1976-12-08December 8, 1976 (Day Me~)
A regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors was held on December 8,
at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building, Charlottesville, 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:
John, County Attorney.
Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive and Mr. George R. St.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 9:10 A.M. by
the Chairman, Mr. Fisher who made several announcements. He requested a special meeting
at 2:30 P~M. on December 15 to discuss with the Highway Department service roads on Route
29 North, to discuss legislative matters and to hold an executive session with the School
Board on property acquisition. He said a notification had been received from Mayor Nancy
O'Brien, that the State Bureau of Outdoor Recreation has approved request for funding of
the Rann Preserve. He also noted receipt of a memo from the Director of Finance, Mr. Ray
Jones, on the Governor's proposal to cut local funds for the next fiscal year.
Agenda Item No. 2. Approval of Minutes: September 16 and October 6, 1976. Motion
was offered by Mrs. David to approve the above stated minutes with the corrections as
follows: September 16, page 2, first paragraph, should say "Mr. Fisher asked if included
in the 30,000+" Dr. Iachetta seconded the foregoing motion and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dottier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 3. Highway Matters.
has
Mr. Agnor said an A-95 request/been received for a $60,000 project on Route 631 from
the northern corporate limits of Charlottesville to its intersection with the existing
Route 631, Rio Road, by the Department of Highways and Transportation. The review
proceedings are being conducted now but the application will not be filed until May 1979.
Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer briefed the Board on the matter. The
notice received is an intent to file for federal funds and is a notification that the
Highway Department intends to reconstruct Rio Road from its present location at the
Vocational Technical Center into the City. As of this date, no plans are ready for
review but when such are developed, another notification will be sent. The Highway
Department is trying to coordinate a city/county project to relocate Rio Road, south of
the Technical Center, and tie same into the Route 250 By-Pass at the McIntire Road intersectic
Hopefully, this will take the majority of traffic off of Rio Road and cause less property
damage. A lot of the impact on Rio Road is created by local traffic. However, once Rio
Road is reconstructed the local traffic could be handled by the existing road with the
exception of the Park Street bridge. Recently, he proposed a project for replacement of.the
Park Street bridge and hopefully this can be started by 1979. Mr. Fisher asked the
possibility of repairing the bridge sooner. Mr'. Roosevelt said reconstruction must be
done. The consensus of the Board was for the Planning District Commission to make favorable
comments on the project.
Mr. Agnor presented a request from Mr. Stuart L. Perry, President of Covey's Radio
and T. V. Service on Westfield Road for erection of three street signs. Motion was
offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS request has been received for. st'reet signs to
identify the following roads:
Westfield Road (State Route 1452) at its intersection
with U. S. Route 29 North, on the west side;
Westfield Road (State Route 1452) at its intersection
with Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852);
Commonwealth Drive (State Route 852) at its intersection
with Greenbrier Drive in Westfield Subdivision; and
WHEREAS a citizen has agreed to purchase these signs through
the office of the County Executive and to conform to standards set
by the State Department of Highways and Transportation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation be and the same is hereby requested to
install and maintain the above mentioned street signs.
Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Zachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Mr. J. Harvey Bailey, County Engineer, said the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
had taken bids on improvements to the Crozet water system which involves the laying of
water mains through a portion of Crozet. A number of water lines will have to cross
streets. The Authority bidded the project and requested two bids; one for boring under
December 8, 1976 (Day Meeting)
of $8,500.00 between open cutting and boring. Mr. George Williams, of the Rivanna Water
and Sewer Authority has discussed the open cutting with Mr. Roosevelt who is opposed to
this method. Mr. Roosevelt felt traffic would be inconvenienced during the construction
and additional maintenance would be required in the future if there is faulty construction
when backfilling ditches and replacin~ pavement. Mr. Bailey favored the open cutting due
to the lesser cost and time required. The main consideration of the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority is the savings and they therefore request the Board to endorse this
method to the Highway Department.
cutting
Mr. Roosevelt said the policy of the Highway Department is not to allow open/~ for
hard surface roads unless the permittee can prove a hardship; rock or a considerable
amount of utilities. Since neither of these exist at the crossings under consideration,
he could not see any benefit to the Highway Department for open cutting. At two locations,
if open cutting is used, traffic will be inconvenienced because that is the the only way
in and out. Mr. Roosevelt said from previous experience, once a road is open cut it can
never be put back to its original state. Therefore, even though he does not have the
power to grant or deny the request, he would recommend against open cutting.
Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department has agreed to let the Authority run the
line on highway right of way which will save the Authority a considerable amount of
money.
Mr. Henley felt the residents would want to save money as much as possible and
supported the Authority's request for the open cutting. Mr. Roudabush felt developers
would have to have the same treatment if the Board took the position that this was an
economical benefit for the Authority. Mr. Roosevelt said if the Rivanna Authority is not
supported by the tax base then they are the same as any other utility company in the area
or any other developer. Mr. Agnor had reservations about the Board endorsing any utility
because Centel or Vepco could request the same. Dr. Iachetta agreed with Mr. Agnor. Mr.
Agnor suggested that the Authority use their own discretion in the matter. Mr. Dorrier
asked the Highway Department's reaction if the Board supported the open cutting. Mr.
Roosevelt felt the Board's recommendation would weigh heavily if they indicated this is
in the best interest of the citizenry. However, he intended to recommend against open
cutting. Mr. Bailey did not feel a precedent would be set because a twelve inch line
was constructed on Route 29 North by the Albemarle County Service Authority and political
aid,. was solicited in order to acquire permits from the Highway Department to lay the lines
through cross-overs with open cutting being used rather than boring. Also, permission
has been given by the .Highway Department in other instances to cross the road because of
economic and other benefits. As for subdividers, they put their utilities in the streets
before turning them over to the Highway Department. He felt the Board has a responsibility
with the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority by virtue '~ the four-party agreement.
Discussion then followed on determination of the water rates in Crozet; will this cost be
paid only by the water users in Crozet. Mr. Bailey said it is portioned out and will be
paid by all users of the system. Mr. Fisher did not feel the Board had any jurisdiction
over the matter. Mr. Roosevelt said his recommendation will be that four out of the five
locations be bored. Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to advise the Highway Department,
that the Board has received through the County Engineer a memorandum concerning the
Crozet water system and are cognizant of the potential savings involved and ask that the
Highway Department take this memorandum into consideration when they receive application
from the Rivanna Authority for a permit. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same
carried-.b~'~thea~o~l~w~ng~re~co~ded ~te:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta expressed his appreciation for the brush cutting on Route ~43. Mrs.
David requested the extension of the 4~ mph speed limit out Garth Road to the entrance of
Colthurst. Mr.' Roosevelt said speed limits can only be changed by the State Highway
Commission and is based on speed studies, therefore, he will have such a study conducted
at the requested location.
Mr. RoudabUsh said last month he requested deferral of action on Route 744 in order
to resolve a right of way problem. He discussed such with the owner of the primary piece
of property involved .and indications are that he will not dedicate the right of way
because his well would be affected and loss of land would result on the opposite side of
the road. After discussing this matter with Mr. Roosevelt, he does not feel it would be
worthwhile to improve the road just to that piece of property.
He then read the following letter containing the signatures of 12 property owners:
"November 10, 197g
Mr. William S. Roudabush, Supervisor~
Rivanna District, County of Albemarle
912 Monticello Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Mr. Roudabush:
We the undersigned property owners residing along State Route
759, located between Routes 616 and the Fluvanna County line,, are asking
for your support and that of the other members of the County Board of
Supervisors in getting improvements made to this approximately one-half
mile of secondary road.
As You are probably aware, efforts have been made in the past, but as yet
no satisfactory improvements have been made.
Within the past three and one-half Fears. ten homes have been constructed
December 8 1.,6 Da-: Meetin )..
the present time two additional homes under construction. The traffic on this
section of road has increased tremendously since these homes and the State
Maintenance Shop have been located on this road.
In places this road is not wide enough for two vehicles to pass safely
without one vehicle stopping to allow the other to pass. This is attested to
in the accompanying photographs. This road is traveled each school day by buses
from Albemarle and Fluvanna counties. To our knowledge there has been one
accident involving a school bus and numerous "near accidents" on this section
of road.
As our representative, we respectfully request that you give us your help in
getting improvements made, and thereby eliminating hazardous conditions on this
road.
Signed,
(12 property owners-names on file in Clerk's Office)"
He asked if the funds allocated for Route 744 could be split between the two above
mentioned roads since they are adjacent to each other. On Route 759, six-tenths of a
mile is involved and 1.4 miles on Route 623. Mr. Roosevelt said he inte~ded~otuse~e ~unds
on Route 727 in order to go further than 1/4 mile. Route 623 has been included in the list of
projects. At this time, Mr. Roudabush offered motion authorizing the Resident High~ay
Engineer to discontinue efforts on Route 744 r~emoving same-from the project list due to the
inability to obtain right of way at this time. Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Mr. Henley said a property owner in his district has expressed concern about the Highway
Department's intention to put in a temporary road around the bridge on Mint Springs Road.
Mr. Coburn, Assistant Resident Highway Engineer, informed him that they intend~to?do half of
the bridge at a time. Mr. Roosevelt said he met with the) location and design engineers from
Culpeper and is having the line changed in tha~hope that the by-pass road can be eliminated
and some damage to the properties reduced. When the plans are returned, he will meet with
the property owners.
Mr. Fisher asked if any Highway Safety funds are available for the deceleration lane
at the West Leigh entrance. Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department sees the West
Leigh entrance as commerical, therefore, is is the homeowners responsibility to build the
turn lane. He could not understand why the West Leigh homeowners desire to maintain
their own roads.
Agenda Item No. 4. Other matters, not on the agenda, from the public.
Mr. Robert Merrill requested regular Board meetings begin with a prayer as done in
previous years. Mr. Fisher requested the matter be discussed at the organizational
meeting in January.
Agenda Item No. 5. Discussion: Bond for Well System-Meriwether Hills.
Mr. Agnor said recently well test procedures were amended to 1/2 gallon per minute
in a 48 to 72 hour testing. Mr. Walter Cushman of Meriwether Hills proceeded to have
tests conducted on two wells serving his subdivisions in an attempt to prove the well
capacity to increase the number of lots served by these two wells. ~Earlier tests on these
two wells under different proeedures had united the total lots to 79, and the subdivisions
had been platted for 102 lots. The tests failed to lift the 79 lot restriction. Mr.
Cushman proceeded immediately to obtain State Health Department approval ~o deepen a third
well, currently not connected to the system, in an effort to provide an adequate water
supply for his 102 lots.
During the period of several months in which the test procedures policy was considered
and ultimately amended, the total building permits ~ssued the subdivisions reached the limit
~f 79, and the InSp~tiohsYD~par~ment ~ea's~theoi~suan'ce ~f~u~the?~p~rmits~dd~i~n~l time
i~sn~w~r~quiredto r~c~ive~H~al~haDepartm~nt~apprO~a~fO~..an~he~ well, plus drill test, and
connect the we~l to the system. A building contractor, who has been building in the subdivisi¢
and has'purchased several lots with schedule to cnntinue a construction program, is now facing
a lay-off of employees while awaiting the alleviation of the water supply matter and the
lifting of the building permit limitation.
With this problem of time, Mr. Cushman asked if the limit of permits could be
administratively lifted while he proceeded with an additional supply. There is, of course,
no authority for this to be done, but in order to respond to his request and attempt
to assist the building contractor with his imminent problem, discussions were held between
Mr. Cushman's attorney, Mr. Landess, and Mr. St. John, Mr. Bailey and Mr. Thompson of the
Albemarle County Service Authority along with Mr. Cushman and the County Executive to
guarantee a water supply to the subdivisions in the event well drilling fails, and thereby lif~
the moratorium on building permits so that construction can continue.
A performance bond has been drafted for discussion today. Mr. Cushman is willing to post
this bond which provides a year for an additional well supply to be obtained, sufficient
for the 102 lots, and if this fails, title to the Cushman water distribution system will pass
to the Albemarle County Service Authority and the bond will provide funds fbr connection of
the Cushman system to~hhe West Leigh system. Th~reJis also a provision for the bond to be
called in the event of a deficiency of water supply during the one year period.
5O0
December 8, 1976 (Day Meeting)
There is presently recorded on the plats of two sections of Meriwether Hills subdivision,
but not on all of the sections involved in this matter.~ a provision for the water distributior
system to be dedicated to public use at such time as the owner and developer (Cushman
Realty and Building Corporation) is'unable to operate the system in compliance with
any order legally issued by the State Board of Health pursuant to a section of the State
~ode, including~ights of appeal,.- There is:'no ~equirement for funds to be.provided to
connect the system-to a public water supply., This bond will provmde for the dedication of
the system for reasons other than an order of the State Board of Health, as well as provide
funds for connection to a public water supply. Mr. Agnor recommended approval of the bond
and requesting the Albemarle County Service Authority for their approval.
Mr. Fisher said endorsement of this bond would not resolve the question of the special
permit which limits connections to 79 buildings. This permit would have to be amended
through regular zoning procedures before any more building permits could be issued. Mr.
St. John said as of now there can be no building permits issued. Mr. Cushman has contracted
with Mr. Forloines who is ready to proceed with construction if he can get the building
permits. Mr. Cushman, in the event of litigation, can show a written agreement that the
previous board entered into with him. This agreement states that Mr. Cushman will turn his
water system over to the Albemarle County service Authority in the event that it drops
below the Health Department's standards and that the Health Department is the agency that
will determine the deficiency. As £ar~-as Health Department standards are concerned, there
is sufficient water. However, there is not enough water according to the Countyrs
standards. Mr. Cushman has been told by the Health Department that he has enough water for
108 connections~ but he is willing to give up his right under the previous agreement and
acknowledge himself bound by the new standards the Board has adopted and the new t~ting
procedures, if the Board will give him the building permits he needs and accept this per~ormaz
bond. The bond states that he will be allowed a total of 102 building permits. Mr. Cushman
will begin work on new wells. If t~ey are not completed within twelve months or if they are
completed and do not provide the necessary amount of water, Mr. Cushman, forfeits the bond
(which is in an amount necessary to connect his present systems with the Service Authority
system) and he relinquishes all of his distribution system to the Service Authority, without
compensation, except for the well lot, pumps, tanks, etc. If at anytime between now and
the end of the 12 months~there is a deficiency in water below the standards which are in
the bond, the bond would be forfeited at that time. If the new well is sufficient, then at
the end of twelve months, his bond is cancelled and he is given back his security funds and
the private ~system.
Mr. Fisher asked if the 79 units was a limit under the central well permit. Mr.
Landess said yes~Mr. Fisher said when the first permit was issued the County Engineer's
office recommended that it go to the 12" water line that was being built. Now something
different is being re~omme~dsd. Mr. Bailey said there is a section of a 6" inch line that
would be in use in conjunction with the 12" inch. Mr. Fisher said this would tie onto the
closest point in West Leigh instead of going back to the 12" main. That would reduce the
flow available for fire protection. ~Mr. Bailey said the W~i system does not now~give
any fire protection at all. They looked first at the problem of domestic water-that could be
accomplished through the existing lines. The six" line could connect and give the allotted
amount of water that 102 lots would need. The amount of the bond is based on the cost of ~
construction of that as an emergency thing. This was the recommendation ~hich~wa~ discussed
with~heAlbemarle County Service Authority ~ndtthey cOnaur~With the recommendation. The?
Service Authority would use that money, in the event they took over the system, to put in a
system that would give fire protection to the area.
Dr. Iachetta asked why a period of one year is needed to find out the capacity of the
well to be drilled. Mr. Landess said this was put in the agreement for caution. The well she
be drilled~and~tested withl~a?m~nth~or~es~ ?Mr.~ishe~'-Said~he~c0ut~not understand
why Mr. Cushman did not go ahead and connect to the public water system and not worry about
wells. Mr. Landess said Mr. Cushman has invested considerable capital in this system. If
he does connect to the public system, he will not be paid for what he has 'done. There is
also the fact that Mr. Cushman likes being in the water business. Basically, the
attempt here is to put up money so that in the event the system is not as good
as Mr. Cushman anticipates, the money is available to immediately connect this line
to an existing system.
Dr. Iachetta felt the third well should be..on line and tested in a month. If there
is more water available, then Mr. Cushman can come ~o the Board for an additional
number of permits. Mr. Roudabush said it would take longer than a month tO~.do the
testing of the lines, installation of the line~, instal~a~ion~O£ the pumps~ and connection
to the storage and pumping facilities. Also, final approval of the Health Department
takes a long time. Dr. Iachetta asked if the bond would assure those people on the
system that they will in fact have water. Mr. St. John said insofar as any bond can do
that.
Mr. Fisher said he has received a number of calls from people presently on
the water _system who have heard about this problem. They have expressed considerable concern
Mr. Fisher did not feel the Board could approve this bond without amending the special permit
that limits the number of building permits and that requires a public hearing. He was reluCt~
to make a decision without allowing the citizens on this water system a chance to voice
their opinion. Mr. Landess asked the nature of the concerns. Mr. Fisher said in the past,
there have been problems with odor, discoloration and air in the lines. He is concerned
about the qua~ity,~f~-'water.~.more-so~han,~Gua!i~y~ ~Mr. St. John said nothing is being
advocated one way or the other, particularly Cutting off the public's right to
be heard. Both the citizens and the Service Authority will have more of a guarantee under
the arrangement set:up in the bond than they presently have. He said there is some danger
that if this matter is not given some exped,ienc~y~.~ the whole thing will fall through and
be back on the existing arrangement. The Service Authority has not acted on this request
at this time. This whole system is in the jurisdictional area of the Service Authority and
they would prefer that there not be private systems in that jurisdictional area. They
would welcome a chance to have this system become a part of the public system at Mr.
Cushman's expense. This is what these documents say is going to happen if this private
system fails. Dr. Iachet~a said a private system within the jurisdictional area of the
Service Authority is another question. The~;~problem is that the builder is ready to build
nt
December 8 19 6 (Da Meetin )
501
present regulations, no further construction can occur until there is more water.
Mr. Landess said when this project started, there was no public water available. The
choices at that time, were individual wells or a private water system. So the private
system started, and a substantial amount of capital was invested and the developer does
not want to give that away. It would be simple~ if the Service Authority took over the syst~
but there is a lot of money invested. Mr. Fisher said.if the Board feels it wants to
take positive action on this request to allow more building permits on a system that does
not now have enough water to meet its own standards, that is something that the Board
has to face. He fait a public hearing should be scheduled~ and all of the people owning
lots there should be notified. Mr. St. John said recent amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
took this out~from under the special permit procedure. It is a matter for a public hearing,
but not a zoning public hearing. Mr. Bailey said the present permit allows 79 building
permits~to be issued and,he did not think this permit should be amend~d~a~i~This would be
a new permit for a new well. Mr. Fisher felt there'wastno choice but to amend the existing
permi2 until such time as there is a new well. Then there could be approval for a new
well system.: Mr. Landess said what is being asked is to issue building permi2sp~r];0~
~o having a new centr~l~:~well]i~permit and in exchange the County will be given a bond
to cover the cost of connecting to the public system. Mr. Fisher said that does not
change anything because the special permit binds Mr. Cushman to 79 building permits on the
combined we~[msystem. If that is going to be changed then the permit must be changed. Dr.
Iachetta asked if the Board can take any action on this.request ~oday. Mr. St. John
said this is very similar, Prooedu~a~yL~.just lifting a building permit moratorium.
Mr. Fisher disagreed. Mr. St. John still felt that the special Us~permit procedure had
been abolished on this type of matter. Mr. St. John then suggested the following
resolution:
WHEREAS, a special use: permit was issued to Walter Cushman
allowing 79 connections to his central well system; and
WHEREAS, it is his desire now to make more connections; and
WHEREAS, the approval of such an application is no longer under
the special permit procedure, but requires that this be done at
a public meeting of this Board; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is in the public interest
to do this with the bonding procedures provided as part of the
record for this meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board does authorize
the issuance of these building permiDs and the acceptance of this
bond.
Mr. St. John said this recites the fact that this was done by special use permit
and the special use permit is no longer applicable, which he believes is true. He does not
think that just because this was originally set up by special use permit that the same
procedure must be used to amend it if the special use permit procedure_has been repealed
with respect to this type of decision. Mr. Fisher said that is aCahange in the
conditions of the permit for the central well system. Mr. St. John said that change no
longer requires the special permit procedure~ That is the reason for the change in the
processing procedure for central wells. Mr. Fisher said he has assured all of the citizens
he has talked with that they will have a chance to comment on this before any change is
made. Mr. St. John said this can be scheduled like any other agenda item and be acted on
immediately.
Mr.-.AEnor said the staff was concerned with the;Connty~'s responsibility in the matter;
also the economic situation of the people laid off from work. The;¢s2aff2fe~t by this
procedure that the County would gain a great/deal and Mr. Cushman would lose a great
amount. Mr. Agnor suggested lifting the building permit limitation, but not issuing
any certificates of o¢cupancy until the well is certified.
Dr. Iachetta disagreed with having a public hearing on the matter. He felt thab--
if Mr. Cushman can eertify the amount of water, only administrative procedures are
needed. Mr. Henley was in favor of the agreement being proposed. Mr. Fisher suggested
the bond be changed so the 1/2 gallon peri?minute will apply to all dwelling units on
the system. Mr. Dorrier asked if the Albemarle County Service Authority would have
the exact amount of bond by next week. Mr. St. John said yes. Mr. Forloines asked
if he could start the process for building permits. No objections were raised.
Dr. Iachetta offered motion to set a public hearing to consider this performance
bond and to lift the limit on the number of connections; same to be advertised for
December 15. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and .same carried by the following recorded vote
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and RoudabU'sh.
None.
Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing: An Ordinance Relating to Issuance of Summons
for Parking Motor Vehicles in Parking Spaces Reserved for the Handicapped. (Advertised
in the Daily Progress on November 24, 1976 and December 1, 19.76.)
The public hearing was opened. With no one present to speak for or against the
ordinance, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Roudabush then offered motion to adopt the following ordinance;as advertised'
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY
OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, OF 1975 BY ADDING A SECTION
RELATING TO ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS FOR PARKING MOTOR
VEHICLES IN PARKING SPACES RESERVED FOR THE HANDICAPPED
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Suoervisors of Albemarle County. V%r~iuis._
December 8~ 1976 (Day~
AYES:
NAYS:
Parking ~ Cars parked in/cerDain-rest~ic~ed spaces.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any operator of a motor vehicle to park in
parking spaces reserved for the handicapped at privately owned shopping centers
and business offices unless the operator of the motor vehicle or a passenger in
the motorvehicle is handicapped.
(b) Any person violating this section may be issued a summons without the
necessity of a warrant being obtained by the owner of the privately owned shopping
center or business office.
(c) Any person violating this section shall be liable to a fine not to
exceed $100.00 for each such violation.
(d) This ordinance shall be effective on and after December 8, 1976.
Dr. Iachetta seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None,
Agenda Item No. 13b. Appropriation:
Survey. (Discussed out of order.)
T. J. Planning District-Housing Committee
Mr. Robert Abbott, Executive Director, Thomas Jefferson Planning District, said the
Albemarle County Housing Seminar Planning Committee had requested his staff to assist
the Committee in undertaking an interview survey of low income housing in the County. The
Planning District Staff agreed to map the locations of poor housing in Albemarle County and
to do a field survey for location purposes when the existing Albemarle field survey proved
to be ~a~eq~ate for use by the interviewers. Mr. Abbott said he has been told that, based on
the just completed survey, a 100% sample of substandard housing in Albemarle County would
require well over 1500 separate interviews, a number considerably greateriilthan originally
thought was needed. It appears that unless the interviews are based on a sample, the time
required would be prohibitive. The Housing Seminar Planning Committee is requemgi~g~$700~00
in funds for a sample. If the Board sees fit to approve this amount, his staff will be
available to oversee this project to its completion. Mr. Abbott said he personally feels this
money would be a most wise investment for Albemarle County.
Ms. Karen Lilleleht, Chairperson of the Committee, said they have spent the last several
months preparing a file on low income housing to be presented to the Board. The Committee
represents four sponsoring organizations--the League of Women Voters, the Albemarle County
Housing Committee, the Charlottesville Housing Foundation and Citizens for Albemarle. A basic
part of the presentation will be the information gathered from combined windshield and
interview surveys of housing. The windshield survey has been conducted by George Evans
and Wayne Harbaugh of the Planning District~Commission staff with the help of a number
of volunteer drivers. The interview survey will be undertaken-by volunteer outreach
workers from various local social service agencies. However, the number of apparently
substandard dwelling units (1500+) makes it impossible for volunteers to conduct a complete
house to house survey during the time allotted. The Committee has contacted William Serow
from the Tayloe Murphy Institute to devise a sample on which to base interviews~and to
correlate the results. His fee for this service is $700.00. The Committee feels the informat
to come from this survey will be vital to Albemarle County and its Housing Coordinator
in allocating money and resources to the low-income housing problem. The Committee,
therefore, requests $700.00 of county funds for this project.
Mr. ~eorge Evans of the Planning District Commission staff then handed to the Board a cop
of questions which will be asked during this survey. Mr. Fisher felt the questions shou%d
be Phrased carefully in order to avoid the possibility that someone might expect
help in their housing situation. He also felt the interviewers should be well ~rain~d. Mr.
Evans said there are four volunteers from the Community Action ~rganization and the
Albemarle County.Social Services Department who will take the survey. There will be a trainin
session before they being. After a short discussion, motion was offered by Mrs. David
to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $700.00 be and the same hereby is appropriated from
the General Fund and coded to 18B.12.1 for a Low Income HouSing Survey.
Mr. Henley did not feel the survey would be beneficial enough for the amount requested.
Dr. iachetta secOnded the mOtion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs, Dorrier, FiSher, !achetta.and Roudabush.
Mr. Henley. ~
Agenda Item No. 7. Land Use Values for 1977.
Mr. Ray'Jones, DimeOtor of Finance, submitted a memo dated December 8, 1976, concerning
land use values which were~discussed on November !0, 1976. After Mr. Henley and himself met
with officials of the State211~Division of Forestry, it was found that the SLEAC values
presented earlier were based on the use of pine (softwOod) as the primary species. Since
the County forests and woodlands are neither totally hardwood nor softwood, he felt the curren
values should be retained.
At 12:45 P.M., the Board recessed for lunch and reconvened at 1:43 P.M.
Agenda Item No. 14a. Lottery Permit Applications. (Discussed out of order.)
~a~ wm~ ~ee~ hv ~_ Tnnh~tt~ tn ~nn~ove a lottery oermit for the calendaryear 1977
7December 8, 1976 (Day Meeting)
5O3
adopted by the Board for the issuance of such.
same carried by the following recorded vote:
Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush to approve a lottery permit for the calendar year
1977 for the East Rivanna Volunteer Fire Company, Incorporated in accordance with the
rules adopted by the Board for the issuance of such. Mrs. David seconded the motion
and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 15a. Discussion: Fire related facilities.
Request for Fire Hydrants, Colthurst. (Discussed out of order.)
Charles Smith -
Mr. Charles H. Smith, representing the Colthurst Homeowner's Association, was
present. Colthurst was connected to the Albemarle County Service Authority in 1974 and
one hydrant was installed near the entrance of Colthurst. Since 1974, he has worked to
get additional fire hydrants for Colthurst. He corresponded with Mr. Batchelor, previous
County Executive, on the matter and was informed that $25,000 was in the budget for
fire hydrants for a number of areas throughout the County. Colthurst was on the list
but nothing specific could be promised. Recently, a chart was ~ompiled by the Fire
Marshal, Mr. Kelly Reynolds, indicating the number of fire hydrants necessary for
Colthurst. Three were indicated.
Mr. Fisher said monies appropriated for the installation of new hydrants had been
used for repairing nonworking, existing hydrants. When a program was conducted of
existing hydrants, a number were found inadequate and this was considered to be a high
priority. For several months, the Engineering Department has been analyzing various
systems in the County to determine deficiency and sufficiency of hydrants. This study
was made so the Board could arrive at a policy as to whose responsibility such should
be. As of this date, the report is not comptete due to lack of records. Mr. Fisher asked
if the report would show priorities for location of hydrants. Mr. Agnor said it will
not. The report will be dealing with actions of the Board in response to particular
subdivisions or areas in terms of treating all areas of the County equally. After a
policy is established, the list 5f?,priorities will follow. Since the study was not
complete, Mr. Fisher informed Mr. Smith that no action could be taken at this time.
Agenda Item No. 15b. Report from County Engineer - Fire Hydrants.
Mr. J. Harvey Bailey said the study being conducted on a County comprehensive fire
hydrant system is more complicated than anticipated. Consideration has to be given to
city mains for developments around the City as well as other mains. The whole use in
the area has to be examined. He felt the study should not be given in a piecemeal fashion.
Mr. Roudabush asked if a map was available showing all existing fire hydrants. Mr.
Bailey said all fire hydrants are recorded on maps. These maps have been furnished to
volunteer fire companies and to the City. The report will indicate places where minimal
action would be beneficial as opposed to places that have a lot to be done.
Agenda Item No. 15c. Fire facilities - Route 29 North Corridor.
Mr. E. A. Cord, Jr., President of the Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Department, was
present. As a result of concern over fire protection for the northern corridor of the
county, a volunteer fire department was formed. On November 22, 1976, an organizational
meeting was held and a board of directors and a slate of officers were elected. ~The
organizational committee has applied for a V.F.D. Charter from the Commonwealth. ~h~?previous
report of ~he~:~Fire Protection Study Committee which was done in 1975 and the present
study have been considered. Both reports indicated an immediate need for a fire ~tation
in the northern corridor of the County so as to reduce response time. A fund raising
committee is in progress. Many citizens have volunteered their services for the development
of a fire fighting facility in the area. The Financial Committee is exploring possible
areas of financial support. Also, a study is being conducted to determine availability
of land, cost for such and cost for the fire station. The committee requests that the
County participate by providing a site for the building. Contractors have indicated that the
building being considered could be constructed in 120 to 150 days. In conclusion, support
is being requested from the County for an annual allotment of $12,600 and a suitable site
for a fire station.
Mr. Fisher said he thought the Fire Protection Study Committee recommendation was
for land to be provided for a professional company in the 29 North Corridor. Mr. Cord
said both reports call for a fire station with complementing equipment~of a specialized
nature. He felt it is less expensive to use volunteers up to the point where growth in
the area would prohibit volunteers from being able to maintain~the area. Mr. Fisher
asked if the land was provided by the CoUnty who would hold the'4~i~le. Mr. 'Cord said the
County. Dr. Iachetta said the reports suggest that a voluntee-r company could be functioning
by May or June and also indicate this to be the proper place for a fire station. H~ asked
whether the Board felt it should go with the previous reports or depend on a volunteer
company or a mix.
Mr. James Samsel!, representing the Jefferson Country Firemen's Association, read
the following letter into the record:
"Dear Mr. Fisher:
The J.C.F.A. would like to clarify who represents them in their
dealing with. County ~overnment because there a~oears to be some confusion
504
December 8, 1976 (Day Meeting_~)
officer between the J.C.F.A. and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
in 1975. The copy of minutes authorizing this appointment are attached.
We would like to state that Mr. Samsell serves in this capacity and if
any questions arise over fire service issues, it is felt that he will
represent the feelings of the Association in an unbiased manner."
Mr. Samsell said the AssociatiOn supports and endorses the recommendation contained
in the report dated October 13, 1976. The Association feels a volunteer company is not
the final answer to the needs in the area but would be an asset. The location of a
volunteer company in the area should not receive any special treatment. This means all
volunteer companies should receive the same allocation° He felt the combination of a
Ilpaid and volunteer company would cause problems. He felt that with the slow movement of
Igovernment, a paid company is far into the future. Consideration should be made of
Isuburban areas around the city as well. He felt there should be a close cooperation
Ibetween the CitY and County. The Jefferson Fireman's AssOciation urges the Board to
ilpurchase another front line pumper, provide 11 more paid men for that truck and place the
Icontrol of the pumper and the men under the direction of the City. This would provide
Iprotection for the area in question as soon as the pumper can be purchased, men hired~and
~trained. This would take approximately three months. He was of the opinion that a study
needs to be conducted by an unbiased group for the placement of fire houses. The study ne~ds
to be based on location, past fire history, current fire rate and growth rate.
Mr. Richard Roane, member of the Fire. Station Committee, did not feel a professional
station could provide the services provided by the volunteers. He suggested a meeting
with the Jefferson Country Firemen's Association to discuss this. Mr. Fisher said tension is
evident between the present volunteer companies and the proposed Seminole Trail Company
and agreed that a meeting should be set up with the ~l~men~!~s~Association. Mr. Lloyd Wood
said there is no dissension between the Firemen's Association and the volunteers forming
this company. Mr. Samsell has indicated today that his association is in agreement with
the forming of'such a company and with the report submitted in October. ~he land
being requested is for the fire station in'the area and the ~Ssociation needs a decision
on funding as soon as possible in order to get started. Mr. Fisher felt the two reports
submitted are in.conflict. Mr. Wood felt the Same thing is'being recommended, but the ~L~i~
second report will provide the most economical fire protection. Mr. Fisher said the
main disagreement is the question of the County providing land,for the fire station.
Dr. Iachetta did not feel anymore time should be spent with respect to the
recommendations~-~of the.~.c~mmittees. The Board must make a decision, and he then offered
motion to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $12,600 be, and the same hereby is appropriated from
the General Fund and coded to 7C-226g for the annual appropriation to the
Seminole Trail Volunteer Fire Department.
Mrs. David seconded th~ motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mrs. David. and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and. Roudabush.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Henley saw no reason why the County could not provide the Seminole Trail Volunteer
Fire Company with a piece of land since a paid company would cost $400,000 a year plus
$800,000 in equipment, etc. Mr. Samsell felt planning for a paid company should wait
until it is decided that same is needed. Mr. Cord agreed with Mr. Henley~
./, Agenda Item No. 8. Discussion: An ordinance concerning costs for construction and
maintenance of certain facilities. (18-20.1 - County Code)
Mr. Roudabush requested the matter be deferred until January 12, 1977, for further
study.
Agenda Item No. 9.. Request from County Marshal.
Mr. Agnor said Mr. Kelly Reynolds, Fire Marshal, requested authorization to issue
summons and serve warrants for misdemeanor violations of the Fire Prevention Code. Mr.
Fisher did not feel there was any demonstrated need for such a~thority. ~,~Mr.'Henley felt
it might be misused and reduce the cooperation of the citizens. Mr. Roudabush agreed.
Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to inform the Fire Marshal that the request was considered,
but at the present, time there is no demonstrated need for such authority and the Board
will reconsider the matter if the need arises. Mrs. David seconded the motion and same
carried by the followi~ng recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 10. Set Hearing Date: Discharge of Industrial Waste Ordinance.
This was deferred until the 7:30 P.M. meeting.
Agenda Item No. i1. Changed to No. 14a.
Agenda Item No. 14(a).
Agenda Item No. !4(b).
Agenda Item No. 14(c).
Appointments:
Appointments:
Appointments:
Airport Commission. Deferred.
Industrial Development Authority.
Fire Prevention Board of Appeals.
Deferred.
Deferred.
December 8, 1976 (Day Meeting)
505
Agenda Item No. 14(e). Appointments: Parks Committee. Deferred.
Agenda Item No. 14(f). ~ppoimSmentS:~.~E~on~miclDe~elop~ent Commission. Deferred.
Agenda Item No. i4(g). Appointments: Equalization Board. Deferred.
Agenda Item No. 14(h). Appointments: Housing Committee. Deferred.
Agenda Item No. 14(i). Appointments: Highway Safety Commission. Deferred.
Agenda Item No. 14(j). Appointments: Joint Jail Board.
Motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to reappoint Mr. Henley to the Joint Jail Board
with said term to start immediately. Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 14(k).
(Deferred).
Appointments:
Mental Health and Retardation Services Board.
Agenda Item No. 14(1). Appointments: Planning Commission.
Motion was offered by Mr. Henley to reappoint Mrs. David to another term on the
Planning Commission beginning January 1, 1977. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion and same
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabusho
None.
Agenda Item No. 12. Parks and Recreation Commission By-Laws.
Mr. Robert Sampson, Director of Parks and Recreation, noted that when the by-laws
were presented in July, several changes were suggested and these have been made.
Mr. Fisher questioned the section pertaining to Advisory Responsibilities because
he felt the Commission's primary responsibility was to advise the Board of Supervisors of
any programs, etc., regarding the recreation system. Mrs. David felt the responsibility
was covered in the first paragraph of Article II. She felt the Board was proposing
a charge which goes beyond anything the County is likely to do. Her other concern ~as
that preparation of a Master Plan by the Parks Commission for the development of recreational
facilities is included in the bylaws of this body. $he~ felt~th~/Commission was setting
itself up like the Planning Commission and did not feel that was what the Board intended.
Dr. Iachetta said it is clear that this is is an advisory body.
Dr. Iachetta then offered motion to adopt the Parks and Recreation Commission Bylaws
with the insertion "Board of Supervisors an~~ under ~rti~l~ III, Section 2, with
the inclusion of a~¢l~e heading and inserting December 8, 1976 as the effective date:
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION BY-LAWS
The Albemarle County Park¢ and Recreation Commission'has adopted the following
articles in order to facilitiate its powers and duties in accordance with the
provisions of the State Code of Virginia, Chapter 8, Sections 15.i-271 and
15.1-272, and the ordinances of Albemarle County, Virginia.
ARTICLE I
~h~se by-laws shall govern the operations of the Albemarle County Parks and
Recreation Commission, hereinafter sometimes referred to as 'the Commission.'
PURPOSE AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Parks and Recreation Commission shall serve as an advisory body to the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors in all matters pertaining to the planning,
establishment, maintenance, operation and supervision of the recreational facilities
and programs for the County of Albemarle. The Commission shall act as a
liaison among the citizens of the County, the Board of~Supervisors and the
Director of Parks and Recreation, representing the needs and desires of
the community to the county administration by means of consultation,
reports and recommendations, and interpreting to~ the community
the services and policies of the Parks'and Recreation Department.
Section 1. Planning Responsibilities.
It sh~ll~beiii~i~he~dUby Of~he~!Commissi~~conceive and recommend the
execution of both long and short range plans for the development of a
recreational system for Albemarle County. The term 'recreation system'
is intended to include planning for open space, scenic easements
and recreational programs.
506
December 87 1976 (Day Meeting)
a. The Commission shall prepare a MaSter Plan for the development
oS recreational facilities, opportunities a~d programs which
will be adequate to the diverse interests and accessible to
the various areas of Albemarle County· This plan shall be
annually reviewed and revised in accordance with the developing
needs and possibilities which become evident and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan of the County.
b. Th® Commission shall ascertain and continually assess the
recreational needs and interests of the community and shall recommend
the'es~ablishm'en~of such facilities and programs as are both
appropr±ate to those needs and within the County's capacity to provide.
c. The Commission shall explore and assess on a continuing basis
the recreational resources available to Albemarle County· It shall
advise in the acceptance by the County of any grant, gift,
beGuest~ or donation of any personal or real property offered or made
available to the County for recreational purposes, and in the disposition
of the same for specific recreational uses; it shall seek to maximize
recreational opportunities by encouraging the development of privately-financed
recreational facilities and by considering the correlations of private
and public resources; it shall seek to identify and develop unused or
underused resources.
Section 2:~Advisory Responsibilities
,~It. shalt'.be the duty of the Commission to advise the Board of Supervisors
and the Director of Parks and Recreation, regarding the facilities, programs
and policies of the recreational system of the County·
ae
The Commission shall make'recommendations to the Board of Supervisors
for the establishment, operation and maintenance of parks, playgrounds,
recreation centers, water areas and other types of recreational facilities
and structures owned by or leased to the county, and shall s~ggest such
improvements of existing facilities as may be necessary or useful to
the recreational system and also feasible within the funds available.
The Commission shall consult with and advise the Director of Parks and
Recreation in the development and implementation of new recreational programs
and in the improvement of existing programs, and shall make to the Board
of Supervisors such recommendations as these innovations and improvements
require.
The Commission shall consult with and advise the Director of Parks and
Recreation in the formulation of policies for the administration of
existing facilities and programs, so as to insure that the recreational
system is efficient, economical and of safe operation and that it is
consonant with the best interests of the community.
Section 3. Financial and Personnel Responsibilities
The commission shall~have no.authority to enter into any contract ore, incur
any obligation binding the governing body of Albemarle County, nor shall the
Commismion have any binding authority in the staffing of the recreational
system. The Commission shall, however, advise the governing body from time
to time as to fiscal and personnel aspects of the recreational system by
means of reports and recommendations upon request of the governing body
or at its own initiative.
In addition, the Commission shall have the following powers, duties,
and responsibilities as to fiscal and personnel matters:
The commission shall advise the Director of Parks and Recreation
in the preparation of an annual budget For recommendation to
the County Executive.
bo
The Commission shall annually recommend to the Board of
Supervisors a budget for capital improvements (acquisition and
development) called for by the Master Plan
for Parks and Recreation.
The Commission may, from time to time, at its own initiative
and on the recognition of an immediate need, submit to the
governing body a recommendation for special appropriations
of funds not included in the regular budgets for operation and
capital~impro~ments.
The Commission shall act as an advisory body to the County
Executive in the choice of a candidate or candidates for
the position of Director of Parks and Recreation· The
actual staffing of the system shall be the responsibility
of the Director, contingent upon the appropriate funding
i~.the-budgeto
The~.~fiscat year of the Commission shall conform to that
of the get, erring body of Albemarle County·
III
~i.~E~BERSHI P
December 8~ 1976 (Day Meeting)
507
Section 1. The Commission shall adopt by-laws, rules and regulations
~overning its procedure.
Section 2. The officers of the Commission shall be a Chairman and a
Vice-Chairman. The officers shall be elected at an annual organizational
meeting.to serve for one year or until successors shall be elected.
No officer shall serve more than two consecutive terms. The Chairman
shall preside at all meetings, sign official papers, appoint committees,
call special meetings, and perform all such duties as usually handled
by a Chairman, except when such duties are properly delegated. The
Vice-Chairman in the absence of the Chairman shall perform all the
duties of the Chairman. In the absence of both officers, the Commission
shall elect a Chairman Pro Tempore to assume such duties as necessary.
Section 3. The Director of Parks and Recreation or his duly appointed
representative shall attend all meetings. The~-~Director shall be official medium
of communication between the employees of the Parks and Recreation
Department and the Commission. He shall keep the Commission informed
concerning the interests, needs, objectives, progress, plans and other
factors of importance to them.
The Director shall provide the Commission with a secretary who shall perform
the usual duties pertaining to that position. The secretary shall
issue notices of regular or special meetings, a brie~ synopsis of the minutes
of the Previous meeting, and any other special material deemed necessary,
prior to'~the next meeting. The secretary shall be the custodian of alt~
official commission documents.
ARTICLE V
Section 1. Regular meetings shall be held at least once a month unless otherwise
agreed upon by the Commission.
Section 2. Special meetings may be called by the Chairman at a time and place
designated by the Chairman.
Section 3. At any duly constituted meeting, a 2/3 majority of the membership
shall have the full authority of the Commission.
Section 4. Ail meetings shall be open to the public, except that the CommissiOn
may hold such executive sessions as it may deem appropriate, ink_accordance
with Section 2.1-344 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
ARTICLE VI
AMENDMENTS
These by-laws may be amended by the membership of the Commission at a meeting,
at which there is a quorum (quorum is defined in Article V, Section 3),
held after reasonable notice to the?~members~of the Commission. The amendments
shall be ratified by the Board of Supervisors.
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Dorrier seconded the foregoing motion and'same carried by the following recorded
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 13a. Appropriation--Editorial Review of the Zoning Ordinance.
A committee which was appointed on November 3, 1976, met.mn November 22, 1976, and wi+h ~
also s~gie!te~ t~at a stlff iommiltee ~i appointed t~'work with ih~ ~eis~ e!ployed for this ~
editorial review consisting of one person from the Planning Department, one person from the
Zoning Office, and one person from the County Attorney's office~ In the process of
the revision, there are to be no substantive changes made and the work is to be
reviewed by the staff committee to insure that no such ohanges are made inadvertently.
The final draft is to be subject to review with adoption by the Planning Commission and the
Board of Supervisors after a public hearing. Mrs. David said another meeting was held
on December 6 and the consensus of the Committee was to employ Ms. Elaine Hadden on
a temporary basis with the total amount not to exceed $2,000.00.
Mr. Fisher said the staff agrees that review of the Zoning Ordinance is needed
immediately. Mr. Roudabush felt the final draft should be reviewed first before the Board
committs themselves to a public hearing. Mrs. David agreed and s~ggested a joint
hearing between the Planning Commission and the Board if a public hearing is needed.
Motion was then offered by Mrs. David to adopt the following resolution with project being
completed by the end of Janua~Yl~77 and the proposal from Ms. Hadden be accepted
with such agreement being ~ ~ ~r~f~ed by Mr. Agnor.
BE IT ~ESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that $2,000.00 be, and the~me hereby
is, appropriated from the General Fund and coded to 10E-226
for an editorial review of the~Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
5O8
December 8, 1976 (Day Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 16. Receipt of Audit: Sheriff. The audit for the Sheriff's
Department for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1975 and ending June 30, 1976 was
received as information from the State Audit of Public Accounts.
Also, received was audit for the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court from the
State Audit of Public Accounts for the~£iscal year ending June 30, 1975.
Agenda Item No. 17. Report of the County Executive for the month of November, 1976,
was received as information.
Agenda Item No. 18. Information: Report of the Department of Social Services for
the month of October, 1976, was received in accordance with Virginia State Code Section
63.1-52.
Agenda Item No. 19. Statements of Expenses for the Director of Finance, Commonwealth's
Attorney and Sheriff's Department for the month of November, 1976, were presented. On
motion by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Mr. Dorrier, these statements were approved as read.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Dr. Iachetta.
Agenda Item No. 20. Statement of Expenses for the Regional Jail for the month of
November, 1976, were presented. On motion by Mrs. David, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, this
statement was approved as read. 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. 21. Regional Jail Report (State Department of Corrections) for the
month of November, 1976. Statements of expenses incurred in the maintenance and operation
of the Regional Jail for the month of November, 1976, along with statements of prisoner
days, paramedic salaries, jail physician and salary of the classification officer were
received. On motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mr. Roudabush, these statements were
approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 22. Other Matters, Not on the Agenda, From Board Members.
Mr. Roudabush reported that the Sign Committee has been divided into five committees
which are: (1) One,ire signs; ~2)~Off-premises signs; (3) Investigate appeals made
previously to the Board of Zoning Appeals; (4) Study special circumstances such as multi-
tenant signs, shopping centers and how these should be allocated; (5) A procedural
committee to set up policies for meetings to receive input from citizen organizations.
He also noted the Committee will meet once a month on the first Tuesday of the month in
the County Executive's Conference Room.
Mr. Fisher noted, at the request of news media persons, weekly press conferences to
be held by himself and the county executive.
Mr. Fisher appointed Mr. Dorrier as temporary chairman of the Solid Waste Committee.
Dr. Iachetta asked if the committee composed of himself, Mrs. David and Mr. Agnor
were to continue working on details of the Rann Preserve project. Mr. Fisher said yes
and reports should be made in writing.
Mrs. David felt more non-professional and board members should attend the Human
Resources Assembly. Mr. Dorrier requested notification of these meetings.
Mr. Dorrier said a meeting was' held in Scottsvilie to determine if that area of the
County should seek industries. The meeting was set up by the Town Council and the Economic
Development Commission. Mr. Dorrier said the area has a large labor supply and currently
has only one industry which is UNIROYAL. One question which arose was tha~of land and
whether a tax break could be given so taxes would not have to be paid at the industrial
rate. Dr. Iachetta felt this would be a bad policy. Mr. Agnor, who also attended the
meeting, felt the question was whether land would be eligible for land use taxation if it
were rezoned. After researching the matter, he found rezoning would have no bearing on
the land use tax. Mrs. David said strong sentiments were expressed ~o~he County during
work sessions on the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Roudabush said the Highway Engineer ha~ indicated that a stop light will be installe¢
at the intersection of Georgetown Road and Hydraulic Road if land can be obtained for rounding
o~the corner on Georgetown. When Mr. Chuck Rotgin, owner of Westgate Apartments, found
that the realignment of the road would take a great deal of his parking area, he was
disturbed. Mr. Rotgin has suggested changing the location of Hydraulic Road to the
undeveloped land behind Sperry Marine Systems. Mr. Rotgin said he has talked to the
owner of the suggested property and that dedication wou~d be no problem. If this were done,
there would be no problems with ~ti~t~es or the right o~ way~ which would cost
considerably less. Mr. Roudabush agreed with this idea and felt it is worthwhile to
consider. The consensus of the Board was for Mr. Roudabush to pursue the matter with Mr.
Roosevelt.
De~ember 8, 1976 (Day & Night Meeting!)
adjourn into executive session to discuss matters of property acquisition and litigation.
Mr. Roudabush seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
The Board reconvened at 7:30 P.M.
Agenda Item No. 25. Public Hearing: Reenactment of Article II, Chapter 7, Albemarle
County Code, Sections 7-10 through 7-14, Protection of Water in South Rivanna River
Reservoir° (Advertised in the Daily Progress on November 24, 1976 and December I, 1976.)
Mr. Fisher read the following letter into the record:
"December 8, 1976
Mr. Gerry Fisher
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia
22901
Dear Mr. Fisher:
The study report on the South Rivanna Reservoir & Tributary
Area has been delayed. The draft report was originally scheduled
for delivery on December 9, but because of technical difficulty
encountered by Betz Environmental Engineers in the analysis of the
hydrologic data, the report will not be available until late
January. We do not have a specific date at this time. We
will advise you as soon as a firm date for delivery of the report
is available.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) George W. Williams
Executive Director"
Since the Betz report has been delayed, Mr. Fisher said the Board has to decide to
either reenact the ordinance presently in effect, or let same expire on December 31,
1976. He then asked Mr. Tucker to describe the moratorium area. At the conclusion of
this, Mr. St. John read the following resolution for the Board's consideration:
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Article II of Chapter 7 of the Code of Albemarle,
said Article being entitled "Protection of Water in the South Rivanna
River Reservoir", said Chapter being entitled "Erosion and Sedimentation
Control" and said Article II consisting of Sections 7-10 through 7-14
inclusive, be and the same hereby is reenacted to be in effect upon
reenactment and to remain in effect until repealed by the Board of
Supervisors, provided, however, that this Article shall terminate and
be of no further effect on and after July 1, 1977, unless the same shall
theretofore have been reenacted according to law; this ordinance to be
known as Section 7-16 of the Code of Albemarle.
The public hearing was opened. Speaking first was Mr. Douglas Zirkle of Z & S
Development Corporation. He felt he had waited patiently and complied with all instructions
given, but, unfortunately, the waiting time and cost related thereto have far exceeded
any normal actions as pertain to his specific interest; townhouses. His corporation in
1973 had optioned Collina near the Keswick area. After much expense and many public
hearings, application for rezoning was denied on the basis of lack of public water, in
spite of a proposed central water system and the State of Virginia's suggestion that a
lake could be used as a backup reservoir. Adjacent property owners supported the project.
Investing another large sum of money, the corporation looked for another site and accepted
the previous losses. In order to avoid the same p~oblem encountered before, property at
the reservoir was chosen which had the required R-2 zoning and water and sewer available.
In June, procedures were begun to contract site development plan financing, mortgage
commitments and construction contractors. After many meetings with authorities~ the
plans were still affirmative. Option contracts were negotiated with owners and certain
services and utilities were to be available as they progressed. Because the Corporation
wanted to be the best in the business, they volunteered to get some expert advice on
design ~far~n~f~control devices. After such advice, the proposed project was to have
such controls, no mass collections and no fertilizers. Decorative gravel with pine chip
lawn areas and planter boxes were to be used. In August 1975, after many meetings and
approval of submissions, they filed for a permit under the county rules then in existence.
~he Corporation was led to believe schedules could be kept. Financial losses once again
occurred due to deferred items at several public hearings. Then moratoriums brought
further delays while the Blue Ribbon committee of water and engineering experts reported
their findings. To his knowledge, nothing in the findings prevented the project from
commencing. Yet more delays caused loss of construction contracts. By September 1975,
the conditions were favorable again. With many delays for site plan revisions and reviews,
general acknowledgment on January 5, 1976, was that the corporation could proceed. The
rest is history. Since January 29, 1976, the project has been blocked by the study of
the watershed. Recent public comments do not seem to indicate that developments are the
destroyer of the reservoir. Mr. Zirk!e complimented the City and County and other interested
groups for seeking to provide a clean environment~ but felt pressure groups or disinterested
citizens who fail to find the facts before generalizing are doing a bad community job.
He felt investing thousands of dollars for sale of homes in the area of a putrid lake
from which drinking water was acquired would be ridiculous if the proj~ect was a known
contributor to the destruction of the reservoir. In conclusion, he was opposed to the
moratorium being extended on community developments.
5[0
December 8~ 1976 (Night Meeting)
Speaking next was Frances Martin, representing Citizens for Albemarle. She reiterated
their support of the moratorium and urged its extension. She did not feel realistic
action could be taken until the receipt of the Betz report. She felt Citizens for Albemarle
is doing everything in their power to inform the citizens and to help the Board arrive at
a reasonable solution when the recommendations from the Betz report are received. She
emphasized the fact that the group has not intended to injure or attack any particular
individual.
Mr. James Fleming spoke next in opposition of the extension of the moratorium and
agreed with Mr. Zirkle's statement.
Mrs. Ruth Wadlington, speaking for League of Women Voters, was next, The group
supported the extension of the moratorium and felt any action without the report would be
premature.
Mr. Wendell Wood was opposed to the extension of the moratorium. If the ordinance
is reenacted, he requested an earlier expiration date S,i~¢~ the~report is due in January.
He understood Dr. Browne of Betz Environmental Engine~rS~will~-~be~peaki~g tomorrow night
to Citizens for Albemarle giving a preliminary report. The preliminary reports to date
do not show development as the destroyer. He hoped another investigation would not be
sought if the report does not yield the information everyone wants to hear. In conclusion,
he suggested the expiration date of the moratorium be thirty days after the receipt of
the Betz report because if July is used, proposed projects will be delaye~ ~ for another
year.
Speaking next was Mayor Nancy O'Brien who read the following resolution adopted by
City Council on December 6, 1976~
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE EXTENSION OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
IN THE VICINITY OF THE SOUTH RIVANNA RESERVOIR
WHEREAS, the Council has previously expressed its support for the action of
the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors in imposing strict development control
measures on property in the vicinity of the South Rivanna Reservoir as set
forth in Article II of Chapter 7 of the Albemarle County Code; and
WHEREAS, such controls are due to expire on January 1, 1977, but the Board
of Supervisors will give consideration to a proposal to extend them until
July 1, 1977; and
WHEREAS, this Council believes that such additional period of time is
necessary in order to properly assess the results of the study of the reser~oir
which has been conducted by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority and to consider
fully the long range measures necessary to protect this vital community resource~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Charlottesville,
that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle be respectfully requested
to take action to extend until July 1, 1977, the provisions of Article II of
Chapter 7 of the County Code; and be it further
RESOLVED that the Clerk of Council be directed to send a certified?
copy of this resolution to the Board of Supervisors.
Mrs. O'Brien expressed the Council's appreciation for the concern of the Board and
said they support their actions.
Speaking next was Mr. Bill Gentry. Since the water quality is the concern, he asked
what has been done with the raw sewage being dumped in Crozet. He also asked if Dr.
Browne had the Board's consent to present the preliminary report tomorrow night to a~..citizen
organization. He felt such information should come to the Board first whether it be
preliminary or otherwise. He agreed with Mr. Wood's request for an expiration date of
thirty days after the receipt of the Betz report.
Mr. Agnor said the sewage treatment plant for Crozet was diverted by Federal and
state regulatory agencies to a regional sewage treatment plant serving the ~ty of Charlottes~
and the area all the way west to Crozet. A portion of the interceptor refe~'~d to as Morey
Greek is now under construction. Once the interceptor is buil~, the raw sewage in
Crozet will be transported to the east of Charlottesville to be treated. The expected
completion date of the interceptor will be in late 1979 or early 1980 .... The interceptor
will be completed at the same time the plant is completed. As to the question of Dr.
Browne presenting a preliminary report, a-;provision was inclnded in the contract that
he be available to speak to any interested group. Dr. Browne will only be discussing the
progress of his firm in the collection and assimilation of the data. He will not be
discussing conclusions or recommendations of data and interpretation of such because such
information has to first be presented to the Rivanna Authority, Board of Supervisors and
City Council. After receipD by them, the information will be made public.
Mr. Wendell Wood was disturbed that certain "no growth" individuals have pressured
the firm and are constantly calling them. He felt Dr. Browne should be requested to
submit the names of the individuals who have done so.
With no one else desiring to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Fisher said he does not want the ordinance extended any longer than necessary.
The ordinance can be repealed at any time after actions have been taken to, protect
the reservoir. When the report is received, the County will move as rapidly as possi~a
to act on whatever is recommended.
Mr. Roudabush was concerned over the controversy about the meeting with Dr. Browne.
He felt those mentioned by Mr. Agnor should receive the information first. He had not
intended that this ordinance would extend to July !, 1977, and intends to ma~e every
effort to repeal such after receiot and review of the Betz reoort, however, ~e ~upported
1~ December~i~, 1976 (Night Meeting)
Mrs. David said the July expiration date can be reduced if the report is available
soon. Action can be taken at any time to repeal the ordinance.
Dr. Iachetta said the question before the Board is the extension of the ordinance
while awaiting receipt of the Betz report which is due in late January. He then offered
motion to reenact Article.II, Chapter 7, Albemarle County Code, Sections 7-10 through 7-
14, Protection of Water in the South Rivanna River Reservoir with such ordinance designated
Article 7-16 of the Albemarle County Code. Mrs. David seconded the motion.
Mr. Dorrier had some reservations about extending the moratorium to July if the
report is received in January, but would support the motion since the Board can rescind
the moratorium at any time.
Mr. Henley supported the extension of the ordinance and hoped prompt, practical and
reasonable action would be taken on the recommendations received from Betz.
The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
Agenda Item No. 10. Set Public Hearing Date:
(Deferred from morning.)
Discharge of Industrial Waste Ordinance.
Mr. St. John said loopvholes had been found in the ordinance entitled "Chapter 19.1,
Water and Sewer of the Albemarle County Code" adopted on November 10, 1976. The ordinance
states that no one can discharge industrial waste into the system without having first
obtained a valid permit. This means one could obtain a permit, violate same, have it
revoked~ but could not be convicted of violating the ordinance; therefore, such needs to
be amended. Motion was then offered by Mrs. David to advertise for a public hearing on
January 12, 1977, c~anging words to "without a valid" Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion
and same carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
At 8:35 P.M., upon proper motion by Dr. Iachetta, seconded by Mrs. David the meeting
was adjourned until 2:30 P.M. on December 15, 1976, in the Board Room of the County
Office Building. The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush.
None.
'~HAIRMAN