1975-07-09N7-2-75 -
7-9-75 (afternoon)
7-9-75 (night)
179
Mr. Wheeler said when he stated that this ordinance should be adopted by .September 15 he did
not mean that as an ab.solute. If it takes ~lon~er'for the public to digest the ordinance, he expects
to give them.time for this. He said the Board~alsa needs to either approve or. disapprove a settlement
with Central Contracting at the Airport~, to discussion space needs with the Space Needs Committee
and the staff, and to review Board actions ~taken in regards to salaries for the 1975-76 year. He
requested that this meeting be adjournad until Wednesday, July 9, 1975, at 4:00 P.M. in the Board
Room.
Motion to this effect was made by Mr. Wood and seconded by Mr. Thacker.
Mr. Wheeler said that Mr. Wood, the Director of Finance, the Clerk to the Board, the Sheriff
and himself would be appearing before the~State Compensation Board tomorrow to appeal aZtowance for
salaries and expect to report some success at next week's meeting. The Board also needs~to make an
appointment to the Soil Erosion Review Committee.
MS. El!en.Craddock asked to make a statement. She complimented the Chairman of the Planning
Commission for leading the others members in a forceful and intelligent way.
Vote was taken at 9:30 P.M. and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker', Wheeler and Wood.
None.
Mr. Carwile.
Chairman
7-9-75 (Afternoon)
An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, scheduled to be
held at 4:00 P.M. on July 9, 1975, was cancelled because all Board members could not be present. Ail
matters which were to have been discussed at this meeting were rescheduled for the regular meeting
held at 7:30 P.M. on this same date.
7-9-75 (Night)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, -Virginia, was held on July 9,
1975, at 7:30 P.M. in the Albemarle~ County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwite, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr.,
and Gordon L. Wheeler.
Absent: Mr. Lloyd F. Wood., Jr.
Officers present: County Attorney, George R. St. John; County Planner, John L. Humphrey;
Deputy County Attorney, Frederick Payne; and Administrative Assistant, Page Godsey.
Mr. Wheeler called the meeting to order. He said that Mr. Wood, Mr. Batchelor, Mr. Jones and
the State Treasurer were in New York today having the bonds which will be sold on July 22, rated by
the rating services. They were to h~ve returned at 6:15 p.m. but because of bad weather the plane
has returned to New York and they will not be able to leave again until 9:30 p.m. tonight.
(1) ZMP-323. Draft Building Company. (Public hearing on this petition was deferred from June 18, 1975
Mr. Humphrey said this is a request to rezone 1.82 acres from A-1 to R-1. The area in question
is rural in character with a farming activity taking place. There is a substantial amount o.f single-
family development just north of the proposed rezoning. The property which is the subject of this
petition, is open farm land and is being harrowed at the present time. The Comprehensive Ptan.~desig-
nates this area for conservation (1 dwelling unit per five acres) because of its proximity to the
mountains. Single-family lots directly across from this property average two acres each. Lots
north of the property, in Newtown, range from four acres down to 3/10th of an acre with the average
lot size being 1.6 acres. There are nine two-acre lots south along Routes 690 and 796, which are
already approved. The staff feels this request is ~o~Zin keeping with the Comprehensive Plans ~elative
to public utilities, t'he assimilation of property in the County or the existing residental development
in the area. The staff also feels this approval would set a precedent for R-1 zoning in the area.
According to a subdivision plat, filed with this application, the smallest lot proposed is 8,200 sq.ft,
which is permissible under R-1 zoning. Approval of the subdivision plat would necessitate public
sewer and central water being made available. Without tried and proven methods of providing water
and disposing of sewer effluent, the staff feels the R-1 zoning in such an outlying area is prematur.e.
Mr. Humphrey fini.shed by saying the Planning Commission recommends denial of this petition. However,
he noted, that the Health Department has suggested that for the purpose a central sewer system, there
is a five-acre area adjacent,,bawned by Mr. Tiffany, that can be utilized for this purpose.
(2) SP-489. Public Service Company of Virginia, Inc.
from June 18, 1975.)
(Public hearing on this petition was deferred
Mr. Humphrey said this request is for a central water and sewer system on property located on
the west side of Route 690. The area is rural in character and sparsely developed residentially.
The property in question contains several farm buildings and is presently being farmed. The applicant
proposes to serve a subdivision containing nine single-family lots (subdivision as yet unapproved)
with the well presently used in the farming operation. The well has an output of 22 gallons per
minute. A central drainfield is als~ proposed for this subdivision. Mr. Humphrey said he was in
receipt of a letter from Mr. Homer Chevacci, of the Health Department, which states: "Soil in
Newtown Subdivision located at Greenwood is suitable for sub-surface drainfields in the lots as
such. There is enough space to insta]l ~he required amount of septic tank system necessary for the
buildings, with additional space (availab!e).to install new drainf±etds, if needed."
Mr. Fisher asked who would own these systems. Mr. Humphrey said there will have to be corpora-
tigns set up through the Sta'te Corporation Commission for the water system~ The maintenance and
operation of the septic system will have to licensed and undertaken by a homeowners association.
i80
7-9-75 (n±ght)
for 21 houses in Greenwood. The2P~blic Service Company would receive a deed for the five-acre tract
and also for the well site and would provide water and sewer services for these houses. The Planning
Commission felt the overall density should be four to an acre, therefore reducing the total lots
from seven to.mine. Mr. Tiffany said he had no objection to this. This would give a density of
four units to the acre for actual living space, and~.w~th the addition of the five-acre plot kept in
open space, and st±ll continued in an agricultural operation, this would be a total density of one
unit to the acre. These nine lots will contain houses in the $40,000 range. Mr. Tiffany said there
is a shortage Of F.H.A. (Farmers Home Administration) housing in the area and he is willing to let
the property be used for F.H.'A. housing. He said the master plan did not acknowledge the existence
of Newtown and set this area for five-acre zoning instead of residential zoning.
Mr. Fisher said he did not understand who would own this utility system and how seven homes
could finance_'same. He said the price of the seven lots must somehow carry the cost of the five-
acre sewerage field and,in part, the cost of the well. Mr. Tiffany said any additional wells would
cost about $1,000 each to drill. By charging the homeowners $500 to connect to the water system,
the water company can serve each homeowner $500 cheaper on a central well. This connection fee is
sufficient to build the facility. The State Corporation Commission has said they have no objections
to The Public Service Company serving these houses.
Mr. Fisher asked if the cost of connecting to the septic field will also include the cost of
the five-acre parcel. Mr. Tiffany said no; Public Service Company will own that land.
Mr. Wheeler asked if any consideration had ever been given to residential zoning in Newtown.
Mr. Humphrey said the concept of a village cluster was discussed.
At this time, Mr. Wheeler, opened the floor to the public. Dr. John Lange said he is generally
in agreement with the County's planned use for the area. He lives adjacent to this property in a
development approved ten years ago and known as Blue Ridge Shores. A very small percentage of that
land has been sold in the last ten years. The parcels in Blue Ridge Shores are small and are suitable
for F.H.A. housing. Therefore, he does not feel there is that much demand for F.H.A. housing.
Dr. Lange said he did not think the cost of a water and sewer system can be sustained without a
large number of homes being served by same. If the Board approves this request, he personally feels
that sooner or later there will be requests for higher density development in the area. If that
will happen, he is against approval of the petition.
Mr. William Washington. said he is a member of the Greenwood Citizens Council. The~Council
feels that approval of high density development in this rural area is not in the best interest of
the people and this development may end up as a slum.
M~. C. H. Jarrett from Yancey's Mill spoke next. He had viewed this piece of property and feels
there is a need for low income housing in the County. But, he did not think the people in NeWtown
will be more interested in this piece of proPerty than that in Blue Ridge Shores. He said low
income families need small houses and he does not think they can afford to purchase land and then
build a house of any kind.
Mr. Jimmy Steppe, from Newtown, said he did not think this would be a slum. He asked how this
would effect his taxes. Mr. Wheeler said approval or disapproval of this petition would not
effect taxes.
Mr. Humphrey noted that a letter from Mr. Nils O. $ibeldt, an adjoining property owner, had
been received in opposition to th±s petition.
Mr. Henley said in the past, the Board has frowned on pipe stem lots. He asked why so many
were being brought for approval. He said there are three different types of development already
started on this property. Eventually~the whole area will be developed and he cannot see putting
R-1 here and there without more planning for the entire tract of land~. He said it seems to be
"hodge-podge" development.
Mr. Wheeler said the Board members know 'of his concern with water. The Public Service Company
is operating quite a distance from this tract of land. If this well goes dry, there may be no other
available water. He also felt that a fairly large development is needed to sustain any public
service company.
Mr. Fisher said there will have to be maintenance costs for keeping the sewer system working.
Mr. Tiffany has said that the initial cost to the homeowners will be slightly reduced because this
is a central system, but there has to be a charge on a monthly, quarterly, or annual basis, to
maintain and operate the system. He asked if the long range economics of this is in favor of the
consumer, as opposed to having a one-acre lot with a private septic field.
Mr. Wheeler said if the Board approves this rezoning, and next month receives another request
for R-1 in this area, that the Board has by then established a precedent. He does not think this is
the proper area for high density. However,he is interested in providing low cost homes.
Mr. Henley said he has only voted for sim-ilar petitions, where the problems had been created
before the zoning ordinance was adopted. He said that approval of this request will create more
such requests.
Mr. Car~ile said he could not support the proposal, based on land use.
Board should set a precedent for R-1 zoning in this area.
He did not think the
Mr. Henley then offered motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and deny
request for ZMP-323. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
Mr. WMee!er asked if denial of ZMP-323 eliminated ~he request for SP-489. Mr. Tiffany said he
would prefer that the Board deny this petition also. Mr. Humphrey said it should be made a part of
the record that because of the negative approach to ZMP-323 that the Board would take no action on
SB-489. Mr. Carwile said it would be to Mr. Tiffany's interest to request that the petition be
withdrawn without prejudice. Mr. Tiffany said he is thinking of taking this matter to court because
he feels the request has been wrongly denied and he would prefer that the Board deny SP-489. He
then filed with the Board a plat showing that density of the zoning request had been reduced from
7'9-75 (night)
Mr. Wheeler opened the public hearing. No one spoke for or against the request. Mr. Henley
then offered motion to deny request for SP-489. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher.
Mr. Carwile said at one time Mr. St. John had advised the Board that in approving special
permits for wells, that different criteria should be considered. Mr. St. John said that was based on
a different factual situationJ There was already, a dwelling in existence and the only question was
whether or not a central well!would be allowed. The record should show that the application for
this central well system (SP-489) is~for the purpose of serving the dwellings which would have come
into existence had apptic~ation for ZMP-323 been approved. Mr. Tiffany wants to have. these two
petitions in a position where he can bring'acsui't on them as one proceeding, if ~e elects to do so.
Mr. Tiffany then suggested that the matter be deferred since there was many questions still
unanswered. Mr. Wheeler said if the petition were withdrawn, as per Mr. Carwile's suggestion, it
could be brought back to the Board. Mr. Tiffany said he did not think he would have any claim in
the first petition if he withdrew the second. Mr. Henley said the whole purpose of SP-489 was to
serve the seven houses to be built after approval of ZMP-323, and he did not see why it was not
proper to go ahead ~nd deny SP-489. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
(3) SP-475. David H. Turner (Public hearing on this petition was deferred from June 18, 1975.)
Mr. Humphrey said this request is for a planned community on 106.72'acres located on the north side
of Route 620, approximately one-fourth of a mile from the intersection of Routes 620 and 618 at
Woodridge. The area is rural in character, wooded, with flat terrain. There are several single-
family dwellings and mobile homes in the immediate area. A general area is located in the center of
Woodridge. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that this parcel lies within the area designated as
Woodridge Village. The Plan suggests that this village have a population of 1000 persons housed in
a variety of densities. The proximity of this parcel t'o the outer edge of the village suggests that
a density of one dwelling unit per one acre is appropriate for the parcel.
Mr. Humphrey noted the following statistics from the staff's report:
Impact Under Existing Zoning (A-i)
90.71 acres-residentia!=45 dwellinss _
(t unit/2 acres net)
16.01 acres for streets (15% of total)
106.72 Total Acreage
ImP~t~Under Applicant's Proposal
69 acres-residential=73 dwellings unit~ (.40,000
square feet per lot)
7.22 acres-streets
30.50 acres-open space acres
106.72 total acreage-gross density of
1 unit/1.42 acres
45 units x 3.2 persons/unit = 144 population
45 units x 1.5 vehicles/unit=68 vehicles
45 units x 7.0 vehicle trips/day/unit=315 vtpd~
45 units x 0.72 children/unit=31 children
(Adjustment factor - 0.961) 14 elementary:
8 intermediate; 9 secondary
75 units x 3/2 persons/unit=240 population
75 units x 1.5 vehicles/unit=ti3 vehicles
75 units x 7.0 vehicle ~rips/day/unit=522 vtpd
75 units x 0.72 children/unit=52 children
(adjustment factor - 0.961) 23 elementary:
13 intermediate; 16 secondary
Mr. Humphrey said the applicant is proposing the development of a planned community consisting
of 75 residential lots on approximately 69 acres with an average lot size of 40,000 square'feet.
Frontage on the parcels with access to the existing State routes will be 150-plus feet with interior
lots having FPontages ranging from 90 to 150 feet. Thirty and one-half (30.5) acres are proposed to
be left in open space while 7.25-plus acres will be dedicated for road rights of way.
The Department of Education has said that under normal development, the impact on schools would
-be slight. However, if the property were'developed at a rapid rate a~d the dwellings inhabited soon
thereafter, this would add to the overcrowded condition presently existing in the~secondary schools,
but the situ~tion~we~Id~bee~±minat~d~up~n'~theoopening of the new western Albemarle high s. chool.
The proposed planned community has major and minor access from both State Routes 618 and 620.
Traffic counts between July and September, 1974, indicate a vehicle count of a9 over a 24-hour
period on Route 618 from Route 620 (east intersection) to Route 729. Route 620 to Rou~e 618 (east
intersection) to Route 619 had a 24-hour vehicle count of 4}1. From Route 620, the applicant proposes
to have one major access which will serve~'!5 lots and seven minor accesses. Each minor access is to
serve two lots. Route 618 is proposed to have two major access and six minor accesses. The two
major accesses are to individually serve 13 lots in one section and 21 lots in another, while the
minor accesses are each to serve two lots. The major access arterials and one branch road are to
have 50 foot rights of way and be constructed to specification for inclusion into the State Highway
system.
The applicant proposes that water to this community will be provided through a central well
system. The special use permit for this central well will be applied for at a future date. Sewer
facilities will be provided by individual septic fields. The available soil information from Soil
~onservation Service, reveals that there may be some difficulty with capability of soils to,support
the proposed number of septic fields. The Solid. Conservation Service classifies the two dominant
soils on this parcel as having severe limitations use for septic fields. A soil analysis has been
requested from the County Health Department and a groundwater study. These should give a~more
detailed insight into soil capabilities and water availability.
Mr. Humphrey said the applicant proposes to provide 35-plus acres in open space in the form of
active and passive recreation facilities, a pedestrian~walkway system, and a pond. The staff suggests
that for ac'tive recreation, the applicant provide one-half acre for a child play lot and equipment,
for children from ages 2 to 6 and two other acres to accommodate such things as softball and basketball.
The remainder of the open space should be in passive recreation, pond and pedestrian walkways, with
the walkways providing intra-community access to open space and recreation facilities.-.'~The maintenance
of such facilities should be handled through a homeowners association. Other recreational facilities
will be available to the general area upon completion of Totier Creek'which is appraximately 10
miles from this proposal.
The staff determined that the proposal fo.llows the suggested densities for development in the
Woodridge Village and is therefore compatible. The initial soil information available to the staff
makes it impossible to make a definite determination regarding soil capabilities.
182
7-9-75 (night)
(1)
Approval of a special use permit for a central well system prior to any
development, with the ability to provide one gallon per minute.
(2)
Dwellings on. lots with direct access to existing state routes be set back
100 feet from road's right of way.
(3)
Dam for pond, when and if it is built, to be approved by the Thomas Jefferson
'Soil and Water Conservation District.
(4)
Ail lots to have shared or common driveways, in other words, one driveway
per two lots, as shown on the preliminary subdivision plan.
(5) Ail streets built to Virginia Department of Highways standards.
(6) All homeowners agreements to be reviewed and approved by the County
Attorney's Office.
(7)
Only those areas where roads, driveways, pedestrian walkways, active
recreation, and structures are to be located shall be disturbed with
grading operations.
(8)
Recreation areas shall include one-half acre devoted to tot lots and two
acres devoted to playfields, basketball courts, etc.
Mr. Humphrey said the staff would like to have one other condition added to those recommended
by the Planning Commission; a section be added to the deed that anyone purchasing a lot which does
not meet approval of the Health Department for a septic tank system would be given his money back or
be allowed to choose another lot. Mr. Humphrey said the following petition, signed by 56 persons,
was presented before the Planning Commission's public hearing:
"We the undersigned, taxpayers and residents of the Woodridge Community of Albemarle
County, oppose the "Woodridge Acres" planned community for the following reasons:
1)
The roads. This strip of road from Route 20 South to Woodridge and beyond is
some of the worst in Albemarle County. It is narrow and crooked. There is no
legal place to pass another vehicle from Route 20 to Woodridge. The normal
growth of the community is already greater than the capacity of the present
roads. Woodridge Acres would add another possible 150 or more passenger
vehicles alone, not to mention supply and repair trucks, etc.
Residents from both Albemarle and Fluvanna County use these roads now. There
are also a number of smaller communities planned for this area in the near future.
We feel that a community of this size would jeopardize the safety of our people
who are now traveling these roads each day.
2)
We also feel that a community of this size would make our vaxes increase and
our property values decrease.
3)
We are fearful of what it might do to the existing wells.
would be worthless without our present water supply.
Our properties
It would overcrowd the school buses putting more on the road and causing a
greater hazard to our children who are already using an overcrowded road.
5)
We feel that it would endanger lives by adding lakes and swimming areas with-
out proper lifeguards and lifesaving equipment. An attraction such as this
would draw still more outsiders into the community."
Mr. Max Evans was present to represent the petitioner. He said the land is almost flat, generally
wooded, although some has been cut over, and it also has several drainageways through the site.
Route 620 is hard-surfaced, with good alignment. Route 618 is a gravel surfaced road, but generally
in good condition. There are some narrow bridges and these have been of concern to people in the
community. This plan features a limited amount of road internally by clustering the lots on the
higher portion of land and leaving the lower portions in open space. Lots 150 feet wide, on existing
roads, have common driveways for each two lots. Internal lots range from 150 feet to about 90 feet.
A~small pond~is propo'sed and a central well. There will be small recreation areas throughout the
site. The Health Department tested the soils for percolation and have given a preliminary report
which states that the soils are good for septic fields. This percolation test was achieved by
digging holes with a back hoe. The Health Department gives final approval lot by lot and not for
the development in total. North American Exploration examined this site for availability of water.
A traffic pattern analysis was conducted. This project fits with the master plan and is a way to
provide housing without subdividing along rural roads. There will be 35 acres in open space and
each lot is a minimum of 45,000 square feet.
Mr. Humphrey said the average density if one dwelling unit per 1.438 acres, gross.
Mr. Fisher said the staff report indicates that 70 to 80% of the total property, according to
soil maps, has severe soil limitations for septic fields. Mr. Evans said the Health Department
prefers to dig holes to make percolation tests rather than rely on information from the soil maps.
Mr. Carwile said he was concerned about the number of road entrances. He asked if there was
any way to lessen the number of roads entering onto State roads. Mr. Evans said more lots could be
put on internal roads, however, the only way to maintain some quality on County roads is to have one
driveway cut for every two lots, rather than for every lot. The houses will be set back from the
road 100 feet and this maintains some quality. The horizontal alignment in this area is good and
there are no sight distance problems.
At this time, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Gribble, from Route 618, spoke first. He
aaid this is not a logical place for this type of development. The roads are rough. The other
parcels across the road are five, seven, ten and twelve acres each.
Mr. Luther Reynolds said he lives on Route 618 and owns 13 1/2 acres.
of this application. He does not feel it fits in a rural area.
He is opposed to approval
7-9-75 (Night)
Mr. Henley asked Mr. Humphrey if he had driven the roads and checked the horizontal alignment and
the number of curves. Mr. Thacker said the roads in the vicinity of the proposed development are
fairly good horizontally and vertically. Route 620 from this development, back to Route 795, has
several bad places, some sharp curves and a very narrow bridge.
Mr. Fisher noted that ~a consultant hired by the applicant has said~he%.hinks he knows were to
drill a well that will produce 20 gallons per minute. Mr. Fisher sai~ the Board's policy of one
gallon, per minute, per unit, would require 80 g.p.m. Mr. -Evans said the consultant is conservative.
If the yield is rel~tiwely low, se~eral'~wells may be considered to make a system. If the yield is not
adequate, the property cannot be developed. Mr. Wheeler said the Board can approve this petition with
a condition that the well produce one gallon, per minute, per unit, and if the yield is only 20
gallons, o~ly 20 units can he built.
Mr. Fisher said he is reluctant to even approve the permit conditionally, thus increasing the
denSity of the land,, when it appears that there are severe limitations for use of septic fields. Mr.
Wheeler said he met with Mr. Honeycutt of the Health Department and was told that they prefer to
actually dig holes for percolation tests. This has been found to be the best method.. If the Board
thinks this plan is feasible, then a determination of the septic fields must be left to the Health
Department. The determination of water availability, and approval of a permit, is 1.eft to this Board.
Mr. Wheeler said he can understand that the applicant does not want to drill a well unless he has
received approval to proceed.
Mr. Thacker said he is concerned both about water and septic field availability for this proposal.
Basically this proposal allows the applicant to have 23 more units than he could by' right, but it also
allows the county set several conditions. In this way it gives more control than a standard subdivision.
The roads are~no bigger problem than most roads in Albemarle County.
Mr. St. John asked about the condition recommended by the staff. Mr. Humphrey said the staff was
interested in insuring that no buyer would buy a lot which would not pass percolation tests. Mr. St.
John said this may be a good idea, but the County does not have to power to do this or enforce such a
condition.
Mr. Thacker then offered motio~
the Planning Commission, but changi~
an application being made for a cen~
gallon/per minute/per unit. This
year from this date. No developmen~
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carw~
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Hen[
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wo.od
to approve SP-475 with conditions #2 through #8 as recommended by
~g condition #1 to read: "The approval of SP-475 is predicated on
~ral water system which will ~erve this entire development with one
~proval is void if ~uch a special permit is not approved within one
~ is to take place until a central water special permit is approved."
~le and carried by the following~recorded vote:
.ey, Thacker and Wheeler.
At 9:10 P.M. the Board took a recess and reconvened at 9:20 P.M.
(4) SP-466. Dr. Charles W. Hurt. (Public hearing on this petition continued from June 18, 1975.)
Mr. Carwile abstaining during discussion of this petition.
Mr. Humphrey said this petiton was deferred so the staff could communicate w~th the Rivanna Water
and Sewer Authority about the availability of sewer connections. A letter has been received from George
Williams, Executive Director, dated July 7, 1975, and he read same into the record:
"Reference is made to your letter of June 20, 1975, requesting information on wastewater
treatment in the Moore's Creek/Meadow Creek drainage basins.
As you note in your letter, there presently is no certified capacity in the Moore's Creek
or Meadow Creek wastewater treatment plants. However, interim improvements~have been
completed at both of these faOilities and are being tested at the present time. Perfor-
mance has to be successfully demonstrated~over a 90 day period before recertification
from the State Water Control Board can be requested.
The general outlook for increased capacity at the Meadow Creek facility is favorable
because of the extensive nature of the Meadow Creek improvements. The Water Control Board
has indicated that increased capacity, when granted, will be in two increments of' 0.5 MGD
each for an ultimate flow of 4.16 MGD. The plant is presently certified at 3.16 MGD.
Interim improvements at the Moore's Creek facility are also complete and in operation.
The outlook for this facility is not as favorable because of the more stringent treatment
requirements and because of the limited improvements we were able to make at the Moore's
Creek Plant. We do, however, expect some increased plant certification following the
90 day successful performance. The plant is presently operating beyond its certified
capacity.
The Advanced ~astewater Treatment Plant is expected to be completed in 1979.
first phase of this project are being received .on July 22, 1975.
Bids for the
The recent directive by the State Water Control Board referred to the excess storm water
that finds its way to the Sanitary System either by way of infiltration into the pipe
lines or by inflow such as storm sewer connections, roof drains, parking lot drains, and
foundation drains, etc. A vigorous program to eliminate the sources of storm flow from
the sanitary system needs to be initiated by both the City of Charlottesville and the
County of Albemarle."
Mr. Humphrey said there was also a question raised about the possibility of reserving land for
a school. A representative from the Education Department is presenv to speak about future school
needs in the general area south of the City.
Mr. John Massie said a development this size would project nearly 200 pupils into the elementary
school level. The elementary schools south of town are presently overcrowded, but there is a
possibility of several schools taking 25 pupils each. In a memo to Mr. Batchelor, Mr. McClure said he
felt that the School Board would support the Supervisors requesting that land be reserved for a school
in this subdivision.
Mr. Humphrey said the staff was asked to define the word "institutional" as applied to land on
7-9-75 (Night)
Mr. Ji~Hill said the County's masver plan shows a school in this general area. He has talked to
George Williams and been advised that sewer connections will be allotted on a first-come, first-served
basis. Conditions #1 and #2 state that no development of this project can take place until sewer
services are available. It will take one year to'get the water lines, sewer lines, roads, and other
utilities installed be-fore any construction can begin.
Mr. Thacker said one of the Planning Commissions' recommendations is that no work is to begin
unvil sewer and water is available. He asked'~if Mr. Hill was pursuing approval of this application
so planning could proceed. Mr. Hill replied yes. Mr. Thacker asked if Mr. Hill were concerned that
no work .could begin until sewer capacity is available. Mr. Hill said they would install the roads
and have these approved by the Highway Department, Then, they would proceed with installation of
trunk lines and connection of field lines. Mr. Thacker said that was not the way he interpreted the
condition. Mr. Hill said he understood the condition to mean that there could be no construction of
houses until utilities are available. Mr. Thacker said he interpreted this condition to mean there
could be no development at all. Mr. Humphrey said the condition states that "no development is to
take place until street plans, suhdivison plats and site plans have been approved by the appropriate
state and local agencies." The staff intended this to mean that nothing would be done "on site"
without the approvals mentioned. MH'r~Thacker asked about the condition concerning availability of
water and sewer. Mr. Humphrey said he did not see anything that would preclude bringing in a trunk
line, if the developer wants to take that chance.
Mr. Fisher asked about the building of roads. Mr. Humphrey said the plan would need subdivision
approval and an impact study~before this could be done. Mr. Fisher asked if the condition comtemplated
construction of roads before the waver and sewer are available. Mr. Humphrey said he did believe
that was the intent. Mr. Fisher said this should be clarified. Mr Humphrey said development has
already taken place to a certain extent; grading roads and building a dam. The idea was that there
be no construction of houses, apartments, or anything of that nature.
Mr. Wheeler said it seems appropriate that the Board put a limit on the construction of houses.
Ail other items are thin~s done to get ready for construction of houses. He said if the water and
sewer do not become available and the lines are in the ground, that is at the developer's risk. Mr.
Hill said they Cannot obtain site plan approval or a building permit without the water and sewer.
Mr. Wheeler said that would automatically take care of the situation.
Mr. Fisher asked if there were any protection for people downstream from this property in event
the dam should wash out or errode; any requirement that-it be reconstructed, or maintained, or bbth.
Mr. Humphrey said at this time there are no provisions spelled out f.or this. Maintenance of the
lake would be part of the homeowners assocation agreement and be included in that section dealing
with open space maintenance. Mr. St~. John said he had questions about the construction of roads, a
dam, and a change in the topography, (earth moving)~.that might sit for years and not be maintained
by anyone since it is not Known when sewer capacity will be available so construction of houses
may begin. There have already been problems on this property with roads that were graded and sat
err. oding for eight months. Finally grass was planted to help alleviate the situation. He asked if
this same thing would occur again. Mr. Wheeler asked if this is not covered by the new soil erosion
ordinance. Mr. St. John said the Board must be sure there is nothing in this record that would
approve any deviation from the soil erosion ordinance. If the Board approves this permit so that
water, sewer lines and roads can be built subject to site plan approval and soil erosion measures on
every phase of this activity, this must be made a part of the record.
Dr. Charles Hurt said he had anticipated installing utilities and putting gravel on the roads,
but denial of this permit last year delayed this action. He does not expect to build any homes
until the water and sewer are available. A pro~ect of this kind takes a long lead time. If approval
had been forthcoming last year, the roads would have been treated and surfaced to state specifications
and~grass sewn. Dr. Hurt said one of the biggest problems with soil erosion is the number of people
who ride motorcycles over his prOperty. He said this is the Supervisor's problem.
Mr. Wheeler said for the record that this Board does not approve any PU~'s, but approves only
the concept as far as land use, location and density are concerned. He asked if the dam broke
and injured property owners downstream, if thos~ property cwners have any legal recourse. Mr. St.
Jo~n said if the dam~were constructed in such a way as to be dangerous. Mr. Fisher asked what
recourse the property owners would have if the dam were~not built in a negligent manner. Mr.
St. John said none.
Mr. Fisher asked if the homeowners association will automatically be responsible for maintenance,
etc. of the dam. Mr. St. John said no. No one will have recourse unless the homeowners agreements
spell out plainly that the person who buys a lot in this development will be assessed his fair share
if the dam/lake needs repairs or rebuilding for any reason. Where a large body of water is part of
the common area, this is one of the most important parts of any homeowners agreements. However,
repair, maintenance and rebuilding ~f the~d~m and lake should be the full reponsibility of the
developer until a large portion of the lots are sold.
Mr. Wheeler asked if one of the conditions is related to the homeowners agreements. Mr. Humphrey
said conditon #6 states that "homeown'ers agreements and deed restrictions are to approved by the
County Attorney's Office prior to any construction and that the homeowners agreements should cover
the maintenance of the dam."
Mr. Wheeler said Mr. St. John would h~ve to approve the wording of these agreements to be sure
the wording is satisfactory. He asked about the School Department's reques~ for reservation of a
school site. Dr. Hurt said he had no objection to reserving a school site. He feels it would be a
benefit to the people living in this development. Mr. Wheeler said five years would seem to be a
reasonable time period for this reservation.
Mr. Thacker asked if the Planning staff had any comments on the flood plains and steep slopes
adjacent to the entrance roads. Mr. Humphrey said these should be left in open space use and this
use could be stated in the conditions.
Mr. Henley said the report from the R~vanna Water and Sewer Authority states that they expect. ~
some increase in capacity after the 90-day performance test, but he feels that even with this increased
capacity they might just be breaking even. Mr. Wheeler asked if the major portion~of this project
would be served from the new wastewater treatment plant that will be opening in 1979. Mr'. J. H.
Bailey, County Engineer, said the present Moore's Creek plant has demonstrated its ability to-treat
sewage, but there is still a possibility that there w±ll be no additional capacity available until
the new plant is put into operation.
Mr. Henley said he will not vote for a project of this size until he is assured that there will
be capacity available. He feels that ance the roads and utility lines are installed, capacity will
Mr. St. John said the City of Charlottesville had obligated itself to furnish approximately 200
connections to parcels of land in the area under question. This commitment is to the parcel, not a
person. The Albemarle County Service Authority, which is the retailer, inherited this area from the
City along with that commitment. This commitment was made in return for land donated for the new
City Armory and possibly the jail. The record should clearly show, whether this petition is approved
or not, that this does not give any particular developer priority over any other for sewer connections.
This Board does not have the power to do this and should not purport to do so. Also, if those
connections committed by the City are not made, a penalty will be assessed.
Mr. Wheeler said this Board will approve only the concept for the development. For sewer and
water connections, the developer must apply to the Albemarle County Service Authority. If the
Service Authority puts them on a list and says they can be served, they will be served.
Dr. Hurt said it is his understanding that the Albemarle Service Authroity is allotting sewer
connections on a first-come, first-served basis. This is the reason h'e wants to get the utility
lines in the ground. When sewer connections are available, he will then be ready to use that capacity.
Mr. Henley asked why the lines must be in the ground before the capacity is allotted. He said
everybody will be sticking sewer 'lines in the ground in this area of the County. Mr. St. John said
the lines must be in the ground. The Albemarle Service Authority cannot let somebody buy up the
capacity and leave those people who are ready to use their connections without capacity. Mr. Henley
asked if putting lines in the ground was not the same as buying up capacity. Mr. St. John said no,
but whoever has their lines in the ground first theoretically, receives available capacity. Mr.
Henley said this is in essence buying up capacity and he does not think that is right.
Mr. Morris Foster said_~he would like to emphasise that this petition is before the Board for
approval of a land use concept. Ail detailed site plans and sewer plans, approved by the Albemarle
County Service Authority, must be brought back to the County before the lines can go in the ground.
This is only for approval of a concept.
Mr. Wheeler said if Dr. Hurt wants to spend money and put sewer lines in the ground, it is at
his risk and he personally does not think this Board is giving him a thing. M.r. Henley said if the
Board waits until recertification is received, they will have some idea of the condition of the
plant and maybe an idea of when the capacity will be available.
Dr. Hurt said if there were problems the County needed to iron out, he was willing to have
action deferred.
Mr. Wheeler said the Board had received a letter from Len Hartman, Jr. reauesting that this
matter be deferred. He then read the following letter:
"July 2, 1975
In reference to Dr. Charles Hurt's application for a Planned Community known as
"Hillcrest", on Route 20 South, which was deferred by the Board on June 18, 1975
until July 9, 1975. Mr. John A. Smart, who has property near the~:ar~a.~,of this
proposed Planned Community, and I who own property adjacent to this, find that
it will be impossible to attend the July 9, 1975, Board meeting and request that
this application be deferred until your meeting after July 15, 1975."
Mr. Wheeler asked if_the Board would like to defer action and request that Mr. George Williams
and the .Chairman of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority appear before this Board for questioning.
Mr. Thacker said when the Board considered this petition last year he felt that the request was
premature based on sewer~problems. He does not see much change since that time and he will not '~ote
for approval until he is assured that sewer capacity is available. He then offered motion to defer
action and continue public hearing on SP-466 until August 13, 1975. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Henley and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. F~sher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
ABSTAINING: Mr. Carwile.
(5) Earlysville Heights Subdivision - Section 4 - Waiver of minimum lot size requirements.
Mr. Humphrey said this request is to waive the requirement for lots sizes of 60,000 square feet
in order to permit individual lots to have both septic tanks and individual wells. No houses have
been constructed in this section. Earlysville Height. s was a large tract of land and de~elo'pment
originally started in 1964. In 1972 the land was rezoned to R-1 and'Section 3 was approved'in June,
1973, based on previous preliminary approvals. There are now a total of 42 recorded lots in this
subdivision. The Health Department has stated they would not like to see these lots approved unless
there is a central well system. Mr. Humphrey ended by stating that the Planning Commission has
recommended denial of the request.
Mr. Morris Foster was present to represent the petitioner. He said this a hardship case. The
development began in 1964 with just a small section which was completed before starting another
section. County ordinances have changedd rastioaliy in the last ten years. About one-half of the
property had been developed when the Zoning Ordinance was adopte~. At that time, the Board elected
to rezone the residue of Earlysviile Heights property for the express purpose of continuation of the
planned development. Section 3 was approved but the developer eleeted not to bond the roads and
hold this section until Section 4 was ready for development. Since that time, the developer has
contracted to sell Section 4 to another builder. When he came to place a bond, he .found that the
new Subdivision Ordinance had changed lot sizes. The Health Department has reported that the soils
are good for percolation, however they must certify that the soils are adequate and the lots meet
the sizes required by the County's ordinance. They cannot take official action until the Board
t.akes action on the lot sizes.
Mr. Humphrey said the Planning Commission suggested that the applicant provide either a central
well or sewer system and show a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet. Mr. Wheeler asked if there
had been any correspondence received from the Health Department. Mr. Humphrey said no. Mr. Wheeler
said the minimum lot sizes in the County's ordinance were recommended by the Health Department.
7-9-75 (night)
Mr. Thacker said he was not happy with the lot sizes, and since this subdivision was only
preliminarily approved in 1964, the applicant probably has no vested right to the lot sizes, but
there seems to be a moral issue involved. Mr. Wheeler said this Board has learned a lot since 1964,
particularly that one-half acre lots are probably not large enough for a septic field, and much too
small for both a well and a septic field. He said the Board should defer action on this matter and
have a representative from the Health Department come to Board meeting next week to give his recom-
mendations. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Carwi!e, seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSEN.T'
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
(6)
SP-49!. Kenas L. and Joyce C. Shifflett. To locate a mobile home on two acres zoned A-t.
Property on Route 776, about 4.0 miles northwest of Earlysville. County Tax Map 18, Parcel 8A,
part. White Hall Magisterial District.
Mr. Humphrey said this area is rural in nature, with several single-family dwellings and two
mobile homes in the genrat area. Buck Mountain is located to the west of this property which is
wooded in non-deciduous trees, however, an area of approximately 5,000 to 6,000 square feet, where
the mobile home is located, has been cleared of all vegetation. This special permit application is
brought to the Board becauSe of an objection from an adjacent property owner, Mr. William A. Perkins,
Jr., who did not attend that hearing. A mobile home is presently located on this property and is in
violation pending the outcome of this special use permit. The Planning Commission, at their public
hearing, ascertained that the mobile home will be used as a residence while a permanent home is being
constructed. The Planning Commission recommends approval with the following conditions:
1)
3)
5)
6)
7)
8)
Approval from appropriate state and local agencies.
Minimum setback from Route 776 of 100 feet.
Minimum side yard setback of 25 feet and rear yard setback of 35 feet.
Skirting around mobile home from ground tevel to base of mobile home.
Mobile home shall not be ren~ed under any circumstances.
Time limit of three years with administrative approval of two additional years, if needed.
Screening from Route 776 approved by the zoning staff.
This permit is not transferrable.
Mr. Shifflett was present. No one from the public spoke for or against this petition. Mr.
Henley said he was partly responsible for the trailer being on the property. Mr. Shifflett had to
move the trailer and there was almost a month's lapse free,the time he applied for the permit and
this date. Mr. Henley then offered morion to approve SP-491 as recommended by the Planning Commission.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwila, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
(7a) Appointment: Soil Erosion Advisory Committee. Mr. Thacker offered motion to appoint Mr. E.
V. Echots for a term of one year beginning on July i, 1975. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. W~ood.
(7b) Appointment: Welfare Board. Mr. Henley offered the name of Mr. Robert Black for membership
on this Board. This appointment was to replace Mr. Alvin Toms; the appointment to be for a four-
year term which expires on June 30, 1979. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and passed by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
Mr. Wheeler said the Board members had recieved correspondence from the County Attorney about
members presently serving on the Welfare Board. Complaints have been received from the State that
County~members have served more than the allowed number of terms. Therefo~e~the Board must replace
Mr. W. A. Pace as a member. He said Mr. Wood has been requested to recommend an appointee for th~s
position~.
(7c) Appointment: Library Board. Mr. Wheeler recommended that Mrs. Katherine D. Hallock be
rea.pp0±nte[d'~to~another term which will expire on June 30, 1979. Motion to this effect was made by
Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
(7d) Appointment: Technical Committee - Transportion Restudy. Mr. Wheeler said Mr. Fred Foster
had declined appointment to this committee. He has asked that Mr. Wood make another recommendation
on this. The matter was ordered carried over.
7-9-75 (Night)
(8) Set public hearing date for proposed Zoning Ordinance and map. Mr. Wheeler recommended that
this public hearing be set for September 3, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. at Albemarle High School. Motion to
order this public hearing advertised was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Henley and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAY.S:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
At 10:55 P.M. the Chairman raq~ested.~that the Board adjourn into executive session to discuss
legal and personnel matters. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr.
Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
The Board reconvened at 11:31 P.M.
(9) Report on Airport Contract. (Deferred from June 19, 1975.) Mr. Wheeler said after discussing
this matter several times, he now recommends that the County agree to a settlement as outlined by
the Airport Board. The County's share of the expense is $38,000. The work needs to be finished
soon. This is a joint operation and there has been disagreement on how to settle the matter.
Although this may not be the clearest route', at this time it seems to be the most sensible.
For purposes of discussion, Mr. Carwile offered motion to accept the recommendations of the
Airport Board in this matter and to adopt the following resolution. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Henley.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $38,000 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund
and transferred to the General Operating-Capital Outlay Fund for expenditures
at~ the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport occasioned by a settlement
with Central Contracting Company and additional work contemplated to finish
project.
Mr. Thacker said he would not support the motion. He felt that under the contract with the
City/County/Airport Board, Central Contracting was obligated to remove all materials encountered,
including rock. In addition to that, Central did not perform their contract in the field of erosion
and enbankment completion in the amount of $16,700. According to documents submitted by the County
Executive it appears that Central Contracting h~s~bean overpaid on excavation work in the amount of
$5,001.58. It does not seem proper to spend public funds of about $28,000 to have new work completed
which costs only $15,000. He did not see rewarding a contractor for not fulfilling a contractura!
obligation. Mr. Fisher agreed.
Vote was taken at this time, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Ca,wile, Henley and Wheeler.
NAYS: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Thacker.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
(!0) Space Needs Committee report.
by the August 21 meeting.
Mr Thacker said this report was not ready, but should be ready
(!1) Salary review. Mr. Wheeler said this matter had been cleared in executive session.
(12) Report on appeals to the State Compensation Board. Mr. Wheeler said the Compensation Board
had allowed the Sheriff a total of six new people; five road deputies and one process server at
$7,032 a year with an increase to $8,040 for the raad deputies upon certification by the Law
Enforcement Officers Training Standards Commission. The State has al~o increased their participation
in the salaries of three other persons and corrected one-error contained in their June 13 letter.
This Board needs to adopt a resolution approving of the new positions. Motion was offered by Mr.
Henley, seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote, to adopt the resolution
which follows:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
7-9-75 (Night)
WHEREAS, the Sheriff of Albemarle County, Virginia, appeared before the Board
of Supervisors on March 13, 1975, and requested approval of six additional deputies;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors on that date authorized the Sheriff to
request approval of these deputies from the State Compensation Board but neglected
to adopt a resolution as required by Code Section 14.1-70, Code of Virginia, 1950,
as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, does hereby request the State Compensation Board to set the number of road
deputies for Albemarle County at twenty-two, tMis being the maximum allowed under
Code Section 14.1-70, taking into consideration the most recent population figure
issued by the Taytoe Murphy Institute.
Mr. Wheeler said the Sheriff now needs authorization to employ four new deputies since the
approvals given covered two people now employed by the Sheriff. As recommended by the staff members
present, motion was offered by Mr. Thacker to authorize the Sheriff to employ four new deputies at a
salary of $8,040 a year, with these deputies to be placed on the State's salary plan, (staff's
recommendation) with the County supplementing salaries until such time as these~deputies are
certified by the Law Enforcement Training Standards Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Carwile and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
(13) Bond - Director of Finance. Mr. Wheeler noted that during discussions with the State Compensation
Board that an amendment to Section 15.1-43.1, Code of Virgnia, was brought to his attention. This
section now allows that the surety bond for the Director of Finance be set at a maximum of $500,000.
The governing body must adopt a resolution to this effeCt.
Motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mro Fisher, to adopt the following resolution:
BE ZT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.1-43.1(c), that the amount of the surety
bond given by the Director of Finance of Albemarle County, Virginia, be set
at five hundred thousand dollars.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
Mr. Wheeler said he would like to make one statement for the press' Mr. Ray Jones was appointed
Director of Finance effective July 1, 1975, and he reports directly to the Board of Supervisors.
At 11:55 P.M., upon proper motion, the meeting was adjourned.
Chairman