2004-02-11
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 1
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on
February 11, 2004, at 6:00 p.m., Lane Auditorium, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville,
Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mr. Ken C. Boyd, Mr. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Mr. Dennis S.
Rooker, Ms. Sally H. Thomas and Mr. David C. Wyant.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W.
Davis, Deputy Clerk, Georgina Smith, and Director of Planning, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m., by the Chairman, Mr. Dorrier,
who thanked the Monticello High School Air Force Junior ROTC, for being present.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 4. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Arthur Epp, a resident of Forest Lakes North, said the lakes in Forest Lakes are the pride of
the community and an integral part of its identity. When he moved to Forest Lakes 15 months ago the
lakes were crystal clear but now they are brown. This appearance came about when the Hollymead
Town Center project commenced in October, 2003. The president of the homeowners’ association has
advised them the lakes will look this way for at least two years. He thinks this has created a crisis in the
community, and will have a psychological affect in the neighborhood. An ecological disaster could occur
depending on the runoff into the lakes. He asked that the Board focus on the effects this development
has already had on Forest Lakes and to proactively shepherd this project to its completion. He also asks
that the Board put on hold all other major projects currently awaiting approval. Lessons can be learned
from the Hollymead Town Center and Albemarle Place projects before approving any more projects.
Make these projects test cases for the Neighborhood Model. He suggested there be a monthly update on
the County’s website. He moved here from New York 15 months ago and has come to appreciate the
history of the County. Albemarle has a legacy which equals or surpasses that of every other county in
this country. The Board of Supervisors is the steward of this legacy and he asks that it be vigilant when it
comes to the Hollymead/Forest Lakes situation.
__________
Ms. Barbara Shifflett with the Albemarle County Fair said she was present with Mr. Lora Crum
from Monticello, and they also represent Ms. Kat Imhoff from Monticello. They are forming a committee
for the Jamestown 2007 project coming up in just three years. They presented to Mr. Dorrier a
commemorative plaque for the community project for Charlottesville and Albemarle, both being
community partners. Mr. Dorrier thanked Ms. Shifflett for the plaque and said it would be placed in the
Board’s meeting room.
Ms. Crum said there are about 30 representative communities which are planning an event for
Jamestown 2007. They represent the arts, the cultural attractions and the historic attractions. There is a
Central Virginia Arts and History Consortium which has just begun the planning process. She said that
Charlottesville and Albemarle County are among 40 other communities across Virginia who are
forerunners in guaranteeing their involvement in Jamestown 2007. She said they are looking forward to
involving a lot of partners as they go forward with their efforts.
_______________
Motionseconded
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. was offered by Mr. Bowerman, by Mr.
Boyd, to approve Items 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4, and to accept the remaining items on the Consent Agenda for
information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Boyd, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Wyant and Mr. Bowerman.
NAYS: None.
__________
Item 5.1. Approval of Minutes: October 15 and October 22, 2003.
No minutes had been read. This item will be moved to the next agenda.
__________
Item 5.2. Resolution to accept road(s) in Running Cedar Court Subdivision into the State
Secondary System of Highways.
At the request of the County’s Engineering Department, the Board adopted the following
Resolution:
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 2
RESOLUTION
WHEREASRunning Cedar Court Subdivision
, the street(s) in , described on the
February 11, 2004
attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated , fully incorporated herein by
reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle
County, Virginia; and
WHEREAS
, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has
advised the Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
, that the Albemarle Board of County
Running
Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road(s) in
Cedar Court Subdivision
, as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated
February 11, 2004
, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of
Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-
of-way, as described, exclusive of any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as
described on the recorded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED
that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the
Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
* * *
Running Cedar Court (State Route 1038)
1. from the intersection of Route 1033 (Bentivar
Drive) to the end of State Maintenance, as shown on plat recorded 05/07/2003 in the
office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 2505, page 734,
with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.14 mile.
Total Mileage – 0.14 mile
__________
Item 5.3. Approval of Department of Fire and Rescue’s EMS License Change.
It was noted in the Executive Summary that at the request of the Scottsville Volunteer Rescue
Squad, Albemarle County Fire/Rescue began staffing Scottsville’s station with career personnel
beginning in October 2003. The career staff provides advanced life support EMS services from 6:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. In addition, the volunteer members of the Monticello Fire/Rescue
Station have been working with County Fire/Rescue staff to plan for the addition of an ambulance to the
Monticello Fire/Rescue Station.
Because the department’s career members are transporting patients via ambulance at Scottsville
and with the plan to add an ambulance at the Monticello Fire/Rescue Station, the Virginia Office of EMS
(OEMS) has requested that the Fire/Rescue Department revise its EMS license from “Advanced Life
Support – non-transport” to “Advanced Life Support – transport” to be in compliance with OEMS rules and
regulations. The Fire/Rescue Department has submitted an application to the OEMS requesting that the
Department be relicensed. Before the relicense request is approved, the OEMS is requiring that the
Board of Supervisors first approve the Fire/Rescue Department’s move from “Advanced Life Support –
non-transport” to “Advanced Life Support – transport”.
According to the OEMS, moving to an “Advanced Life Support – transport” agency does not
obligate the County to any further requirements. The department currently staffs the volunteer ALS
ambulances; therefore, no additional equipment is needed. The department also utilizes a regional
training process to ensure that all EMS career providers have experience with treating patients in a
transport environment. In addition, the Virginia Municipal League (VML) states that the County’s liability
insurance policy will cover employees that are involved in EMS transport and that no increase in
premiums will occur because of this change.
Staff recommends that the board approve the Fire/Rescue Department changing its EMS license
from “Advanced Life Support – non-transport” to “Advanced Life Support – transport”.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board approved the Fire/Rescue Department’s
request to change its EMS license from “Advanced Life Support – non-transport” to “Advanced
Life Support – transport”.
__________
Item 5.4. Adopt resolution accepting landowners’ offer to sell conservation easement under the
ACE Program.
It was noted in the Executive Summary that ACE regulations require each landowner who desires
to sell a conservation easement to submit a written offer to the County to sell the easement for a fixed
price, determined by an appraisal and subject to an adjustment based on adjusted gross income. Said
easement is also subject to the terms and conditions contained in a proposed deed of easement
negotiated by the parties. The regulations also require that if the Board accepts the offer it must do so in
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 3
writing and only after an action by the Board authorizing acceptance. The Board is not required to accept
an offer to sell a conservation easement. Either the Albemarle County Public Recreational Facilities
Authority (PRFA) or the Virginia Outdoors Foundation (VOF) may be co-holders of the easements.
Regulations also require the ACE Committee to recommend which parcels, from an initial pool of
applicants, the Board should invite to submit offers to sell conservation easements on. In the event a
higher ranked applicant(s) drops out of this initial pool, the Committee may slide down the ranking list and
substitute another parcel(s) that is lower ranked provided it is still eligible.
On January 14, 2004, the Board approved staff’s recommendation to waive the existing method
(according to the ACE ordinance) of determining income for Henley Forest, Inc., applicant from the 2002-
03 pool. Upon receiving this approval, the County Attorney extended the landowner an “Invitation to Offer
to Sell” a conservation easement to the County. On January 26, the County received an offer to sell a
conservation easement from Henley Forest, Inc. on the following property consisting of two individual tax
parcels:
Owner Tax Map-Parcel Number Price Co-
holder
Henley Forest, Inc. TM 6, Parcel 15, 296.370 acres $237,644 PRFA
Henley Forest, Inc. TM 6, Parcel 17, 186.630 acres PRFA
Total 483.000 acres
It is recommended that the Board adopt a resolution accepting the offer to sell a conservation
easement to the County for the price specified and subject to the terms and conditions contained in the
proposed deed of easement and to also authorize the County Executive to sign the final deed of
easement for the property.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted the following resolution accepting
Henley Forest’s offer to sell a conservation easement to the County for the amount of $237,644
and subject to the terms and conditions contained in the proposed deed of easement and
AUTHORIZED the County Executive to sign the final deed of easement for this property.
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING OFFER TO SELL
A CONSERVATION EASEMENT UNDER THE ACE PROGRAM
WHEREAS
, the County has received an offer to sell a conservation easement under the
ACE Program from the owner of the following properties:
Tax Map 6, Parcel 15 (Henley Forest, Inc. Property)
Tax Map 6, Parcel 17 (Henley Forest, Inc. Property)
WHEREAS
, owner offered to sell conservation easement on the respective properties to
the County for a fixed purchase price, subject to terms and conditions set forth in the proposed
deed of easement enclosed with the County’s invitation to offer to sell, subject to any further
revisions deemed necessary by the County Attorney and agreed to by the owner.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
that the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts
the offer to sell conservation easement described above, and authorizes the County Executive to
execute all documents necessary for completing the acquisition.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED
that the Board of Supervisors hereby directs the County
Attorney to send copies of this resolution to the owner of the properties identified herein, or their
contact person.
__________
Item 5.5. SP-2003-07. Gregory R. Gallihugh-Nextel Partners (Sign #59). (Applicant requested a
deferral to the March 17, 2004, Board Meeting.)
Discussion
(: There were some people in the audience who had come to speak about this
request. They were advised that the applicant had requested a deferral, and although given the
opportunity to speak tonight, said they would come back on March 17. Ms. Thomas said this property lies
in her district, and she invited those who would like to comment to get in touch with her.)
At the request of the applicant, this petition was deferred until March 17, 2004.
__________
was received for information as follows:
Item 5.6. Updated FEMA Flood Study and Maps,
It was noted in the Executive Summary that the FEMA flood plain study and maps, currently
being updated, identify areas of “detailed study” where the one hundred year flood elevations have been
determined at specific stream cross-sections and delineate the flood plain limits (no elevation) along other
reaches or streams within the study area. Currently there are separate studies and map sets for
Albemarle County, the City of Charlottesville and the town of Scottsville. The Albemarle County study
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 4
was adopted in 1980 and updated in 1990, but only included changes resulting from construction of the
Scottsville levee.
Due to significant changes within the “urban ring” (including the City), and increased development
in the growth areas, an update to and expansion of Albemarle’s study and maps has been needed for
many years. Despite this need, requests for updates were hampered by limited Federal funding for flood
studies, as well as competition for that funding. Fortunately the investments made by the County, City
and the Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) in the development of GIS and aerial mapping
systems facilitated the process of updating the flood study and mapping of the community.
There have been a number of improvements made to the FEMA Study Report and Mapping. A
set of the “preliminary” study and maps are available for perusal in the Engineering Department. The
most noticeable improvement is that the study and mapping for Albemarle County, City of Charlottesville
and town of Scottsville has been consolidated into one set. Other significant improvements are: 1) The
report expands and updates the community description and flood history; 2) The maps reflect the “Letters
of Map Revision” FEMA has issued since 1980; 3) The maps are based on the topographic mapping
provided by the County, City and ACSA and reflect the changes in topography and land development
activity since 1980; 4) Map scales were improved. The current map scales are 1” to 2000’. The new map
scales are 1” = 500’ within the urban ring, Crozet Development Area and Scottsville. The map scales are
1” = 1000’ for the remaining maps, except for the few maps along the edges of the outer perimeter of the
County where the scales are 1” to 2000’.
Current “detailed study” areas were expanded along the Rivanna River and North Fork Rivanna
River. New “detailed study” areas were added in the Crozet Development Area (Lickinghole Creek,
Powells Creek, Slabtown Branch), in Urban Neighborhood 4 (Cows Branch), and in Hollymead/Piney
Mountain Community (Herring Branch, Flat Branch and Tributary to Flat branch).
Changes in the elevation and limits of the one hundred year flood plain, due to the expanded
“detailed study” will impact properties along the streams. The Engineering Department has visually
compared the “preliminary” maps to the current maps and summarized the more noticeable changes.
The FEMA Regional Office met with Albemarle, Charlottesville and Scottsville staff members
(January 27, 2004) to outline a process and schedule for finalizing the study. In approximately two
months, FEMA will publish two public notices of the study/map update in the local newspaper. This
notice will initiate the ninety-day appeal process. Community representatives are encouraged to submit
their concerns and comments any time before or during the appeal period. After the appeal period,
FEMA will address the appeals received and then proceed with an ordinance review period. The targeted
effective date for the new study/maps is January 1, 2005.
This update was provided for information only.
__________
Item 5.7. Copy of letter dated January 29, 2004, from John Shepherd,
Manager of Zoning Administration, re: Official Determination of Parcels and Development Rights to Jeff
Dise, L.S. Kirk Hughes and Associates, re: Tax Map 103, Parcel 9 (property of House and Garden
was received for information.
Company, LLC) – Section 10.3.1,
__________
Item 5.8. Copy of 2003 Annual Report from the Citizens’ Advisory Committee of the
was received for information and is on file in the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Public Defender’s Office,
Clerk’s Office.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 6. SP-03-72. Linda Vest – Alltel (Sign #87). Public hearing on a request to
allow construction of personal wireless fac w/wooden monopole, approx 85 ft in total height & 10 ft above
height of tallest tree w/in 25 ft. The proposed fac includes flush-mounted panel antennas & ground
equipment, in accord w/Sec 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning. TM 109, P 43C, contains 2.16 acs. Znd RA. Loc on
Rt 718 (Murrays Lane), approx 1 mile N of intersect of Murrays Lane & Rt 29. Samuel Miller Dist. (Notice
of this public hearing was given in the Daily Progress on January 26 and February 2, 2004.)
Mr. Cilimberg briefed the Board by reading the Executive Summary that is on file in the Clerk’s
Office with the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors. He said the Planning Commission first
reviewed this proposal with staff’s recommendation for denial at its meeting on December 2, 2003. At
that time, the applicant requested deferral pending revisions to its construction plans to address staff
concerns both with the proposed amount of grading and disturbance, as well as the visual impacts
anticipated based on the original balloon test. Additionally, staff noted that there were no trees within 25
feet of the proposed monopole location.
Mr. Cilimberg said the original application proposed the construction of a facility with an 85-foot
tall monopole that would be approximately 879 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). An extensive amount
of grading and disturbance was proposed in close proximity to several of the trees that were identified to
remain. Furthermore, the owner of one adjacent parcel expressed concern with the possible impact of
the facility on nearby properties held in conservation easements. Another owner took issue with the 85-
foot tall monopole because its “fall-zone” would have extended onto her property.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 5
Mr. Cilimberg said ALLTEL attempted to address the significant concerns noted in the staff’s
recommendation for denial and the Commission’s review of the original petition. According to revised
construction plans, they propose a 75-foot tall monopole for this facility that would be 11 feet shorter in
height as measured AMSL than the pole originally proposed. The revised facility design also replaces the
originally proposed 184 square foot ground equipment shelter with two cabinets on a 100 square foot
concrete pad. Additionally, the revised plans significantly reduce the proposed amount of site grading
and eliminate the need for a fall-zone easement on the adjacent parcel identified as Tax Map 109, Parcel
12.
Mr. Cilimberg said a much larger adjacent parcel located to the west (Tax Map 98, Parcel 15A),
on the opposite side of Murrays Lane, is currently held in an easement by the Albemarle Public
Recreational Facilities Authority, and some other nearby properties are also held in easements. The
proposed site of the facility is in a wooded area on the side of Cook Mountain. The proposed site of the
monopole is located approximately 75 feet from the nearest property boundary line. The facility is to be
accessed by a proposed 12-foot wide gravel service road extending from existing driveways. He said the
monopole would actually be five-feet shorter than the tallest tree within 25 feet of the pole location. That
tree is situated uphill from the pole site.
Mr. Cilimberg said that during a second field visit for the revised plan, staff observed that a
balloon floated at the height of the proposed monopole was no longer skylighted above the tree line from
Murrays Lane, a matter that had contributed to staff’s concerns for visual impacts. Instead, the balloon
was seen within the trees situated between the facility and the road, but was still visible from various
nearby points on U.S. Route 29 well below the ridgeline with substantial backdrop provided by vegetation
on the mountain. Due to the presence of vegetation on nearby properties, the balloon could not be seen
from portions of Murrays Lane farther to the north and south of the site.
Mr. Cilimberg said staff recognized that other sites throughout the County have been approved
where facilities were placed on properties lying adjacent to conservation easements and/or
Agricultural/Forestal Districts. Although the proposed facility site is not located within an easement area,
staff did a balloon test from a portion of the Wingspread Farm conservation easement after that property
owner expressed concerns about the possible impacts of the facility. From a pasture on that property
located adjacent to the southbound lane of U.S. Route 29, the balloon was visible well below the ridgeline
of Cook Mountain and was surrounded by several trees similar to its proposed height. It was staff’s
opinion that a brown monopole (now it is actually a wood monopole) at this site would blend in with the
natural surroundings to an extent that mitigates the visual impacts upon that particular easement.
Mr. Cilimberg said based on review of the revised construction plans and observation of a balloon
test, the applicant amended the request for this facility to an extent that mitigates the most significant
concerns about visual impacts that originally prompted staff’s recommendation for denial. Staff did
recommend approval, with conditions, to the Commission at its second hearing.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Commission, at its meeting on January 20, 2004, by a vote of 6:0,
recommended approval of SP-2003-72 with conditions, recommending some modifications to conditions
that were originally proposed by staff. The conditions of approval are set out in the action letter in the
Board’s packet of materials for this evening’s meeting.
With no questions of Mr. Cilimberg at this time, Mr. Dorrier asked the applicant to speak.
Mr. Pete Caramantis, Tremblay & Smith, said he was present to represent Alltel. He said this
project is part of a larger project by Alltel to improve their service in the County. He said that along Route
29 south of Charlottesville, there is no coverage at this time. This is just one of their applications intended
to address that issue. Since the original recommendation for denial, there have been a lot of changes to
the application. There has been a lot of interchange between Alltel and County staff trying to get this
application into a form acceptable to every one. They changed the shelters to equipment cabinets that
significantly decreased the footprint of the site. The tower was moved slightly to take care of the issue of
its being within 25 feet of the tree that was being relied upon for height. The use of a retaining wall has
substantially decreased the amount of grading needed. The tower, as proposed now, is actually five feet
lower than the height of the tree it is based on, and actually 15 feet lower than would be allowed by the
ordinance. Also, the pole was changed from a metal monopole to a wood pole. All these changes
resulted in a change so staff was able to recommend approval. They did a second balloon test that
showed there was minimum visibility from all lanes up and down Route 29. This application calls for
removal of only two trees, which is a significant accomplishment since construction is needed for the
facility and the access road to the facility. He thanked the Planning staff for working so diligently with the
applicant. He asked that the Board follow the Commission’s recommendation and approve this permit
with their recommended conditions.
At this point, Mr. Dorrier opened the public hearing. With no one from the public rising to speak,
the public hearing was closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
motion
Ms. Thomas immediately offered to approve SP-2003-072, subject to the conditions
seconded
recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was by Mr. Bowerman. Roll was
called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Boyd, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Rooker and Ms. Thomas, Mr. Wyant and Mr. Bowerman.
NAYS: None.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 6
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
The facility shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows:
1. With the exception of all changes that would be required in order to comply with the
conditions listed herein, the facility including the monopole, the ground equipment
building, and any antennas shall be sized, located and built as shown on the construction
plans entitled, “Alltel-Hardware River Site”, last revised January 8, 2004, and provided
herein as Attachment I;
2. The calculation of pole height shall include any base, foundation or grading that raises
the pole above the pre-existing, natural ground elevation;
3. The top of the pole shall not exceed seventy-three (73) feet above the finished ground
level contour of seven hundred and ninety-five (795) feet, nor shall it exceed a top height
of eight hundred and sixty-eight (868) feet, as measured Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL);
4. The wooden monopole shall be a brown wood color that is consistent with the trees
surrounding the site;
5. The ground equipment cabinets, antennas, concrete pad and all equipment attached to
the pole shall be the same color as the pole and shall be no larger than the specifications
set forth in the application plans;
6. Only flush-mounted antennas shall be permitted. No antennas that project out from the
pole beyond the minimum required by the support structure shall be permitted. However,
in no case shall the distance between the face of the pole and the faces of the antennas
be more than twelve (12) inches;
7. No satellite or microwave dishes shall be permitted on the monopole;
8. No antennas or equipment, with the exception of a grounding rod, not to exceed one (1)
inch in diameter and twelve (12) inches in height, shall be located above the top of the
pole;
9. No guy wires shall be permitted;
10. No lighting shall be permitted on the site or on the pole, except as herein provided.
Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only. Each outdoor luminaire
shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane
running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For the
purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or
lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the
lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply;
11. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the
lease area shall not be permitted;
12. Site grading and graveling around the site shall be minimized to only provide the amount
of space that will be necessary for placement of the monopole and equipment shelter;
13. All proposed grading and construction shall be held outside the dripline of trees to
remain. Additional methods of tree protection, including but not be limited to tree
protection fencing, shall be provided for the trees that are identified as numbers fifty-three
(53), fifty-five (55), ninety-seven (97), two hundred and eighty (280), two hundred and
eighty-two (282), two hundred and ninety (290), two hundred and ninety-two (292) and
seven hundred (700) on the tree survey; and
14. The tree conservation area shall be shown on the construction plans.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the following requirements shall be met:
15. Size specifications and other details, including elevation drawings of the antennas and
ground equipment shall be included in the construction plan package;
16. Certification by a registered surveyor stating the height of the tallest tree within twenty-
five (25) feet that will used to justify the final height of the monopole shall be provided to
the Zoning Administrator;
17. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the pole, the equipment cabinets or
vehicular or utility access, an amended tree conservation plan, developed by a certified
arborist shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval. The plan shall
specify tree protection methods and procedures, and identify any existing trees to be
removed on the site - both inside and outside the access road and lease area. All
construction or installation associated with the pole and equipment pad, including
necessary access for construction or installation, shall be in accordance with this tree
conservation plan. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of
Planning and Community Development, the permittee shall not remove existing trees
within two hundred (200) feet of the facility on the subject parcel. A special use permit
amendment shall be required for any future tree removal within the two hundred (200)
foot buffer, after the installation of the subject facility;
18. With the building permit application, the applicant shall submit the final revised set of site
plans for construction of the facility. During the application review, Planning staff shall
review the revised plans to ensure that all appropriate conditions of the special use permit
have been addressed.
After the completion of the pole installation and prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy or to any facility operation, the following shall be met:
19. Certification by a registered surveyor stating the height of the pole, measured both in feet
above ground level and in elevation above sea-level (ASL) using the benchmarks or
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 7
reference datum identified in the application shall be provided to the Zoning
Administrator;
20. Certification confirming that the grounding rod’s: a) height does not exceed one ( 1) foot
above the monopole; and, b) width does not exceed a diameter of one (1) inch, shall be
provided to the Zoning Administrator; and
21. No slopes associated with construction of the facility shall be created that are steeper
than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to
the County Engineer are employed.
After the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following requirements shall be met:
22. The applicant, or any subsequent owners of the facility, shall submit a report to the
Zoning Administrator by July 1 of each year. The report shall identify each personal
wireless service provider that uses the facility, including a drawing indicating which
equipment, on both the monopole and the ground, are associated with each provider; and
23. All equipment and antennae from any individual personal wireless service provider shall
be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use is
discontinued. The entire facility shall be disassembled and removed from the site within
ninety (90) days of the date its use for personal wireless service purposes is
discontinued. If the Zoning Administrator determines at any time that surety is required to
guarantee that the facility will be removed as required, the permittee shall furnish to the
Zoning Administrator a certified check, a bond with surety satisfactory to the County, or a
letter of credit satisfactory to the County, in an amount sufficient for, and conditioned
upon, the removal of the facility. The type of surety guarantee shall be to the satisfaction
of the Zoning Administrator and the County Attorney.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 7. Public Hearing: Six-Year Secondary Road Plan for 2004-2010 and County’s
Priority List for Road Improvements. (Notice of this public hearing was published in the Daily Progress on
January 26 and February 2, 2004.)
Mr. Dorrier skipped reading of the executive summary, read the Board’s guidelines for conducting
a public hearing, and then opened the public hearing.
Mr. Kurt Illig said he is speaking for the Mill Creek Homeowners’ Association Board of Directors.
The Association represents about 200 families in the Mill Creek neighborhood. He handed to the
Chairman a statement which is on file in the Clerk’s Office with the permanent records of the Board of
Supervisors. He said the homeowners think a connector road between Avon Street Extended and Fifth
Street Extended is necessary to improve emergency response from the Monticello Fire Station to
southern Albemarle County and to connect roadways in the southern section of the County. But, they
oppose extension of the Southern Parkway to Fifth Street Extended to serve as this connector believing
this extension would negatively impact the homeowners in Mill Creek and Foxcroft by decreasing their
property values. They were pleased to learn that this road may be part of a proposed mixed-use
development on the north side of I-64, and be built at that developer’s expense. They suggest as an
alternative to the Southern Parkway that a westbound-only on-ramp from Avon Street to I-64 be
constructed.
Mr. Illig listed the following reasons for not constructing a Southern Parkway: 1) The road would
impact the environmentally-sensitive Biscuit Run and the surrounding wooded area; 2) A major connector
road in this area would conflict with the County’s Strategic Plan to protect natural resources; 3) The
extension would bring increased high-speed cut-through traffic to roads in Mill Creek where there is
currently a problem with such traffic; 4) The Southern Parkway is a very expensive road; and, 5) The
Southern Parkway would border exclusively on residential housing areas; no land for new development
would be served. He said that as stewards of the County’s financial and natural resources, they asked
that the Board fight for their best interests and end plans for a Southern Parkway.
Mr. Dorrier said he believes Mr. Juan Wade, Transportation Planner, has met with the
Homeowners’ Association. Mr. Wade said he met with them several times. He will be glad to meet with
them again and go over the County’s position based on the Board’s approval of the final plan. Up until
this time, the County has been in favor of a southern connector south of I-64 as well as to the north.
Mr. Peter Kleeman said he is speaking for the residents who are opposed to improvements on
Blenheim Road (Route 795). Mr. Kleeman said he is a civil engineer and has been involved as a
consultant in transportation and environmental issues in the state. He was contracted by a group of
citizens opposed to the upgrading of Blenheim Road. He has three questions. Can the road be restored
as an unpaved, low-volume road? Can the paving of the road go forward without VDOT providing an
opportunity for a public hearing? Can a private individual actually improve this road? Based on VDOT’s
maintenance procedures, there is a method called machining non hard-surfaced roads which has been
part of VDOT’s manual since 1970. Although this manual has been upgraded many times, this is still a
practice in the field. He said the current road is damaged, but it can be brought back to its original
condition using standard maintenance methods. He then listed things that would need to be identified
before this type of maintenance would be considered. He thinks maintaining the road is feasible and
practicable. Also, the issue of surface binding has been brought to his attention. He heard that the
County believes an unbound surface would be unsafe. He said surface binding procedures are available.
The Highway Research Council is presently studying eight different ways of surface treating non-paved
roads to be able to maintain them in their current character. He said putting Route 795 in the Secondary
Road plan would require that VDOT bring the road up to Secondary Road standards. That would require
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 8
that a public hearing be held first. There are only three situations under which a waiver of the public
hearing could apply, but none of those occur in this case. Finally, can a private individual pave a road?
The answer is “yes”, but the General Assembly passed a law outlining the process through which a
private individual can enter into an agreement to construct or maintain or operate a roadway in Virginia.
He said the law outlines a mechanism which includes specific submittals to VDOT, specific approvals and
recommendations from VDOT engineers, from the District Office and VDOT’s Richmond Office. Based
on the hurdles and obstacles involved to bring this forward in a timely manner, he thinks the ideal solution
would be to maintain the road to its current standard and then wait until the summer and consider binding
surfaces to allow the road to remain an historic road in its current state.
Ms. Paula Brown-Steedly asked that the people present for Route 784 (Doctor’s Crossing), but
who are standing in the hall outside of the Board Room try to get into the room to hear her presentation.
Mr. Dorrier apologized for the cramped quarters tonight. He said the School Board is meeting in
the Lane Auditorium, so the Board of Supervisors must meet in Room 241.
Ms. Brown-Steedly said she is a native of Albemarle County and has been a resident in Stony
Point on the western portion of Route 784 (now called Doctor’s Crossing) for the past 23 years. She
asked that this route be approved for the Rural Rustic Road program. She said that from 1986-88, she
got petitions signed to get this road improved. The intent of the petition was to make improvements for
health and public safety reasons. In 1986 there were 41 homes and 24 building lots on the road. Safety
improvements were accomplished and the road paved from the bridge north to the top of the hill. Due to
excessive erosion a drainpipe was put under the road alleviating flooding in front of what is known as the
“Rocking W” residence. Today there are 30 more homes, and 18 undeveloped lots on the road. The
majority of the health issues have only increased because of additional traffic. In 2000, the average
number of vehicle trips per day was 280. Since then, 15 more homes have been built. She gave several
examples of the condition of the road including traffic accidents caused by its unsafe conditions. She has
been told by her doctor that excessive dust is destroying her health. She said copies of the 1986-88
petitions were resubmitted (copy on file). The majority of people signing the petition still own property and
live on this road. She said the residents of this area have waited patiently for this improvement, and have
repeatedly followed the democratic process, and asked for immediate action of good faith on the part of
the Board of Supervisors. She asked that Doctor’s Crossing be approved as a Rural Rustic Road project
now. She then asked that those present in support of her request stand.
Mr. Dorrier said he would estimate that about 75 people are present in support of the request.
Someone said there were people in the hall that could not get into the room. Mr. Dorrier said he would
raise the number to 100+.
Mr. Clifford Hammill said he had come to discuss the future of Route 795 (Blenheim Road). Over
the past few months this road has drawn praise from some and criticism from others. He is in favor of
paving this road. This is a single-lane, dirt road which has sections where it is almost impossible for cars
to pass. In the summer the road is wash-boarded and dusty. When there are heavy rains, the road near
the bridge is damaged by the swelling waters of the Hardware River which causes the road to be closed
and causes VDOT to make repeated repairs. In the wintertime the road freezes and because of snow
and ice is impossible to traverse; dirt roads cannot be chemically treated. Banks are high in several
locations contributing to snow drifts. Prior to the massive cleanup along the road, several locations were
used as make shift dump sites for animal carcasses, bottles, tires, household debris and furniture.
Abandoned cars sat idle on the side of the road for several years. He said Mr. Sullivan has already made
a tremendous contribution to the community by cleaning up this unsightly mess and for that alone
deserves a huge “thank you.” Also, a heavy fence has been added along the ravine to protect motorists
and to prevent future trashing of the area. He respects all the residents who have expressed their
concerns regarding this issue. One criticism he has heard about paving of the road is that it might bring
increased traffic. He lives at the corner of Route 713 and Route 795 which is where 795 turns into a dirt
road. The traffic now is heavy enough to prevent them from allowing their two sons to play in certain
parts of their front yard. Cars traveling straight through on Blenheim Road now are going in excess of 45
mph. Although paving of the road might attract some motorists traveling through to Scottsville and area
residents trying to avoid dirt roads, Route 795 is far enough “off of the beaten path” so that Route 20
would still be the preferred route for nonresidents. He said dirt roads are outdated and cause road
maintenance issues for VDOT.
Mr. Jeffery Wimsatt said he lives in the Ashley Subdivision which feeds into Gilbert Station Road
(Route 640). He said there is a clear and present danger because Route 640 is no longer capable of
handling the amount of traffic using the road. The last count from VDOT was 500 vtpd. As a result, the
road is degrading rapidly. The road has potholes and diversions created by streams running into the
road. There are places where the road peaks. Cars meet on a road that has only 20-foot margins.
Everyone is swerving as they drive down this road. The road needs more than just throwing gravel down.
There are “white-outs” in the middle of summer where one cannot see any car coming toward you. He
said this eastern section of Routed 640 is actually the only road out of the area in the event of flooding
because all other roads have bridges.
Ms. Nancy Dresner said her family lives off of the east end of Route 640. This is a dangerous
road which should be paved immediately. She said that because of the age of the road and the volume
of traffic, it is impossible for VDOT to maintain safety by scraping and graveling. Most of the time Route
640 is slippery and a sea of mud. Petitions were delivered to the mailboxes of all people living on the
east end of Route 640 and they were also made available to other local residents. These petitions were
signed by 191 people. This is not the first time petitions have been presented to the Board. The
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 9
residents of Route 640 have been trying to get this road paved for over 50 years, starting in 1953. All
requests have been acknowledged, but “brushed aside.” She handed in a memorandum containing
excerpts from the Board’s minutes since 1953 concerning this road. She said it means nothing to be put
on the Six-year Road Plan. Other speakers will say they think the delay in paving Route 640 has resulted
in a crisis situation. She asked that this road be put on the list for immediate paving. She asked that all
present who agreed with her remarks stand.
Ms. Donna McDaniel said she has lived on Gilbert Station Road for 16 years. Traffic is not limited
to just the residents of the road. Many new homes are under construction and there are many roads
feeding into Gilbert Station. There is heavy machinery, heavy trucks and vans using the road. The
residents also rely on many public service vehicles; police, school buses, fire/rescue, etc. They met with
representatives of these services and were told they could not comment about the road because it would
jeopardize their jobs. She said that last Friday, because of freezing rain and the poor condition of the
road prior to that, maneuvering the road was complicated. A Fed-Ex truck, two other trucks, a Virginia
Power truck, and several vehicles were either stuck on the road or slid off of the road. She knows driving
was bad in the County, but their situation is different. Many wrecker companies know the road well
enough that they will not come during bad weather. She said the problems with the road have been
discussed with prior Supervisors. They urge the Board to now put Gilbert Station Road on the first year of
the Rural Rustic Roads Program. She asked those in the audience in favor of her comments to stand.
Ms. Mary Shipp said she was here on behalf of the residents of Gilbert Station Road. She is a
rural mail carrier on Gilbert Road and has been one for 10 years. The condition of Route 640 has
deteriorated over the past ten years. Potholes are unbelievably large. She has gotten flat tires from this
road. It is unfair to characterize it as a gravel road because there is no gravel. It changes with the
seasons. Each season brings a different dilemma. Hurricane season causes flooding and that causes
her to run her route backwards. Winter months are devastating. It takes more than a week before
chemicals are put on the road. Snow removal is terrible. In the summer months there is tremendous
dust. The road has eroded on the sides to the point where it is almost impossible for two cars to pass.
Mr. Van Wilson said he has lived in Stony Point for 40 years and has a farm on Route 640. All
that has been said tonight is true. The dust infiltrates his pastureland to the point where the land is not
usable. The road maintenance for Route 640 has always been to put on another load of crusher run
stone which is about 40 percent dust. VDOT uses it because it is the cheapest stone it can get. When it
is on the road and there is some dampness it packs down, but when it rains it erodes and runs into the
ditches. There are three creeks that come through his property, converge and exit under Route 640.
During a recent heavy rain he observed that the water coming through his property was crystal clear, but
on the opposite side of the road it looked like brown broth. It was full of sediment headed toward the
Chesapeake Bay. A lot is said about a construction site that is not protected from runoff, but there are
many unpaved roads that are regularly covered with crusher run stone and it goes directly into Preddy
Creek, in this case, and then to the Bay.
Ms. Kim Innes said she has only lived here for two years, but has lived in many areas all over the
world, and has never seen a road in this condition. She asked that the road be paved. She said the road
is dangerous throughout most of the year, particularly during rainy and snowy conditions. If there were an
emergency event during such a period, these conditions would prevent or slow the arrival of critical
personnel. It is also dangerous for several days after laying down new gravel. Because traction is poor
and visibility limited, people drive in the middle of the narrow road and being run off of the road is a
common occurrence. Flat tires are a common occurrence because of sharp gravel. Children have told of
the times when school buses have been scraped by other passing buses or trucks. She does not know
why there is any road in the County which is unpaved. Paving of Route 640 has been on the list of road
improvements for over 50 years. Citizens have voiced concerns about this road for decades.
Development continues to be approved on the road which increases traffic and makes it more dangerous.
Residents of the area support smart growth, but also support restricted development. They do not
believe compromising their safety or the safety of their children should be a means to this end.
Mr. Paul Haney said he lives on Gilbert Station Road on the west end. He is a forester. If this
road were one of his logging roads, he would stop the loggers because it does not meet his standards.
He said that everything that was said tonight, he has experienced. He said Mr. Boyd visited the area
today and saw the road. If there were a fire near the railroad tracks and 15 tanker trucks had to respond,
would they be able to respond? Furthermore, Amtrack runs the rail there. If there were a derailment,
could that road support the necessary emergency vehicles that would be needed? It is a desperate
situation. He said the Chisholm’s paid to upgrade 1.1 mile of that road, and that is a definite
improvement. He asked that all who agreed with his statement raise their hands.
Mr. David Cox said he is a resident of Stony Point. He encourages the Board to include Doctors
Crossing and Gilbert Station Road in the Rural Rustic Road improvement program. His family has gone
door-to-door the last couple of weeks with a petition. He will not add to what has been said, but he has
had three flat tires in the last four months and been forced off of Gilbert Station Road by a state truck. He
said the roads are hazardous and should have been paved years ago. He handed the petitions to the
Clerk.
Ms. Debbie Donly said she is speaking about Blenheim Road (Route 795) and she is against
having that road paved. There are only 40 vtpd on that road. When she first saw what had happened to
the road, she was shocked, saddened and angered. They are opposed to the widening, straightening
and paving of that road. They hope it is not allowed to continue. They want the road to remain a rustic,
gravel road including curves and vegetation. Aside from the natural wilderness beauty, miles of wildlife
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 10
habitat has been destroyed. The trees and 50-year old hedgerows are now gone. There is nothing that
can be done about that. She suggests that instead of planting grass and a white fence, Mr. Sullivan
make a conscious effort to restore the area with the wildlife and native plant species. Many indigenous
and ornamental plants can serve a four-way purpose of erosion control, food and habitat for wildlife. It
could again be very beautiful. Judging by the nice landscaping of several of Mr. Sullivan’s entranceways,
she feels he appreciates the variety and beauty of landscaping. If he were to replenish the clear cut
areas with beneficial trees and shrubs and flowers, everyone would feel better about the entire situation.
Mr. Jim Donly said he lives on the gravel portion of Blenheim Road. He is totally against the
paving of the road. Nobody is heeding the speed limit on more major roads, so what will happen when
Blenheim Road is paved. He thinks cars will travel 60 mph, when at the present the speed limit is 25 mph
because the road is not paved. He thinks people will use this road as a cut-through to avoid traffic on
Route 20. The other end of Blenheim Road near the Kluge property was paved by Mr. Kluge a few years
ago and now there is going to be a housing development in that area. If this road is paved, when will the
housing development come? His family members walk along that road, ride bicycles along the road, and
horseback ride along the road. He does not think that will be possible if the road is paved.
Ms. Liz Jones said she lives on Blenheim Road. She speaks for herself and her brother Matthew.
She said her great-great-grandfather was born in the Mt. Pleasant Farm area. He bought and started his
farm in Blenheim, Virginia. They ask that the Board of Supervisors support their efforts to preserve the
rural character of the historic roads and the Blenheim Crossroads in Virginia. They hope the Board will
support and uphold the Comprehensive Plan which requires careful planning of road improvements with
prior input from all residents, and with respect for all heritage of the community. She said Route 795 was
not listed on the Six-Year Plan. They recently suffered a property loss with no notice of what was
happening. This operation by Mr. Sullivan blocked access to the Middle Oak Slave Cemetery. This is
where some of her ancestors are buried. The cemetery is still in use. She said that none of the trash and
debris she has struggled to remove was removed by Mr. Sullivan. If anything, some may have been
added. She has been working for years to improve this slave cemetery site. Her family would like to
continue to use this site where access has been blocked. Residents of Blenheim owned farms, hand built
homes, hand dug wells, had a blacksmith shop and a post office. Although much property has been lost
to road changes, they are struggling to maintain their properties and they hope that Albemarle County
officials will consider all implications of this recent clear cutting of land including their property, and follow
the democratic process. She showed to the Board photos of the slave cemetery taken in 2002.
Mr. Leslie Jones said he lives at the intersection of Routes 708 and 795. He is a retired teacher,
and a veteran of World War II. He came home Thanksgiving morning from his brother’s funeral and
found the road completely messed up. The road department said they knew nothing about it. If he wants
to put something to keep the gravel from going into his driveway and clogging it up, he has to get
permission from VDOT. Somebody came in, did all this work and nobody knows anything about it. He
would have to go to court to make it right. Can a retired teacher fight Mr. Sullivan in court to redo what
VDOT should have done? They should have stopped it and made sure it worked in a normal process.
Any time you go more than 15 feet on either side of the centerline, you are on someone else’s property.
After the trees are taken out, who would know how many trees were there? If you take two feet of bank
and cut it down to road level, how can the top soil be put back? He has been put in a position of having
to settle for whatever he can afford using a lawyer. That makes it impossible for him to get satisfaction.
He thinks what was done was done in a warlike way, but he is not going to fight back in the same way.
He thinks the people in charge should have gone about carrying out the rules the same for everybody. A
lot of what is happening to him today will happen to other citizens tomorrow who do not have the money
to fight big money.
Ms. Anne Stevens said she lives on Doctors Crossing. Everything said tonight about Gilbert
Station Road and Doctors Crossing is true. She thinks money is being wasted trying to maintain these
roads. Doctors Crossing gets scraped but never has gravel applied. Within a week it has potholes again,
dust or mud. She invited the Board members to come out in about a week and see the condition of the
road. She only drives about 25 mph on that road, but it is hard to keep control of her vehicle.
Ms. Laura Dollard said she owns Broomfield Farm at the corner of Routes 712 and 715, Blenheim
and Glendowner Roads. She is opposed to the paving of Blenheim Road. They bought the farm in 1988
because it was on a dirt road. If Blenheim had been a 50-foot wide, paved road, they would not have
bought there. In the 16 years since she has lived here, she has enjoyed the peace and quiet, the wildlife
in the community, and the safe feeling she has driving gravel roads. She has never had a flat tire, has
never skidded, has never been stuck, but she also does not speed. If this road is paved, it will change in
many ways the place she chose to live. As for safety, she has never felt to be in danger of having an
accident on these roads, nor has she ever seen an accident. The general tranquility of her farm will be
reduced by the road improvement, and the specific effect on her house will be quite disastrous. Although
the farm contains 165 acres, her house is less than 150 feet from the center of the road. What protects
her house is a solid double row of pine trees and to accommodate the road improvement, one-half of
these pine trees will be cut down and the other half will die. The land she owns across the road
containing large hardwood trees would suffer the same fate. She owns about 3500 feet of frontage on
this road, and does not wish to sacrifice it when there is not a public need. The road has much less traffic
than some of the other roads mentioned tonight. She hopes this misconceived plan to improve this road
which was not on the Six-Year Plan will be abandoned or altered to protect this beautiful historic avenue
through the County. For people who have lived here all their lives, or who have come here with the intent
of staying, this is a vital issue, much more vital than getting to town faster, or a little more dust free. Many
of these people are letting the Board know this by signing a petition (on file).
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 11
Mr. John Bittner said he lives on Route 713 at its intersection with Route 795. He has collected
over 100 signatures of people opposed to this road paving project. The road is a dirt road and has the
characteristics of a dirt road, but it does not have the traffic volume to constitute such a project at this
time. The residents who live along that road feel their property is being impacted by this road, and they
should have had some say in the project. That is the big issue. He thinks this sets a bad precedent. If
he owned a piece of property with a paved road in front of the property, what would stop him from
bulldozing the road to preserve rural character without proper permits to do so? Allowing Mr. Sullivan to
continue with this project, the Board has been as reckless with the public process as he has been with his
bulldozers. This is a concern for all people who live on rural roads in Albemarle County.
Mr. Leonard Dykes said he has lived on Blenheim Road for 27 years, just 6/10ths of a mile south
of the crossing with Route 708. It has been a dangerous road for him for all of those years. There are
two blind curves and a blind hill. He thinks this was a good road during horse and buggy days, but cannot
handle present day traffic. Driving this road is aggravated by the vegetation along its sides because it
diminishes visibility. He thinks the project Mr. Sullivan proposed is good. He is pleased to see something
happen that will remove the danger he has been driving with. Because the road is so narrow, people
have a tendency to drive in the middle. Just 1000 feet south of his driveway, there is a nasty double turn
going uphill and then downhill. There was a bad accident involving one of the residents on the road in
that section. It is very dangerous there because there is no visibility even after the leaves are off of the
trees. He thinks this improvement to the road will make that situation safer.
Ms. Noelle Roane (Mrs. Bryan Ward) asked that the Board review the Comprehensive Plan and
see that it supports retaining the rural character of this road. She said maintaining this as a safe gravel
road and traveling at low volume speeds was the kind of planning wanted when the Plan was written.
They moved here from Pennsylvania and were very careful about their choice of a property. They chose
a property on a gravel road so that it would not be subject to a lot of traffic. They moved from an area
where a country road became a thoroughfare. It destroyed the area and a development soon followed
that improvement. She thinks Mr. Sullivan should have looked at the Plan and chosen his property
accordingly. She said that neither she, Ms. Dollard or Ms. Thompson will ever agree to a 50-foot right-of-
way for this project. Also, Mr. Mellon is adamant that he will not grant any right-of-way.
Mr. Bryan Ward said his wife just spoke. They chose a road which was not paved, and that is the
way they would like to keep it. He gave to the Board a map showing the property of residents who are
opposed to this paving project. Mr. Dorrier asked if this map shows properties which do not front on the
road. Mr. Ward said that is true, but they are still affected by the paving and the increased traffic
proposed by VDOT up to 500 vtpd. He said gravel does slow down traffic. The drop going down to the
Hardware River is an unsafe road. Paving it could increase accidents because people might think it is
safer. He then handed to the Board members some pictures of the way the road looks now after trees
were taken down. He said that has improved visibility. If the road could just be regraded and left dirt it
would be improved dramatically in the way of safety. He said there are only 40 cars a day on that road
each day. He thinks there have been few accidents, maybe only one in the last ten years at the very
southern end of Blenheim Road. It was not on the dirt area of the road. He thinks Mr. Sullivan should
pave Route 640 instead.
Ms. Karen DeGiorgis said she lives on Blenheim Road. They purchased their home last summer,
and before doing so they went and parked in the driveway and watched the traffic. They did this because
the house is near the road. They also have small children. After this research, they decided to buy the
house. They felt comfortable with that decision because they knew about Albemarle County’s
Comprehensive Plan. They thought sure Blenheim Road would remain the way it was. Now that they
live there, her children play in the front yard, and she walks the road for exercise. They decided to
purchase bicycles so they could ride on the road, but will not be able to do that if the road is paved. Last
week Mr. Sullivan stood in this room and said he wanted to pave the road for the safety of his children.
She asked that the road not be paved for the safety of her children. She believes the perceived safety of
one person’s children should not be able to be purchased at the expense of another person’s. She is a
veterinarian and travels to other farms on Blenheim Road and other nearby roads. Whenever she can,
she takes the slow, scenic route. To date, Mr. Sullivan has ruined the scenic part of that route. She
asked that the Board insist that he return it as best he can to its original condition. She asked that the
road not be paved.
Mr. Giovanni DeGiorgis said he lives on Route 795. They chose this place because of the safety
of the road. Because the road is dirt, there is not a lot of traffic. He is opposed to the paving of the road.
There will be consequences after the road is paved, such as an increase in traffic and loss of its rural
character. There will be conflicts on the road far away from Mr. Sullivan’s property. One will be at the
entrance of Blenheim Road on Route 20. There is a very narrow exit there. Changes will be necessary.
Even though there will be money given by Mr. Sullivan for the paving of that tract overall, there will be
changes after that that will be done and paid by taxpayers. At the Hardware River there is no way that
narrow bridge can handle more than 50 cars per day. Who will pay for that change? That is why more
than just the residents of Blenheim Road are interested in this matter. They are also interested because
of safety reasons. He said they have gotten 125 signatures of people opposing the paving (handed in
petition), 49 of which are from residents on Blenheim Road, 40 from people in the vicinity of Blenheim
Road, and 38 from residents of the County who are just concerned about losing this nice scenic rustic
road. They want the road returned to its original condition.
Mr. Norm Carlson said he is in favor of paving Blenheim Road. He has lived on that road for 12
years. Their house also sits close to the road; their driveway is about 125 feet long. He does not feel
safe having his children near the road. They have not purchased bicycles for their children because there
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 12
is no safe place for them to ride. People pay no attention to the fact that it is a gravel road and they
speed. Paving it in the section where he lives will have a minimal impact on vehicular speed. It was
mentioned that the number of vehicular trips per day might be up to 500, but considering the number of
people living in the area and where the road goes, that number is way out of line. Although it was
mentioned that people were contacted about their feeling on this project, he was not contacted by any
group. It was mentioned that a meeting had been held with residents to discuss this project, but he knew
nothing about that meeting. He thinks that is why the preponderance of opinion at that meeting was in
opposition. Those in favor were not notified. He thinks the road is unsafe and maintaining it as unsafe
will not limit traffic or development. There has been a lot of development on Route 708 since he moved
to the area. The fact that it has been a gravel road until now has not stopped development.
Ms. Valerie Mathews said she lives on Blenheim Farm which is at the north end of the road.
Blenheim Road is an historic road, and is not on the Six-Year Road Plan. She use to travel south on
Blenheim Road to Jefferson Mill. The last time she went that way she found that Secretary’s Road was a
single-lane mud track with the trees on both sides of the road demolished. She spoke to an Albemarle
County policeman who said that 3000 acres of land had been bought by someone who was permitted by
VDOT to pave the road at his own expense. He said the owner was not planning to develop. She hopes
this is true, and hopes the owner will follow the example of many other landowners and place his property
under conservation easement so it will never be developed.
Mr. Scott Hendrix said he is a resident near Route 712 between the Hardware River Bridge and
Route 20. This road suffers from the same maladies as those described on Gilbert Station Road. It is a
short section of road, less than one mile. He asked that the Board look at the pavement of this road
under some program.
Mr. Tom Sullivan said he will speak for some of the people who live on the road who are in favor
of having the road improved (he asked them to stand). Mr. Dorrier said six people stood. Mr. Sullivan
said some of the others have already spoken. He said he owns about 4,000 acres with about five and
one half miles of frontage on Route 795 which is not paved. He said they have removed junk cars,
asbestos, several hundred tires, refrigerators, boilers, etc. from along that road. He knows people are
opposed to paving the road because they fear having increased traffic. He said no one has been riding
horses on that road because there is dust, blind curves, it is a disaster. He cut down trees on his property
with the exception of a mistake on Mr. Jones’ property. He said a petition was handed to the Board last
week showing that a majority of the 12+ families who actually live on this road are in favor of this paving.
In terms of those owning frontage along this road, 90 percent are in favor. He is paying for this paving;
there are no County dollars involved. Of the three major problems on the road, speeding is one even
though it is a dirt road. He spoke with the Albemarle County Police who said they will enhance patrols on
the road if requested by the citizens. They also said that if requested they can put an electronic speed
sign on the road. In terms of increased traffic, it is a guess. The minimum standard for building the road
was for 800 vtpd. That is why that number has been mentioned, but he does not see 800 residents
anywhere near the road. He thinks traffic will increase from Route 708 going into Scottsville. School bus
drivers, emergency patrol personnel and the postal worker are all in favor. In terms of development, a
year ago he engaged Williamsburg Environmental to land bank some of his property. He has spoken with
people at the Piedmont Environmental Council about putting some of it under conservation easement. A
thousand acres of his property is in the floodplain. He is not developing. It would take 50 years to “chop
up the property” and sell it. Nothing he has done with the property, including restoring the historic house
on the property (improving the Mount Ida property), has been an issue.
Mr. Dorrier asked about the one-lane bridge that is not being improved. Mr. Sullivan said that
bridge is not being touched. VDOT said there is another one-lane bridge which sees 15,000 vtpd and
they have not changed it. He has no intention of changing the bridge; it is not a money issue. It is to
restrict traffic and to restrict speed. This gravel road is a disaster. You cannot drive on it, see on it, or get
around on it.
Mr. Dale Abrahamse said there is another road in Albemarle County. He handed in a petition.
He said the residents of Rocky Hollow Road would like to petition the Board of Supervisors to adopt the
Rural Rustic Road Program. They ask that Rocky Hollow Road be designed as a Rural Rustic Road and
request that VDOT give the highest priority to the road’s improvement using the guidelines of this
program. He said the petition is signed by 31 households on that road. They believe that is about 85
percent of the people who live off of Rocky Hollow Road. The people who did not sign are not opposed,
but have not been contacted yet. A couple of them did not want to sign, but said they would not oppose
the program.
Mr. Keith Shifflett said he is in favor of paving Blenheim Road (Route 795). He lives there and
manages the farm for Mr. Sullivan. He can see both sides of the issue. He would like to have it improved
for the safety of his family. Also, in doing farm work in the area, the road is unsafe for moving equipment.
He thinks the road is in need of improvement.
Mr. Bill Puso said that last week he handed to Mr. Wyant, with copies to the other Board
members, a petition from residents who live on Allen Road (Route 666) and the feeder roads into Allen
Road. They would like to have the road considered for paving under the Rural Rustic Road Program. He
said they live with mud, potholes, and wash boarding on a daily basis. VDOT comes out at least once a
month and they view that as a waste of taxpayer’s money. Immediately after VDOT is gone, the road is
back in the same condition. Beyond paving, there is no solution to solve the problems with the road. Mr.
Wyant did tell him that Route 666 is on the Six-Year Plan under the Rural Rustic Road Program. He
pleads tonight to keep the road on the list and boost up its priority.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 13
Mr. John Coleman asked that all present who are in favor of Gilbert Station Road being paved
stand. He said many times it has been said by public officials that if there is a problem, the citizens must
stand up, come out and speak up. That is what has happened here tonight. The RRR Program makes it
fiscally feasible. The danger has been presented as clear and present. It is time, after 27 years, for the
Board to act.
Mr. Goetz Hardtmann said he has lived for ten years on Allen Road. He said they went around
the neighborhood and talked with the neighbors. They found that at least 80 percent of the neighborhood
is in favor of paving. The road is dangerous and is also affecting his house. He said the gray poison ivy
is a standard along the road. He is afraid for the children in the school buses, and afraid for the elderly
people driving the road. They ask that Allen Road be put on a high priority.
Mr. Edward Johnson said his neighborhood lies off of Routes 685 and 616 (Bunker Hill Road) in
Keswick. They have been put by the wayside for so long the neighborhood has just given up. He handed
in a petition signed by everyone living along this road. The road has been neglected for at least 21 years.
He asked that the Board support paving of this road. They were told 10 years ago that the road would be
paved, and it has not been. They need some immediate attention to this road.
Note
(: At 7:55 p.m., the Board recessed, and reconvened at 8:05 p.m.)
Mr. Dorrier called the meeting back to order. He said there have been some questions about how
the Six-Year Road Plan works. He suggested that staff give a short presentation of the plan.
Mr. Cilimberg said some of the projects mentioned tonight have been on the list for a long time.
In reality, VDOT provides $700,000+ each year for unpaved roads. Projects on the list at this time would
work their way up on the list over the next six years; three of those projects are estimated to cost more
than $1.2 million. The Rural Rustic Road Program is new. VDOT has made an initial analysis of which
roads might qualify. If the Board chooses to use the RRR program for roads on the list, more roads could
be approved to that level than could ever be improved under normal reconstruction projects.
Mr. Dorrier said another important issue for the public to understand is that the rights-of-way have
to be available along these roads. Mr. Cilimberg said if it is a full improvement project, no unpaved road
funds are used to buy rights-of-way unless the road lies in a Development Area. All of the roads
mentioned tonight on the list are in a development area. Staff is not sure about right-of-way availability on
the roads mentioned tonight. Under the RRR Program, the idea is to improve the road within its existing
alignment. Staff does not know yet if these roads actually qualify for the RRR Program. Before this plan
comes up for review in 2005, staff wants to know an answer to that question. Hopefully, it will be possible
to make one or two RRR improvements before that time so it can see how those projects transpire. The
Board has already set out a process to be used for each RRR proposal.
Mr. Dorrier then opened the floor for more public comments.
Mr. Eric Elfren said he lives on Gilbert Station Road. He said the road is dangerous and causes
school to be cancelled when it snows. He said this past weekend two thugs who had committed a crime
and were driving too fast wrecked their car on this road. They knocked on his door. He said the
government has been unresponsive in dealing with this issue. He thinks 27 years of being politely
listened to, but without actions, is enough.
Ms. S. Woodford said she lives at the intersection of Routes 795 and 53. She is not a direct
neighbor of the proposed paving area, but she is opposed to paving 795 because she thinks it will affect
the whole area and not just in this section. She said there are weekly accidents at her intersection. She
said they clean along their section of road, and also along Route 732. They do not come for favors from
the County. It is a civic duty for those who are privileged to own land. She urged the Board not to let 795
be paved.
Mr. Burt Wellons said he lives on Allen Road. He has owned property there for 30 years and has
traveled the road many times. It is not long, only about 7/10ths of a mile. He thinks it is an ideal road for
the RRR program, and he urged the Board to include it on the Six-Year Plan as early as possible. He
said Mr. Wyant saw the road recently so he can attest to its condition.
Ms. Marcia Joseph asked that the Board consider not paving Route 795. The neighbors along
that road have asked her to speak about some of the issues. She said the road plans filed last week
show existing conditions. They show 15 feet of pavement, no grades, no proposed grades, no erosion or
sediment control plans. They do not know what kind of road is proposed. They did see a section
showing 18 feet of pavement, two feet of shoulder and a three-foot ditch. They do not know if that can fit
within a 30-foot prescriptive easement. She said the prescriptive easement is owned by VDOT. No one
along that road owns the easement, it is prescriptive to all those living in the Commonwealth. She said
the neighbors have been working hard trying to find alternate methods to pave the road so it would look
like a dirt road. They are not engineers and they do not have the information yet. They are trying to
make this road into something that is passable now. That is difficult. She said Mr. Sullivan has talked
about hiring police, but there have been three owners of his property in the last five years. Saying he will
hire police would not be in perpetuity, but the road once it is paved will be there for a long time. She said
3.7 miles of road are proposed to be improved, but coming from the entrance to Mount Pleasant would
require one to travel an eighth of a mile before getting to paving. There is also an alternate exit from
Mount Pleasant that goes directly onto a paved road. She asked that these aspects of the project be
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 14
considered and that the Board wait until all members are present before making a decision on this
project.
Mr. Benjamin Ford said he is a resident of the City but is here tonight representing Preservation
Piedmont which is a local preservation organization. He opposes the paving of Route 795 and opposes
any effort to remove VDOT from the process. He said if VDOT is removed from this project, it will remove
an important and valuable level of regulatory review and compliance. Prior to initiation of any work VDOT
is required to make an assessment of the impact of the work, and in some cases recommends conducting
architectural and archaeological surveys in the area of the impact. There is a slave burial ground within
the right-of-way Mr. Sullivan has already impacted. In a county without a historic preservation ordinance,
it is imperative to allow the regular process of assessment and analysis of cultural resources to take place
prior to any construction and development. He does not think Mr. Sullivan has made a contribution to the
County, but has bypassed a standard procedure for upgrading and improving roads. In doing so he has
deprived the citizens of the County from their preservation due process. He does not think Mr. Sullivan
should be allowed to continue. If paving of Route 795 does happen in the future, it should happen
through VDOT.
Mr. Mike Farish said he has lived on Route 795 for 15 years. In that period of time he has seen
several accidents. He was in two major accidents himself. At the time, he was not moving, but was
sitting still because there was no place to move over. He manages Nutmeg Farm. Occasionally, they
borrow equipment from each other and there is no way to move big equipment up and down the road. He
is in favor of the paving of Route 795.
Ms. Khristina Hammill said a few points have been misrepresented about Route 795. She was
told by a representative from the County that the traffic count of 40 cars a day was from a 1996 VDOT
survey. She lives at the intersection and does not think that is accurate. She does not think VDOT has
been removed from this process, other than for the money. Regardless of whether the Board allows this
road to be paved, if Mr. Sullivan chose to subdivide the property and create a subdivision, he would be
allowed to do that whether he paid for a paved road or not.
Mr. George Hammill said he retired from VDOT after working there for 30 years. He has worked
on 795 and seen numerous accidents. He has seen snow drifts so deep heavy equipment was needed to
get them out of the road. He has seen the bridge wash out several times. Two weeks ago, they got half
way up the hill and had to turn around and go back to Carter’s Bridge to get back to Route 713. He said
Mr. Sullivan cleaned up the trash and had it piled up at the foot of the hill at his gate. He came by and
thought Albemarle County had opened a recycling center there; that was how much trash had been
cleaned up. Around near the hunt club there were cars which had been pushed off the road and left. As
to the count of 40 cars per day, during hunting season there are more cars than that using the road each
day. He said the residents may never get the chance to see such an improvement again in their lifetime.
Mr. Pat Recusky said he currently lives on the Mount Pleasant Farm; he has lived there for one
and a half years. He said people have talked about riding horses and bicycles and walking their children
on Route 795. He has seen none of that in the time he has lived here. The road is a death trap. No one
is insane enough to try and walk the road, or ride a horse there. The road washes out with water running
over the road every time it rains. The water lifts up the pavement and takes it away from the bridge.
VDOT has to repair it. When there is snow, VDOT does nothing. There are at least 60 or 70 cars each
day riding up and down that road. He is working on a farm right across the street, the lower Sherwood
Farm, and traffic is constant through there. He said this would definitely be an improvement to safety.
There is no way to pass another car without going into the ditch or pulling off to the side of the road. He
is scared to drive the road, and takes the paved road exits out.
Mr. Tray Castle said he lives in the Ashley development at Gilbert Station. He handed to the
Board some newspapers showing a rural rustic road project in another locality. He also had pictures of
Route 640 in the wintertime. He said his wife just had a vehicle accident on this road and he left pictures
of the damaged vehicle. He said no one was hurt. To him, it all comes down to safety. He has one child
at Stony Point Elementary now and another child in day care. He has heard that one of the school buses
travels along Doctors Crossing and turns around and goes back. He recently checked on the car seatbelt
law which says that in a car children must be in a seatbelt up to the age of six, but on a school bus they
have no safety belt. That concerns him because of the safety of these two roads. At the least, he asked
that the portions of Doctors Crossing and Gilbert Station used by three school buses, be paved.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was closed and the matter
placed before the Board.
Mr. Dorrier asked if a person wants to pave a road and pay for it, what standards are used. Does
VDOT work it out with the person? Is this the only chance that the public has for input? What does the
Code say about pavement of a road by a private individual?
Mr. Davis said the Attorney General’s Office gave an opinion to VDOT in which they said that if
the road is not funded using public funds, it is a VDOT decision as to whether or not that road is improved
and it does not require a public hearing for inclusion on a six-year plan. The road would still be
considered a VDOT project and would have to meet all construction requirements like any other VDOT
road. It would be reviewed by VDOT, plans would have to be approved, a permit would have to be issued
by VDOT, VDOT would inspect the construction to be sure the road met VDOT construction standards
just as if it were a publicly-funded road. There is no shortening of the criteria or the review process. It is
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 15
simply a matter in which VDOT makes a judgment as to whether or not they would allow the project given
the same criteria as if public funds were being used.
Mr. Dorrier asked if it would be analogous to a developer having to put in VDOT standard roads in
his development. Mr. Davis said it would be similar to that. If someone were building and dedicating a
new road, they would construct the road and VDOT would accept it after review and approval of plans.
Mr. Dorrier said there is no public oversight and no public input in the process except through a
hearing such as this. Mr. Davis said that usually when existing roads are upgraded, they have to be
included on a Six-Year Plan. The process gives the public an opportunity to comment because it is a
hearing on prioritizing the expenditure of public funds. He assumes the Attorney General’s position is that
if public funds are not being expended and it does not require inclusion on a Six-Year Plan, the public is
taken out of the process as far as the six-year plan is concerned. It would be up to VDOT as to whether
they wanted a public process. He said the Resident Engineer was evidently interested in that, and this
Board in conjunction with his recommendation included this project in the hearing on the Six-Year Plan,
even though it is not required to be included in order to give the public a voice in this matter.
Mr. Dorrier said he wanted to clear up that one point. This Board has roads to deal with that are
in the Six-Year Plan, and this road is not a part of that plan. The Board can have some say about what
occurs there. He believes all the Board members have looked at the situation. He has driven Route 795.
His great-grandfather lived and died on Mount Pleasant. He was pulled to death by a horse on the very
stretch of road being talked about tonight. It has been a safety concern for a long time. He asked the
Board members for comments on the Six-Year Plan.
Mr. Boyd said he would like to speak about Gilbert Station and Doctor’s Crossing, both of which
are in the Rivanna District. What was heard tonight is an extension of what he has been hearing since he
decided to run for office on the Board of Supervisors. There was no need for the history of these roads to
be presented because some of these people have been waiting for 27 years. He said that Item 16 in the
VDOT Secondary Road Plan shows a section of Gilbert Station Road which was actually designated to
be paved this year at a cost of $380,000. He understands that someone building a development at the
end of that road has already paved that road. To him, that frees up the money earmarked for the current
year. He proposed that the $380,000 be used for the remainder of Gilbert Station Road as the Board’s
target case for a RRR project. He asked that the Board move the project forward so it can be done this
year assuming that amount of money would cover the cost of a RRR project.
Ms. Thomas said she had been wondering about the status of that money. Mr. Cilimberg said the
money will not be spent on Gilbert Station Road. The $380,000 would be moved to the next eligible
project on the list. The Board must decide on the next eligible project. In this case, the next project on
the list (not scheduled to be under construction until 2007) is Heards Mountain Road. If Heards Mountain
Road became eligible to be paved as an unpaved road project, the moneys would go there and the rest of
the money would keep moving down the list for other projects.
Ms. Thomas said she thinks Heards Mountain Road used to be designated from the Nelson
County line to the village of Heards. That $380,000 will not pave the entire length of that road. She
thinks there is some error in the designation of that road because it is a very short piece of road from
Heards to the Nelson County line and was a request by Nelson County’s fire/rescue services. She asked
that staff look into this question and suggested it qualify to be a RRR project. She asked if staff has some
explanation for how a road can be on a list for 27 years and still be such a low priority on the list.
Mr. Cilimberg said this has been a long list for as long as he has worked for the County, nearly 18
years. Projects have been moving up the list slowly. He said it is a function of two things. One is the
availability of money from VDOT which has consistently been near $700,000 each year, and two is the
cost of the unpaved road project. Another thing holding back some road projects is not having the full
right-of-way. Under the new RRR Program, that right-of-way may not be necessary and that will change
the dynamics.
Mr. Tucker said all of the roads listed through the year 2010, where there are estimated costs
shown, are full improvement projects, not RRR projects. He thinks the County should request that VDOT
look at these roads to see what the new cost would be if the road were eligible for improvement as a rural
rustic road. Staff does not know at this time how many of these projects could move forward if they are
eligible.
Mr. Boyd said he does not have the historic perspective of Ms. Thomas or Mr. Tucker but returns
to the idea that Gilbert Station has been on the plan for 27 years. That should count for something,
particularly given the fact that this money was dedicated to Gilbert Station Road anyway. He knows
Doctors Crossing is listed for 2010, but maybe if money can be freed up through the RRR Program, it will
free up money to move up some of those projects. He is in favor of doing whatever is needed to put the
RRR Program on a fast track.
Mr. Wyant said the RRR Program is new. It will probably be only one-half the cost of road
projects done in the past. He has ridden over a lot of the roads on the list. His question is how to move
the projects forward and improve more roads in the County. Mr. Cilimberg said the key from a money
standpoint is to qualify as many roads as possible for the RRR Program.
Ms. Thomas said one person mentioned Route 712 (Coles Crossing) which is one of the roads
mentioned that does not qualify for the Rural Rustic Road Program because it would become a popular
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 16
cut-through for getting to Route 29. She asked staff to remind the Board about the resolution it adopted
to have the RRR Program looked at, and to have at least one road done as a RRR road.
Mr. Juandiego Wade, Transportation Planner, said staff intends to undertake the whole process
of the rural rustic road adopted by the Board last year. Staff will go through the process and bring one
project to the Board. The next project on the list is either Heards Mountain Road or Beam Road. Staff
will work with VDOT to see if either of these roads meets necessary criteria. Hopefully in December of
this year staff will bring back the whole process and give an evaluation of the process so the Board can
determine if it wants to support the program. If the Board likes the process staff can create two lists; a
rural rustic road list and a regular road paving list. VDOT will probably be able to bundle three or four of
the RRR projects into one contract. He said there is a big difference in costs for the RRR projects
because those projects will be simply for paving, the project will not take care of drainage issues, etc.
That is one of the reasons why they want people to be familiar with the criteria for the RRR road. If the
traffic count on a road is low and meets the criteria but VDOT determines that the road improvement will
introduce a lot of new traffic, they will say the road is not eligible. That is one reason why staff will work
with VDOT during this year on one project to be returned to the Board for discussion, and then take
directions from the Board at that point.
Mr. Cilimberg said if the Board follows the priority list as presented tonight, staff would just go to
the next project.
Mr. Boyd said he is having trouble with the process. If Heards Mountain is on this list ahead of
Gilbert Station because it has been on there for 30 years he can understand that, but he does not
understand why it is put ahead of that project now. A great deal of people came tonight to demonstrate
the need and the safety issue so how does he get Gilbert Station moved up on the list?
Mr. Wyant said he has a bigger problem. Looking at the traffic count on these roads, it is about
50 versus 200. He asked which road (Beam Road or Rocky Hollow Road) is unpaved. Mr. Cilimberg
said they both have unpaved sections. Mr. Wyant said if the dollars can be stretched to provide better
service to the citizens, he would like to see some of these projects moved forward as rural rustic road
projects.
Mr. Bowerman said the people who came tonight are speaking about the roads which have been
on the list the longest. When one rural rustic road project is completed, that will give an idea of how much
these projects will cost. Then, the Board can decide on priorities.
Mr. Boyd said he needs to know why the road has been on the list so long.
Mr. Bowerman said the Board has not approved projects that did not have sufficient right-of-way.
For the roads on this list, staff has talked with every owner on that road and gotten one hundred percent
dedication of the right-of-way. That is why the roads are at the top of the list. One of the primary ways to
move up on the list was to have dedication of right-of-way without a take. VDOT will not spend money for
purchase of right-of-way.
Mr. Wyant said he thinks VDOT would like to do some of these road projects because
maintenance of these roads is difficult. Roads are in worse shape than he can remember in his 30+
years of working for VDOT.
Ms. Thomas said on the list provided to the Board, Route 640 does not have the necessary right-
of-way available. If it is a rural rustic road project, that probably will not matter. Someone from the
audience suggested that the right-of-way is available. She suggested that anyone who lives on the road
check with staff to determine if right-of-way is available.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the Board is going to approve the Secondary Six-Year Plan tonight with
sequencing of some parts of that plan. He thinks the Board needs to decide if it is going to move any of
these road projects around.
Mr. Boyd said he would like to move Gilbert Station up on the list. Mr. Cilimberg said there are
two sections to that road which are on the list totaling about five miles.
Mr. Dorrier said he thinks Gilbert Station needs to be higher on the list in order to get something
done to it. He mentioned the Southern Parkway and said that residents of Mill Creek and Foxcroft and
Lake Reynovia are concerned about it. There is no money allocated for that project at this time. It is
listed in the Six-Year Plan as No. 10 with no money for construction.
Mr. Wade said staff has been working with VDOT trying to obtain full secondary funding for that
road. Up until last year VDOT said it was not eligible for funding. They have now said it is eligible for
revenue sharing funds which fund about one-half, but staff has not received anything in writing. He does
not think it will be eligible for secondary funds.
Mr. Dorrier said that in effect nothing will be done about that road. Mr. Wade said that nothing will
be done until there is full funding. Mr. Dorrier said that for the residents of Mill Creek that means there will
be no improvements made in the immediate future.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 17
Mr. Cilimberg said it is being reviewed in a couple of venues. One, it is part of the urban area
study taking place with the University and the City in the southwestern urban area of the City and County.
It is called the Southern Area B Study. Secondly, it is a project which would ultimately be recommended
by the MPO and CHART. Any decision regarding the Southern Parkway which is now in the County’s
Comprehensive Plan, would require an amendment to be removed. There is no way to know when this
road might be built.
Ms. Thomas said this is one of the roads where a sign was put up so people would know it would
be a continuous road. People would then know when moving into the area what is expected in the way of
a safe network of streets. She does not want to say there will not be a Southern Parkway because it is an
important part of providing a network of roads.
Mr. Boyd said being new on the Board he does not understand exactly how things like the MPO
and CHART interact with the County’s plans. To what extent do the regional roads which are not on the
Six-Year Plan compete with dollars for things like paving Gilbert Station Road? Mr. Cilimberg said they
do not compete with each other. There are separate funds for unpaved road projects.
Ms. Thomas said that is why the list only goes to Project No. 11 with a dollar amount, and then
suddenly there is a big gap which goes from No. 11 to No. 70 before there are any more dollar figures.
That is an indication of a separate pot of money. The County is required by VDOT to spend a certain
amount on unpaved roads each year, but some projects are so big that they take a couple of year’s worth
of money.
Mr. Tucker said the Board has a couple of alternatives. One would be to either move the roads
around on the list now or the Board can wait until it gets information back from staff before setting any
priorities.
Mr. Cilimberg said there will be one rural rustic road project done this year, and it will be the next
project on the list that qualifies as a rural rustic road. There is not enough money beyond that for the first
project since most of the money is not available to these projects until 2007. At this point, that next
project would be Heards Mountain if it qualifies. If it does not qualify, the next project would be Beam
Road, then Woods Edge Road and then Doctors Crossing.
Mr. Boyd said he is at a disadvantage because he would obviously like to have the road talked
about so much this evening moved up on the list. He does not know why the other road is higher on the
list.
Ms. Thomas said when a road project gets close to the top of the list people have a tendency not
to attend a public hearing because they are confident their road will be paved.
Mr. Boyd said he would like to know if the other Board members, based on what they heard
tonight, would be in favor of moving Gilbert Station up to be the first rustic road test case.
Ms. Thomas said the Board also heard about Allen Road, which would be skipped over, and
Rocky Hollow Road, which would be skipped over.
Mr. Wyant said Doctors Crossing received comments from the most people tonight.
Mr. Bowerman said there would need to be representatives of other roads present before making
such a decision.
Mr. Wyant asked when the Board gets a chance to “bump” other projects ahead.
Mr. Bowerman said he would like to have Mr. Rooker present before the Board makes a move on
this.
Ms. Thomas said this list is based on well-accepted policy. Staff goes through a process to
evaluate the requests, and as far as she knows, the Board has never totally run roughshod over that
process and taken a road and put it ahead of others. She thinks it is fair to ask staff why Heards
Mountain Road was put at the top of the list. This road is in her district, and she thinks it is designated
incorrectly on the list. She does not think it is the entire Heards Mountain Road that is being suggested
for improvement. She thinks the section from Heards to the Nelson County line is needed because there
is no other way to get emergency vehicles to Heards.
Mr. Tucker said staff will provide that information for the Board. The Board can also talk to Mr.
Jim Bryan about what can be done to move the rural rustic road design forward.
Mr. Wyant said as much as the Board wants the rural rustic road program, he has talked with Mr.
Bryan who said that not a lot of these roads will qualify because of right-of-way steepness or slope. A
fairly flat road will take the 30 feet with a one-foot ditch on the side. If right-of-way is needed, that might
help the Board decide which road can be put into the RRR program. If not in the program, the road has
to be on the Secondary Roads list as it always has been up until this RRR program came into being.
Mr. Boyd said he would like staff to give some historical reasoning as to why roads are on the list
as they are.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 18
Ms. Thomas said Route 795 appears high on the list, but it is an intersection near Route 790
which is in the town of Scottsville.
Mr. Bowerman said there have been an equal number of people who want the road paved, as
those who do not want it paved.
Mr. Dorrier said the road in the plan is a different project. He thinks the Board needs to give an
opinion on the project. He drove the road and there are a couple of issues that need to be addressed.
One is the one-lane bridge that will not be improved and it will be a bottleneck. What will happen to that
bridge when the road gets paved? He thinks it needs to be looked at as a safety issue. He said the
larger right-of-way issue deals with the width of the road. That is also part of the issue. In addition, there
are issues dealing with the nature of the road. There are some major safety concerns, and he is not sure
VDOT has dealt with all of those concerns. The landowner is doing the work under VDOT supervision,
but VDOT is not involved with him on the scene. He asked if that is true. Mr. Cilimberg said he is not
sure whether VDOT has done any inspection yet. He knows the County’s inspection occurred after the
fact.
Mr. Dorrier asked how the road can be built to state standards if it is not inspected on a regular
basis. Mr. Cilimberg said there have never been any plans submitted for that road. He does not think
VDOT is looking at it as a project.
Mr. Dorrier said there is a gentleman who wants to spend $1.0 million to improve it for safety
concerns. The neighborhood seems to be split over the paving issue. Safety concerns will continue
whether or not the road is paved. He does not think anyone knows what the increase in traffic will be. He
agrees with the statement that most of the traffic will probably be from the intersection of Route 708 down
to Scottsville.
Mr. Bowerman said people should be aware that it is not going to be blacktopped, but will have
prime and double seal. It is a different type of paving.
Ms. Thomas said Mr. Bryan had mentioned to her that Wyant Lane was a good place to see what
the surface will look like. She did that and checked with people who live along that road. She said this
hearing has gone on for so long that many may not remember what Peter Kleeman said in the beginning.
She thought he came up with something that is about as close to a compromise as the Board can get.
VDOT said this road did not qualify for the RRR program because it will attract new motorists who are not
familiar with the road. She said VDOT is agreeing that it will be an attractive road for people to travel on.
They also said it would be difficult to improve within the existing prescriptive easement. The Board has
heard that some people are not willing to give more easements. She thinks engineering the road will be
difficult. What Mr. Kleeman suggested is that there not be a final decision about what surface should be
put on the road until after VDOT in Loudoun County has finished with their study of the best kind of road
stabilizers. They have been interested for years in to the types of road surfaces that would not make a
road an attractive nuisance, but stabilize the surface so a road does not require constant maintenance.
The study is to be completed this summer. She thinks paving the road, even with a surface like Wyant
Lane has, will have consequences that hardly anyone will like. She said Wyant Lane has people going
off in the ditches because they are driving too fast and it is a dead-end road. She thinks Route 795 will
attract more traffic. What the Board is talking about is the image of what the rural areas should be like.
“Prettyfing” the rural area is almost every first person’s thought of what they can do, but for some reason
people do not like to live along those roads after a while. They leave Fairfax County where all the roads
are quite pretty. They say they could not wait to get someplace else. At our peril, we prettify the rural
areas. She thinks more study is needed to see how this road can be put back together so it ends up
being the kind of road that gets a consensus among the neighbors. She would suggest that there not be
a permit for the paving of the road until the studies can be completed to see what the best kind of surface
should be.
Mr. Dorrier said he would like for staff to look at the issue about the slave cemetery. He thinks
that needs to be protected and it should be a part of the planning. He agrees with Ms. Thomas’ comment
about needing more study. There are many people against the project. He does think Mr. Sullivan wants
to do right by the road. He thinks the Board might look into it further.
Mr. Wyant said he heard that when any road is paved it has to connect into an existing paved
road. Someone mentioned that there is a small section at the northern end that is not connected to
Mount Pleasant Farm. If they had to acquire right-of-way there, they might not be able to tie back into
that paved section. He thinks the Board needs to find out about that. He also feels the process has been
in reverse and needs to be done right. He said the other road has been torn up and it needs to be fixed,
but there are no plans that completely cover everything. One of the first things required on a project is
erosion control. That needs to be taken care of right now. As far as surfacing, summer is the only time
that can be done. There is a lot of other work they could be doing to get things correct. First, plans are
needed. The only thing he saw that he liked on the last set of plans passed around at a Board meeting
was that they are putting down eight inches of stone. For the County to have a road that does not require
maintenance over the years, it requires a decent base. Many different things can be done to the top
surface to cut down on dust. By the time summer comes, the study by the Highway Research Council will
be completed, and the Board will know what kind of surface is desired. He does not think the right-of-way
will be available in all sections, and the road is fairly steep on the south end near Scottsville, so the road
cannot be improved in that area. As for the bridge, it works as sort of a traffic calming thing. It can
handle the width of the vehicles and the weight of the vehicles. He thinks most of the traffic will be going
toward Scottsville. Ten vehicle trips per day is the national average for traffic from a home. Multiple ten
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 19
times the number of houses on the road and that will give the expected traffic count. The road was
designed for 800 vehicles a day and that is how the eight inches of stone came about, but there are not
going to be 800 vehicles on that road.
Mr. Boyd said he agrees with everything that has been said. He might have a different approach
to what should be done. He, personally, thinks that the Board should “get its thumb out of the pie.”
Mr. Bowerman said this is the first time the Board has been faced with a situation like this one.
Mr. Boyd said the Board was told by VDOT that this matter does not fall within the Supervisor’s
jurisdiction because it is not using approved dollars. If the project were turned over to Mr. Sullivan and
VDOT and they could work out the details, the Board need not continue to stay in this effort.
Mr. Bowerman said Mr. Bryan said that if this Board is against the project, he will not approve it.
All the Board needs to do is decide one way or the other, and he will follow that decision. The Board can
make that decision tonight or wait for Mr. Rooker.
Mr. Boyd said he did not hear Mr. Bryan say that.
Mr. Bowerman said Mr. Bryan stood right there and said he will listen to what the Board says.
Ms. Thomas said Mr. Bryan had said he did not have to listen, but he could.
Mr. Boyd said he thinks the Board should go ahead and make a decision. If this is just held in
suspense, nobody gains anything. Since the Board has no jurisdiction in this, he thinks it should be
turned over to VDOT and the citizens and let them work it out.
Mr. Wyant said for the people who came tonight to speak, he thinks VDOT should be provided
with their comments about the road. He is bothered that Mr. Davis said VDOT does not have to hold a
public hearing on this road like they do for other projects.
Ms. Thomas said a lot of work will have to be done to lay down the base for this road no matter
what happens. As to exactly what surface treatment is going to be put on it, she thinks the Board could
tell VDOT to hold off on that decision until the results of that Highway Research study is completed.
Mr. Boyd said he has no problem doing that, but he does think the Board should require that it
come back to it for some sort of formal approval. He thinks the Board might be able to recommend and
suggest certain things and insist that VDOT look at other surfaces, and hold a public hearing, etc. Then,
he thinks the Board should back off.
Mr. Bowerman said if it is left to VDOT they would do it because they have a willing person to
pay.
Mr. Boyd said if Mr. Bowerman is ready to vote on whether to do the project or not, he is ready to
vote. But that is not what Mr. Bowerman is saying. He is saying the Board is going to be an overseeing
group that may or may not jump in. It may have something to say about it. He does not see why the
Board should be involved.
Mr. Dorrier said the problem is that VDOT does not monitor the road now. Anybody who drives
that road can see there are problems with it. He is not sure VDOT administration knows what is going on
out there. He thinks the Board needs to allow some time to get the road back into some semblance of
shape. The type of surface will not be decided tonight or this month. He agrees with Mr. Boyd that the
County did not make this mess. He thinks the citizens have the right to some support to get it in shape.
That is what he would like to see. The Board can’t just “wipe its hands” when 30+ people come to speak
about the road.
Ms. Thomas said she thinks the reason the Board “has a horse in this race” is something all have
had experience with. A zoning decision has been made because the applicant is a really nice person.
Then, a few months later he has sold the property. There is still some property on the corner near
Albemarle High School that the Board rezoned because of the really nice person who owned that
property. She said the Board has learned not to depend on personalities. It is the Board’s responsibility
to make a decision based on its policies and not to get carried away by a promise from a person who
sincerely wants to put a lot of money into something. The Board should not “wash its hands” of what
would otherwise be a long public process. She thinks the Board has a role to play in this decision. That
role can be to tell VDOT to listen to the public. She would be more comfortable if this came back to the
Board at some point.
Mr. Boyd said he wants to be sure the press understands that “washing our hands of it” is Ms.
Thomas’ term and not his. That is not what he was talking about. He just thinks that the Board has to
come to some finality. In his very brief experience in government, he has observed that there is more
interest in activity than accomplishment. He just wants to bring this to some sort of finality so everyone is
not “sitting on the fence” wondering what will happen. He said Ms. Thomas is proposing that the Board
tell VDOT to hold off on this project until we or they can study it more. He asked why the Board feels they
cannot trust VDOT, cannot trust Mr. Sullivan, cannot trust the citizens, and cannot make a decision on it.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 20
Mr. Wyant said something has to be done about this road. When he rode through it he was
concerned about the erosion and the runoff. VDOT or somebody has to give them directions. They need
to get something done immediately. What VDOT does on this type of road is check to be sure that the
contractor on the job is putting down eight inches of stone. VDOT does not have inspectors on every job
today. They had to cut back years ago.
Mr. Dorrier asked Mr. Wyant if he thought the County should coordinate this with VDOT and ask
them for a report next month.
Mr. Wyant said he would like to get on top of the process and make sure there are plans so you
will know what they are going to put out there. A cross-section showing eight inches of stone is not
sufficient. He looked at the plans passed around last week. There is a need to know the grades and the
alignment of the road. Somebody needs to stake it so the person building the road will know where to put
it. He would like to follow up on this because the citizens need to know that the Board has an interest in
it, not that the County is going to run the project.
Mr. Davis said outside of the prescriptive easement, a Stop Work Order was issued and a
corrective order issued. The County has an expectation that there will be some immediate remediation
done outside of the right-of-way. Inside of the right-of-way is VDOT’s responsibility. Staff expects VDOT
to take immediate steps toward correcting the erosion problem created within the prescriptive easement.
Probably, they will need an idea of how it will be done efficiently. Otherwise they may have to do
additional work. He thinks VDOT will probably take that into account when they make decisions over the
next several weeks as to how they will remediate what has already been done. That is one reason VDOT
will be looking for directions.
Mr. Wyant said Mr. Davis is saying that Mr. Sullivan has got to straighten out erosion control with
VDOT and also with the County because they disturbed over the 10,000 square foot limit. He has to deal
with two government agencies.
Mr. Dorrier asked what the staff wanted the Board to do tonight. Mr. Tucker said if the Board is
not ready to take action on Route 795 it should defer this and get more information from Mr. Bryan so he
can answer any questions proposed today. He said staff cannot answer a lot of the questions without
VDOT being present. Staff will have information on all the questions about the Six-Year Plan for the
Board’s meeting on March 3.
Ms. Thomas said the Board needs to assure the public that it is moving ahead with consideration
of the rural rustic road program. It will not be in the next six months, but will be done sometime in the
next year. After doing one project, the Board will have the necessary information on which to base
dividing the roads list into two sections. The Board focused so much attention on those roads tonight that
it did not focus at all on the roads in the designated development areas. She will point out that there are
some decisions to be made on some of those projects. The Northern Free State Road (No. 7) has been
discussed a lot by the MPO. It is of concern to people in the City. She is happy and thinks the MPO is
happy with the way the project is worded on this list.
Mr. Boyd said the name of the project was just changed. He said Mr. Bowerman had said he
would be happy to see that project dropped out of the plan. It is not staff’s recommendation to do that.
Ms. Thomas said the MPO is proposing that it be studied in connection with the proposed Eastern
Connector road.
Mr. Boyd asked if funds had been allocated to study an Eastern Connector road. Who approved
that?
Ms. Thomas said that is why she wanted everyone to look at the small print. It is No. 7 under
VDOT’s Secondary Road Plan. The estimated cost is over $4.0 million but that is not for the study. The
proposal is that the Northern Free State Road and the Eastern Connector be studied because they do
form alternatives to existing roads that are some of the most congested in the County and in the City.
Mr. Boyd said he is not prepared to allocate any funds to that if that is what Ms. Thomas is asking
the Board to do.
Ms. Thomas said “no,” that is why it is to be studied. She said the MPO has been hearing from a
lot of Mr. Boyd’s constituents because people are concerned about an Eastern Connector and where it
might go. It was studied some ten years ago and there did not seem to be a place for it because it either
went through subdivisions or parks.
Mr. Boyd said that has not changed.
Ms. Thomas said it would still go through parks, so they are trying to find a different alignment.
There was a suggestion from a citizen to double-deck Free Bridge so things could be carried that way.
She just wanted everyone to notice the small print. She does think staff has done a good job of working
with their counterparts in the City in getting some wording the MPO can agree with.
Mr. Boyd said someone needs to tell him how all the parts (CHART, MPO, the County’s Six-Year
Plan, VDOT, the State, and everybody who wants to design and build roads in Albemarle County), fit
together.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 21
Mr. Dorrier asked for a motion.
Motion
was then offered by Mr. Bowerman to defer taking any action on the Six-Year Secondary
seconded
Road Plan and defer any consideration of Route 795 tonight. The motion was by Mr. Boyd.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Boyd, Mr. Dorrier, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Wyant and Mr. Bowerman.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Rooker.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 8. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Ms. Thomas said she would like to speak about the Nextel Tower request (SP-2003-07, Gregory
R. Gallihugh-Nextel Partners) listed on the consent agenda with a request that the public hearing be
deferred a month. She said there was a conservation easement on the property that appeared to be the
better site on the Verulum Farm. Staff and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended
approval of the tower on the Verulum property. The question was whether a second tower could be
placed on that property. She said the landowner has said he always planned to put two towers on that
property. The Nature Conservancy did not write the easement that way. They will have to change the
easement and that is difficult for them. They need some assurance that the Board of Supervisors
believes it is an approvable site. The only thing the Board could base that on is that it did approve a
tower on that property just last week. The Planning Commission turned down the tower on the “bad” site.
The Nature Conservancy would like some assurance from the Board that this meets the public’s wishes to
have the tower on the Verulum site. She did not know if the other Board members would feel comfortable
doing that. She can make that kind of statement because she has dealt with the neighbors and knows
their concerns about the site that was turned down. No one has commented about the Verulum site. She
can say that as the person from the Samuel Miller District.
Mr. Boyd asked if all parties feel okay about this.
Ms. Thomas said “yes.” They are working hard for this approval. If others will join her in this, she
would move that the Board pass a resolution saying that based on what the Board knows at this point, the
Verulum site is the preferable site. That would help them in changing the conservation easement.
Mr. Boyd asked if there can just be a consensus among the members on this.
Ms. Thomas said she does not believe there is any legal requirement. They would just like to
have some assurance from the Board that it will not vote down the Verulum after they have done all that
work.
Mr. Dorrier said he can agree.
Ms. Thomas asked Mr. Davis his opinion.
Mr. Davis said it might be better to just write a letter on behalf of the Board saying the Board has
reviewed the site, and Ms. Thomas can use her words to express their state of thought.
__________
Mr. Bowerman said he thinks the County’s newly designed website is great, and it really is user
friendly. It has real information that is timely. He no longer needs staff reports because they are on the
website along with graphs, charts, etc.
Ms. Thomas said it has been set up so citizens can send all Board members e-mail messages
with just one punch of a key.
__________
Mr. Boyd said it was mentioned at an earlier meeting that there are plans for a joint session
between the Board and City Council. With all the transportation and water issues, he wondered what
could be done to expedite the meeting. Mr. Tucker said there is not a meeting scheduled at this time.
Mr. Dorrier said it would probably be better to wait until after Council elections are over in May.
He said the County does need a better dialogue with the City.
Ms. Thomas said concerning transportation issues the Board does have a good dialogue, but it
includes only two members of this Board and two members of Council, plus staff of the MPO. From time
to time, the City has wanted to go around that process. That makes them a little leery of giving them too
big of a platform for going around that process. CHART used to be called CATS but the name of CATS
was changed because CATS got a bad name in the City. Some politicians thought it was not responsive
enough, so its name was changed in an attempt to keep the City in the process. Then a new director
came in and he thought of the clever name UN-JAM. The CHART is about to be adopted and that might
be a basis for having a joint meeting.
Mr. Tucker suggested it be reviewed by the full Board before meeting with City Council. Ms.
Thomas agreed.
February 11, 2004 (Regular Night Meeting)
)
(Page 22
Mr. Boyd asked if the CHART Plan is about to be adopted. Ms. Thomas said that by Federal law
there has to be a plan that looks 20 years into the future and the MPO is about to adopt CHART 20-25.
Mr. Boyd asked if it would be a good idea to plan a meeting in the future with City Council and
talk about issues.
Ms. Thomas said it might be better to do so after the elections.
Mr. Dorrier suggested discussing this again when Mr. Rooker is in attendance.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 9. Adjourn.
At 9:45 p.m., with no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
________________________________________
Chairman
Approved by the
Board of County
Supervisors
Date: 03/02/2005
Initials: DBM