1977-08-10August 3, 1977 (Regular - Night Meeting)
Dr. Iachetta said he accepted appointment to a State-Wide Committee being formed to
define urban runoff from non-point sources and to draft a handbook on Same. He said he
was nominated for the position by Mr. George Long of the Virginia Association of Counties.
Mr. Fisher requested Mr. Agnor to bring the following items to the attention of the
Airport Board. First, extending the 10 minute grace period for parking to possibly 15 minute
He said he had received several telephone Calls from people saying that 10 minutes is not
enough time to discharge a passenger and unload his luggage. He also requested that
Albemarle County's name be included on the parking ticket receipt stub, which presently
reads "Charlottesville Airport."
Agenda Item No. 5. Application for a Literary Fund loan. Mr. Ag~or said the standard
form of application for a Literary Fund loan for physical education and health facilities at
Albemarle High School has been prepared by Mr. Jones. Mr. Agnor then read the following
resolution contained within the application and requested its adoption:
W ERE~S, ~T~ School Board for the County ~of Albemarle, on the
3~d day of August, 1977, presented to this Board, an application
addressed to the State Board of'Education of Virginia for the
purpose of borrowing from the Literary Fund $500,000 for adding to
or improving the present school building at Albemarle High School
to be paid in 20 annual installments, and the interest thereon at
~ per cent paid annually.
RESOLVED, That the application of the County School Board to the
State Board of Education of Virginia for a loan of $500,000 from the
Literary Fund is hereby approved, and authority is hereby granted the
said County School Board to borrow the said amount for the purpose
set out in said application.
The Board of Supervisors for said County will each year during
the life of this loan, at the time they fix the regular levies, fix
a rate of levy for schools or make a cash appropriation sGfficient for
operation expenses and to pay this loan in annual installments and the
interest thereon, as required by law regulating loans f~m the Literary
Fund.
Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush to adopt the above
resolution. Motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 9. Adjournment.
the meeting adjourned at 9:20 P.M.
There being no further business, Mr. Fisher declared
August 10, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
Chairman
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held
on August 10, 1977, at 9:00 A.M.,.in~t.he Board Room of the Albemarle County Office BUilding,
Charlottesville, Virginia.
PP~: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher~
J. T. Henley, Jr., and William S. Roudabush.
Absen2~: Dr. F. Anthony Iachetta.
Officers Present:
County Attorney.
Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive and Mr. George R. St. John,
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to~order at 9:09 A.M. by the Chairman, Mr.
Fisher.who noted receipt of a letter from Governor Godwin stating the President of the United
States has officially declared Albemarle County eligible for Federal Assistance Programs due
t~'~'h~"~drought. This aid will be for the period of July 23 to September 1, 1977, although
the Governor is applying for an extension, which if granted, would apply through ~ay 31~ 1978
The Governor then listed possible steps which would aid,~t~he farmers who take advantage of
the Federal Assistance. Mr. Fisher then requested Mr.~Henley to keep track of this situation
and advise the Board if further assistance is needed.
Agenda Item No. 2. Approval of Minutes for November 3, 1976. No additions or correctio
were noted and motion for approval was offered by Mrs. David, seconded by Mr. Roudabush and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dottier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
NAYS: None..
ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta.
August I0~ (Regular-Day Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 3a. Requests to have roads taken into the State SecOndary System.
Agenda Item No. 3al. Camelot, Section 2.
Mr. Agnor presented the resolution with the road description:
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 C~melot Subdivision, Section 2:
Beginning at station 9+10.33 of Camelot Drive (present end of State
Route 1510), a point common to the centerline intersection with station
0+00 on St. Ives Road (State Route 1511); thence with Camelot Drive
in a northeasterly direction 823.24 feet to station 17+33.57 the
centerline intersection with Barnsdale Road, station 0+00, the
end of Camelot Drive in Section 2 of Camelot.
Beginning at station 0+00 of Merlin Comrt, a point common to the
centerline intersection with station 12+59.48 of Camelot Drive;
thence with Merlin Court in a northwesterly direction 210 feet to
station 2+10, the end of Merlin Court in Section 2 of Cama!ot.
Beginning at station 0+00 of Barnsdale Road, a point common to the
centerline intersection with station 17+33.57 of Cam'clot Drive;
thence with Bar~sda!e Road in a northwesterly and southweaterly
direction 1221.58 feet to station 12+21.58, a point common to the
centerline intersection with station 6+87.43 of St. Ives Road
(State Route 1511), the end of Barnsdale Road in Section 2 of
Camelot.
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
easements along these requested additions as recorded by plat in the Office of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 545, page 68.
Mr. Agnor further noted that a letter dated July 8, !977 from Mr. John Sims of Camelot
of Albemarle, Incorporated, was received requesting this procedure be taken. Motion offered
by Mr~ Roudabush, seconded by Mrs. David to adopt the foregoing resolution. Roll was called~
and motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. !achetta.
Agenda Item No. 3a2. Greenbrier Heights, Section 4.
Mr. Agnor said the paperwork for this road has not been completed.
Agenda Item No. 3a3. Whippoorwill Hollow Road
Mr. Agnor said this was the second time this road has been brought before the Board for
approval. He noted that a contract had been drawn up between Dr. Hurt and the County. and
Mr. St. John explained the contract.
Mr. ~ans~o2avelt, Resident Highway Engineer, was present and said he got together with
Dr. Hurt and they agreed that no more than ninety lots would be allowed on a Class II road.
Mr. Fisher asked whose re~pansibility it would be to enforce this agreement in the distant
future. Mr. St. John said no matter how the land was subdivided, it is still the responsib±l~
of the County to eversee the road situation. Mr. Roosevelt said the service this road gives
is only to through traffic, not to adjacent development and this was the basis for his decisi,
for acceptance. The figure for the~mount of through traffic is strictly a guess, baSed only
on ca!c. ulations for future developments. Mr. Roosevelt further explained that this type
agreement is going to be used on many other through type roadways where the County desires a
through road but where the developer wishes to build a road adequate only for the needs of hi;
immediate development. He gave the example of the develpper building a small dead end road
which may somedaY become a four lane d~vided highway--the developer does not want to build
such a highway for future use.
Mr. ROudabush offered motion authorizing the Chairman to sign the agreement as follows:
THIS AGREEMENT made this 30th day of August, 1977, by and~i~between CHARLES WM.
HURT ("Hurt") and ~HE COUNTY OF ALBEMAREE ("County") provides:
Hurt is the owner of two tracts of'land situate in Albemarle County, Virginia,
containing 50.5 acres and 158.2 acres, (the "Whippoorwill Property"), as shown and
described on a plat of B. Aubrey Huffman & Associates, dated June 8, 1977, of record
in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of.t.Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed
Book 623, at page 467, (the "Whippoorwill Plat"). The Whippoorwill Plat shows a road
which has been dedicated to public use, which road connects Virginia State Route
676 and Virginia State Route 614 (herein referred to as Whippoorwill Drive"), all
as further shown on the attached unapproved plats consisting of three' sheets~
captioned "Preliminary Plans Sh0W~g Whippoorwill Hollow", dated July, 1977,
("Preliminary Plans"). Whippoorwill Drive has been constructed as a category II
road in accordance with the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation
("Highway Department") standards. The Highway Department is willing to accept
W~o~w~]~ Dr~ve i~to the state highway system ~rovided that the real ~rouert~
August !0, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
to the proviso, that in the event that Hurt hereafter proposes to subdivide the
Whippoorwill Property into more than 90 lots, that that portion 5f the Whippoorwill
Drive from State Route 676 to the intersection of a proposed road between the well
lot and Lot 5'2 as sho~n on the Preliminary Plan is up-graded to the Highway Department
road category necessary to handle the additional traffic to be generated from
those Lots in excess of 90. Hurt agrees, for himself, his successors and assigns,
as developer of Whippoorwill Hollow Subdivision, that concurrent with the
submission to the County of Albemarle of a subdivision plat showing in excess of
90 lots for the Whippoorwill Property, that he will up-grade the portion of
Whippoorwill Drive from State Route 676 to the intersection of the proposed road
between the well lot and Lot 5.2 as shown on.~.the Preliminary Plan to the standards
required by the High~ay Department based upon the number of lots actually platted
of record. The preceding sentence shall not be construed as imposing any obligation
upon the purchasers of individual lots which have been platted pursuant to a
subdivision plat which complies with-the provisions of the Albemarle County Land
Subdivision and Development O~dinance.
WITNESS the following signatures and_.seals.
(SIGNED BY)
Cha~es Wm. Hurt
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
BY: (SIGNED BY)
Gerald E. Fisher, Chairman
Board~f County Supervisors
ATTEST:
(SIGNED BY)
Linde W. Leake, Deputy Clerk
The motion was seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Dr. Ia~hetta.
Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of AlbemarZe County, Virginia,
that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby
reque2~d to accept into the Seconday System of Highways, subject to final
inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following
r~ad.~.~n~.~hippoorwill HOlloWvSUbdi~is~on:
Beginning at station 0+00 of Whippoorwill Road, a point common
to the centerline intersection with State Ro~2e 676; thence with
Whippoorwill Road in a northwesterly direction 5395 feet to
station 53+95, a point common to the centerlinel~tersection with
State Route 614, the end of Whippoorwill Road in Whippoorwill
Hollow 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 easements along this requested addition as recorded by plat in
the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed
Book 623, page 279 and Deed Book 623, page 467.
Mrs. David seconded the foregoing motion and same carried by the following recorded vote
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David: and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 3a4. Corvilte Farm Road-Sections 1 and 2.
Mr. Agnor~presented the following resolution for consideration by the Board:
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 Corville Farm Subdivision, Section 1 and 2:
Beginning at station 0+00 of Corvil!e Farm Road, a point common
to the centerline intersection with State Route 691; thence with
Corville Farm Road in a southeasterly direction 1256.63 feet to
stat'ion 12+56.63, the end of Corville Farm Road.
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 easements along this requested addition as recorded by
plats recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
County in Deed Book 474, page 9 for Section 1 and Deed Book 499, page
376 for Section 2.
Mr. Henley offered motion to adopt the foregoing resolution, seconded by Mrs. David and
carried by the following recorded vote:
August 10,. 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 3b. Other Highway Matters.
Mr. Fisher said a resolution appro~gthe Secondary Road System budget for the fiscal
year ending June 1978 was needed. After a brief discussion~!.~r~ga~Hg the possibility of
certain roads (which?were still in need of right-of-way acquisition)~being constructed, motio~
was offered by Mrs. David, seconded by Mr. Roudabush to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Boa~d~of Supervisors of Albemarle CoUnty~ Virginia,
that'~the Secondary System Budget for Construction for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1978, as submitted by Mr. D. S. Roosted!t, Resident Highway Engineer,
be and the same hereby is approved for the total of $1,333,423.00.
Roll was called and motion carried by the following recOrded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Hehley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a copy of a letter regarding Section 33.1-70.01 of the Code
of Virginia. He noted that it was important g~r the Board's information:
"August 1, 1977
Ladies and Gentlemen:
In my letter of May 19, 1977 to you ~garding the 1977-78 Secondary System
allocations, I made brief mention of the enactment of House Bill 1041 by the 1977
session of the General Assembly. This bill contained a variety of repeals,
amendments, and new laws. Among the new laws is Section 33.1-70.01 which
addresses the requisite joint effort of county officials and Department personnel
in the promulgation of official six-year plans and annual construction budgets
for the Secondary System.
This section is very specific in that the Boards' active participation in
the six-year plan process is at the Boards' option. It is equally specific in
its requirement of the Boards' involvement in the construction budgetary process
as well as the public hearing procedure and official adoption of the documents.
The six-year plan will be the basic foundation for the t~ntative~commitment
of established available Secondary construction funds for the six-year period
beginning with fiScaZ~l~78-7~. As such, it is so closely related to each annual
budget that it seems almost imperative that the Boards become equ~l!y involved
in its development.
I~think that there are many inherent advantages of the law that are in the
best interest of the publi~ as well as the caunties and the Department. It
affords the opportunity to the Board and the Department to demonstrate to the
public our mutual interest, not only in the Secdndary needs of the county but
our combined responsiveness to their ideas of these needs as well.
Within the near future, our district~engineers will be~contacting you with
regard to the implementation of the bill. I strongly urge that you join~with us
in all applicable phases so that we will have a comprehensive and congruous
plan that enhanees our respective credib~!ity with the public.
I am attaching a copy of Section 33.1-70.01 for your ready convenience.
Our engineers will be happy to disauss any questions ymu may have. I~would
like to paint out that this section of the Code ~ddresses the fact that the
program follow "gensra!ly the policies of the State Highway and Transportation
Commission in regard to the statewide Secondary System improvements." We plan
to develop a consolidated list of long-sta~dingypolicies to be distributed
to the Boards and our engineers as a reference guide.
I have always considered the relationship between the Board of Sup~r~sors
and the Department to be excellent~ and we look-forward to its further strengthen-
ing through this means. To this end we pledge the capabilities of the Department
for the fulfillment of the objectives of this program.
Sincerely,
(Signed)
John E. Harwood
Commissioner"
Mr. Roosevelt requested time at a future Board meeting when he and the D~strict Engineer
could be present and discuss the six-year plan. Mr. Fisher suggested 4:00 P.M. on
September 7, !977, in the Board Room.
Mr. Fisher said he received a letter from the Louisa Board of Supervisors requesting
Albemarle County to join them in a resolution to the Department of Highways. The resolution
would regard the building of an industrial access road to a new industry off Route 231 near
the Orange/Albemarle County lines. It was further stated that if Albemarle County does[join
in the resolution, it ~ill not effect industrial funds for Albemarle County. Mr. Roosevelt
agreed with the statements in the letter, but suggested the County wait until formal request
for the road is received in writing from the industry itself.
Mr. Agnor presented two 'letters received from the Department of Highways and Transporta~
August 10, 197~ (Regular-Day Meeting)
"July 26, 1977
Gentlemen:
As requested in resolutions by your Board on December 18, 1975 and June 8, 1977,
the following additions to the Secondary System of Albemarle County are hereby
approved, effective July 1, 1977.
ADDITIONS LENGTH
HOLLYMEAD SUBDIVISION
Maiden Lane - From: Hollymead Drive to cul-de-sac
Robin Lane - From: Hollymead Drive to cul-de-sac
Woodburn Road - From: Hollymead Drive to POe's~Lane
Poe's Lane - From: Woodburn Road to cul-de-sac
White Oak Lane - From: Goldentree Rlace to cul-de-sac
Goldentree Place - From: Hollymead Drive to cul-de-sac
Easy Lane - From: Hol!ymead Drive to cul-de-sac
0.12 Mi.
0.16 Mi.
0ell Mi.
0.19 Mi.
0.11 Mi.
0.23 Mi.
0.25 Mi.
MERIWETHER HILLS SUBDIVISION
Kimbrough Circle - From: Rte. 678 to a point of intersection
on Kimbrough Circle
Gui-de-sac "A" - From: Kimbrough Circle-~tocend of cul-de-sac
Cul-de-sac "B" - From: Kimbrough Circle to end of cul-de,sac
PEACOCK HILL SUBDIVISION
0.49 Mi.
0.03 Mi.
0.03 Mi.
Peacock Drive - From: Rte. 708 to Intersection of Turkey
Ridge Road
Turkey Ridge Road - From: Intersection with Peacock Drive
southwesterly 2,572 feet~
0.29 Mi.
0.49 Mi.
WEST WOODS SUBDIVISION
West Pines Drive - From: Raute 677, 958 feet in a
southwesterly direction
West Pines Drive (Continued) From: 958 feet southwest
Route 677 southwesterly 527 feet
Fox Path Court - From: West Pines Drive to end of cul-de-sac
0.18 Mi.
0.10 Mi.
0.08 Mi.
Sincerely,
(Signed)
W. S. G. Britton
Deputy Commissioner and Chief Engineer"
"July 20, 1977
Dear Miss Neher:
Subject:
Route 684 - Albemarle County
Project 0684-00'2-159, C-501
Knowing of your interest in the above project, we wish to advise that the
High~ay and Transportation Commission, after reviewing the ~anscript of the public
hearing held on May 12 in the Crozet Elementary School-and considering the economic,
social and environmental effects of the propesed improvement of Route' 684 in Albemarle
County, has approved theklocation and major design features Of this project as
presented at the hearing.
Your interest in this proposed highway development is very much appreciated.
Sincerely,
(Signed)
D. B. Hope
District Engineer"
Not Docketed. Mr. John Moore requested the Board's advice on his problem of how to obta~
a temporary water hook up to the old Oakhill Subdivision water system. He gave the Board som~
background on why hook ups were not obtainable and said he had a/~Otcon which he wished to
build. Mr. Fisher suggested that he get in tou~h with Mr. Williams ~ the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority and Mr. Agnor stated that he would have the staff check into the problem more
thoroughly and if need be, bring the matter back to the Board.
Agenda Item No. 6. Discussion of Library Budget.
Mr. Fisher noted receipt of the following letter:
"June 11, 1977
Dear Gerry:
In the course of the last year we have been able, with the help of Charlottesville'
Director of Finance, to develop a much clearer system of accounting for the operating
funds of the Library. It is because of this that we were able to make some projections
last winter and to advise you of a refund of $638.00 which we expected to make to
Albemarle County at the close of our fiscal year, June 30, 1977.
August 10, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
~?~LaWhIle the books have not been closed as yet, our best projections are that
we will be able to make this refund and, in addition, we will have an additional
surplus of approximately $4,000 for Albemarle, m~king~a combined total to be refunded
to Albemarle County of $4,638. These surpluses, as you know, develop when
expenditures for a locality fall below appropriated funds.
The Budget Committee is now seek~n~::iygur advice on how beSt~to proceed with
the difference between the Basi~c Budget which was proposed for this year, 1977-78
and the amounts appropriated by some of the jurisdictions. As you know, under
the Contract, expenditures are apportioned to each jurisdiction according to the use
of the library by its residents.
Whereas, three of the jurisdictions have appropriated the full amount necessary
to meet the operating costs of the library, Albemarle County ~and Nelson Count~) has
not. The operating budget for 1977-78 for the library included a reqmest of
$253,706 from Albemarle County. Albemarle County appropriated only $250,575 which
is $3,131 less than the amount which will be spent for library services in
Albemarle County.
So that you can maintain your proportional fair share of the operating cost
of the Library, that is, that Albemarle County will pay for those expenses incurred
by the library mn behalf of your citizens, will you consider authorizing the use
of~Zhe~smrp!us~funds from last year to cover the short-fall in your appropriations?
Turning to another matter, I am enclosing, for your consideration, a revised
"Supplementary Budget" reflecting the reduced income from Federal Funds for the
Library together with an outline of proposed expenditures off, these funds in accordance
with the rules of the State Library for their use.
Sincerely,
(Signed)
Robert W. Stroh, Chairman
Budget Committee"
Mr. Fisher also noted recommendations from Mr. Agnor in his memorandum which fol!o~s:
"August 5, 1977
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Guy B. Agnor, Jr.
RE: Summary of Library Budget Revision
The FY-78 library budget estimated State revenues in the basic or operational
budget at $70,597, and Federal revenues in a supplemental budget at $50,000. The
State Library Board has recently advised that the State revenues allocated for
FY-78 will be $74,960 (an increase of $4,363) and Federal revenues will be $33,216
(a decrease of $19,784). ExDenditures of these revenues require approval by the
governing body of the library's parent jurisdZctions.
The Library Board proposed that the ~asic budget not be amended to reflect
the change in State revenues, but to allow the additional funds to be included
in any surplus that may develop in FY-78, maintaining the total expenditures
at the level originally requested ($620,498). The Library Board has prepared
for your approval a revised supplementary budget accommdating the reduction in
Federal funds, reducing the expenditures to the adjusted level of revenues.
In approving the County share of the library budget for FY-78, Albemarle's
share was reduced from a requested amounv of $253,702 to $250,575, a reduction
of $3,127, which~was calculated to be Albemarle's share if the total local funds
from all jurisdictions were maintained at their FY-77 level. Total local funds
in FY-78 had been requested to be increased from $525,299 (FY-77 total) to
$530,899, an increase of $5,600. Albemarle's adjustment was based upon what was
understood to be an agreement between parent jurisdictions at a budget work session
with Library officials that totaI ~cal shares would not be increased in FY-78,
even though individual shares would increase or decrease from circulat~nn
percentages changing. The effort to f~llow such an agreement was not to reduce
the Library's total budget but to utilize estimates of State or Federal funds
to balance the operatimnal budget.
The Library's budget received by the parent jurisdictions did not reflect
this agreement, and subsequent adoptions by other jurisdictions did not completely
follow the concept. Albemarle and Nelson reduced their requested amount, both
of which had increased from usage. Charlottesville, Greene-and Louisa approved
their requests, two of which were decreases from FY-77 levels (Charlottesville
and Greene) and one an increase (Louisa).
The Library Board is requesting three actions:
!. By letter of June 1t, approval of an estimated $4,638 carry-over
balance to cover the $3,127 reduction in Albemarle's appropriation to the
operating budget.
2. Authorization to expend the FY-78 State.funds ($74,960) in the
operating budget without adjustment to expenditures.
3. Approval of an amended supplementary budget totalling $33,216 for
purposes detailed in the budget request, thereby authorizing~he expenditure
of Federal funds.
Recommendations for your consideration are as 'follows:
t. Remind the Library Board that consideration of the~!:use of
August !0, !9_~ularbDa~llMeet_j~
2. Authorize the expenditures of State funds as requested. Although,
in my opinion, it would be preferable to decrease local funds to reflect
the increase in State funds (as long as they do not decrease below FY-77
levels, which they would not do), Albemarle and Nelson Counties' efforts
accomplishes practically the same purpose, and any further efforts for
adjustments will probably be futile since Charlottesville has already
approved the State and Federal fund expenditure~as requested by the Library.
3. Authorize the expenditures of Federal funds as requested.
supplemental budget was intended to provide expenditures equated to
available Federal funds.'v
The
Mr. Stroh of the Library Board asked the Board not to approve the first request as
stated in Mr. Agnor's memo, as the amount stated was not yet fixed. Mr. Fisher then
expressed his concern that the Library expenditures were increasing at too fast a rate and
the Library Board would have to in the future keep their expenditures within the~hudgeted
amount After considerable discussion as to the method whereby the budget figures are
arrived at and what the additional dollars would be used for, motion was offered by Mr.
Dorrier, seconded by Mrs. David to authorize the expenditure of Federal Funds as requested.
Roll was called and motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Hen!ey~a~d Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta.
Motion was offered by Mr. Dorrier authorizing the County Executive to execute forms
for the expenditure of state funds with the proviso that if there is an'unexpend~d balance~
it will reduce local funds at the end of the ~ear. Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorri.er, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 4. Joint Jail Agreement. It was noted by Mr. Agnor that this agreement
had not yet been reviewed by the Jail Board. Mr. Henley requested the opportunity to have
the Board review this agreement before formal adoption by the BoaPd~f Supervisors. Mr. Fish~
suggested this matter be placed back on the agenda at the regular day meeting in September
at which time additional comments may be received from the Jail Board and possibly the
City of Charlottesville.
Agenda Item No. 7. Public Hearing: Ordinance increasing the penalty for failure to
pay taxes in time from five to ten percent. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 27~ 19r
and August 3, 1977.)
Mr. Agnor presented the ordinance as advertised and said it is now allowed in the Virgini
State Code to charge a maximum of 10% for late payment of taxes and the County has lately bee~
in the position of "financing" many late payers.
No one from the public wished to speak either for or against the ordinance and the pUbli~
hearing was closed. Motion was then off~ered by Mrs. David to adopt the ordinance as set out
below~ The motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
ORDINANCE INCREASING THE PEN~T%.~'~POR'~i~FAILURE TO PAY TAXES IN TIME
?~.~.~i._~ '~FROM~PtVE~TD~N P~CEN~i.{~N~ SET~iN~¥~TH:'~DATE~.~. '~ .......
MANNER OF PAYMENT, AND INTEREST PROVIDED BY STATE LAW
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
as follows:
Section 8-1.4. Penalty; %nterest; Date and Manner of Payment.
(a) Taxes due and owing to the County of Albemarle, Virg%nia, for real
estate, tangible personal property, and~a~hinery and tools shall be due and
payable in one installment on or before the£fifth day of December of the year
such taxes are assessed; and on all such taxes remaining unpaid after that
date there shall be added (i) a penalty equal to ten per centum of the amount
of tax past due; and (ii) interest thereon at the rate of eight perr~centum per
annum commencing the following first day of July and continuing until paid.
(b) The provisions herein are in no way intended to alter any other
provisions of Sta~e law or County ordinance, the subject of which is not
specifically addressed herein.
(c) If any part of this ordinance, for any reason, is he%d by a court
of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Agenda Item No. 5. Resolution to Accept Gift of Land. Mr. St. John presented a Deed of
Correction to accept a gift of land donated by David J. and Joseph M. Wood.
August 10, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
TH~S'DEED OF CORRECTION made this 27~h day of July, 1977, by and between'
DAV~ J. WOOD, JR., and JOSEPH M. WOOD, II, ~artners,ttrading as Berkeley Partners,
parties of the first part and COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, party of the second part,
WI TNES SETH
WHEREAS, by deed of gift, dated December 28, 1976, and recorded in the
clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in D. B.
611, p~ 388, the parties of the first part conveyed to the County of Albemarle
the property hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.1-286 of the Code of Virginia provides that no deed
conveying property to a County shall be valid unless accepted by the County
and said acceptance appears on the face of the instrument as providad by
statute; and ~
WHEREAS, the County wishes to accept the gift of said property.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties of the first part do hereby GIVE, GRANT
and CONVEY unto the County of Albmmarle, all that certain tract o~ parcel of
land, fronting 218 feet on the west side of Berkmar Drive, in the County
"of Albemarle, Virginia, containing .8 acres, and being more particularly
described on plat of Thomas D. Blue, dated December 28~ 1976, attached to and
recorded With the aforesaid deed,-~ated December 28, 1976, and~racdrd~daim
said Clerk's Office in D. B. 611, p. 388, and being a portion of the property
acquired by the parties of the first part b~ deed from Charles W. Hurt and
wife, dated May 3, 1957, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court
of Albemarle County, Virginia, in D. B. 332, p. 3, and by bill of sale from
Sterling R. Decker, dated October 29, 1971, and bill of sale from George
Gilmer and George Gilmer, Jr., dated October 29, 1971, both of which are attached
to decree of the Circuit Court of the City of Charlottesville, Virginia,
in the chancery cause of B. B. Woodson, Trustee, v. George Gilmer, entering
November !1, 1971, and recorded in said Clerk's Office in D. B. 497, P. 1, and
by deed of exchange from Caleb N. Stowe, et al, dated September 28, 1972, and
recorded in said Clerk's Office in D. B. 517, P. 264.
This conveyance is made subject to all easements of record and more
particularly to the drainage easement along the southern boundary of the
above described property.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.1-286 of the Code of Virginia
and pursuant to resolution of~vthe Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County~
Virginia, adopted at its meeting on August !C, 1977, the County ~f ~lbemar!e
doth hereby accept the gift of the hereinabove described property.
Motion was offered by Mr. ~oudabush to acaept this gift of land from David Jo, Jro and
Joseph M. Wood, II; to approve the draft of the Deed Sf Correction; and to authorize the
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to sign same after signatures of the Woods' have
be~n obtained. Motion was seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 8. Appointments.
Agenda Item No. 8a. Appointments-Parks Committee.
No Board member had names of appointees to offer.
Agenda Item No. 8b. BOCA Code Board of APpeals.
Mr. Roudabush offered motion .to reappoint Mr. Joseph F. Birckhead for a term which will
expire on August 21, 1982. Motion was seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 8c. Land Use ~lassification Appeals Board.
MOtion was offered by Mr. Roudabush to reappoint the following three members to terms
w~ib.h'~will expire on September 1,.1979~. Messrs. ~an M. MauPin, Samuel Page and Montie Pace.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by~the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorr~er~ Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 9. Claim for Injury at Mint Springs Park.
Mr. Agnor said he examined a written statement from the on-duty lifeguards and previous
cases brought before the Board of Supervisors as ~e!l as the Virginia State Code. He
presented a memorandum to the Board recommending that they pay a claim of $15.00 for injury
to Miss Lisa McCauley. He added that fOl!~ng~d~tribut±on~of ~is memorandum to Board
August 107 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
wished to change his recommendation and not pay the claim. Mr. St. John said Counties in Vir
are immune by State law to the payment of claims for personal injury arising from the 0Perati~
of any County activity. This immunity is known as "sover'eignhimmunity" If a ICounty voluntar
pays a claim, no matter what amount of money or circumstanee is?~involved, it puts itself in a
position of waiving its immunity for Other claims. Additionally, such voluntary payment of
a claim can be~.considered an illegal diversion of public funds by a county board of supervisor
since the State law providing the immunity is intended to protect public fmnds from being
diverted from their normal use of administering county~g~vernment and?placing these funds in
the hands of persons that are not entitled to receive them by State law.
Motion to deny the claim and notify Miss McCauley of this denial was offered by Mrs.
David seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher~ He~ley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
The Board recessed for lunch at 12:15 Pi~M. and recon~ened at 1:36
Agenda Item No. 18. Tom Hill: Albemarle Hous±ng Improvement Program Quarterly Report.
Mr. Hill presenved copies of the first year progress report to the Board°
"June 30, 1977
FROM: Tom Hill, Executive Director
RE: Year I Progress Report
Goals
Year I
Major Rehabilitations ~6
Emergency Repair Jobs 9
Funds Appropriated
Funds Required (Spent)
Surplus to be refunded to County
Accomplished Persons Elderly Persons
Year I S~rv~d~ Served (%)
6
27 69 37 '~'~53~n kmn
- ' d
General Operating County Grants Labor Supp¢
~'~i~'~25,000 15,000 30,100
23,959 12,464 30,100
1,043 2,536 0
Total Cost of Ail Work Not Including Labor
Total Cost of Labor and Operating Support
Total Cost of Improvements
Estimate Value of Improvements if Done Conventionally
"Sweat Equity" Obtained by Families
$23,116
$51,776
$74,892
$102,550~
Mr. H~ll then presented slides for the Board to view showing houses before and after AHIP
assistance.
Agenda Item No. 19.
make her presentation.
Vivian Gordon. Mrs. Go~don was present at the August 3 meeting to
Agenda Item No. 20. Report on Updating_the Circuit Court Clerk's Office.
Mr. Fisher sa~d copies of a report from Mr. Hugh L. Stovall, Clerk of the Circuit Court,
Fourth Judicial Circuit of Norfolk, Virginia, dated July 11, 1977, had been distributed to
all Board members. Present at the meeting w~re Mrs. Shelby Marshall, Clerk of the'~Circuit
Court for Albemarle County and Mr. Harry T. Marshall, Chairman of the Bar Association's
Committee on Courts and Clerks. Mr. Marshall said no one had had the opportunity to get
together and assess the r~p~rt?.in detail. Mrs. Marshall said some of the recommendations
regarding custodial services to the Clerk's office have been discussed with Mr. Calvin Jones
and most of them fully taken care of. Mr. Fisher said that sinoe the Clerk and the Bam~~'
Association have not met and discussed the other recommendations he could see no reason to
continue the discussion at this time.
Agenda Item No. 10A. Appropriatimns: Rann Preserve.
Following the ree~mmendation of Mr. Agnor, motion was offered by Mrs. David,
seconded by Mr. Dorrier to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $425.00, be and the same hereby is transferred from the General Capital
Outlay Fund and coded to 19W.1-600.1, for appraisal of the Rann Preserve.
The foregoing motion was carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Ite~ No. 10B. Appropriations: Health Center Expansion.
Mr. Agnor explained that a loan in the amount of $30,000, to be repaid when the Federal
funds for this project are r~eceived, is required to pay contractor fees at this time.
was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Roudabush to adopt the f~!lowing resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County~ Virginia,
that $30,000, be and the same hereby is transferred from the General Fund and
coded to 18B.1A, Health Center Expans~mn~ for a loan to be repaid when Federal
funds are received.
Motion
~nia
is
'.ly
August i0, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
AgendaZItem No. 10C. Reappropriation for Joint Security Complex.
Mr. Agnor presented a request to reappropriate unexpended grant funds in the amount of
$350.00 for an adult education program at the Joint Security Complex. Motion was off~red
by Mr. Henley~ seconded by Mr. Roudabush to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors-~0f Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $350.00 be and the same hereby is transferred from~the
Jail Fund and coded to 190-611.
The foregoing motion was carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 11. Receipt of Audit for the General District c6~rt~f~r~Fiscal Year
Ending June 30, 1976, was received.
Agenda Item No. 12. Receipt of Audit for the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District
Court for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1976, was received.
Mr. Fisher noted that an audit for the County Clerk and Clerk of the Circuit Court of
the County of Albemarle, Virginia, for the calendar years 1976 and 1975 had been received
from the Auditor of Public Accounts.
Agenda Item No. 13. Statement of Expenses for the Director of Finance, Commonwealth's
Attorney and Sheriff's Department were received for July, 1977. The statements were presente~
by Mr. Agnor and motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush to approve the statements as presented.
Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush,
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 14. Statement of Expenses for the Regional Jail for the month of
July, 1977, was presented. Motion was offered by Mrs. David, seconded by Mr. Dorrier to
approve the statement as presented. The foregoing motion was carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Ia~het~a.
Agenda Item No. 15. Regional Jail Report (State Department of Corrections), July,
1977. Statement of expenses for operation of the Regional Jail, elong with summary statement
of prisoner days, statement of Jail Physician, paramedic salaries and salary of the
classification officer weme presented. On motion by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Mrs.
David, these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded
Vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Ia~hetta.
Agenda Item No. 16. Report of the Department of Social Services for June, 1977 was
received in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52.
Agenda Item No. 17.
as information.
Report of the County Executive for July, 1977, was presented
Agenda Item No..21. Petter Daly: Report on Section 8, Rent Supplement Program.
Mr. Peter Daly, Housing Coordinator, was present and presented his Section 8 Rent
Supplement Program Progress Report ~for the period from March ! to August 10, 1977.
" The Section 8 Rental Assistance Program was approved by the Board of
Supervisors last fallland delegated to the Housing Coordinator for
administration.
It is a cash transfer or welfare type program that pays a portion of the
participating family's housing costs. The~program is funded through HUD and
administered for the areas of the state without a local housing authority by
the Virginia Housing Development ~Uthority.
The program was planned to begin on March 1, 1977. However, because
August 10 1 ( - tin~4_)
did not sign the contract with VHDA until April 29th. Therefore we were not
able to actually enroll famili~s~a~d sign leases until after May l, 1977.
Even after the contract was signed between VHDA and HUD administering the .
Section 8 program in Alb~m~te6i~Cm~y'i~as~m~de difficult by the extremely
low maximum housing cost~lev'els established by HUD (known as Fair Market RentSl)~
After repeated inquiras~ letters, a detailed report and one trip aach to
Washington and Richmond, some increase was granted. Below theo~riginal, existing,
and requested fair market rent levels are indicated. Until the requested
lev~ts are reached the Section 8 program will never be administratively
f~asible in Albemarle County. This is of serious concern because administrative
costs after the first year are reimbursed'to the County on the basis of the
number of units under lease.
Fair Market Rents
Number of Bedrooms
March !, 1977
August !0,. 1977
Requested by the
Housing. Coordinator
1 Bedroom $144.00 $181.00 $209.00
2 Bedrooms 172.00 217.00 229.00
3 Bedrooms 199.00 252.00 284.00
4 Bedroi~ms 217.00 274.00 310.00
"~.'~ ill,he following is a statistical profile of the SectiOn 8 program as of
August 10, 1977. Planned or target goals established by VHDA and HUD are noted
and actual achievements are indicated. It'shoul~d be'remembered that the entire
program is two (2) months behind schedule because of the delay in the contract
sig~ing~ Target projections are those, original!y intended for June lst~ now
moved to August 1st, 1977.
Famllies Znterviewed and Applied:
VHDA - HUD Target for
August 1~ 1977
n/a
Actual
August 10,1977
57
Families Certified Eligible:
n/a 40
Awaiting Certification:
n/a 17
Under Lease: 49 15
Under Lease as of August 15, 1977:
67 24
One Bedrooms Under Lease~
8 5
Two Bedrooms Under Lease
18 3
Three Bedrooms Under Lease
12 5
Four Bedrooms ~nder Lease
11 2
These figures indicate two things. First, until the fair market rents are raised
there will be little or no chance of achieving the leasing schedule, particulariy
in the tight local rental market. Second, we are getting m~e~oneaa~d%Zh~ee bedroom
households, rather than the more expensive two and four bedroom households projected
by HUD. If this t~end continues we should have no problem staying within our
f~nancia~ allotment Of $440,904.
Administrative Expenses
Administrative expenses are nearly 100% covered for the first year of the
program. Salary expenses incurred between February 1, 1977 and May t, 1977, will
also be covered.
Administrative expenses after the second year will be covered by a "piece work"
administrative fee of $7.85 per unit per mnnth.
~ To date only $47.50 has been received from VHDA. Requests for expenses
from February 1, 1977 to August 1, 1977 are now pending. A reimbursement is
expected soon.
Problems.
1. The Section 8 program has proven so burdensome and odious from a
paperwork standpoint that it consumes~nearly 90% of the Housing Coordinato~s
time. This should be reduced considerably now that there is a secretary in
the office and once the units are under lease.
2. The full two hundred (200) units cannot be put under lease with the
current rental market and low fair market rents. These rent levels have already
resulted in the concentrating of tenants with landlords with less than savory
reputations in order to fi'nd housing. Unless raised, the fair market rents
will defeat the goals ~f the program."
Mr. Fisher requested Mr. Daly to provide quarterly reports to the Board~and particularly
on procedures for following up on rentals.
August 10, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 24. Other Matters Not on the Agenda from Board Members and the Public.
Mr. Fisher said he received a letter from MrsQ Wayne Harbaugh of the Planning District
Commission staff dated August 5, 1977. The letter has several items discussing the Comprehens
Plan~ He suggested each Board member place it with other material concerning the
Comprehensive Plan and~hat copies of the letter be given to the consultants on the project.
Mr. Fisher noted a copy of the June, 1977, Civil Digest~ dealing with the 'YPrivacy
Protection Act" he had received. He felt it important that all county staff and elected
of£i~a~als be brought up to date on the laws dealing with personal information.
Mr. Fisher read a letter received from Mr. John Herridon, Chairman of the Fairfax
County Board of Supervisors, advising the adoption of a~Beverage Container Ordinance to
become effective on S~ptember 1, 1977 and urged the adoption of similar legislation in
Albemarle County.
Notice was received f~om the Virginia Housing Development Authority of a public hearing
to consider the implementation of an energy conservation and rehabilitation loan program
to provide low interest rate loans to persons and families of low and moderate income to
make improvements to their homes. Mr. Fisher noted that although the hearings had already
taken place, written comments would be accepted.
Mr. Fisher said notice was received from the Virginia Employment Commission regarding
a new program for employment of youths. This CETA program would employ young people between
the ages of i6 to 19 in either part-time jobs while completing school or full time,positions,
in the area of public works. Mr. Fisher then gave ~ files to Mr. Agnor and suggested that
if any Board members had ideas for County projects which may use this type of employment to
contact Mr. Agnor as soon as possible°
Agenda Item No. 22. Work Session on Crozet Housing Project.
Richard A. Goodling from Farmers Home Administration was present.
Mr. Fisher noted that Mr.
Mr. Goodling said he was present to explain his reasons for requiring an environmental
impact study on this site. He is interested in a housing project for the elderly in Albemar
County, however, after the Board of Supervisors approved the site now under consideration, he
received comments from those citizens in opposition to this site asking for information from
F.H.A.'s legal department. Mr. Goodling said he was then threatened with a law suit by
F.H.A.'s attorney. Because of the controversy which has surrounded the Green Springs situati~
in Louisa County and the ensuing litigation, he took the position that an environmental
impact study should be required on this project. This decision has now been reaffirmed by
his legal people in Washington. There is also another consideration; that being HUD's
knowledge that there is an alternate site which could be used for this project. This alterna~
site better fits the criteria used for apartment sites. Mr. Goodling said his history shows
that he likes to work with low and moderate income people and this exercise is not being done
to stop the project. Mr. Fisher asked how long it takes to complete this type of study. Mr.
Goodling said about six months. Mr. Fisher asked who would pay for the study. Mr. Goodling
said, the applicant, Jordan Development Corporation, would pay a part of the cost with the
remainder being paid by the Federal government.
Mr. Fisher said that HUD and FHA have before them applications for funding only on a
single site. He asked if there were any assurance that there would not be opposition to the
alternate site mentioned. Mr. Goodling said the citizens in opposition to the proposed site
had assured him that they would not oppose the alternate site. If there were ne opposition,
no environmental impact study would be required. If the 27 sewer connections allocated to
the proposed site were distributed to the people in Crozet, this would be considered in the
environmental study. Mr. Fisher said it made no difference which site was chosen; both sites
would be using the Brownsville Sewage Treatment Facility.
Mr. Goodling said there was one other apsect of this application to discuss. He was led
to believe that the first 28 units were only part of an application for 80 to 108 units. He
and his staff feel there must be a minimum of 50 units in order to have proper management for
this type of project. FHA would not fund a small project of this type if the HUD grant were
not attached to same because it is not felt the loan would be repaid. Mr. Fisher said the
Board did not commit itself to more than 28 units on the grant application. Mr. Peter Daly,
Housing Coordinator, said more units were considered and discussed at the Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors meetings on the rezoning of the property. It was felt that if the
property had a potential for a larger project, it would be easier to have the property all
rezoned at one time. However, the applications filed with Farmer's Home were for only 28
units. Mr. Goodling said he was aware of that, but was led to believe that the project would
be phased. Mr. Henley said the Board has never rezoned any property for more units than its
available sewer hookups. Mr. Goodling said there are 54 hookups available to the alternate
site.
Mr. Dorrier asked if the fact that the application is for 27 units rather than 80 un~ts
effected Mr. Goodling's decision. Mr. Goodling said the nu.mber of units had nothing to do
with requiring an environmental impact statement. Mr. Fisher said he appreciated Mr. Goodlin
appearing today to explain his reasons for requiring an environmental impact study. It is
now the Board's decision as to whether or not to look at the alternate site. At 3:50 P.M.,
Mr. Fisher called a recess and the Board reconvened at 4:00 P.M.
August 10, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Daly for a report on what had happened since the meeting last week.
Mr. Daly said Mr. St. John, Mr. Kradravetz and himself had spoken with the HUD attorney by
telephone on Monday and discussed the questions raised by the Board last week. He had
drafted a letter setting out the following questions:
What will be the County's responsibility to HUD after the completion
of the grant and transfer of the property?
At what point in the completion of the grant related construction could
title be transferred to Jordan? (i.e., before construction, during or
after?)
Could the County contract with the Jordan Corporation under HUD guidelines,
to perform the construction of the roads, utilities, and senior center on
a "draw-down" or voucher basis?
Can the County transfer title to the senior center to the Jordan Corporation
at any time or must it hold title in perpetuity? If title can never be
transferred could we have a copy of the regulations governing leasing or
other arrangements for management?
Will any HUD restrictions prevent the Jordan Corporation from giving a
first mortgage to the housing finance agency?
What record keeping requirements will the County have related to the
grant administration and when will the HUD audit(s) be conducted?
Mr. Daly said he has asked for a reply to these questions in writing although answers
have been given verbally to all but No. 4. Mr. Fisher said the County Attorney should
review Mr. Daly's letter before it is mailed.
Mr. Kradravetz said he had just been handed a response to the letter written to Mr.
Goodling requesting notification to the applicant about the requirement for an environmental
impact study. Mr. Fisher said when the Board had further information about this project,
another meeting would be scheduled.
Agenda Item No. 23. Discussion of the Reservoir Ordinance. Mr. Fisher said the Board
had received a new draft ordinance dated August 4, 1977, and requested Mr. Agnor to give a
report.
Mr. Agnor said he had contacted Betz Environmental Engineers and asked them to review
the staff's work on the ordinance. This review took place with the Citizens Advisory Panel,
as well as the Technical Committee of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. The ordinance
dated August 4th does not have the technical appendices attached, but Dr. Frank Browne of
Betz has brought the~appendices today. Yesterday, the Rivanna Authority met to receive the
ordinance and it was noted that the one dated August 4, 1977, had not been completely edited
so Mr. Agnor presented a new ordinance dated August 9, 1977, and the technical attachments.
Mr. Agnor said the August 9th version of the ordinance has had complete review, but the
technical attachments have noT. Mr. Fisher asked the basic changes made in the ordinance
since the first version was handed out. Mr. St. John said the first draft contained a
Section II which prohibited land-disturbing activities within the five-mile arc of the
reservoir. That provision has been dropped and there is no definition of "immediate drainag~
area" in this newest version. This new ordinance is regulatory rather than prohibitory; witt
one exception. No one can have a sewage treatment facility within 200 feet of any tributary
A citizen can do just about anything once a plan or program for controlling runoff is
approved by the runoff control officer. The other changes were of a technical nature.
Dr. Browne said some of the guidelines attached to the original ordinance talked about
implementing environmental performance standards requiring that all post-development runoff
not exceed what the Betz Report showed to be the loading for undeveloped land. Given in the
Report were total values for the whole watershed. These values can vary and change with the
type of soil conditions and in some cases would be unrealistic. Therefore, it was decided
that the developer should make two types of calculations. First, the typical annual runoff
without any development. Second, post-development conditions of runoff. Basically, the
developer would have to show that these two are equal or less than pre-development condition~
Dr. Browne then gave several examples which will be given to aid the developer in arriving al
these calculations.~
Mr. Fisher said he had hoped t.he Board would be ready to advertise the ordinance for
public hearing by now. He is frustrated and asked what problems exist in getting all of the
information back to the Technical and Advisory Committees for their reactions. Dr. Browne
said all of the manuals used for this type of program are being reviewed more carefully than
ever before. Each~day new information comes out on the effectiveness of these practices.
Mr. Fisher said it sounds like there is never a place to stop because something new is alway~
being learned, but the Board cannot deal with an ordinance in this manner. Somewhere there
must be an engineering practice that can be accepted, adopted, and tried until the County hat
some experience under the ordinance. Dr. Browne said it will take some time, possibly four
or five months to develop these standards, and the Board is pushing for four or five weeks.
Mr. Fisher said he thought the agreement signed by Rivanna stipulated that the Board would
have an ordinance for advertisement by this time. Dr. Browne said the original agreement wa~
for Betz to review the staff's work on the ordinance. This was done, but before starting to
write the attachments, they had to see that the ordinance was acceptable to all parties.
After this was done, they began to write a skelton for the attachments and that is where the
work has progressed to this date.
August 10, 1977 (Regular-Day Meeting)
Mr. Roudabush asked if the ordinance could be adopted with what has been drafted to date
as the basis for the standards, then amend the ordinance when more specific standards are
available. Mr. St. John said the staff assumes that there will be someone ready to apply for
one of these permits the day after the ordinance is adopted and the standards are presently
too vague. Also, the ordinance states that the runoff control officer is to prepare and
adopt guidelines for calculation of pre-development and post-development characteristics of
runoff and for runoff control measures. These technical appendices will be the guidelines
and the ordinance cannot be adopted when they have not yet been drafted.
Mr. Dorrier said this ordinance will apply to all water supply impoundments in the
County and he wonders if such stringent controls are needed throughout the County when other
water impoundments do not have the same problems as those associated with the Rivanna Reservo~
He asked if controls could not be limited to one area where the results can be measured. Dr.
Browne said other water impoundments may not have the same problems now, but could have them
in a few years.
Mr. Agnor said it appears that all involved will have to accept the fact that adoption
of this ordinance will take the full 90 days. If four additional weeks'ar~ needed to'complete
drafting of the technical appendices, there will still be three and one-half weeks to complete
the Board's work and advertise the ordinance. Since the technical apsects are of no particula~
interest to the Board, the remaining work sessions could be devoted to settling issues such
as that just raised by Mr. Dorrier.
Mr. St. John said the Board will receive questions as to how much it will cost the
developer to comply with the requirements of this ordinance. The Rivanna staff has been
working on an example and this should be presented along with the ordinance.
Mr. Fisher said he would like to suggest that Betz has not fulfilled its contract. Dr.
Browne said he did not think anybody understood the scope of the contract which was basically
to review the drafted ordinance, make comments, and write some technical data. The contract
did not cover a manual such as that now being developed. Dr. Browne said he feels what is
being drafted goes one step further than anything presently existing in the country because
there is a more definitive problem in Albemarle. Mr. Henley said he likes what he has seen
so far and he feels the staff will get it straightened out. Mr. Fisher felt everythi~ng
should be in the Board's hands for advertisement by September 7th. Dr. Browne said the
Technical Committee will have to meet and decide how detailed the manual should be. This can
probably be accomplished in four weeks; without technical drawings.
Mr. St. John said this ordinance will probably stand or fall on its enforcement. This
will depend on which department is assigned to do the work, how many'people are working in
that department, etc. Mr. Fisher said that question can be decided next week and suggested
1:30 P.M. on August 17th as the time for continuing this discussion.
Not Docketed: Mrs. David said she feels the Board should state its intention to make
certain changes in uses allowed in the A-1 zone of the Zoning ordinance. She gave as an
example:
Community Centers, A-1 zone, by special permit.
Nursing homes and hopsitals, B-1 zone by right;
A-i, R-3 and CO zones by special permit.
Hotels, B-1 zone only.
Inns, A-1 zone with special permit.
Motels, A-1 zone by special permit; B-1 zone by right.
Mrs. David said the Board will be hearing a petition next week for a life-care center.
She felt it would be better to anticipate that this type of.facility will be requested in the
County rather than doing a tortured interpretation of the ordinance. In order to take care
of such uses,she suggested that the ordinance be amended to provide for life-care centers,
and possibly other housing for elderly persons, in the A-i, R-3 and CO zones, by special
permit. Currently this is being handled by putting in an RPN category and she did not think
that is a reasonable assumption. Mr. Fisher said it was too late to make a change before
hearing the petition next week, and at 5:45 P.M. requested a motion to adjourn this meeting
until August 17, 1977, at 1:30 P.M. in the Board Room. Motion to this effect was offered by
Mr. Dorrier, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
~ ..... Ct~grfnan