Loading...
1974-07-317-31-74 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on July 31, 1974, at 7:30 P.M. at Jack Jouett Junior High School, Charlottes~ ville, Virginia; said meeting being adjourned from July 30, 1974. Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J~ T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler ~and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr. Officers present: County Executive and County Attorney. The Chairman called the meeting to order and called for a public hearing on the following matter as advertised in the Daily Progress on July 10 and July 17, 1974: _ SP-281. Pursuant to a court order issued by the Circuit Court of Albemarle County dated June 7, 1974, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will conduct a public hearing on July 31, 1974, commencing at 7:30 p.m. in Jack Jouett Middle School to consider the request of the City of Charlottesville under Special Permit 281 to locate a landfill operation on property containing 50 acres d,escribed as County Tax Map 64, Parcel 24 (part thereof), Parcel 28 (part thereof), Parcel 27 (part thereof), and Parcel 26 (part thereof), Rivanna Magisterial District; said property is further described as the "Cason Tract" located on the east side of Route 20 approximately 1/2 mile off 250 east. ~ Humphrey: The staff would like to submit some additional information above that previously submitted at hearings. I refer you to the map, Section 62, which depicts the general area in which the landfill is proposed. The red line represents the general line representing the urban cluster in the Comprehensive Plan. The green areas represent the historical landmark areas. The brown area represents the property involved in the landfill. Of course, this is the area of Key West and the Rivanna River, Pen Park, City, Northfields. The larger scale map is an outline or blow up of the larger tract in which the-activities are to take place involving the landfill. The red line indicates the area in which the City proposes to have the activity of the landfill take place. This represents 28 acres within the red line. The access road is just off 'the map leading into Route 20. Within the 28 acres, utilizing the soil survey previously done by the Soil Conservation Service, we find that there are moderate limitations in acreage for the area type landfill on this site, seven and one'half acres, and is represented by the light brown. Those having severe limitations represents 20.5 acres and are represented by the darker brown. Also on this map is an indication of the cover material, suitability, whether it is slight, moderate or severe for a landfill. The severe area would be your cross-hatch and if you look very closely here you will find generally a ... line, like so, in keeping within the activity area. So it covers practically all that area that is also classified as severe for landfills in area methods. The 49C classification here is the only area which is indicated as having any possibilities for a landfill area type. It also has slight disadvantages with reference to cover material. It would be slight in this area here. That is within the seven and one-half acres. In addition, Mr. Chairman, ~the staff has prepared an evaluation of the site. The guidelines for that is 11-13-3, of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance of which you have a copy and represents the first five pages, I believe, of Volume I, Cason Site, Landfill Technical Land Use Data, which reads generally as follows: "Considering the role of agriculture, the 7-31-74 existing rural pattern and the documented historical significance of Stony Point Road, the character of this area is well established. A general description of the character of this area would be semi-rural, middle and upper income residential. At present the immediate area is zoned a mixture of A-l,. Agricultural District, and RS-l, Residential Suburban, and the area is designated as part of the urbanized area in the adopted Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan. The large-lot subdivision of Key West is located 0.7 miles north of the proposed sanitary landfill's access road site, and there are many well established single-family dwellings within a short distance from the proposed site. "The historical structures of the Stony Point Road area that are of major' concern with regard to the proposed sanitary landfill include Franklin, Windie Knowe, Buena Vista, Rid~eway, and Edgemont. Documented information concerning each of these structures is readily available in such texts as History of Albemarle, Woods, and Ante-Bellum Albemarle, Rawling, Hayward, Robinson. "The following are the distances from each of the above mentioned historic structures access road to the proposed sanitary landfill access road; Franklin, 0.1 mile; Buena Vista, 0.4 mile; Windie Knowe, 1.1 miles; Ridgeway, 1.9 miles; and Edgemont, 2.2 miles. "Section 11-13-3(a) of the existing Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that a Special Use Permit shall be denied or granted after considering the following guidelines and standards. 'The use shall not tend to: (a) change the character and established pattern of development of the area or commUnity in which it wishes to locate.' "Directly addressing the special use permit requested to this guideline, it is obvious that this proposed land use would not be in harmony with the existing character of the area and the established pattern of development. In fact, a sanitary landfill in a "semi-rural, middle and upper income, residential area" is a land use that is in direct conflict with the established character of the area. "Realizing that in most instances it is difficult, without a large amount Of speculation, to anticipate the Change in character and development of an area that results from allowing a nonconforming land use, this is not the situation in the present case. Because of the existing and developing character of the area and because of the nature of the special use permit under consideration, it is certain that approval of SP-281 would appreciably alter, to its detriment, the present character of the area, and would significantly impair the potential to develop the area-in consonance with its established patterns and character. This is not to imply that no nonconforming use should be allowed in this area, but that the proposed nonconforming use is too dissonant to be considered for this area. "As previously s~ated, the present zoning in this area is predominantly A-i and RS-1. The proposed new Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance designates this specific site and the immediately adjacent area as Rural Residential. The surrounding area is proposed to be zoned in either Conservation or R-1 (Residential, single unit). Both the existing zoning and proposed zoning support the continuing development of this area following its established pattern. "Quoting the adopted Zoning Ordinance, RS-1 is 'designed to accommodate quiet, low density residential areas...regulations for this district are ~esigned to stablize and protect the essential suitable environment for family life.' It is apparent then that the requested special use permit and objectives of the RS-1 District are at opposite ends. It is difficult to assume that the proposed sanitary landfill will allow the existing zoning district to serve its purpose.' "Section 11-13-3(b) states that a special use permit 'shall be in harmony with the uses permitted by r~ight under a zoning permit in the zoning district.' This is not the case in ~his instance. Again quoting the effective zoning law with reference to land uses that are allowable in RS~i districts with a special use permit, 'Public Utilities: Public water and sewer transmission; main or truck lines, etc. and treatment facilities, and pumping stations, electrical power transmission and distribution substations and transmission lines and towers.' Section 3-1-12(6) 'Public Utilities: Unmanned telephone exchange centers.' Section 3-1-12(7). There is no mention of sanitary landfill in the allowable special uses and judging from the general nature of allowable public service special uses in RS-1 districts, a sanitary landfill could never be even remotely considered to be in harmony with the uses permitted by right. "Further quoting Section 11-13-3(b), it also states that 'the use...shall not affect adversely the use of neighboring property.' This standard for approval of special use permits is essentially repeated in Section 11-13-3(c): '...the use will not hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent-land and buildings or impair the value thereof.' While the case may be made that no actual impairment of the physical use of the adjacent land will result if the proposed sanitary landfill is approved, it is unquestionable that both the historic values attached to Franklin and Buena Vista and the monetary values of the residences situated along the affected[ stretch of Route 20 would be significantly decreased. One possible case of actual physical impairment would be the property belonging to Mr. E. H. Deane, which is located on the east side of Route 20, along both sides of the creek which drains the proposed sanitary landfill site. Even with the stringent precautions recommended by Metcalf & Eddy, Consultant. s, it is likely that a large amount of siltation will occur in the development and operation of the sanitary landfill, which would result in an increased frequency and severity of flooding on his property. "Notwithstanding the many valid technical reasons for denying the permit request, as brought out in the five expert witnesses' reports, we feel that there exists ample justification for the denial of SP-281 solely on the basis of the incompatibilities previously stated, when considered in conjunction with the guidelines specified in the existing Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance." 7-31-74 Wheeler: Questions of Mr. Humphrey at this time, gentlemen? Mr. Wood? (No.) Mr. Carwile? (No, sir.) Mr. Thacker? (No, sir.) Mr. Fisher? (No.) Mr. Henley? (No, sir.) Just to~ comment Mr. Humphrey. As I understand it, so there cannot be any question in anyone's mind, the staff positively does not recommend approval of this site. Humphrey: That is correct, sir. Wheeler: Mr. Epps. Epps: Our presentation will be relatively ~brief tonight. We will present five witnesses. Mr. Guy Agnor and Mr. John Green from the City, Dr. H. G. Larew, Professor of the University of Virginia Engineering School, Mr. Robert Warner of the 'State HighWay Department and Mr. John Podger, Civil Engineer. ii would like to say in opening, in response to Mr. Humphrey's statement that this is a use under your.present zoning ordinance which is. designated as being available in zoning A-l, which is the zoning. I don't understand a nonconforming~use reference. The. law indi~cates 'that it is permissible in thins type of zoning and we are not quarrelling with the judgment, but I think that is a matter of fact we would like to state before we start. At the close of the testimony we~will ask that you gr~ant the permit and. we' would like to start with Mr. Guy Agnor from the City. ~gnor: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen, I'm Guy Agnor, Jr., Director of .Public~ Works for the City of Charlottesville. Having appeared before you at other hearings my credentials are' known to you, but for the record of this meeting,-I am a graduate of V.M.I'. I have a Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering.~. I ama registered professional engineer in the Commonwealth of Virginia. I served as a member of the faculty, in the Engineering School, at V.M.I., for five years. I have been employed~in municipal governmen~ in Virginia for nine years, with time spent in between in military service and in private business. I appear before you tonight on behalf of the.City of Charlottesville to describe to you the site plan design for a propoSed sanitary landfill operation in an A-1 zone, and for the record, on prOperty that is described as Parcels 24, 26, 27 and 28 on County Tax Map 88, located east of Route 20, approximately one mile north of its intersection with U. S. Route 250. I will described to you, in as brief of terms as possible, the characteristics map for the development of this site as ~a sanitary landfill and I will address my comments to statements and reports made at previous hearings. We will not show you a movie tonight, .but for the record of this meeting we wish to refer'to it, and it will be provided as requested to the County Staff for the file. The City has submitted to you at an earlier hearing on this appl~ication all the data and the information that was relevent to the feasibility of the use of ~this site as a sanitary landfill~.from preliminary engineering investigations and by evaluations of State regulatory agencies. Reviews of this data and the interpretations by eminently qualified Consultants have been completed since their presentation in September, 7-31-74 5 1973. The City tonight reaffirms these studies and investigations made in preparation of this site plan and all the data has been in the possession of your staff for many months° I am well aware, as you gentlemen are, that the subject of landfilling and solid waste is an emotional one. I appreciate the unenviable task that you have of sorting through the volume of written material generated by these hearings, separating fact from myth, and making a decision based on the intent of your ordinance. Please be assured that the Cify has been absolutely committed from the beginning of these proceedings that the design and operation of the sanitary landfill will negate the nuisances that are historically associated with land disposal of solid waste, that the environment will be protected and that the landfill will not be detrimental to the character and development of the area, as much as is humanly possible. We have no desire to violate the intent or spirit of the County Zoning Ordinance. We fully realize that further details of design and operation will be required following the approval of this application; that due procedures to be followed in this design and study and with regulatory agencies satisfied to insure compliance. We expect such additional details to be a condition of the permit approval, as they should be. We have entered into this matter in good faith and we have proceeded~ accordingly. I will now review the site plan from the stage and in doing so I would like to emphasize to you that we are discussing the features of a sanitary landfill and not a garbage dump .... area for a period of ten years. The design is as done by the engineering division of the City. We employed the consulting firm of Eo O. Gooch and Associates, consulted engineers and geologists to make a soil analysis of the site and from our study and calculations we estimate that this site has adequate cover materials for a life of ten years. ~s you will notice, the proposal of a deceleration lane-entering the site is one of the questions that ... raised is this has been approved by the Virginia Department of Highways. The design of this road, as is the final design of the site, is considered to be one of the conditions that will be required in the ... process, and as alluded to earlier. This will bean all-weather road entering the site from a differant location than it's current access. The current access is south on a very narrow, winding trail entering the property. So ~this will be an entirely new roadway. A weighing station and office/maintenance building, sanitary facili~ties for personnel, truck washing, pads for vehicles; all of this covered in-the operation manual that was filed with you for record of this meeting. Surrounding the site and located withinthe site also will be diversionary ditches for intercepting water to control the flow of~ surface water across the site. Located within the site will be underground drains for' controlling the ~flow~of any underground water~. Again, we have been asked questions as to the sizes of the ditches, the design of the pipes, and this of course again is part of the ultimate design that would be required. The ... is deep valleys 'with ridges on each side. The proposal for the operation will be the waste dispo~sed of~in the valleys and the cover material located on the ridges adjacent 7-31-74 tO it s~ that the topographY of the land will cha,nge dramatically from the very rough terrain now to one that in ten years of ultimate use' can lend itSelf readily~to open space or some recreational purpose or whatever intent the owner would have for ultimate use. At the lower end of the site is proposed a sedimentation/stabilization basin similar to the basin that you have dicus~ed at other hearings. This is designed 'and intended to stabilize any soil that is not contained through soil erosion measures. Conditions of the. lease on the~property require that the State law on erosion control shall be met, that the clearing of the site shall be~done by selective-timber removal, that the .property will..be fenced and protected' from adjacent properties, ~and that, of course, as I discussed here earlier, engineering design and principals for ther protection of the normal nuisances built into the operation. This operation will assume a completely new and radically different posture and appearance from the operations that are now in Operation in ~this area. The evaulation by State agencies have been filed With you in your recent staff report. In the copy that was furnished to the City, the site evaluati~ by the Solid Waste and Vector ContrOl Board Was omitted. In the event that'it was also omitted from your copy I will present it to you tonight for inclusion in the file. I will not elaborate on these evaluation reports, I will simply read to you the very brief conclusion"of the Solid Waste and Vector Control Board~ detailed.'by Mr. W. W! James, investigator for the Board, reads as follows in Item 17'. "From information available, at this date; it is difficult to form an opinion as this will.depend on the operational plan to be. submitted. In general, the site is not well suited for operating a sanitary landfill, however, if properly engineering it may be made acceptable." Evaluation .by the State Water Control Board, and there~are ~wo of~those, one by Mr. Prager in July, 1973., in which his summary is: "While the proposed site is not ideal for a iandfill~ operation, not many sites are. With proper preparation and operation; the sitm' Could be developed satisfactorily for a landfill opera~ion." As subsequent investigation by the Water Control Board at the request of citizens in Albemarle, this investigatfon made'by Mr. Hinkle of the Water Control Board, this is a geohydrological investigation in August of 73 concludes with three statements. "1) ~The proposed landfill would have minimal effects on ground water in the area. 2) Proper engineering and operation would be necessary to prevent leachate from adversely affecting the surface water downstream from the site. '3) Proper engineering design would also be necessary to control any erosional problems which would result from a landfill operation." .In describing this' site plan at an' earlier hearing, the validity of ~he City's da~a on the drainage area was questioned'. This matter has been Clarified by the City tO'the gentlemen who raised the question, and will be explained to you by Mr. John Green of the City Engineering Division. Quest.ions were also raised aS to the approval o~ the Highway Department e~trance road design and its connection With Route 20-. The design and approval of this road, as I mentioned, is expected to be a condition of the permit approval and Mr. Robert Warner, a resident engineer of the Virginia Department of Highways will discuss this tonight. 7-31-74 Concern was also expressed ... underground Wa~er pollution and the effect on wells in the area. The Wa%er Control Board report which I just read to you, addressed itself to these matters and a'monitoring of underground water supplies in the area is a normal procedure in the development of an operational plan for a sanitary landfill operation and this will be done in this instance. Information refuting these differences and validating, the City studies were forwarded to the Planning Staff last fall. In closing, I wish to comment on the difference in the Planning Staff report dated July 23, 1974, which Mr. Humphrey just referred to, from an earlier report which your staff provided you last September. In Item 7, u~der Sit~ Chara. cter~istics~, which is titled "Streams, Ground Water and Well Contamination Potential" the report last fall listed it and described it as moderate, with care. The report in July of this year describes it as being severe. We do not know of any new evidence that has been presented to cause this change, and in fact I believe it is contrary to the State Water Control Board evaluation that was just referred to. I will close where we all began. The City has been involved-in a landfill site selection ever since 1970. We spent two years looking and have spent two years seeking conditional approval of our selection. Two yea~s ago, tomorrow, we submitted our first application-to you for a special permit at the selected site. All of us knDw this has been a very laborious task, and we are all tired. No matter what the future holds for governmental responsibility of solid wasote disposal services, no matter how we elect to dispose of this waste, or how dramatic or sophisticated technology will provide us with~changes in these disposal methods, the City of Charlottesville, as well as the County of Albemarle, will always need a sanitary landfill for the disposal of solid waste that-is nonburnable or non- recyclable, a landfill which will be convenient to its citizens and which will serve their"health and safety needs with as little impact as humanly possible to adjacent That is why we are here tonight and we solicit your approval of our properties. efforts. Wheeler: ~Fisher: Henley.: Any questions of Mr. Agnor, gentlemen? No sir .... No. Thacker: No. Carwile: No, not of Mr. ~gnor. in the report~Mr. Agnor alluded to. I wonder if Mr. Humphrey can .explain the difference Is there.-any new information .... Humphrey:~ Is th'is the comparative study? Investigation by the staff indicates that %here were one or.tw_o additional wells we felt might b.e further affected than originally thought and therefore in our opinion we put "severe". Epps: I. would like~ to ask-Mr. John Green to come forward. Green: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen. I am John Green, a professional engineer, registered to practice in 'the State of Virginia, presently employed by the City of Charlottesville, and I conducted and coordinated most of the studies that were done on this particular site. There are threetpoints I 7-31-74 would like to address tonight. One is the volume calculations that we used to determine the life expectancy of the site; 2) the distance that'we used in our description to'the nearest dwellings; ~and, 3) the area of the catch basin of the stream that crosses the landfitl site. First df all, the volume calculations. An average "in" area'method was used, which is a Common method in engineering practices and earth excavation to determine the volume of earth., In this case, however, the average "in" method was used in a vertical direction and we feel sure that 10 years of life can be expected from this site based on a-five year increase in the volume of waste from'the~City of CharlottesVille COmpounded through that periOd of time. The cover material was investigated by E. O. Gooch and Associates and Dr. Larew will address the matter of available cover material. That, too,, is adequate. Number 2, the distance to the nearest dwellings. Our measurements were made from the actual face of. the operation and~ we~ measure 160'0 feet to the Franklin.property, 1500 feet to the property previously owned by Mr. Smith, presently owned by?,Mr. Cason;. Number 3, the~area of the catch basin'was certainly in question at'all the previous hearings that we' had. There were at least three people who spoke, with'.different areas described as the catch basin for this area. ~Depending on which stream you use, or which combinat~On'.of streams, the areas range from 300 acres to' about 500 acres. I -have'~a U.S.G.S. map tonight~ to..help describe"the area that is actually the catch basin for the stream that crosses the landfill site~ I met with Dry. Goodell on April 4th and~we; together-~ determined the area of the catch basin that does cross this area.~ Once we agreed'on the.stream'~that we were studying, Dr. Goodell admitted,that he had~-st~died~ the wrong stream, two streams,- as a matter of fact,'and the streams that he'described-as having severe indications of severe erosion were not the streams that crossed the~ Cason site. His calculations agreed with mine once we had determined the proper stream. This catch basin area is approximately 130 acres. I would .like to pass this small scale map around so that each of you can see it. The streams are accentuated by the blue marks. The orange area is the catch~basin for the stream that crosses the Cason site. The way to orientate yourself on this map is, that dot right there is the old dwelling on the property right by the stream that crosses the property. The stream, the larger stream that joins the stream that crosses the ~p~operty just off the Cason site is this s~ream, and that drainage area is much- larger. That is the stream,that has contributed to the erosion evident all the way to the mouth of ~he .stream~..'~ Rivanna River, These are the two ~treams. This is the stream that does cross the site and this'is' the stream~that does not cross the site. This is the stream that many of the peopts have used to o.. the catch area and this stream comes from the south and the east of the~ site. and joins the st,ream that does cross the site- just' below the fill operation and then ... the river. That is all I have. Are there any questions? Wheeler: Any question~ of Mr. Green, ~entlemen? 7-31-74 Thacker: Mr. Gree~ t believe you have stated that based on the City's investi- gation of the site, I assume this is ~the 50-acre site, it has a useful life of 10 years. Is %hat correct? (Yes, sir.) Based on the information given us by the Staff that indicated some seven and one-half acres .... and one-half acres have moderate limitations, the balance of the proposed site has severe limitations for use as an area landfill. Based on this information, have you any thought as to what this would do to the~projected usable life of the site? Greene: First of all we don't feel that severe limitations from an agricultural soil scientist standpoint means that the soil is unusable for a sanitary landfill. The grades are steep, but these steep grades also contribute to the volume of the ravines that we are planning to fill. Thacker: You still contend that you still have a 10-year useful life on the site? Green: Epps: Larew: Yes, sir. We would like to call on Mr. H. G. Larew of E. O. Gooch and Associates. Mr. Chairman and members of the Board and the public, my name is H. Gordon Larew. I live in Charlottesville, Virginia. I am an engineer by profession and am a registered engineer in the State of Virginia. I have practiced engineering as a professional engineer since 1952. In the course of our work here in the Albemarle and Charlottesville area and throughout the State, more particularly here in the Charlottesville area, we have had to deal, or had an opportunity to deal, with soils and materials very similar to those which are found on the Cason site~ We had an opportunity to work a design, or help design the foundations for buildings, for dams, for roads/streets, parking lots, sewage lagoons,-airports, and sanitary landfills. Some time ago our firm, a firm of which I am a partner, E. O. Gooch and Associates, was hired by officials of the County of Albemarle and %he City of Charlottesville to explore the Cason site from the standpoint~of the soils and geology. This is the engineering soil, engineering property, to see if it might be a potential landfill siteD. Now, just-what did~ our firm do? We, of course, went out and went over the site. The first visit was made with Harvey Bailey and Mr. Green. Mr. Green being with the City; Mr. Bailey wi~h the County. We mapped out a series of test borings. which 'were to be made and ~these were rather randomly selected as I understood it and I think.we have a~map here this evening which Mr. Green can uncover there and show where these borings were taken. The maps that you will see show the location of some 40 borings. Some 40 borings were made there.; seven of which were-made in roadway areas to locate the~ground.water table and this type thing so that really 33 of those borings' were made in the sanitary landfill site or immediately adjacent, to it. These are those little blue-dots that you see. I believe that those are fairly randomly spaced-so that we were trying to get a good picture of how much material you had there and of course what the properties of that material were. Let me first address myself to some of our findings. First of all the underlying bedrock. The underlying 7-31-74 bedrock is eatcotcin greenstone. It is a .metamorphism lava, very hard and very water tight. In'fact .you will find very, very few gOod wells in that catcotcin~.greenstone. In some places it may~be 'fi.ssur.ed and cracked and you~will find a welt, so some water can move through-the rock, but by and large it is a water.tight.formation. Now, some question was~rai~Sed about-the amount of outcropping from this rock. In ~the area in question, that we. were stUdyi~g,..we found .very few rock outcrops. I think you will recall Dr. Goodell contested that, but~I believe he was looking.at the wrong site really.. The site we are looking at here, I deScribed as a bowll. It i~s bOwl-shaped~ but sloPes. It s~opes~.tOWa~d the Rivanna River. It is surrounded by streams that catch the water that comes the mountain, off the top of the mountain, and diverts the water around this bowl-shaped area. There is only one, rather one or ~two small streams-really that~ go up into the area, so that the larger stream, the one that was described as erosive, is not a part of this site, the immediate Site. Now, what about the soils of the site? Now, I think you are going to hear something here that is in ~conflict with~what you see there on the board, but let me try to explain befOre I begin why tha~ comes up. I am an engineering soil specialist. I understand that report was 'w~itten,~p~epared, by an agricultural sOil.specialist. These men are known as agronomists..or, soil scientists. We are known as engineers. ~s · under'stand it, these~men are trained, primarily, t~determine hOw well certain sites, or land, will support vegetation,-~such ~as corn, potatoes., cotton, fOrests, so forth. Ordi~ nari~ty, When-they go ~out to~evaluate a-site~, they drill not more than three to five feet deep. I%3~s t~hat- soil~which normally supports plant life which they evaluate. Three~'to five feet deep, so tha~t their experience and their judgment here is based primar~ily on agricUltural use, not engineering uses. We, as engineers, go out and- remove, frequently remove that top soil, that three to five feet, stockpile it and use it later, we put our buildings on soil below that. We are trained to evaluate, design ~such struCtures as earth dams, building 'foundations, sewage lagoons, sanitary landfill's, so that may help explain the differences here. We put down 33 borings and I think~ they are fairly randomly spaced. Let me indicate to you what'we found.. The borings r.an anyWhere from zero depth to 33 feet in depth. We found that 13 of the borings were over 20 feet deep, ,as I say going up to 30, 33. Five were between 15 and 2~ feet deep. Five more were between I0 and 15 feet deep. Ten were less than 10 feet deep. Now,-assuming ~hat ~as I have indicated here, ~t think that in order to protect, proPerly protec~ the~possibte- outcropping of rock at 'the site, this catcotcin greenstone, I think everyone is in agreemen~ that we~should leave something in the order~°f three or four feet of cover over ~hat rock to protect, it so the leachate can"~ get .in to. it. Discounting that four feet then, and about a foot of top soil, I have estimated that there is an average dePth o~about 12 feet on the Site available for use in this landfill. At your last hearing, perhaps Dr. Gro~e; indicated that some iD8 tons of material, soil~ wou~d be needed each day to cover the day's work. That sounds like a .iot ~of material~ but.~gentlemen, that materia~ would go inside of a 7-31-74 room 15 feet this way, 15 feet this way, and~nine feet high. That is what we are talking about for one day. That's your 100 tons or about 75 cubic yards. Since the last time, I have made some calucations to see hOw much usable soil we can get from one acre. I came to'the conclusion that there is enough soil, now this is on the average, to provide soil for covering one acre for about 205 days. Now, I hope that will help indiCate to you that we have, we feel that we have sufficient soil there, at the site. Now, the question comes up, is this soil suitable to build a sanitary landfill on and of? In order to further evaluate this, now our firm'of course does work in this area, we are familar with the soil here, we sampled the materials, took them into our laboratories and ran certain laboratory tests, engineering laboratory tests. We of course wanted to know if this soil suitable for ~compaction, is it too wet, too dry? By and large we found it appears to be' suitable for 'proper compaction. It is primarily a red clay silt on the top anywhere from one to 10 feet. Below that it changes to more of a .silty soil or a sandy silt from there on down. We made permeability tests-on this soil, on the compacted soil. We found that it is quite impervious when compacted. I made some studies which indicate that if for some unknown reason two feet of water might be ponded on the surface of this site, it would take some 10 days for the water %o penetrate through six inches of compacted fill. NOw, in the first place, I don't think we are going to have two feet~of ponded water on there, and I can't believe they will leave it there for 10 days. This gives you some idea of how impervious it is. 'The soil is moderately subject to shrinking and swelling. It is moderately subject to erosion, but really not much more than any soil that you will find in~ Albemarle County. I have made an observation 'that I would like to pass on to you. There is a trail that goes up around, just around the edge of this site. That trail has been there I would say for 30 years because there are trees growing out of the sides of the cut that I would estimate to be 30 years old. This roadway is nothing more than a drainage ditch. There are no ditches, no side ditches, and water coming off of the mountain would tend to follow that road. That road is little eroded.~ Very'little erosion do you find there. You can drive right up there. This is after 30 years. Now, I think the danger primarily would come if they do not take proper precautions in quickly seeding and getting vegetation on slopes, these new.slopes. I think with the advances that we have made in erosion control in the last few. years', that along with the lagoon that is to go downstream, should control the erosion. In my opinion, that stream will bring less sediment after this is in there, than it does right now. Because you will have a check dam. you will have other devices there which will cut down the sedimentation, really. I think that pretty well covers what I have to say. In terms of just general observations, just as ~ firm Of. geologists and engineers, we feel that perhaps the major limiting feature of the site, perhaps~ is the initial costs and site preparation. It does have, however, alrelatively short haul. distance. We feel that by properly engineering this site, in other words if good sanitary landfill practices are employed, as they 7-31-74 must be, this land which is currently suitable only for~forests ~and very limited agricultural uses, coul-d be enhanced for?future possible' residential ~development. Landfill areas, would create larger level areas at the site upon which playgrounds, tennis courts, picnic areas and parking facilities ~ould be constructed, leaving the untouched areas for residential development~-later on. Thank you, gentlemen. Wheeler: I have some comments for this gentlemen, but we may also have some questions. Epps: I wonder if I might ask him to comment on one or two points. I wonder if you might in your summary comment on the exposure to the highway and the .sound impact and screening and dust, specifically. Larew: Yes, I~don'~t know that I am the World's best expert on that but this area to me appears to-be a~ rather~sectuded area. You have to drive a little distance to get up in there. It is wooded, The road is going to be paved. I can see no dust there. Sound should~be no-worse than it is on 20 at the present time. I think that ..... Wheeler: Questions of Mr Larew, gentlemen? Mr. Larew I want to take a few minutes of your time. YOu took right' much of~mind giving me an explanation. Let me clear something uP in your mind. I am not an expert on anything and my~constituents are well aware of that~and have been for some time, but I do have this knowledge. We have an expert staff, a planner, we have an engineer' and we have asked this sOil scientist to look at this land and not anywhere along the line have we asked him to look at it'with the idea that we are going to.grow corn and you are well'aware of that. Thank-you, sir. ~ ~ Charles Midkiff: We would like to present Mr'. Robert Warner now who is the Resident Engineer in Charlottesville, ~to discuss Route 20. Warner: Mr~ Chairman-~and members of theBoard. I hope that after four or five years e~erybody Up there knows my name by now, the number of meetings that we have had together, but for the record, my name is Robert G. Warner.~ I am the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Highways here in Charlottesville and have been for a period of a little over seven years. I have been asked to comment briefly on Route 20 leading to the Cason site. Ro~ute 20 has a pavement width of 20 feet and a shoulder width of six feet on either side. In 1973 the section~ in question was carrying an average daily traffic volume of 2100 vehicles. This is within the design range, -or the range-of the design capacity of a.~f~cility of this-type. However, the sight distances on a facilit~ of this type requires 650 feet in either direction and at the present site of the entrance, there is only 580 fee~. This ~s a deficiency that can be corrected by employing engineering techniques, by sloping the banks to the north of the entranceway, the proposed entranceway, and trimming the vegetation to the-south. Any work of thfs nature would have to be done under permit approved by our department. In this permit would have to ~be included all other requirements as far as deceleration lanes and entrance and access into Route 20'. In studying the -- 7-~1-7--4 - 1 3 traffic count, we had evaluated the percentage of truck traffic on Route 20 on a 24- hour basis and find that approximately 5.5% in 1972 and approximately 4.8% in 1973 and on a 12-hour basis this would fall in a range of approximately 3.6% to 6.6%. However, evaluating a percentage on an individual hourly basis it could vary somewhat higher from a low of 5% to-approximately '10.5%. The design capacity of. this road, however, will accommodate %he present percen'tage of truck traffic that is there and which has been considered in the previous study alluded to. In conclusion, we feel as previously stated, that if engineering techniques are employed properly by providing adequate sight distance, that Route 20 is an adequate access to the proposed landfill site. ~This is especially true if the Cason site is to be used solely as a site for the City. If joint use of the site is proposed, there probably would be private haulers using Route 20 to the area north of~the landfill site and Key West' This would introduce a different type of traffic, probably. However, if no significant heavy development takes place to the north of the area, 20 could probably cope with this activity. Howeverw if any significant development-does take place, in the area north of Key West, then Route 20 would certainly have to be improved to handle any additional traffic Of thins type that might be~put on it. Thank you. Midkiff: First-off, as we mentioned before, any special permit approval, of course, Would be conditioned upon this correction of Route 20 at the critical portion. Secondly, last evening; Mr.. ~Henley made reference to Route 637. If the Board wishes to answer any ~questions concerning this route from Mr. Warner, he has made a study of that r~oute and it might help the Board. Wheeler: We are not taking up 637 this night. Any questions, gentlemen? Mr. Warner, ... has talked about the same thing, automobiles and traffic-and I understand what you have ha~ to say about-Route 20, but~I would like for you to'comment to me what you think about the traffic situation. There is no way in the world to get to ~-Route 20 except to~ come across the Rivanna River Bridge and come up 250 or come down 250. .Tell me about that~situation. Just what is the situation right now? Warner: As.far as traffic volume? ._ Wheeler: Yes - . - Warner: I don"t know'the exact ... we are.talking about but in the~-neighbOrhood of some-13,00.0 vehicles a.day on the 250/20 co..rridor c.rossing Free Bridge coming into town and going .up the By-pass or going up East'iHigh Street. .~ Wheeler:. So:it is at the critical point right'.~ow? Warner:- The..Free Bridge area is congeste:d and critical as.far as existing traffic movement, yes sir .... 'Wheeler: Thank you; sir: Epps: We would .~like'to call on Mr...JOhn Podger of Metcalf and. Eddy. Podger: Mr. Chairman, members of.the Board, ladies and gentlemen. My name is John Podger. I 'am-a Senior Vice-President .of the Boston based engineering firm of Metcalf and Eddy. I graduated from London University in 1949 and I have practiced sanitary engineering, civil engineering, in the United States since 1953. I have been a member of the firm of Metcalf and Eddy since 1954. I am registered in a number off,states in the United States and overseas. I am presently direct0r of our firm's general engineering department 'with direct responsibility for all matters relating~to the management and disposa~l of solid waste. I visited the Cason site-in the spring of this'year. I inspected the access from RoUte 20 and the road~leading into the site. I t~ooked at the superficial geol0gy ~and 'I looked at such evidence that exists and erosion that has taken place and cuts and streams and the~effects of this erosion on. the Rivanna-'River. I have-also studied the soil lOgs and the site plan, the plan which you have seen here prepared by the city. I have discussed these proposals for the. sanitary landfill development with the engineers at the City and'I studied various reports by Messrs. Homer Smith, Gooch, Goodell, ~Sherman Grove, and others. Based on .these activities, I have no hesitation in sta'ting that this site can-be, developed a.s a suitable sanitary landfill site. It has a~'adequate level of screening and access is ~reasonably good. ~You have heard this evening from other speakers regarding th'e-quantities and suitability of the soil materiall I concur with the statements.'that..have been made previously by Professor Larewregarding the nat~ure and the ext-ent~ of that material as being, s~itabl-e for a 'sanitary landfill. I would lik~e to make that very clear. There~are some minor hazards of ground water say min~or, I believe they are relatively slight .for a number~of reasons. pollution. I First of all, there is not a great deal of ground~water flow thrOugh'the area which will be used-fo~a sanitary landfill, we have heard tonigh~ of the limited basin, the fact that..the rock horizon, the rock foundation consists of a hi'gh~ly-impermeable greenstone. ~We.~have. also heard Of the-f~act that-if and when fissures are discovered in this rock, they will be sealed with a.blanket of about'four feet of an impermeable material which can be obtained from the 'site'. This is standard pr.~ctice. The engineering proposals also include a~standard practice of providing about a, four-foot separation from the bottom of the fill and any areas in which ground~water may exist. The purpose of this, of course, is to prevent any possible flow of lea'chate from the fill t~o the ground water~ This is a practice~,that is widely adopted. I have been personally responsible for engineering successful projects where this particular procedure has been followed. This procedure was proposed for three'sanitary landfills in the Richmond area of Virginia for which I was respOnsbile; for a sanitary landfill in Sparksborough, Massachusetts, in a ravine situation very .similar ~to what we are faced with here tonight. For again at a sanitary landfill in Laconia, New Hampshire, where there is a considerably greater amount of flow through ground water then would ever be likely.to occur in this area here and in Fatmouth, Massachusetts. I just cite these as examples of the successful application of this technique.to prevent the contamination of ground-.water. In my judgment, th'ere is also very little risk of 15 contamination of surface waters. Here again this is based on the fact that the basin is a small basin. There are no great quantities of surface water in the area. Suitable cut off ditches and diversionary structures would be constructed as has already been described.~ The material which would be used to seal the fill is an impermeable material of suitable characteristics as has already been previously noted. The purpose, of. course, of sealing over the top of the fill. is again to prevent the generation of~ leachate which is the source of contamination. I have looked at the hazards of erosion, and-in my~opinion these are not particularly severe. It is .evident that the natural erosion that has occurred in this particular basin is not severe and I think that we have heard from Professor Larew, Even in-areas where there has been disturbance of the vegetative cover, in the ... there, there is no great evidence of erosion. Nevertheless~ to spite-this, there undoubtedly is an erosioh hazard and this would have to be controlled by careful operation of the sanitary landfill. Here again, well-proven techniques would be used which would consist of keeping to an absolute minimum the borrow areas from which vegetation has to be stripped and providing suitable cut off, diversionary swales around these areas, keeping to a minimum the stockpile areas which again could be a source of erosion and again constructing diversionary swales.around those and establishing vegetative cover on newly placed soils as rapidly as possible. Also providing aids to this cover during the time the cover is being established with matting straw and that-~sort of thing to prevent erosion. Another factor in preventing~or limiting erosion would be the construction of the settling pond that has beennoted here. A further factor you gentlemen should bear in mind is the intent to monitorJthe downstream areas"'~f the stream that f, lows through the site and to establish ground water monitoring and control wells, again with an idea of making sure that there is no contamination of the ground waters. In conclusion gentlemen, I would like to say that in my opinion the Cason site certainly can be engineered to operate as a satisfactory landfill without creating water or erosion problems and with a minimum degree of inconvenience in terms of.noise and dust and aesthetics from~a point of view of visibility because of the screening. There is~'an excellent possibility that .the site can be finely landscaped into_an Open area that will submit to a~greater variety of uses than are possible_under the present topography~ Thank you. Wheeler: Any questions of Mr. Podger? Thank you~ sir. Epps: In closing, I would like to call the Board's'.attention to the fact that the traffic that would be using admittedly 250 as well as 20, will be off peak and not'at the critical periods. Secondly, I would like to call attention of the Board to the.fact that ~this is a joint application. Mr. Cason, the owner~ is a joint signer to the application, ~He is here with his counsel.- I would like to ask Mr. Marshall if he has something he would like to present and ask him to come forward at this time. 7-31-74 Marshall: Mrs. Chairman, members of the Board, ladies, and gentlemen. I am Harry Marshall, attorney for.the~joint applicant Mr. Cason. I have made some notes of things I wanted.'to~say. I ~will be as brief as I possibly can. I do feel, however, it is appropriate at. the outset to try and get one or two-points more clearly in focus. The staff report which was given ~o me by'Mr. Humphrey~uses the~.term non- conforming. I think this creates an erroneous impression. A special use.permit is not a nonconforming use. I think those of',you~who are~experienced~in zoning matters will ~recognize ~this. It is a use that is permitted~ but. it. may be:subject to certain conditions, which is certainly the case in your zoning ordinance. Now, another'thing that was alluded~to rather extensively by. Mr. Humphrey were the uses:permitted in zone RS, 1. I will call"the Board's attention.~to the fact that~this is in, fact A-1 zoning. I wouldtike~the Board to consider"first the'statement that is contai~ned in Section ll-13-3,.which says ~'the uses~shall be in harmony with-the uses.permitted, by right under a zoning permit in a zoning district. It shall not adversely affect the use of neighboring property." Looking at uses permitted in Agricultural District A-l, you find that among the uses that are.permitted, horseshow grounds, of a temporary nature; sawmills, temporary; dairying. Now.when I grew up in the country in Albemarle County, dairying was a rather different sortof proposition. You-had a large acreage and you~had a few head of,cattle that roamed~extensively on the grass. Dairying today, as I understand i~; is more closely similar to a feed~lot operation because the cattle are.concentrated in an area, fed large ~olumes of food, not grazed, they are grazed, but the.~grazing is limited. They are stuffed at one end and milk is subtracted from the other. There is a good deal of waste-material that comes~in'hi~h concentration, But,.~this is one matter of right that may~be done in an A-1 zone on the 150-acre Cason, property~ Consider that and compare it~with a sanitary landfill under the control of a c~unty inspector, personnel, consider it with State Water Control B'oard and So~id ~aste and Vector Control, all:.of them. So when you talk about uses being in harmony with, I think you should consider that aspect. The question of distance has already been covered. I think that also it is well to point out at this time, the question of adverselaffect on the economy~or viability of the neighborhood. It is. interesting to note that during the pendency of these proceedings, the Franklin property which has been mentioned previously,,and which is appraised by your appraiser at $80,000, was sold-,for $135,000. Another property, very' close by, appraised for $30,000, sold for $80,000. ~11 of-theSe were during the pendency~of these proceedings when no one who was buying could fail to,know that there was a potential for a landfill and no one could predict what the outcome of these hearings might be~ So, I don't think it is fair to say that the threat of a landfill, or the operation of a landfill, is~ that detrimental, When'you-consider that.this landfill would be in a very well screened area, behind hill'masses, which are covered with trees and in a bowl where you wouldn't be heard or seen from the street. I think the Board should also consider another side of the economic aspect. This relates to your own constituency, gentlemen. Refuse haulers tod'ay ~ih~the Albemarle County area ~experience costs as high as $1.00 per mile for truck operation. Now, in the case of people living in cismont, Keswick and north on Stony Point Road, ~the Cason site certainly holds the. opportunity to reduce costs or to hold costs down for the taxpayers and voters of this community. After all, the solid waste disposal haulersw the refuse haulers are not in it for charity, their costs are high. If they have to go to Ivy instead of to Cason, those costs are going to be passed directly to the consumer who is paying for the service. I understand that the cost of refuse collection in Key West has risen twice'within the past two years. So, I think you should consider that too when you start talking about landfills. I think this is touched on in your Master Plan where it is~suggested that landfills at various points throughout the County are in the best interests of the local citizens. Finally, I would like to remind the Board of something else. We are talking about a piece of property here tonight proposed for .use as a sanitary landfill. I. would like tO remind you that three members of this Board on the 26th of September '73 voted to approve~this site as a landfill. According to the minutes of that meeting, one member said it was ~an excellent site, but he couldn't vote for it because there had been some discussion about the possibility of the limitation in time~ That makes.four who thought it was a worthwhile site. Gentlemen, this is 'the same site that we are talking.about now. I think it' is also,, just a-side comment, !it is fair for the Board to remember that Dr. Larew who was talking here tonight, speaking for E. O. Gooch and Associa~tes, was hired by the County to conduct the soil evaluation. Thank you, gentlemen. Wheeler: Do you have any questions, gentlemen? He was not hired by Mr. Cason. Mr. Marshall~I must straighten the ~record out again. You are well aware that when'you said our appaiser,' that when those figures that are used are not up to date figures, probably 1967 figures. Appraisals have been made in 1974, but I know you haven't gotten them. They are not available. I am aware of that and you are aware of that. Also, you ... and your client and the City might consider that property for dairying but you know a farmer. is not. Thank you. Gentlemen, we will take a two minute break. Reconvened. Forbes Reback: Mr.. Chairman, gentlemen of the~Board~ I am Forbes Reback, 'a residen~t~of Albemarle County, attorney for a citizens group.which opposes ~the use of the CasOn site for~a sanitary landfill. As Charl~ie Haugh asked you last night, w~ith respect to another site, what.has changed since your 5/1 vote on September 28, 1973, to deny Special Use Permit 2817 My answer to that is nothing. The Cason site was bad than and is just as bad.now, t want to take an opportunity to answer some of the specific, a few of the specific allegations made tonight by witnesses fore. the City. We have the same problems with the studies presented-by-the City tonight as we had last night. They are not final studies in any sense of the word, they are merely preliminary'studies. We don't~have all.of the data %hat you'gentlemen'desire to have. One of the things, that concerns me ~tha% was brought out in Mr. Agnor'~s presentation is the very fact that this~tand is being leased.. I~t seems to me~'that-from.the information I have on landfills, it is a far superior practice to own your landfill before you finnish with it. At the end of ten-years, or-when this site is'finished, ~the City ~ will close the gates and hand the key .over to George Cason. There is no end use at this time that we know of that .has been proposed~for this site. Now, at the end of that ten-year period, who~will be responsible-forTs~abilizing,that landfill? Landfills, unless they are engineered to the "enth".~degre'e, sometimes are unstable, they' move, ~ they~shi.f~, they catch on fire occasionally~ There are a lot of factors there that ~ the City Will not have~any~contro1 over once .they t~urn the key. over to George Cason. I noticed throughout all presentations tonight, every witness for the City, that we have been properly engineered to death. Every single witness ~before youLsaid,~yes, this may be made-into a landfill~ if properly engineered. And last night,.you heard that the McIntire~Tennis Courts could be made.into a sanitary landfill, if properly engineered. If.the City is willing to spend the amount of money that it'takes, .and if it carries through, it can put a sanitary landfill anywhere,.perhaps within it's own boundaries. But, we have heard all this about proper engineering. Now, I wrote to Mr. Eugene Jensen, Acting Secretary of the State-Wa%er Control Board, some months ago. .I~ said what. dO.you mean bylproper engineering?~ iHow does proper engineering affect.these ~streams? ~He wrote back and said 'it~"is-~not up to us to do~the~proper engineering. We.just'review the proper engineering Submitted by-the ~City and the ~ City has not'submitted~any ~to us yet. So I am in <no position~to answer your question and that is what I-received. These final reports, this so-called proper engineering, has not been submitt~ed. ,We just~have~preliminary approvals, if properly engineered. I am s~rry that Dr~ Grant'~Goodell is in-Spitzburg~n and~is not here to'defend himself, either last night or tonight. But, I have-the utmost faith in Dr. ~Goodell's integrity and his abilities as a geologist. He is'not~ Chairman of~the Department of Environmental Sciences at the Univerity of Virginia because he doesn't know what he is talking about~.~ He did,have a meeting with John Green'and you will recall that he showed some slides in his presentation which showed'the effects of erosion from the' landfill site, or from the Cason property, or Trevillians Mountain, all the way down the streams into the Rivanna River,~which pushed a gravel bar, I think he said two-thirds of the way, across the Rivanna Rive-r~ Now, these streams are outlined on this diagram we have over here on the board. ,~This.i~s..a scale draWing.. One inch equals 200 feet. You saw this diagram at the previous public hearings~ The two streams~in question are clea~ly shown converging just below thedam less than 100 feet below where the dam one,he holding pond~and the two streams converge. 'It is. true that the stream to the left, the southernmost stream, carries a larger f~ow of water in normal times than --~ the stream on the right, the northern stream. -But, .it is %he combined effect of these two streams that Dr~. Goodell is referring to. Gentlemen, I was absolutely amazed at Dr. Larew's testimony tonight. His testimony on the soils of the Cason 7-31-.74 19 site varies and is inconsistent with the te'~t~mohy of every other witness that you have heard from concerning the soils on this site.. We will highlight those studies for you in a minute. He was saying that' from a study that he made, which I have no way of refuting, that one acre of soil on the Cason site would provide enough cover for 205 days, if I heard him cOrrectly. ~f we accept Mr. Brunger's report, there are only about eight acres available for use, ... this thing is only going to last about five and one-half years. I don't know. t don't know how we measure an acre of soil and I guess Dr. Larew told us, but I didn't .catch it. He talked about silty soils. He talked about sandy silts, but gentlemen, he never talked about clays. Never mentioned clays.~ That is going to be very important because Mr. Brunger and Dr. Goodell found clay soils. Five different varieties of clay soils all over this Cason site. We will talk about what clay Soils mean in a minute. Mr. Warner, in talking about the roads tonight, told you that there was an inadequate sight distance which could be corrected, again with the proper engineering. He never mentioned the eight perce~nt grade. He doesn't deny that it exists. It is shown over there on our diagram as an eight percent grade at the entrance road, on a curve. That gr~ade is one or two percent steeper than is permitted under the current specifications for similar class highways in Virginia. I want you to think about the effect of that grade on trucks turning in and turning out and school bus traffic and all the rest of it on two, ten-foot lanes. I was, as you were, amused by Mr. Marshall's comparison of the dairying use that could be done and performed in~ an agricultural area. We welcome a well-run dairy farm on this mountain, but we would hope that.the cows, that their~up hill legs would~be shorter than their down hill legs and that they could thrive on leaves and .bark. Now, the Franklin farm has been appraised within the last year at between-S150,000 and $175,000 and was sold, as Mr. Marshall said, for $135.,000. He also said that another place that was appraised-for 50, sold for .80, but I believe George Cason bought that. Now, on the theory that one picture is worth a thousand words, allow me tc refute a significant portion of the E. O. Gooch soils report of September, 1973, 'which has been defended tonight by Mr. Larew. In the report, Mr. Larew .reprints Ta~ble 4 ~from the Sanitary-LarLdfill Design and Operation Report published.in 1972 by the United States Envi~'onmen%at Protection Agency, which he claims proves that clay soils are good to e:[cellent for sanitary landfills. Coinci- dently, the entire E..P.A. report is in Vol~le I of your Staff Report, in the yellow cover. .Now if we turn to that table, it is on, well it says Page 14,' but that is a reprint from the other, anyway it is in the E. O. Gooch report, and it is the table ,that looks like. that. You .will note that i~ ~the right hand column they talk about clay and they talk about the various functi~nSl_ that.,they preserve,, that-they perform, in a sanitary landfill as cover material. TheY ~don t talk about the sealing material around the bake of the landfill or anything else, this is simply for cover. You see just above that, Dr.Larew has-said, his comment is that they-rate these, soils as good to excellent for sanitary landfills. Let's look at it. Prevent rodents from burrowing 7-31-74 or tunneling, poor; keep ~flies from emerging, excellent, but note the asterick; minimize moisture from entering the fi!l,~ excellent, but note the~asterick; minimize landfill gas venting through cover, excellent, but again note the asterick; provide pleasiDg blowing paper, excellent; grow vegetation, fair to appearance control good; be permeable for-venting decomposition gases, .poor. Now those three astericks caught my attention, so look down and it says "except when cracks extend through the entire, cover".. Now, :the cover is only six inches-thick each night. No~, Mr. Larew says. the clay soils present-on the Cason site are only.moderately subj'ect to shrinkage and swell with changes in moisture content, says that above. He concludes from this that-cracking should not be a~serious problem. Well, gentlemen, we have brought a tub full of Mr'~ ~Cason's clay here ~tonight so you may judge for yourself whether Mr. Larew is-right or wrong. Jack Vermillion, Who3.1ives at Franklin, collected this.sample and I will-ask him to explain-to you what he did. I might also add that this clay is .not fully dried out yet. Vermillion: Mr. Wheeler and Board of Supervisors, my name is John Vermillion. I live on the Stony Point Road at' Franklin. I got this dirt off the back part of my proper.fy which is'right next.to the scales and entrance area to the landfill, just up the hill from it.I have lived in the area ,for a little while now and I have covered the. land pretty thoroughly.- The same.soil.to .the eye seems to cover pretty well. I am not-an engineer. Incidentl~, I am a little bit excited and a little bit upset about this thing so~ excuse-me if I don't com~ across quite right. A ten year old boy ,and two little.~irls ,and I took the garden tractor back and we dug this up and our put it in / ho~se bucket and they beat-it-up with hammers and we hosed it down and smoothed it over and I sit it out in the sun. We didn't have enough sun when we startDd'l&st week. It rai~ed ,a few days-, but it~ did get a few days of' sun-on it.. It is not'compl'etely dry yet but as-you see i--t~, is nice and cracky.- I might add that I had Some bulldozer .work done around the place a. few months ago and in the recent drought we had large .cracks in this area where we have been unable to get grass to grow. -I have tried. I have had femtilizer and fescue' and it just doesn't seem to grow. We did get a few good weeds, but anyway that is enough .said about the land and the soil around there. I was here last night, As a matter of fact, I have been to every hearing on'these .sites and I can realize your frustration, but I do have a few things to say since I am the closest to the site. They want to run these trucks right up beside, practically, our house. There were some citizens, leading citizens, from Route 29 South here la,st night and I have heard a lot of people~stand up and are make a to do about they/ Albemarle citizens and were born and bred and came from Albemarle. I would like to note that my family roots 'in Albemarle go ba~k into the 1700's. My great-grandfather was Sheriff Df Albemarle County .at one time. My great- uncle was founder of the blind shop in Charlottesville, so we go back. a little ~bit and I have been here for 10 years since I came up and had' my own business in Charlottesville. I just wanted to let you know that I do'have an interest'. Ths~Franklin house was once owned by Benjamin Franklin's grandson. It Was built,~ we can't tell quite when, but !~'~' prior to 1799. Meriwether Lewis stayed in this house when he was secretary to Thomas Jefferson ~nd Jefferson was at Monticello. Meriwether Lewis stayed here and commuted back and forth to Monticello, so history runs deep. I won~'t comment on the rest of the places. I am just going to give you the run down on what I know and the importance of it. Several months ago we had an overnight rain of almost an inch and I had water in my basement. We had water in the backyard. The next morning my son and I took a little walk, it is not that far, over to where the proposed site is. The streams that were referred to at one time by City engineers or City consultants as being dry weather streambeds of insignificance, and have said so again tonight, were running four to five feet across with water. It was pouring dOwn out of the mountain. There is a gulley eroded across the road. I don't know what the gentlemen drove when he drove up in there but it was either a Sherman tank or something like that to get up in there and it isn't all that easy. I would like to point out something else and I feel it is very important. Engineers have come and they have given us all the fa~ts about how they are going to engineer something but there is something that has been left out; the human factor. How about the people who live around here? Who has stood up and said the value and what they are going to loose and what is going to be the effect~on their Children? Nobody. Nobody has put any time into this at all. I would like to tell you that several years ago Hurricane Camille came through Nelson County. I happen to have the privilege of being on the Charlottesville Rescue Squad at that time. I was on one of the first rescue trucks that we sent down. I saw'the terrain. I saw terrain that looks exactly like this land and it was d~nuded. The houses were in it. We were pulling bodies out.-of it and I would just like to say to put garbage up in that mountain and pile it up, cover it up, take away the land cover, take away the bushes, put the dam up, and if we get something anywhere near Camille it is going to come down out of that mountain and will take Mr. E. H.~Deane's house. Hope he isn't home~ It is going to take away part of Route 20.~ I saw this right down in Nelson County. Who is to say it couldn't happen here? I know that just a few months ago, as I said, that a heavy overnight rainfall was bringing water down out of that mountain. I am not Mr. Goodell and I am not talking about the stream that everybody says is not part of it. I am talking about the stream running by the old house.on the Cason property and coming down immediately out of this .dump site. I wanted to point that out to you. I have a couple of~other things I want to say and I am going to quit. I have four young daughters and two sons; 2, 3, 4, and 7, the girls, the little girls. I have a 10 year old boy. They have to. catch the school bus, the ones who are going to school. I have one in kindergarten, one in the second grade, one in the fifth grade, the other two will be coming along in a year or so and when this thing is planned to be here. There is an inadequate sight distance. The foot of my driveway is at the beginning of the turning lane, 'the deceleration 7-31-74 lane where they want to bring these garbage trucks in. I haven't heard who is going ,to .be responsibl~e, whether it is going to be Mr. Cason or'whether it is going to be Mr. Agnor, or who the City is going to put out there, but who is going to be responsible when one of those garbage comes in there and gets out of control and kills one trucks of my little girls. It doesn't make sense to me. It is an ill-conceived plan. It will do damage to this community. Other people can testify to the value of the land; experts can do that. I hadn't planned on saying this, but since Mr. Marshall brought it up, I would like to answer a couple of things he said. I am the one who bought the F~ranklin farm. We paid $135,000 for it. We felt at that time, and we feel now, that the Cason site is so unsuitable for a landfill as to be almost ridiculous. have been over there and checked ir'thoroughly. It is not something that I have taken a couple of hours on. I have spent literally days and days as I know you gentlemen have and getting all the mail. I have written you a few letters from time to time. My wife and I have a firm belief in our government and that they wouldn't in their wildest imagination approve such a folly. That is why we bought Franklin. we just felt like there was no chance that anybody would approve such a thing. Just as a side note. It is a fact that it cost more to restore Franklin house to its original condition, or as close as possible, as Mr. Marshall says the whole place is worth. I thank you. Reback: Let,s discuss these clay soils for just a minute. The Environmental Protection Agency report on Page 15 addresses itself to the problems just alluded to and I quote from that report: "Many clay soils can absorb large amounts of water but, after dry~ing, usually shrink and crack. These characteristics make many clays less desirable than other soils for use as a cover material. The large cracks that usually develop allow water to enter the fill and permit decomposition gases to escape. Rats and insects can also enter or leave the fill through these apertures." That is taken from the E.P.A. report which is included in your yellow cover. Now, let's look at the table on page 2 of the report of the Soil Conservation Service dated September 21, 1973. In this table, Earl H. Brunger, who is familiar to all of you, analyzed the suitability and extent of the five soil types which he found on the Cason site for use as a sanitary landfill and his summary, his table really has been put into graphic form for you and that's the soils map hanging on the wall behind you which Mr. Humphrey tells us is 28 acres, which is the only 28 out of the 50 acres, and I think that figure should be borne in mind throughout. Mr. Brunger's table on page 2 shows that'all of these soils exhibit severe limitations for use in a landfill, with some exceptions, some minor exceptions. Basically the greatest part, the vast major~£ty of the soil-is unsuitable for use in a landfill. Now, in his decree entered on June~-7, Judge Berry remanded the landfill problem to you with directions.. First to reconsider special use permit applications 203 and 281 in which you are to be guided by the substantive provisions of your Zoning Ordinance as contained in Section 11-13. If having followed those guidelines, and having made positive findings in accordance with the Court's decree, you are Still of the opinion that applications 203 and.281 should be denied, then you are further directed to find an alternate site which will meet the criteria of your Ordinance and the needs of the City. I am here tonight again to tell you that you made the right decision on the Cason site on September 28, 1973. And, in my opinion, you made it for the right reasons. In the interest of brevity let me recap the highlights of the reports that were presented to you concerning the Cason site. Dr. H. Grant Goodell, Director of the Department of Environmental Sciences at the University, a geologist, has told you that the Cason site is unsuitable for the safe and economic operation of a sanitary landfill for the following reasons. 1) The topographic slopes on the property are steep, often exceeding 35%r and after the trees' are removed and the fill is in place and returned to grade, it will be extremely difficult to stabilize against severe erosion. This would lead to large scale environmental damage to the Rivanna River. 2) The soils vary greatly in thickness and consist of boulder clays which have a tendency toward cracking when dry. We have shown you the clay. They will be extremely difficult to work, are unsuitable as fill cover, and exhibit some of the worst gullying tendencies in the County. On the soils map of the County, these are Class 6. Only a very, very small portion of the County is in soils classification 6. Why a site would even be considered in soils class 6 is beyond my knowing ..... outcrops of Catcotcin greenstone in the area attest to the fact that the soils are sporadic and variable in thickness and probably insufficient in quantity fOr sustained landfill operation. 'Dr. Goodell showed you slides of the Catcotcin outcroppings in the area. We don't have those slides with us tonight. Dr. Goodetl concludes that almost any other location available to the City would be more suitable for its fill location. Rosser H. Payne, Jr., a member of the American Institute of Planning, a man to whom you entrusted the preparation of your Comprehensive'Plan has told you in his report of September 5, 1973~ that he is amazed that anybody could seriously consider the Cason site for a sanitary landfill in the first place. After discussing the Cason site in relationship to the objectives of the Comprehensive .Plan, he concluded that the granting of a special use permit to the City at this site would not serve to promote the public health, safety,, and general welfare, because of the steep, slopes, timber and soil lost, traffic and access problems, environmental damage, damage to the scenic and historic values of the immediate area and based upon the technical reports submitted, it would do violence to the premises, goals and objectives of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. I think Mr. Payne's objectivity is illustrated by the fact that he has testified on.behalf of sites that he considers suitable, including the Massie site last night. Mr. Payne is here tonight %o address you and discuss this situation further, but I will ask him to wait until I conclude. Homer G. Smith, Jr., a consulting forester, testified before you on September 12, 1973,. that_establishment of a landfill within the hollows, as proposed on the Cason site, will create serious erosion problems if the trees and vegetation are removed from the steeper slopes. Serious consideration should be 7-31-74 given to evaluate the potential damage that could be brought about by the clearing of this site and the high cost of maintenance' if it were established. C. Sherman Grove, Professor of Engineering at the Un~versity, and an authority on solid waste disposal systems, in his report of July '31, 1973, which is a part of the record before you, stated that the Cason site is located in an area which will promote maximum leachate drainage into the.streams, excessive runoff and siltation to existing streams with final sedimentation~in the~Rivanna River and high pollution and severe degradation of the streams fed by surface waters. Dr. Michael J. Demetsky, a P. rofessor of Traffic Engineering at the University~ submitted a very detailed.report last July evaluating the effects on local roads of traffic to a sanitary landfill on the Cason site. Dr. Demetsky's investigation revealed significant problem areas relating to safety which were: 1) the pavement conditions on Route 20; 2) the narrow ten-foot lanes on Route 20; 3) the excessive eight percent grade on the Cason frontage on Route 20; 4) traffic movements along Route 20, that is, slow moving, decelerating and entering truck traffic;' 5) the increased accident potential along Route-20; 6) the problem of limited access roads from the City, the Free Bridge, primarily; 7) providing an environmentally acceptable access road to the landfill from Route 20. He concluded that the Cason site is inadequate as a sanitary landfill in view of traffic and highway considerations, and adds that most of these problems would be nonexiStent or considerably reduced by a landfill site accessible from a .major, multilane highway which in turn can be accessed at a number of peripheral points from the-City of Charlottesville. The foregone~ conclusions reached by experts retained by the Stony Point Road Association, are generally shared and supported by various impartial Federal and State agencies., Mr. Earl~H. Brunger, Soil Scientiest with the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, has analyzed the soils of Albemarle County for many, many years. He 'is considered an.expert in his field. Mr. Brunger's report to you, dated September 21, 1973, discussed five soil .types which he found- on the Cason site and everyone of them demonstrated severe limitations of one kind or another for use in a landfill. I refer you to Table 2. He concluded by reporting that there is a problem with seasonal high water tables in the bottoms with the attendent possibility of contamination of ground water and that the sloping ridge tops generally have go'od soil ..., but they' have a heavy clay subsoil which is difficult to work when wet On the steeper~ slopes, soils are not generally as deep as the ridge tops so that shallow soils and steep slopes become related prOblems. There are some rock outcrops on the'site. Stones are scattered on the surface and in the soils profile particularly on the steeper slopes. Remember how steep the slopes really shown on the map over there, but it comes down from about 635 are. The contours are feet to about 400 or 375 feet at the bottom in a space of about 1500 feet, so it averages a 20% or better grade. Mr. W. W. James, investigator for the Bureau of Solid.Waste and Vector Control of the State Health Department, the agency which has 7-31-74 25 the ultimate responsibility for granting o'r~denying a permit to operate a sanitary landfill states in his report to the City of Charlottesville on July 17, 1973, "the topography .does not lend itself readily to a landfill operation there being slopes of L 20 to 60 degrees. The landfill will be a major engineering project and carried out at an exorbitant cost." Mr. K. R. Hinkle, investigator for the~State Water Control Board, inspected the Cason site on August 29, 1973, and in a geohydrologic memorandum dated August 31, 1973, stated that the plastic, clay soils of the area would divert the downward migration of leachate laterally along the slopes in the same general direction as the surface water and, consequently, careful engineering design would be necessary to prevent adverse effects on surface waters downstream from the site. Mr. Junius Fishburne, Jr., Executive Director of the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission, in a letter of September 7, 1973, concerning the historic significance of Franklin concluded by saying ~"in light of the great efforts taken by the owners to restore Franklin and improve their property, it seems inappropriate ~and indeed tragic that such an incompatible activity as a sanitary landfill operation could be placed adjacent to it. Restoration of houses and structures is an asset to any locality and is an activity that should be encouraged. I hope that steps can be taken to find a more suitable location for the proposed landfill project." I got the following letter today from M. Jack Rinehart, Jr., a member of the American Institute of Architects, Which is directed to the Board of Supervisors. I will give it to Mr. Wheeler at this time. Mr. Rinehart says: "Two months ago, I was asked by Mr. & Mrs~ Jack Vermillion to prepare drawings for certain alterations and additions to their home. In proceeding with this work, I have learned that this home had much historical significance. Further- more, previous alterationS and additions have been quite sympathetic leaving this as a fine architectural example of its era. Such examples are very difficult to find and should be preserved. The detrimental effects, both aesthetic and economic, will be great. This property is bordered by the landfill site. As a member of the Planning Commission, I voted against this landfill site because our Master Plan has slated it for low-density, residential use. Because of its close proximity to downtown Charlottes~i ville, .this choice of land use remains very viable. A landfill in its midst will definitely deter devetopment~ according to the Master Plan. For these and many other reasons, I hope you will find that this particular site is not suitable for a landfill site." We have also received a letter addressed to Mr. Wheeler by B. Ernest Wheeler, a broker with Roy Wheeler Realty Company. "Dear Mr. Wheeler: This is to certify that I have inspected the land under consideration for the landfill on Route 20 North, or the Stony Point ~Road, now owned by Mr. George Cason. In m~ estimation to have this landfill at.this location would be very detrimental to the properties in this section, and, by all means, I advise, if possible, temporary land be used elsewhere until an incinerator is built to take care of the~waste. I sincerely hope that your decision can be made bearing in mind .that maybe one of these~properties could have belonged to you. Respect~fully submitted, E. Ernest Wheele~." In addition, we would like to add as part of our record the 1.etter which was submitted to you last night by Mr .... , of Polly P. McGavock, who spoke about a landfill, but did not tie herself to any specific site. In addition to Franklin, there are a number of other historic landmarks and scenic vistas in the immediate vicinity of the Cason site which are shown in t,he Comprehensive Plan and which you have thereby recogni~zed as worthy of your protection. Some of these are the Old Ordinary, Buena Vista and Windie Knowe. Further down the road are Ridgeway, Edgemont and .... Gentlemen the community · surrounding ~the Cason site is no longer agricultural in character and development. The established character of development and growth is suburban. Key West is a burgeoning subdivision with over 150 homes and more under construction all the time. Some of Key West. is zoned as RS-1. I wi~ll hand you a plat of the entire Key West Subdivision covering approximately 450 acres located just across from down the road to the' Cason site. There .are approximately 198 lots shown on that plat ~and it has a potential for about 35.0 lots, or 300 lotS, excuse me. This has become an extremely popular subdivision serving the needs of the community. The homes ~in there now are, range from about $50,000 to, as I understand it, about $115,000. Across the road from Mr. Cason's property, -as shown on our map on the easel, Mr. & Mrs. John Dorrier have built a number ~f. dwellings in a small R-2 ~zone and just to the west of the Cason property is~a large undeveloped tract zoned R-3. I believe it is under the control of,~Dr. Hurt. More rezonings to. permit higher density residential uses in the neighborhood are anticipated and your own proposed, new zoning map designates this specific site and the immediately adjacent area .as rural, residential, where I believe you can limit homes to one and one-half acres'. A large conservation area is also adjacent to ~the, site~ ~ It ~covers~the Trevillians Mountain. .Now, your capable Planning Staff has prepared a new comprehensive study'of the Cason site for this meeting. You~may ~ecall that the staff, in'its original report of last summer, stated that they could not.recommend approval of the Cason site. In it's new memorandum of July 23, 1974, after a thorough reevaluation of the site, the Planning Staff concludes that approval of special use permit 281 would appreciably alter, to its detriment, the present character of the area and would significantly impair potential to develop the area in consonnance with its established patterns and character; not to imply that any nonconforming use is too dissonant to be considered in this area. The staff report goes on to say "not withstanding the many valid technical reasons for denying the permit request, as brought out in the five expert witnesses reports, they feel that there exists ample justicification of the denial of SP-281 solely on the basis of th~ incompatibilities previously stated, when considered in conjunction with the guidelines as specified in the existing Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance." Upon~hearing the original report of the ~Planning Staff, and after the extended presentation of evidence at a public hearing on September ~5, 1973, the Albemarle County Planning Commission, a body appointed by you to make recommendations concerning matters of planning and zoning, unanimously recommended denial of the pending application. Now, gentlemen, whose health, safety and general welfare is entitled to your protection in the just and impartial application of your Zoning ordinance? Is not the E. H. Deane family, whose house is shown right near Route 20 where the two streams converge as they approach Route 20? The Deane house is right there on the tef~i~hand~side, very close to the stream bank, maybe 150 feet from the stream bank. Are not the E. H. Dearie family entitled to be protected from the siltation and ~'~ pollution 'of this stream and the fear of a premature burial under the weight of the City's garbage should it break loose from the mountain with another Camille or Agnes? Is not the Vermillion family, which has invested its future in the purchase of Franklin, entitled to be protected from the noise, odor and falling trash from the City's trucks which will grind their way up to the access road nearly in the front yard of Franklin? Are they also not entitled to be protected from the drone of the bulldozer as it covers up the City's garbage night after night? Is not the Dorrier family not entitled to be protected in it's investment in it's small R-2 zone across the road? Isn't even Dr. Hurt entitled to have his investment in his R-3 land protected? And what about all those young families in Key West? Are they not entitled to your protection from additional truck traffic on Route 20? Must their children be endangered in riding school buses to Stony Point and McIntire, Jack Jouett, Albemarle, and elsewhere? And what about this natural resource we all enjoy in the Rivanna River? Are we all entitled to your protection from further pollution and sedimentation? Finally, ~gentlemen, aren"t even'the citizens of Charlottesville who will use Pen Park in the future, entitled to be protected from the foolishness of their own elected represent'atives? For all these reasons we request that special use permit 281 be denied. At this time I would like to call on Rosser Payne, who has cOnsented to speak to this matter. Payne: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name is Rosser H. Payne, Jr., a member of the American Institute of Planners, Planning Consultant, with offices at 59 Culpeper Street, Warrenton, Virginia. I am not going t© take a lot of time with yon tonight. We have worked together since 1968. You know what this situation is and I know what it is. I'm here because I have Lo be. I prepared your Plan and in the controversy that we are now facing, after three years of the Plan and the recom- mendations that were made, we are going to continue to be tog'ether until this issue is settled, I'm sure. I. would like to make it quite clear that regardless of all the emotions expressed at these hearings, as there Will always be on any landfill site anywhere, that I will come here and make a recommendation technically based on planning principles, as I did to you last night, and stand~ behind that on this forum or any other forum. I am here tonight in a diathermidally opposed position, and I stand behind, completely, the report dated September 5th, 1973, which I prepared for you on the Cason site and which is included in Mr. Humphrey's report. I 'believe it is the last entry in the report and Mr. Reback has read to you my statements which are generally spoken with regard to the Comprehensive Plan. I don't need to take your time to go through the details and the outlines of it except to point out our three years of progress since ~this plan was drawn up. You will recall, as part of my contract~I had to write a zoning ordinance for you in which I recommended that sanitary landfills, based on criteria on Page 71 of your report, be confined in zoning, with special permits, to agricultural and conservation zones. As you have been told by all the legal counsel, you now have it permitted, with use permits, in A-1 zones. You must deal with that. I am under the same court order that you are. Now it is interesting to note that you have been working on this ordinance for just over two years~ Mr. Barry Marshall started out with it in reviewing it legally. I believe my good friend, Herb Rickford, also reviewed it from the legal.point of view and Mr. St. John has reviewed it in terms of the ordinance. I have spent a large number of hours working with the Planning Commission and the staff on this ordinance. I would simply ask you to recall this with regard to landfills,, and the reason I am here tonight in opposition to the Cason site. I do not see how it can be conceivable from the planning point of view, after having spent nearly four years working with you and knowing your objectives, to set forth an objective in a plan which creates an area of residential development with "R" zones. They are clearly enunciated on Mr. Reback's map here and they are initiated clearly on Mr. Humphrey's map right behind you. There isn't any doubt that we prepared t~e plan together and that the citi~zens of ~the County designated this area as a residential area. I had some discussion with Mr. Fisher on that point last night. Now, to get to my major point. Here is your preliminary, proposed ordinance. You have gone over my work and you have decided to come up with ~an ordinance that ~removes a sanitary landfill from the conservation zone but you. have kept it, as you must, somewhere, and you have it in your Article II, proposed Agricultural District, General. That I consider a proper .... But, I simply say that we .have-now reached this point and I do not see how it is conceivable that we could prepare and adopt a plan the citizenry supports in general, which calls for residential uses of this area,~including the Cason site. We could ... that plan, and propose to adopt an ordinance, I hope in the near future, which does not permit landfills in residential areas. This area is quite clearly shown on Page 94 of the Comprehensive Plan as part of the Charlottesville urban ~area and it is~my statement as a planner that a sanitary landfill is a conflicting use in a developing residential area. It is not a conflicting.use in agricultural or conservation, in my judgment. But, you chose, as is your prerogative, to limit it in the proposed ordinance to agricultural zones. I am suggesting as a planner to keep it that way. As strongly as I was in favor of a previous site here before you on a previous night, I suggest to you that I am just as strongly opposed to doing something entirely antithetical to your planning program which is the case before you tonight. I respectfully suggest that this permit be denied. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 7-31-74 29 Wheeler: Any questions of Mr. Payne, gentlemen? Thank you. Do you have anything else Mr. Reback? ~-- Reback: I am going to conclude now, but I may have something to say later. There are a number of people here to speak. Wheeler: C. M. Davidson. I would ask you to please be brief and do not repeat unless you feel it is necessary. Davidson: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen, I'm Charles M. Davidson, Jr. I speak as a private, resident citizen of the City of Charlottes- ville. I have no representative capacity but I have reason to believe that a number of us feel very grateful to you for what you are doing for us now in letting us use the Ivy landfill. It is our trash and you are kind to be helpful. As explained briefly a few moments ago, %he courts order seems to leave it to the Board of Super- visors to find a place for our trash if you don't approve either of these two sites. We hope, I hope that you won't approve this site. With deference to the court, and I am very deferential to the court, I absolve you from any such obligation to me as a citizen of Charlottesville. I am your petitioner. You don't have to find a site fOr my trash. But, that is not entirely unselfish because I wonder what my distinguished friends from Charlottesville would dO if the shoe were on the other foot and your proposition was that we had to find a place for your trash. I believe that perhaps ~" there is land in Charlottesville as sorry or sorrier than the worst land in Albemarle County. Of course our plan, and hope, and desire is that the great County of Albemarle, the great City of Charlottesville, and the great University of Virginia will get together and come forward with modern treatment. Landfills are for us as ancient and gone as the "Doo-Doo" birds, so we are prepared to support the expenditure of the necessary funds to do this in a scientific manner. I know you are most interested in our views on this particular site. I don't believe there is anYthing I can add to the distinguished report. I do underscore that 250 and the Free Bridge are a sorry place~ for any more traffic of this size and dimension. This is no small truck. The historic values out here are very real and we thank you for your time. Rohrbaugh: Mr. Chairman members of the Board, I am Barbara Rohrbaugh, a resident of Key West. This community of about 150 homes lies 7',/10 of a mile to the entrance ,-, of the proposed Cason. site. Key West alone has a population of close to 500. Approximately 30% of these people are children. In addition to the homes on Route 20 North, Key West adds considerable traffic to this two-lane road and the adjoining State Route of 250. It is this traffic problem that I would like to address myself to tonight. There are four serious-hazards, which now exist in this area. 1) Access to the site is halfway up an extremely steep, curved hill. Vision at the proposed access would be very poor for both dump trucks entering the road and south bound traffic. Nine to ten months 'of the year school buses would compound the problem, especially during inclement weather. There is Only one passing zone all the. waY-to the site and it's location is just north beyond Route 250. Increased accidents are certain along this one passing zone with it's steep embankments on either side. Unfortunately, drivers take chances when they know they have only one passing zone in a slow moving line of traffic. The Stony Point Road, or Route 20, is paved to a width of 19 feet. I have measured it. Other two lane roads in ~he County are paved to widths of 26 feet. The edges are worn and crumbling in many places eliminating as much as a foot on either side, thereby narrowing the usable portion of the road to 17 feet in many places. A dump truck is seven and one-half feet wide. A school bus is eight feet wide. That,leaves six inches between truck and bus and six inches between each vehicle and the shoulder. Traffic is already backed up from Free Bridge, past Stony Point Road, at certain times of the day. Drivers already take chances turning into the flow coming down Pantops Mountain and across the flow to reach Route 20 North. Of the. four main entrances to Charlottesville, Pree Bridge ranks with 29 ~North as the most heavily trafficked road. Both service over 15,000 vehicles daily. Free Bridge is the leas% able to handle additional dump truck traffic. The extensive population adjacent and in close proximity to the Cason site is currently causing traffic problems on 20 North and 250. we sincerely .hope this problem will not be further compounded by the addition of the City's dump trucks. Thank you very much. Nolting: Thank you Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen, I am Fred Nolting. I live on Route 20 North, about a mile north of the Cason property. Much of what I have to say has been said tonight., I will be brief as I possibly can. I understand that yesterday there was a great outpouring of public opposition and some indignation by those living on Route 29 South. I want to say that I have every sympathy for that and for their effort to protect their area and it seems to me that we have the same obligation. When push comes to shove, we've got more people. All the arguments that ~have been advanced there tonight against this site, I entirely agree with. Those of us affected have many more things that we could say of a personal nature, but ~ think Mr. Vermillion and others have made these very clear. I just want to ask a few questions backing up what Mr. Charles Davidson said.. It seems to me as a citizen of Albemarle County that. it doesn't make any sense for us to be in all these dissentions pushing this thing ~from one pot to another when we ought~to be living as friendly neighbors and we ought to be working toward a sensible solution to this problem. Mr. Agnor referred to the fact that the City has been looking for a dumping ground, although he did not call it. that, he-called it a sanitary landfill, for four years now, since 1970 I believe he said. They have also been paying as I understand it, avvery considerable amount to renew the option on the property which is under consideration tonight. The question I would like to ask is why they spent no time or effort as far as I know in trying to work out a sensible ~solution in the direction which so many other communities, and~ some of them no larger than %his, have made appreciable successes, that is in the line of incineration, recycling or a combination of the two.. The money and effort that has gone into this push and shove business .about landfills starting four years ago could have put a plan in operation 7-31-74 by now. ~ Why should the County have the obligation to be the dumping ground in perpetuity, anywhere in the County for the City's refuse? I simply cannot see the logic of that. Finally, Mr. Chairman, it comes to a question of pushing and shoving, I don't think any of us here, with the possible exception of the gentlemen offering this property for lease is going to stand still for it. It may be a long fight. It may take a long time. It may cost a lot of effort and a lot of money, but it is too valuable for all of us in our personal lives to let this thing go by the fork. There are too many of us involved. I think you gentlemen will understand our position when we say that we just can't stand still and be victims of this kind of stubborn position on the part of the City of Charlottesville. Thank you. Henley: I have a question of this gentlemen. Last night I heard someone .refer to the,.large number of communities who are using this new process of recycling and so forth. Could you tell me some of these communities? Nolting: Mr. Henley, yes, I have a great file on this. Richmond is the biggest one I have heard, has an experimental plant going. I would be interested to know if anybody from the City of Charlottesville has been the 75 miles to Richmond which has been recommended to them on numerous occasions to see what the City of Richmond is doing in that respect. Memphis, Tennessee, has one. There are two in Massachusetts. There are a number in California and I cannot recall where other operational piants are, but I do know that in several communities.in Massachusetts, for example, they are already in o'peration. General Electric is buying the power from one of them and the plant has already been amortized so %'here is plenty of precedent for this° It has also been stated, I heard, that there was no cooperation. T k~ow for a fact that the University of Virginia is very much interested in this and would' be glad to cooperate and perhaps buy the power that would be generated from the incineration. McMurdo: Mr. Chairman, gentlemen of the Board, my name is Montague McMurdo. I was born at Buena Vista in the year 1.900. There are just two things that I want to say. One.is the fact that in my young.er days I trapped in the Free .Bridge all the way up to the forks in the RiVer and the only place we have a big gravel bar in that River, ~eve~ to this day, is where this ... runs in down there in front of Franklin. My second point ±s, ~the total area that ~we ar.e discussing here for the landfill.is estimated to be 50 acres. You know, a piece of ground 500 yards square will contain 51.6528 acres which is more than this plat here. That means that the maximum distance you could get to the center of.this plaCe would be 250 yards ~to the border of the Franklin property~and I don't think we want to wish that on ,anybody. I thank you. George Worthington: Mr. 'Chairman, members of the Board, I am going~to be~-~ery brief .... I took a lot of notes, but a ~lot of people'have stolen my fire. I was going to say that the worst disaster, I live at Edgemont which is 2.2 miles from the entrance site and am sort~of an amateur historical buff and in checking over the history of my house, Bill Stevens put out a brochure a.~few years ago and it took place about 110 years ago to this date. I think the worst disaster that has befallen 7-31-74 us since the Cason site came up was, we had a visit from General Sheridan and he not only took everything out of the smoke house but he also as a little ... up at the end set the house on fire and if it hadn't been for some of the faithful people in the neighborhood there wouldn't be any Edgemont standing today to talk about~ One of the things that nobody has mentioned tonight is that we were honored. These houses on the Stony Point Road which some people have sort of downgraded a little bit in history, the Virginia Garden Club for the first time had a house tour of five of the well-known houses, and would have had Franklin except for the fact that the property changed hands and they had to drop out. I understand from our secretary, Mrs. Alling, that the Garden Club tour in this year, in Albemarle County, took in about $10,000 and we had our houses open one day and we took in about $4,000, so it shows that people were paying to see these houses. I don't think that if they knew that a landfill was going to be located right next to them that they would probably pay 50¢. I thank you gentlemen. Frederick Hartt: Mr. Chairman and member's of the Board of Supervisors, ,I have stood before you before on the problem of the Cason landfill. I have stood before you before on another question which had nothing to do with any of my personal interests. I assure you that even if the proprietor of a house, an historic house, was in this area I would be here tonight defending the historic districts along Stony Point Road just as I have in the matter Of Green Springs When I carried my defense of the historic Green Springs area to the papers and to the Governor's office. The incompatibility of a sanitary landfill or a garbage dump, call it whatever you will, it remains the same, with historic buildings is so obvious that it hardly needs to be underlined. I beg you gentlemen to remember that in two years we have the ~200~h Anniversay of the independence of our country coming up. Charlottes- ville, more than most places, in the east, is going to be filled'with visitors to historic areas. Are theY going to see the beautiful homes on Stony Point Road while treading their way through the endless procession of garbage trucks? I want to close on a personal note. I am not, I do not have any roots in Virginia or Albemarle County. I am a Yankee transplant, but I am happy in Virginia. I love ~the University of Virginia where I teach proudly and gentlemen I want to spend the later years of my life in peace and quiet inducive to scholarship and the kind of work which I have been put here to do. Thank you. Alling: Gentlemen, I am Cynthia Alling. Last year at the ~ublic hearing on the Cason site I presented to you an unanimous petition from the Sacagawea'~Garden Club opposing the use of this site as a landfill because such use would be incompatible with the history and~residenrial growth of the surrounding area and because of the dangerous access of the winding, narrow Stony Point'ROad- You have the petition in your files so I shall not repeat it. But, I would like. to add some information tonight. This spring during~ Historic Garden Week, six houses, as Mr. Worthington told you, along the Stony Point Road, two of them within a quarter of a mile from the proposed entrance site were on the garden %our. These homes, Wilton, the Old Ordinary, Edgemont, Magic Mountain, and Windie Knowe, plus the George Rogers Clark memorial, were open for tours and contributed substantially to the income made that week. Of the approximately $10,000 made in Charlottesville during Garden Week, $3500 was made on the Stony Point Road tour. Since last fall, the George Rogers Clark memorial has expanded from a marker on the Buena Vista proper.ty to a tourist attraction of a cabin filled with antiques which is visited daily~ with admission fees. This birthplace of George Rogers Clark is within 250 .yards of the proposed entrance to the Cason site. And, of course, I must not forget to mention that Franklin is located at the entrance to the proposed site. Gentlemen, is this an area in which to put the City dump? Also, last year, I illustrated by tape measure that there would be literally inches between the seven and one-half feet wide dump trucks travelling on the 20 foot wide Stony Point Road in places worn to 18 or 19 feet. I now have some statistics on the number of accidents which have occurred within three miles of~ the proposed entrance to the Cason site over the past three and one-half years. Route-250 East is the most heavily trafficked entrance to Charlottesville and I know you have the figures on the traffic count on Route 20 North ~also. I have listed here, and I would like to give it to you for the record, the dates and locations of traffic accidents; some of which were fatalities, near the intersection of Route 250 East and 20 North and on the Stony Point Road within a couple of miles of the ~proposed entrance. The accidents are listed by the month in which they occurred and the sources for the information were the Sheriff's Office at the Albemarle County Courthouse and the State Highway Police Department on 250 East. Records of the State Police prior to January~ 1973, are on microfilm in Appomattox. COnsequently, only the accidents which they have handled since that time are listed here. There have been a total of'105 accidents in this area according to three and one-half years of Sheriff's records and one and one-half years of State Police records; 63 of which have happened within one mile of the City limits and/or entrance to the Cason site. I was prompted to do this report after-having seen three accidents in a~two and one'half Week period; one between 250 East, on.20 North, about one-half mile from the proposed entrance, and two directly on the steep, curved hill of the proposed entrance. The Stony Point Road is one of the roads in the County which,~acc~rding to this article which~ came out last Sunday, suffers from hazardous conditions with narrow, winding pavements and sometimes dangerous "S" curves according to this article by Ben Critzer in last Sunday's paper. Gentlemen, is this an area ,in.which to burden an atready overcrowded road with the traffic created by City dump trucks and other garbage.trucks? Presently, during the school year, ten loaded school, buses cross Free Bridge on Route 250 East between.~three and four o'clock. I have counted them there. As I understand from the City statement at the Planning Commission last year, this hour would be a peak time for the dump trucks to be using this-.road also. Five of these ten. buses turn left on Route 20 North to deliver children to points between;.250 and Key West but also further north. With increase in residential building in-this:area, we can expect the number of buses to increase :in the future. .To envision the.~schoot buses.competing with dump trucks on 20, particularyvin icy,-inclement weather on,the steep,:curved hill where the entrahce to the site would be:.located, poses a definite safety hazard to our children. If you lived on this road, and your children rode the school bus., how would you .feel about garbage trucks on the Stony Point .Road? Two years ago the Council of Garden Clubs here in Charlottesville had a series of meetings on recycling methods to .which:City'an.d :County officials were invited.. Mr. Fisher pointed out last night that the County ~has offered ~to .cooperate with the City and Univ.ersity to investigate new...methods-of solid waste disposal. I would like to encourage the City of Charlottesville', and I don't .know if any of'the City COuncil members are here, I haven't seen them so I hope:their attorneys will take'this back to them, I would like to encourage 'the City, kicking and screaming, to use Mrs. Diehl's .image from last night, to .rethink~it's position and to put the money that is going toward court costs and landfill-studies'toward investigation and-creation of a long-range recycling solution. Even the $2000-a month 'of City taxpayers money that i.s being paid Mr. Cason to keep. %he"option on his land.could be better used toward a better long-range goal. The Ivy-Landfill Gan accommodate us all temporarily while we. work together. Let's operate Ivy properly, to avoid plagues like the fire this spring. According to the .... residents within a five mil.e radius of the:landfill have been plagued by smoke from the.fire and an:unbelievable smell.- A five-mile radius.of the Cason site would include the Albemarle County CourthouSe. In an editorial on January 20th, the Daily Progress: called for serious consideration by the citizens and the :responsible officials involved to investigate converting garbage.into'engery..- Zf we go into a whole new landfill :in 'Albemarle County, we might, not:have another opportunity .such as this for-another 20 years. 'One:of our.concerned-Citizens who.lives.in the City. called landfills obsolete dinosaurs. This issue :has already become a monster, but let's tame it and plan.ahead for the future. ,Sometimes when I think of the efforts and the time and the money that. have gone'into .this whole.~landfill issue,.I think that someday when I am dead and..gone it!s not:going to make any difference, but the fact is that it will make a difference. The way that we solve our solid waste disposal.now and in-.the near future, with. growing population and diminishing natural resources, can be the key to the quality of life for our children and future generations. I hope that the-good which will come from all'of these meetings, public hearings, and court cases will be~ul.timately that of cooperation between County/City/University to solve our solid'.Waste disposal problems together by the use of a recycling method. Let's'plan ahead,Charlottesville/Albemarle. 'This .area is known as one of the finest places to liv'e in our country. Let's keep it that way. Schwab: Gentlemen, my name is Jan Schwab. I am'a resident of Key West.and Albemarle County. This meeting has something of the air of an"instant.replay. I am 7-31-74 35 beginning to associate somewhere in the back of my mind the hot summer sun with the dark clouds of a quote sanitary landfill. Because the record is long amd human patience tends to be short, I will be brief. The only reason I speak at all is because a year is a long time and it is very easy to forget the very cogent testimony given here. A year ago, I won't say experts because the word expert connotes someone who has all or most of the answers and I don't believe anyone has all the answers when it comes to the subject of landfills or you would not constantly run into Contradictory expert testimony. A year ago, several men with special knowledge of soil and erosion and water runoff, hydrology, studied the Cason site. Not one of these men found the Cason site to be a good site. Almost every category was some gradation of poor. Soil cover was found to be inadequate. The concensus was that runOff would be impossible to control and that contamination of nearby wells and even the Rivanna River would be a virtual certainty, particularly in a rain like Camille. My children have been swimming in that river for 17 years, a testimony to wise government and wise planning in Albemarle County. Findings were even more damaging in regard to the traffic situation. It would be difficult to imagine a worse site. Free Bridge is a terrible bottleneck. Traffic is backed up a half a mile now at certain times of the da~ Flow would have to go across 250 east, 2/3rd of the way down a long steep hill. Finally, the entrance to the site is half way up a steep, curved hill. As I said, it would be difficult to find a much more dangerous situation to impose upon County residents. Last fall, Mr. Fisher proposed that the City and County and~University work. together to look for a system that would be safer and far more productive in the long run Where tax dollars spent would be building rather than just effecting a stop gap. Tax dollars spent on this site would be a poor investment indeed. The lifetime of this site is short, operation'very expensive and the land would not even be an asset to the taxpayers whose dollars were used because the land would only be leased. Albemarle County has been governed in a tradition of caring, of cherishing our rivers and fields and mountains. Accepting the Cason site for a landfill~ does not seem in keeping with this tradition. Further, it is down right dangerous for residents travelling stony Point Road. For'these reasons I ask that the Board of Supervisors turn down the special use permit. Thank you. Wheeler: Ladies and gentlemen this completes the list of those who signed up to speak. Are there others who ~would like to make comments? Schwab: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name is Jack Schwab, I live in Key West and my corporation is the developer of the Key West area. I only have three points to make tonight. I think everything has been very adequately covered and anything we could say now would be anticlimatic. A couple of things that I don't understand. My good.friend Mr. Bob Warner, from the Highway Department, tonight made a statement that I would like to pursue and that is that a 20-foot road is adequate on a heavily travelled road like Route 20. I ask you gentlemen, if I came to you with a petition, or a plan, in the Key West area, and submitted on the basis of my primary roads on a width of 20 feet, would you accept it? Absolutely not. Under your rules and regulations, the High- way Department's rules and regulations, a road 20 feet in width is not adequate. All of my roads are 30 feet. From Bob's testimony tonight., the only thing that I can assume is that the Highway Department f~r some,strange reason figures that the traffic count within the subdivisiOn itself is going to~'be greater than on-Route 20. I have had a little trouble with ,that'~tonight. As far as values are concerned, I have heard that sanitar~ landfills basically are ~excellent for' value. They increase it tremendously. don't know.and I don't think any of the experts on 'the other side know. ~ The only thing that I can say is that basically we are the ones who are going to have to find'out. We have a substantial investment out there ~in the Key West area. We've got a 450 acre area that we are working on; 300 families, so it is going to leave probably in the neighbor- ~ hood of 150 acres of open~land. We have gone along with the spirit ~f your Master Plan. You have gone along with 'the 'spirit of your Master Plan. I remember when Charlie Hurt came down one' dark night to the County CourthOuSe there and I was in the process of trying to get an R-t zoning through, t had the misfortune of going first, and I remember that I barely made it through, and the people had come down-there and they were not interested in having Charlie~go through with an R-1 situation out north on Route 20 above us. · Finally because of the way the personal and public opinion and everything else and the pressure from the-Planning COmmission, and from' you people, he withdrew his petition and he didn't try to'do it'.-~You policed the'Master Plan. Now, when I come'in there, most of .the conversation is based on the Master Plan. 'Is-what I am proposing based on the Master Plan? Am I within-the Master Plan area and so far I' think we have been. But we are here tonight"and wa are talking about sOmething that is so totally out of order as far as the Master Plan situ.ation ~is concerned and can be.so potentially damaging to one of the most beautiful areas in Albemarle County. We have an unspoiled area. When we drive home at night we don't have to put up with a whole lot of nonsense. It is a beautiful area. I Would like to'~keep ~t that way. I think that basically I have a responsibility to the people who have. moved out into that area on the basis of.our people selling them and telling them that this is the place to live. I think you people have the responsibility for maintaining tha~ trust and faith. I woUld ask you to vote this situation down tonight. Thank you very mucho~ ~ ~ Reback:. I don',t disagree at all with your decision last night, but havinq.made that decision I don't believe you have any reasonable choice tonight. I think you have to deny it, the permit tonight. Epps: There is one small point. I would like to call on Mr. Podger to make a .comment about the cracking and the clay and the-use of it~. Mr. Podger, ~ wonder if you would comment on the theories of blending and ... the use of material of this kind? Podger: Mr. Chairman~ gentlemen, you have heard a lot of arguments tonight and I would just like you to consider one other factor which is purely a technical matter. have a feeling there could be a misunderstanding in your minds as regards the types of soil on this site. The soil expert, Dr. Gooch, the Gooch report makes the following comments about the soils there. "We subjected the soils from the site to selected soil tests and have over the years worked with similar soils from the same formation on a number of engineering projects. We have found that this type of soil can be employed in compacted fills under highways or one or two story buildings,, in earth dams, etc., with few or any problems. Our tests show that when properly compacted, this soil is essentially impervious, watertight. It is only moderately subject to erosion, or shrinking, or swelling, if properly engineered," we get this phrase "controlled and compacted most soils at the site will be suitable for sanitary landfill cover. Roads, subgrades, and earth dam holding ponds.." And, I refer again to this table 4 where I think there is some possible danger of misunderstanding here. The clay soil is rated as excellent in all situations for rodent burrowing, or tunnelling, poor. Excellent for keeping out flies. Excellent for minimized moisture entering the fill. Excellent for minimized landfill gas venting through cover. Excellent to provide pleasing appearance and control blown paper. Fair to good on,growing vegetation and its poor from the point of view of permeability, preventing decomposition gas. It is true that in three out of the four excellent categories there is a footnote attached which says "except when cracks extend through the entire cover" but the point here is that it is excellent except under certain circumstances. The point here is it can be rendered a suitable material if it is properly treated with regard to compaction and moisture content. It can also be treated with chemicals to render it into a suitable material or it can be blended with other more granular material. I would also like to make that point clear to you. The business of bringing mn a tub with clay in it exhibiting cracking is not a reliable indication of what can be done with a material of this nature. That's all I wish to say gentlemen. After the Chairman declared tke public hearing closed, the Board members made the following remarks: Mr. Wood offered motion to deny application for SPy281. He said he offered this motion for reasons offered by the staff, the people present tonight in opposition~ as well as those reasons the Board heard at the former hearing of this matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley who said he supported the motion based on ~he same reasons stated by Mr. Wood. Mr. Fisher said in order for the citizens of the County, and for the City again to understand some of the history and background, and to show the willingness the County has tried to exhibit in cooperating in this search, he would give a short history, as some of the people present tonight have given a history. In the fall of 1972 when the great landfill controversy was reaching its first high point, Mr. Fisher was approached by the Environmental Protection Agency and told that they had experts who would be willing to come to Charlottesville and talk to the Board and City Council about possible resource recovery and energy recovery systems. Some cities had received, funds from the Federal Government to fund such systems. Mr, Fisher said he accepted the invitation and called a meeting. He issued invitations to City Council, this Board of Supervisors, the City Planning Commission, the County Planning Commission, the County Engineering staff, the University Planning Department and a meeting was held in the County Court- house. This meeting was a disaster. The two experts who came talked about what could not be done. They were so negative that essentially they blew any chances for any significant search a% that time. Mr. Fisher said that was his responsibility because he had not found out in advance what they intended to say. Last year, when the Board discussed this site, he had tried to find a reasonable way to look for a better solution than having landfills-. On September 26, 1973, he proposed to the Board a charge for a commission. On September 28, Mr. Thacker made a motion containing tho~se condition-s. He read the following from page 288 of Minute Book 10, of a meeting held on September 28, 1973: (6) The City/County/University of' Virginia Resource Recovery Study Commission shall be formed within two months of the date of final approval of the special permit by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and the Charlottesville City Council, with instructions as follows: Investigate on~a ~e~Ii~i~a~y~ basis the various forms of (a) resource reeoverYa~Dgr~ recovery which might be available to the cO~'~mm~nk~'~within five years. A pre- liminary'report expec~e~thin one year should itemize these techniques and in~i~e the two or three most promising techniques which would be~more fully investi- gated in the next phase. (b) Investigate fully the two or three most promising recovery techniques specifically detailing these aspects of the problem: (1) Cost of implementation, land, transportation~ buildings, employee training, disposition of residues, etc.; (2) Anticipated revenues and losses; 3 8 7-31-74 (3) ~nortized net costs; (4) Environmental impact including any existing or pro- posed state or federal standards which might stop the recovery operation and make it too expensive to operate. (5) Collection and transportation methods required. A final report on this phase expected within one year after completion of the preliminary report should indicate the commission's choice of techniques; a step by step procedure to accomplish this chosen technique for the community and a recommendation as to formation of a regional body to implement and operate the recovery system. (c) The membership of the resource recovery study co~mission shall consist of twelve persons appointed as follows: University of Virginia, two members; the City of Charlottes- ville, five members, three of whom are private citizens; the County of Albemarle, five members, three of whom are private citizens. (d) It is anticipated that some cost will be required for this investigation. The Commission will be requested to prepare it's own budget and staff requirements application, which, if approved by the City/County, will be apportioned on a 50-50 basis between the City and County. Mr. Fisher said the motion, of which this was a part, was subsequently defeated. That same date, Mr. Wood offered motion to appoint a resource recovery study commission as outlined. Mr. Wheeler said he would support the motion,-but the Mayor had asked that the Board wait a few days before taking this action and Mr. Wheeler asked that Mr. Wbod withhold his motion until there had been a meeting with the Mayor. Subsequently the motion was withdrawn. Mr. Fisher said he gave this background, not as reasoning for the vote that he would make, but to indicate willingness on the part of the County, and also on the part of the University, to try to find a better way. Mr. Fisher said that was his political statement. Mr. Fisher said on the issue on which the Board has to vote tonight, he has heard all the evidence presented tonight, and he feels adequate information has been presented on which to render a decision which is in complete compliance with the County Zoning Ordinance and which is in compliance with responsibilities as members of the Board of Supervisors and by implication as representatives of the citizens of Albemarle County. When this application for a special permit was considered in 1973, his personal vote was based, partly, on a perceived obligation to cooperate with the government of the City of Charlottesville in solving its solid waste problems. As a result of that perceived obligation, he felt impelled~to choose one or the other of the sites which had been brought to this Board by the City of Charlottesville because he had been unable, after long searching, to find any other new sites which he felt were any more suitable or which were less objectionable. However, as a direct result of the review of the Board's decision by the Circuit Court of Albemarle County~ Mr. Fisher said he was aware that his vote should not, under any circumstances, have involved any com- parison of this site versus any other site. It should be made solely on the basis of the Zoning Ordinance under which the Board operates. This ordinance compels the Board to evaluate the proposed use of a parcel of land in relation to its capabilities for 7-31-74 supporting that use and to evaluate %he effects of the proposed use on surrounding properties. The Zoning Ordinance does not require this Board to find alternative sites for any applicant. The Circuit Court has held that the City of Charlottesville comes before the Board as any other applicant; with no special standing. As a result of this combination of ordinance and court decision, this Board of Supervisors must pass upon the application before it on the merits of the site and on the effects on surrounding properties. Sectio 11'13-3, part thereof, says: "the use shall not tend to change the character and established pattern of development of the area or the community in which it wishes to locate". It also says; "the use shall be in harmony with the uses permitted by right under a zoning permit in the zoning district and shall not affect adversely the use of the neighboring property." Mr.. Fisher said he believes, after studying the matter carefully and listening to all of the evidence brought to this Board, that only one decision can be made. The proposed use of this property as a sanitary landfill would violate these provisions of the County Zoning Ordinance. He said he must support the motion to deny, on this basis alone. Mr. Thacker said once again the Board has received a lot of information. This information must be sorted ou~ to the best judgment of the Board. The Board must attempt to separate the wheat from the chaff. Under the Zoning Ordinance, in the County of Albemarle, there are certain criteria which must be applied to any special permit application. The first is that the use shall not tend to change the character and established pattern of development in the area or community in which it wishes to locate. The staff report states that it is obvious that this proposed land use would not be in harmony with the existing character of the area and the established pattern of development. Also, under criteria established in the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must consider whether or not the use requested in the special use application would hinder or discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land or buildings or impair the value thereof. Once again, in the moist recent staff report which was delivered to the Board on July 23, 1974, it is stated that because of the existing and developing character of the area, and because of the nature of the special permit under consideration, it is certain that approval of SP-281 would appreciably alter, to its detriment, the present character of this area and would significantly impair the potential to develop the area in constancy with its established patterns and character. For these reasons, Mr. Thacker said he would support the motion. Mr. Carwile said he would support the motion for the same reasons giv. en by Mr. Thacker. He did not feel this.spacial permit is defined within the criteria set forth for approval of special permits in the County's Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Wheeler said he had heard nothing tonight on any planning that makes this use compatible. It is questionable whether 'it can be engineered. This site does not meet the criteria of the Zoning Ordinance or Master Plan. Also, it is not, Mr. Wheeler said, in the best interests of the citizens of Albemarle County, nor, does he believe it is to the bes~ interests of the citizens of the City. ' 7L3~i_74 vote: AYES: NAYS: Vote was taken at this ~time.and the motion carried by the following recorded Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Mr. Wheeler said'the petition was denied. He then made the following remarks to Mr. Epps and those representing the City. He said he hoped that within a few minutes the Board would pass another resolution stating again that this Board stands ready and willing and able to work with the City of Charlottesville to solve the solid waste problems, not only in the City of Charlottesville, but in Albemarle County and maybe this region of Central Virginia. He commented on the Court Order. The Board has carried out the provisions of the Court Order.'by rehearing these petitions. The third provision of the Court Order was that if the Board did not approve one of these petitions, that the Board look for another site. He asked Mr. Epps and Mr. Hendrix to confer with City Council, and to notify this Board if Council wants this Board to accept this responsibility. Mr. Wheeler then asked that the Board adopt a resolution stating that this Board is ready, willing and able to cooperate with the City in the search for a landfill, writing a letter to the City asking them to reply within 10 days in writing stating to this Board whether they want this Board to look and find a landfill. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Thacker and seconded bY Mr. Wood. Mr. Thacker said he would like to make one brief statement. He feels that Charlottesville/Albemarle is one community of interest and much too close to let this divide us any further than we have been divided. These problems are much larger than jurisdictional boundaries. The City and County have been able to cooperate in many cases; the fields of water and sewer, joint jail facility, joint regional library facility, joint technical school, and many others. Hopefully, this is another area in which the City/County can demonstrate that same spirit of cooperation. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. None. Motion was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Wood to adopt the following AYES: resolution: RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of_Supervisors endorses the proposed project to enlarge the Albemarle- Charlottesville Health Department Building and will provide up to $99,500 as its share of the cost of the project on condition that the City of Charlottesville provides an equal amount in that Federal funds under the Hill-Burton Act in the amount of $199,000 will be available for this construc- tion project. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher,~Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and WoOd. NAYS: None. 7-31-74 Claims against the County in the amount of $1,186,462.39 were presented, examined, allowed and certified to the Director of Finance for payment and charged to the following funds: General Operating Fund School Operating Fund School Construction: Capital Outlay Fund General Operating: Capital Outlay Fund Town of Scottsville: Local Sales Tax Commonwealth of Virginia: Current Credit Account Total $ 379,.722.73 520,957.04 276,647.58 7,392.21 209.84 1,532.99 $1,186,462.39 Mr. Wheeler said there were several matters which the Board should discuss in the near future. He asked that this meeting be adjourned until August 7, 1974 at 4:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building. At approximately 11:35 P.M. motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood. NAYS: None. Chairman