Loading...
1957-09-18 A regular meeting of the Beard of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held at the Office Building of said County on the 18th day of September, 1957. Present.' Messrs. John W. Williams, Edgar N. Garnett, H. Ashby Harris, Edward L. Smith, M. Y. Sutherland, Jr. and Robert Thraves. Absent ~ I~one. Officers present: County Executive and Commonwealth's Attorney. The meetimg opened with the Lord's Prayer led by Mr. M. M. Pence. Minutes of the meetings of August 21 and A~st 24, 1957, were read amd approved. The Welfare Biennial Budget Estimates for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1959 and June 30, 1960, in the amount of $195~?10.00, total for each year, as approved~'by the Welfare Board, was presente~ and on motion by Mr. Smi~, seconded by Mr. Thraves, was unanimously approved. The matter of the pending proposed Subdivision and Sanitation Ordinances was again brought up and the Chairman appointed Mr. Edward L. Smith and Mr. Edgar N. Garnett as a committee to work with Dr. S. D. Sturkie, Health Director, and the Planning Commission, in an effort to combine the two ordinances. Communication was received from the Planning Commission setting forth~'~the following recemmen- dations: (1) "BE IT RESOLVED BY-THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION that this Com- mission request the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir- ginia, to consider again the urgency involved in the need for the passage of the sanitation ordinance." (2) "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PDANNYNG COMMISSION that this Com- mission request t~e Board of County Supervisors to urge more strict en- forcement of the highway litter law by the law enforcement agency, and to press for more and severe convictions in cour% of those found guilty of this law violation." The County Executive recommended that the foregoing recommendations be accepted and that resolutions be forwarded to the Commonwealth's Attorney and the law enforcement officers with regard to item No. 2. Considerable discussion was given to this matter, and on motion of Mr. Garnett, seconded by Mr. Harris, and unanimously carried, the recommendations of the Planning Commission were accepted. It was brought to the Board's Attention that the term of Mr. L. C. Huff on theWelfare Board expired on June 30, 1957. Mr. Thraves advised that he.had contacted Mr. Huff and had been advised that Mr. Huff was willing to continue on the Board. On motion of Mr.-Thraves, seconded by Mr. Harris, and unanimously carried, Mr. L. C. Huff was reappointed to the Welfare Board for a term of three years. On motion of Mr. Sutherl~nd, seconded by Mr. Harris, and unanimously carried, the resignation of Mr. C. PUrcell McCue, Jr. from the School Board was accepted with regret, and Mrs. Richard A. Yancey was appointed to succeed Mr. McCue on the School Board to represent the Samuel Miller District. The County Executive advised that the Sheriff had recommended the employment of Mrs. Daniel O. Albert, wife of the Jailor, as Jail Cook at a salary of $40.00 per month. On motion of Mr. Garnett, seconded by Mr. Smith, the employment of Mrs. Albert as Jail Cook at a salary of $40.00 per month, was 'With regard to the installation of a street light at the entrance to Bellair o~ Route $~O, West, the County Executive stated that he had been advised by the Virginia Electric and Power Company that an unofficial estimate revealed $350.00 would be necessary for this installation. This would re- quire a contribution of $200.00 on the part of the home owners in Bellair plus $2?.00 per year for a 4000 l~en light which was recommended for this installation. Also, if road construction should ~ecessi~ ate a change, the home owners would als0 have to bear this expense. Mr. Pence durther advised that he had been contacted by Mr. Pat Jansen who stated that the home owners were willing to bear the expenses as outlined above. The County Executive stated that he felt the C~mmonwealth's Attorney should draw up a contract to be signed by the Bellair Owners Association and to be recorded i~ the Clerk's Office, whereb~ said Association would accept th® responsibility for paying for the foregoing expenses. Mr. Inabinet of~~ the Vir~inia Department of Hi~hwa~s advised that the installation ~f a light won1 ~ ~n~ ~ ~m~ ~ *~ t his department since the power line for this installation W°ul'd cross the highway. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by' ME, Smith, and unanimously carried, it was ordered that the Virginia Electric and Power Company be requested to make an official sur~ey in regard to this matter and report back to this Board. The COur~ty Executive advised that all contributions had-been receiVed on improvements to River Road and turned over to the Highway Department and that said Road had now 'been'brought up to specifica- tions of the Virginia Department of Highways. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, the following resolution was ~nanimously adopted: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the State Department of Highways b~ and is hereby recommended to take 'into tl~e Secondary System, River Road beginning at its intersection with Route 748 and extending north for a distance of .11 efa mile, this road having been brought up to standards of the Department of Highways. ' '~ BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways be and ~ is hereby guaranteed a 40 foot unobstructed right of way along this requested addition. Request was received from the Beltemore Realty CorporAtion that the Board of Eupervisors recom. me~t inclusion in the Secondary System, Brandywine Drive in Rutledge Subdivision from the intersection of Route 743 to the intersection with King Mountain Road. Mr. Inabinet of the Virginia Department of Highways advised that a section of this road was not up to State standards and action em this request was. deferred until Brandywine Drive is brought up to standard. Communication was received from the State Department of Highways enclosing letter from the Morton Salt Company with regard to Route' 731, which letter was read to the Beard. On motion of Mr. Garmett, Seconded by Mr. Sutherland, this Ietter was received ~nd ordered filed, and it was ordered that Mrs. W. Herbert Martin be mailed a copy of this letter. Communication was received from the ~Virginia Departmemt of Highways advised that im accordance with resolution of this Board under date of August 21, 1957, the Highway Department had accepted in the Secondary System road beginning at Forest Hill Drive at the Charlottesville-Albemarle County line and' extending in a southwesterly direction for 1,380 feet, or 0.26 mile~ to a dead end. Mr. H. W. Runkle, Resident Highwa~ ~ Engineer, recommended several changes in the Board's Policy prefacing recommendation for the acceptance of Sub-Division Roads into the State Secondary System. Said changes were discussed and on motion of Mr. Thraves, seconded by Mr, Smith, this matter was carried over for final action at the next meeting. Communication was received from Mr. James H. Michael, Jr'., Attorney, on behalf of the Green- brier Corporation, regarding the development of Greenbrier Subdi~ision with respect to the acceptance of roads in order to obtain FHA financing. This matter was discussed and it was decided that action on same be deferred until am adjourned meeting to be held on, September 25, 1957. Mr. J. J, Edwards appeared and~ presented, petitie~ signed by twenty-six residents of the Burnle area requesting this Board and the Commonwealth's Attorney to use their influence in getting the Virgini~ Telephone and Telegraph Company to extend service to' the B~mmley area and if unsuccessful, to appoint a committee to appear ~efore the State Corporation .Commission in this regard~ Mr. Edwards also presente~ a list of seventeen perSOns who wished telephone service in addition to the twenty-eight persons who were listed with the Telephone Company. Mr. Edwards was advised that the Board felt he shoul~ present to the Telephone O~mpany the ~additional names he had obtained ~in an effort to determine if such addition names would change the picture insofar~ as the Telephone COmpany was e~ncer~ed, and if he so desired, he could appear before this Board at its adjourned meeting if he received no satisfaction from the Telephone Company. On motion of Mr. Thraves, seconded by Mr. ~utherland, the Board went into a short executive session to receive a progress report from the Board of Assessors, on the 'following recorded vote: Ayes: Messrs. Garnett, Harris,~ Smith, Sutherland and Thraves. Nays: None. The Director of Finance submitted statemen% of expenses of the Department of Finance for the month of August, 1957, of which one-half is- to.. be borne by the State, On motion, duly made and Eeconded this Statement was examined, verified and approved. The Director of Finance submitted statement of expenses of the Sheriff's Office for the month of August, 1957, of which two-thirds is to be borne by the State. Ou motion, duly made amd seconded, this Statement was examined, verified Ed approved. The DireCtor of Financ® submitted statement of expenses of the office of Commonwealth's Attorney for the month ef August, 1957, of which one-half is to be borne by the State. On motion, duly made and seconded, this Statement was examined, verified and approved. Statement of Expenses ineureed in the maintenance ef the Jail for the month of Au~ast, 1957, was presented along with Summary Statement o.f Prisoner Days. On motion, duly made and seconded, these Statements were examined, verified and approved. Reports of the Department of Public Welfare for the month of August, 1957, were presented in accordance with Sections 63r67.1 and 63-67.2 of the Code of Virginia. Claim of the University of Virginia Hospital in the amount of $1,579.00, of which onehalf is to be reimbursed by the State, was received and on motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Garnett, was approved for payment. Report of the County Executive .for the month of August, 1957,. was presented, approved, and ordered filed. On motion of Mr. Thravew, seconded by Mr. Garnett, rules with regard to second readings were suspended, and the following resolution unanimously adopted: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of. CoUnty .Supervisors of Albemarle CoUnty, Virginia, that $74,267.48 be and is hereby appropriated for operating expenses of the School Board for the month of Octo~ber, 1957. On motion by Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, an Ordinance amending a~re-enacting an Ordinance adopted May 20, 1953, spread upon page 212, Minute Book 4, governing rules and regulations with respect to water supply system in the Crozet Sanitary District, notice of intention to amend having been published on September 3 and September 10, 19,57, was adopted and ordered published once a week for two consecutive weeks in the Daily Progress, a newspaper having general circnlation in Albemarle CoUnty: ORD I NA,NC E BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle CoUnty, Virginia, as follows, The following rules and regulations shall be operative with respect to water supply and system in the Crozet Sanitary District until changed by order of this Board: (1) Water rates shall be as follows: (a) A minimum charge of. $3.50 ~er month for the first 4,500 gallons or fractional part thereof, and amom~ts in excess of 4,500 gallons at the. rate of 40~ per 1,000 gallons. (b) Connections outside the boundaries of the Crozet Sanitary District shall be charged double the foregoing amounts. (2) If any water meter shall fail to register, the charge shall be the average- reading for the three .preceding months. (3) Ail water accoUnts shall be due and payable monthly on or before the 15~h day after a statement is rendered. (4) The Director of Finance shall disconnect and cease furnishing water to any consumer who is delinquent in the payment of his or her account, after thirty days from the rendering of a statement. (5) For turning water on again after it has been cut off for nos-payment of bill, there shall be a charge of $2.00 payable in advance.. (6} (8) {9) (lO) Where two or more dwellings or living-'units are served with water tKrough the same meter, the minimum charge of $3.50 per month shall be multiplied by the number 'of dwellings or living units so served and the minimum consumPtion shall be~ increased in the same manner. The Director of Finance shall be authorized to negotiate for Water consumption on an annual basis where there is a seasonal demand and all water' customers billed on an annual basis shall be billed in advance om July 1st of reach fiscal year for the fiscal year. A charge of $40.00 will be made for each additional connection to the Croze% Water SyStem within the Crozet Sanitary District boundarieS and a charge of $80.00 will be .made for each addit&~nal connection outside the boundaries of the DiStrict. Whenever.-amy person owning or leasing property along the line of any water main shall desire introduction of Water into his premises, he shall make written application therefor to the Director of Finance on forms prescribed by him which Shall Set forth the name of the' applicant, the location and description of property, and the purPOse for which the water is to be used. For domestic consumers such ~appliCation shall ~he accompanied by a depSsit of $7.00 if the water furnished is within the Cr~zet S~nitary District limits and $14.00 if water is f~urnished outside the Croze~ Sanitary District limits. For commercial consumers, the ~deposit shall be based upon the esti- mated consumption but shall not exceed $25.00~ . For~ Consumers who desire er require a meter in excess of 5/8" size (domestic service), there shall be a monthly service charge in ~addition to ~he regular~ monthly water rate, such charge to be as follows: Connections 1 inch $3,00 " 1~ " 4.00 " 1½ "~ 5.00 " 2 " 10.00 " 3 " 20;00 Ail meters above 5/8" size (domeStic service) areto be purchased ~by the water ~ustomer. Meters so purchased are'to be the property of the Crozet Sanitary Dis%rict upon installation. In adopting the ~foregoing rules and regulations, the right is reserved by this BOard to ~makeamendments, changes, alterations and revisions at any time said Board~ may deemadVisable. ThisORDINANCEshall be in effect on and after January 1, 1958. Communication was received from Mr. George Gilmer, Attorney, enclosing proposed rate schedule of sewer and water to be aPplied by Commonwealth Utilities in the Berkley Subdivision. This matter was carried over. Plat of Section six of Rutledge Subdivision as approved by this Board on March 20, 1957, was brought back te the Board for re-approval due the to fact that more ths~u sixty days elapsed. On motion of Mr. 3uther!amd, seconded by Mr. ~arnett, it was Ordered that the date on sai~plat be changed te this date, September 18, ~957. Plat was received on Block II and Block I~ of Albemarle Homes Subdivision which has been ap- proved by the City and County Planning commission. On motion of. Mr. Garnett, seconded byMr. Harris, and unanimously carried, the Chairman and Clerk were authorized te sign same en behalf of this Board, giving approval to same. The CoumtyExecutive advised that he had employed Miss Este!le Neher in his office, effective September 1, 1957, at a s~lary of $185.00 per month, and aSked the Board's'approval of same. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Thraves, and unanimously carried, the employment of Miss Estelle Claim against the Dog Tax ~Fund was received from Mrs. G. R. Paschal 'for one duck killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, Mrs. Paschal was allowed $1,~00 for this duck~ Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Mr. John G. Hart fo.r omc ewe killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Thraves, Mr. Hart ~was allowed $25.00 for this ewe. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from J. T. Via for one lamb and one ewe claimed to have been killed by dogs. On motion of Mr, Thraves, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, this claim was denied for lack of evidence. claim agA...~nst the Dog Tax Fu~d was received from Mrs. A.~ W. Manley for two hens killed by dogs~ On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, Mrs. Manley was allowed $0.?5 for each of these heni Claim against the .Dog _Tax Fund was received from Mr. J. ~T. Via for one lamb killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Harris,. seconded by Mr. Gar~ett, Mr. Via was allowed $15.00 for this lamb. Claim against the Dog Tax F-~d was received from Mr. J. T. Via for .four. 'sheep killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Harris, this claim was denied for lack of evidence. Claim against the Dog~.Tax I~ was received from Mr. J. T. Via f~r two~ sheep an~ one l~b kille~ by dogs. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, second~ ~by Mr. Harris, Mr. Via was allowed $15.~00 for eno lam~ and $15.00 f~r one of the ewes, amd claim for the other ewe was denied for lack of evidence. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Mr. J. T. Via for two ewes claimed to have been killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Harris, this claim was denied for lack of evidence. Claim against the Dog Tax Fu_~d was received from Mr. Robert Crile for sixteen turkeys totalin 108 lbs. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded, by Mr. Sutherland, Mr. Crile was allowed $0.25 per po~d for these turkeys. Other claims were received from Mr. Crile and carried over for .further i~vestigation. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received f. rom Dr.~ Herbert Chase for fou~ ewes and one lamb claimed to have been killed~ by ~ogs. O~ motion of Mr. Garnett, seconded by Mr. Thraves, this claim was denied since the Game Warden was unable to determine that the damage was caused by dogs. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received-from Dr. Herbert Chase for one lamb killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, Dr. Chase was allowed $20.00 for this lamb. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Dr. Herbert Chase for three lambs kille~ by dogs. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Garnett, Dr. Chase was allowed $25.00 for each of these lambs. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Dr. Herbert Chase for one ewe claimed to have been ~un to death by dogs. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Garnett, this claim was denie~ ~ the basis of insufficient evidence to prove that the damage was done by dogs. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Mrl J~seph T. Henley, Jr. for one ewe and one lamb killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Harris, Mr. Henley was allowed $22.00 for the ewe and $10.00 for the lamb. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Mrs. Mahone Madison for one rooster, two hens amd eleven pullets killed by dogs. O~ motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by ~. Thraves, Mrs. Madison waa allowed $0.?5 for the rooster and $1.00 for each of the hens and pullets'. Claim against the Dog Tax Fu~d was received from S. L. ~ichols for four turkeys and three guinneas killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Garnett, seconded by. Mr. Sutherlan~d,. this claim was denied due to the fact that ~be Game Warden did not view the carcass. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from S. L. Nichols for one _ewe killed by dogs. On motion of Mr. Harris, seconded by Mr. Sutherland, Mr. ~iehols was allowed $25.00 for this. ewe. dogs. dogs. lambs. Claim ag~_inst the Dog T~xFund was received from Mr. Cammann C. Duke for one lamb killed by On motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded ~y Mr. Garnett, Mr. Duke was allowed $12.00 for this lamb. Claim against the Dog Tax Fund was received from Mr. Camman~ C. Duke for three lambs killed by On motion of Mr. Harris, seeomded by Mr. Garnett, Mr. Duke was allowed $12.00 for each of these Claim a~ainst the Dog Tax FUnd was received from Mrs. James B~ Murray for one bucE sheep Eille by dogs. Om motion of Mr. Sutherland, seconded by Mr. Harris, Mrs. Murray was allewed $25.00 for this Claims against the County amounting to $172,289.20 were presented, examined, and allowed, and certified to the Director of Finance for payment and CharSed' against~the following funds: General Fund School Fund Dog Tax Fund Crozet Fire Dist~t Fund Crozet Sanitary District Fund Joi~t Health Fund Central Fire District Fund Woolen Mills Sanitary District Fund $ 33,974.78 124,679.83 910.48~ 4.4O 565.85 5,117.O5 61.40 6.OO Commonwealth of Virginia Current Credit Acct.~ 6.~969o4~ Total $172,289.20 On motion, the meeting adjourned to September~25,~ 1957, at 7:30 P.M. / Chairman'