Loading...
1976-10-13 / October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 13, 1976, at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Charlottes- ville, Virginia. Present: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F..Anthony Iachetta and W. S. Roudabush. Absent: None. Officers Present: St. John. County Executive, GuyB. Agnor, Jr., and County Attorney, George R. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Mr. Fisher, who reported on a visit from an Italian delegation from Poggio a Caiano made as part of the Bicentennial Celebration. Mr. Fisher also announced that the Board will have a special meeting on October 20 to discuss appointments to various boards and commissions. Mr. Agnor said City Council is having a one-hour public hearing on Monday, October 18, for the purpose of~hearing ,comments to clarify the position of the City in requesting the United Postal Service to keep an office in the downtown area. He will attend this meeting for the County. Agenda Item No. 2. Introduction and Appointment of a 4-H Agent. Mr. James Butler of the County Extension Office introduced Dr. Wayne Keffer the new district agent who in turn introduced Miss Melinda May Wampler. Dr. Keffer asked that the Board appoint Ms. Wampler as '4-H Agent for Albemarle at a beginning salary of $5,580. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, and passed by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Dr. Keffer noted that Mr. Butler had received the Distinguished Service Award given by the Virginia Association of Extension Agents at their annual meeting in August. Agenda Item No. 3. Approval of Minutes: February 4, February 19, February 24, February 25, May 19 (night meeting), August 11, September 8 and September !5 (night meeting). Dr. Iachetta noted the following corrections: February 4, page 18, middle of page, change "access" to assess"; page 19, sixth paragraph, change "magniture" to "magnitUde"; page 24,.third paragraph, change "recomment" to recommend"; page 24, sixth paragraph, change "affort" to "afford"; page 25, eleventh paragraph, change "threated" to "threatened"; page 27, change "Gilmer" to "Gilman"; page 30, fourth paragraph, change "If" to "Is"; February 25, page 70, second paragraph, insert the word "only"; September 15, 1976, first page, change "Mrs. Simmers" to "~rs. A. T. Symmers"; same page, change "family-operated~'' to family-orientec third page, under agenda item No. 4; change sentence to read "Dr. Iachetta said these propertl owners should be commended for taking this step on their own."; page 4, first paragraph, change wor~ "down" to "lane". Mrs. David noted the following corrections: February 4, page 19, seventh paragraph, change "minerals" to "run-off"; page 30, sixth paragraph, take out the word "of"; page 31, fourth paragraph, change "costal" to "coastal". Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, to approve the minutes of the meetings noted above with corrections. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 4a. Highway Matters - Secondary System Improvement Program. Mr. Fisher noted that the Board had received a letter from Mr. D.S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, dated September 9, 1976, in which he had asked that the following road projects be dropped because of right of way problems. 1) Route 824 from 0.6 miles east of Route 250 to Route 688 - $75,000 2) Route 668 from Route 601 to Route 671 - $80,000 3) Route 744 from Route 731 to 0.57 miles south of Route 631 - $65,000 . Mr. Roosevelt recommended that the funds allocated to the above projects be transferred to projects as listed below: l) Route 623 from Route 616 to 0.5 miles south of Route 616 - $40,000 (New home con~ struction in this area caused the traffic count on this gravel road to rise by over 50 v.t.p. The~right of way along this route has been dedicated by the builder as part of his constructi The improvement of this section of road was requested by interested citizens at the Annual Road Hearing in March, 1976.) 2) Route 689 from Route 688 tO Route 250 - $100,000 (This route carries over 100 cars per day and is currently gravel surfaced. The right of way has been dedicated.) 3) Route 727 from Route 627 to 1/2 mile south of Route 627 - $80,000 (This allocation will allow improvements to begin on this route. The section of Route 727 from Route 627 to Route 795 is almost three miles long and carries in excess of 100 cars per day. The currenv surface is gravel. The Department attempted to obtain right of way three years ago, but was unsuccessful. The right of way may now be available. Mr. Roudabush said he viewed Route 744 with Mr. Roosevelt yesterday. One property owner is not willing to give right of way and owns land on both sides of the road thereby making it impossible to shift the road in order to make the necessary improvements. Mr. Roudabush asked that the other property owners be allowed two additional weeks to see if they can obtain the necessary right of way, and, if not, he will recommend that the funds allocated for this project be reallocated to Route 623. N~. ~f~h~_~ .~8 h~_ ~.~ f~mfl~r with the ~tl]at~oM oM Route 82~. There are two orooertv October !3, 1976 (Day Meeting) indicated that he would give right of way, if the other owners would, but one other owner would not. That has completely isolated the road. Mr. Fisher said he has talked with these owners and is convinced that the right of way will not be donated and agrees that the money. should be used on another project. Mr. Roosevelt said he plans to do these projects with his own forces. He already has 24 projects ready for construction, so no action is needed this date. This information is presented for the Board's review. -~,- Dr. Iachetta noted Project 643-002-37-C501, for Route 643 from Route 29 North to 1.5 miles east of Route 29 at a cost of $53,500. He said this matter has been unresolved for~a long time and if the right of way question cannot be resolved, he would suggest that this project a.lso be dropped. He said Mr. Clarke, a new owner on the road,, has indicated that he will help the Highway Department in resolving the right of way question. If this question cannot be resolved, he would suggest that. this project also be dropped. Mr. Roosevelt said he will bring this matter back to the Board at a later date. Mr. Fisher asked about Project 0634-5000 from Route 634 from 1.50 miles west of Route 635. Mr. Roosevelt said this is .to replace a bridge. Mr. Fisher then noted Project 0692-6078 for replacement of a bridge over the South Fork, Hardware River. He has received many communications from a lumber company in the area complaining about the reduced weight restriction on the present bridge. Mr. Roosevelt said he hopes to have repairs on the six or seven bridges currently on the list in progress by July-l, 1977. Mr. Dorrier asked about Project 0633-002-29,C502 for Route 633 from Route 29 South to Route 712. He asked when this project will be completed. Mr. Roosevelt said this project is to be stage constructed. To go beyond the present construction, new rights of way must be obtained from Southern Railroad. As soon as this is resolved, the project will continue. Mr. Fisher suggested that any action on Mr. Roosevelt's request be carried over to the November day meeting to allow Mr. Roudabush time to work out right of way problems on Route 744. Agenda Item No. 4b. Highway Matters: Road in Airport Acres. Mr. Roudabush noted receipt of a letter from Mr. Roosevelt dated Septembe~ 24, 1976. Mr. Roosevelt has said that a review of the Highway Department's files indicate that Airport Acres Road is eligible for addition to the Secondary System under the Rural Addition Law if one-half of the Department's estimated cost of developing the streets to minimum standards as established by the Department is donated through the County. If~initial surface treatment is desired, 75% of the estimated cost Must also be donated through the County. Rights of way~ drainage easements and utilities must also be cleared. Mr. Roosevelt has estimated the cost of this project at $25,000. The current Albemarle County Secondary Budget has a $20,000 allocation and as of this date none of these funds have been 'designated for use. Mr. Roudabush said based On this information, he met with residents of Airport Acres last night. This is a 17-year old problem, but it appears that the problem can now be resolved. There were 19 property owners at the meeting who signed a resolution stating they would participate in the costs of bringing this road up to standards. There were.14 property owners not present leaving only six owners who have not answered. The majority feel!that all of the owners will participate and pay their share of the costs. Mr. Fritz Brittain, a property owner in Airport Acres, said he now had 21 signatures on the resolution. 16 owners are committed by telephone, leaving only two who have not given a definite answer. He said the residents are confident they will come up with their share of the money to see this project through to completion. Mr. Fisher asked if any action was needed by the Board this date. Mr. Roudabush offered motion to request the Highway Department to allocate the funds mentioned in Mr. Roosevelt's letter of September 24, 1976, ($11,200) from the Secondary System Rural Addit~onl ~unds, to be used for this project. ~ Mr. Roosevelt said the Board should have a new report submitted by the Road Viewers befo~ taking this action. Mr. Agnor said the Road Viewers have been called three times this year and the State Code allows-~he Board to accept and act on a report from the County Engineer. Since this road has been inspected many times, he recommended t~he use of this procedure. (No second was received on the motion.) Motion was then offered by Mr. Roudabush requesting the County Engineer to review Airport Acres Road and the data presented by Mr. Roosevelt and to make a recommendation to the Board at their meeting on November 10. The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs; Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Fisher encouraged the property owners in AirPort Acres to get complete information. He said the Board, when they vote on this matter~ will be committing about 55% of this year'S allocation of rural addition funds to this project. Agenda Item 4c. Highway Matters: Street Signs: Camelot Subdivision. Correspondence was received from Mrs. Sara Cart, President of the Camelot Home Extension Club, along with signatures of 37 homeowners in Camelot, requesting that the County order street signs. Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, to adopt the following resolution: ..... ~ October 13, 1976 (DRy Meeting) 4O7 AYES: NAYS: WHEREAS, request has been received for street signs to identify streets in Camelot Subdivision as follows: Camelot Drive (State Route 1510) at its southwest intersection with U.S. Route 29 North; Camelot Drive (State Route 1510) and St. Ives Road (State Route 1511) to be erected on the same post on the east side of State Route 1510; St. Ives Road (State Route 1511) and Dorset Court (State Route 1512) to be erected on the same post and on the southeast corner of this intersection; St. Ives Road (State Route 1511) and Barnsdale Road to be erected on the same post and at the intersection on the south side of St. Ives Road; WHEREAS, residents of Camelot Subdivision have agreed to purchase these signs through the Office of the County Executive and to conform with standards set by the State Department of Highways and Transporation; NOW, THEREFORE, 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 install and maintain the above mentioned street signs. The~foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 4d. Amended Road Viewers Report. "Charlottesville,~Yirginia September 23, 1976 Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County, Virginia Gentlemen: We the undersigned Road Viewers~w~e called back in session to review original recommendation of August 6, 1976, regarding the following road: Samuel Miller District - Petition to have approximately 1,965 feet of road at the end of State Route 698 taken into the system. Recommend denial. This property has been subdivided since 1959 and does not quality under State Law. At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on August 11, 1976, Mr. J.D. Huggins revised his request to include o~ly 200 feet northwest. After meeting with Mr. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, on this date to discuss his review of the roadway, it is our recommendation that work outlined in his letter of September 2, 1976, be undertaken by the Highway Department. Respectfully submitted, 1976 ROAD VIEWERS (S~gned) William A. Gray (Signed) John O. Higginson (Signed) Alonzo Jones "September 2, 1976 Re: Proposed Rural Addition~ Route 698-(0ff of) Albemarle Count~ "At the August Board of Supervisors meeting, I was requested to meet with Mr. J. D. Huggins concerning a proposed rural addition from the end of Route 698. I have met with Mr. Huggins and have reviewed the location on the ground. As originally proposed, this request was for 0.37 miles of new roadway. I advised the Viewers at the time that this carried the roadway to an area which qualified as a subdivision; therefore, the road was not eligible for addition. The section now requested is much shorter than the original request. The new request begins at the end of Route 698, and extends approxi- mately 200 feet to the northwest. From my review of the County Land Records, it appears that this section~m~ld be eligible for consideration as a rural addition. From my review of the location, it appears that a~roadway 22 feet wise with a 14ffoot wide gravel surface would be required to meet State Standards. This cross section would require the removal of almost 200 cubic ya~dS.~ of material from the west- side of the existing roadway. My cost estimate for the grading and placement of drainage and base amounts to approximately $2950. October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) ~In my discussions with]?~Mr.~H~ggins he indicated this road would serve three hOuses ocCupied by himself, his brother, and his mo~har. In addition the road serves three other properties, two of which are used as orchards. One of the orchards has access to existing Route 698. In addition to liVing in this area, the Huggins also raise apples for ~ale. The cost per housing unit served is almost $!,000. Thi~ figure exceeds some- what the Department's guide lines for rural additions, but I believe would be acceptable to the Department if requested by the County. I will certainly be available to discuss this matter at a future!~Board meeting if so desired. Yours truly, (Signed) ~. B. Roosevelt Resident Engineer" Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Henley, to accept the Road Viewers Report on this matter. The.motion carried by the fol!'o~i~g recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs..David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. FiSher asked if any further action is needed by the Board on this question. Mr. RoOsevelt said when right of way has been obtained, he will request a resolution from the Board. 'Mr. Huggins was present and said Mrs. Josie Martin has,said she will give this right of way. it was suggested that Mr. Huggins contact the County Attorney to discuss the of ~his dedication. Agenda Item No. 4e. Highway Matters: Milton Boat Launch. (Deferred from September 8. Mr. Fisher noted that a report was received from the County Executive at the September meeting~recommending that this site be closed as a recreational facility because of the nuisance it creates to the adjoining property owners. Considerable discussion was held and the matter was deferred so the Board members could make a site-review. Mr. Garrett Kirksey and Mr. Charles Aimy, adjoining property owners, were present. Mr. Kirksey said the County has erected a sign inviting people to use a boat landing which the County does not adequately police. The County has only a 30-foot right of way, consequently citizens are using his land for turning around, etc. Recently a group of citizens drove through his gate. They were arrested by the Sheriff. Mr. Kirksey said he spent two days in Court and the case was dropped. He now requests that~the boat landing be closed to the public, but the road not be closed since that would landlock his property. Mr. Almy said people coming into the boat landing site have been target shooting on his property. This site is used for purposes other than boat launching most of the time. Mr. Fisher asked is the site is policed by the Parks crew. Mr. Robert Sampson, Parks Director, said the crew from Chris Greene Lake goes to the site once a week to pick up trash and do incidential work. Mr. Fisher asked if the County has tried to obtain additional land for this site. Mr. Sampson said Mr. Kirksey was asked if he would allow the use of any of his land or sell additional land to the County. The answer was negative ~o both questions. Mr. Henley suggested that the sign at the entrance be changed to read "Boat Launching Only". He felt the site is sufficient for the intended purpose. Mr. St. John said the COunty Attorney's Office was asked to look into this question. There is a problem in that the citizen cannot get to the river at all from the strip of land owned by the County without going off to-the sides onto private property. The strip of land owned by the County is level with the old bridge and then drops Sharply dov~ to the river. Dr. Iachetta said the County has posted a sign for a boat launch site and has not provided adequate facilities for same. The fact that the site is used for other things is immaterial. The site should be made adequate so as not to impose on the adjacent landowners or be closed. Mr. Fisher felt the site should be made adequate. He said the County has, in the past, permitted the closing of all pUblic access to waterways. He does not believe this is in the best interest of the citizens. Mr. Henley still felt the site is adequate for the intended purpose. Mr. St. John said he has been asked if the County has the Power of eminent domain for recreational purposes. The Code gives the County that power~ Mr. Kirksey suggested that th, County use a site at the Milton (University) Airport which is just a short distance away. Mr. Fisher said the University's offer was unsatisfactory. He said the Board should in- vestigate alternatives to see that the citizens are guaranteed a right in perpetuity to the river. He said he ~0uld n~t vote to close this site until further information is in hand. ~ Dr. Iachetta said the present facility is an imposition ~n the adjacent property owners. He did not think anyone has ever assessed the site to see if ~t Should be used for a boat launch area. He then offered motion to asked the Parks Staff to examine the requirements fo~ a proper boat launch facilitiy and to make recommendations on same. (NO ~econd was received ) Mrs. David felt the report received from Mr. Agnor in September sets out all the infor- mation needed. It was indicated in that report that there is a limited need for the site. Mr. Roudabush asked if a proper facility could be located on property owned by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority at the entrance to Moore's Creek. Mr. Agnor said it probably coul~ be at some time in the future after construction of the AWT plant is completed. Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to. abandon the site temporarily and to ask the Parks Committee to find an alternate site for use as a boat launch. The motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush. Mr. Fisher oooosed this action. Dr. Iachetta said he did not understand this reasoning October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) 40@ Mr. Roudabush said he did not see how the County can make this site adequate without acquiring additional land. He has reservations about using the power of em~m~nta~oma~n~ to acquire land for that purpose. Mr. Fisher asked who is going to take on the responsibility of making sure the County has another such facility by early Spring. Mrs. David said the Parks Committee is intereste~ in trying to provide better facilities for the citizens. Mr. Henley said he thinks the site serves the purpose for which it was established. At this time, roll ~as called and the vote was as follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Iachetta and Roudabush4 Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher and Henley. Mr. Fisher then asked if any member of the Board wanted to move to reconsider the vote. There was no motion to this effect. Mr. Roudabush offered motion that the Parks Committee b. requested to work with the County staff to seek other alternatives for either the replacement of this facility or improvements to same so that it will be a useful facility to County citizens, with a report to the Board as quickly as possible. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley and Roudabush. NAYS: Dr. Iachetta (who prefaced his vote by saying that based on information received, thi~ ~.~,f~-~ motion will not address any new aspect of the problem.) Mr. Kirksey asked what the Board will do to help Mr. Almy and himself during the time this study is in progress. Mr. Fisher said the Parks staff could be asked area more often. Mr. Kirksey asked that .the Board properly post his land so the citizens will know it is private property. Dr. Iachetta suggested the Parks staff be instructed to insure that the policing of the area include that part of Mr. Kirksey's and Mr. Almy's land nearest this site. Mr. Kirksey and Mr. Almy both gave verbal permission to have their land policed. Agenda Item No. 4f. September 8, 197~.) Report on Route 691 re: sewer line problem. (Deferred from Mr. Fisher said Mr. Henley had brought this matter to the attention of the Board. Mr. Roosevelt wrote on September 9, 1975, saying that work in the area of the sewer line had bee stopped and the roadway will continue to be maintained as a gravel road. He asked if any- thing new has occurred since that date. Mr. Roosevelt said no. Mr. Agnor said he was instructed to contact the Health Department about the se~er line problem. Mr. Homer Chevacci was aware of the problem. Repairs to the sewer line have been completed and the line is now functioning in a sanitary way from a health standpoint. The line is privately owned. Research by the Highway Department shows that the line is in the right of way of Route 691 although the owner has taken the position that it is not in the right of way of the road. There are two problems. 1) The line is too close to the road's surface to be able to build over it, and 2) the line is of such an age that it will not stand a bearing load. Mr. Fisher asked what will happen if this road project is stopped. Mr. Roosevelt said Route ~91 was a narrow, winding, gravel road connecting the Greenwood School intersection with Route 250 West. The road has been widened and the alignment corrected from Route 250 t within ~00 yards of the intersection where the sewer line exists. This ~00 yards will conti~ to be maintained as a gravel road. Mr. Henley asked if the Board can take any legal steps to force the complete correction of the problem. Mr. St. John said the Highway Department has the authority under State Code to make any owner relocate a utility within their right of way. If, after proper notice, this is not done, the Highway Department can proceed to remove the utility and leave the property owner on his own. Mr. Roosevelt said he could take action in court, but does not want~to use Secondary Road Funds for this purpose. There are no houses on the section of road which is gravelled. The sewer line can remain as it is. If the Board feels completion of this 400 yards is important, he will proceed to take action. If the Board does not feel this ~00 yards is important enough to spend funds in a Court fight, the road can continue to be maintained as gravel. Mr. Henley said he did not think there would be a big problem in court. At least 12 people have called to say this project should not be stopped while the High~ay D~partment has the equipment on location. Mrs. David felt the Highway Department's position is a commo~ sense position and the Board need take no action at all. Mr. Roudabush asked if this property owner's sewage disposal system would be able to function if the line were moved. Mr. Chevacci said this system is about 40 years old. The sewer line goes along the road and into a field. The exact location of the drainfie!d is unknown. There is a house and the Country Store on the drainfield. The line could be moved but it would have to go on someone else's property. Mr. Roudabush said it seems that everyb~ is boxed in by this situation. Mr. Henley said he hated to do it, but he would surrender to the wisdom of the Board on this matter. Mr. Fisher said no further action will be taken by the Highway Department to relocate the sewer line at the present time. Agenda Item No. 4g. Road project. Discussion of storm sewers, sidewalks and bike trails on Hydraulic Mr. Fisher said this item will take quite a long discussion. He said a special meeting will'be held on October 27, 1976, at ~:00 P.M. in the Board Room to discuss this project wit] representatives of the High~ay Department and staff members. 410 October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 4h. Other Highway Matters not on the agenda. to bring before the Board. No one had any matter Agenda Item No. 5. Other Matters, not on the agenda, from the public. Mr. Joel Cochra~ was present on behalf of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Rescue Squad. He said the Rescue Squad has been conducting their annual fund drive. He want to close out the drive by October 15 and they are presently short $800. He asked that the Board underwrite the Squad in this amount noting that no funding may be necessary depending on contributions in the next few days. Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush to consider~amending the County's appropriatic to the Rescue Squad at the November I0, 1976, meeting, if so requested at that time. The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. D0rrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 6. Homer Chevacci: Discussion of procedures used by the Health Department in approving septic tank permits. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of the following letter from Frederick W. Payne, Deputy County Attoney: "October 4, 1976 :{~, ~ At their meeting of Sep2ember 7, 1976, the Albemarle County Planning C~mmission instructed the undersigned to communicate to the Board their concern with the current practice of the local Health Department in approving plans for septic systems. The Commission is concerned that the Health Department apparently does not consider all relevant planning and zoning considerations in giving approval for septic systems, such approvals sometimes resulting in useless expenditures of money by County citizens. The particular case which has raised this question is the application of Dock Mills (SP 63-76) for a two-family dwelling on .61 acres in the A-1 agricultural zone on Route 53 near Simeon. In this case, a citizen located a single-family dwelling on the parcel in question~with the intent of modifying the dwelling to accommodate two families. He obtained Health Department approval for two septic systems; one to serve each dwelling unit. Then, before obtaining County zoning approval, he proceeded to install both systems 'at a substantial cost. Because of the small size of the lot, the Commission has recommended that the special permit be denied. The Commission believes that this recommendation was consistent with good planning practice and the only proper course for the County. However, the Commission was disturbed that Mr. Mills was apparently misled by the Health Department's approval into making sub- stantial expenditures which may now prove worthless to him. The Commission requests that the Board communicate with the Health Department to attempt to solve this problem so that it will not arise again." Mr. Chevacci said the Health Department does not enforcezzoning. If a citizen of Albem~ County wants a septic tank permit, he applies to the Health Department. A soil study is made and if the soil is suitable, ~he Health Department must, under State Code, grant the permit. The former Zoning Administrator, Mrs. Miller, had instituted a zoning clearance procedure, but during the last year this was changed so the citizen would not have to make two or three trips to obtain a permit. The Health Department disagreed with this change, but it was made 2nyway. Mr. Agnor said he recommends that the zoning clearance procedure be reinstituted. It was discontinued in the interest of speeding up the permit procedure. In doing so, Mr. Mills expended money in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Fisher said this sounds like the proper direction to take with the details being worked out by Mr. Agnor. Agenda Item No. 7. Agency. Ken Ackerman - Grant Request: Monticello Area Community Action Mr. Fisher noted that at a recent meeting of the Planning District Commission the Commission members were presented with an A-95 review from the Monticello Area Community Action Agency for a grant in the amount of $53,000. The County members had heard nothing of this request in advance of that meeting so could not comment on Albemarle County's position. He then asked Mr. Ackerman to appear before the Board today to discuss this grant. Mr. Ackerman said the grant will cover four proposed programs. They are: 1) a Buying Co-op; 2) a community garden; 3) summer food for children; and 4) Food Stamps/Emergency Food. Ail, except the emergency food, will be offered in Albemarle County since the Emergen~ Food Bank has indicated it has enough resources to serve the needs~in~b.~2s area. There is no local match required for these grant funds. Mr. Ackerman said MACAA organized a Buying Club during the past year using a VISTA volunteer to direct the project. There are approximately 100 members to date with 10 famili from the Keswick area participating on a regular basis. A total of 21 order days have been offered with Albemarle residents purchasing items at a cost of $1,387. The store value of those goods was $1,721. Thus, members realized a savings of $33~ or 19.~%. One member purchased $600 worth of goods over a three-month period. Her savings total $120 and could amount to $480 if continued for a full year. This is a significant amount for a family living at proverty level ($5,500 per year for a family of four). The proposed program will serve to stabilize and expand the Buying Club. Program funds will be utilized as seed money with the expectation that the Co-op can be self-supporting by the end of one year. Funds will be used to hire a full-time manager, rent a building to house the program and purchase 'le October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) or rent equipment to support activities. It ~s anticipated that this form of support will increase membership, number of days when purchases can be made, potential savings and participation of members in the operation of the program. It is anticipated that 60 low- income families (300 persons) will participate in the program and savings can be increased by about 20%. This will be possible since items can be purchased in greater bulk and stored in the facility. The financial base to continue the program beyond the first year will be developed through membership fees, service charges and fund-raising activites. Mrs. Frances Moore, a member of the Buying Co-op in Keswick, was present. She said this program is needed because many in the area do not have cars and cannot adequately feed their families. With the addition of a truck, this Co-op can serve the elderly and handi- capped persons. With money for a freezer and refrigerator and rent for a building, items can be purchased in larger quantities and this will increase savings. She urged the Board to support this program. Mr. Ackerman said a Community Garden Program was initiated in Albemarle County in March, 1976. The program was made possible through the time of two MACAA Outreach workers, a donated tiller by FAST, donated seeds, technical assistance from the VPI-SU Office, referrals from the County Social Services Department, and the hard work of the participants themselves. Approximately 25 individual and two community gardens were raised at a cost estimated at $2,250. For the coming year, 50 individual gardens and an acre of co~unity gardens are planned. In Albemarle, the program will be operated on a year-round basis to include planning gardens, preparing plots, planting and preserving food. Thus, the yield for each participant will be maximized. Mr. Fisher asked if this is a program where the people are trained to do the work for themselves or if these gardens will have to depend on salaried personnel. Mr. Ackerman said in most cases the family will be given the"teChnical assistance to plant and take care of the garden, but in cases were there are elderly or handicapped people, the gardens will require assistance. Mr. Ackerman. continued by saying that MACAA has sponsored a summer food program for children for several years. Three sites, serving an average of 30 children each, were operated in 1976. The sites were open for 44 days and provided a meal and recreational activities at an estimated cost of $2,800. Dr. Iachetta asked if this is the same program to which the County contributed funds this past summer. Mr. Ackerman said yes. The County's contribution was used to provide supervisors for the three sites. The money in this grant will be used to provide a coordinator, but that person will not be a direct supervisor.for of the sites. Funds were requested from the County last summer because the U'.S.D.A, funds received could not be~.~used for labor costs. Mr. Ackerman said the intent of the Community Food and Nutrition Program is to improve participation in existing feeding programs, develop self-helD and alternative food production and distribution mechanisms and to provide direct feeding support when other resources are not available. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta authorizing the County's representatives on the Planning District Commission to endorse this application at the next meeting of the Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS' Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Agnor said the. County had been presented with a form from the Office of Economic Opportunity to be signed recognizing the Monticello Area Community Action Agency as the _~ community action agency for the County. Motion authorizing the Chairman to sign for the County was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. At 12:02 P.M. the Chairman requested an executive session to discuss legal matters. Motion to this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. The Board.reconvened at 1:40 P.M. Agenda Item No. 11. (Discussed out of order). Lottery Permit Application: Y.M.C.A. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, issuing lottery Permit as per the Board's adopted policy. Motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 8. Set public hearing date:~ Amendments Zoning Ordinance and County Code relative to certain fees charged for review of site plans, subdivision plats, etc. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, to advertise for public hearings on November 10, 1976, at 10:00 A.M. the following ordinances: 1) An ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Code concerning fees for soil erosion plan review. 2) An ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Code concerning fees for the review of preliminary subdivision plats. October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) An ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance by the amendment of Section 17-6-6 thereof concerning fees. 5) An ordinance to amend Section 15A-9-4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance; said section entitled Sign Permits. 6) ~An ordinance to amend Section 14-1-1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance concerning fees for rezoning. The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dottier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 9. Authorize Chairman to sign lease between the Nelson County Industrial Development Authority/Georgia Marble/County of Albemarle. Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Dr. Iachetta, authorizing the Chairman to sign the following lease on behalf of Albemarle County. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. "THIS AGREEMENT made on the first day of AuEust, 1976, by and between the INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF NELSON COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a political subdi- vision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the Authority), and NELSON COUNTY and ALBEMARLE COUNTY, political subdivisions of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the Counties), provides that: WHEREAS, the Authority has entered into a lease agreement with S.V. Wilkins, Jr. (the Lessee), dated as of August 1, 1976 (the Lease), whereby the Authority has leased to S. V. Wilkins, Jr. certain real estate and personal property in the Counties and the Authority may enter into additional lease agreements with other parties with respect to other properties to be financed by the Authority; and WHEREAS, Section 6.5 of the Lease provides for the payment of additional rent on account of governmental services rendered by the Counties in an annual amount which together with the leasehold tax. imposed under Sections 58-758 and 58-831.2, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, and other taxes and governmental -Charges to be paid by S. V. Wilkins, Jr. pursuant to Section 6.2 of the Lease, will be equal to the taxes and governmental charges which the Lessee would pay if he rather than the Authority owned the fee simple title to the Project,-if the Authority enters into a written agreement with the Counties to pay over such additional rent to the Counties; and WHEREAS, the Authority and the Counties desire to agree, in accordance with Section 6.5 of the Lease and Section 15.1-1382 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, for payments by the Authority to the Counties on account of govern- mental services to be. rendered by them and similarly to agree for payments by the Authority to the Counties on account of such governmental services to be rendered to other parties with respect to properties financed by the Authority in the future (S. V. Wilkins, Jr. and such other parties each hereinafter referred to as the Lessee and the property leased to each respective Lessee hereinafter referred to as the Project); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, the parties agree as follows: 1. Payment for Governmental Services. The Counties agree, with respect to each Project the Lessee of which has agreed to pay additional rent according to the standard set forth in this section, to supply the same governmental ser- vices to each Project and its occupants as if such Project were owned by the Lessee rather than the Authority. The Authority agrees to pay to the Counties, but solely from the amounts, if any, received f~rom the Lessee as additional rent for payment of governmental services, on account of governmental services to be rendered by the Counties, an annual amount which, together with the leasehold tax imposed on the Lessee by Sections 58-758 and 58-831.2,. Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, and other taxes and governmental charges to be paid by the Lessee will be equal to the taxes and governmental charges which would be paid by the Lessee to'the Counties if the Project were owned by the Lessee rather than the Authority. 2. Determination of Amount Due. The Commissioners of Revenue and such other officials of the Counties responsible for the assessment of real estate personal property for taxation shall determine annually, at the time fixed by law for the assessment of property for local taxation, the full assessable value of the real ~estate and personal property, if any, constituting the Project, using the assessment ratio or ratios then applicable to other locally assessable property. On such date or dates there also shall be determined the assessable value (a) of the leasehold interest, if taxable, of the Lessee in the real estate constituting part of the Project pursuant to Section 58-758 or other pertinent law, (b) of the personal property constituting part of the Project pursuant to Section 58-831.2 or other pertinent .law and (c) of any other interest in the real estate or personal property and which is owned by the Authority but the taxes on which are to be charged directly to and paid by the Lessee. Copies of each such valuation shall be sent to the Authority and to the Lessee and to such other person designated by the Lessee. The difference between the total assessable value and the assessable value.of the interests the taxes on which are to be paid directly by the Lessee shall be 'designated October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) The Counties will apply the then applicable tax rate or rates ~o the assessed valuation or valuations as determined by this section and submit to the Authority and to the Lessee, or to such other person designated by the Lessee, statements of the amount due. The Authority, or the Lessee if so requested by the Authority, will make payments to the Counties on or before the dates that tax payments on similar property would be due if the property were owned by the Lessee rather than the Authority and the same penalties and interest that apply for failure to make sure tax payments when du~t shall apply with respect to payments required hereunder. 3. Procedure for Contest. Either the Authority, the Lessee or any assignee or sublessee from the Lessee who has agreed to make the payments required hereunder shall have the right to contest any assessed valuation made or payment demanded, whether the property is owned or leased by the Lessee or by the Authority, and whether the tax or other payment is payable by the Authority or the Lessee, in the same manner provided under the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, as from time to time in effect for contesting assessments of property or other valuations for taxation or levies of tax, including rights to petition the appropriate officer charged with assessment of the respective property or other valuation and to appeal to boards of equalization and courts of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The Counties hereby waive any right which they may otherwise have to object to such procedure for any reason whatsoever, including any objection that payments to be made hereunder are not taxes, but do not waive any objection as to time for filing such petition, request or suit. Rather, such times as provided by law for filing similar petitions, requests or suits with respect to taxes shall control the right to contest any valuation or demand for payment under this agreement. 4. Ot~her Charges. If at any time service charges for governmental services are generally assessed against tax exempt property, the property shall be exempt from such service charges so. long as the Authority makes payments as provided ~herein, but this provision shall not exempt the Lessee from payment of water, sewer and other similar charges which, in addition to taxes, are ordinarily borne by users of the service. 5. Effective Date. This agreement shall be effective and apply with respect to each lessee from January I following the recordation of the Lease between the Authority and such Lessee, provided that if there be any abatement of taxes during the year of recordation, this agreement, to the extent-of such abatement, shall take effect from the date of such recordation." Agenda. Item No. 10. Discussion: County participation - Human Resources Assembly. Mr. Agnor said the Human Resources Assembly sponsored by the City Planning Department i c~nHinming intotab~hird~year~ ~_The purpose of this Assembly is to provide a forum for community coordination of social service providers and to eliminate duplication of efforts. There has been a positive response to the program. Mrs. Karen Morris, Albemarle Social Services Director, considers it one of the most useful mechanisms for cross-agency communicat The third year budget is $8,500. The City is being asked for $4,000 and the remaining $4,500 is to be raised from other agencies. The United Way is expected to make a contributio and the County is requested to consider an appropriation of $2,000. The participants may also be charged a fee to complete the balance needed. Seven, one-half day meetings are scheduled. Mr. Agnor said ~knowing the concern of the Board in coordination of such programs, he recommends financial support of the program in the amount requested. Dr. iachetta said it appears, from the budget presented to the Board, that 17% of the requested funds are for furnishing lunches to the participants~ He asked why this is necessary. Mr. S. Huja, City Planning Director, said it has been found that a great deal of business is conducted over the dining table. The people who attend these meetings from out of town are not highly paid personnel and to ask them to pay $2.00 or $3.00 for a lunch is a burden on their salary. Mr. Fisher asked how many people attend these meetings. Mr. Huja said about 50 or 60. Mr. Fisher askedthe length of the meetings. Mr. Huja said they last from 8:30 A.M. to approximately 1:30 P.M. Mr. Fisher said that equals almost one man year of time. He asked if the number of meetings could not be reduced and still accomplish the same goal. Mr. Huja said it is felt that these meetings save many dollars. The participants usually meet more often on their own. For an example, he said it was found that one family had 14 Out-Reach workers. Mrs. David said she had authored the report that led to the first Human Resources Assembly. At the time, she~had written this report for just the City even though she protest that this should not be limited to just the City because all agencies involved cover a much larger area. Mrs. David said she is happy to see the County a~ked to carry their own weight in this matter. Mr. Fisher said if the County is to participate, he feels the Board should be able to say if the staff can give this much time to these meetings and also have a say as to whether lunches will be included. He felt the schedule could be cut in half and still accomplish the same goals. Mr. Henley said Mr. Huja knows the Board's concerns and he would therefore offer motion to support the Assemblym and-adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $2,000 be and the same hereby is appropriated from the General Fund and coded to 18B.14 for the County's participation in the Human Resources Assemb!y~ The motion was seconded by Mr. Dorrier. Mr. Fisher said he would support the motion on the assumption that the questions raised by the Board will be placed before the Assembly. Dr. Iachetta said he would like to see the result of this effort being toward improving 414 October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 11. (Discussed earlier in the meeting). Agenda Item No. 12. Discussion: Solid Waste Collection System. (Deferred from August 1976.) Mr. Fisher noted that since the initial presentation of the staff's report, Mr. Dennis White had furnished the Board members a new memorandum on projected costs for a county-wide container system and had a briefing session with each Board member. Mr. White said population is the criteria for the number of containers needed for a comprehensive cost estimate. These figures are presented on the assumption that if the County enters into a pilot project, this would necessarily be expanded into a county-wide system. To arrive at a cost he took the total population for Albemarle (now estimated at 46,000) and deducted 5,800 people associated with the University who would not be expected to be taxed for this system. This left 41,000 people, or 12,600 dwellings in the County with 3.2 residents per household. Dr. Iachetta asked how many of these households are rural. Mr. White can he did not know the delineation between rural and surburban and therefore could not say. The maximum number of containers for the whole county is estimated to be 352. Discussions with firms who handle a lot of the apartment complexes on the fringes of the City indicate that they supply 120 boxes of business and there is no reason to think that the County would have to supply this service. This reduces the number of containers to 232 estimated to rent for $44 a month for 12 months or $122,496. This would cover pick-up twice a week. Six rolloffs (large containers used to collect non-resident household trash), with pick-up twice a month, would cost $12,240 in rental for a year. Public relations to help educate people to this program is estimated at $5,000. A driver and truck for site clean up, maintenance, and emergencies could be included in a contract, but if furnished by the County it would assure that the County would have a system that would not degrade scenery or the area around the container. This is estimated to cost $17,000. A~ministrative costs for a secretary to handle communications with the man in the truck and the contract with the hauler is estimated at $2,000. Site preparation costs are estimated at $6,960. Site preparation and platform costs for rolloffs are estimated at $3,600 with land site use for containers and rolloffs estimated at $2,320. This is a total of $165,616 to run a county-wide system for one year or a cost of $4.10 per County resident. Mr. Fisher said initially this project was discussed as a pilot program but he had requested that the Board look at the whole picture before making a decision. Dr. Iachetta said the mass of waste computed on a county-wide basis (2 lbs. per person) is low by at least a factor of two. If the entire county p~pulation is used, this gives an urban area of about 20,000 people and a rural area about the same size. Two pounds per day, per person, is inadequate to predict the amount of waste per day in an urban area. Currently accepted figures for rural areas, based on Office of Solid Waste Management studies, is about 3 1/2 rather than two. On a composite basis, the average is about 4 1/2 and in some areas this has been as high as 5 1/2 to 6. Mr. Agnor said 4 1/2 is correct but Mr. White has reduced that figure by the amount of business, commercial, etc. waste expected from that area. ' Dr. Iachetta said he has some new figures for a study conducted by Purdue University. These figures are specifically broken down into household rural and household urban. Househo~ rural came to 3.9 and household urban came to 5.7 exclusive of commercial or industrial. Dr. Iachetta said this began as a discussion of a pilot project and has now expanded into talk about a county-wide system. He is one of those people who have private trash collection service and would not expect to use one of the public containers. Mr. Dorrier felt the number of users would be far below the 40,574 mentioned in the report. Mr. White said there is no way to know how many people would be using the containers without proper feedback from the people now being served by the private haulers. He has been unable to obtain any figures from the private haulers. Mr. Henley said the Board had a figure for container rental on which to rely. He felt the Board should decide how many containers should be placed for a pilot program and place those containers. He did not think there is a need for a connty-wide system. He said in the White Hall District from Route 810 to White Hall and from White Hall to Charlottesville there is hardly a house that cannot obtain .private service if it is needed. Mr. Robert Hornbarger,a private hauler, said he furnishes services from Crozet all the way to Boonesville. He has been unsuccessful in obtaining business in the Dyke area because there is a private landfill in that area. Mr. Fisher asked the cost of Mr. Hornbarger's services. Mr. Hornbarger said he charges $6.00 a month for once a week pick-up and $4.00 a month for pick-up every other week. He usually gives the customer an option for the type of service wanted. Mr. Dorrier asked how the private haulers were effected in the other 55 counties in Virginia which are now furnishing this service. Mr. Hornbarger said a.few of them went out of business entirely. He personally lost 152 customers when Nelson County implemented their system. He suggested that the Board members go door-to-door to find if the citizens really want this service. A. Mr. Atkins said he lives in an area where he has been unsuccessful in obtaining the services of a private hauler. He is in a position of having to illegally dispose of trash, usually putting it in City dumpsters. However, he felt a container system should be implemen' only as a last resort. He said new Federal legislation, the Resource Recovery Act of 1976, includes grants and other things needed by localities to turn this whole problem into somethi]Lg constructive. He urged that the Board take some action on a resource recovery system. Dr. Iachetta said this new legislation is just an enlargement of previous legislation. The local Resource Recovery Commission obtained a $50,000 grant from that legislation and without having spent that money, he did not think further funds could be obtained. Dr. Iachetta said one part of the problem cannot be solved by separating it from the total problem. The Board started looking at a collection system for rural areas that have little or no access to landfill areas. He did not think the Board can suddenly include 40,000 people without an analysis of what that type or.waste system requires. October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) Mr. William Woodworth said he lives in the White Hall area. He suggested that the Board defer a decision on this question until they have looked into the whole question of resource recovery. He said he has lived in areas where there are dumpsters and they are a nuisance. A lot of things should be studied before making a final decision. Mr. Dorrier said he still feels such a system would be beneficial to County citizens. He would be willing to poll the rural citizens to see if they are willing to financially support such a system. Mrs. David said it seems the Board has gone far afield. She felt the idea was to design a pilot program and then use the results from that to make the bigger decision on a county-wide system. Mr. Fisher said the Board was advised that it would be almost impossibl( to stop this service after it was once implemented. Dr. Iachetta said if you assume that the pilot program is an exercise in how to start a county-wide system, he does not object as long as everyone understands what it is going to cost. Mr. Roudabush said he is still receiving comments from people in the rural areas who feel that since they support their own volunteer fire companies and other things which the County does not furnish, they d~serve this type of service. He is willing to start a pilot program on a less intensive basis than suggested by the staff. Dr. I~chetta asked if proper monitoring would be done in order to determine if this _~xp~riment is worthwhile. Mr. Fisher asked if Dr. Iachetta supported a pilot program if properly designed. Dr. Iachetta said yes, if at the end of a certain period of time there is information on which to make a rational decision of the cost effectiveness of the program. Mrs. David said she would also support a more limited pilot program. Mr. Fisher said there seemed to be a consensus for a pilot program. Mr. Henley said he would like to have an opportunity to help select the container sites in his district. Mr. Fisher suggested that this matter be deferred until October 27, 1976, at 1:30 P.M. Mr. Dorrier recommended that the Board adopt the proposal for having a pilot program in the area outlined by the staff with the location of the containers to be made at a later time. Mr. Fisher said he felt Mr. Henley's request was reasonable. He would also like for Dr. Iachetta to draft a set of controls to be used for this pilot program. Mr. Hornbarger asked that the Board hold a public hearing on this question at a night meeting. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to defer this matter to October 27, 1976, for another work session and ordering the Clerk to advertise this question for a public hearing on November 3, 1976, at 7:30 P.M. in the Courthouse. The motion was seconded by MrJ Roudabu and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 13. Albemarle Housing. Mr. Tom Hill was present. As the first quarterly report from the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program, Mr. Hill showed sl~des~Sf the housing rehabilitations which have taken place during this period. Agenda Item No. 14a. Appropriation: Jail Board. Mr. Sam Pruett, Jail Administrator, was present. Mr. Pruett said the Jail Board has approved two new positions: recreational counselor (salary $8,400, of which 2/3rds is to be paid by the State Department of Correctio~ with almost 1/3rd to be paid by the Division of Justice and Crime Prevention and 5% from the localities) and an institutional counselor (salary $8,0~0, with 2/3rds being paid by the State D~partment of Corrections, and the other 1/3rd coming from local funds). Mr. Pruett requested that Albemarle County participate in these salaries and fringe benefits in the amount of $550.00 and that the Jail Budget be amended in the amount of $9,141.00. These positions will be filled on only a partial year basis during the 1976-77 budget year. Motion was offered by Mr. Dorrier .to amend the Jail Budget in the amount of $9,141.00 and to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $550.00 be and the same hereby is transferred from the General Fund and coded to 18C.5 for ~lbemarle County's share of two new positions at the Regional Jail. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush. Mr. Fisher requested that the Jail Board, in preparing their budgets, show separately positions that are being paid from grants, when such positions become the tOtal responsibility of the localities. The motion carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14b. Appropriation: Crime Resistance Program. Mr. Agnor noted the following memorandum from Clarence S. McClure, Superintendent of Schools: "The Crime Resistance Program was initiated as a Joint project by the school systems in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County at the request of the Assistant Director of the FBI, the Governor Of Virginia and the Superin- tendent for Public Instruction. The objective of the program is to develop a curriculum and provide in-service for teachers so that members of the community can learn how to avoid becoming Victims of crime. Ail of the funds from the State will be reimbursed to the City of Charlottesville with the Albemarle County school system being reimbursed from the City as expenditures are made. October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting). The School Board authorized this program several months ago and specifically authorized an appropriation of $39,050 at it's September meeting. This program will be conducted over a three-year period of time. None of the costs will be paid for with local funds. I would appreciate having an appropriation made at the earliest possible date." Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution with the Understand that the County will be reimbursed for these expenditures: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $39,050.00 be, and the same hereby is appropriated from the School Operating Fund and coded to 17Z for a Crime Resistance Program. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the vote which follows AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14~. Appropriation: Airport Fire Truck. Mr. Vince Tolson, Airport Manager, was present. Mr. Agnor said the Airport has been operating under a waiver of fire suppression capabilities from FAA. In t974, the Airport Board applied for a grant to purchas a vehicle. The grant was approved in February, 1975. The grant provides 82% Federal monies, 9% State, with 9% to be divided equally between the City and the County. The vehicle is scheduled for deliver in October at which time 90% of the cost is to be paid to the manu- facturer. Following testing by FAA officials, the remaining 10% will be paid. As with other Federal grants, the disbursement of funds must be made first, with the reimbursement received later. The unit costs $133,108. Federal and State sources amount of $121,128, with $5,990 requested from both the City and the County. The Airport Board also requests a loan of $60,564 from both the City and the County to meet the payment requirements upon delivery~ Reimbursement of the loan should be within four to six months after delivery of the vehicie. Mr. Fisher asked if this vehicle can be made available for fighting other fires in the Route 29 North corridor. Mr. Tolson said it is a specialized piece of equipment. There might be a mutual agreement worked out with the City so_it~cou%d be used in special cases. · ~, ~ . FAA requires that the fire truck be on Airport property~lt~ exceptmons of eight hours each granted. When the fire truck is not on Airport property, the air carrier must be notified immediately and is required to reduce the size of the carrier during that period of time. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $5,990 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to the General Operating-Capital Outlay Fund and coded to tgJ for expenditures of the Airport Board in the purchase of a fire truck. The motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Motion was then offered by Mr. Iachetta authorizing a non-interest bearing loan in the amount of $60,564, to the Airport Board for the FAA-03 Project, 1500 Gallon CFR Vehicle, with the understanding that this amount will be reimbursed to the County upon receipt o£ grant monies. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dottier and carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14d. Refund: Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company. Mr. Roudabush said the Board had discussed earlier in the year, refunding building permit fees to volunteer organizations which are funded by Albemarle County; Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company being the case in question. The Board had decided not to take any action on the question until all of the fees had been collected. He then offered motion to adopt the following resolutions: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, pursuant to Section 15.1-25 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, that the County Executive be, and he hereby is, authorized and directed to cause to be paid, from !the~Treasury of the County, unto the Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company the sum of THREE HUNDRED SIXTY-SEVEN DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($367.00) as reimbursement for certain building permit fees here- tofore paid by the said Company pursuant to Section 5-3 of the Albemarle County Code. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that $367.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund and coded to 0-1108, Refunds. The foregoing motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: ag AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. NAYS: None. October ~3, 1976 (Day Meeting) Agenda Item No. 14e. Appropriation: Driver Education Range-Westside High School. Mr. Ray Jones, Director of Finance, requested that this item be deferred until the November meeting. Motion to this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14f. Reappropriation: Joint Security Complex. Mr. Jones said there was an unexpended balance at June 30, 1976, in the Joint Security Complex Fund, in the amount of $489.81, representing the unexpended balance of Federal Grant #75A-3271. This balance is to be used to complete the recreation program during the grant period which ends on December 31, 1976. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, authorizing the reappropriation of $489.81 to Code 190-405a, Recreation Equipment, in the Joint Security Complex budget. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iahcetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 14g. Appropriation: ESEA-Title I. Mr. Agnor asked that this request be deferred pending clarification from the Superintendent of Schools. Motion to this effect was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. vote: AYES: NAYS: AYES: NAYS: Agenda Item No. 1Sa. Refunds: Real Estate Taxes. Motion was offered by Mr. Dorrier to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Director of Finance for Albemarle County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and stated that Georgia Marble Company is due a refund of $973.10 on real estate taxes for tax year 1974 and tax year 1975; and WHEREAS, the County Attorney consents that tax bills for the stated years were erroneous; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that Pursuant to Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142, said refund is hereby authorized. The foregoing motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Director of Finance of Albemarle County, Virginia, has apPeared before this Board and certified that a refund is due Robert M. Snead on Parcel #056-48 & 47A on 1975 real estate taxes; and WHEREAS, the County Attorney consents that such refund was occasioned by a duplicate assessment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that pursuant to Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142, said refund is authorized. The motion was seconded by Mrs. David, ~and carried by the vote which follows: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dottier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 15b. Refund: Business License Tax. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, the Director of Finance of Albemarle County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and certified that a refund is due Mrs. J. J. Wiles in the amount of $338.76 on a 1976 Business License; and WHEREAS, the County Attorney consents that such refund should be made because of a change in ownership of East Side Texaco; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that pursuant to Albemarle County Code Section ll-16, this refund is hereby directed. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mrs. David and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting ) Agenda Item No. 16. Set public hearing date: Ordinance for Biennial Assessment of Real Estate. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr.-Dorrier, to advertise for a public hearing on November 3, 1976, at 7.:30 P.M., an ordinance providing for the biennial assessment of real estate at 100 per centum fair market value; said ordinance to be known-as Section 8-1.1 of the Albemarle County Code. Motion passed by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 17. Set public hearing date: Ordinance for tax refunds. Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, to advertise for a public hearing on November 3, 1976, an ordinance providing for the refund of any local levies erroneously paid; said ordinance to be known as Section 8-1.2 of the Albemarle County Code. The motion carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 18. Set public hearing date: returned for non-payment. Ordinance for charging penalty on checks Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, to advertise for a public hearing on November 3, 1976, an ordinance providing fee for passing bad checks to the County of Albemarle; said ordinance to be known as Section 8-1.3 of the Albemarle County Code. The motion carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 19. Committee Report: Central Well Permits. Mr. Fisher said he had not had a chance to read the County Engineer's memorandum on this matter and asked that this discussion be deferred to October 20, 1976, at 3:00 P.M. Agenda Item No. 20. Discussion: Ordinance regulating, limiting and restricting the discharge of waste into the sanitary sewer system of the Albemarle County Service AuthOrity. Mr. Agnor said one of the requirements for Federal wastewater funds and for the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority's operation, is adoption of a local ordinance regulating discharge of waste into the sanitary sewer system. The ordinance .presented to the Board today has been prepared by the consultant for the Rivanna Authority and has been reviewed by both the City and County Attorneys, the Rivanna Board and the Rivanna's attorney. The ordinance has also been adopted by the Albemarle County Service Authority. In order for the ordinance to be enforceable, it is requested that the Board of Supervisors adopt this ordinance. Motion was then offered by Dr. Iachetta to advertise for a public hearing on November 10, 1976, at 10:30 A.M., the ordinance as titled above. The motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dottier, Fisher, Henley-, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 21. Claim against the Dog Fund was received from Albert F. Schwarz.enboe< for one dairy heifer calf~ killed by dogs on September 6. Motionwas offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, allowing Mr. Schwarzenboeck $75.00 for this claim. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley~and Roudabush. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Dr. Iachetta. Agenda Item No. 22. Report of the County Executive for the month of September, 1976, was received as information. Agenda Item No. 23. Report of the Department of Social Services for the month of August, 1976, was received pursuant to Virginia Code Section 63.1-52. Agenda Item No. 24. Statements of Expenses of the Director of Finance, the Commonwealth~ Attorney and the Sheriff's Department for the month of September, 1976, Were received. Upon motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, these statements were approved as read. The motion passed by the vote which follows: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 25. Statement of expenses for the Regional Jail for the month of September, 1976, was received. Upon motion by Mr. Dorrier, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, this statement was approved as read. The motion carried by the fol!owing recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs.~David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 26. Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance and°peration of the Regional Jail for the month of September, 1976, 'along with summary statement of prisoner October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Agenda Item No. 27. Other matters, not on the agenda, from Board members. Mr. Fisher Said he had received a letter supporting use of the Old County Jail building by the Museum of Commerce. He asked if any such request had been presented to the staff. Mr. Agnor said no. Mr. Fisher said he had drafted a form letter to be used when advising appointees of their appointment to the various boards and commissions which have budget responsibilities. This is an outgrown from meetings held with chairmen of boards of supervisors in the Region~ X district. He asked that the Board members review the letter and give their co~ents on same. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from Mr. J. B. Hinch, President of the Chamber of Commerce, thanking the Board for their financial support of the Chamber. Mr. Fisher noted that the Virginia Employment Commission's preliminary estimate of unemployment in Albemarle for August was 4.2%. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from a Mr. Frederick T. Gray, Jr., who is a member of the Virginia Advisory Commission on Outdoor Advertising in Sight of Public Highways Mr. Gray had written in response to a newspaper article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch and had asked for Mr. Fisher's comments on the problem of signs. Mr. Fisher said since the Board has amended the agreement setting up the Jefferson Area Board on Aging, the Board must appoint two more members to this Board. It has been requested that the members come from the Brown's Cove and Keswick areas. Mr. Fisher said he has received many complaints from people in the North Garden area about some outdoor band concerts held this past summer. Mr. St. John said he has had on file for three years an emergency ordinance on rock festivals. He will send a copy to the Board members. Mr. Fisher noted that there is a vacancy on the Parks Committee for his district. He recommended Mrs. Katherine Burton for this vacancy. Motion to appoint Mrs. Burton was Offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Fisher said he had heard that Mr. Preston A. Coiner has resigned as a member of the Resource Recovery Stmdy Commission. He asked is such a letter had been received and was advised that it had not been.- Dr. Iachetta said.he has heard that the University of Virginia will charge the Resource Recovery Study Commission a 15% fee for administering their grant funds. He then offered motion that Albemarle County volunteer to be the bookkeepers for the grant funds. The motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mrs. David asked when the Board members will receive a staff report on placement of fire hydrants in already established subdivisions in the County. Mr. Agnor said it will be ready in about 30 days. Dr. Iachetta said a group of citizens has set an organizational meeting on Monday~ October 18, 1976, at 7:30 P.M. at Jack Jouett School, to see if there is any interest in establishing a volunteer fire company in the Route 29 North area. He will attend that meeting and will say that the fire company must be established on the same basis as the other companies in the County. If any support is received, he can then come back to the Board with recommendations. Dr. Iachetta said he is having a problem with his office telephone. He said the University will not let him connect a separate phone in his office for Board work, unless there is some way the County can assure the University payment each month. He would reimburs the County for this expense. Mr. Ro~dabush said he is disappointed with the reports being made monthly by Betz Environmental Engineers on their study of the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir. Mr. Agnor said a draft report is to be received in November~ Mr. Agnor noted receipt of a rate increase proposal from Central Virginia Electric Cooperative. A public hearing on this rate increase is scheduled for January 24, 1977. Mr. Agnor handed to the Board members a report on the Chamber of Commerce's Convention Bureau contract. He said this will be included on a future agenda for discussion. Mr. Agnor said the County has been asked to comment on an A-95 request for Federal funds to rebuild State Route 637 from 1-64 to Route 250 at Ivy. He mentioned it today so the Board members will know that it will be coming to the Planning District Commission. Mr. Agnor said the Highway Department has a six-year plan for highway contract work. They have been preparing projects with little input from the Board. These are mostly the Highway Department's selection of projects and priorities on that list. Mr. Agnor said this Board should be able to state their ooinions on the oriorities. October 13, 1976 (Day Meeting) reorganized. 'They are supposed to study the long term needs of transportation for the entire area. Mr. Agnor said he feels the request for Federal funds for this project may bear on O~.her~n~ed~'W~hin the corridor. Mr. Agnor noted receipt of a request for a street sign to identify Westfield Road (State Route 1453). Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution: WHEREAS, request has been received for a street sign to identify Westfield Road (State Route 1453) at its intersection with U.S. Route 29 North; and WHEREAS, a resident has agreed to purchase this sign through the Office of the County Executive and to conform with standards set by the State Department of Highways and Transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to install and maintain the above mentioned street sign. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Mr. Roudabush said he had spent four hours riding around the County with the Resident Highway Engineer. Mr. Roosevelt had mentioned that the Highway Department has a $100,000 discretionary fund for bridge replacements. They had tentatively suggested replacement of bridge at Advance Mills (a ~rus~.tyDe span), but Mr. Roosevelt feels that since all the bridges leading to this bridge would not carry a heavier 'load, replacement of this bridge would be premature. Mr. Roudabush suggested that the bridge on Rio Road, just on the edge of the City limits, be considered for this expenditure. Dr. Iachetta said the School Director of Transportation has put together a proposal to put two-way radio cormr~unication equipment.on all school buses. This must go to the School Board, and the State Highway Safety Commission, and eventually will come to this Board for a decision since the County would have to pay 1/2 of the~oe~ts. Dr. Iachetta said he has heard that the Vocational Technical School has a plan developed by an area in Northern Virginia on how to optimize bus routing. He asked if this had been considered for use by Albemarle. Mr. Agnor said he had told the Superintendent of Schools about this study some months ago, but has received no response. At 5:05 P.M. motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David, to adjourn into executive session to discuss property acquisition. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. The Board reconvened at 6:00 P.M. Motion was then offered by Dr. iachetta, seconded by Mr. Dorrier to adjourn this meeting until October 20, 1976, at 3:00 P.M. in the Board Room. The m6tion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. ~ Chairman