requested financial assistance. If the total amount requested is not appropriated, consideration should be given to aiding the septic field installation payment as this portion of the Newtown project contributed towards maintaining the quality of the South Fork Rivanna River drinking water impoundment area. The portion of the accounts still outstanding amounts to approximately $2,300." Mr. Tucker said the $11,000+ the group has spent on the building has been raised in the community. He recommended that, if the Board should choose not to fund the entire balance of the Newtown Community Center's debt, it at least fund the drainfield project. The money can be taken from the Board's Contingency Fund acco.unt. Mr. Bowie asked if the staff knew how many other community centers there are in the County and whether or not the Board might become liable for the costs of expansions at these centers also. Mr. Tucker said the staff had not made such a study, but he noted that the staff sug- gests helping this center because most of the effort thus far has come from the community rather than through a direct appeal to the Board. Mr. Tucker said this type of community participation in such projects should be encouraged. Mr. Tucker said the drainfield is an expense the County can justify subsidizing, so this can be used to draw a distinction between this project and any future projects of this type that might come to the Board for financial assistance. He said the drainfield will definitely improve the quality of the water draining into the water impoundment area because prior to this construction, the area had no drainfield whatsoever. Mr. Fisher said he was impressed with the amount ($3,800) paid by contributers. Mr. Henle s~id this community center has been a source of inspiration for the whole area, which must deal with other difficulties, such as.narrow roads, and lack~of water and sewer. He said he felt the Board should help. Mr. Way said that he, too, was impressed with the amount of money already raised. He asked Mr. Donald Nobles, president of the Newtown Community Center, who was present, if any of the actual work had been donated. Mr. Nobles said the group has been raising money and that Col. William Washington has been instrumental in the fundraising aspects of the renovations. He said that the group has gotten the money together and. has spent it. The reason it has spent so much, he. said, is because the contractor hit rock and the line had to be changed and then the group had to buy stone for the 539 November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) ~ill. He added that the well had to be drilled to 303 feet and be sealed at 55 feet. After that came the expense of cutting under the state road, done, he said, by the one man the High- way Department said could do the work. That expense was $900, plus purchase of an insurance policy in case the road caves in on that spot. Mr. Nobles said the contractor who dug the drainfield did not charge the Center the entire, amount because the position of the field had to be shifted slightly. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Highway Department has a policy whereby only one man can do the cutting across highways. Mr. Nobles said the group had been given to understand that only one person had the proper type of equipment for such work. Mr. Nobles said the electrician helped by donating time, as did the bulldozer operator who bulldozed the septic field site. Each of the Community Center members also donated free time for fundraising and construction activities. Mrs. Mildred Nobles gave the Board an itemized list of the Center's expenses, a copy of which is on file. Col. William Washington addressed the Board saying that he had worked with Mr. Nobles ~bout a year ago in connection with the efforts to save Greenwood School. In one conversation on that subject, he asked what could be done to get Funding for the Community Center. Col. Washington committed himself to raise $3,000 for the well and the drainfield. He raised $3,810 from 18 of 20 prospects in the area. In addition to the money, a lot of fixtures were given to the Center. Col. Washington said the Community Center needs help because it will now have operating expenses it never had before. The Center will have to raise about $50 per month to meet just electrical costs. He said the building is utilized a great deal because it is within easy walking distance of the community and he would like to urge funding of the project by the County. Mr. Fisher oommendad~dol~/Washington for his efforts in raising funds for the Center. Mr. Gordon Walker, Executive Director, Jefferson Area Board on Aging, told the Board he felt the building would be useful for the senior citizens' community meals and for recreational and social activities in the community. He said that JABA has committed itself to a meal site at Newtown and that the storage space there enables his agency to distribute food and services to a wider area of Western Albemarle County. Mr. Henley made motion, seconded by Mr.-Lindstrom, to adopt the following resolution. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. ~~_ Mrs. Cooke. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir~a .uL,~: ginia, that $3~Q18 be, and the same hereby is, transferred from the Board of Supervisors Contingency Fund coded 1-1000-11010-999999 to Newtown Com- munity Action coded 1-1000-91032-562800; AND FURTHER, that this appropriation is effective this date. Agenda Item No. 14. Western Albemarle Rescue Squad - Request for Funding. A letter dated November 5, 1984, was received from Mrs. Martha B.'Amato, President, West- ern Albemarle Rescue Squad, Inc. stating that on May 30, 1984, the WARS made an offer in the amount of $138,000 tpvt~e Crozet Volunteer Fire Department for the?pnrp~secOfopu~hasing its property (Parcels 68 and 69, Tax Map 56(A-01) located in Crozet. Mrs. Amato noted'that for the past several years, the WARS has searched for a proper location for a building, being in-need of more space. The CVFD property will provide adequate office, training, meeting and bunkroom space, as well as house all of the Rescue Squad's equipment and provide for future growth. Mrs Amato requested an advance allocation under the County's Capital Improvements Program of $65,000 in February, 1985, and $65,000 in July, 1985 for ~e ~urR~se of purchasing the property described. She said tha the majority of money needed for remodeling w~ll be solicited from the public and other local organizations· Mr. Ray Jones reminded the Board that the current five-year Capital Improvements Program carries about $190,000 for the Western Albemarle Rescue Squad. In the meantime, the rescue squad requested the Crozet Volunteer Fire Department to sell its property to the squad for $138,000. The squad, while it feels that total project costs may reach $150,000, is requesting a letter of commitment from the Board so it may negotiate with the fire department for the building. Mr. Jones suggested that a public hearing be set on the appropriation, so the staff can proceed with having a service agreement drawn. Mr. Fisher asked if the actual funds are available at this time. Mr. Jones said yes. Mr. Henley said it seemed to him that since the County donates funds to both agencies the money from the sale of the existing fire department building should go toward the construction costs of its new building. Why, therefore, should the County be obligated to give the Rescue Squad the money to give to another agency that also receives County funding. Mr. Jones said the fire company is anticipating using the money from the sale of the old building for con- struction costs, and then applying for an advance from the County. Mr. Fisher asked when the new fire department building will actually be built. Mr. Jones said a site plan has been approved and when the fire company gets a letter of committment from the Western Albemarle Rescue Squad, it will be able to complete its financing package. Mr. Henley said he could no~ understand why the rescue squad had to pay the money back if it will place them in a financial bind, when the money is going to be used for another agency that receives County money. Mr. Jones said the whole plan here is to advance to the rescue squad $130,000, and then advance an additional amount to the fire company. The sale of the old building, he said, is one third of the total cost of a new building. Allocation of this amount ($300,000) has been approved by the Jefferson Country Firefighters' Association. 54O November 14, 198~ (Regular Day Meeting) --Mrs. Amato was present to speak on behalf of the request. She introduced president-elect Charles Waersaa~d~a~d~%f she could answer the Board's questions. Mr. Fisher asked if the Board understood the request correctly. Mrs. Amato said yes. She said if the rescue _squad were to construct a new building, it would cost about $225,000, excluding the land, for the same ~square footage as the fire company property. She said the Squad has proven that it can raise funds for its operation and maintenance by solicitation from the community, and the community has shown that it wants a rescue squad by its support. She said this-'seems to be the most economical way to go, and the location is good for the squad. She would like to se~ the request approved. Mr. Henley then offered motion to approve a letter of committment to the Rescue Squad and t'o also set a public hearing on the appropriation for the December 12 meeting. Seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, the motion carried by the foll'owing recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None; Mrs. Cooke. Agenda Item No. 15. Establishment of Petty Cash Fund for Police Department. Mr. Jones told the Board that this request came from the Chief of Police supported by the Director of Finance. The fund is to be used for payment of informants: a problem occurs at night and on weekends, when the County Office is not open and petty cash is not available. Previously the Sheriff used his own money and applied to the County for reimbursement. This method has-not been satisfactory because of the many bookkeeping problems involved. By estab- lishing this petty cash fund, the County can keep the bookkeeping in-house and keep closer track of the funds disbursed. Mr. Jones said the law requires that a resolution from the governing body to create a petty cash fund be adopted. Mr. Bowie said he will support this request because it will give the County better finan- ~i~lcon~r~2a~ddif it wants information this may be' necessary because informants do 'not sign re.oeipts nor do they like 'to drop by the Police Department and pick up a check. Mr. Henley asked if the $2,000 budgeted this year for payment of informants will be placed in the fund. Mr. Jones said only $500 will be set aside. Chief Frank Johnstone and Commander James Higgins w~ll be the only people authorized to use the fund. Mr. Fisher asked how many petty cash funds the County has and was told that the number was not readily known, but Mr. Jones did not beliew there are many. Mr. Bowie made motion to adopt the following resoldtion, seconded by Mr. Way. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, ~v~:_:.~,o pursuant to Virginia Code 15.1-548 as amended, ~hat the Board determines that more efficient administration will be promoted by the establishment of a petty cash fund for the payment of claims arising from commitments made pursuant to provisions of law, by the Police Department of Albemarle County. This petty cash fund shall not exceed $500.00. Ail provisions of Code Section 15.1-548 shall apply to the administration of this petty cash fund and the Director of Finance shall have the author- ity and responsibility to assure that the person or persons into whose hands .~this fund is placed, complies with the provisions of said statute. (Note: Mr. Henley left the. meeting at 10:.50 a.m.) Agenda Item No. 16. Appropriation: Full-Time Secretary for Circuit Court. (See memorandum from Ray Jones dated November 5, 1984.) Mr. Jones told the Board that the Judge of the Circuit Court's long'time desire for a full- time secretary has become a real need according.to Judge. Gerald E. Tremblay. Mr. Jones Said the Judge has called the situation desperate, since the amount of paperwork has increased with the increasing caseload, but the secretary is actually paid by the County for part-time work, even though she is working almost forty hours per week for Albemarle. He said the staff had expected to delay the request until the next fiscal year, but finds the position should be made full-time immediately. Mr. Jones said while the secretary is working almost full time for the court she is also working as a court reporter to supplement her salary. To change ~o a.full- time salary at this time would require an extra $5,715 for the seven months remaining in fiscal year. 19~4-85. The gross salary would be $15,075 witha total cost of $18,673 including fringe benefits. Mr. Jones said this money can be taken from the Board's contingency fund without a public hearing since the Board has not appropriated more than one percent of the total budget. Mr. Jones said the current secretary, if she is hired full-time, will cease the court reporting job and work only for the County, however, the decision about the exact person to be hired will be left to Judge Tremblay. Mr. Jones said the current workload is affecting the health of the present secretary, who has been on sick leave for several weeks. Mr. Jones said there is precedent for furnishing such help to the Judge of the Circuit Court. Charlottesville, Augusta and Staunton all provide secretarial help, ranging from full-time to part-time. 54.1. ,._.November 14, 1984 (RegularyDay Meeting) Mr. Fisher said Judge Tremblay had called him to ask for~help, saying the. situtation is becoming desperate as the workload becomes more and more unmanagable. Mr. Fisher said it seemed from Mr. Jones' memorandum that some of the workload is for other counties. He asked whether the Board should support the full cost of the secretary or if it should ask. for a proportional share from other counties. He added that he is convinced that the need is there, but is not sure about where the money should come from. Mr. Jones said he had discussed this with Judge Tremblay who explained that he works in Albemarle County four days per week and a supplemental judge in the.County on the one day Judge Tremblay is in another county. Nonetheless, his secre- tary must schedule all the courts in the district of which he is Chief Judge. Mr. Jones said he asked the Judge to discuss partial payment with other counties when he makes his budget requests. He said'the Judge cannot assure that the County will be reimbursed. The State, Mr. Jones said, has discussed providing secretarial and office help for judges. Mr. Bowie said such a resolution of this problem was discussed at the Virginia Association of Counties Annual meeting, in the Criminal Justice Committee meeting, but the problem is that the Circuit Court is the only court not funded by the State. A resolution asking for state support will come before the General Assembly, but it will have to pass that body and be signed into law before the state can provide funds to pay such costs. Mr. Bowie said that if the state is going to require that secretarial help be furnished for the judges, it should pay the cost. He said, in addition, that he did not see how giving an overworked person a full-time position would help solve her health problems. Mr. Fisher said the Board's job is only to establish the position. Mr. Lindstrom said the problem seems to be that the Secretary has to work more than one job in order to provide basic support for herself. Mr. Way then offered motion to adopt the following resolution. motimn,!~.~lhh~Dass~d~y!~he following recorded vote: Mr. Lindstrom seconded the AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $5,715 be, and the' same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to the 21010 Circuit?Court Fund and coded as follows: 1-1000-21010-100100-Salary 1-1000-21010-200100-FICA 1-1000-21010-200200-Retirement 1-1000-21010-200500-Medical 1-1000-21010-200600-Group Life 1-1000-21010-201100-Workmans Comp. $4,780 335 525 60 15 TOTAL $5,715 AND, FURTHER, that this appropriation is effective this date. Motion was then offered by Mr. Way that the above appropriation was made with the standing that a permanent, full-time secretarial position is created for the Judge of the CirCuit Court. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom and carried by the following recorded rote: ~YES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley. Agenda Item No. 16a. Transfer of Appropriation: for Jack Jouett Tennis Courts. Mr. Jones said the Director of Parks & Recreation has noted that in the current Capital ~mprovements budget there is an amount of $31,000 for construction of two tennis courts at Jack Jouett School, and $10,000 for resurfacing-four tennis courts at~-A!bemarle High School. The two projects were bid together, with the low bid being $43,149.40. The Parks Director has reques- ted that $2,150 be transferred from the Totier Creek Road-project to cover the additional amount needed. It appears that the road project can be completed with the remaining balance, which is in excess of $4,000. Mr. Jones recommended approval of the transfer in that account. Mr. Lindstrom made motion to adopt the following resolution. motion passed with the following recorded vote: Mr. Way seconded it and the AYES: NAYS: ABSENT~: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $2,150 be,. and the same hereby is, transferred from 1-9000-O5612- 975602 Totier Creek Road Fund to 1-9000-71000-702003 Jouett Tennis Courts Fund; AND F~HEH~$~ ~at~ans~e~be effective this date. ~Een~ao~msNo. 23. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Tucker said he had one item to bring to the Board's attention. He had just learned that the CharlotteSville-Albemarle Airport project for a parking garage may lose funding if some preliminary clearing andgrubbing of trees is not completed in this calendar year. Mr. Tucker said the garage project (a part of the approved Airport Master Plan) requires a circum- ferential road that cannot be designed with the wooded areas in its path. Unfortunately, the November 14~ 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) I!~ont i~llow t~e t:~ ,~ t~viation iF I~ucker ~ l~indstrom ;ractors cannot obtain a soil erosion permit without first getting final site plan approval. requests the Board to waive the requirement for a preliminary site plan in this case to the grubbing to take place immediately. He said if the Airport Authority is allowed to e~;.the~soil erosion permit without the required site plan, it will be able to use Federal Agency funds to do the work. If the work is not done this calendar year, the Airport lose those funds as the contingency funds they are using will run out this calendar year. .,.Mr. Fisher asked if the contractors will have to obtain another soil erosion permit to do actual construction and actual grading for the project and was told that they would. Mr. ~aida~e~hetual~¢~nstruction and grading will not begin until the spring of 1985. Mr. asked how much time will elapse between this grubbing and the construction and was Iold road construction will begin in the spring, but the parking garage will not be constructed or some time. Mr. Lindstrom pointed out that the Board had changed 6he Soil Erosion ordinance o prevent people from doing speculative grading and then abandoning the property for a period ~f years. He said he did not feel that the Airport would do that in this case. Mr. Tucker said the Board and Planning Commission had both reviewed and approved the ~irport Master Plan. The County Engineer (who is also assigned as the engineer for the Airport) ~ill be directly involved with the process. Mr. Lindstrom made motion that the Board waive the requirement for a preliminary site plan ;o allow the issuance of a soil erosion permit for this pre-construction phase of the work on the parking garage at the airport. Mr. Bowie seconded the motion, which passed by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. &BSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley. (Mr. Henley returned to the meeting at 11:12 a.m.) Due to the fact that the Board had taken care of matters ahead of schedule and the next agenda item was a public hearing slated for ll:30 a.~., the Board did not follow the agenda but took up a later item. Agenda Item No. 22b. Proposed agreement with Claudius Crozet Park. Mr. Tucker said this agreement is a follow-up to the request by the Claudius Crozet Park Board of Directors for some funding for the regular maintenance of the park as well as for any improvements the County could make to the park. He said the Board had approved the concept of ~laudius Crozet Park's directors applying through the Capital Improvements process as the need for improvements arises. The Park's Board found that satisfactory and has sumbitted a document that outlines the responsibilities of the ~ark Board and the County. Mr. Tucker said the agreement is also to insure that the Park remains open to the public so the money the County spends will no~ be for private benefit. The agreement is designed only to require the signature of the president of the Park Board, and the COunty's legal staff has indicated that this is a ~roper legal procedure. Mr. Bowie asked that certain language in the "NOW, THEREFORE" paragraph be changed so that ]t reads "for the benefit of the citizens of Albemarle County" rather than "the citizens of the ~ommunity of Crozet and the surrounding area of Albemarle County." He said the latter version ould be interpreted to mean that the park would not be available for use by all Albemarle itizens, but only by those who live around Crozet. Mr. Lindstrom said he would request that in paragraph three, the language be changed from "The owner is willing to" restrict use to "civic" purposes, to "the owner shall" restrict use to "public" purposes. Mr. St. John said he did no~' think such a change in language would be prohibitive, but would only make things more clear and therefore was a good change. Mr. Jones Pointed out that the Board of Supervisors has to approve any amoun~ spent in the park. Mr, Lindstrom nade motion to accept the agreement with the changes noted. The motion was econded by Mr. Way an~ ~a~i~do~¥~h~ following recorded vote: .YES[ Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. ~AYS: None. ~BSENT: Mrs. Cooke. The text of the Agreement as approved by the Board is set out in full below: "THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 1984, by and between CLAUDIUS CROZET PARK, INC., a Virginia non-profit cor- poration (the "Owner"), and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBE- MARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA (the "County"); ~ WITNESSETH 1. The Owner is the owner of all that lot or parcel of land, with improvements, thereon and appurtenances thereto, known as Claudius Crozet Park, containing 22.43 acres, more or less, and shown as Parcels A and B on plat of John McNair & Associates, recorded in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 587, page 55 (the 'Property'). The property is the same pro- perty in all respects conveyed to Claudius Crozet Park, Inc., by deed of Dabney N. Sandridge, et. al., dated September 23, 1958 and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's office in Deed Book 3~3, page 381. The'Owner presently operates a park on the Property for the benefit of~the residents of the community of Crozet and the surrounding area of Albemarle County, Virginia. November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) 2. The County proposes from time to time to make recreational improvements to the Property that have been jointly agreed to by the Owner and the County. The County will assist in the maintenance of these improvements and in the mowing and trimming of the Park ~rounds. ~uch improvements are subject to annual appropriation by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County. These improvements and maintennance are not inclusive of the swimming facility, existing build&ngs or future buildings, structures or additions made indepen~a~¥Z~ dently by the Owner or groups or individuals other than the County. 3. The Owner shall place a restrictive covenant on the Property restricting the future use of the ProPerty to recreational and public purposes. NOW THEREFORE, Claudius Crozet Park, Inc. hereby makes the Property subject to the following restriction running with the land for the benefit of the citizens of the community of Crozet and Albemarle County, Virginia, through the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia: The Property shall be used for recreational and public use only." At 11:20 ~i~. the Board took a recess and reconvened at 11:30 a.m. Agenda Item No. 17. Public Hearing: To Amend Section 2-26(a) of the Code of Albemarle to Increase the Number of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority from five to six with one member being appointed from each of the six magisterial districts. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 30 and November 6, 1984.) Mr. Fisher said this change was recommended to the Board by a staff study of the way in which appointments are made. Changes in the makeup of the Service Authority board will provide for one member from each magisterial district within the County. Mr. Fisher then opened the public hearing. ment, the public hearing was closed. With no one present to speak on this amend- Mr. Fisher asked Mr. J. William Brent, executive director of the Albemarle County Service Authority, who happened to be present, if his Board has seen the recommendation. Mr. Brent said the Service Authority Board is aware of the proposal to increase the membership, but has no comments. Mr. Fisher asked if Mr. Brent saw any procedural problem with the plan, and was told that there would be no real problems. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion to adopt the ordinance as advertised to amend Section 2-26(a) of the County Code. Before the motion received a second, Mr. Bowie said he thOught the Board planned to realign the terms of the Service Authority Board members with those of the appoint- ing member of the board of supervisors. He said the drafted sections of the Ordinance do not provide for the terms to be made concurrent with the Supervisors' terms. Mr. Fisher asked if the Board could make such a change in the advertised ordinance without another public hearing. Mr. St. John said the setting of lengths of terms and appointments is at the discretion of the Board, but it could not appoint members for terms of more than four years or shorten the terms of present members. Mr. Fisher then speculated that the Board could borrow some language from the Planning Commission Ordinance. Mr. Lindstrom then amended his motion to adopt the ordinance, but incorporate a transitio for current members of the Service Authority Board and to provide that once the transistion is complete, the members will serve four-year terms concurrent with the supervisor from their district. He added, however, that it might take a little more language than that, since some members may have a shortened term their first term. Mr. Lindstrom then suggested that the Board have staff add this language to the ordinance and bring that back to the Board for approval. Mr. Lindstrom then made motion to defer action on this ordinance until December 12, and in the meantime have the staff review the language. The Chair ruled that this motion superceded the previous motion. Mr. Bowie then seconded the motion, which passed by the fol ing recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. Agenda Item No. 18. Public Hearing: Amend Code of Albemarle in various sections to change the word "Sheriff" to "Chief of Police" and the words "Sheriff's Department" to the words "County Police Department". (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 30 and November 6, 1984.) Mr. St John presented the ordinance saying the changes are basically housekeeping measures" requested by Chief Johnstone. The changes are presented in numerical form. i~:~i~chie Company will incorporate all of them into the County Code when same is updated next time.j Mr. Fisher opened the public hearing and closed it again when no one was present to speak for or against the amendments. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion to adopt the following ordinance. Seconded by Mr. Way, the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke. November ~4:1984 (R~gu]a~-~y-wearing') ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE CHANGING THE WORD "SHERIFF" TO THE WORDS "CHIEF OF POLICE" AND THE~WORDS "SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT" TO THE WORDS "COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT" IN SECTIONS 5.1-2, 5.~3, 5.1-?, 5.1~, 5.1-13 11-66, 12.1-3, 12.1-4, 13-1.'1, 13-1.2', 13-1.3, 15-1 and 19-2, AS APPROPRIATE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following sections of the Albemarle County Code are hereby amended and re-enacted as follows: 1. The word "Sheriff" as it appears in Sections 5.1-2, 5.1-3, 5.1-7, 5.1-9, 51~l~t3.j. ltA66'; 12.1-3, i2.1-4, 13-1.2, 13-1.3, and 19-2 of the Albemarle County Code is hereby amended to the words "ChieE of Police." 2. -The words "Sheriff's Department" as they appear in Sections 13-1.1, 13-1.3, and 15-1 o£ the Albemarle County Code are hereby amended to the words "County Police Department". In all other respects the Albemarle County Code shall remain the same. Not Docketed. Mr. Fisher made a brief report on the proceedings at the Virginia Associ- tion of Counties Annual meeting for those ~embers who did not attend in this past week. He said the VACo Board has appointed a new director, M~, Richard Hall-Sizemore, who will begin on 15, 1984. Mr. George Long, the current executive director, will retire on December 31. ~°'" V&Oo, Mr. Fisher said, will open its new office in Richmond soon after Mr. Hall-Sizemore takes-¥~ffic~; S~aae for the new office has been found in the Old Richmond City Hall building facing the Darden Garden on the Capitol Grounds. Thm new office is due to o~n J~nuary 1 rd of Directors three times ne×t year. ~r. Fisher also said he did not ~now how many of the ,arlottesville staff members will be relocating to the Ric~'~ond office. Mr. Fisher said he spoke with the State Director of Planning and Community Development and him for approval of the County's Community Development Block Grant applications. Mr. Fisher said the Director felt that the application Albemarle County submitted this year was far superior to the ones submitted in years past. Mr. Fisher said legislatioh"concerning the withdrawal of lands from an Agricultural- tat District without cause came out of the committee studying that issue as the committee's highest priority. However, when this reached the Resolutions Committee, Mr. Fisher said he was, instrumental in having the legislation "kicked off" the priority list. He hopes the idea will get much attention. He said other counties that have such districts have joined him in opposition to such legislation. Legislation concerning uranium mining, Mr. Fisher reported, has been requested for an indefinite moratorium rather than the customary one-year moratorium. Halifax County objected strenuously to mining taking place in Pittsylvania County because it is downstream, from the mines, on all three rivers and the county would therefore be subject to contamination during flooding. Mr. Bowie reported that the Criminal Justice Committee has recommended a study on the problem of state-mandated training for police officers (such as Albemarle's new police force) tha~,is~ not funded by the state. The study should show how much the program costs the counties and how much those counties think the State should fund. He said the committee thinks that a 75/25 percent split, with the counties having the larger share, is more equitable than the county paying the entire amount. Mr. Fisher noted that there was a vote taken to raise the annual dues of to the Virginia Association of Counties from seven cents per capita to ~ineL~oen~sFpem~capita. Mr. Jones reported to the Board that during the financial sessions of the meeting, members learned that changes in the highway funding formula are still being negotiated. He also reported that forty county administrators statewide pledged their time in the amount of one day each, to help the new VACo executive director during the General Assembly's session this winter. Agenda Item No. 19. Public Hearing: Amend County Code in order to grant the Chairman of the Planning Commission an additional salary of $1,200 per year. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 30 and November 7-, 198~.) Mr. Fisher explained that this change was instituted by the Board in order to pay the Chairman of the Planning Commission an additional $1,200 yearly beyond the amount that is paid to the other commissioners. He then opened the public hearing. There being no one .pres~ent to speak for or against the amendment the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that the proposed l'anguage of the ordinance be worded to state: "The Chairman of the commission shall receive an additional $1,200 per annum to be paid in monthly installments." Mr. Tucker said anp. motion to adopt the ordinance should include authorization that $600 ce transferred from the Board of Supervisors Contingency Fund to the Planning Commission for this additional expense and that the increase go into effect on January 1. 1985. November 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) Ma Mr.~Lindstrom made motion to adopt the ordinance with the in the last sentence "the chairman of the commission shall receive an additional $1,200 per annum-" (set out below) and that the Board also adopt the following resolution. The motion was seconded by Mr. Way and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom, and Way. None. Mrs. Cooke. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir- ginia, that Section 2-4(c), Article II, Planning Commission, of the Albemarle County Code be amended and re-enacted to read as follows: Sec. 2-4. Compensation; appointmenti terms and compensation of me~bers; quorum. (a) Same. (b) Same. (c) Compensation. Ail members of the planning commission, except the member of the board of supervisors serving as a non- voting member, shall receive two thousand four hundred dollars per -annum to be paid in monthly installments. The chairman of the com- .mission shall receive an additional one thousand two hundred dollars per annum to be paid in monthly installments. (d) Same. (e) Same. 'BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this amendment shall be effective as of January l, 1985. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir- ginia, that $600 be, and the same hereby is, transferred from the Board of Supervisors Contingency Fund 1-1000-11010-9999~ .to 1-1000-81080- 101000 Compensation - Boards and Commissions, Planning Commission; AND FURTHER, that this appropriation is effective this date. ~$~da Item No. 20. Recommendations by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission ~e~nding formulas for regional agencies requesting local funds. Mr. Fisher said the Board had been asked by the Planning District Commission to comment on whether or not the Commission should develop funding formulas for regional agencies that could be used for requests of local monies. Mrs. Wayne Harbaugh, Executive Director of the T.J.P.D.C., said the main point that needs to be discussed by the Board is whether or not the Commission should even consider making such a recommendation. She said that last spring three regional agencies asked the Commission if it could help arrive at an equitable way to allocate requests for local funding. Mrs. Harbaugh said past experience shows that an individual locality sometimes uses a dif.ferent formula (not just a different funding level) for determining its fair share of the total local request. The record shows that decisions have been based on one or more of the following guidelines: 1. A percentage change over the locality's funding for the previous year; 2. A per capita share of the agency's total request to all localities; A share of the total request based on the localities' share of a target population; A share of the total request based on services to the locality over the past year or on anticipated services for the coming year. Mrs. Harbaugh said members of the T.J.P.D.C. Executive Committee, and other local official discussed this request and have identified a number of questions, generally used in the budget process. These questions seem to fall into three categories: management and resource availa ability, services to local residents, and local resourse capability and tax effort. Mrs. Harbaugh said a short staff report was written, on this request, bUt before proceeding further, the question is whether the Board feels the study should be conducted, and if so, would the recommendations be used by the governing body. ~z FMr~Fishe~ Shtd thatfthe funding formulas change for at least one agency each year. Mrs. Harbaugh said the agencies devise formulas for what they think is a reg2onal use and then find out that each county has adopted a different formula. She called this approach haphazard, and said if the counties and agencies are happy with such a difficult approach, there may not be a ne~ed for change. Movember 14, 198.4 (Regular-Day-Meeting). Mr. Lindstrom said a formula is one thing and funding a particular agency another. He said some localities may have difficulty in some years funding the amounts calculated from such a formuta.M?MrslYaHa~h~gh~a~id she felt the agencies understand that aspect of formula develop, ment. Mr. Way said his position has been that Albemarle County is interested in knowing what services are provided within Albemarle County and will base its funding on this information. IThe last of the four alternatives, he told M~s.~H~h~E~ would be the one in which he has the ~most interest. Mr. Bowie said he had met with supervisors from other counties and the cons.en- sus of all those people is that the fourth alternative is the only one they will accept. He said the persons present agreed that their boards would accept a formula, if it was equitable with the services provided in that county and if that board was free to fund any portion of the request. The formula really does not make a difference; the counties will pay what they feel to be the equitable ra~e for the services. Mr. Bowie said that if the agencies wanted to~ develop a formula, fine; he does not think the .various governing bodies will pay any attention to it. If they do not want a service, they will not pay for it. Mr. Bowie said he did not think there was support among the counties in the region for a general funding formula that would require a certain amount of support. It would waste time to come up with complicated formulas that the counties will not pay any attention to when funds are allocated. Mr. Fisher said he was certain that the agencies want a formula that they can count on and one that each county will pay, but he did not think that will ever happen. He said the various boards cannot delegate their legislative authority for appropriations to any other body, including these agencies themselves. Mrs. Harbaugh said this information will be helpful, because, the agencies need to know where to place their efforts. She said what the Board seemed to be saying was that these agencies should put their effort into identifying the cost of the services being supplied to each locality. Mr. FiSher said the Board wants to see the benefits to Albemarle County citi- zens. Mr. Way said the agencies must justify to the Board that the service is really needed. Mr. Bowie pointed out that the County funds many agencies that seem to be doing the same thing. In job training and placement, he said, there are six agencies involved, all of which are asking for money. He asked that programs be looked at not only on their own merits, but also on how they interrelate and how many services are duplicated. Mr. Fisher asked what the State's per capita contribution to the planning districts is and learned that the amount is still 25 cents per person. Mrs. Harbaugh thanked the Board members for the comments on this subject. Due to being ahead of schedule, the Board moved to a non-chronological agenda item. Agenda Item No. 22. Discussion of Proposed Fee Schedule Amendments. Mr ~u~k~r, ..~p~ y~_.~ ~o~n~ ~EX~ c ~i~eJ~ ~a~ e~_Ne~e~b.~-r~i-~ ~ ~198 ~. ) (.Memorandum from Mr. Tucker told the Board that the fees charged by County departments had come up ~or discussion during budget review sessions in March 1984~. At that time the Board requested that the staff look at the current fee schedules, especially for engineering, planning and zoning inspection fees. The last change in the amounts of these fees was made in 1976. No changes had been made in building inspection fees since 1973. He said the staff found that some increase in fees would be advisable immediately because costs to the County have increased oonsiderably due to a higher volume of permits and general inflation. Most permits and plan- ning requests have grown complicated and require s~veral steps and a lot of time for review. higher volume has, in some instances, necessitated hiring more staff members. Under the current fee structure, Mr. Tucker said, the Engineering Department recoups only L1.8 percent of its actual costs for processing soil erosion control permits. The Inspections Department does much better, but still only recoups 40 percent of its expenses. Planning and Community Development only realizes about a 16 percent recovery of its expenditures. Mr. Tucker said that the proportion of fees that the County recovers is a policy matter, whether the Board wants to charge 25, 50, 75 or 100 .percent of the actual costs. The Board should indicate to the staff its wishes. Most of the departments have prepared reports showing the fees would be if t00 percent of the costs were recovered. An overview breaks down what lower percentages would cost. Mr. Tucker said the staff recommends that the County try to recoup at least fifty percent of the costs for services. He said that seems only fair, consid- ering the actual service provided and the fact that the costs are now being passed to the taxpayer, and not the consumer. The cost recovery process, as recommended, could span a couple of years to ease the transition. The staff recommends recovery of 100 percent of building inspections costs because the authority to do ae i~ in©t~eL8~ate~Code. Mr. Tucker told the Board that the recommended changes are substantial. In some cases no fees are being charged for services. In other cases, certain types of permits should be placed in separate categories because they require a lot more staff time than other permits in the same category. On the other hand, costs for mobile home permits will actuaIly decrease under the new plan, since the processes for being permitted are fairly standard. Mr. Tucker said the major change in the fee schedule is in the Inspections Department, where staff recommends a change in methodology, shifting from basing the fee on the value of construction to the amount of square footage involved. In the Engineering DeD~Dme~a~.s2a~e~law sets a limit on the amount that can be charged. Soil erosion permits, cannot cmost more than $300. Mr. Tucker said that will not allow a recovery of 100 percent of those costs· The staff- is recommending a fee of $75 for the reviewing of those plans and then having an erosion control inspection fee of $25 per inspection up to a $300 maximum· If the Board wanted to go above $300, it would require a legislative change. 547 November 14, 1.984 (Regular Day. Meeting) The staff report on the subject (contained in Mr. Tucker~s memo) ~ompared fees with other counties and Mr. Tucker said Albemarle is on the low end of the scale for counties with similar development. Mr. Way asked what the philosophy behind the original fee schedule is. Mr. Fisher said the State has mandated much of the way fees are set up. For instance, the Building Inspections DeD~rtment can recoup 100 percent, of its operating costs, not counting the space it uses in the building and so on. The rest of the limits were established on the basis of what was a reason- able fee. Some were mandated specifically by the state and could not be changed. Mr. Fisher said that every type of permit had a separate kind of control. Mr. Fisher said he would like to see some increase in the fee structure to help offset the costs of these departments, but the inspection system itself needs to be as efficient as possible so that costs are controlled. There is no incentive, if the Board grants increases liberally, to cut costs unless the Board pressures Mr. Tucker and the staff to try and find ways to be more efficient. Mr. Bowie said he could not vote yes or no on this proposal as~a package today. Some of the fees he agrees with and some he objects to. He said he saw no need to augment a devel- oper's profit by a low building permit fee or a low site plan fee. On the other hand, he said the small builder may suffer unnecessarily. He said that the administration of higher fees may become a problem and more people may start building without permits because of the expense and the hassle. Mr. Bowie asked who is protecting the citizen who is simply trying to build a storage shed or finish a basement. He said he would like these problems addressed before a revised fee schedule is approved. Mr. Lindstrom concurred, saying that the "bugs" should be worked out of the system first. He said also that the land use procedures study he has propose~ may help in this regard. He added that he thinks the less the County pays for the services, the less interest it has in seeing that the inspections are performed with dispatch and econ- omy. Some things, however, only benefit the private property owner, Mr. Lindstrom said, and the proportion of those costs paid by the user can be higher than the proportion paid by people whose plans involve the public welfare. He said that on most things of this nature, he is inclined to a 50-50 split of fees rather than 100 percent recovery. Mr. Bowie reiterated that he feels approval of a new fee schedule is almost a line,by,lines.decision. Mr. Henley suggested that the Board defer action on the fee schedUle, and Mr. Fisher agreed, saying that it would take a work session to decide on categories line by line. ~r. Henley said he feels there is a reason why no charge is made for some things. Mr. Fisher said ~e thought that was wrong. Mr. Henley pointed out that in some cases, such as a flue inspec. tion, the County hopes to encourage compliance by inspecting without charge. Mr. Lindstrom said he questioned whether or not, by charging for everything, the County will be encouraging noncompliance with the regulations. Mr. Fisher asked that the Board schedule another time to 10ok at the fee schedules and asked how long the Board has Until a final recommended fee schedule is required. Mr. Jones asked that the Bo~d move quickly so that department heads aan use the proposed rates to plan the 1985-86 budget. Mr. Fisher said the Board should not 'drop this issue. ~ ................ At 12:30 p.m. the Board recessed for lunch and reconvened into open session at 1:30 p.m. Mr. Lindstrom was not present at this time. Mrs. Cooke arrived at 1:40 ~.~. Agenda Item No. 21. Albemarle Housing Improvement Program Quarterly Report. Mr. Gary Oliveria presented the Board with a slide show and report on the A.H.I.P activities for the quarter ended September 30, 1984. Mr. Fisher congratulated Mr. 01iveria at the end of the presentation on doing something so beneficial for the County with volunteer summer help. The report showed that AHIP had completed three major rehabilitations to homes; three minor rehabilitations; and one repair job during this quarter. Seven families composed of twelve people (26 percent elderly, 8 percent disabled, 66 percent minority) were helped. The cost of materials and subcontracts amounted to $18,420.92, with the cost to families being $5,164.61 (the difference is Albemarle's share).' Agenda Item No. 22a. Appointment t'o Airport Commission. ~mEia~ms.aid that the term of Mr. George C. Prill will expire on December l, 1984. Prill is a member of the Airport ~u~:h~i~y/~because he is also Chairman of the Commission. Fisher recommended that Mr. Prill be reappointed for a second three-year term. Mr, Mr. Henley made motion ~hat Mr. Prill be reappointed to the Airport Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Way and carried by the following recorded vote: (Mr. Prill's term to expire December l, 1987~) AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs.3Fisher, Henley~an~:.~ay~,on ~:~ :,,;'~:~ ~one. Mr. Lindstrom. Mr. Fisher noted that the Board has also received a memo from the Clerk listing all the appOintments to be made until July l, 1985. He said that should serve as adequate notioe. The Board has not had any further information about combining the Fire Prevention Board and the Board ~f Zoning Appeals, which were to possibly be combined for the sake. of effioiency. Mr. Tucker said there ~ould be a staff report on that presented to the Baard in December. 548 November 14, 1,984 (Regular Da~ Meeting) Mr. Fisher also noted that ther~aare vacancies on the Welfare Board from the Scottsville and White Hall districts. Mr. way said he would have a ~ecommendation on the Scotts¥il!e appointment by the next~ Board Meeting. Mr. Fisher said Mrs. Cooke's term as liason Bo the Plan~ing Commission will expire on December 31, 1984. He asked her if she~would be willing to serve in that capacity again. She sa£d she would agree ta do so. On motion by Mr. Way, seconded by Mr. Henley, Mrs. Cooke was . reappointed for one term,~h~ expire December 31, 1985. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, M~ssrs. Fisher, Henley and Way. None. Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 22c. Request for Central Well System - Keswick Country Club. A request dated November 13, 1984 was received from Mr. Charles D. Kincannon, Trustee for Keswick ¥ Club Land Trust, as follows: "November 13, 1984 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Albemarle .County Office Building Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Dear Miss Neher: On behalf o~ Keswick Country Club Land Trust, this is to notify you that the owner requests a permit for a central water system to be constructed in conjunction with the pending application for PUD designation. The proposed water supply will consist of one or more well sites to serve 150 dwelling units together with the club and related facilities. The applicants have engaged the services of a consulting Geotech- nical Engineering firm for the purpose of evaluation and selection of well sites. This process will involve the drilling of test and observation wells for determination of flow and influence upon draw- down in the surrounding area. Construction of the system will not commence until approval of the PUD application. However, the applicant intends to commence the evaluation, testing and monitoring immediately. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, (SIGNED) Charles D. Kincannon, Trustee" Mr. Tucker said the development has been filed with the Planning Commission, but no action been taken on it. The request for the test sites must come be~o~th~.~Boa~d~under County Code Section 10.17 and is then referred to the County Engineer. Mr. Fisher said that if the Board does approve this request, it must make certain that it in no way implies approval of the special use permit the developers are seeking for the proP- erty. He said the developers mus~ understand that they are beginning the process of drilling a central well system at their own risk. The Board will not be responsible for future decisions about whether or not the developers will be allowed to complete their plans. He said another question is whether or nov a central well is a good approach to take for the type of develop- ment that is being proposed. Mr. Tucker said the developers may be attempting to obtain some information on which to base future decisions about the water supply. Mr. Fisher said he feels very insecure in encouraging people to spend money on something like this when the property does not have the appropriate zoning and the request is still subject to the public hearing process. Mr. St. John told the Board that he did not feel that anyone has to come before the Board to get permission to dig a hole and find out how much water is in it. Mr. Tucker said that as he understood the matter, the request has to be submitted to the Board, but does not require any Board actions or approval. Mr. St. John said this applied only to the establishment of a central well system and not to the digging of test wells that were not to be connected to anything. Mr. Fisher said part of the request is that the developers want the county engineer to supervise the drilling process. Mr. St. John said that as far as connecting the approval of test wells to the zoning, the two have nothing to do with each other. Mr. St. John said the procedure is that the county engineer will take the notice that has been given to the Board~and will get the information from the applicant, will review the ~ request, approve the well site, approve the construction, test the wells, allocate the capacity a2dd test the quantity of water. Finally, he will approve the wells and make a report to the Board. That would be the first time that the Board would say yes or no to the wells. He said the concept of a central well system for a development is not connected with the well itself. By referring the request to the County Engineer, the Board is not approving the central well system itself. That is part of the petition before the Planning Commission. November 14~ 1984 (Regular Day Meeting) ~L~d ~ Tucker apologized to the Board, saying that maybe the project should not have come to the Board at this time. Mr. Bowie said it would have seemed more appropriate to give it to the proper staff person first. Mr. Fisher said the Board should refer the request by motion to the county engineer and include in the motion the fact that such action in no way states that the Board will approve the impending zoning request. -Mr. Bowie made motion that the request be referred to the county engineer without addi- tional action by the Board and with the understanding that however the county engineer may Iproceed, it does not in any way obligate the County or the Board to do anything other than ~allow the testing. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion which passed by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Way. None. Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 22d. Program. State Water and Conservation Service - Chesapeake Bay Initiatives Mr. Tucker explained that this item was a follow-up to a grant the County applied for from the State Water and Conservation Service to fund an engineering position for agricultural nonpoint source pollution control. Some shifting of funds will be required to establish a new account, and he asked the Board to resolve to advertise the request for a public hearing Decem- ber 12. Mrs. Cooke made motion to this effect'. The motion was seconded by Mr. Way and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, and Way. NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. Agenda Item No. 23. Other Matters Not on the Agenda. Mr. Tucker noted Agenda Item No. 4.6c. on the Consent Agenda this morning concerning the reissuance of a permit to Del Monte Frozen Foods/Mortons in Crozet. Del Monte is about to receive another five-year permit to discharge effluent into Howell's Branch, a tributary to Limkinghole Creek, which is a tributary to Mechums River and the South Fork Rivanna River and Reservoir. Del Monte is operating under a special permit at present from the State Water Control Board. The reissuance of the permit will allow them to continue to discharge effluent for another five years. The problem, he said, is that the Albemarle County Service Authority has an agreement with Del Monte whereby the manufacturer is required to hook up to the Crozet sewer interceptor as soon as it becomes available (or within six months thereafter). If the permit is issued, the Service Authority may be in a position of having to defend its contract with Del Monte. He said it might be advisable to write a letter to the State Water Control Board, signed by the chairman requesting that the SWCB tie the reissuance of this permit to the connection to the Crozet sewer interceptor. That facility is designed to carry the effluent From Del Monte. Mr. Fisher said the contract between Del Monte and the Service Authority goes back several ~ears and it took a long time to get it signed. Mrs. Cooke asked how, if there is a contract with the Service Authority, this permit procedure could take precedence over that. Mr. Fisher said the only way the Service Authority got the contract is because the permit was about to expire. They could, with a new state contract, take the position that they do not have to comply with the Service Authority contract anddthhn~thhsS~vice Authority would have to try to enforce the contract terms. Mr. Jones said the state is in a bind because its permit does not seem to be worded in sufficiently well- defined terms. Mr. Way made motion that the Board take action as suggested in the memorandum, waiting for the opinion of the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of Directors before sending the letter~ Mr. Henley seconded the motion, which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Way. None. Mr. Lindstrom. Appropriation for County Office Building Phase II and Juvenile Court. Mr. Jones asked the Board to reconsider the action it took on November 7, 1984, to hold a public hearing on two appropriations, $38,474.22 for the County Office Building Phase II pro- ject and $3,000 for Juvenile Court renovations. He said the total amount of these two appro- priations is under the one percent of the total budget that may be appropriated without a public hearing. ~Mr, Jones said that Mr. Tucker and Mr. Breeden are getting telephone calls from the creditors. He added that both projects have been mentioned in public hearings before. Mr. Henley made motion to repeal the Board's action to advertise for a public hearing and to adopt the following two resolutions. Seconded by Mr. Way, the motion carried by the follow- ing recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: &BSENT: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Way. None. Mr. Lindstrom. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $38,474.22 be, and the same hereby is, transferred from 1~D00-91080- 999999 Contingency Funds to 1-9000-05001-975001 County Office - Phase II; AND FURHTER, that this transfer is effective this date. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $3,000 be~ and hereby is, transferred from 1-900.0-.91080-999999 Capital Improvement Contingency funds to 1-9000-21050-701002 Juvenile Court; AND FURTHER, that this transfer ±s effective, this date. Mr. Bill Roudabush arrived late to discuss the central well application for Keswick Countr Club property. He said the developers would like for the Comprehensive Plan ~-~h~m~d~d to ~eaignate Keswick as a growth area and allow public water to be provided in that area. Since they feel such a request may not be approved, they have downscaled their request and are. now looking at a central well system and a central sewer system. He said that for a project of this scale, the head of the Albemarle County Service Authority might want to come to the Board to voice an epinion on whether it wants to serve the area. Mr. Fisher said the Board discussed this request earlier and did not feel that it could stop the well drilling, but that does not mean that a central well system will'be approved. The drilling is being done entirely at the developers' risk. He said that perhaps someone should notify the developers that the Albemarle County Service Authority is considering request ing the Board to include this area in its project areas for public water. It appears that the developers are assuming that they will not get public water, but the question has not been studied yet. Agenda Item No. 24. Adjourn to November 29, 1984, at 6:30 ~.~', at Blue Ridge House for a joint meeting with City Council and the Region Ten Community Services Board~ :~ On motion by Mr. Way~ seconded by Mrs.. Cooke, the Board adjourned by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: A~SENT: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Way. None. Mr. Lindstrom.