Loading...
1979-10-101'30 October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 10, 1979 at 9:00 A.M. in the Albemarle County Office Building Board Room. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J.T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta, C. Timothy Lindstrom (arriving at 9:30 A.M.) and W. S. Roudabush. OFFICERS PRESENT: Attorney. Guy B. Agnor, County Executive, and George R. St. John, County Agenda Item No. 1. the Chairman, Mr. Fisher. the unusually heavy snow Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 9:19 A.M., by (NOTE: The meeting was late being called to order because of storm.) Agenda Item No. 2. 1979. Approval of Minutes for April 18, June 13, June 20, and July 11, June 13, 1979: Mr. Henley reported no corrections or additions. June 20, 1979: July 11, 1979: words. Dr. Iachetta reported no corrections or additions. Mr. Fisher reported that "Meadow Creek Parkway" should be three Mr. Roudabush reported the following errors in the July llth meeting, page 389, last paragraph, insert the word remains in the sentence "36 feet of line remains to be com- pleted''; page 394, 5th paragraph should read Mr. Morris "Foster". Motion for appoval of minutes for June 13, June 20 and July 11, 1979 as amended was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: ABSENT: Mr. Lindstrom. None. Agenda Item No.3a. Highway Matters: State Farm Insurance -- Request for Industrial Access Funds. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of the following letter: "September 27, 1979 State Farm Insurance Companies is making formal application for industrial access funds to improve the access roads to our new site on Pantops, east of Charlottesville. As you know, construction began on this new building approximately 18 months ago and we are looking forward to a completion date and occupancy of the building during December of this year. It is our understanding that you need the following informa- tion in order for you to take favorable action recommending the upgrading of the access roads - namely State Farm Boulevard - to our new site. Access road usage. State Farm Boulevard will be used by our employees, visitors, and people seeking service at our new drive-in claim center. Additionally, people connected with serving the various equipment needs in our office will also make extensive use of this road. As a result of our size, considerable usage will be made by mail trucks, contract trash haulers and tractors and trailers delivering supplies. At the present time, based on our employment, we expect that we will have close to 500 cars a day entering and leaving our property. This is in addition to the mail trucks, contract haulers, tractors and trailers and service people. The latter categories all will make numerous trips daily depending upon their various activities. Inasmuch as our supplies come from many locations, almost daily usage of the road will be made by tractors and trailers. Employment at site. At the present time, we have 647 employees working in our Regional Office at Emmet Street. This employment is expected to climb annually to a level of over 1,000 by the late 80's. We have space to accommodate the transfer of personnel from other contiguous areas if the need arises which would further add to our expected growth in Virginia and North Carolina. Our parking lot is built today to park 934 cars, and when the building is enlarged we have plans to park up to 1165 cars. e Cost of facility. This facility when completed will have resulted in a cash outlay by our organization in excess of $10,000,000. This $10,000,000 would be all inclusive of land, building, equipment, furnishings, etc., but does not include company-owned IBM equipment which would add several million more dollars. Use of new building. Our new location will continue to process application~ and claims and serve State Farm policyholders in the states of Virginia and North Carolina. Our need for new facilities came about because of our growth and lack of space in our present location. Before this decision to move was made, con- sideration was given to other locations which could have served our geographic area. The final determination was made to stay in the Charlottesville-Albemarle area because of the excellent business conditions and employment market we have experienced since moving here in 1951. Our insurance operation can be broken into these basic operations: 1) Approximately 129,293 square feet of our building is set aside to process insurance applications, claim reports, and other related matters as they pertain to auto, life and fire insurance. 2) 35,289 square feet for support services including general office operations. 3) Another 2,841 square feet is used as a service center for the purpose of settling claims for automobile policyholders. 4) 24,581 square feet represents ware- housing and storage for supplies and dead records as they pertain to our business and for fulfilling the needs of our 29 Field Claim locations throughout the 131 October !0, 1979 (R.e~ular Day Meetinx) 563 agents in Virginia and North Carolina. 5) 1,964 square feet is devoted to printing, fabrication, reproduction and other internal uses in the preparation of forms, stationery and supplies for both the office here in Charlottesville, our 29 Field Claim locations throughout the region, and our agents. Dedication of roads. By the attached plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of Albemarle County Circuit Court - Deed Book 669, page 13 State Farm Boulevard ha's been dedicated to public use. This dedication will grant control over such roads to the Department of Highways and Transporta'tion. We~would appreciate the support of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors in- helping us to obtain a favorable resolution for upgrading the access roads to this site through the use of industrial access funds. Sincerely, (signed) D. T. Zimmerman" Mr. Don Zimmerman was present in support of this request. He felt his ietter contained sufficient information on which to request Board action. He said hisltraffic count figures are conservative since there is space in the new building for an an additional State Farm facility. Mr. Jim Hill, representing the developer, was also present. request is for the top paving on the road only (riding surface). State specifications. He explained that.this The road is built to Mr. F±sher said he was surprised to see this request since he had assumed that since this is a new industry in the County, the property would have been bought with a road built to State specifications. Mr. Zimmerman said when State Farm purchased this site, the contract required that State Farm Boulevard be bUilt to State standards and accepted into the State System. (Mr. Lindstrom arrived at the meeting at 9:30 A.M.) Mr. Hill said he had talked with Mr. Sandy Brown at the Richmond Office of the Highway Department, and was advised that State Farm could apply for industrial access funds for the surfacing of this road. He was told that the Highway Commission would not consider the request until the proper base had been built and the road was ready for the final surfacing. Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, said he has not been a party to any conversations regarding this request, but his office had supplied State Farm with a copy of industrial access regulations. In the past, it has been the Department's policy to use industrial access funds for industries which actually manufacture something; so the road would be used for a true industrial use. Yesterday, Mr. Brown informed Mr. Roosevelt that the Department's philosophy is changing, but he also said that industrial access funds could not be used to lift any responsibility put on a developer by a county's subdivision ordinance. State Farm Boulevard is to be a Category V Road, however there is a problem by the fact that the developer's master plan (Pantops Properties Master Development Plan) indicates that State Farm Boulevard could carry 30,000 cars a day. If that is the case, with no control over the number of access points on State Farm Boulevard, he would recom- mend that this request for industrial access funds be rejected. Mr. Fisher asked if State Farm Boulevard was constructed to standards the County requires under its subdivision ordinance. Mr. Roosevelt said yes and this additional surface will bring the road to a Category V. Mr. Roudabush asked if the road is~to be accepted into the State System,, what sort of improvements will be necessary. Mr. Roosevelt said one requirement is that the base and surface be brought up to a Category V. Beyond that, there is still the question of the maximum traffic to be generated by proPerties shown on the Pantops Master Plan. Without accurate traffic estimates, definite access points to the various properties, and without additional frontage improvements, if 30,000 cars a day use this roadway, it will be similar to the existing Route 29 North. Dr. Iachetta asked if Mr. Roosevelt was referring only to State Farm Boulevard. Mr. Roosevelt said based only on traffic figures for State Farm Insurance, a Category IV road might be sufficient. The problems arise when vehicles from other properties start using this road. Dr. Iachetta asked if Mr. Roosevelt was saying that the Highway Department will not accept State Farm Boulevard into the State System as it is presently constructed. Mr. Roosevelt said that was correct. Mr. Dorrier asked if the 30,000 estimated v.t.p.d. is based on full development of all the properties shown on the Pantops Master Plan. Mr. Roosevelt said yes. Mr. Dorrier said this seems unfair to State Farm, Mr. Roosevelt said if the developer will tell the Highway Department how he expects to actually use the property, or if the County can guarantee the limits of development on the property, the problem might be resolved. Mr. Hill said in planning for State Farm Boulevard, the developer was told that the road must be built to State standards with a four-inch base, etc. The developer also posted a bond for $116,000 to insure completion of the road to the proper standard. The developer was advised by the Highway Department in Richmond to follow this procedure before requesting industrial access funds. Mr. Zimmerman s~,id the local Highway Depart- ment has had a copy of the estimated traffic counts for the State Farm operation for seven months. His request to this Board is simple. He considers the use to be in compliance with regulations for industrial access funds published by the Highway Commission. Mr. Zimmerman said he considers this as a new business in the County which will add to the economic development of the community. Even though it is not a manufacturing operation, there will be many trucks bringing supplies to the building. There is also the possibility that the computer part of State Farm Insurance will move into this building. Mr. Fisher said he did not disagree with what had been said, but the Board~was only apprised of this request when the agenda was published last week. 'He asked if there was a guarantee in the contract for purchase of the property that the road would be built to State standards. .Mr. Zimmerman said yes, but at the same time, State Farm was advised that they could apply for industrial access funds. Mr. Lindstrom felt this use of industrial access funds would accrue to the benefit of Virginia Land Company (the developers). Mr. Zimmerman disagreed, saying State Farm will be the principal user of the road. Dr. Iachetta said with the undefined condition of the rest of the property, and with the statement that the Highway 132 October 10, 1979 (~gu!ar Day Meeting) build what State Farm needed to begin their operation on this site. Mr. Lindstrom said if the developer has obligated himself to build the road to State standards~ it seems that recourse to State Farm is through the courts. Mr. Henley said he could see ~no problem in passing this request to the Highway CommissiOn.~ Mr. Dorrier a~r~ed~ saying the money is available to Albemarle County and if the application is ~~~~e approved. Mr. Roudabush said if State Farm had bought this parcel of land wit~'~§~ ~arrow tract~ of land for access ~o Route 250 and built a road to State standards, the developers could subdivide properties on either side of that road and use same. Mr. Lindstrom said if there is a valid contractual obligation for the developer to build a road to State standards, he is not inclined to recommend that industrial access funds be used for this purpose. Mr. Roudabush suggested that all of these facts be passed to the Highway Commission for their consideration of this application. Dr. Iachetta said he had a problem with Mr. Roosevett's statement that even if the road is built to State standards and bonded, Mr. Roosevelt does not feel the planning £or the properties shown on the Pantops Master Plan is adequate and the road will not be taken into the State system. Mr. Roosevelt said the 30,000 figure was calculated by a member of the Planning staff based on the zoning of the land. Mr. Roosevelt said he does not believe the land can be developed to that potential, but until someone furnishes figures on traffic counts to bring that figure down, the road will not be accepted. Also, there have already been subdivision plats presented to the Planning Commission for lots on State Farm Boulevard, and the Planning C~mmission has not seen fit to require the frontage improvements recommended by his office. Mr. Roudabush asked if this application w~ll go to the Highway Commission whether or not this Board favors the request. Mr. Roosevelt said he did not feel the application would be considered seriously without a recommendation from the County. Mr. Lindstrom asked someone to clarify why State Farm Boulevard will not be taken into the State system. Dr. Iachetta said the County required a bond with the intent that the requirements placed on the developer would put the road into the system. He asked why a bond should be required for a road that will not be accepted. Mr. Ashley Williams, Assistant County Engineer, said the County holds Sufficient bond to complete the road to the approved plans. If State Farm Insurance was to be the only user of the road, the road could be surfaced and accepted into the system. Mr. Roosevelt said the question of the traffic count on this road and access points must be resolved. Mr. Fisher said there are two questions involved. will s~ppo~t the request for industrial access funds. traffic count. Number one is whether the County Number two is the question of the At this point, Mr. Roudabush offered motion to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, a request has been received from the State Farm Insurance Companies for improvements to State Farm Boulevard in Albemarle County, Virginia, as access to their development under the Industrial Access Law (Section 33.1-221 of the Code of Virginia); and WHEREAS, State Farm Insurance Companies has constructed a building containing more than 190,000 square feet~of space which will be used to house over 650 employees and service customers and visitors; and WHEREAS, State Farm estimates that the facility has resulted in a cash outlay in excess of $10,000~000 inclusive of land, building, equipment and furnishings, and this facility has also been planned for future expansion; and WHEREAS, State Farm Boulevard will be used daily by automobiles carrying employees and customers, and by trucks and tractor trailers delivering mail and supplies; and WHEREAS, all but the surface of State Farm Boulevard has been completed to State Specifications, and has been dedicated to public use by plat recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and hereby is requested to grant Industrial Access Funds in the amount of $116,000 for the final surfacing of State Farm Boulevard. The foreEoing motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta. Mr. Fisher said he would support the motion, but requested that details of this discussion be made available to the Highway Commission, along with a copy of the plat for State Farm Boulevard and other pertinent materials. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: ~ AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Highway Department was saying that the width of the road will not be adequate if the tand ~ both sides develops. Mr. Roosevelt suggested that~the use of the road be budgeted as p~jects are approved. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion that the Planning Staff and Planning Commission develop a budget which will keep State Farm Boulevard within a Category V in the future. Mr. Henley and Mr. Roudabush did no~ feel a motion was necessary. Dlr. Iachetta said the Staff and Planning Commission have spent a good deal of time detailing small areas in the Urban Area of the Comprehensive Plan and he feels what is expected for this area should also be penciled in. Since the Board has voted for this resolution, he feels the Board has an obligation to see that the road does not become overloade~ Mr. Fisher asked the staff for suggestions on how to resolve Mr. Roosevelt's concerns. Mr. Robert Tucker, Director Of Planning, said any solution will depend on the ultimate development of the land, but he did not feel the land will ever develop to its maximum potential. Mr. Henley noted that the Board had recently seen a copy of the Pantops Master Plan. Mr. Tucker said the developer could proffer that plan as his proposal. Mr. Roosevelt said if the Highway Commission acts favorably on this request for industrial access funds, it is the same as requesting that State Farm Boulevard be taken into the State ~eqondar~ October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Agenda Item 3b. Request for street sign and naming of street. Mr. Roudabush reported receipt of a request from Mr. Harry van Beek, President of Klockner-Pentaplast dated October 3, 1979 for an appropriate street sign naming Route 860 in Albemarle County from Route 231 to the Louisa County boundary "Kloeckner Road". He reported Klockner-Pentaplast would pay the cost of the signs and their installation. Mr. Roudabush offered motion for adoption of the following resolution: WHEREAS request has been received for street signs to identify State Secondary Road 860 in Albemarle County from Route 231 to the Louisa County Boundary Line and be designated K!oeckner Road: WHEREAS Kloeckner-Pen~aplast of America, Incorporated, has agreed to purchase these signs through the Office of the County Executive and to conform to standards set by the State Department of Highways and Transportation: ~OW, 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. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item 3c. Report: Flooding of Route 29 North. Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer, presented a verbal report to the Board regarding the flooding problem on Route 29 North near the entrance to Berkeley Subdivision. H~ said shortly after the flood on June 2, 1979, he was approached by several of the affected people ~from the area. He said in his study he tried to identify the frequency of the storm which caused the flooding and the capacity of the. two culverts, one on Commonwealth Drive and one on Route 29 near Pizza Inn. Mr. Bailey reported the capacity of the culvert on Commonwealth Drive was for a storm frequency of every 2~ years, and for the culvert on Route 29 of every 10 years. Mr. Bailey said the design recommended by the Highway Department would provide 10 year service under secondary roads and 50 year service under Route 29. Costs for such service would be approximately $30,000 for the traditional culvert and $200,000 for the specially requested culverts. Mr. Fisher asked where funds for such a project would come from. Mr. Bailey said they would have to come from Highway funds, and he would assume that such a project would be done at the same time as improvements are made to Route 29. Dr~ Iachetta said something must be done as soon as possible, as the last flooding washed away property and almost killed one family trying to escape from their home. He said there was $50,000 damage to property on Berkmar Drive and the Pizza Inn, reported two~ feet of water in the building. He added that the flooding problem would worsen as the development of the Berkeley/Four Seasons/ Berkmar Drive area progressed unless something is done now. He then offered motion requesting the Highway Department to design a cor- rection to Commonwealth Drive and recommend improvements and a time frame to correct Route 29 North. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom. Roll was called and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Bailey about a statement in his report: "current county drainage policy is inadequate to protect personal property and human life." Mr. Bailey said the person who prepared that aspect of the report was no longer with the County staff, but it was his opinion that only-traffic was considered in road decisions. Mr. Lindstrom felt this should be investigated further by Mr. Bailey and Mr. Agnor, and reported back to the Board. Agenda Item No. 3d. Request' for Sign to Designate Clearview Community. Mr. Fisher read a request from Mr. Robert Busby requesting Clearview be designated a Community, and signs be placed on Route 660 to identify it as such. Mrs. Jacqueline Huckle, a resident of the area was present and said there are people in the area who own large acreages and they do not feel the area should be identified by the name of one subdivision. Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department had been asked to put up signs designating this area as "Clearview". If this request is approved by the Board, signs would be erected at the expense of the Highway Department and Clearview would be noted on County road maps. Mr. Lindstrom requested this item be deferred to November 14, 1979 and made motion to this effect. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 3e. Request to have roads taken into the State Secondary System. Mr. Agnor presented the following requests for roads: 1) Mr. Agnor presented letter dated September 27, 1979 from Mr. James M. Hill, requesting that Cardinal Ridge Road in Whippoorwill Hollow Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System. Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: R~ T~ RESOT~ED hv the RoR~ of S]]oerv~sors of Albemarle County. Virminia. October 1G, 1979 (Regular ~ay Meeting) 2) 3) 4) requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Whippoorwill HollOw Subdivision: Cardinal Ridge Road: - Beginning at the station 0+10 of Cardinal Ridge Road, a point common to the centerline intersection of Cardinal Ridge Road and the edge of pavement of Whippoorwill Hollow Road (State Route 839); thence with Cardinal Ridge Road in a southwesterly direction 1,598.63 feet~ to station 16+08.63, the end of the cul-de-sac of Cardinal Ridge Road in Whippoorwill Hollow Subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Trans- portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 646, Page 220, Deed Book 646, Page 221 and Deed Book 657, Page 790. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded~vote: AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Mr. Agnor presented letter dated September 27, 1979 from Mr. James M. Hill, requesting that Pinedale Road in Westwoods Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Westwoods Subdivision: Pinedale Road: Beginning at station 0+10 of Pinedale Road a point common to the centerline intersection of Pinedale Road and the edge of pavement of West Pines Drive (State Route 1610); thence with Pinedale Road in a southeasterly direction 1,202.86 feet to station 12+12.86, the end of the cul-de-sac of Pinedale Road in Westwoods Subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office o~ the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 617, page 510. Motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: None. Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS: Mr. Agnor presented letter dated August 13, 1979 from Mr. James G. Cosby requesting thatroads in Oak Forest Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System. Dr. Iachetta offered motion for approval of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following roads in Oak Forest Subdivision: Oak Forest Drive: Beginning at station 016 of Oak Forest Drive, a point common to the centerline intersection of Oak Forest Drive and the edge of pavement of Whitewood Road (State Route 1455); thence with Oak Forest Drive in a southwesterly direction 329.81 feet to station 3+13.81, a point common to the intersection of Oak Forest Circle station 3+13.81 and station 30+25.84. Oak Forest Circle: Beginning at station 3+13.81 of Oak Forest Circle, a point common to the centerline intersection of station 3+13.81 of Oak Forest Circle; thence with Oak Forest Circle in a clockwise direction marking a full circle 2,712.02 feet to station 30+25.84, the end of Oak Forest Circle. Oak Tree Lane: Beginning at station 0+15 of Oak Tree Lane, a point common to the centerline intersection of Oak Tree Lane and the edge of pavement of Oak Forest Circle (Station 18+62.17); thence with Oak Tree Lane in a northeasterly direction. 529.75 feet to station 5+44.75, a point common to the centerline intersection of Oak Tree Lane and the edge of pavement, of Oak Forest Circle (Station 28+32.17). Pin Oak Court: Beginning at station 0+15 of Pin Oak Court, a point common to the centerline intersection of Pin Oak Court and the edge of pavement of Oak Forest Circle (Station 14+71.45); thence with Pin Oak Circle in a northeasterly direction 225.00 feet to station 2+40.00, the end of the cul-de-sac of Pin Oak CourT. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed rightofway and drainage easements along these requested additions as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 658, page 796. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom ~and carried by t. he following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, and Lindstrom. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mr. Roudabush. Mr. A~nor~ presented letter dated September 19, 1979 from Mr. James J.S. Lee, requesting Greentree Park Road in Greentree Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System. __ October 10, 1979 ~(~e~_,~ m_ ~.i ' _ ]. 5) 6) 1) BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to-final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Greentree Subdivision. Greentree Park Road: Beginning at station 0+00 of Greentree Park, a point common to the centerline intersection of Greentree Park and the edge of pavement of Georgetown Road (State Route 656); thence with Greentree Park in a northwesterly direction 182~-60 feet to station 1+82.60, the end of the culdesac of Greentree Park in Green- tree Subdivision. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia DePartment of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 40 foot unobstructe~ right-rOf-way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 670, Page 717 and Deed Book 678 Page 387. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Mr. Agnor presented letter dated October 9, 1979 from Mr. John A. Dezio, attorney for Mr. Harold Davis, requesting Springfield Road located in Block B of Springfield Subdivision be taken into the State Secondary System. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Springfield Subdivision: Sp~i.n.gfield Road: Beginning at station 0+I0 of Springfield Road, a point common to the centerline intersection of Springfield Road and the edge of pavement of State Route 649; thence with Springfield Road in a northeasterly direction 705.15 feet to station 7+15.15 the end of the cul-de-sac of Springfield Road in Springfield Sub- division. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk.of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 394, page 371; Deed Book 645, page 87 and Deed Book 683 page 589. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Mr. Agnor presented letter dated October 1, 1979 from Mr. Garrett W. Kirksey requesting Milton Hills, Section 3 roads be taken into the State Secondary System. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion for approval of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following roads in Milton Hills, Section 3. Mil~on~H~.lls Drive: Beginning at station 0+00 of Milton Hills Drive in Section 3 of Milton Hills, a point common to station 22+26.17 of Milton Hills Drive (State Route 1120) in Section 2 of Milton Hills; thence with Milton Hills Drive in a northwesterly direction 1,574.95 feet to station 15+74.95, the end of the cul-de-sac of Milton Hills Drive in Section 3 of Milton Hills. Deer Valley Court: Beginning at station 0+00 of Deer Valley Court in Section 3 of Milton Hills, a point common to the centerline intersection of Deer Valley Court and the edge of pavement of Milton Hills Drive (station 3+58.82); thence with Deer Valley Court in a southwesterly direction 883.09 feet to stat±on 8+93.09, the end of the cul-de-sac of Deer Valley Court in Milton Hills, Sect±on 3. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of-way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of-Albemarle County in Deed Book 625, page 85. Motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Lindstrom. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mr. Roudabush. Agenda Item No. 3f. Other Highway Matters. Mr. Dorrier said he met with Mr. Roosevelt of the Highway Department regarding the unsafe intersection at Routes 627 and 6 near Yancey School. Mr. Dorrier said he wrote a letter to Dr. McClure, Superintendent of Schools, regarding the possibility of a blinking signal at this intersection, and said he would also forward a copy of this letter to the-Highway Department. October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) 3) Complex" on Barracks Road. He said many residents use the exit as a~ entrance. As there is no deceleration lane (or possibility to build one) at this point, it causes sudden stops in traffic. Mr. Lindstrom asked the Highway Department if they could erect .a "Wrong Way -- Do Not Enter" sign at the beginning of that driveway. Mr. Roosevelt said that he would erect the sign, but would like to see someone other than the Highway Department bear the cost, as this problem was the fault of the Board and Planning Commission when the apartment site was approved. Mr. Tucker said it was not the responsibility of the owner to erect further signs, as he has done all that is necessary to comply with the site approval. Dr. Iachetta asked if trash dumped at the corner of Routes 643 and 29 could be removed, as it was the site of a small fire. Mr. Roosevelt said there have been problems with trash being dumped at this site before, but he would see that it was removed. Agenda Item No. 4. Final Plat Appeal: Richard DeButts. Mr. Fisher said this appeal was requested by Mrs. Emma Baber and Mr. Robert Louis Baber. Mr. Fisher noted that Mrs. Baber was not able to attend the meeting today due to the snow. Mr. Tucker reviewed the staff report with conditions as approved by the Planning Commission as follows: Location: EaSt of Mount Alto, south of intersection of Route 626 and 735, Tax Map 134, Parcel 9 in the Scottsville District. ~.~~ ~ Z.oni~g: A-i, Agricultural Proposal: Division of one ~-acre parcel leaving 29 acres residue. Reason for 'Planning Commission Review: Parcel is served by an easement. Topography of Area: No severe slopes. Condition of Roads Serving Proposal: Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation recommends pavement improvements for the existing commercial entrance. Sight distance is adequate for the commercial entrance. Between Route 602 South and Route 723, Route 626 is accommodating 567 vehicle trips per day and is currently listed as tolerable. Comprehensive Plan Recommendation: Other rural land. School Impact: Slight with one total' student projected enroIlment. Type Utilities.: No public facilities are available. Staff Comment: This plat meets the Land Subdivision and Development Ordinance ~a~re~ui~emants and Staff recommends approval subject to: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. This plat will not be signed until the following conditions are met: a. Health Department approval; b. Compliance with the private roads provisions including: 1. County Engineer approval of road; 2. County Attorney approval of maintenance agreement; c. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commercial entrance approval as recommended in their letter of September 7, 1979; d. Owners' notarized signatures. Additional Conditions Set By Planning Commission: e. Note on the plat "no further subdivision without Planning Commission approval; f. Note property line in the center line of the right-of-way. Mr. Richard DeButts was present, and said he purchased the property three years ago as a recreational facility for his family. He said there are 1t0 acres with a house in the center of three acres which he would like to cut off and market before the house is destroyed by vandals. Mr. Robert Baber was present, and said he felt the plat presented by Mr. DeButts was misleading. He presented copies of a different plat to the Board for observation, and he noted the following letters of appeal sent to the Planning Department: "September 25, .1979 M Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Director of Planning Re: Richard DeButts final plat On behalf o~ Robert Louis Baber, who is an adjoining land owner and as such a party in interest, this letter is to request appeal of the action of the Planning Commission taken September 18, 1979 with respect to the Richard DeButts final plat to the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia. Robert Louis Baber appeals the action of the Planning Commission in approving the final plat on the grounds that the approval constitutes a variance from the requirements of the County Ordinances, that no particular hardship is shown as ground therefor, that the interests of the adjoining land owners are adversely affected thereby, and that the action of the Planning Commission is arbitrary and results in a denial of equal protection of the laws to other land owners similarly situated. For the reasons stated Robert Louis Baber respectfully requests appeal to the Board of Supervisors from the decision of the Planning Commission rendered September 18, 1979. Very truly yours, (Signed) 'James P. Baber for Robert Louis Baber" "September 26, 1979 Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Director of Planning Re: Subdivision by Richard H. DeButts, James B. & Stephen H. Helvin I wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Board approving subdivision request of a parcel containing 2.8 acres. Very truly yours, (Signed) Robert L. Baber" Mr. Tucker or Mrs. Kimsey The Planning Board of Albemarle County I wish to express my opposition and also the opposition of Robert L. Baber, at his request, to the subdivision of a plat of 2.8+ acres and the house of the property of DeButts and Helvin. Therefore we will appeal the recent decision of the Planning Board of Albemarle County which allows the plat to be so divided. From the enclosed rough drawing you will see how closely involved we lie. We need more time to study the situation and its implications. The road 626 and Route 735, also the road to the subdivision are infested with hunters day and night, 365 days of the year and I am shot across from all four sides. (today Sept. 24, 1979, there has been a stream of cars and running of deer dogs through the area, intersPersed with gunfire and speeding cars.) This supposedly quiet residential area has become a hunters paradise and at times a dangerous thoroughfare. We do not need more of the same. Most respectfully, (signed) Emma Frances Baber Robert L. Baber (per EFB)" Mr. Fisher asked if there was any variance granted by the Planning Commission. Mr. Tucker said there were no variances, and that the private roads involved .can be allowed in this instance. Mr. Lindstrom aSked the County Attorney if there were any grounds for denial of this requested subdivision. Mr. St. John said this request complies with all the necessary requirements set by the County. He said the private road was allowed at the judgment of the Planning Commission. Mr. St. John added that he had not looked at Mr. Baber's copy of the plat, but if there were an error, it would not be binding on the owner as long as an easement exists. Board members agreed this request for a subdivision met all requirements set by the Planning Commission, and that there were no legal grounds for reversal of the approval set by the Planning Commission. No motion was offered, and Planning Commission approval remained. Agenda ~em No. 5. Request for Supplementary Appropriation for the Scottsville Library. Mx. ~Christopher Devan said the use of the Scottsville library has increased, but staff hours and hours of operation have not. He then requested a supplementary appro- priation of $1,500 to increase hours from 24 to 28 hours weekly and to increase staff hours to the same amount. He said this could be accomplished by remaining open all day on Wednesdays rather than just half a day. Dr. Iachetta said this was a reasonable request, and offered the following motion for approval: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia that $1,500 be, and the same hereby is appropriate from the General Fund and transferred to Code 18B.3--Regional Library. This is a supplementary appropriation for the Scottsville Branch Library. Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 6. Request from the Crozet Library. Mrs. Maria Thompson and Mr. Christopher Devan said the circulation at the Crozet Library has increased 50% in the last year, and they have outgrown their present location. Mr. Devan said an offer was made to them by Mr. Stanley Wilcox to construct a new building for use by the library at a rent of $2.00/square foot. Mr. Devan said construction could be completed by May and that the library could use temporary quarters until that time. He then requested the Board's financial support for such a venture. Mr. Fisher said he did not feel the Board could deal with this question on such short notice even though it seems a reasonable request. Dr. Iachetta asked how much additional money this would require from the County. Mr. Devan said $3~000 per year increase in rent and $10,000 for capital outlay. Mr. Fisher said he would like a recommendation from the Library Board and Mr. Agnor, and suggested deferral of this item. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to defer this item until October 24, 1979. Motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom and carried by the following recorded vote: October 10, 1979 (R~gular Day Meeting) 138 Agenda Item No. 7. ~SP-79-53. Ernestine B. Witherspoon. (Deferred from October 1979.) Mr. Fisher noted receipt of the following letters objecting to approval of a mobile home to be located on Mrs. Witherspoon's property. "September 18, 1979 We wish to show strong objection to the proposal to locate a mobile home on ParceI 27, Tax Map 19. We as adjacent owners will be directly and adversely affected by allowing a mobile home to be placed in the immediate area. My wife and I have owned our rural home for 30 years. Our intentions are to keep it as a farm of 13.13 acres. We also have a lot of 2.614 acres joining the property in question. The immediate area is composed of active farms of various sizes and quality built homes and permitting such a development to be placed in the area would lower the values of newly built homes, change the out look of the area and depreciate presently existing values.~ For many years there has only been single family home developments in accordance with County regulations. Therefore, has not been any mobile homes placed in the immediate area. Hopefully, there will not in the near future. We firmly object to such a development which will change the appearance of the area. Sincerely, (Signed) Amon P. Williams, Sr. and Maxine L. Williams" "September 11, 1979 We wish to register a strong objection to the proposal to locate a mobile home on Parcel 27, Tax Map 19, as described in a letter to adjacent owners by the Department of Planning on August 20, 1979. We are adjacent owners who would be directly and adversely affected by a variance to regulations that would allow a mobile ~home in the immediate area. My wife and I purchased our rural home a little over a year ago. Our intention is to improve our 23 acre farm, and keep it as a farm. We examined the immediate area before we bought; we found it to be active farms of various sizes and tastefully built homes of sound and lasting values. We expected some continuing single family home development, but in keeping with past development of the area and in accord with County regulations. There are no mobile homes within the immediate area. A mobile home exception in the area will turn new develOpment to loWer values, change the character of the area, and depreciate existing values. We object to such a development which is not in keeping with the area or its orderly development. Sincerely, (Signed) Neil H. Borden, Jr. and Beverly B. Borden" "August 29, 1979 As an adjacent property owner, I am opposed to special permit #97-53 to locat~ a mobile home on property described as County Tax Map 19, Parcel 27, Rivanna Magisterial District. This property is located on the southwest side of the intersection of Routes 664 and 743. ' My husband and I feel this proposed trailer would seriously devaluate our property which is on Route 664 near the intersection of 7'43 Lot 1; Subdivision Plat showing lots 1, 2 and 3 being the southwest portion of Property owned by Amon P. Wi!liams. We own and live on Lot #1 as purchased December, 1978. Sincerely,  ( Signed) Linda H. Browning and Robe.rt N. Browning III"A ~ ~ Mr. Tucker said the home presently ±oca~em on the property is aeveriora~ing, and that Mrs. Witherspoon wished to remove that structure and temporarily replace it with a mobile home. ' Mr. Robert Browning was present, and said he objected to the mobile home, as it would lower his property values. He also said the area was presently developed in small farms, and that Mrs. Witherspoon's intended us.e was out of character. Mrs. Witherspoon was present, and she said that although they still resides mainly in Washington, D. C., she comes to Charlottesville at least two weekends a month and needs a place to live. Mr. Fisher and Mr. Roudabush asked if this would be her primary home, or a vacation home. Mrs. Witherspoon said it was used only on her trips to Charlottesville on w~ekends. Mr. Roudabush, Dr. Iachetta and Mr. Dorrier all felt that there was a definite need for housing for Mrs. Witherspoon, and that the request for a mobile home on her land should not be denied. Mr. Eugene Miller, an adjacent property owner, said he tried to purchase Mrs. Withers property to enlarge his farm. Mr. Miller said she was not interested in selling her "old homestead", but wished to develop a sma/ll farm herself when her husband retired. .Mr. Fisher voiced some concern about setting a precedent in granting a mobile home for the purpose of using it for vacations only and not as a primary residence. There being 139 October 10~1979'(Re~ular Day Me~ti~ following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Mr. Fisher reminded Mrs. Witherspoon that the old structure must be removed, that trees must remain, and that under no circumstances is she to rent out the mobile home. Agenda Item No. 8. Gordon Yager -- Report on Soil Map. Mr. Yager of S.C.S. was present, and-presented to the Board a copy of the "Interim Soil Survey Report". Mr. Yager said this report covers 180,000 acres of the County, and that the report includes copies of field sheets, key sheet of mapped areas, soil names and information about the various types of soils. He noted that copies of this report have been given to about 90 other people, such as land surveyors, real estate people, engineers, etc. Mr. Yager reported that there are still approximately 143,000 acres in the County remaining to be surveyed, and that his office anticiPates completion of this report some- time in June, 1981. Mr. Yager said the survey was made by soil scientists who observed the steepness, length and shape of slopes, the size of Streams and the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of native plants or crops; the kinds of rock; and many facts about the soils. Holes were dug to expose soil profiles, which are the natural sequence of layers or horizons in the soil. Profiles were recorded and compared to those in other counties nearby and in places more distant, in accordance with uniform procedures used throughout the nation. Mr. Roudabush said this type survey is most useful to land surveyors such as himself, and was anxious for the completed report to be issued. 'Other Board members were equally enthusiastic about the possible uses of this report. Mr. Fisher thanked Mr. Yager on behalf of the Board for his presentation. Agenda Item No. 8a. At 12:25 P.M., Motion was offered by Mr. Roudab~sh, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adjourn into executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel matters. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. The Board reconvened into open session at 1:42 P.M. Agenda Item No. 9. Public Hearing: Community Development Block Grant Program. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 7, 1979). This public hearing was requested by the H~s~ Coordinator's Off~ce. The r~quest is for approval to Submit a proposed grant application to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. This grant program will provide funding for housing rehabilitation for low income families in Albemarle County. The funding is available through the Community Development Block Grant/Small Cities Program. This application process is a competitive one in that the Department of HUD does not have funding for all localities that apply. No one from the public was present to speak, and Mr. Fisher declared the public hearing closed. Motion tO approve the application for funds was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, L~ndstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 10. Discussion of Lease for Meadows Community Center Building. St. John presented the following lease for the Board's consideration. Mr. THIS LEASE, made this 10th day of October, 1979, by and between the County of Albemarle, Virginia, hereinafter called the Landlord, and The Jefferson Area Board for Aging, hereinafter called the Tenant, W I TNE S SETH: 1. Description of Leased Property. That in consideration of the rents herein reserved and the mutual promises herein made, the Landlord hereby leases unto the Tenant the following described property: Ail that certain lot or parcel of land, with improvements thereon and appurtenances thereunto pertaining, consisting of a cummunity center, a narrow strip of land around the community center, and a roadway from the community center to Route 240, being approximately 1.050 acres, more or less, located off Route 2~0, south of the Town of Crozet, Virginia, designated as Parcel B on a plat of R. O. Snow and Associates, dated April 14, 197~, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Albemarle in Deed Book 595, page 449. 2. Term of Lease. The term of this lease shall be for a period commencing on October 1, ~979, and shall expire on September 30, 1980. Unless terminated by either party hereto at the end of the term by notice in writing to the other at least ninety (90) days prior thereto, this lease shall continue thereafter, on a year-to-year basis, upon the same terms and conditions and at the same rent, as this lease, until terminated at the end of some such term by either party be giving to the other written notice at least ninety (90) days prior to such termination. October 10, 1979 (R~gular Day Meeting) to be undertaken by the Tenant, as set forth in this lease. 4. Use of Premises. The Tenant shall use the premises as a public facility for recreational, social, civic and other public activities and services oriented primarily toward benefitting the elderly citizens of the community under the direction of the Board of Directors of the Tenant and an Executive Director appointed by the Board of Directors. 5. Obligations of the Parties. (a) Obligations of the Tenant. The Tenant will maintain the premises, keeping the premises in good repair except for ordinary wear and tear, pay for all utilities and other services, provide all furnishings and furbishments, see to the proper management of the facility in such a manner as to accomplish the public purposes set out above at the most economical cost practicable in keeping with the fulfillment of the purposes. The Tenant at all times during~the term of this lease will provide tenant's hazard insurance and liability insurance for its employees. (b) Obligations of the Landlord. The Landlord will provide fire and casualty insurance on the premises and Will undertake major repairs of exceptional nature other than ordinary wear and tear, due to mechanical failure, design failure, or act of God. The Landlord shall have no duty to make ordinary day-to-day repairs or provide custodial service or maintenance. ~ 6. Sublease. The Tenant shall not assign this lease or sublet the whole or any part of the premises leased hereunder without the prior written consent of the Landlord. This assignment restrict±on is not intended to prohibit use by public or private groups, agencies, or organizations on an occasional basis under the supervision of the Tenant. WITNESS the~following signatures and seals: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA (Signed) Gerald E. Fisher THE JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING (Signed) James H. Elmore, Executive Director With Mr. Agnor's recommendation for approval, motion to authorize the Chairman to sign the above lease was offered by Mr. Lindstrom and 'seconded by Mr. Dorrier. Roll was called, and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 11. Request from Region X Mental Health to increase the FY 80 appropriation. Mr. James R. Peterson, Executive Director of the Region X Mental Health and Retardation Services Board was present, and read his letter written to Mr. Agnor dated September 14, 1979: "Two years ago the Region Ten Community Services Board adopted a new formula for apportioning the local tax share among the six participating localities. For Our current year, FY 80, the total local increase actually granted was less than one percent (from $148,092 to $149,322). The Virginia Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation is withholding $25,000 in state mental health dollars previously allocated to our Board because of the shortfall in local match. The apportionment formula is based on three equal factors: population; ~alue of services received by the locality; and revenue capacity. The Region Ten Board has reexamined this formula in light of the unfavorable local response and has decided to resubmit the FY 80 requests based on a revised apportionment formula. The revised formula retains the elements of population and valu~e of services but drops the "revenue capacity" factor. The philosophical rationale for including a measure of revenue capacity originally was that federal and state grants were determined in part according to the relative economic standing of our area and therefore this should be reflected in turn within our formula in establishing the relative levels of local partici- pation. Experience now reveals that the relative wealth of our area has not been a determinig factor in state or federal funding. The Region Ten Boa-rd respectfully requests that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors increase its FY 80 appropriation from $55,199 to $55,606 based on the revised apportionment formula. The revised request represents a total increase over the FY 79 level of 5.91 percent (.0591). We wish to emphasize the urgency of this request in that staff positions are being held open pending the outcome of our local appeals. Sincerely, (signed) James R. Peterson, ACSW Executive Director" Mr. Fisher said the amount was almost too small to waste the Board's time. Mr. Peterson said it was not just the $407.00 that he was interested in, but the formula change, because that will affect apportionment for the years to come. Following a brief discussion by Board members, it was the consensus of opinion to approve Mr. Peterson's request, as it created little effect on Albemarle County. Mr. Henley then offered th~ fn]]nw~ m~ em~ ~~- October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) AYES: NAYS: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia that $407.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to Code 18B.2--Region X Mental Health and Retardation; this amount due under the revised apportionment formula. Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier and carried by the following recorded vote: Messrs. Dorrier, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. Mr. Fisher. Agenda Item No. 15. Request from the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. Mr. Agnor presented cop~ies of Senate and House bills which amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to provide additional allotment of funds to Virginia. The Rivanna Authority Board requested the County and City to seek support of congressional representatives for this legislation, to improve the funding available to complete the Crozet interce.ptor. Mr. Agnor requested the Board to review the following resolution and consider forwarding same to Virginia's representatives in the House and Senate: WHEREAS, the State Water Control Board of the Commonwealth of Virginia in its efforta to comply with the provisions of Public Law 95-217 (the Clean Water Act) has identified the need for Municipal Wastewater treatment projects in Virginia and has developed a priority process for the funding of said projects, and WHEREAS, the State Water Control Board has been able to obligate its share of federal funds by May 31 of the succeeding fiscal year, and WHEREAS, 'the County of Albemarle believes the federal government should recognize the timely actions of Virginia as being one of the few states wh'ich promptly obligates available funds, and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle believes the federal government should respond to the needs identified by the State Water Control Board, now therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that the County of Albemarle requests the passage of House Bill 4113 and Senate Bill 1328 if amended to substitute "May 31" for "March 31" so that the two similar bills would read as follows: "Additional Allotment" "Section 218.~(a) If on May 31 of any fiscal year a State which has obligated 90 per centum or more of the funds allotted to such State for the preceding fiscal year under section 205 of this title, the Administrator shall allot to such state for obligation after the first day of the fiscal year which begins after such May 31 an amount equal to the difference between the amount allotted to such State for such fiscal year under section 205-and the amount appropriated under section 207 of this title for such fiscal year and attributable to such State." AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that our congressional delegation and other appro- priate individuals be informed of this action. Mr. Fisher asked about HR 4020, and Mr. Agnor said this was an amendment to bill #4113. Mr. Agnor noted that it was not spoken to in a resolution adopted by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, and should not be considered by this Boar~. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adopt the resolution as presented. Roll was called, and motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Lindstrom. None Mr. Roudabush. Agenda Item No. 16. Report and request for an appropriation for Land Use Task Force. Mr. Timothy Lindstrom reported that he and Mr. St. John attended a'meeting set up by the Virginia Municipal League and the Virginia Association of Counties to deal with the trend in courts to substitute decisions for legislation in zoning matters. He said the task force is trying to approach the problem by studying procedures and decisions in land use cases.~w~He s~d ~ ~ w'~[m~~~. ~, ~ ~ t_s~ o s ~y certain, circuit court cases to determine if there has been an ero~mon f~m . ~s evmously discussed during the August 15, 1979 meeting of the Board, Mr. Lindstrom reported the Task Force hoped to raise $19,000 to conduct the study, and asked the Board to consider making their "commitment", ~ ~,olid aDDr. oDriation of $1,500 towards this goal. He concluded by saymng the County, ~"-.'-~ .[~-~,~ou!d have little chance in'affecting change; that it needed the support of most of the counties and municipalities to build a foundation. Mr. Fisher asked if the' $1,500 was a contribution. Mr. Lindstrom said money was being collected on a voluntary basis, and that many of the more populated northern counties have already contributed large sums to the study. Mr. Dorrier felt this study was a good idea, and asked how long it would take to complete. Mr. Lindstrom said approximately nine months to a year. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia that $1,500.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and trans- ferred to Code 18A.Ib--Virginia Association of Counties Land Use Task Force. The purpose is to study judicial decisions in zoning matters. Motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, and Lindstrom. None. Mr. Roudabush. October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 17. Legislative Matters. Mr. Fisher said these proposed resolutions were discussed at last weeks meeting, and that a final decision by the Board was neces- sary. Motion to approve the following five resolutions to amend the State code regarding bingo laws was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. RESOLUTION PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO AMEND SECTION 18.2-340.9(H) TO AUTHORIZE THE GOVERNING BODY OF ANY COUNTY, CITY OR TOWN TO ADOPT A LOCAL ORDINANCE CONTROLLING THE PLACING OF SIGNS ADVERTISING ANY BINGO GAME WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, efforts of the General .Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its 1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia be memorialized to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.9(H) as ~follows: Section 18.2-340.9. Prohibited practices.-- In addition to_those other practices prohibited by this article, the following acts or practices shall also be pro- hibited under the provisions of this article: H. The governing body of any county~ city or town is ~hereby authorized to adopt a local ordinance regulating the placement of any sign or signs advertising any bingo game. No organization shall place or cause to be placed any sign or signs advertising any bingo game in violation of the requirements of such ordinance. ~&~&~-e~e-~e~-~e-eg-~e-e~e~&e~-e~-~e-~em~eee-~e~e ~e~-~&~e-~ame-Ae-~e-~e-~a~e~ RESOLUTION PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA~TO AMEND VIRGINIA CODE SECTION 18.2-340.5 TO AUTHORIZE LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES TO SET THE PERCENTAGE OF AN ORGANIZATION'S BINGO OPERATION RECEIVED FROM "INSTANT BINGO." WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its 1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is memorialized to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.5 to authorize the governing body of any county, city, or town to set the percentage of gross receipts of an organization's bingo operation received from the playing of "instant bingo." In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends changing Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.5 to read as follows: Section 18.2-340.5. "Instant bingo".-- A. Any organization qualified to conduct bingo games pursuant to the provisions of this article is authorized to play "instant bingo" as a part of such bingo game; provided however, that "instant bingo" may be conducted only at' such times as a regular bingo game as defined in Section 18.2-340.1 2 is in progress and only at such location and at such times as are specified in the bingo application permit. B. The gross receipts in the course of a reporting year from the playing of "instant bingo" shall not exceed thirty-three and one-third per centum of the gross receipts of an organization's bingo operation; Provided however~ that the governing body of any county, city or town is hereby authorized to adopt a local ordinance allowing gross receipts in the course of a reporting year for the playing of "instant binEo" to be that percentage of the ~total gross receipts of an organization's bingo operation that the local governing body considers appropriate. t43 October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) D. Any organization playing "instant bingo" shall maintain a record of the date, quantity and ~card value of instant bingo supplies purchased as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies. The organization shall also maintain a written invoice or receipt from a nonmember of the organ- ization verifying any information required by this subsection. E. No organization shall sell an "instant bingo" card to any individual below sixteen years of age. RESOLUTION PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO AMEND VIRGINIA CODE SECTION !8.2-340.6(D) TO SIMPLIFY RECORD-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its 1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia be memorialized to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.6(D) to simplify the record-keeping require- ments set forth in that section for organizations authorized to conduct bingo' games and authorize as a local option more detailed record-keeping requirements. In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends changing Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.6(D) as follows: Section 18.2-340.6. Reports of gross receipts and disbursements required; form of reports; failure to file; certificate of compliance; right of entry upon premises; records.-- D. ~Ae-e~a&Rea~&eR-e~a&~-ma&R~a&R-a-~eee~-&R-w~&~-e$-~e-~a%ee e~-w~&e~-~&~e-&s-~a~e~?-~e-R~m~e~-e~-~ee~e-&~-a~e~ee-e~-eae~ ~a~e-a~-~e-ame~-e¢-~e-~eee&~e-a~-~&eee-~a&~-e~-eae~-e~e~-~a~. ame~R~-e¢-e~e~-awa~ The organization playing bingo shall maintain an itemized record of all receipts and disbursements; including operating costs and use of proceeds incurred in operating bingo games. The governing, body of any county~ city or town is hereby authorized to adopt a local ordinance requiring the organization to maintain a record in writing of the dates on which bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date and the amount of the receipts and prizes paid on each such day. The governing body of any county~ city or town is further authorized to adopt a local ordinance requiring the organization to maintain a record of the name and address of each individual to whom a door prize~ regular or special bingo game prize or jackpot from the playing of bingo is awarded~ as well as the amount of such award. RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO AMEND VIRGINIA CODE SECTION 18.2-340.7 TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENT OF AUDIT OF REPORTS FOR BINGO GAMES AND RAFFLES OPTIONAL WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organizations authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its 1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not suited for or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of Virginia is best able to determine what controls are needed for bingo games or lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia be memorialized to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.7 to provide that the requirement of audit of reports of bingo games and raffles is optional. In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends changing Virgini~ Code Section 18.2-340.7 to read as follows: Section 18.2-340.7. Audit of reports; fee.--A. AA~-e~e~-~epe~e-$&&e~ ~a~-~e-See~&e~-~8~-8~-~a~-~e-a~&~e~-~-e~e~-~eea~-e~e&a~ as-~e-Be~e~R&~-~e~-e~a~-~ee&~a~e. The governing body of any county.~, city or town is hereby authorized to adopt a local ordinance~requiring 'that ail such reports 'filed pursuant to Section 18.2-3~0.6 shall be October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) B. If such an ordinance is adopted~ the local governing body shall establish a reasonable audit fee not to exceed one percentum of the gross receipts which an organization reports pursuant to Section 18.2-340.6. The local governing body may establish a graduated scale to determine such audit fee. Such audit fee shall accompany each such annual report; provided, however, that if the gross receipts of an organization are less than two thousand dollars for the designated reporting period, such audit fee may be waived by the local governing body. C. Such audit fee shall be payable to the local designated official who is responsible for the performance of such audit. RESOLUTION TO AMEND ARTICLE 1.1 OF TITLE 18.2 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA (BINGO AND RAFFLES) SECTION 18.2-340.4 TO AUTHORIZE THE LOCAL GOVERNING BODY TO SET THE HOURS PER DAY AND THE DAYS PER WEEK THAT BINGO GAMES WILL BE CONDUCTED WHEREAS, the present laws governing bingo and raffles are posing major problems to the funding efforts of volunteer fire companies and other civic organ- izations authorized to conduct bingo games and lotteries in the County of Albemarle; and WHEREAS, efforts of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia at its 1979 session to amend Article 1.1 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia to correct problems found in urbanized areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia are not Suited for or needed in more rural areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the governing body of each city or county in the Commonwealth of Virginia is best able to-determine what controls are needed for bingo games or lotteries conducted in their respective jurisdictions; NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is memorialized to amend Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.4 to provide that the governing body of each city or county in which a bingo game is conducted shall set the frequency of conduct of such bingo games. In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends changing Virginia Code Section 18.2-340.4 to read as follows: Section 18.2-340.4. Frequency of conduct of bingo games~-e~ee&a~-~e~m&%T ~e-e~a~&~a~&e~-ma~-~e~-~&~e-~amee-me~e-~eg~e~-~a~-~we-ea~e~a~ &a~-&~-aR~-e~e-ea~e~a~-wee~-e~ee~-~a~-a-e~eeAa&-~e~m&~-ma~-~e-~a~e~ a~-e~a~&~a~&e~-w~&e~-w&~-e~%&~e~aR-e~a~&ea~e~-%e-ee~e~-me~e &e-~e~-&R-~&e~a%&eR-e$-a~-&eea~-ee~&R~-e~&Ra~ee~ The governingbod¥ of any County~ city or town is hereby authorized to 'adopt a local ordinance Setting the frequency of conduct and the hours per day that- an organization may hold bingo games. Mr. Agnor next presented a resolution requesting the Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc. be eligible for exemption from personal property taxes. Motion was offered for approval of~the following resolution,by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, and carried by the following vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom-and Roudabush. None. RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE CODE OF VIRGINIA-BY ADDING A SECTION RELATING TO PROPERTY OF JEFFERSON AREA UNITED TRANSPORTATION, INC. EXEMPT FROM TAXATION WHEREAS, the Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc., a charitable, nonprofit organization, is presently providing transportation services to the citizens of the County of Albemarle ena nonprofit basis; and WHEREAS, the transportation vehicles of Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc. are presently taxes by the County of Albemarle; and such taxation reduces services that would otherwise be provided the citizens of the County-of Albemarle; NOW, THEREFORE, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia is memorialized to amend the Code of Virginia to provide that property owned by the Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc., and used by it exclusively for charitable purposes on a nonprofit basis, be exempt from taxation. In this regard, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle recommends adding a section to the Code of Virginia to read as follows: -Section Property of Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc.-- A. The Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc., a nonprofit organization, is hereby classified and designated as a charitable organization within the context of Section 6(a)(6) of Article X of the Constitution of-Virginia. B. Property owned by the Jefferson Area United Transportation, Inc. and used by it exclusively for charitable purposes on a nonprofit basis, as set forth in subsection A of this section, is hereby determined to be exempt from taxation, State and local, including inheritance taxes. October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Boards and Commissions, and that Board members must look for qualified people to fill them as soon as possible. Agenda Item No. 12. Site Plan Appeal: Church of the Incarnation. Dr. Iachetta said he wished to abstain from discussion and vote on this matter, as he had done engineering work on the design plans for this site. Mr. Tucker read the following staff report: Location: Property described as part of parcel IA on'tax map 61Z, Charlottesville Magisterial District; located off the east side of Route 29 North at Branchtands. Acreage: 10 acres Zoning: PUD History: On August 7, 1978, the Board of Supervisors approved a special permit (SP-78-31) for the development of 80+ acres of this property. ~roposal: A 7,000 square foot addition to the existing church. Topography of Area: Level. Soils: The Soil Conservation Service reports no particular soil problems with proper erosion control measures. Compr~h~si~e~Plan Recommendation: Urban area/low, medium and high residential densities recommended. Type Utilities: Public facilities are available. Staff Comment: The Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation commented that the existing access on Route 29 North is adequate at this time. The Albemarle County Service Authority and the Fire Prevention Officer have recommended that the applicant connect to public water at this time. The applicant, however, does not feel that water is reasonably available for the church addition. This site plan complies with Article 17 of the Zoning Ordinance and Staff recommends approval subject to: R~b~mmended Conditions of Approval: 1. A building permit will not be issued until the following conditions have been met: a. Compliance with conditions C. 1-3 of SP-78-3t; b. County Engineer approval of pavement specifications and drainage facilities; c. Fire Official approval of hydrant locations; d. Show on plan general intersection and alignment of approved collector road as shown on approved "plan 3 amended" under SP-78-31 (Board of Supervisors approval August 7, 1978); 2. A Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until the following conditions have been met: a. Compliance with condition number D-3 of SP-78-31 within the area shown on the site plan dated 9-19-79 NMC. Mr. Tucker said the Planning Commission-approved this site plan on September 27, 1979. M~. Tucker said h~ received the following letter requesting this appeal hearing by the Board: "September 28, 1979 Re: Incarnation Church Site Plan Dear Ms. Neher: As I discussed with you on the telephone today, Father William Gardner of the Church of the Incarnation wishes to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission at its September 25, 1979, meeting with respect to the condit±on regarding water imposed by the Planning Commission in the approval of the site plan for the church expansion. Accordingly, I am filing this appeal on behalf of the church. As we discussed, this will be placed on the October 10, 1979, agenda. Very truly yours, (Signed) M. E. Gibson, Jr." Mr. Tucker said the Fire Marshal felt this was an appropriate time to have water for fire protection. Mr. Roudabush said he thought this area was already on public water and sewer lines. Mr. Fisher said the approval of a PUD such as Branchlands, required water improvements to the site. Mr. Tucker said this was something the Board needed to decide, and he noted that the church intends to maintain twelve acres, separate from the PUD. Mr. M. E. Gibson, Jr., of the law office of Tremblay and Smith, representing the applicant, said the membership of the church would be the same, only the building space would be enlarged. He said the water requirement by the Fire Marshal would make them construct a 12 inch water line the distance of 2,000 feet, which represents a cost equal to 10% of the total construction costs for the new building. He said it was his goal to eliminate this requirement for water which would cost them approximately $50,000; and also to eliminate this as a requirement for their certificate of occupancy. He said this waterline would service a temporary structure, and that there would be no way for them to regain their loss. Mr. Dan deBettencourt illustrated to the Board how the water line would have to be laid initially in order to furnish fire hydrant service to the present structures (a distance of 2,000 feet), he then showed the Board the final entrance road, and that the location of the hydrant and length of the water line would be shortened to only about 50 feet. He said this would cause the church to lay about 1,950 feet of line for a temporary use. /? October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Fisher said it would be up to the Board to determine what length of water line would be considered reasonable. He asked if the church would be willing to hook onto the public water line as soon as it is within approximately 200 feet of their buildings. Mr. Gibson said they were very interested in getting hooked up to the public water, as the well system they are presently on is inadequate and of poor quality. Mr. Roudabush suggested that a temporary dry hydrant system be installed, which would allow a pumper truck to pump water to the structure, and would meet the fire protection requirement set by the Fire Marshal. Mr. Gibson said this possibility was investigated, but the nearest fire company (Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Company) does not have a pumper truck. Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Henley said they could support an amendment of the conditions. Mr. Fisher asked for an opinion from Mr. St. John regarding the church being a part of the PUD. Mr. St. John said it was his opinion that according to the plans approved in SP-78- 31, the land for the church facility was reserved apart and separate from the area to be developed. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to approve the site plan with the Planning Commission conditions, but changing conditions iA and lC to read as follows: IA. Mandatory connection to water line and placement of hydrants to requirements of the County Fire Official as provided in Condition "C" at such time as a water line shall be available within 200 feet of any required fire hydrant or building. lC. Fire Official approval of future hydrant locations. Motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote: ,Henley AYES: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher,/Lindstrom and Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 13. 12, 1979). Site Plan Appeal: Christian Mission. (Deferred from September Mr. Fisher said this item was deferred so the applicant could set up a meeting with the adjoining property owners, and see if they would be interested in participating in the cost of laying 3,000 feet of water line. Mr. W. G. Landes said letters were sent to property owners to find out their interest in laying this public water line over their property. He said four answers were received of the seven letters mailed. Two of the letters indicated interest in the project. Mr. Edward H. Bain, Jr., said an estimate of cost was~obtained from Mr. Rives Gentry, who said it would cost approximately $15.00 /linear foot including the boring under Route 250, plus additional for five hydrants for a total of approximately $50,000. He also noted that this would not affect the insurance coverage for this property , as they are still four miles from the nearest fire station. Dr. R. V. Finley, President of the Christian Mission, said they did want the water line there, but that it would be contingent on the sewer line from Crozet passing their property. Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom to approve the site plan as recommended by the Planning Commission with the following conditions: 1. A building permit will not be issued for the guest house until the following conditions have been met: a. Written Health Department approval; b. Note building information for the guest house on the plan, i.e. square footage, number of floors, number of rooms, etc.; c. Compliance with the Runoff Control Ordinance; d. No buildings shall be constructed on slopes greater than 25%; e. ApProval of future hydrant locations by the County Fire Official. f. Mandatory connection to the water lines and placement of hydrants to requirements of the County Fire Official at such time as appropriate water lines shall be available within 200 feet of either the building or any required hydrant site. 2. Water diversion and seeding specifications for the athletic field to be approved by the County Engineer; 3. Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation approval of a commercial entrance for the intersection of Old Route 250 and Route 677, if required; 2. Maintenance agreement for 01d Route 250 between landowners using the road, to be approved by the County Attorney. 5. Five parking spaces shall be provided at the proposed guest house. If the guest house should be rented at any time in the future, the site plan shall be amended prior to any rental of u~its, to provide an appropriate number of parking spaces. AYES: NAYS: The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Not Docketed. Mr. Tucker asked the Board to adopt a resolution of intent to allow the planning staff to begin studying ordinance amendments (Subdivision and Zoning)' to allow for implementation of the Route 29 North corridor study. Mr. ~isher asked if this would interfere with the rewriting of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Tucker said no. Mr. St. John said he would recommend adopting a resolution of intent to allow the planning staff to move forward. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, Seconded by Mr. Lindstrom to adopt the following resolution of intent: October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) ~BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend both tha Albemarle County Land Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in appropriate sections in order to implement the adopted Route 29 North Corridor Study; and FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Commission is hereby directed to draft appropriate amendments to these ordinances, hold public hearings on said amendments, and return their recommendations to this Board at the earliest possible date. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14. Carnival License. Mr. J. Ashley Williams, President of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Jaycees, referred to his letter dated September 27, 1979 re- garding the payment of a $100/day license fee for the operation of a carnival or circus under Albemarle County Code Section 11-49. He said they operated a "Fun Fair" the first week in July this year, and after payment of license fees totaling $748, they only netted a profit of $835. He asked if the Board could eliminate or reduce the County's license fee to allow charitable organizations to at least see a profit for their efforts and have more funds to effectively help the needy in the community. Mr. Fisher asked how much of the gross receipts of the carnival they received. Mr. Williams said they received 20% of the total receipts. Mr. Fisher then asked how the Board could determine the difference between a charitable, non-profit organization and some other type group. Mr. St. John said the charter of the organization could be re- viewed and that also the Federal Internal Revenue Service keeps a master list of all non- profit organizations. Mr. Ray Jones said there are only about six applications made each year for carnivals under this code section. Debate ensued regarding the possibility of too many carnivals coming into the County because of a reduced license fee, and also the problem of the charitable organization having to pay that license fee from their net receipts. Mr. Jones and Mr. Agnor said the license fee should be taken from the gross receipts and the cost shared by the carnival management and the charitable organization. Mr. Bruce Duncan of the Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Department asked if the license money could be refunded at the conclusion of the carnival. Mr. Fisher said that would be impossible. Mr. Jones and Mr. St. John suggested wording be placed in the ordinance that the license fee be paid by the operator of the carnival. Mr. Henley suggested the County parallel the State's ordinance. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to advertise for a public hearing to reduce the County's license fee from $t00 per day to $25 per day in Section 11-49, and hold that public hearing on Wednesday, November 14, 1979. Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iache~ta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Mr. Fisher asked that a list be made up beginning July 1, 1979 as to how much money was collected for carnival licenses, and how much it would equal if collected at the new proposed fee. Agenda Item No. 19._ Affirmative Action Plan. Mr. Agnor summarized a memorandum from Mrs. June Moon, Administrative Assistant, regarding adoption and implementation of an affirmative action plan for the County. Mr. Agnor said many of the practices in this plan are already in use by the personnel department of the County. Mr. Agnor said this would not apply to the School system, unless adopted by the School Board. Dr. Iachetta said job classifications are the same whether the person is a typist in the County office or in a school office, and it should be handled the same under this plan. Mr. Agnor said he agreed; that when the offices moved into their neW facilities at Lane, a central personnel office will be used to serve both county and school personnel. Mr. Agnor requested adoption of the proposed plan, with two changes: those being on page 3 the target completion date should read NoVember, 1979 instead of "immediately", and on page 6 the target completion date should read October, 1979 instead of "immediately". Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to accept the recommendation of the County Executive and adopt the following affirmative action plan: AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN FOR ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: PURPOSE: This Affirmative Action Plan (AAP) is designed to aid the Board of Supervisors and Department Heads of Albemarle County in handling the requirements of effective personnel management. The plan will provide directions for administration, job structuring, recruitment, selection, evaluation, training and reporting in order to insure fair and equal treatment of all employees of Albemarle County. POLICY: It is the policy of Albemarle County that discrimination against any person in recruitment, examination, appointment, training, promotion, retention, discipline or any other aspect of personnel administration because of political or religious opinions or affiliations, or because of race, national origin, or other non-merit factors will be prohibited. Discrimination on the basis of age, sex, or physical disability will be prohibited except in cases where specific ages sex, or physical requirements would constitute a bona fide occupational qualification. October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) '148 I. EVALUATION OF CURRENT PROGRAMS: The Board of Supervisors employs approximately 260 persons. This number varies depending on seasonal and temporary employment. There is a centralized personnel office but no personnel director Therefore, the responsibility for hiring ulti- mately rests with the Board of S~ pervisors and the County Executive. Accordingly, this Affirmative Action Plan must be understood an the context of a small organization with limited staff and time to commit to specialization in the affirmative action program. The County Executive is delegated responsibility for supervising the Affirmative Action Plan and for insuring its proper administration. While it is obvious that a tremendous time commitment cannot be made, nevertheless every practical and possible effort will be devoted to the tasks assigned hereunder. Evaluations will be made periodically and will take into consideration such major problems as limited staff resources and time constraints. The Board of Supervisors authorized the preparation of a personnel management system for Albemarle County. This was prepared by an independent management co- nsultant firm and takes into consideration discriminatory issues in the titling, content and requirements for a particular job. Job titles have been selected to remove sexist connotations. Educational and experience qualifications have been reviewed to assure their relevancy to a particular job itself~ There are no re- ferences to any issues other than merit in the installation and management policies governing the personnel management system. The Personnel office will periodically prepare an analysis of the local labor market based on data available through the Virginia Employment Commission to deter- mine population makeup, skills available, and the availability of individuals for employment. These will be compared to the jurisdiction's present profile and eval- uated to determine areas of improvement and areas where adjustments can be made to eliminate sex or racial imbalance where it appears that they may exist. Record keeping will be undertaken as necessary to peoperly prepare the EEO-4 and to isolate helpful information to assist in evaluating and administering the AAP. On-going evaluation of every aspect of the AAP will be undertaken by or at the direction of the County Executive. It should be noted that Albemarle County has been complying with EEO requirements and has been in the process of developing this AAP for some months. Many objectives have already been completed and are in force. It was hoped that final adoption could be delayed until all offices are again centralized under one roof with a personnel department headed by a director who would act as our EEO person. However, since centralization is running behind schedule, it has become urgent to finalize this plan in order to continue eligibility for certain funding. When offices are centralized and an EEO person is appointed, this plan will be amended to change many of the action steps now assigned to the County Executive to the EEO person. The following action steps are established for Section I of the AAP: Action Steps Labor Market Survey Comparison of EEO-4 to Labor Market Survey and identification of employment areas where weaknesses may exist preparation of final report Evaluation of on-going programs As.signed to Personnel Office Personnel Clerk County Executive II. PLAN~ DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNICATION AND ADMINISTRATION: Target Completion Date Nov., 1979 Nov., 1979 Quarterly beginning Jan., 1980 The Affirmative Action Plan will be managed by the County Executive with the assistance of an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Advisory Committee composed of 4 members chosen by him and representing minority groups within the County staff. The County Executive will act as Chairman of the Advisory Committee and shall vote. The Committee shall evaluate various aspects of the program, participate in communications and training activities, and advise the County Executive concerning the conduct of the AAP. Meetings shall be held no less than quarterly and minutes will be taken and circulated as the Committee may see fit. The Committee shall establish its own by- laws as may be deemed appropriate. The County Executive may work with all other employees and individuals as he may deem appropriate in the execution of the AAP. The grievance procedure established as a part of the County's Personnel-Management System shall be followed by employees who wish to file complaints of alleged dis crimination. 'The County'S policy concerning equal employment opportunity as embodied herein shall be communicated to all employees and others with an interest in the County as a possible employer. Efforts will be made to help all concerned employees in under- standing the policy. The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section II of the AAP: 149 October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Action Steps. Adoption of AAP and Policy Statement Assigned to Bd. of Supervisor~ Target Completion Date Oct., 1979 Appointment of EEO Advisory Committee and ~.~-,~i.,~L~,~,;~ ~;~ ~-~'~J .. orientation and organization of EEO Advisory Committee County Exec. Nov., 1979 Publication of Policy Statement on discrimination to employees.; Placement on bulletin boards, notification to following groups: ~ VEC Minority Organizations Voc. Rehabilitation Agencies Employee Associations Local High Schools Personnel Clerk Nov., 1979 Meetings with department heads to discuss EEO issues and to resolve these as they develop - to isolate recurring problems for attention. County Exec. Quarterly III. JOB STRUCTURING AND UPWARD MOBILITY: The County's Classification Plan makes every effort to eliminate any factors which do not relate to merit criteria in employment. The County Executive will assure that there is developed an on-going review process with regard to any new class specifications to insure that they properly address EEO issues. Efforts will be made to encourage supervisory personnel to evaluate their employees to determine those who are capable and might logically move into more responsible positions. They will then be counselled concerning needed skills and education and efforts will be made to assist where possible. However, such employees must compete with the open labor market for any vacant position to insure that all qualified applicants are given an equal opportunity. The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section III of the AAP: Action Plan Assigned to Target Completion Date Establishment of a policy requiring review of class specifications periodically and prepara- tion of new specifications when vacancies occur. County Exec. and Department Heads Annually Identification of promising employees suitable for eventual promotion Department Heads As needed Development of counseling programs for above employees and selection of training alternatives County Executive with Dept. Heads Feb., 1980 IV. RECRUITMENT, SELECTION AND PLACEMENT: Albemarle County recruitment efforts are directed toward local newspapers with areawide readership and occasionally professional publications and metropolitan newspapers are utilized. As part of the AAP, the County will actively recruit among those organizations which may have specialized knowledge of minority, female and handicapped individuals qualified for employment. Referrals will be requested from the local co~mmunity college, the vocational-technical school, VEC, community action agencies and similar resources. The statement "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" shall appear on all recruitment literature. To insure relevance and equity in selection and placement, employees who normally are involved in the interview process will be trained in interview methods and pr- ocedures. After an employee has been selected, the County Executive will determine whether any discrimination has taken place because of matters not related to merit. The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section IV of the AAP: Action Steps Assigned to Target Completion Date Publication of vacancies among organizations familiar with minority employment potentialities Personnel Clerk Oct., 1979 "An Equal Opportunity Employer" shall appear on all recruitment material Personnel Clerk Oct., 1979 Evaluation of need to train employees who conduct~interviews and scheduling of such training~ County Executive Jan., 1980 V. TRAINING: TA~' Affirmative Action Plan will require training from the very beginning. Individuals must be briefed on what the AAP is and hopes to accomplish. They must understand their roles and responsibilities and realize that their own job eval- uations will be affected by their own ability to deal effectively with their re- sponsibilities. October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Training programs will be needed to facilitate upward mobility within employee ranks. Such programs will be developed or researched and provided as appropriate. Ail training activities will be evaluated to insure the participation of the appro- priate individuals. The following action steps shall be made with regard to Section V of the AAP: Action Steps Assigned to Target Completion Date Orientation of all employees concerning AAP County Executive Jan., 1980 Orientation of EEO Advisory Committee County Executive Nov., 1979 Training of department heads and all employee supervisors concerning the policy statements and its implications, the AAP, and the individual roles in carrying out the AAP County Executive Jan., 1980 and thereafter as needed Periodic meetings with department heads to discuss and solve EEO problems County Executive Continuous Motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 20. Report of the County Executive for September, 1979 was presented for the Board's information. Agenda Item No. 21. Report of Social Services Department for August, 1979 was presented in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52. Agenda Item No. 22. Statement of Expenses - Director of Finance, Sheriff and Common- wealth's Attorney for September, 1979. Statement of expenses for September, 1979 was presented along with salary statements for August, 1979. On motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 23. Statement of Expenses, Regional Jail for the month of September, 1979 was presented along with salary statement for August, 1979. On motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 24. Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance and operation of the Regional Jail for the month of September, 1979 along with summary statement of prisoner days and salary of the jail physician and paramedics, were presented. On motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, these statements were approved as presented. The motion carried by the following recorded' vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 25. Lottery Permit. Mr. Agnor presented a lottery permit appli-~ cation from the Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company for the~calendar year 1979. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom to approve the lottery permit for the year 1979 in accordance with the Board's adopted rules for issuance of such permits. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 26. Other Matters: Mr. Fisher read a letter of thanks from Mr. Joe Teague of the Charlottesville/Albemarle Rescue Squad for the County's contribution to the resque squad's annual fund drive. Mr. Fisher noted this money was a budgeted amount in the County's 1979 budget. Oakhill Water System: Mr. Fisher requested a status report on this matter. Mr. Agnor reported that progress has been made in the negotiations for acqu.isition of the Oakhill Water System by the Albemarle County Service Authority. He said Mr. Thompson, Director of the Service Authority, felt this matter will be ready to be placed back on the Board's agenda some time in late November. October 10, 1979 (Regular Day Meeting) Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from Mrs. Susie Sherwood, President of the League of Women Voters, dated September 26, 1979 regarding the continued problem of trash being dumped in southern Albema.rle County. The letter reminded the Board of the funds appropriated by the Board for a solid waste collection system in 1979. It was suggested that dumpsters or containers be placed in the problem dumping areas to help control the problem. Mr. Dorrier said he felt it was a good area to try such a container system.' Dr. Iachetta said container systems have run into many problems in other counties, and he felt they would cause more problems than they solved. Mr.~Dorrier said he felt the citizens would support it's use based on requests he had received and photos of roadside garbage he has seen. Mr. Agnor said he would rather study the whole county to try and locate a site for a pilot program to be conducted. Dr. Iachetta suggested the staff bring back a report on where in the county a study of this type should be conducted. No vote was taken on this item, and discussion ended. Mr. Agnor reported that the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority yesterday authorized the sale of their bond issue. These bonds will fund the local share of the fire. year pollution abatement program, which includes all local funds except the Crozet Interceptor. $13,250,000 until the year 2009 is being borrowed. Mr. Agnor said an invitation had been received for the Board to tour Western Albemarle High School during the week of November l~th. Mr. Fisher said that the Virginia Assoc- iation of Counties meets that week but he would try to take the tour. Mr. Agnor reported approvals had been received for three transportation g~ant pro- grams; the Route 29 North corridor transportation system, the ride-sharing program, and $1,000 for administrative costs for JAUNT. Agenda Item No. 2 Minutes (continued) Mr. Lindstrom (who was not present at the beginning of the meeting), said he had read the minutes of April 18, 1979. He offered approval of the minutes with the following correc~tions: 2) 3) Page 264, next to the last paragraph, the word "and" is duplicated. " .contract has been ~exlao~ted~. " Page 266, center page, . . " restrictions that ~i-~0therwise be ~**~ Page 266, last paragraph, .. applicable." Motion for approval of the minutes was seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier,. Fisher, Henley, Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 27. Adjournment. At 4:48 P.M. motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorri~r, to adjourn to 11:30 A.M..~n October 11, 1979 in the Board Room of the County Office Building. Roll was called and/~o~ion-carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Dorrier,~ Fisher, Henl'ey, None. Iachetta, Lindstrom and Roudabush.