1974-06-20-316
~ regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
was held on June 20, 1974, at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Room of the County Office
Building, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Present: Messrs. Stuart F. Carwile, Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr.,
William C. Thacker, Jr., Gordon L. Wheeler and Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.
Absent: None.
Officers present: County Executive and County Attorney.
The meeting opened with The Lord's Prayer, led by Mr. Wheeler.
Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher, to approve the minutes of March 21 (pages
107 and 108) and April 10, 1974. The morion was seconded by Mr. Wood and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Carwite.
The Board continued with highway matters, the first item being a discussion
of Jefferson Village Roads. Mr. Wheeler said Mr. J. H. Williams had just called
and said he would not be present for"this.meeting. He asked Sf the necessary
repairs and bonding of these roads has been completed.
Mr. Humphrey said he checked yesterday and the roads are the same as they
were 60 days ago when Mr. Williams appeared before:the Board.
Present to speak about the matter of Jefferson Village roads not being a
part of the State Highway System was Mr. James P. Muro, President, Jefferson
Village Community Association. He said two-thirds of the families in.Jefferson
Village are members of the Association. In accordance with the desires of the
membership, a letter was forwarded to the Board and he asked that it be made
a part of the record.
"June 18, 1974
Chairman, County Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The Jefferson V$1!age Community Association, which represents
a majority of the families residing in the Jefferson Village Sub-
division, requests that the Albemarle County Boar'd o6 Supervisors
act to insure the Subdivision's roads are taken over by the State
Highway Department as soon as possible. Adoption of the roads
will permit the State laws to be enforced and the roads' surfaces
to 'be Smproved for the safety of all individuals traveling these
roads. While the homeowners have been undersbanding and patient,
the roads' surfaces have deteriorated to include a number of large
holes, which are a safety hazard.
In connection with this matter, it is requested that "25 Miles
Per Hour" speed limit signs and "Children at Play" signs be posted
at strategic points in the Village, and a sign indicating the
intersection of Proffit Road and Colonial Drive be considered. This
latter sign will warn motorists of a blind intersection."
"Please provide any information that may clarify the situation and
contact the undersigned for any questions or assistance. Your action
on this matter will be deeply appreciated.
Very truly yours,
JEFFERSON VILLAGE
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
(Signed) James P. Muro
President"
,He sa±d~th~se are ~oncern~d citizens. The.~roads have deteriorated to point
where they can be considered a safety hazard. They would like to have the
roads taken into the State System in the near future.
~. Wheeler said the Board had discussed this situation with Mr.
Williams two months ago. Since that time the Board has taken action and
ordered the Building Department not to issue any additional building permits
until the roads are brought up to standards.
Mr. R. G. Warner, Resident Highway Engineer said there are no major
repairs to be completed. However, he has no legal tool with which to make
the developer complete the repairs. Mr~ Wood said when Hhese homes were sold,
they were sol~ with intention that they would~ be~on~State~ma±ntained roads.
This was one of their biggest selling points. He asked Mr. Muro to
explain to the Board so they would know under what pretenses he had bought
his home.
Mr. Muro said the only written material provided was a letter dated
December 13, 1971, which was sent to himself and the other homeowners. He
read paragraph 5 of that letter as follows: "The Highway Department will
take over the roads the first of 1972 and we have been informed that Mr.
?lunkett will be here before Christmas and grade and gravel the shoulders
on our roads, fix bent pipes and make sure they are thrashed out. I will
notify you by phone or letter as soon as I know the exact date. Everyone
will have to move their cars off the road and completely out of the right
of way. Yours very truly, James H. Williams."
Mr. St. John said the normal thing to do would be to forfeit the bond
which was put in for the purpose of fixing these roads. The last
correspondence he had on this is from John Humphrey in which he said there
is not an adequate bond in this case. He asMed the status of the bond at
this time.
Mr. Humphrey said the status is still the same. The County h~tds,~a
personal check of J. H. Williams and a bond between he and the contractor,
A. B. Torrence. Mr. St. John asked if the County had tried to cash the
check. Mr. Humphrey replied no. Mr. St. John said with respect to the
citizens who have a contract with J. H. Williams, the County cannot enforce
328
a contract between a buyer and seller. This has to be enforced by the
individual who holds the contract. The citizens need to have their attorney
enforce their rights through a breech of contract suit. The bond the
County holds was originally requested to enable the County to enforce the
conditions placed on the developer. There was a defect in the way the bond
was executed and the County does not really hold a bond, but they do hold a
personal ~check. Mr. St. John said at the time this took place this type
of bond was acceptable, but has since proved to be inadequate however, the
County still holds this check, and does have a~remedy. Mr. St. John asked
who the check was payable to. Mr. Humphrey said it is payable to the County
o~f Albemarle in the amount of $49,945.50 and is dated April, 1969. Mr.
St. John said he would recommend that the check be deposited. If the check
bounces, this gives rights to the County against J. H. Williams for breech
of contract on a bad check. Since the check is dated April 1969, the bank will
not cash it unless he gives them permission, but this does give the County
legal rights against him. ~
~.~-~..~i~Mr.~heeler'~asked:.if the-~:Board should pass.a ~eso!ut$on. to gi~e notice
that they will deposit~the check since the roads have not been brought into the
system. Mr. St. John said this is not necessary. It is simply a matter of
writing a letter saying that the check will be deposited as of this date.
Mr. Thacker asked if it would be advisable to tell Mr. Williams that if the
check is not honored by the bank, that the County contemplates taking further
action. Mr. St. John said that was not necessary and he offered to write
the letter to Mr. Williams. Mr. Wheeler said the County will proceed and see
that all action is taken that can be be taken to have these roads brought
into the State system. It is to Mr. Williams benefit to have the roads taken
in since his liability toward the maintenance of the roads will end at that time.
Mr. Humphrey noted that there has been one house completed on a building permit
issued prior to the building permit moratorium. He asked if it is ascertained
that the house is still in the name of J. H. Williams, if the Building Department
should withhold issuing the certificate of occupancy on this one house. Mr.
Fisher said if the house has been sold that would bring the pressure to'bear
on someone other than Mr. Williams. After a short discussion, Mr. Wood offered
motion that this be done so a third party is not involved, but if the house is
still retained by J. H. Williams, the Building Dep~tment should not issue a
certificate of occupancy until such time as the roads are taken into the Secondary
System. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
6-20-74
319
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Eisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wood said there has recently been formed a Homeowners Association
in Jefferson Village. He met with them once, and their attitude is to
cooperate with the Board in getting things done for that area and to assist
the Board whenever possible. One matter that they had discussed is the
Proffit Road from 29 down to Jefferson Village. He asked that Mr. Warner
explain what needs to be done to get that road upgraded to a proper standard.
Mr. Warner said that Highway revenues are decreasing instead of increasing.
The allocation for'~.t, he.'.iCmunty.next year is only 90% of the present year's
allocation. That means the County loses $80,000 - $85,000 immediately.
He must provide funds for maintenance of roads. That means improvement
funds will decrease and disrupt the improvement program. In the past
he had anticipated a five to six percent increase annually, now he is
anticipating a 90% base for next year, plus an increase of only one to
one and one-half percent for the next five-year period. One percent a
year is not a significant amount, but it will throw the whole improvement
program behind. They are also figuring at least ten-percent a year for
increase in costs. Mr. Wheeler said the Board has just recently gone over
highway improvement plans for the next five years and there was nothing
in that plan for Route 649. Mr. Wood said he felt this was the ~type of
information the Homeowners Association should have. He said with people
moving in from out of state, they often do not understand the make up
of the Highway Department and where the funds come from. No County tax dollars
go into the impro'vement or maintenance of any roads. Roads are maintained
entirely from State funds.
Mr. Fisher stated that he had received the following communication
from the West Leigh Property Owners Association:
WHEREAS, there exists an extremely dangerous intersection
at the junction of U. S. Route 250 and West Leigh Drive,
Albemarle County, four miles west of Charlottesville, Virginia,
and
WHEREAS, this condition has been recognized by the Resident
Highway Engineer, and
WHEREAS, upon the recommendation of the Resident Highway
Engineer the Culpeper Office of the State Highway Department
affirmed this recommendation and approved the installation of
a deceleration lane at the said junction, and
WHEREAS, this recommendation was disapproved by the
Richmond Office of the Virginia Highway Commission, and
WHEREAS, with continuing traffic increase the dangerous
condition does greatly imperil all users of West Leigh Drive
as well as the users of U. S. Route 250,
NOW, THEREFORE IT IS UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the West
Leigh Property Owners Association do, and it hereby does,
request the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
to again join with them in praying the State Highway Department
reconsider the recommendation of its Resident Engineer and its
320
Culpeper Regional Office, and forthwith approve the immediate
commencement of construction of a deceleration lane at the
junction of West Leigh Drive and U. S. Route 250 to assure
the safety, health and welfare of all users of these roads.
After a short discussion, motion was offered by Mr. Fisher to adopt the
following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, has the utmost concern in the health, welfare and
safety of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Board has requested on numerous occasions
that a deceleration lane be installed by the Highway
Department on U. S. Route 250 at the entrance to West Leigh
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, prior requests of this Board haw been forwarded
to the District Office in Culpeper by the local Resident's
Office and reviewed without progress being made;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, hereby requests the Virginia
Department of Highways to make the necessary study involved
and to take without delay all steps necessary to alleviate
the traffic hazard at the entrance to West Leigh by
installation of a deceleration lane. v
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
As requested by Mr. James H. Hill, agent for Dr. Hurt, Mr. Wood offered
motion to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department
of Highways be and is hereby requested to accept into the
Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection
and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the
following section of roads in Westfield SubdivisioN,
Section 1:
Beginning a~ station 0+00 on Westfield Road, a point
common to the center of Westfield Road and the western
right-of-way of U. S. Route 29, as shown on the plan and
profile of Westfield Road prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman;
thence with Westfield Road in a northwesterly direction
1060.63 feet to station 10+60.63, the intersection with the
center of Commonwealth Drive and the end of Westfield
Road in Section I of Westfield Subdivision.
Beginning at station 0+00 on Commonwealth Drive, a point
common to the centertine intersection of Commonwealth Drive
and Greenbrier Drive, as shown on the plan and profile
of Commonwealth Drive revision dated October 17, 1973,
prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman; thence with Commonwealth
Drive in an easterly direction 1300 feet to station 13+00,
the end of Commonwealth Drive in Section I of Westfield
Subdivision.
Beginning at Station 11+98.50 on Greenbrier Drive, a
point common to the centerline intersection of Greenbrier
Drive and Peyton Drive, as shown on the plan and profile
of Greenbrier Drive revision.dated October 8, 1965 and March
18, 1971, prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman; thence with Greenbrier
Drive in a northwesterly direction 677.97 feet to station
18+76.~7 the end of Greenbrier Drive in Section I of
Westfield Subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of
Highways~be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 ft. unobstructed
right of ~ay and~ainage easements along these requested additions
as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 545, page 458.
~-20-74
321
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS': None.
ABSTAINING: Mr. Carwile.
As requested by Mr. Richard L. Nunnally, Mr. Henley offered motion to
adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of
Highways be and is hereby requested to accept into the
Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and
approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following
section of roads in Orchard Acres Subdivision, Section 3:
Beginning at station 0+00, a point in the center of
Peach Tree Drive as shown on the plan and profile ~ the
roads in Section 3 of Orchard Acres prepared by Roudabush
and Gloeckner dated February, 1972; thence with Peach Tree
Drive in a north-westerly direction 530 feet to station
5+30, the end of Peach Tree Drive in Phase I of Section 3
Orchard Acres.
Beginning at station 0+00, a point in the center of
Orchard Drive as shown on the above mentioned road plans;
thence with Orchard Drive in a north-westerly direction
400 feet to station 4+00, the end of Orchard Drive in
Phase I of Section 3 Orchard Acres.
Beginning at station 0+00, a point in the center of
Winesap Lane which equals station 4+34.57 of Peach Tree
Drive, as shown on the above mentioned road plans; thence
with Winesap Lane in a south-westerly direction 436.75 feet
to station 4+36.75 which equals station 3+36.83 of Orchard
Drive, the end of Winesap Lane.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of
Highways be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 ft. unobstructed
right of way and drainage easements along these requested
additions as recorded by plat in the Office of the Clerk
of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 536,
page 281 and Deed Book 553, page 352.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
Mr. Batchetor presented the following communication from the Department
of Highways:
"May 22, 1974
Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County.
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Secondary System
Additions
Albemarle County
Gentlemen:
As requested in resolution by your Board on March 21, 1974,
the following additions to the Secondary System of Albemarle
County are hereby approved, effective May 1, 1974.
$22
"ADDITION
ARBOR PARK SUBDIVISION
Audubon Drive - From Route 660, E 1.745' to
Dundee Road.
Dundee Road - From cul-de-sac, 345' S.
Audubon Drive, N. 1792' to
cul-de-sac.
LENGTH
0.33 Mi.
0.34 Mi.
Sincerely,
(Signed) J. E. Harwood,
Deputy Commissioner and
Chief Engineer"
Mr. Batche!or stated that a copy of a letter in reference to allocations
for the Secondary System for the 1974-75 year was on file in the Office of
the Clerk.
The Board continued with discusSion of roads in Earlysville Heights
Subdivision. Mr. Warner said he met with Mr. Amon P. Williams last week.
Mr. Perry has also talked to Mr. Williams. He said the roads are at the
same status as those in Jefferson Village. Mr. Wheeler asked if the County
holds a bond on these roads. Mr.. Humphrey said they presently hold bonds
in the amount of $1,312.50 and $5,100. There are minor items which need
correcting, such as easements. Mr. Warner said the roads are not in bad
shape, however, there is one drainage easement which must be corrected.
Mr. Thacker asked the form of the bonds. Mr. Humphrey said they are both
certified checks. Mr. Wheeler said he felt the Board should take some
action to put Mr. Amon Williams on notice. Mr. Thacker asked if in a
situation like this, where the owner had been notified of the defectiveness
of the road system, and has not complied, if he County could establish a
date for completion to bring the roads into the system or forfeit his bond
and the County take corrective action. Mr. St. John said yes.
Mr. Thacker then offered motion that Mr. Amon P. Williams be notified
that unless the corrective work on Earlysville Heights Subdi.vision Roads,
as indicated by Mr. Warner, be accomplished by the Board's meeting of
August 15, 1974, that the bonds held by the County for the completion of
these roads will be exercised and this work caused to be completed to the
satisfaction of the Highway Department. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The Chairman requested that Mr. St. John write the letter to Mr. Williams.
Mr. Humphrey said he had one other subdivision to bring to the Board's
attention. This is a subdivision developed by H. H. Tiffany called Corville
Farms. He said it has been brought to his attention that several lending agencies
323
are withholding loans until the roads are brought into the system. They
have not been. By virtue of information brought out at the last Board
meeting, he understands Mr. Tiffany has communicated with the Highway
Department to ascertain what has to be d~ne. The County has held two
bonds, each in the amount of $3,150 since 1970. Mr. Warner said this is the
same situation as the two discussed earlier. The roads have basically
been completed. He has told Mr. Tiffany several times that he must post
a performance bond and make some minor corrections to the roads before
they are acceptable. Mr. Wheeler asked if building permits are still
being issued. Mr. Humphrey said the subdivision is about complete, there
are three or four houses up for sale, however, loans are being held up.
Mr. Thacker then offered motion that the Board declare a building
permit moratorium on this subdivision and notify Mr. Tiffany to complete
this work no later than August 15, 1974, to the satisfaction of the Highway
Department or the County will cause the bonds held by them to be exercised
and the work to be performed to the satisfaction of the Highway Department
for acceptance into the State System. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Carwile and carried by the following vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Humphrey the status of Auburn Hills Roads. He
said houses continue to go up and he knows the roads in that subdivision
are not ready to go into the State system. Mr. Humphrey said they had
recently requested a bond for the last section, however, heewas not prepared
to give a definite answer. Mr. Wheeler asked that he'make a report at
next month's meeting.
As requested by Mr. Warner, motion was offered by Mr. Fisher to appoint
the following people as Road Viewers for the year 1974: Mr. H. Edward
Chapman, Mr. John O. Higginson, Mr. Edgar L. Paige, and Mr. Franklin W.
Yancey. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Warner said he had received a number of calls from people about
bushes in the right of way at the corner of !nglewood Drive and Georgetown
Road. The work the Highway Department does on the right of way will help,
however, they would like to get permission to cut on Dr. Word's property.
Mr. Carwile said he would be willing to talk to him .about this matter. Mr.
~arner said.if.he agrees, the Highway Department will have their landscape
people come in and do a proper job.
324
g-20-74
Mr. Carwi!e said there is a street in Canterbury Hills, Vicar Court, which
has a drainage problem which must be corrected before the roads can come into the
State Highway system. The problem stems because the preliminary subdivision
plat showed a drainage easement which did not show on the final subdivision
plat through an error on the part of the engineer. Since that time, a house
has been constructed. The drainage was put where initially shown and does not
fit in the terrain. There have been preliminary agreements to secure drainage
easements across other people's property and something needs to be resolved
to the benefit of M~ Jeffrey K. Hadden who is the adjoining property owners,
in order that the developer can get the roads into the system. The adjoining
property owner agreed to give the easement. This was conditioned upon
arrangements being worked out as to how the work would be .completed.
Mr. Jim Hill was present. He said Mr. Thomas Michie is handling this
easement. He has a meeting with him tomorrow to see how this matter can be
straightened out. Mr. Warner said Mr. Aubrey Huffman has prepared a plan and
the Highway Department had reviewed it. He feels he will do whatever is needed
to comply with what the Highway Department has recommended.
Mr. Hadden said they had moved to Vicar Court two years ago and they have
been trying to get some action on this since that time. They had worked
intensively this spring and since the first of February, Mr. Carwile had been
helping. There were recommendations made on March 15, 1974, and these were
communicated to Virginia Land Company from the Highway Department. They were
promised plans any week, but did not get them for six weeks. A week later Mr.
Perry informed Virginia Land Company the plans were not acceptable. A month
later Tom Sinclair came and looked at the situation, and a day later submitted
plans that conform to Highway Department specifications. As of today, these
plans have not been submitted from Virginia Land Company to the Highway
Department. This is not only a matter of inconvenience because the street is not
up to standards, but they are on the downhill slope where they get continual
washing. Mr. Hadden estimated that refilling the dirt and reseeding the area will
cost $500 - $750. They want to landscape and build a patio and make other
improvements to the property. Their contractor has indicated that with the
inflation factor this will be an additional $1500. The matter of the easement
has been settled and signed by Mrs. Kayan, his neighbor. Mr. Hill said he would
like to clarify one point. The roads were built to Highway Department standards.
When the developer stated building, he did change some driveways and some of the
drainage. There was an easement down Mr. Hadden's property that was not recorded.
He has been trying to work out the situation to the betterment of everyone in
that section. This is partly due to the fact that part of Mr. Hadden's driveway
325
is on the right of way. If they put in curb and gutter, they may not be
able to get into their driveway. It looks good on paper, but sometimes
it is not practical.
Mr. Hadden said in April, 1972, the Highway Department had informed
Virginia Land Company that the roads were not up to standards. The
driveway being introduced had nothing to do with the subject since there
were no houses built in 1972. Mr. Carwile asked Mr. Hill if the easement
is signed by Mrs. Kayan and the other party involved, if he would be in
a position to start work on this project in the near future. Mr. Hill
said it is their intention to request that these roads be taken into the
Highway system within sixty to ninety days. Mr. Fisher asked if there is
a bond on these roads. Mr. Humphrey said yes, it is a certified check in
the amount of $11,800. Mr. Carwi!e said there have been problems with
drainage easements in Canterbury Hills. This is not the only one. There
were three or four drainage easements omitted from the subdivision plat.
Mr. Fisher asked the date of the performance bond. Mr. Humphrey sai'd it
is dated March 18, 1971. The bond is for WestminiSter Road, Vicar Court
and several other Streets. Mr. Carwile said he felt these roads should
be taken into the State system as soon as possible.
Mr. Wheeler said he keeps hearing from the developers that they have
built the roads to state requirements. However, they also have to be taken
into the State system. The Board does have a policy and it will have to be
enforced. Mr. Thacker said he sees a slight difference in this case because
the developer is trying to work on the situation. However, he offered
motion to allow Mr. Hill until the July meeting to show that the easements
have been recorded and at that time to make a report as to a reasonable
time for completion of any improvements that have to be made. He said if
that evidence is not shown, he would offer a motion at that time to impose
the same conditions on this area concerning performance bonds that the
Board had previously imposed this morning. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Carwile said it had been brought to his attention that the
Southern Railroad Bridge at the entrance to the Fairview Swim Club
needs repairs. Mr. Warner said he will check this with Southern Railroad.
Mr. Carwile asked if it has been resolved whether the Highway Department
will install sidewalks at the Barracks Road and 250 By-Pass ~nterchange.
Mr. Warner said the revised plans show a sidewalk on the north side. He has
not received word as to whether this has been officially approved. Mr.
326
5-20-74
Carwile asked if there is any way sidewalks can be extended to Georgetown
Road along the Hessian Hills Apartment area without going into the bank.
Mr. Warner said they must provide curb and gutter for drainage, and maintain
a shoulder along the road. These plans do incorporate storm drainage.
Mr. Wood said now that Rio Road has been reconstructed there are two
houses, owned by Mr. Acree and Mr. Thomas, where the land used to drop off
to the right of way. The right of way is now well away from their houses.
He asked if the Highway Department could slope this so that they can mow
their yards. Mr. Warner said he had done more than required by leveling
off the old road. The bank had been there for years and he did not feel
the Highway Department was obliged to slope it straight down to facilitate
mowing. It would be desirable, but he felt the project had gone too far
to say it was something the Highway Department had done. Mr. Wood said he
agreed from that point of view. But, although this would be on highway
right of way, Mr. Acree has said he will cut and maintain, if he can get the
lawn mower aver it Mr. Acree realizes this is not something caused by the
Highway Department. Mr. Wood said their attitude was very cooperative
and he felt it would be in the best interest of everyone if the bulldozers
would scrape it down to facilitate mowing before seeding.
Mr. Thacker asked Mr. Warner if he had received a request for improvements
on Routes 715 and 723. He thought this was an area to be considered by the
road viewers. Mr. Warner said no. Route 715 is in the budget and hopefully
they will start on this project the first of July.
Mr. Thacker asked the status of Greenbrier and Peyton Drive, and asked
if anything has changed on that request. Mr. Warner said the State has
asked for additional information from Stromberg-Cartson in relation to their
request for Industrial Access Funds. He did not know if this information has
been sent to Richmond. Mr. Thacker asked about that section of Greenbrier from
Stromberg's entrance to Whitewood, which was not part of the Industrial Access
request. Mr. Warner said there is a sizable bond on that section and the
developer wants to transfer t'He bond to other roads and get this section into the
state system.
Mr. Fisher said the Board discussed the railroad bridge on Route 745 behind
Gleco Mills at last month's meeting. He asked if anything has been done about
that situation. Mr. Batchelor said he received a letter from the district engineer
of the railroad stating that it has been referred to another p~rson. Mr. Fisher
said school starts in September. That bridge should be up to standards by that
time and something should be done this summer and not wait to hear from Southern
Ra±!road.- Mr. Wheeler asked if someone had written a letter to the Southern Railroad.
6-20-74
327
Mr. Batchelor said he had. Mr. Fisher said he fel~ this matter should be
expedited. Mr. Wheeler asked that a telegram go from the Board of
Supervisors saying that they have been unable to get a response to the
letter.
Mr. Fisher again inquired about a situation on 250 West near where
the 250 By-Pass ramp enters 250 West at the Gulf station and three lanes
converge into one lane. Mr. Warner said the Highway Department has plans
to install a temporary facility to channel traffic, probably in the nature
of sandbagging. This temporary sandbagging will take place around July
1 and if it proves to be satisfactory the Highway Department will install
curbing.
Mr. Fisher asked if Mr. Warner was aware that the County had taken the
responsibility, to have a telephone cable moved out of the right of way of
the unnamed road South of Crossroads. Mr. Warner said yes, the right of way
has been cleared and as soon as the telephone cable is moved, the Highway
Department will be ready to proceed with this addition.
Mr. Wood said he has discussed with Mr. Warner several times problems
the residents of Woodbrook Subdivision have getting in and out of the
shopping center. He met with Mr. Claude Cotten last week, pointed out the
problems he has seen, and Mr. Catten has agreed to paint proper markings
on his property. He asked that the Highway Department work with Mr. Cotten
and instruct him as to the proper lines to be painted.
Mr. Wheeler told Mr. Warner that a Mr. and Mrs. Saegmuller who live
on Route 20 near the entrance to Little Merrie Mill Farm and Cismont Manor
Farm would be coming to talk to him about a culvert in'the middle of their
driveway which is washed out. He asked that Mr. Warner check to see who
is responsible for these repairs.
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Humphrey if he would give further reports on other
subdivision roads which are not yet complete. Mr. Humphrey said he has
received calls from people who have indicated that they are working on
problems and the Planning Department has given them 30 days to complete
repairs, etc.
Mr. Warner said there was one other he would like to bring to the
Board's attention; that is Westover Hills, a development of Ashby Kennon
and Harley Easter. The Highway Department met with them on the site,
June 25, 1973, to outline the work which had to be completed. To this
date nothing has bean done. At that time, all items were minor~ Mr.
Wheeler asked that Mr. Humphrey communicate with the developers of
~estover Hills and that they be put on the list for the July meeting.
328
Communication was received from Mr. James A. Nunnally giving $2,000
as fair market value for a well lot located in the future development of
Woodbrook Subdivision known as section 10. Offer was received from
Claude W. Cotten on April 18, 1974, to purchase this well lot. Mr. Wood
said he had looked at the appraisal and has also looked at the lot. While
it is hard to disagree with Mr. Nunnatly, when actually looking at the lot
this appears to be a high appraisal. Mr. Wheeler said the Board should be
guided by an appraisal given by a professional. Mr. Wood then offered
motion to sell this well lot to Claude W. Cotten for $2,000, subject to
approval of the sale by the Court. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher.
Mr. Thacker said he did not feel the Board is setting a precedent in
disposing of property of the County or any of its agencies. The $2,000
figure is reasonable because the lot is in an undeveloped area. Vote was taken
at this time, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Claude Cotten was present and made the following request of the
Board.
"I respectfully request your favorable consideration of
this proposal for the bond security required for Section
10, Woodbrook. I will furnish to the Board a letter
of credit from the Citizens Bank and Trust Company of
Charlottesville, Virginia, that will read as follows:
We hereby establish our irrevocable letter of
credit in your favor for the account of Claude
W. Cotten in the aggregate amount of
$32,600.00. These funds will be available by
your sight draft drawn by you and accompanied
by your statement that said funds are due the
County of Aibemar~ through the failure of
Claude W. Cotten to complete Eastbrook Drive,
Section 10 of Woodbrook Subdivision (more
accurately described in Mr. Cottenrs letter
to Mr. J. Harvey Bailey of June 10, 1974)
according to State specifications. This
letter of credit expires December 31, 1974.
The advantage of this type of security and bond is the
speed with which action can be taken. There is no
need to file the long procedure that would be required
with a bond with an insurance company. As stated in
the letter, the funds are immediately available upon
notification to the bank of our fei'lure to produce.
In these times of acute monetary crisis with high interest
rates and shortage of funds, this method lowers the
cost ~emendously for me and ultimately for the purchaser."
Mr. Batcheior said he would prefer that this matter be referred to the County
Attorney because this is a new form of surety with which the staff is not
familiar. Mr. Carwile said the only problem he can see is the expiration
date on the ~tter of credit. Mr. Cotten said this can be set at any
date suitable to the Board. Mr. Carwile said if the County accepts this
type of surety, they will have to call on the bond prior to the expiration
date, if the roads are completed even if work is in progress. Mr. Cotten
said generally a letter of credit would be for the full amount of the
work. As the work progresses, amounts are released. When this gets to the
last or final item there will be a small-oer~ificate~o£~deposi~e~uired.
Mr. Cotten said everyone is aware of the interest costs today. The
6~- 20 -74
329
availability of large sums for a small developer doubles the cost to that
person, ties up money for an indefinite period and is a hardship at times.
A letter of credit would be on call at the bank upon notice from the Board.
They do not have to prove anything to a bonding company. Mr. St. John
said the Board should be careful about the way the letter of credit is
drawn. This is a favored means of surety, in,'~ther localities fo~ this
type of improvement. Mr. St. John said one safeguard would be to use
banks in the State of Virginia. He asked if the matter of surety is in
an Ordinance somewhere. Mr. Batchelor said the ordinance only states, at
the moment, that it has to be surety satisfactory to the Director of Finance,
and the County Attorney. Mr. Carwile asked if the Board could not
authorize this method being accepted in a form to be set out by the County
Attorney. Mr. Cotten would not have to come back to the Board at a later
date. Mr. St. John said the Board could do this. Mr. Wood said he
would like to see the Board proceed along these lines. He offered motion
to approve a policy of accepting letters of credit drawn to the satisfaction
of the County Attorney, and the expiration date, etc., to be handled by the
Planning Department. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile.
Mr. Fisher said he was.hot familiar with this procedure, and asked if
other Board members were. Mr. Carwile said a letter of credit is a bank's
guarantee that they are in effect acting as surety for Mr. Cotten. The
County would not have to exhaust their rights against Mr. Cotten if he
failed to complete his obligation, but could call directly on the bank
to pay. Mr. Wheeler suggested that as part of the policy, it be added
that the surety is acceptable only from banks in Virginia. Mr. Thacker
said in establishing this policy the Board is setting a precedent, and
it is something that they will have to watch closely. Mr. Wheeler said
the Board will have to watch it closely, but they also need to watch
the roads closely. Vote was taken at this point and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wood said there is a 50-foot easement in Woodbrook Subdivision
from the school lot to Brookmere Road. This easement was recorded
some time ago and is no longer being used. It has been a continous
erosion problem and eyesore for years during construction. Mr. Cotten
has cleaned it up, graded it, seeded it, mowed it and it looks nice.
Mr. Wood said the Board should request the School Board to take title since
there would be no cost involved. This easement should be owned by the
School Board in connection with other school property in Woodbrook. The
sch$ols could then cut and maintain this strip., Mr. Wood offered motion to ask
~&~£chool Board to take whatever action is necessary to acquire that piece
of property. Mr. Wheeler asked who owned the property. Mr. Cotten said when
the Woodbrook School was built the plat was vacated. There was a well lot in
back of this property. They had to keep this dedi'cation open as an approach
to the well lot and the School Board property. Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Cotten
if he had oontacted the School Board. Mr. Cotten said no, he Had not. He had
talked to MX. Wood about it. Mr. Carwile asked if the easement was for the
benefit of the water system. Mr. Cotten said it was part of the original
dedication. He does not know where the title stands or where it is vested.
Mr. Wood said he felt it would be an advantage to the School Board to have this
since it gives them access to their property from Brookmere Road. Mr. Carwile
asked the length of the easement. Mr. Wood said about 150 feet x 50 feet.
Mr. Wheeler said he would be willing to refer it to the School Board for
their consideration. Mr. Wood then offered motion to refer this matter to the
School Board since acceptance of this easement would be a logical extension
of School Board property, ~nd to accept title at no cost to the County. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
At 10:20 P.M., the Chairman called for a public hearing on an ordinance
establishing the equalization of pay of members of certain boards and
commissions appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia
as advertised in the Daily Progress on June 6, 1974 and June 13, 1974. Mr.
Batchelor read the following letter from Hugh F. Simms:
"The schedule of. the Board of Equalization is not set
up in such a way that they have specific meeting dates. Their
meetings are only scheduled when there is a sufficient
number of requests for review of properties. If the Board
is to be subject to the above ordinance, it will sure play
havoc with our operation. Therefore, I am requesting that
the Board of Equalization be excluded from the above ordinance."
Mr. Carwile offered motion to adopt the ordinance as advertised with the
exclusion of the Equalization Board. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood.
Mr. Fisher asked if members of the Board of Supervisors would be paid
for their services as members of these boards and commissions. Mr. Wheeler
said in working on this ordinance he had reservations about members of the Board
being paid for their services. After review~g:~ the work load of the Board
during the last few months, he has withdrawn his objection. Mr. Thacker said
the Board has increased their salary service on these boards and commissions
is one of their duties. For that reason he has serious reservations about paying
Board members for such service, although there is a tremendous work load involved.
6-20-74
3'32
There is work on four committees that is not covered by this ordinance,
and this is part of the responsibility that Board members accepted
when they accepted their jobs. Mr. Wheeler said in the past board members
serving on the Planning Commission and Welfare Board have been paid. If
the Board is not going to pay members listed in this ordinance, they should
not pay members who serve on either the Planning Commission or the
Welfare Board. Mr. ThacMer agreed. Mr. Wood said alOt of these boards
and commissions are more active than in the past. ThSs is the reason this
ordinance is before the Board. The Planning Commission meets every Monday
night from 7:00 P.M. until midnight. He said this is beyond what he expected
when he ran for this job. Mr. Thacker agreed the work load has increased
tremendously, but reminded Mr. Wood that the salary of the Board had
increased three times since he was elected to this Board. Mr. Henley asked
what happens when county employees attend these meetings. Mr. Batchelor said
beginning May 1, employees who work more than 40 hours a week must be paid
time and a half for overtime. This for all except supervisory personnel.
This will be an additional expense not anticipated when the budget was adopted.
The county has no latitude whatso~¥~ in this matter. The law is very specific
and the county will be fined if the law is not followed. Mr. Henley also
felt this is part of the job. Mr. Carwile said the whole thing originated
because some board members were being paid for their service on boards and
commissions and some were not. Mr. Wheeler said that was correct. Ail members
should be paid for such service or none should be paid. Mr. Fisher said if
there is to be extra pay for members of the Board, it should be equitable.
He does not feel at a disadvantage for not receiving extra pay during his
two and one-half years service on the Board. This is part of the job and
the Board should stick solely by salary. Vote was taken at this time and
the motion failed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile and Wood.
NAYS: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
Mr. Carwile asked the County if it would be proper to adopt the
ordinance with an addition which would exclude certain commissions and
board members. Mr. St. John said yes. Mr. Carwile ~hen offered motion
to adopt an ordinance establishing the equalization of pay of members
of certain boards and commissions appointed by the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia deleting members of the Equalization
Board and members of the Board of Supervisors. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: Mr. Wood.
332
(The full text of the ordinance as adopted is set out below.)
ARTICLE X
Chapter 2
Albemarle County Code
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE EQUALIZATION OF PAY OF MEMBERS OF
CERTAIN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA.
BE IT ORDAINED and enacted by the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors as follows:
Section 2-53. Equalization of Pay of Certain Boards and CommiSsions.
Each member of the following Boards and Commissions duly appoint-
ed by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, shall
be paid twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each and every regularly
scheduled meeting of the Board or Commission actually attended, as
set forth in the rules and regulations of that Board or Commission:
Joint Jail Board; Board of Zoning Appeals; Monticello Area
Community Action Organization; Piedmont Virginia Community College
Board of Directors; Joint Airport Commission; and Thomas Jefferson
Planning District Commission.
Section 2-54. Members excluded.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2-53, all Albemarle
County employees and members of the Board of Supervisors, when
serving as members of Boards and Commissions listed in said section,
shall serve without compensation.
Section 2-55. Limitations.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2-53, no member of
any of the Boards and Commissions listed in said section, shall receive
more than fifty dollars ($50.00) per month for all scheduled
meetings of that Board or Commission actually attended in one month.
Section 2-56. Travel and other expenses.
Each member of the Boards and Commissions listed in Section
2-53 shall be paid his necessary traveling and other expenses
incurred in attendance upon regularly scheduled meetings and while
otherwise engaged in the discharge of his duties as such member.
Mr. Jim Ritchie, Director of the Department of SOcial Services, was present
to explain to the Board the Work Incentive Program. Mr. Ritchie said Albemarle
County has had a work incentive program for welfare recipients for a year and a half.
It is now becoming mandatory in the State of Virginia. The WIN program in
Albemarle County was approved by the Welfare Board and the Board of Supervisors
before it became mandatory. This requires that any one who applies under the ADC
category, unless they have certain things like a child under six years of age
in the home, must be referred to the WIN office, which is in the Virginia
Employment Commission, for training or work. Mr. Ritchie said he has statistics
for the last eleven months which indicate that the county has had a mandatory
registration of 79 people in WIN; having actually registered a total of 106
people. The WIN program offers job training or job placement depending on the
ability of the person. Some have received their GED and other training through
WIN. The emphasis next year will be on trying to write contracts with employers
where the employer gets certain benefits by hiring welfare clients. Mr. Ritchie
said his staff does not particularly like the program because it has numerous
accounting forms that must be filed. However, they have changed the procedure
333
to try to get some valid information. Programs of this type are very slow
starting. The WIN program has been directly responsible for five people
getting jobs and going off of welfare at a savings of $574.00. Over the
last five months, the WIN program has also been directly responsible for
26 people going to work and obtaining jobs in the community. However,
they are still on welfare. With the incentive built into the program
by the Federal Government where they have to deduct the first $20.00 made,
plus one-third of the remainder it is almost impossible to get a person
off of welfare. This is one of the primary reasons why welfare~ rolls have
increased. In the past when a person went to work, they went off of Welfare
because the Department of Social Services deducted all of their earnings
from their allowance. Now, with the deductions they receive as an incentive
to go to work, not many cases are closed, but, payments are reduced. Mr. Ritchie
said he understands a citizen had remarked that the County does not have such
a program. They do have a program and it is working to some degree. The
program does have good potential.
The Board continued by discussing the resignation of James Ritchie as
Director of the Social Services Department. Mr. Wheeler said he was
reluctant to discuss this matter. Mr. Ritchie has done an outstanding job
for the County as Director of that department. The Board does not want
to see him leave the County but realizes his new job is an excellent opportunity.
Mr. Ritchie said he is in a unique position. He can say what he feels. There
is excellent county government in Albemarle County. Although he has not
always agreed with the Board and knows they were not always pleased with
some of the programs he had to administer, whenever he has come before the
Board he felt respect for himself. His department has been looked upon with
dignity and he appreciated that. His philosophy is the better the welfare
system and the more it is supported, the better the community will be and
the less crime there will be. The dollar spent for welfare, with the return
of the Federal and State governments, is a good investment of county funds.
Motion was offered by Mr. Wood to accept the resignation of James Ritchie
as Director of Social Services and to express the Board's appreciation for
a job well done. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley.
Mr. Fisher said he would like to pass on a comment he had heard from
a citizen. This citizen looked into some of the programs going on in
Albemarle County and anotheri~_locality. He found that welfare clients
are treated as human beings in the county welfare department and that is
entirely different from the treatment that both the citizen and the client
seem to be getting at another jurisdiction. Mr. Fisher said there is an
atmosphere of human dignity that seems to exist in the County welfare
department. He felt Mr. Ritchie should be commended for helping to
establish that atmosphere.
Vote was taken on Mr. Wood's motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
Mr. Charles A. Norford, President, Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company, Mr.
John C. Haskell, Jr., a member of the board of directors of the Stony Point
Volunteer Fire Company and Mr. James E. Samsetl, representing the Jefferson's
Country Fire Association were present to make the following request to the Board.
"June 7, 1974
Mr. Gordon L. Wheeler, Chairman
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
c/o Miss Lettie E. Nehsr
County Office Building
Court Square
Charlottesville, VA
Dear Mr. Wheeler:
The Board of Directors of the Stony Point Volunteer Fire
Company, Incorporated respectfully request the Albemarle
County Board of Supervisors to consider our fire company
eligible to receive the County's annual appropriation of
$7,200 granted to all qualifying volunteer fire companies.
The residents of the greater Stony Point area feel a
definite need for a fire company in our area because of the
continued growth of homes in this part of the county and
because, due to the Southwestern Mountain range, the Southern
Railroad, the Rivanna River, and the condition of the Stony
Point road, we are far removed from other fire companies
in the county. A fire company in Stow Point could very
effectively serve the Rivanna Magisterial District in
the area extending from the river and railroad tracks on
the west to the top of the mountains on the east, and from
the Key West area on the south, northward to the county line.
On April 24th we held a public meeti'ng at the Stony
Point Ruritan Club for the purpose of determining the need
and support for a volunteer fire company. There were
118 people in attendance, and they were very enthusiastically
endorsed the formation of a fire company for Stony Point.
We have since incorporated, written By-laws, chosen a Board
of Directors, and applied to the IRS for our tax-exempt
status. A committee is presently making arrangements
to acquire a site on which to build a fire house, and several
directors are gathering information on fire engines and
other fire fighting apparatus and equipment. Several
young men from Stony Point are at present attending the
training sessions at the East Rivanna Fire Company each wee~.
Shortly we will begin our fund raising campaign.
Unfortunately, we have not been able to move into
any existing building nor find any suitable used equipment,
so we will have to start from the beginning. Needless to say,
it will be extremely .helpful if we are included in the
County's current budget so that we may receive $6,000 for
capital expenditures and the $1,200 general expenses subsidy
for the current year.
We hope you will look favorably upon our request.
the People of the greater Stony Point area and for the
Board ~f Directors, I am
For
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) Charles A. Norford, President
Stony Point Volunteer Fire Co., Inc.'~
6-20-74
Mr. Norford said they were presant this morning to ask the Board's help
in getting a fire company established. They feel there is a need for a
fire company in this area. They have been told the first ten to eleven
minutes of a fire are the most important. There is no fire company
that can reach the Stony Point area in less than twenty-four minutes.
Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Samsell to explain the set up of the county's
volunteer fire companies and how this fits into the overall scheme. Mr.
Samsell said there has been discussion of placing a fire company in the
not
29 North area, however, this would/effect in any way the decision
to be made on the Stony Point Volunteer Fire Company. The Southwest
Mountains form a barrier which makes it very hard for East Rivanna to get
into the Stany Point area in a reasonable length of time. Also, access
from 29 North is very limited. He said the approval of this volunteer
fire company will give a better perspective of what will be required of the
29 North Fire Station.
Mr. Wheeler said~the request is for funding in the 1974-75 budget
year and also for future years. He asked the Board to look favorably on
the request. Mr. Thacker agreed that this area of the county is very
difficult to service from any of the existing fire companies. He feels
a volunteer fire company is the most economical way to give fire protection
to the citizens.
Mr. Fisher felt the request is in order and the citizens involved
should be commended. He then offered motian to approve the Stony
Point Volunteer Fire Company for funding by the County for the 1974-75
budget year and for future years. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
The following request was received from the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority.
"May 22, 1974
Mr. Tom Batchelor
County Executive
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia
Dear Tom:
22902
The Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority at its regular
meeting of May 20, 1974, agreed to extend the time frame
for appraisal of the water and wastewater facilities
addressed in Section 3.7 and 8.3 of the Four-Party Contract
to August 1, 1974. In granting this extension on behalf
of Rivanna, the Board noted that the request for an extension
is not based on an inability to agree at this point~ but rather a
higher priority being placed on prior construction needs.
Therefore, the Rivanna Board does not feel it necessary
to invoke the provision for the third consulting engineer
at this time. An opinion from Harry Marshall, of Gordon,
336
"Marshall and Rutschow, dated May 21, 1974 regarding this matter
is attached.
It is recommended that Albemarle County, as a party to the
Four-Party Contract take action similar to the above and extend
the appraisal deadline to August 1, 1974.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) George W. Williams
Executive Director'"
After a short discussian, motion was offered by Mr. Carwile to grant this request.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher,. Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. CHarles Youngman, Director of the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library
was present to discuss the revised library contract. He also introduced Julia
Bush, extension services board member. On June 11, the committee working
on this contract met with representatives' from the Board of Supervisors and the
City af Charlottesville. No one was present, at that time, from Louisa,
Nelson, or Greene. However, the contract has been signed by Nelson County and
the City approved the contract this past Monday. Mr. Youngman said this contract
is what the Board of Supervisors requested concerning allocation of the library
budget and method of budgeting.
Mr. Thacker said it was the Board's feeling that the cost b~ borne by the
various political subdivisions in direct relatim to the services received.
In this contract, the general overhead of the regional system is borne by the
Counties and the City on a direct proportion of circulation. The cost for the
branches serving the individual counties is completely borne by those counties.
The cost of the bookmobile serving Albemarle County is borne entirely by this
County. The cost of the bookmobile serving the other three counties will be borne
by those counties, based on circulation within those counties. The cost of the
branches which have circulation among several political subdivisions will be
borne in proportion to the circulation and service to those counvies. In this
way, the counties and the city actually bear the cost of the services they receive.
Basically, this is the only change with the exception that any new county will pay
a minimum charge of $1.00 per caPita until it has an experience of one fiscal
year's operation. Mr. Thacker said he feels this contract is fair and equitable
to all.
Mr. Fisher asked how this contract will change Albemarle County's allocation
in the budget for 1974-75. Mr. Thacker said the budget figure was established
on the basis of this method. This problem arose because the contract signedin
1972 was~not clear in its method for allocating specific cost.
337
Mr. Fisher said Albemarle County will still be paying between $4.00
and $4.50 per capita, based on population, and the new counties coming
into the regional library will only be paying $1.00 per capita. Mr.
Youngman said this is just for one year. Thereafter, their cost will be
based on this same method of allocation. Mr. Thacker said Mr. FisMer's
supposition is correct. The City and County are paying $4.00 and $5.00
on a per capita basis. However, the citizens of the City and~the County
use this syStem far more than the outlying counties. If you look at the
cost of each book circulated, you will find that the cost of circulation
of each unit is less than the cost of circulation in other counties.
Mr. Fisher said if based on circulation, as the contract proposes, Albemarle
will be subsidizing the other counties. Mr. Thacker said this is possible,
but there is also a State grant which comes into play the first year. To
a small extent Greene will be subsidized for the first year. Mr. Batchelor
said the chance of subsidizing other counties in the future had been
eliminated by this contract.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker authorizing the Chairman to sign,
prior to July 1, a contract with the City of Charlottesville and the counties
of Albemarle, Louisa, Nelson and Greene pertinent to the operation of the
Jefferson-Madison Regional Library. The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The full text of the contract as signed is set out below.
"WHEREAS, the City of Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle,
Louisa and Nelson have heretofore established, pursuant to law and
subject to the provisions of a ~certain contract between the afore-
mentioned City and Counties, dated August 11, 1972, a regional library
described in such contract as the Thomas Jefferson Regional Library but which
is now known as the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library; and
WHEREAS, the County of Greene has requested it be admitted to
membership in the regional library system, to include membership
on the governing board thereof; and
WHEREAS, Charlottesville, Albemarle, Louisa and Nelson are willing
to admit the additional member to the regional library upon the terms
and conditions hereinafter set forth,
NOW THEREFORE, this agreement made and entered into this 2nd
day of July, 1974, by and between the City of Charlottesville
and the Counties of Albemarle, Louisa, Nelson and Greene,
WI TNE S SETH :
That for and in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements
to be performed respectively as hereafter set forth, Charlottesville,
Albemarle, Louisa, Nelson and Greene contract among themselves as follows:
1. The regional public library heretofore established as The
Thomas Jefferson Regional Library shall be designated as The Jefferson-
Madison Regional Library, with its principaI office at such place as the
Library Board may from time to time designate and shall continue to
operate as a regional library as provided in Chapter 2, Title 42.1,
Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
338
~-20-74
2. The management and control of the Regional library shall be vested in
The Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Board created and appointed pursuant to
the aforesaid Chapter 2, and which shall have all the powers vested in such
boards by law. Charlottesville shall appoint four members to the Board;
Albemarle, four members; Louisa, one member; Nelson, one member; and Greene,
one member. Louisa, Nelson and Greene are each authorized to appoint one
alternate member who may attend all meetings but may vote only in the absence
of the principal member. The members presently appointed to the Thomas
Jefferson Regional Library Board are hereby confirmed and continued in office
as members appointed by Charlottesville, Albemarle, Louisa and Nelson to the
Jefferson-Madison Regional Library Board for the balance of the terms for which
they were originally appointed.
3. The Library Board shall provide and regulate library services to the
residents of the City of Charlottesville and~A!bemarte, Louisa, Nelson
and Greene Counties on as equal a baSis as is practicable.
4. The operational costs of the regional library shall be assessed to
the subscribing political subdivisions as follows:
a. The total operational cost.of each library and bookmobile
within the regional system shall be determined for the next fiscal
year.
b. The total operational cost of the administrative overhead
shall be determined for the next fiscal year.
c. The circulation of each branch library and bookmobile shall
be analyzed to provide the percentage of circulation by residents of each
political subdivision within the regional library system.
d. The total circulation of the regional.~library shall be
analyzed to provide the percentage of circulation to be allocated
to administrative overhead.
e. Each political subdivision Shall pay a percentage of the
operational costs of each branch library and bookmobile based on
the percentage of library materials circulated from such branch
or bookmobile to its residents within the regional library system.
f. Each political subdivision shall pay a percentage of the
general administrative expense based on the percentage of all
library materials circulated from the regional library to their
respective residents:
provided, however, the minimum charge to any political subdivision
shall be $1 per capita of its population and until it has one full
fiscal year's operating experience, any present or incoming party
to this agreement shall pay the minimum charge towards operational
costs of the regional library. Until further notice from the
Library Board, the counties shall pay such assessments quarterly
to the Charlottesville Director of Finance, who shall from time to
time be appointed Treasurer of the Regional Library Board and whose
office shall act, without charge, as the library system's accounting
and disbursing office, maintaining payroll and purchasing accounts
and rendering monthly statements.
5. Operational funds received from the United States or the Common-
wealth of Virginia, as well as fines collected, shall be credited to
each participating member on the same circulation percentage basis.
6. The Library Board shall determine hours and places of library
service and determine all policies in accordance with the statutes and
with the State Library Board's regulations regarding employment of the
Library Director. The Library Board's policies, formulated on recommendation
of its members and the Director, shall govern the selection, emphasis and
distribution of library books, periodicals, records, films and other media,
and guide all supplementary services such as to schools and other institutions,
public meeting rooms, and every other question of service policies or expenditures
within the annual appropriation. Regulations concerning such services,
including branch libraries and bookmobiles, shall be promulgated by the Library
Board.
7. Until further determination by the Library Bo~ard and notice to all
subscribing political subdivisions, all Library employees, including
custodial, are to receive compensation equal to rates paid by Charlottesville
and are to receive retire~man~ insurance and other benefits at least equal
to those for Charlottesville employees, provided, however, that schedules,
work assignments and conditions of employment shall ben'fixed by the Library
Board.
339
8. By December 3!st of each year, the Library Board shall
submit copies of its proposed budget for the next fiscal year, beginning
July 1st, to the governing bodies of the subscribing political subdivisions.
The participating authorities shall appoint a Joint Library Committee
to meet by January 15th with representatives of the Library Board and
thereafter to recommend allocation of funds.
9. Gifts of money, books or other useful donations may be accepted
by the Library Board for general use in the library system, or at the
Library Board's discretion, for particular use in the library branch or
participating counties preferred by the donor. Such gifts of money are to
be paid in to the Treasurer of the Regional Library Board, credited for
use as the Library Board decides. Removal or re-allocation of
such particular gifts or funds, where permitted under terms of the original
acceptance, may be ordered only by the Library Board.
10. In the event any participating political subdivision determines
to dissolve this agreement as provided by law, the distribution or allocation
of buildings, books and equipment within the system shall be negotiated by a
joint committee appointed by the subscribing political subdivisions,
provided, however, that library books or other media permanently assigned
to any particular branch library or agency within a county or city, at the
time that negotiation for dissolution begins, shall remain in that
county for its use or disposal.
11. This agreament may be executed in one or more counterparts,
any one of which need not contain the signatures of more than one party,
but'all of such counterparts taken together shall constitute one and
the same agreement. This agreement shall be in force and effect upon~
its ratification by all of the parties named herein.
IN WITNESS W~EREOF, the subscribing political subdivisions have
caused their names to be signed and attested by their duly authorized
officials.
ATTEST:
J. S. Rush, Jr.
ATTEST:
Lettie E. Neher
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
By: Francis H. Fi~e
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
B~: Gordon L. Wheeler
COUNTY OF LOUISA
By: C. S. Winston
ATTEST:
Dean P. Agee
COUNTY OF NELSON
By: Richard Sperry
ATTEST:
J. L. Morris
COUNTY OF GREENE
By: R. Gilbert
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
CONCERNING THE REGIONAL LIBRARY BUDG~.T
In order to clarify the fourth paragraph o~l the regional
library contract, concerning the allocation of ~osts to each
politioal subdivisio~ the following steps are s~gSested to
be taken each year in the preparation of the bu~gelt.
1) The Library Budget Committee composed!Cf ,three
library board members will meet during the montk of
November to work out a line item budget for eack library
agency (also referred to as "branch" and including book-
mobiles) within the regional-system.
340
2) Following approval by the Library Board, the line item
budget will be incorporated into budget forms provided by the
City of Charlottesville ( The City was selected because our
finance and personnel matters are done here ) and distributed
to the various administrative heads of each political subdivision.
3) A document is also distributed at this time entitled
"Library Budget, Cost Allocations." These allocations shall
be based on the circulation of each library agency (branch)
or bookmobile and on the total circulation for administrative
overhead as provided in paragraph four of the regional library
contract.
4) The library will also provide a circulation sheet to
each political subdivision showing the circulation of each
library agency (branch) and bookmobile for th preceding fiscal
year.
Mr. Wheeler asked the Board to recognize Mr~ Kate Hallock, an Albemarle
County representative on the Library Board, who had arrived since the
discussion began.
M~Wheeter said the Board of Supervisors would be out of town during the
week of the regular July meeting attending the National Association of County
officials meeting in Miami. Motion was offered by Mr. Carwile to change the
regular meeting date for July from July 18 to July 25. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Fisher and car~d by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs'. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
As requested by Dr. Harold McGee, President of Piedmont Virginia Community
College, and an ordinance having been drafted by Mr. St. John, motion was
offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher to advertise for a public hearing
on July 25 at 10:00 A.M. an ordinance to regulate parking on the campus of the
Piedmont Virginia Community College. The motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
The Board continued with a discussion of a letter from the Virginia Employment
Commission which had been presented at the May meeting and on which a clarification
was asked. The VEC stated that they have the capabilities and the authority to
handle youth employment services in the County. Mr. Batchelor said this is not the
Y.E.S. Program. If the Community Action Organization is ever unable to handle the
Neighborhood Youth Corp the VEC will be able to handle this program. However, no thing
of this sort is anticipated at this time. Mr. Drewy Brown's program has
approximately 120 youths and the County is using about 17 of those working in the Parks
and for the Schools. The County is also taking advantage of Federal programs being
administered through the State. It was the concensus of the Board that this program
should not be transferred.
The Board continued with discussion of an ordinance to prohibit discharge of
firearms in subdivisions as drafted by the County Attorney:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County
It shall be unlawful for any person to
discharge any firearm within the boundaries of any
subdivision within Albemarle County, Virginia.
Any person violating this ordinance shall be
liable to a fine of not less than
nor more than for each such
violation.
For purposes of this ordinance, "subdivision"
shall mean any residential subdivision of land
containing more than residences.
Mr. Fisher said this ordinance would meet the immediate problem but it
does not mention apartment houses, townhouses, etc., where the density of
population might be high enough to merit such restrictions. Mr. Batchelor
said the staff interprets subdivision to be any subdivision of land for either
business or residential purposes. Mr. Carwile said apartment houses or
rental duplexes can be built on unsubdivided land. Mr. St. John said this
ordinance might give the County as much trouble as the dog law. There is
no way to define the limits where this ordinance would apply unless those
limits are described by metes and bounds. Mr. Fisher said State statute
gives the Board authority to impose this type of ordinance in areas which
are so densely populated as to constitute a hazard. He said areas which are
zoned for residential use, such as those in the Zoning Ordinance of RS-i,
R-i, R-2, and R-3, might be used as a basic outline for this ordinance.
When other lands were rezoned to accommodate a higher density of population
they would automatically fall under this ordinance.
Mr. St. John said this is a criminal statute and constitutes a criminal offense
if violated. Mr. Wood said he did not know of any problem with the discharge
of firearms. Mr. Fisher said there has been a problem in his subdivision for
some time; this is not just a single occurrence. Mr. Carwile agreed there is
a problem in the Belfield-Canterbury Hills section. Mr. Wood did not feel this
is the right way to adopt such an ordinance. Mr. St. John said this ordinance
would be difficult to enforce.~ Mr. Henley said he could see the difficulty,
but he would support the ordZnance including residential land such as R-I,
R-2, etc., and he felt this might be a good idea. Mr. Carwile the existence
of such an ordinance may be enough to prohibit some of the occurrences that have
happened in the past and he supports such an ordinance on residentially
zoned property. Mr. Wheeler said firearms should not be discharged in residentially
developed land.
Mr. Wood asked if this ordinance would prohibit him from discharging a
firearm at a burglar. Mr. St. John said the City has an ordinance which prohibits
the discharge of firearms. In fact, you are not allowed to own an air gun. If
you do possess one, and a burglar breaks in and you fire at self defense, you
can be fined for firing a firearm. He has seen this happen in other cities, but
heard that the judge dismissed the case.~ He said if the Board is going to adopt
this ordinance it probably would be best to do it in this manner by designating
areas such as R-I, R-2, etc. Mr. Fisher said he would like to see the ordinance
drafted in that way. Mr. Wood said the Board is trying to solve a problem which has
occured only a few times. He fait this ordinance would be unenforceable.
Mr. Wheeler asked the County Attorney to redraft the ordinance covering
residential developments only and to report back at the next Board meeting.
At 12:05 P.M., the Chairman requested an executive session to discuss
legal matters presentIy before the Court. Motion to this effect was offered by
Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The Board reconvened at 1:35 P.M.
Miss Page Godsey was present to present information to the Board on a
classification and pay study for all general county government positions. This
study was approved by the Board in April. Miss Godsey said the staff contacted private
comsu!ting firms and asked them to make proposals on a study of positions, not
showing how the person presently in the job performs that job, and a pay scale.
Three proposals were received. The costs were $4,950.00, $5,800.00, and $11,853.00.
In evaluating the proposals, the staff contacted other Virginia localities
who have used the three firms for consulting work. During these discussions,
several personnel administrators suggested that professionals on the
personnel staffs of Virginia localities might be interested in conducting the
study for Albemarle on an ±ndividual consulting basis. After learning of Albemarle's
needs, the professional personnel staff of one Virginia locality expressed interest
in conducting the study. Two of the five consultants have visited the County and
discussed with Albemarle's staff, ~he county situation and their needs. The staff
recommends the employment of Friesz, Lowe, Schroder Associates, who are alt
employees of the Fairfax County Personnel Department. However, she emphasized that
whoever performs this study will perform the study locally by studying the jobs
in this locality to make their wage survey. .They do not look at wages in Arlington
and Fairfax, etc., to determine wages for AlbemarLe County.
Mr. Mike Carroll gave a verbal description of the steps that would be used
by the consultants in working out this pay and classification plan. Miss Godsey
said the staff does recommend the hiring of Friesz, Lowe, Schroder Associates and
listed the following three reasons:
1- Ail have expe~ence working in local government in Virginia
and therefore have worked in developing classification and pay
plans for jurisdictions similar to Albemarle. Such expe~ence makes
them sensitive to the factors which must be considered by local-
governments in making personnel decisions.
6-20-74
343
2- These people are willing to invest more consultant
days in the study. They have promised to conduct desk
interviews with 80-90% of all employees rather than only
20-35% as proposed by the other firms. These people
place more emphasis on orientation of employees than the
other firms. They have also promised to conduct more
extensive reporting and review sessions with the Board of
Supervisors and the staff and to work with us until we
are happy with the results.
3- Ail overhead costs are eliminated since these
people will conduct the study for expenses only. They
anticipate expenses of $1,231.
Mr. Fisher asks .who pays the salaries of these people while they are
conducting this study for Albemarle County. Miss Godsey said they will take
leave from Fairfax County to do this, therefore will be performing the study
as individual consultants. As a part of the cost of the plan, Albemarle
would pay a per diem rate for~their expenses, it is of value to these
consultants in their jobs to be able to look at another locality. In
talking with other localities, she found that some of the larger localities
are more willing to help solve problems than~the Staff thought they
would be. Many times Albemarle County has obtained advice from other
localities about problems.
Mr. Fisher said the proposal lists 35 man days that would be spent
on this study. He found this very unusual and gives him a degree of concern.
Miss Godsey said the staff was also concerned abou this. These
consultants assured the staff that they have compensatory and vacation
time saved and can use it in this manner. With five people working on
the study, this would be about seven days per person. The other consulting
firms interviewed had said they would desk audit about 20% to 35% of each
position. These consultants h~ve-stated they will do 80% to 90%. Speaking
from an objective point of view, these consultants will talk to almost
everyone who has a position different from another position. The staff
thinks this is a big advantage.
Mr. Thacker asked over what period of time this study would be performed.
Miss Godsey said the staff needs a dc
people can be hired. They will be r~
and need to work this into their sch~
individuals have performed this serv:
said they have not performed this oul
worked on pay studies as an individu~
indicated that they want to meet wit!
to set a date for this meeting. Mr.
Mr. Batchelor and Miss Godsey and fez
job for Albemarle County and hiring
~cision today as to whether or not these
~ady to start work the first week in July
~dules. Mr. Thacker asked if these five
.ce before as a group. Miss Godsey
~side of their jobs as a group. Each has
tl. She said the Board had previously
the consultants and the staff needs
~heeler said he has discussed this with
~ls these consultants would do a good
~f same should be approved.
344
Mr. Fisher said in view of the strong recommendation from the staff he would
bury his doubts and he offered motion to accept the proposal of Friesz, Lowe,
and Schroder Associates for a pay and classification study. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carw±le, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Batchelor introduced a group of county empioyees who have been taking
a middle management class for the past eight weeks, and Mr. Dick Dunsing
from the University of Richmond, their, instructor.
Request was received from the Airport Board for a loan of $75,000.00 to
meet the cash flow for the runway reconstruction project; the loan to be
repaid in approximately 120 days after completion of the work, if all Federal
funds are received by that time. Motion to authorize a loan of $75,000.00
to the Airport Board was offered by Mr. Wood, seconded by Mr. Carwile and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wheeler said there are two appointments to be made on the State
level. The Board of Supervisors has been asked to lend their support to Mr.
Charles S. Hooper, from Nottoway County, as a member of the State Highway
Commission. He who would represent the rural areas.
Mr. George Long, Virginia Association of Counties, was present. He
said the 19Z~ session of the Legislature changed the State Highway Commission
to the Department of Highways and Transportation. They also created two
new positions from the State at large; one to represent the rural area, and one
to represent the urban area. The Virginia Association of Counties feels Mr.
Hooper would ably represent the rural area. Mr. Wood said he had known Mr.
Hooper for a long time. Mr. Hooper is a past-president of the Virginia
Association of Counties and is now Recording Secretary. Mr. Wood offered
motion to adopt the following resolution.
WHEREAS, Mr. Charles S. Hooper, Jr., of Crewe, Virginia,
has been Chairman of the Nottoway County Board of Supervisors
and President and Recording Secretary of the Virginia Association
of County, and has a great deal of knowledge of the rural areas
of Virginia;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby pray that consideration
will be given Mr. Charles S'. Hooper, Jr., as a member of the
Virginia Highway Commission. This Board feels that Mr. Hooper
would ably represent all localities of the State of Virginia.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wheeler said there is also an opening on the State Water Control
6-20-74
345
Board'. .This Board has been asked to support either Joe B. Johnson or
Joseph E. Gibson. Mr. Long explained that everytime the Executive
Board of the Virginia Association of Counties meets they are disturbed
by the troubles counties have with the State Water Control Board.
They feel there is a lack of understanding, by members of the State
Water Control Board, as to how county government operates and the time
it takes to put their orders and edicts into effect. No person who holds
an elective office can be appointed as a member of the State Water Control
Board. Both of these gentlemen have been on boards of supervisors and have
worked well in their counties and could be relied upon if they became members
of the State Water Control Board.
Mr. Wheeler said he personally feels Joseph Gibson served this county
well. He was an excellent supervisor, understands county government, and
also understands the legal ramifications. Mr. Wheeler urged the Board to
support Mr. Gibson as a nominee for the State Water Control Board.
Mr. Carwile offered the following resolution for adoption:
WHEREAS, there will be vacancies in the membership of
the State Water Control Board on July 1, 1974; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Joseph E. Gibson, a resident of Albemarle
County, Virginia, a Professor of Business in the McIntire
School of Commerce at the University of Virginia, an
attorney, and a former member of the Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors, has indicated that he will accept an
appointment to the State Water Control Board if so invited;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board Of
Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, feel
that Mr. Gibson's experience and background with local
government would make him an outstanding member of the
State Water Control Board, and pray consideration be
given Mr. Gibson in making these appointments.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: Mr. Henley.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher.
The next item before the Board was approval of the final site plan
of Peacock Hill. Mr. Humphrey said this plan for section I has been
before the Planning Commission for a total of 38 lots; 32 townhou's, es
and 6 single-family dwellings. Ail technical data has been provided.
The staff now has the utility plans which are being reviewed by the County
Engineer; grading plans are in the hands of the Thomas Jefferson Soil
and Water Conservation District; road plans have been submitted by the
highway department; and the County Attorney has reviewed the homeowners
association and declarations. There have been some changes and modifications
made in the homeowners agreements from those~resented to the Planning
346
Commission, and Mr. St. John will explain those changes. The Planning COmmission
felt it necessary to insure that the best interests of the homeowners
association are maintained and attached the following three conditions
to thi.s approval: 1) No building[~permit is to be approved until the
corporation for maintenance and operation of utilities is approved by the
State Corporation Commission; 2) The developer may not transfer the
utility corporation ownership until such time as the majority of the
lots have been sold and occupied; further, this transfer must be approved
by the State Corporation Commission; and 3) The homeowners association
is not bound to accept ownership of the public service corporation at
this time; but the transfer of ownership is subject to approval of the
membership at the time any transfer is offered.
Mr. Humphrey said this is the Iast approval required prior to actual
construction. Once the utility and road plans are completed, a bond
will be required for construction of the roads. When all the different
permits have been approved and issued and a bond obtained by the County,
the plat will be signed for recordation. Over the past year-and-a-half
the Board has required certain elements under the Zoning Ordinance and the
Subdivision Ordinance. The Board has seen plats of the background systems
and information on the testing of wells. Mr. Humphrey saiH the staff feels
the applicant has complied with all requirements to date.
Mr. Fisher said the question of density was discussed when this matter
was before the technical review committee. He asked if this question has
been resolved. Mr. Humphrey said yes. It is standard procedure in planned
developments to consider the gross area when computing density. The staff
still feels this is the intent and the applicant has stated that he does not
wish to change anything. Mr. Fisher asked if the plans have been changed
accordingly to reflect the fact that they are talking about gross area, which
was originally implied. Mr. Humphrey said yes.
Mr. Frank Folsom Smith, the developer, and several of his consultants were
present. He said,they~request approval and are waiting to move ahead with
what they consider to be a pioneer project.
Mr. Fisher asked if this plan meets all requirements for access to water
for fire protection. Mr. Humphrey said yes. Mr. Fisher asked if the question
of setbacks had been resolved. Mr. Humphrey said on plannad Unit developments'
all of these requirements are waived. It is suggested in the plan that the
minimum setback from the right of way be five feet and the side yard setback
be zero. In this type of development the staff sees no problem with clustering
and with easements to the rear for septic tanks. This gives more flexibility
for design.
6-20-74
34.?'
Mr. Fisher said some weeks ago he sent the Board of Supervisors
a response he received in answer to a letter written to the Stat~
Water Control Board because two people who live in the Peacock Hill
area are concerned about possible pollution of their water systems.
Mr. Fisher said he does not believe it is necessary, at this time,
to request that well points be put down for monitoring pollution. But,
he suggested that the Board request the State Water Control Board to
monitor the wells on this property and surrounding properties ~o gather
data on how the common septic system is working. If the State Water
Control Board will monitor this for the County, as it is developed, the
Board will have more information on which to make decisions on future
requests of this type. He asked that the Board~cansider this as part
of the final approval. He had no objections to anything that has
been done to this point.
Mr. Fisher said two different motions would be appropriate.
He offered motion that the site plan be approved, with the conditions
stipulated by the County Planner, and final approval of the utility
system by the COunty Engineer. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile.
Mr. St. John said the conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission are no longer pertinent. The attorney for the developer
has submitted to him an amendment to the homeowners documents regarding
utilities. There are no restricted roads in Peacock Hill, but there
are utility systems involved in the declaration of the subdivision. Until
yesterday when the change was made, the utilities were set out in the
declaration in such a manner as to require the conditions the Planning
Commission recommended. The developer wanted to establish a public service
corporation to own and operate the central~ water and sewer system to serve
Peacock Hill. The developer also reserved the right to transfer this company
to the homeowners association at any time and the homeowners association had
to accept the transfer anytime it was tendered. Mr. St. John said he did
not like this condition. Mr. Middleditch recognized the problem and redrew
the document simpty to say the developer anticipates organizing a Virginia public
service corporation to own and operate the system. Mr. St. John said he does
recommend that a condition be placed on the approval that no certificate
of occupancy shall be issued until the public service corporation is in
effective operation and approved by the State Corporation Commission.
Mr. Middleditch said the developer will accept that condition. He
checked with the attorney for the State Corporation Commission and was
informed that a transfer of the properties of the public service company
will require approval of the State Corporation Commission. For this reason
it did not seem feasible at this time to work out terms of future ownership.
Mr. Fisher amended his motion to add as a condition that no certificate of
occupancy shall be issued until the public service corporation is in effective
operation and approved by the State Corporation Commissian. This addition
was accepted by Mr. Carwile.
Mr. Fisher asked if there are any other problems the County Attorney can
foresee with continuing ownership of a water and sewer system. Mrs. St. John
said he has never seen this type of sewerage system operated in this way. He
understands that from a planning viewpoint, it is very good. He saw no legal
pitfalls since it is under the auspices of the State Corporation Commission.
Mr. Fisher asked what happens if the corporation set up goes out of existence
by bankruptcy, etc. Mr. St. John said a receiver would be appointed. The
receiver would impose rates and assessments on the user to keep the system going.
At this time, the Chairman called for a vote on the motion and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Fisher then offered motion to request the State Water Control Board
to monitor the existing wells and surface waters, on this property and
surrounding properties, to determine whether or not any pollution of the
ground waters and surface waters is o.ccurring. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Thacker. Mr. Smith sa±d. his engineers think this is a good idea. He
suggested that the monitoring start immediately or before the first well
or septic tank goes into operation. This could provide base line data. He
offered ~o have his maintenance people take tests or monitor stations or
whatever is required. The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Request was received from George W. Bailey, Sheriff, for a special
appropriation in the amount of $97~.00. This money was part of a Federal
grant from DJCP Funds for office and investigative equipment for the Sheriff's
Office. Motion was offered by Mr. Wood to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that $974.00 be, and the same hereby is,
appropriated from the General Operating Fund for expenditure
by the Sheriff's Office.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile, and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
6'_20274
The following request was received from Clarence S. McClure, School
Superintendent.
"In accordance with the County's Appropriation Ordinance
I hereby request that the following special appropriations
be presented for approval by the Board of Supervisors. Ail
of the funds for which appropriations are requested are
state funds.
Vocational Agriculture. The State Department of
Education approved a special project for equipping the
shops for the middle schools. The state's 70% share
amounts to $8,980.60.
Code to 17k-403 $ 8,980.60
Business Education. This special project was
funded by the state for 70% of the cost of equipping a
new business education block for Albemarle High School.
The state's share was $7,170.80.
Code to 17k-403 $ 7,170.80
Home Economics. The State Department of Education
has approved a special project for appropriately equipping
the Home Economics Departments of our middle schools on a
50/50 matching basis. The state's share of this project
is $1,365.03.
Code to t7k-403 $ 1,365.03
Total $17,516.43"
Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that $17,516.43 be, and
the same hereby is appropriated from the School
Operating Fund for expenditures by the School
Board, and expenditure of these funds is hereby
approved.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the
following recorded vote'
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Batchelor stated that a special appropriation in the amount of
$239,323.23 is needed in order to pay 1973 tax refunds. MOtion was
offered by Mr. Wood to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that $239,323.23 be, and
the same hereby is appropriated from the General
Fund for the payment of tax refunds, ordered by the
Supreme Court, and expenditure of these funds is
hereby approved.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, HenIey, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Clarence McClure, Superintendent of Albemarle County schools was
present,to .discuss his space needs. Mr. McClure said based on the
space the Education Department presently has and on the five-year
program which has gone to the State, they need about 50% more space. There
are nov a large number of positions in this requirement. They have a much
349
increased Federal program which does bring in additional money from the Federal
government. The School Board chose the central supervision approach since it is
felt to be more effective and also saves money. Mr. McClure said he is not tied
to this approach. He would be glad to go back to the department head program which
entails at the secondary schools 10 people who have two periods a day off to
supervise and do department head work. This would cost more money and would not be
as effective as what they have now.
Mr. Wheeler said if the Education Department needs 50% more space, it will have
to be out of this building. Mr. McClure said if they get the space which will be
available on the first floor and on the third floor, they can get by for two or more
years without any major adjustments.
Mr. Thacker said the Board's Space Committee met with the staff's space
committee earlier this week and will have another meeting tomorrow. After that
meeting they can probably come back to the Board and consider Mr. McClure's
requirements in a better light.
Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance, the Sheriff's Office
and the Office' of the Commonwealth's Attorney for the month of May 1974 were
presented. On motion by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Wood, ~hese statements
were approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Statement of expenses incurred in the maintenance of the County Jail for
the month of May 1974 was presented. Also presented was summary of prisoner
days and Jail Physician's bill in the amount of $55.00, of which two-thirds
is reimbursable by the State. Motion was offered by Mr. Carwile to approve these
statements. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Report of the County Executive for the months of April and May 1974
were presented as information.
Report of the Department of Social Services, for the month of April 1974,
was presented as information in accordance with Virginia Code section 63.1-52.
The Board continued with a discussion of a proposed noise ordinance. The
County Attorney said the Board had sent a draft of the proposed ordinance on May
21 with a letter. The ordinance makes the state ordinance applicable to
motorcycles whether or not they are on a public highway. Motion was offered
by Mr. Wood to advertise a Noise Ordinance for a public hearing on July 25, 1974,
at 10:15 A.M. in the Board room. Motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried
by the following recorded vote:
6~120-74
3'52
AYES:
NAYS:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
The next items discussed were appointments to certain committees
of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission. Mr. Fisher said
the by-laws of the Planning District Commission require that their
committees and boards be appointed for one-year terms. They are trying
to get all the boards and committees to operate on the same basis or
June to June. Mr. Fisher asked that appointment to the Criminal Justice
Advisory Committee be passed over until the August meeting.
Mr. Fisher offered motion to reappoint Marilyn Cram, Paul Devries and
Sylvia Lea Culp as members of the Drug Abuse Council of the Thomas Jefferson
Planning District Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
Mr. Fisher offered motion to reappoint Mr. Donald G. Heyne to the
Health Planning Steering Committee of the Thomas Jefferson Planning
District Commission. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAIS:
Jul
as
fo
AYi
NAI
of
and
AY~
NAI
ovc
fr¢
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
None.
Appointment to the Planning Commission was ordered carried over to the
y meeting.
Mr. Carwile offered motion to appoint Mr. Charlas Smith, Jr., of Colthurst
a member of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Advisory
.ncil on Aging. The motion was seconded by Mr. Wood and carried by the
lowing recorded vote:
S: Messrs. Carwite, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
S: None.
Mr. Carwile offered motion to appoint Mr. Jack N. Kegley as a member
the Historic Landmarks Committee. The:motion was seconded by Mr. Wood
carried by the following recorded vote:
S: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
S: None.
Appointment to the Joint Airport Commission was ordered carried
r to another meeting and the Clerk was asked to obtain an opinion
m the County Attorney as to whether or not Board members can serve
this commission.
352
6-20-74
Appointment to the Welfare Board was again discussed. Mr. St. John said he has
researched the matter of appointments to the Welfare Board. He has determined that
it does not make any difference if we are under the County Executive form of government
or not. A Welfare Board member cannot succeed himself after two consecutive
terms. Mr. Wheeler said if that is true, the County will need a new welfare board
since all excep~ one member has served beyond that time. This appointment
was carried over.
Mr. Wheeler said he had received the following letter:
"Scottsville, Virginia
July 11, 1974
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Charlottesville, Virginia
Attn: Gordon Wheeler, Chairman
Dear Mr. Wheeler~
It has been brought to my attention that as of July 1,
1974 the Albemarle County residents will no longer be
admitted Monticello without charge.
I hope and trust your Board will disapprove of this
matter as strongly as I do and take action to investigate
it so the final solution will be in the best interest of
our county.
We must keep in mind that Monticello is privately
owned, tax exempt and gets free advertising from every
aut~omobi!e licensed in Albemarle County.
Thanking you in advance for your consideration, I remain,
Sincerely,
(Signed) Page T. Massie"
It was the concensus of the Board that this is not a matter for the
Board to consider.
Mr. Wheeler read the following letter from Mr. Harry T. Marshall, representing
Mr. George Cason:
"June 12, 1974
The Honorable Gordon L. Wheeler
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia
Dear Mr. Wheeler:
RE:
City of Charlottesville
V.
Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors
Special Use Permit
Application No. 281
Mr. Cason has received a copy of Mr. Roger Wiley's letter
of June !0, 1974, with respect to hearings for special use
permits Nos. 203 and 281. After considering the matter
carefully, it is respectfully requested that the Board of
Supervisors consider first, special use permit application No.
281, for the reasons set forth herein.
"During the course of hearings on June 6 and 7, counsel
for the intervenors, Mr. Forbes Reback, and the undersigned,
both stated that ample opportunity for a full and thorough
hearing had been made by virtue of the Planning Commission
and Board of Supervi.sors hearings with respect to this
application. Thereafter, Judge Berry entered an Order grid
I quote from paragraph (3) as follows:
'If requested by any interested party as to either
or both of the pending special use permit
applications, a prompt, full and complete
hearing shall be accorded the City, the
intervenors, and~other interested persons
or parties as defined under the zoning
ordinance for the purpose of proffering
addStional evidence.' (emphasis supplied)
Based on the foregoing, it is respectfully suggested
that the parties having agreed that a full and fair
hearing has been accorded, no additional hearing is
required and the Board can act on application 281 based
on the existing record. It would be appropriate to allow
the applicant and any intervenor to submit memoranda
to the Board pointing out those aspects of the record
already made in this case upon which they relied
principally for the positions taken by them.
Should the City of Charlottesville offer:additional
evidence, it is further suggested that any intervenor
or other party be allowed to submit evidence only in rebuttal
thereof.
There can be no useful purpose in the Board of
Supervisors re-hearing the voluminous statements, reports
and arguments already heard by them in September of 1973.
The tapes are available for listening and some parts
of the hearings have already been transCribed and can
be made available to the Board for such additional
use as they may see fit.
Since special use permit apPlication No. 281 is in
this posture, it is strongly urged that this matter be taken
up first by the Board of Supervisors in fairness to Mr.
Cason in order that he may have a definitive answer as to
whether his land will or will not be involved to any
further degree in consideration for a landfill site.
Very truly yours,
GORDON, MARSHALL & RUTSCHOW
(Signed) By Harry T. Marshall"
The Clerk was advised to inform Mr. Marshall that the Board has already
taken action to hear SP-203 on July 30, and SP-281 on July 31, in accordance
with the Court Order.
At 3:00 P.M. motion was offered bly Mr. Fisher.to adjourn into executive
session to discuss legal matters. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The Board reconvened et 3:50 P.M. Mr. Wheeler announced that during
the executive session possible violations of the Soil Erosion Ordinance
were discussed. It was the concensus of the Board that these violations
be referred to the County Planner, the Zoning Administrator and the
County Attorney for action.
354
6-20-74
At this time the Board taok a two minute recess.
At 4:00 P.M., mambers of the Fire Station Committee, Messrs. Warren Jones,
Richard Roane, Roger Baber, Julian Taliaferro and Calvin Moyer, were present to
discuss their duties. Mr. Wheeler said this committee was formed to study th~
feasibility of establishing a fire station for_~the northwest section of the
County. The committee should study the possibility that operation of ~this station
can be set up on a contractural arrangement with an outside interest or possibly
it can be operated by the City of Charlottesville. The committee should also
locate land for a fire station and formulate figures for building a fire station.
This station could be county-owned or the committee can study any other arrangement
that would give this area adequate fire protection. The committee would then
make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors as to the course of action to be
taken.
Mr. Fisher said the rural areas of the County are fairly well served by the
volunteer fire company system. If there is a need to go to a professional system
for the urban area of the county, the Board should not establish a separate
professional fire company but should work with the City.
Mr. Taliaferro said the Board's instructions are explicit. He asked if
the committee should develop several alternatives. Mr. W~eeter said that would be
the desire of the Board. Mr. Wood asked that a member of the county
staff be present ~o take minutes of the Fire Station committee meetings. Mr.
Moyer said a meeting of the Fire Station Committee should be called at the
earliest possible date and he does appreciate the intere~ of the Board in working
on this proposal.
Mr. John Humphrey, County Planner, was present with a request from the Planning
Staff that the Board reconsider SP-350 granted to Moore Brothers, Inc. Mr.
Humphrey said he has received, since the public hearing on May 22, 1974, information
which indicates that during the Camille flood this property was under water. The
Corp of Engineers has been requested to do a flood plain study on the
Hardware River, but it will be ayear to a year and a half before that study is
completed. Under the Flood Plain Ordinance~ the 100-year flood plain must be
delineated by the Corp of Engineers. DUring the Camille flood, the~height of
the water was 594.6 feet above mean sea level. That was at Route 708 near Route 29
on telephone pole number 864. Pictures were given to Mr. Humphrey; three on
Route 29 and one on Route 708. These were used to ascertain where this flood
point might be, however, it was very difficult. There is a possibility that
the property which is the subject of the application would have been under water.
Mr. Humphrey said he was presenting this information to the Board for
consideration and noted that the County has no legal method~ at this time to
determine the i00 year flood plain. He did note that, as a matter af normal
policy, when site plans are received for locations along rivers where the 100
6-20-74
year flood plain has been established along those major rivers on which
studies have been requested, that the site plan is Submitted to the
Corp of Engineers for their review to assist the Planning Department
in establishing where flood conditions may exist on these properties.
Mr. Henley asked if this would cover the whole property. Mr. Humphrey
said it would, if you follow the 594.6 foot level along 708. There is
a constriction of the flood plain at the railroad overpass near this property.
Mr. Fisher asked if there is a provision in the ordinance that an engineer
with appropriate background can be employed to help establish the
flood plain levels on properties which may be in the flood plain. Mr.
Humphrey said in cases where no study is available someone can do this and
can also perform soil analyses to determine the alluvial soils. The
Planning Department can, at the direction of the Board, make such a request.
He said the information presented indicates that sometimes this property
is subject to flooding. Mr. Fisher asked if it is possible to develop
this property for the proposed use and still project the downstream people
from property damage by materials which have washed away. Mr. Humphrey
said ~ithin the flood plain ordinance there is a provision that anything
that is permitted within the floodway is permitted provided certain
conditions are met. This is done after evaluation by the Corp of Engineers
and the County Engineer.
Mr. Robert Boyle was present for Mr. Moore. He said they had learned
of this request several days ago by letter from Mr. Humphrey. He felt
this is a Planning Commission matter or a matter to be considered during
site plan approval. He said the largest flood in recent history was the
flood in 1972. If the water achieved the level Mr. Humphrey spoke aboUt,
all of the property would have been under water, but it did not. The reading
given was taken on Route 29 which lies west of the site. Between the site
and Route 29 is a railroad overpass which is an ea~hen dam with a large
culvert to allow the Hardware River to go through. The culvert is not
large enough to allow the flood wavers to go through so it acts as a dam
and that is the reason for~that ~reading. There are people who live in the area,
Mr. Walker who owns the land, and neighbors, who say the highest water they
have ever seen was in 1972. Seventy-five to 100 feet from the Hardware River,
the water did not cover the rock. If the water had achieved the level Mr.
Humphrey had spoken about all the property across the road and into the
quarry would have been covered. He said a Mr. Pack, who was the engineer
on the new bridge being constructed on 29 South, was present. Under State
and Federal regulations, the bridge itself is four feet below the level which
Mr. Humphrey has given. Mr. Boyle stressed that he feels this is a Planning
Commission matter. The applicant would not put the plant in an area that might, at
sometime, be covered with water, although the plant itself would not float
away. He said the applicant intends to comply with every requirement imposed
by the Planning Commission when they approve the site plan.
Mr. Wood said he had viewed the site before the Board voted on the rezoning.
He asked neighbors about the flood waters during the 1972 flood. At the time
of that flood, there was a plowed field within 150 feet of the stream. The
flood washed away some of the top soil, but it did not cover this land. Mr.
Wood said he does not feel there is any possible way this property can ever be
completely flooded. If that is the basis for asking for reconsideration, he does
not think it is a valid reason.
Mr. Matt R$~a~g was present. He said he spent time with the Corp of
Engineers in Norfolk. They told him they have no legal authority to command
any local body to do anything. They gave him oertain information as to flood
levels obtained in the area during the floods of 1969 and 1972. They then drew
a contour map and showed him that the property had to be under water in both
of these 'floods. He said Mr. Boyle pointed out that there is a railroad
trestle, but he failed to point out that the trestle has a bridge that goes over
Route 708. Once the water backs up against the earthen dam, the water follows
along Route~708. He said there may or may not be a flood of this type in the
future. The weather bureau thinks this September may be the worst hurricane
season ever. If there is a flood, there would be gravel going away and
asphalt spills. The county would then have trouble with the Norfolk-Newport
News Water Authority because the Hardware River is in their domain.
Mr. John Walker said he has owned this land for 25 years. He took
measurements this morning of his bridge. He measured it at 19 feet wide.
The superintendent of the Superior Stone Company also visited. They had
determined that ~he water had come back 75 feet from the bridge on either side.
As far as all of the land being under water, this is not reasonable or possible.
Mr. Fisher said the information presented conflicts. Without professional
advice from the Corp of Engineers or someone else, it is not possible for the
Board to make a decision based on this information. At the time this was
presented to the Planning Commission and the Board, if there had been significant
evidence that the land would be under water, they would not have considered the
rezoning. Until.there is more information, he saw no reason to change his mind.
Mr. Fisher said Mr. Humphrey had suggested that the Board may be able to get
someone to determine the flood plain limits, and he felt this is what the Board
should do. Mr. Wheeler said he felt the information Mr. Fisher wants will be
needed by the Planning Commission before action can be taken by the technical
committee on the site plan. Mr. Boyle said it is the applicant's intention
to present this information.
6-20-74
357
Mr-. ~Fisher then~ offered~motiom,~to~.recomsider this.~requast :and.~.to__abtain
the~bestLinformation pmssib!e in order~.ta~maka, a dec±sion~ ~he'~motion
~ ~.~'was seconded by Mr. Thacker.
Mr. Carwile asked if Mr. Fisher meant to reconsider the rezoning
itself. Mr. Fisher said yes. Mr. Carwile said he could not support that
motion. He would rather see it handled through site plan approval. If the
information spoken about needs to be obtained, then the site plan will have
to be approved in such a way that flooding, if it is a problem, will not,
be a problem in the future. Mr. Wood said he agreed with Mr. Carwile.
The Board should deny this motion, take the information presented here and
refer it to the Planning Commission for consideration at the time of site
plan approval.
The Clerk drew the Board's attention to the fact that this was not the
next Board meeting after the zoning request had been heard and therefore
the motion on the floor was out of order. The motion and the second were
withdrawn. Mr. Fisher offered a motion to suspend the rules of the Board.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Fisher then offered motion that the matter be reconsidered on the
basis of the evidence presented today and the request submitted to the
Board by the Planning Staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and
failed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher and Thacker.
NAYS: Messrs. Carwi!e, Henley, Wheeler and Wood.
Mr. Thacker then offered motion that the final site plan come to the
Board of Supervisors for final approval. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Carwile to
advertise a public hearing on the Albemarle County Land Subdivision
and Development Ordinance for August 14, 1974, at 7:30 P.M. in the
Courthouse. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wheeler read the following letter into the record:
g-20-74
"June 17, 1974
Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
County Office Building
Court Square
Charlottesville, Virginia
Re: Ivy Landfill
Gentlemen:
Mr. Bailey has asked that Whitfield Morris or I write you concerning
the Saturday noon closing of the l~ndfitl.
Several pieces of equipment Mr. Morris uses in the operation of
the landfill require a great deal of maintenance, in part because
the landfill operation is one which is hard.on machinery. Unless
Mr. Morris is to work seven days a week he has to have sometime
during the week which he can devote to work on his equipment.
Mr. Morris preceded the Saturday noon closing by several weeks
of telling users of the landfill that it would be closed at noon.
The .users of the landfill have generally now learned of this noon
closing and there are few people who come after noon on Saturday
to try to use the landfill. It might be noted that there are even
people who come on Sunday to try to use it.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) J. T. Camblos
Attorney for Whitfield Morris"
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher, authorizing the
County Executive to notify Mr. Morris by registered mail that he has a
contractural obligation and that this request does not comply with that contract.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
At 4:50 P.M., the Chairman requested that the Board adjourn into executive
session to discuss the purchase of or condemnation of land. Motion to this
effect was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
NAYS: None.
The Board reconvened.
At 4:59 P.M., Mr. Thacker offered motion to adjourn this meeting until
June 26, 1974, at 3:00 P.M. in,the Board Room. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Wood and carried by the following recorded vote:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker, Wheeler and Wood.
AYES:
NAYS:
None.
C HA IRMAN