1973-09-2025O
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia
was held on September 20, 1973 at 9:00 A.M. in the Board Reom of the County Office
Building, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Present: Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J.T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr.,
and Gordon L. Wheeler.
Absent: Mr. Stuart F. Carwile and Mr. Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.
Officers Present: County Executive and County Attorney.
The meeting opened with The Lord's Prayer led by Mr. Wheeler.
Mrs. ~~c:h~ League of Women Voters, presented to the Board a copy of
A Guide to Local G~overnment in Charlottesville and Albemarle County as prepared
by the League of Women Voters.
Upon motion by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Thacker, minutes of the meeting of
August 8, August 15 and August 16 were approved with the following corrections:
1) Page 185, fifth line from the bottom, says "of ownership" should say "or"
2) Page 189, ninth line, first word, should be "irrevocabl~." 3) Page 197, fifth
word, says "agreed," should say "aggrieved." 4) Page 207, last paragraph should
read: Mr. Carwile offered motion to adopt the following resolution and also re-
quested the Planning Commission to make a report of their recommendations:
A RESOLUTION SIGNIFYING THE INTENTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, TO CONSIDER SPECIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL PROJECTS TO BE UNDER-
TAKEN BY THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY INCLUDING THE ACQUIRING, FINANCING,
CONSTRUCTING, OPERATING AND MAINTAINING ONE OR MORE WATER SYSTEMS AND ONE OR MORE
SEWERAGE SYSTEMS, OR ANY COMBINATION THEREOF, AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXERCISING
THE POWERS CONFERRED BY THE SAID ACT AND AMENDATORY THEREOF.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, as follows'
SECTION 1. That it is the intention of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, having created, pursuant to the Virginia Water and Sewer
Authorities Act, (Chapter 28, Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950) as
amended, the Albemarle County Service Authority, to consider designation of the
following water and sewer project~ to be undertaken by the Authority, which are
set forth in resolution adopted by said Authority on August 14, 1973:
PROJECTS
To acquire, construct, maintain and operate water and sewerage systems in
areas described as follows:
Beginning at a point, the intersection of the Northern boundary line of lot #1,
section 61 Albemarle County Tax Map, of the Chapel Hill Sub-Division, with the
center-line of State Route 631; thence along center line of State Route 631 in a
Southerly direction to its intersection with the Western boundary of parcel 144,
section 61; thence with the Western boundary of parcel 144, section 61, in a
Northeasterly direction to a corner, and continuing with the Eastern boundary of
said parcel in ~a Southerly direction to its corner with parcel 146D, section 61;
thence with said parcel 146D, section 61, in a Northeasterly direction along its
Northern boundary to a corner in the Western margin of the R.O.W. of the Southern
R.R; thence with the said margin of the Southern R.R. in a Southerly direction to
a corner common to parcels 150 and 15lA, section 61; thence crossing the said
9-20~73
Southern R.R. in an Easterly direction to a corner common to parcels 154 and 155,
section 61, in the Eastern margin of the R.O.W. of the Southern R.R.; thence with
the Northern boundary of parcels 155, and 154D, 154B, 154A, and 164, section 61 to
to corner common to parcel 164 and 164A, section 61, in the line of parcel 16, section
62; thence crossing parcel 16, section 62, in a Southerly direction to a corner
common to parcel 16, section 62, and parcel 165, section 61; thence with the
Easterly margin of parcels 165 and 166, section 61 to a corner common to parcel
166, section 61, and parcel 16, section 62; thence crossing parcels 16 and 17,
section 62 in a Southeasterly direction ~o a corner common to parcels 17 and 17C,
section 62; thence with the boundary of parcel 17, section 62, in a Southeasterly
direction to a corner common to parcels 17 and 17C, section .62, thence in a
Northeasterly direction along the Southeastern boundary Of parcel 17, section
62, to the West bank of Rivanna River; thence Southerly along the West bank of
Rivanna River to the center line of the right-of-way of the Virginia Electric and
Power Company; thence, with the center line of Virginia Electric and Power Company
in a Southeasterly;7 direction, crossing the Rivanna River, Parcel 1, section 78,
parcel 23, section 62 and parcels 59A, 57, 55, 55B, 56 (Glenorchy Subdivision),
53, section 78 and continuing the same line, crossing parcel 5lA to a point in
the line of parcels 5lA and 51, section 78; thence in a Southerly direction along
the boundary common to parcels 51, 5lA, and 5lB, section 78 to a point in the
north margin of InTerstate Highway 64; thence, in a Southeasterly direction,
crossing 1-64, to a corner common to parcels 45 and 47, section 78, in ~he south
margin of 1-64; thence, with the Western boundary of parcel 47 to the north margin
of U.S. Hy. 250 and continuing, crossing U.S. Hy. 250, along the east boundary of
parcels 33B and 33, section 78, crossing the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad and the
Rivanna River ~o the South bank of the Rivanna; thence with the South bank of the
said river, up stream in a Westerly direction to the Western boundary of parcel
29, section 78; thence in a Southwesterly direction along the Western boundary
line of parcel 29, section 78 to a corner common to parcels 29 and 22, section
78; thence, crossing parcel 22, section 78, in a Southwesterly direction to a
corner common to parcels 22 and 23, section 78, in the margin of State Route 53
and continuing the same course to the center of State Route 53; thence in Westerly
direction along center line of State Route 53 to its intersection with the
Charlottesville-Scottsville district line at or near the entrance to Monticello;
thence in a Southerly direction along Charlottesville-Scottsville District line
(crest of Mountain) to a point where South boundary line of parcel 25, section
77 and parcel 30, section 91, extended Eastward intersects the Charlottesville-
Scottsville District line; thence in a Westerly direction to the South Eas~
Corner o~ parcel 30, section 91, and continuing along the Southern boundary of
s~id parcels 30 and 25 to a point 700 feet East of State Route 20; thence in a
Southerly direction crossing parcels 29 and 7, section 91, to the North East
corner of lot 36, section 91; thence Southerly along the East property line to the
9-20-73
Southeast corner of lot 36, section 91; thence in a Southwesterly direction,
crossing parcel 7, section 91, to the center line of St. Hy. 20; thence with the
center line of Hy. 20 in a Southwesterly direction to a point opposite a corner
common to parcels 27 and 7A, section 102; thence crossing from the center line of
St. Hy. 20 to the said corner common to parcels 27 and 7A; thence along the
Eastern boundary lines of parcels 7A, 7 and 2 section 102, to a corner common to
parcel 2, section 102 and parcel 38, section 101; thence, crossing parcel 38,
101 along the center of a private right of way to its fork leading to 39,
section
40 and others, section 102 and continuing therefrom in a Northwesterly direction
to a corner common to parcels 38 and 25, section 101; thence with the Northern
boundary of parcel 25, section 101 to the center of St. Rt. 631; thence along the
center of St~ Rt. 631 in a Northeasterly direction to the intersection of the
center line of St. Rts. 631 and 781; thence Westerly from the intersection of
State Rou~es 631 and 781 crossing parcel 49B to the South East corner of parcel
23, section 76; thence Westerly along the Southern boundary of parcel 23,
section 76, to a corner common to parcels 23 and 49, section 76, and Sherwood
Farms, as shown on section 76N; thence with the said Sherwood Farms in a clock-
wise direction along the Southern and Western boundary of Sherwood Farms, section
76N, to its corner common to parcel 44, section 75; thence with parcel 44, section
75 Westerly along its Southern boundary to a corner common to parcels 43 and
44, section 75; thence Northerly with the Western boundary of parcel 44, section
75 and continuing the same course, crossing the Southern Railroad and Hy. 29 to
a point 300' North of the center line of Hy. 29 in parcel 45, section 75; thence
in a Northeasterly direction by a line paralleled to and 300' from the center
line of Hy. 29, crossing parcels 45 and 48, section 75, to apoint in the boundary
section.75;
line common to parcels 48 and 53,/thence ~n a Northwesterly direction along the
Western boundary line of parcel 53, section 75, to its intersection with the
South R.O.W. of Hy. 1-64; thence Westerly along South R.O.W. of 1-64 to its
intersection with Eastern boundary of parcel. I (City Reservoir) section 75;
thence along Eastern boundary parcel I, section 75, ~o its intersection with the
Western corner of parcel 81, section 59D; thence along Western boundary of par-
cel 81, section 59D to a point approximately 300' South of the Southern R.O.W.
of U.S. 250; thence parallel to and 300' from the Southern R.O.W. of U.S. 250 in
a Western direction to a point opposite the Eastern boundary of parcel 23E, section
59; thence Northerly 300' to U.S. 250 R.O.W., and continuing along same line ~o
the Southeast corner of parcel 23E, section 59; thence along Eastern boundary
of parcel 23E, section 59, to its intersection with the C & O_ R.O.W. and the
same course continued crossing the C & O R.R. to its boundary with Farmington;
thence along the Western boundary of Farmington in a clockwise direction to the
intersection~of State Routes 601 and 654 at the bridge over Ivy Creek; thence
Southeasterly approximately 200' along center line of State Route 654 to the
9-20-73
253
Western boundary of parcel 3, section 60; thence in a Southerly direction along
the Western boundary of parcel 3, section 60, to a corner common to parcel 3,
section 60 and "Colthurst Farm" section 60C; thence with "Colthurst Farm," section
60C, along its Western and Southern boundary to a corner common to "Colthurst Farm"
and parcel 66, section 60; thence in a counter clockwise direction along the
Western, Southern and Eastern boundaries of parcel 66, section 60, to the center
of State Route 654; thence in a Northerly direction along the Western boundaries
of parcels 27 and 27A, to the Northwestern corner of parcel 27A, section 60A and
continuing with the said parcel 27A Eastward along its Northern boundary and
Northward along its Western boundary to a corner common to parcel 27E, section
60A; thence in a Northerly direction with the Westerly boundary of parcel 27E
to a corner common to parcels 27E, and 10A, ("Hessian Hills") section 60A; thence
in a counter clockwise direction along the boundary of "Hessian Hills" to a corner
in the West side of State Route 656; thence in an Easterly direction to the center
line of State Route 656; thence in a Northeasterly direction along center line
of State Route 656 to the South corner of Georgetown Green; thence in a clockwise
direction around the boundary line o£ Georgetown Green Sub-Division to the center
line of State Route 743; thence in a Northerly direction along State Route 743,
to the Northwestern corner of parcel 27A, section 61; thence Easterly along the
Northern boundary of parcel 27A, section 61 and continuing along Southern boundary
of parcel 29, section 61, to a corner common with parcel 29, section 61, "Westfield,"
section 61W, and the Berkeley Community, section 61M; thence with the South-
western boundary of Berkeley, section 61M and parcel 119, section 61 to the center
line U.S. 29; thence Northward along the center line of Hy. 29 to a point, the
intersection of the center tine of Hy.. 29 with the Southern boundary extended, of
parcel 135A, section 61; thence with the Southern boundaries of parcels 135A and
135B, and 135C in a Southeasterly direction to a corner common to 135B and 136,
section 61; thence along South boundary of 135B, section 61, in an Easterly di-
rection to a corner common to lot 135B and lot 14 of Chapel Hill Subdivision; thence
in a clockwise direction around Chapel Hill Subdivision to the center line of
State Route 631 (Rio Road), the point of beginning. Included in this juris-
dictional area is all that land which lies between the above described perimeter
and the corporation boundary of the City of Charlottesville. Included in this
area are portions of Jurisdictional Areas 2, 4, and 6, into which the Albemarle
County Service Authority's utilities have not hitherto been extended.
Section 2. A public hearing will be held on this resolution at 7'30 P.M.,
Wednesday, September 19, 1973, in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville,
Virginia, at which time those citizens affected can be present and make their
views known.
Section 3. The Clerk of the Board of County Supervisors is hereby authorized
and directed to cause a notice of the public hearing, together with a copy
of this resolution, to be published once in The Daily Progress, a newspaper
of general circulation in Albemarle County, Virginia, .said publication to be
at least ten (10) days prior to the date fixed for the hearing.
The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote'
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
At this time the Board continued a public hearing on an ordinance to vacate
certain portions of Powhatan Drive. This matter had been deferred from August 1'6,
1973. Mr. Lee R. Lucas presented to the Board a letter signed by Lee R. and Ruth
D. Lucas, Michy M. and Barbara H. Pugh, Wayne Greene, E.B. Loftin and Mrs. John
Todd, all residents of Carrsbrook, in which they stated the developer had proceeq~d
with alteration of publicly owned land in such a manner as to render it unfit for
the purpose for which it was dedicated and he did this without obtaining a vaca-
tion of that dedication. They asked that the Board defer any action on this
matter until a thorough investigation of the arbitrary actions of the developer
to convert publicly owned land to his own personal use and profit could be investi-
gated.
Mr. Wendell Wood said he had talked to Mr. Hemmer and Mr. Lucas and they
were not opPosed to the closing of Powhatan Drive. The only one still in opposi-
tion is Mr. Loftin. After a short discussion of the letter, Mr. Thacker offered
motion to refer this matter to the County Attorney for his opinion and to defer
any action on this request until a later date. Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley
and carried by the following recorded vote'
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
At the August 16, 1973 meeting of the Board a Mr. Henry J. Browne had pre-
sented to the Board a matter relating to the Pines Subdivision roads. Mr.
Humphrey said that after'a study of this matter he felt the only expedient
way to help Mr. Browne would be to cause a vacation of the subdivision plat and
revert this land to one lot. After this, the County could release the maintenance
bond on the roads and if Mr. Browne ever wanted to sell he would have to rewobtain
subdivision aPproval. He felt this would have the least intanglements and the
only-other way to accomplish a release of the bond would be to have the Highway
Department say that the roads were built to state standards. Mr. Browne said
he had not had time to consult with-his attorney but he would do this before
October 18 and he asked that the matter be deferred for 30 days.. Mr. Thacker
asked if there were ~nything~in the new subdivision ordinance which would preclude
f~h%~ approval of this subdivision. Mr. Humphrey said no. Mrs. Elizabeth
Rosenblum asked if this land had not been rezoned from agricultural to RS-1 and
asked if you could take RS-1 and divide it into rental units such as these. Mr.
Wheeler said the land was zoned on density and he suggested that this matter be
continued to the next regular meeting of the Board in order to allow the County
Attorney time to investigate the legal ramifications.
At 9'30 A.M., ihe Chairman called for a public hearing for abandonment of
9~20~-73 ·
255
certain sections of Route 635. Notice of this public hearing was advertised
in the Daily Progress on September 7 and September 14, 1973.
A Mr. Hamilton Jones, one of the effected property owners was present. He
had no objection to the closing of the road, however, he stated that there are
run-off problems on his land due to construction of the new road.
Mr. Juul-Nielson recommended that the Highway Department consider returning
land to the property owners and also complained about soil erosion.
Mrs. Mary Carter also spoke. She had no objection to abandonment of ~he
road, however, she also complained about run-off problems. After a short dis-
cussion, the Board ascertained that there were no objections to abandonment of
the portions of Rt. 635 which were advertised. Mr. Fisher then offered motion to
adopt the following resolution-
WHEREAS, certain changes have resulted in the Secondary System due
to relocation and construction on Route 635; and
WHEREAS, public hearing was held on September 20, 1973, in accordance
with notice forwarded to each property owner effected, and there appears
to be no opposition from the public with regard to such proposed changes;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the following sections, as indicated
on sketch presented to this meeting and made a part of the Board's per'
manent file, be abandoned pursuant ~o Section 33.1-155 of the Code of
Virginia:
Section 1 - length 0.182
Section 2 - length 0.049
Section 3 - length 0.176
Section 4 - length 0.028
SecTion 5 - length 0.125
Section 6 - length 0.057
Section 7 - length 0.028
Section 8 - length 0.161
Section 9 - length 0.076
Section 10 - (A) Sra. 166+30 - 168+15 - Length 0.035 (185')
Section 10 - (C) Sta. 170+50 - 175+00 - Length 0.085 (450')
Section 11 - length 0 157
Section 12 - length 0 072
Section 13 - length 0 083
Section 14 - length 0 057
Section 15 - length 0 034
Section 30 - length 0 011
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following sections be added to the
Secondary System'
Section 16 - length 0 227
Section 17 - length 0
Section 18 - length 0
Section 19 - length 0
Section 20 - length 0
Section 21 - length 0
Section 22 - length 1
Section 23 - length 0
Section 24 - length 0
Section 25 - length 0
Section 26 - length 0
Section 27 - length 0
Section 28 - length 0
Section 29 - length 0
Section 31 - length 0
Section 32 - length 0
248
208
061
136
290
193
119
100
091
038
028
087
028
095
028
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following section be discontinued'
Section 10 - (B) Sra. 168+15 - 170+50 - length 0.048 (255')
9~20-73 ~
25'6
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
Mr. Batchelor asked Mr. Warner if he had received any further information
on a resolution o£ the Board requesting the closing of the lower part o£ oI.d Route
53. Mr. Warner said he had a meeting with the right-of-way department, however,
a decision on this mat~er was not ready at this time.
The next item under discussion was a petition received from residents of
Sunrise Acres concerning the maintenance of the road leading into and through
this subdivision. Mr. Henley said this land was divided and pu~ to record over
twelve years ago and he has talked to the County Attorney concerning this matter.
He was advised that since this is not a state maintained road there is nothing
the Board of Supervisors or the Highway Department can do to alleviate this
situation.
Mr. Wheeler said he had fought this type of battle for a number of years
and it is one of the reasons a member of this Board has spoken out against
restricted roads. He said there had been legislation proposed in the General
Assembly which would turn jurisdication of such ma~ters over to the localities,
however this legislation~has never been enacted. He then directed the Clerk to
write a letter ~o the petitioners explaining the Board's inability to offer
assistance in such matters.
Mr. Batchelor said the staff has been working for many months on a solution
to the problem of Greenbrier, Commonwealth and Pey~on Drives. They are now trying
to have the roads in Hollymead accepted into the State System in order to have
the bond on those roads tranferred to Greenbrier, etc.
Mr. James Hill, representing Dr. Charles Hurt, was present. He said they
now have plans approved by the Highway Department for Peyton Drive. The plans for
Commonwealth, Westfield, and Greenbrier Drives have been sent to Culpeper for
approval. Mr. Hill said they would like to obtain Industrial Access funds for
Stromberg-Carlson's entrance off of Greenbrier Drive. Mr. Thacker said it was the
feeling o£ the Board that this would not be considered until some resolution has
been made on the balance of this road system. Mr. Hill said they hoped for a
definitive answer from Culpeper before the October meeting.
Mr. Wheeler asked for a report on the Hollymead roads. Mr. Warner said there
was a meeting last week to discuss the dam in Hollymead and to resolve a practical
way to have the. remainder of the roads in this development accepted into the
State System. Mr. Warner said Mr. Hill has proposed that the Highway Department
accept into the system the road up to the dam, that ~he dam no~ be included in
the Highway system, and ~he responsibility for maintenance of the road across the
dam and the dam itsel'f would be the responsibility of the Hollymead Homeowners'
9-20-73
Association. The engineers are now in the process of completing plans on the
remainder of the Hollymead roads from the dam to Route 649. Mr. Warner said if
this proposal is finalized the Highway Department would be able to maintain the
road since access into this development would be available other than across the
dam.
Mr. Wheeler asked how many members there are in the Homeowners' Association
at the present time. Mr. Hill replied that there are none. Mr. Wheeler said he
felt it was premature to enter into such an agreement before the Homeowners'
Association is operational.
A Mrs. Grace Muro, presented to 'the Board a petition signed by approximately
I00 persons, all parents of children riding school bus number 25. They asked
that the Hollymead road be opened for school bus service.
Mr. Hill said they would like to comply with the petition, however, there
are two and one-half miles of road in that section that would have to be maintained.
Mr. Wheeler said he had discussed this petition with Clarence McClure and he felt
the school board would be making a recommendation to the Board.
Mrs. Rosenblum said she had brought to the attention of the Board problems
concerning school buses when this road was first approved. She was told that this
was a safe area. There had been discussion held to see if there should be signalling,
a reduction of the speed limit, and she is still concerned about site distance
at this entrance.
Mr. Batchelor asked Mr. Warner to make a report on the deceleration lanes
at the rear entrance of Four Seasons. Mr. Warner said the develqper is finishing
work on the taper and when completed this deceleration lane will basically comply
with all requirements of the Highway Department. Mr. Henley asked if the telephone
poles h~d-.been moved. Mr. Warner said no, however, the road has been widened and
they are no longer in the middle Of the road.
Mr. Warner said the Highway Department has held two public hearings on the
proposed changes for Rt. 637. The Highway Department needed.an additional reso-
lution from the Board expressing their final views about this project. He said
the Highway Department feels there is not an immediate need for this project and
they would like to have a conformation of the Board's feeling on the project to
either continue or defer. Mr. Batchelor said that when Interstate 64 was built
the Board and the staff indicated there should be consideration given to the up-
grading of this road into Ivy; this before there was any commercial development
considered in this area.
Mr. Ed Smith stated that he lived on Route 637 and there is a definite need
for improving this road. Mr. Fisher theft offered the following resolution for
adoption:
WHEREAS, on January 21, 1971, the Albemarle County Board of Super-
visors passed a resolution requesting that certain funds allocated to
Route 801, Project No. 0810-002-126,C501, be transferred to Route 637,
Project No. 0637-002-138,C501; and
9-20-73
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on December 7, 1971, to determine
if a new location was needed for RouTe 637 and twelve months passed without
this Board being advised of any determination; and
WHEREAS, on December 21, 1972, this Board passed a resolution asking
for a determination on this matter and thereafter a second public hearing
was held on July 17, 1973;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia does hereby state to the Virginia Department of
Highways that a serious problem exists on Route 637 and this Board does
hereby urge the Virginia Department of Highways to make a final decision on
this matter.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote'
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Walter Young was present to request that Route 691 be taken into the
State secondary system. He had made this request au the annual road meeting in
March. After viewing this road the road viewers had turned down his request. Mr.
Young said he had built one-half of this road and he is not the only property
owner concerned. Right of way had been held up for a number of years by a Mr.
Shifflett, but Mr. Shifflett is now willing to dedicate sufficient land to pro-
vide for a 40-foot right of way with an 18 foot hard surfaced or graveled road.
The people in this area would like to request school bus service on this road.
Mr. Warner said ~he road viewers had recommended that Mr. Young upgrade this
road at his own expense because of the type of development that has taken place on
this road. He said the Highway Department must accept their recommendations and
they did not feel the road is ready for acceptance.
Miss ElLen Nash was present to represent Mr. Young. She said that when the
road viewers had viewed this road there had not been sufficient right of way, how-
ever, now there will be right of way along the entire length of this road. She
said Mr. Young had applied for RS-1 zoning in this area and the Planning Commission
had deferred any action on this petition until he obtains a permit from the High-
way Department.
An unidentified lady said she also lived on this road. She said if the road
was taken into the state system, her child would not have to walk a mile to the
school bus.
Mr. Fisher said if the situation relating to right of way had changed since
the road viewers met, the Board could ask them to change their recommendation.
Mr. Henley asked if there were problems other than right of way. Mr. Warner
said there were no drainage easements recorded.
Mr. Wheeler told Mr. Young that the Board would ask the road viewers to recon-
sider this matter when problems concerning right of way and easements are resolved
and for him to notify the Board when this matter is ready for final action. Mrs.
Rosenblum asked if there were any way to speed up proposed improvements to Hydraulic
Road.
......... '- ' 9L20-73 ~ .....
259
Mrs. Grady Covington asked if the Board Was ready to discuss public trans-
portation. Mr. Wheeler said not at This time.
Mr. Richard F. Pietsch complained to the Board about the traffic problem on
Route 240 when Morton's leaves trains on the track d'~ring rush hours and he asked
if there was any way to put a stop to this. Mr. Warner said this is a problem,
however, there was an agreement reached with Morton's several years ago. Mr. Batchelor
said there was a letter in the files to this effect and Mr. Wheeler ordered that the
Clerk write Morton's about this situation.
At 10'55 A.M., the Chairman called for a public hearing on SP-280 for Pauline
Morningwake. Action on this petition had been deferred from August 22, 1973. Mr.
Humphrey stated that the property is situated on the west and east sides of Route
810 near its intersection with Route 629 at Browns Cove. The subject property
contains one permanent dwelling on the west side of Route 810. No other dwellings
are in the immediate area. Subject property on the east side extends about 150 feet
to a stream and has fairly dense natural screening, however, he said since the trailer
was on rental property the Planning Commission recommended denial of this petition.
Mrs. Morningwake was present. She said she had no place to move the trailer.
Mr. Peter Vanderlinder, an adjacent property owner, said he proteste~ the
installation of a permanent mobile home for ecological reasons. He said he lived
downstream and he was tired of picking garbage out of Doyle's Creek.
Mr. Fisher said since this trailer was located close to the road and in a flood
area, he suggested that the Planning department study conditions under which the
emergency permit was issued. He felt this might lead to situations that should not
be continued.
Mr. Henley then offered motion to deny SP-280 and to allow Mrs. Morningwake
60 days to remove the trailer from the property. He suggested that she check with
the Planning Department to see that any property she might find for this trailer has
adequate zoning and is suitable property for a mobile home. The foregoing motion
was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote'
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
Mr. Louis Scribner presented to the Board a study entitled, Manpower Development,
which had been written by the Charlottesville-Albemarle Economic Development
Commission. He said they would like comments and recommendations from the Board.
At 11'10 A.M., the Chairman called for a public hearing on SP-286 for the
Albemarle County Service Authority as advertised in the Daily Progress on August 31
and September 7, 1973.
(i)
SP-286. Albemarle County Service Authority has petitioned the
Board of Supervisors to locate a water transmission line from
Stillhouse Mountain west on Barracks Road to the Vepco right-of-way
west of Colthurst; then in a westerly direction north of
Farmington to Ivy Creek; then southwest along Ivy Creek to West
Leigh. Jack Jouett and Samuel Miller Districts.
260 9-20-73
Mr. Humphrey gave the staff report and stated that the Planning Commission
recommended approval of the special permit as applied for. Mr. Ray Jones stated
that the Service Authority has awarded contracts for the Stillhouse-Ivy ~ater
to proceed should be given before October
line
subject
to
Board
approval.
Notice
1973. This project has been approved as a priority item by the Rivanna Authority.
Mr. Fisher asked who would own the line and Mr. Jones said the Rivanna Authority
would own it upon completion of the line. Mr. Fisher then offered motion to approve
SP-286 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion was seconded by Mr. -~.
Thacker and carried by the following recorded vo~e'
AYES- Messrs. Fisher, Henley; Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS- None.
Mr. Sam Robertson, CounTy Dog Warden, was present. Mr. Batchelor said he
had asked Mr. Robertson to be present to make a presentation to the Board about
the work load of the Dog Warden.- Mr. Robertson said he was no longer able to
keep up with the work and usually was about a week behind. The County definitely
needed more help in order to enforce the new specially imposed leash law. Mr.
Batchelor inquired how many additional persons would need to be employed and Mr.
Robertson said probably three. Mr. Henley said there were more dogs than people
in the County and Mr. Robertson would have to let the people know that if they had
dog problems they would have to be patient. Mr. Batchelor was directed to draw
a report of costs on this and to return this t.o the Board of Supervisors at the'
next meeting. ,
Claim against the Dog Fund was received from Thomas D. Wetsel for one (1) ewe
and two (2) lambs killed by dogs. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Thacker,
Mr. Wetsel was allowed $60 for this claim. Motion carried by the following recorded
vo~e'
AYES'
NAYS'
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Claim against the Dog Fund was received from Hunter C. Lc~ng for one (1) calf
killed by dogs. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Fisher, Mr. L~ng was
allowed $140.00 for this claim. Motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None~
A gentleman asked what was the present attitude of the Board about paving
private driveways with public money. He said that when the entrance road into
Mint Springs Park was paved a private driveway had also been paved at no cost.
Mr. Batchelor said he had discussed this with Mr. Henley. There had been a small
amount of paving performed for Bourne Wayland. It was an inexpensive trade-off
and it was expedient at the time. Mr. Henley said he had talked to Mr. Wayland and
saw the area and he didn't see anything wrong with this. Mr. Fisher said he felt
that if it were a trade-off or a gift it should be in the form of a written agree-
261
merit.
Mr. Thacker said he had been given a number of petitions from the Willoughby
Area Association. These petitions were signed by about 660 persons ~pposed to
the consideration of this site as a County landfill.
Mr. Wheeler said he recognized this but in the future the Board would be
looking at all areas of the County for landfill sites. At the present time this
Board does not have before them a request for the Willoughby area.
Mrs. Rosenblum asked if a committee had been appointed to study solid waste
disposal. Mr. Fisher said he had been trying to help Mr. Humphrey write conditions
for a special permit; that formation of this committee, periodic reports and
schedules shoul, d be part of any permit granted to the City for any area in the County.
Mrs. Rosenblum asked if the recreation committee had given a report to the
Board. Mr. Wheeler said they were ready to give a interim report.
Mr. Wheeler then asked if it was the intent of this Board to reopen the public
hearing on the landfills on September 26th. Mr. Fisher said he would prefer not
unless there were information not available in any other manner. He said the Board
had asked the staff for new information and he thought this shouid be presented.
Mr. Batchelor suggested that the public submit any additional information to the
Chairman prior to the meeting so he could make a determination if it should be
heard at that time.
Statements of expenses of the Department of Finance, the Sheriff's Office,
and the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney were presented for the month of
August, 1973. On motion by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Thacker, these statements
were approved. Motion carried by the following recorded vote-
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
Statements of expenses incurred in the maintenance of the County Jail along
with summary of prisoner days was presented. Statement of expense for the Jail
Physician in the amount of $28.00 was presented, of which two-thirds is reimbursable
by the State. Motion was offered by Mr, Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher to approve
these statements. Motion carried by the following recorded vote'
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
Report of the County Executive for the month of August, 1973 was submitted
as information.
Reports of the Department of Social Services were submitted for the month of~
July, 1973 in accordanoe with Sections 63-67.1 and 63-67.2 of the Code of Virginia.
Mr. Batchelor said he had received a request from the Cavalier Country Bank
asking that the Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution authorizing them as an
approved depository for County funds with the Treasurer of Virginia acting as
escrow agent. Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker to adopt the following resolution'
262
WHEREAS, there has been prepared and submitted to the Board of County
Supervisors of the County of Albemarle at its meeting held on this 20th day
of September, 1973, Escrow Agreement between T.M. Batchelor, Jr., Director of
Finance of the County o£ Albemarle, the Cavalier-Country Bank of Charlottesville,
as Depository, and the Treasurer of Virginia, as Escrow Agent;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Agreement be and it is hereby
approved as to both £orm and substance, and T.M. Batchelor, Jr. is authorized
and directed to execute in triplicate the aforesaid Agreement on behalf of
this Board; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copy o£ this resolution be sub-
mitted to all parties to this Agreement.
The foregoing motion was seconded' by Mr. Henley and carried by the following re-
corded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
At 11:50 A.M., the Chairman requested the Board go into an executive session
to discuss litigation with the County Attorney. Motion to this effect was offered
by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
The Board reconvened at 1:40 P.M.
Mr. -Jim Ritchie was present to make a report on the experimental working
hours of the Department of Social Services. He said that during the month of
July there had not been much interest shown, but, since August 1 there had been a
gradual increase. He said there is a Welfare Involvement Committee and they had
commended him for the change in office hours and also the reaction o£ the staff
is good. He said the Welfare Board has discussed This matter and they feel there
might be a problem during the winter months when the days are shorter. The Wel-
fare Board, therefore, requests the Board of Supervisors to give them the author-
ity to have a partial staff between 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. on Thursdays and a
partial staff between 12:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Fridays with further authority
to close on Thursday nights if this proves inadvisable during the winter months.
He also said that the Welfare department now had one member of the staff on call
for the hospital, the sheriff's office and the courts, 24 hours a day, seven days
a week.
board.
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Motion was offered by Mr. Henley to grant this privilege to the Welfare
Motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker to adopt the following resolution'
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $5,092.00 be, and the same hereby is, transferred
from the General Fund to the Capital Outlay Fund for resurfacing of
the Airport Runway.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by The following re-
9-20-73
263
corded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Wheeler stated that he had received notification that Virginia Tel. & Tel.
has applied to the State Corporation Commission for a rate increase. He had also
received a letter from Mr. F.G. Whitley in which he said he is concerned about this
rate increase and he requ.ested the Board have a public hearing to determine ~hat
~elephone service is adequate and sufficient.
Mr. Whitley was present. He said that the last rate increase was in January,
1972.- This was about 18% and only by concerted effort and a show of public opinion
were improvements ordered to be made by the State Corporation Commission. The
service today is a consequence of tha~ order. He said he has notified the telephone
company that he is not satisfied with the service that he is receiving and the pro-
posed rate increase is not warranted.
MX. Wheeler said there had not been sufficient interest shown to him and he
would not support holding a public hearing. Mr. Fisher said this was a ma~er to
be decided by the State Corporation Commission and asked in what capacity the Board
would hold a public hearing on this matter. Mr. St. John said in an advisory
capacity only. There were no procedures on this. Mr. Fisher said he had no ob-
jection to holding a public hearing if interest was expressed by citizens of the
County. Mr. Wheeler suggested that this matter be carried forward since he felt
this request would receive publicity from the press.
Mr. Michael Gleason, Executive Director of the Bicentennial Commission, was
present to make a report on financing of the Co~nission. This was requested by the
Board and City Council in June. He said that several formulas had been recommended,
however, none were satisfactory to the Board or City Council. The Bicentennial
Commission voted to recommend that a 2% lodging tax be levied in the City and the
County and collections from this tax could then be used to work ou~ a satisfactory
formula.
Mr. Wheeler said this tax had been under consideration by the Board for the
last 18 months. It was a part of the legislative package presented by The Virginia
Association of Counties during the last session of the General Assembly.
Mr. Batchelor said any revenue received from this tax would go into the Genera~
Fund and each yea~ the Bi-Centennial Commission would need ~o have a budget approved
by the Board. Mr. Thacker offered motion to advertise a transient occupancy tax
at 7:30
fixed at 2% by law for November 28, 197~P.M. in the Albemarle C~unty Courthouse.
Motion
AYES'
NAYS:
was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
vote'
Mr. Les Philips said he had a photocopy of a report he wished to present to
to the Board. He said this had been sent to his City Editor with copies to James
Cosby and the Attorney General. This article which the Daily Progress did not print
attributed information not found in his article of September 19. He felt the in-
formation that he was able to gather was a matter of public record. He. did not say
that Mr. Carwile had a conflict of interest but that certain involvements should be
public information. Alsa the fact that Mr. Carwile voted on the Biscuit Run water-
shed when he had a client who would benefit.
The next item under discussion was adoption of a building code. Mr. Fishe~
asked if the County was liable for inspections under the State Code and what recourse
an aggrieved person would have if there were an explosion, etc. Mr. Clark said the
State Code exempts anyone from liability. Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker To
adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED that the office of Building Inspections for Albemarle
County is hereby created; that the appointment of Mr. Hartwell P. Clarke
as Building Official for Albemarle County is hereby ratified and confirmed;
that the Building Official is hereby empowered and di-rected to administer
and enforce the State Building Code;
That the following schedule of fees for issuance of building permits and
making of inspections by the Building Official and his staff is adopted
effective immediately~ payable by the applicant to the Building Official
upon approval of building permit:
(Fee Schedule)
Permit Fee Schedule
Building Permit (minimum charge) ............... $10.00
or
$0 to $100,000 of Value ....................
$100,000 to $200,000 . ~ ...................
Excess of $200,000 .......................
0.0035% of value
0.003% of value
0.002% of Value
Plumbing Permits - (minimum charge) ............... $10.00 plus
$4._~0 per fixture
Electrical Permits - (minimum charge) ........... ' . . $10.00
or
0 - 100.00 ..................... $10.00
100.01 - 150.00 ...................... 12.00
150.01 - 200.00 ...................... 16.00
200.01 - 250.00 ...................... 20.00
250.01 - 300.00 ........ ~ .............. 30.00
300.01 - 500.00 ..................... - ~ 36.00
500.01 -1000.00 ...................... 40.00
Ail over $1,000.00, $40.00 plus $10.00 per $1,000.00 or portion thereof.
MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT CHARGES
Mechanical:
Elevator ............................ $ 30.00
Escalator (per floor) ..................... 8.00
J
9-20-73
Power Driven Dumbwaiter or Manlift ................ $
Hand Driven Dumbwaiter or Elevator .................
Central Heating Furnace or Boiler'
Residential ...................... · ....
Commercial, First 100,000 BTU .................
Each additional 100,000 BTU ............
Maximum Fee ....................
Central Air-Conditioning, Refrigeration and
Refrigeration Cycle of Air Conditioning
Systems'
Residential, per unit ....................
(excluding cooling units installed simultaneously in and
with heating system in Group L-3 Buildings)
Commercial, First 5 Tons ...................
Each additional ton ......................
Maximum Fee ..........................
Each Fire Danger or Subduct in Ventilation, Exhaust or Duct
System ............................
Incinerators, Per 100 lbs. per hour burning rate, or fraction thereof ......................
Coin Operated Dry Cleaning Machines ................
(Plus 1.00 per Tumbler) ....................
15.00
10.00
5.00
8.00
3.00
120.00
5.00
7.00
1.00
175.00
.50
7.00
5.00
265
MISCELLANEOUS FEES'
Miscellaneous Fees and Fees for Structures other than Buildings'
1. Swimming Pools, Residential .................. 25.00
(Ail other ½ of 1% of Total Cost)
2. Foundations, per building .................. 10.00
Structures, other than buildings for which no fee appears
in this schedule, the fees shall be calculated au the rate
of one-half of one percent of the actual cost of the work,
with a minimum fee of ...........................
7.50
4. Mobile Homes ........................ 10.00
5. Pre-Fabricated Homes with State Seal ............ 15.00
For an inspection and report of any building or structure
made upon application of The owner, occupant or prospective
purchaser, the actual cost of the inspection as determined
by the building inspector shall be paid by the applicant.
REINSPECTION
o
T_he fee for a reinspection when the work for which ~_
an inspection request was made was not approved or ready
for inspection shall be ..................... t0.00
The additional fee'for final inspection after the building
or structure is occupied shall be fifty percent (50%) of the
building permit fee.
FEES
Fees for Required Inspection
(including but no~ limited to)'
$ 10.00 per
insp'ection
Hazardous Uses ........................ 3 months
Places of Assembly .................. ' .... 3 months
Boilers and Unfired Pressure Vessels .............. Annually
Fire Extinguishing ...................... 2 years
Flow Test (Stand Pipes) ................... 2 years
Fire Pump .......................... 90 Days
Automatic Sprinklers ................... Discretion of
Building Official
Open Sprinkler ........................ Annually
Fire Alarms ......................... Monthly
Construction Equipment And Assembly ............. Initial
Signs ............................ Annually
Elevators .......................... 6 Months
Power Dumbwaiters or Dumbwaiters with capacity
of more than 100 lbs ................... Annually
Pressure Tanks ........................ 3 years
266 9-20-,73
Miscellaneous Hoisting and Elevating Equipment,
Conveyors and Amusement Devices ................ Discretion of
Build£ng Official
Refrigeration Systems, Assembly & Institutional ......... As Required
FURTHER that this resolution shall be effective until superseded by further
appropriate resolution or ordinance.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following
recorded vote'
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
Mr. St. John said in order for the county to charge violations on County
warrants under this building code, the Board would need to adopt an ordinance.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher to advertise for
a public hearing on October 18, 1973 at 10'00 a.m. a building code ordinance for
Albemarle County. Motion carried by the following recorded vote-
AYES' Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS' None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher to approve the
following special appropriation'
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $96,020.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated and
transferred from the General Fund to the General Operating Fund for
expenditures of the. Building Inspections Department.
T. he foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
Mr. H. Harvey Bailey was present to make a report on county landfills. He
said that night use of these landfills would cease on September 30 and that all
users had been notified of this change in policy. The keys will be taken up and
the locks changed. He said he had met with Mr. James of the Bureau of Solid
Waste and Mr. Hinkley of the State Water Control Board and they had agreed that
Landfill No. 1 be changed from a fill method to a pit method. Site preparations
for the,new method have been started and a pit opened. The dirt taken from this
area will provide final cover for the area to be abandoned. The state has also
issued permits for the operations of the County landfills. They recommend a
monitoring system for leachate.
Mr. Bailey said they had also inspected the Keene landfill and this would
require some dressing up and a monitoring for leachate. The Engineering depart-
ment is proceeding to act on these recommendations. The cost will probably be
$2160.00.
Mr. Charles Long said that there is a lot of trash along Route 250 to Ivy.
He asked if this was caused by large trucks on their way to the landfill. Mr.
Bailey said there had been an occasion to caution people using improper trucks.
9-20-73
26.7
Mr. Wheeler suggested that this be brought to the attention of the Sheriff and
-the State Police.
Mr. Thacker asked if there were any provisions at either landfill for disposal
of waste after hours with a container at the gate. Mr. Bailey said he understood
this had been tried at Ivy a number of years ago and it was no'successful. Mr.
Thacker said he had received several calls about this at the Keene landfill.
Appointment to a Health Planning Steering Committee for the Thomas Jefferson
Planning District Commission was deferred.
At this time the Board continued their discussion of a moratorium imposed
for building permits in West Leigh and Flordon subdivisions.
Mr. Ray Jones was present and read the following letter from R.D. Wade:
"September 11, 1973
Mr. Ray Jones
Executive Director
Albemarle County Service Authority
County Office Building
Court Square
Charlottesville, Virginia
Dear Ray'
Inasmuch as I have considerable financial responsibility involving
my lots in "West Leigh Subdivision," and I have a potential purchaser
of one of these lots with a house constructed thereon, but have been
denied a building permit by the County of Albemarle due to inadequate
water supply from the normal sources of the subdivision, I hereby
propose to (1) dig a well on said lot for its own private system or
(2) agree to pay the Service Authority up to $600.00 over and above
the normal water cost for the additional cost of providing supple-
mental water necessitated by the consumption of said house.
It is of considerable business importance to me to be able to
construct a house for this customer; he has been very patient while
we attempted to arrive at a solution to this problem, bug he is a
newcomer to this area as a professor at the University of Virginia
and does not understand our local problems. I trust that through
cooperation we might arrive at a mutually satisfactory long-range
solution.
Yours truly,
Randolph D. Wade"
:,: :-:~:~.:J~n:e:s~'~gaid from a citizens standpoint that if Mr. Wade is willing to pay
the $400 connection fee, which is the new charge, and a $600 escrow fund towards
water hauled//~at the Board allow this building permit to be issued and
yet
maintain the building permit moratorium and to judge each case on its merits until
the Stillhouse line is complete.
Mr. Charles Long asked if the Board made one exception to the moratorium
on building permits how many others would be made. Mr. Wheeler said he had been
hearing about these problems for a long time and the Board has been pushing efforts
to get this line completed. Mr. Long said he felt that if there were problems
with furnishing water it was wrong for the County to continue issuing building
permits. Mr. Henley said he did not think the Service Authority can haul water
268
for $10 a 1,000 gallons. Mr. Fisher said he had received a letter from Henry
Odell, Chairman of West Leigh, Section 1, property owners. They asked that the
Board take whatever special action is necessary in order to maintain a quality
water supply until the new water line is completed.
Mr. Fisher offered motion to accept the recommendations of Mr. Jones on this
one case and to reserve decision on each individual case, and to continue the
moratorium on building permits until such time as the Stillhouse Ivy line is
operational. Motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker ~o adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $5,000.00 be, and the same is hereby appropriated and
transferred from the General Fund to the General Operating Fu~nd to be
used for payment of rent for the Elk's Building which is being used by
the Plannin~Engineering and Building Inspections Departments.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following re-
corded vo~e:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Thacker to adop~ the
following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $5,326.56 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated and
transferred from the General Fund to the General Operating Fund for salary,
furniture and equipment for assistant to the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors.
The foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
Memorandum from Clarence McClure asking for transfer of funds for additional
kindergarten teachers was deferred until further information is available.
At this time the Chairman asked the Clerk to read into the records the
following letter'
"13 September 1973
Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County
County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia
9-20-73
269
Shelby J. Marshall, Clerk, Circuit Court o£ Albemarle County
- Salary
Gentlemen'
This is to advise you, on behalf of my client, Shelby J. Marshall,
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, that we are here making
demand upon the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County for unpaid
salary heretofore earned by Mrs. Marshall for the years 1968-1973. The
unpaid salary through 1972 totals $28,433.52. The estimated salary
deficiency is approximately $9,000.00 for 1973, but at this point in
time cannot be accurately calculated. When it can be so calculated,
we will, of course, send our ~igures on to you.
It is our position that the County of Albemarle has failed to pay the
aforesaid salary deficiency in accordance with requirements of Section
14.1-155.1 Code of Virginia (1950) as amended.
Further, we wish to advise that we rely on the general law as to
the Clerk'.s compensation determined by Sections 14.1-143, 14.1-145,
14.1-148, 14.1-152, 14.1-155, 14.1-155.1, 58.65.1 Code of V~rginia
(1950) as amended.
Attached are copies of letters to Mr. Batchelor from the Virginia
Compensation Board for the calendar years 1970, 1971 and 1972 giving
the amounts to which the Clerk is entitled and a tabulation sheet for the
period 1968-1972 showing the total compensation for those years to
which the Clerk is entitled, the amounts actually paid to the Clerk
and the yearly difference.
I request a response from the Board at its earliest opportunity.
Sincerely,
Edward H. Bain, Jr."
Mr. Wheeler said this letter had been turned over to the County Attorney for
reply.
Mr. Batchelor said he bad.asked for suggestions from the Board for inclusion
in the legislative package. He said someone from his staff would call each member
so a list could be complied by telephone.
Mr. Fisher suggested that the Board include in the legislative package a
proposal for a local option income tax.
Mr. Wheeler said he had received a letter from the family of M.M. Pence for
the contribution made to the Rescue Squad.
Mr. Wheeler asked the Board members if they had received a copy of a letter
from the Western Albemarle Taxpayers Association and were aware o~ the resolutions
passed. Ail indicated yes.
Mr. Wheeler said he had received from Larry Sabato, President of the Student
Council at the University of Virginia a rape prevention booklet prepared by the
student council and distributed to female students this semester.
Mr. Wheeler said he had received a copy of a resolution from the Mayor stating
the City's appreciation for services rendered by the County fire companies during
the recent fire in downtown Charlottesville.
Mr. Wheeler suggested that a news release be prepared on Bingo PermiTs.
Mr. Wheeler said he had received a letter stating that the Central Virginia
Electric Cooperative has asked for a rate increase. Any objections must be filed
9-20-73
27O
by October 6th.
Mr. Wheeler gave a short report on a trip to Richmond to the State Water
Control Board to discuss plans of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. Mr.
Palmer had discussed events which took place prior to the forming of the joint
Authority. He stated that the Powell's Creeks plant and the upgrading of the
Berkeley sewerage plant had been abandoned. The State Water Control Board
questioned th~ interim plan proposed. They had suggested that the Board and the
City or the Rivanna Authority contact Fairfax ~-~
)~~.~~~z~~~~-- County/an~hey instructed that once
a capacity_ h~d~been established that the Rivanna Authority stay within that limit.
They had questioned the Mayor and the Chairman about the steps ~ taken during
the last twelve months since both plants presently in operation are at capacity.
They had been assured we were taking precautions through notification to pro~
spective developers that we do not have capacity now, but will, have capacity in this was
the future. Mr. Wheeler said he noted that on approval of Hollymead/limited to
50 units with septic tanks and mandatory connection to sewer lines when they
are available. He also stated that petition of Albemarle Development Corp. had
been discouraged and The developer had withdrawn the petition. Mr. Wheeler said
the decision by the State Water Control Board on the staff's recommendations had
not been received at this time.
Mr. Thacker said the Board had received a letter from Richmond & Fishburne
asking that the Board again review approval given to Charlottesville Shopping
World site plan. Mr. Wheeler stepped aside. Mr. Fisher said this was the fifth
time this had been before the Board, however, since this was a formal request he
felt ~he Board must permit Mr. Fishburne to make a statement. In order to fit
this into the schedule, Mr. Fisher offered motion to adjourn this meeting until
7:00 P.M. on September 26, 1973. Motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Thacker.
NAYS' None.
ABSTAINING'
Mr. Wheeler.
Chairman