1997-01-15January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 1)
00007;
A regUlar meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on January 15, 1997, at 7:00 p.m., Room 241, County Office
Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr.,
Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Mrs. Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County
Attorney, Larry W. Davis, and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at
7:00 p.m. by Mr. Marshall, Vice-Chairman.
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
PI/BLIC. There were none.
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda.
Regarding Item 5.5, Mr. Bowerman inquired as to the status of the
Branchlands Detention Basin extension.
Ms. Jo Higgins, County Engineer, responded that it has been a couple of
years since this topic was brought before this Board. The staff has worked
out the improvement to be completed by the developer upstream before the
signing of the plat is authorized which splits the basin parcel into two
pieces. She explained that one will be filled and developed and the other
will be borrowed by the County. At this point, the work is 95 percent
finished, and the remainder of the work will have to be bonded. This matter
will be brought back to the staff within the next couple of months. She noted
that Jack Kelsey, of the Engineering staff, has worked with the developer
along each stage of the project, and he is very familiar with it. She said a
sewer line had to be dropped in front of the church where the church road
culvert is located. This will actually be constructed before the County staff
releases the other portion of the basin.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the Supervisors will have information on this
project within the next couple of months. Ms. Higgins answered affirmatively.
She said, though, it depends on the weather and the completion of the work.
Mr. Bowerman next referred to Item 5.10 and said he would like to make
an appointment to this Committee, and he wondered when would be the appropri-
ate time. Mr. Tucker asked if Mr. Bowerman is prepared to make the appoint-
ment this evening. Mr. Bowerman responded affirmatively. He would make a
motion to appoint Sherry Buttrick to the Development Area Initiatives Steering
Committee at the appropriate time.
Mrs. Thomas referred to Consent Agenda 5.3 relating to maintenance of
the court house cannons. She said she understands the logic of replacing the
cannon carriages with aluminum, and even though this is the way it is done in
Williamsburg, she anticipates some people saying it doesn't seem quite right.
She asked if someone would check with the Historical Society to see if there
are people who feel strongly enough about this project to want to contribute
some of the money.
Mr. Tucker stated that this was a maintenance decision in hopes to avoid
further maintenance by replacing the cannon carriages with an aluminum
material. He said it has already had to be done two or three times since he
has been associated with the County.
Mrs. Thomas commented that she understands the difference between
$19,000 for one time and $7,000 for five or six times, but she thinks it would
be good to check with the Historical Society. She said perhaps Ms. Higgins
has already done that.
(Page 2)
Ms. Higgins responded that Joe Litteri has been in contact with a lady
associated with the Historical Society, but she did not bring her name to the
meeting. She said he actually has this person's support, but the staff will
get confirmation of this, if Mrs. Thomas so desires.
Mr. Tucker stated that Mrs. Thomas is wondering if anyone is interested
in putting up additional funds to replace the wheels with wooden spokes rather
than aluminum. Ms. Higgins said the Historical Society is in agreement to use
aluminum for the carriages. She commented that now the cannons are braced,
and people like to get on them for pictures. She noted that some of the
research information has come from the Historical Society.
Mrs. Thomas stated that she would feel more comfortable if someone
checked with the President of the Historical Society so it will be official,
and agreement has not just come from a member who is trying to be helpful.
Mr. Tucker agreed that this could be done.
Mr. Marshall asked if the Board could vote on this item the way it has
been presented by staff. He said if there has to be additional funding, the
Historical Society will be responsible for it. Mr. Tucker responded that the
staff will need to find out if the Historical Society members are supportive
of this approach, and if they are in favor of it, then aluminum will be used
for the cannon carriages. He said if the Society members are not supportive,
then they will be asked if they can provide the additional funding to continue
in the traditional way.
Mr. Martin pointed out that the aluminum is expensive in the beginning,
so there wouldn't be any additional cost. Mr. Tucker concurred. However, he
noted that if aluminum is not used, there will be an additional cost in the
future.
Mr. Martin also referred to Consent Agenda 5.3 where the memo shows in
the last sentence how the maintenance costs are broken down. He said there is
no explanation for the cost of $1,311 for the Juvenile Court, and he wondered
how this money will be used. Ms. Higgins stated that the appropriation is for
$84,200. She said the sentence, to which Mr. Martin referred, shows the
balances of all the accounts to show that all of the money is not being used.
Next, Mrs. Thomas asked about Consent Agenda 5.4 involving an appropria-
tion for Industrial Access Funds for Quail Run in the Airport Industrial Park.
She said it is difficult for her to put the figures together and see exactly
the total need. She wondered if there is enough funding now so there is no
need for additional tourist related dollars to go into the Airport Road fund,
or is this an entirely separate matter.
Mr. Tucker answered that this matter relates to Quail Run and not
Airport Road. He said this is the section which goes into the Airport
Industrial Park. Mr. Cilimberg explained that Quail Run actually comes off of
Route 606. Mr. Tucker added that Route 606 is the road heading north from the
Airport.
Mrs. Thomas stated that she likes the idea of the future road signs, and
she is glad the staff comes up with such good ideas.
Mr. Marshall asked if the Board should vote on the Development Area
Initiatives Steering Committee appointment.
Mr. Cilimberg and Mr. Tucker suggested that the Board vote on the
Consent Agenda at this time. Mr. Tucker also indicated that the Supervisors
could vote for all of the appointments to the Development Area Initiatives
Steering Committee at a later time during this meeting.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve
Items 5.1 through 5.10b and to accepted the remaining items on the consent
agenda as information. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) 000074
(page 3)
Agenda Item No. 5.1. Adopt Resolution endorsing ISTEA Enhancement Grant
Application for Airport Road (Route 649) improvements.
The Executive Summary indicates that the Charlottesville-Albemarle
Airport is seeking an ISTEA Enhancement Grant to provide sidewalks, bikelanes
and landscaping as part of the road improvement project for Airport Road
(Route 649). The Airport Road improvement project is identified as priority
five (of a total 70 projects) in the County's proposed Priority List of
Secondary Road Improvements. The ISTEA funds would be used to supplement six
year secondary road construction funds, revenue sharing funds and Airport
Access funds to allow the Airport Road project to meet the County's desire to
create an aesthetically pleasing, pedestrian friendly corridor. Airport Road
serves not only as the gateway to the County and region for airport users, but
also serves as a major spine road within the Hollymead Community.
It is proposed that ISTEA Enhancement Grant funds be utilized to provide
a means to make this corridor more usable for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Installation of designated bikelanes and sidewalks to enhance Route 649 would
also support vehicular traffic reduction efforts since these facilities would
link residential areas such as Deerwood, Airport Acres, Forest Lakes, and
businesses and employment centers such as Crutchfield Corporation, Central
Fidelity Bank, the Airport Industrial Park, the North Fork Research park, and
the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport. Bikelanes and sidewalks, funded
through an ISTEA Enhancement Grant, would offer employees and customers living
in the surrounding residential areas an alternative to automobile transporta-
tion to these businesses. It would also link this area to planned sidewalks
and bikelanes in the Hollymead Community. This ISTEA Grant would also be used
to provide for landscaping to enhance the aesthetic quality of this corridor.
The total cost for the bikelanes, sidewalks, landscaping, and scenic beautifi-
cation is $1,000,000, of which $200,000 would be Albemarle County's local
match. Funds to fully cover the County's local match are anticipated to come
from the proposed 1997/98-2001/2002 CIP ($39,200 for Airport Road Sidewalk)
and funds originally intended to match the Airport Access award ($300,000 in
local money was necessary for Ehat). The Airport Access match is now antici-
pated to come from the Airport's Passenger Facility Charges subject to Federal
Aviation Administration approval. The Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) Policy Board endorsed this project at its meeting on January 7, 1997.
The ISTEA funds would be used to support improvements to Airport Road
which are consistent with the goals, principles/objectives, and recommenda-
tions of the Land Use Plan regarding community and road design, multi-modal
use, and traffic reduction. Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors adopt
the attached resolution with the understanding that the source for the
County's match will be as described above.
By the above shown vote, the Board adopted the following resolution:
PROJECT ENDORSEMENT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation
Board construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a
request by resolution be received from the local government or
state agency in order that the Virginia Department of Transporta-
tion program an enhancement project in the County of Albemarle.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County
Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby request the
Commonwealth Transportation Board to construct bike lanes, side-
walks, and landscape/scenic beautification on Airport Road (Route
649) from Route 29 to Route 606; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of County Supervisors
hereby agrees to pay twenty percent of the total cost for planning
and design, right-of-way, and construction of this project, and
that if the County of Albemarle subsequently elects to cancel this
project, it hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of
Transportation for the total amount of the cost expended by the
Department through the date the Department is notified of such
cancellation.
January 15, 1997 (Regular Nigh~ Meeting) O000~------------
(Page 4)
Agenda Item No. 5.2. Appropriation: Circuit Court Computer Equipment,
$1,000 (Form #96044) .
The Circuit Court Judge's office is in need of upgrading and improving
their current word processing capabilities. The Supreme Court of Virginia has
approved a request from the Judge to upgrade their computer equipment. The
computer will be purchased by the State at a total cost of $3,093. The State
will fund $2,093 with the locality funding $1,000. This new computer and
associated software will assist their office in being able to more quickly
issue motions, orders, letters and memos. The PC will also have the capabil-
ity of being used as a terminal with the Courts Automated Information System
(CAIS). CAIS will facilitate retrieving information related to defendants,
plaintiffs, attorneys assigned, hearings scheduled and various notices
generated by the system. The Judge has requested that the County fund the
local share.
By the above shown vote, the Board adopted the following Resolution of
Appropriation:
FISCAL YEAR: 1996/97
NLIMBER: 96044
FUND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: LOCAL SHARE OF COMPUTER EQUIPMENT FOR
CIRCUIT COURT.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1100021010800700 ADP EQUIPMENT $1,000.00
TOTAL $1,000.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1100051000510100 GENERAL FUND BALANCE $1,000.00
TOTAL $1,000.00
Agenda Item No. 5.3. Appropriation: Court Square Building Maintenance,
$84,200 (Form #96045).
The Court Square facility is in need of significant maintenance work
which inCludes interior painting and exterior painting. Due to the lead base
paint regulations, the painting costs are significant. The total cost of this
work is $65,000.
In front of the Court House is a monument with two cannons which were
unveiled in 1909. Preserving these cannons has historic significance. Both
cannons are in need of new carriages. Because the wood carriages are exposed
year round, the life expectancy is about five years. The wheels have deterio-
rated to the point where they are not safe. The cost to rebuild the wood
carriages would be $7,200. If the carriages are replaced with aluminum, the
cost is $19,200. The aluminum would last at least ten times longer and is
less than three times the cost. The aluminum replacement carriages have been
used in Williamsburg.
The total cost is $84,200. This is to request that the Board approve
the use of the Court House maintenance account funds for this purpose. The
current balance is $124,968 for the General District Court; $9,207 for Circuit
Court; and $1,311 for Juvenile Court.
By the above shown vote, the Board adopted the following Resolution of
Appropriation:
FISCAL YEAR: 1996/97
NUMBER: 96045
FLIND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: COURT SQUARE BUILDING MAINTENANCE.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 5)
OOO076
1100043002331200
REPAIR & MAINT - EQUIP/BUILDING
TOTAL
$84,200.00
$84,200.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOLrNT
2100051000510100 GENERAL FLrND RESERVE $84,200.00
GENERAL DISTRICT COURT MAINT
TOTAL $84,200.00
Agenda Item No. 5.4. Appropriation: Industrial Access Funds for Quail
Run in Airport Industrial Park, $184,641.50 (Form ~96046) .
The County entered into agreement with the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) on March 13, 1995, for the application of Industrial
Access Funds for the improvement and extension of Quail Run in the Airport
Industrial Park. In turn, the County entered into agreement with the Univer-
sity Real Estate Foundation (UREF) for the same reason. The roadway was
accepted by the County and VDOT on June 13, 1996. In accordance with the
County/VDOT agreement, the County on November 26, 1996, requested the amount
of $184,641.50 from VDOT. The Virginia Department of Transportation electron-
ically transferred the funds to the County. The $184,641.50 must be appropri-
ated into an expenditure account in order to reimburse the University Real
Estate Foundation.
By the above shown vote, the Board adopted the following Resolution of
Appropriation:
FISCAL YEAR: 1996/97
NUMBER: 96046
FUND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
INDUSTRIAL ACCESS FUNDS FOR QUAIL RUN
IMPROVEMENTS. PASS THROUGH TO UNIVERSITY OF
VIRGINIA REAL ESTATE FOUNDATION.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOI/NT
1100041000950046 QUAIL RUN/INDUSTRIAL ACCESS $184,641.50
TOTAL $184,641.50
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2100024000240432 VDOT-QUAIL RUN/INDUSTRIAL ACCESS FUNDS $184,641.50
TOTAL $184,641.50
Agenda Item No. 5.5. Authorize acquisition of Woodbrook Channel as
public regional basin.
As upstream areas have developed over the years, residents of Woodbrook
have been impacted by flooding and erosion along the Woodbrook Channel. This
project was sited in the 1986 Urban Drainage Study and funded through the
Capital Improvement Project. In order to evaluate the problem and long term
solution, the Albemarle County Department of Engineering had to do a specific
analysis of the existing channel. The recommended best long term solution is
to provide additional detention at a regional location upstream in combination
with upgrading the channel. The channel upgrade alone will not provide a long
term solution.
The County currently has several working regional basins including
Smithfield Basin, Berkmar Basin, Kegler Basin and Agnor-Hurt Basin. There are
several owned basins that are not upgraded as yet including: Four Seasons
Basin and Peyton Basin. These is one basin planned that has been postponed
pending the decision on the extension of Greenbier Drive which is called
Birnam Basin. These regional facilities were either programmed due to the
1986 Urban Drainage Study or resulted from an upstream project. There are two
basins pending acquisition: Branchlands Basin and Rio Hills Basin which is
addressed in this request. With respect to channel upgrades, the Berkeley
Channel (CIP) project was completed several years ago and there have been
other minor projects.
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting) O0007~W'~
(Page 6)
To proceed with this endeavor, we need authorization to proceed in
acquiring the Rio Hills Shopping Center Basin for this purpose. At the time
the shopping center was developed, it was oversized without formalizing what
the future use would involve. It is our intention to either have the basin
dedicated to public use or have the physical area deeded to the County. The
physical improvements will be limited to an area within the existing storm-
water detention basin. There may be some possibility of incorporating private
contributions for the capital expenditure necessary for this project in order
to take advantage of the regional use. Specifically, proposed upstream
development could meet their detention requirements offsite rather than
onsite. An agreement with the developer may be considered for this purpose.
We anticipate that the funds necessary to provide the improvements have
been appropriated. Once the basin is designated for regional use, the design
can go forward.
By the above shown vote, the Board authorized staff to proceed with
contacting the property owner, prepare the plat and deed, and bring back to
the Board of Supervisors for signature.
Agenda Item No. 5.6. Voluntary Early Retirement Requests for FY 1997-98
for five County employees.
Albemarle County Personnel Policy §P-63 provides for voluntary early
retirement for county employees who have been employed by the county for ten
of the last thirteen years and who are at least 50 years of age and currently
employed. Staff has received five requests from employees who has been
employed with the county for the prerequisite minimum number of years and
have indicated their intentions to retire within the next fiscal year. The
associated employee costs will be built into the FY 1997-98 budget since
notification has been received,
County policy requires the Board of Supervisors to approve all early
retirement applications upon recommendation of the County Executive. Staff
recommends that these five requests be so approved with the budgetary implica-
tions absorbed within the appropriate departmental FY 1997-98 budgets.
By the above shown vote, the Board approved five Voluntary Early
Requests from County employees for FY 1997-98.
Agenda Item No. 5.7. Voluntary Early Retirement Request for County
Deputy Sheriff.
Albemarle County Personnel Policy §P-63 provides for voluntary early
retirement for County employees who have been employed by the county for ten
of the last thirteen years and who are at least 50 years of age and currently
employed. Staff has received a request from an employee who has been employed
with the county for 26 years. The employee has requested that he be allowed
to take early retirement February 1, 1997. The associated employee costs for
the current fiscal year are $1,986.14 (pro-rated) and will come from the
Sheriff's Department FY 96-97 budget.
County policy requires the Board of Supervisors to approve all early
retirement applications upon recommendation of the County Executive. Staff
recommends that this request be so approved with the budgetary implications
absorbed within the current budget of the Sheriff's Department.
By the above shown vote, the Board approved the Voluntary Early Retire-
ment request received from the County Deputy Sheriff.
Agenda Item No. 5.8. Adopt Resolution designating February as "Petfix
Month" in Albemarle County.
County Police, local veterinarians and the Charlottesville/Albemarle
S.P.C.A. recommend passage of this resolution from the Board to help bring
attention and action to better control the pet population of the area.
Police indicate they are finding more and more wild dogs and cats in the
County, and any help to reduce these numbers may help prevent euthanization.
The Petfix Coalition composed of 18 supporting humane organizations is
ooooVS
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
seeking support and recognition from Virginia governmental bodies to approve
the attached ~Petfix" resolution. Since spaying and neutering has been shown
to drastically reduce dog and cat overpopulation, last year several Central
Virginia localities adopted the resolution, and Governor Allen signed a
proclamation recognizing SPAY DAY 1996.
Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution to designate February
as "Petfix Month" in the attempt to encourage local residents to have their
pets spayed or neutered or sponsoring the spaying or neutering of a companion
animal for another.
By the above shown vote, the Board adopted the fOllowing Resolution:
RESOLUTION
Designating the Month of February, 1997 as PETFIX MONTH 1997
WHEREAS, dogs and cats give companionship to and share the
homes of over 50,000,000 individuals in the United States; and
WHEREAS, two unaltered cats and their kittens can produce
420,000 more kittens in seven years and two unaltered dogs and
their puppies can produce 67,000 more dogs in six years; and
WHEREAS, it is estimated that more than 12,000,000 dogs and
cats are euthanized each year in the United States, although many
of them are healthy and adoptable, simply because there are not
enough homes; and
WHEREAS, the Virginia Federation of Humane Societies esti-
mates that there are over 300,000 dogs and cats euthanized in the
Commonwealth of Virginia each year; and
WHEREAS, the problems of pet overpopulation costs the
taxpayers in this country millions of dollars annually through
animal control programs trying to cope with the millions of
unwanted animals; and
WHEREAS, spaying and neutering dogs and cats has been shown
to drastically reduce cat and dog overpopulation; and
WHEREAS, veterinarians, humane societies, and national and
local animal protection organizations worked together to ensure
the spaying and neutering of more than 51,000 companion animals
during the "Spay Day USA" event in February, 1996; and
WHEREAS, veterinarians and humane organizations in the
Harrisonburg, Charlottesville and Central Virginia areas have
joined together to advocate the spaying and neutering of companion
animals during "PETFIX MONTH 1997"
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of County
Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, recognizes the
Month of February, 1997 as "PETFIX MONTH 1997" and encourages all
citizens to observe this month by either having their dogs or cats
spayed or neutered or by sponsoring the spaying or neutering of a
companion animal for another.
Agenda Item No. 5.9. Set public hearing for February 5, 1997, to
authorize County Executive to execute Deeds of Easement for Natural Gas Line.
The City of Charlottesville has been requested by property owners on
Adams Court and Woodbrook Drive Extended to provide natural gas from the
City's Gas Division. All or portions of these roads are not yet accepted into
the VDOT system and are therefore owned by the County. The City desires to
place the gas lines within the right of way.
Typically gas lines are placed within the right of way of roads accepted
by VDOT by permit. Because these roads are still owned by the County, an
easement for the gas lines is necessary before the City can place the lines in
the County right of way. Attached are two quitclaim deeds which the City
requests that the County execute to grant the necessary easements. Engineer-
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
OOO079
lng has reviewed the proposed placement of the gas lines and reports that it
will not interfere with the eventual acceptance of the roads by V DOT.
A public hearing is required by State law prior to the County's granting
of an easement. Staff recommends that a public hearing be set for the Board
of Supervisors' February 5, 1997 meeting to consider authorizing the County
Executive to execute the attached Deeds of Quitclaim granting gas line
easements to the City of Charlottesville.
By the above shown vote, the Board set the public hearing for February
5, 1997.
Agenda Item No. 5.10. Appointment of representatives to serve on the
Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee.
On November 6,1996 The Board endorsed the proposal to establish the
Development Areas Initiative Steering Committee to provide assistance and
guidance in the development of a public input/education process to define the
vision for, and character of, the built environment of the Development Areas.
Staff had recommended membership of the steering committee consist of repre-
sentatives from citizen and business groups, professional organizations,
County elected and appointed bodies, and others interested in or affected this
process.
The following individuals have been identified by their respective
organizations for participation on the Steering Committee:
Citizen GrOups:
Albemarle Neighborhood Association
Citizens for Albemarle
Piedmont Environmental Council
League of Women Voters
Business Groups:
Chamber of Commerce
Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
Board of Realtors
Professional Orqanizations/Interests:
Design Review Council
American Institute of Architects (AIA)
Tom Loach
Kathleen Galvin
Babette Thorpe
Katie Hobbs
Don Wagner
Bob Watson/Steve Runkle (one vote)
Ivo Romenesko
Marilyn Gale
Brian Broadus
American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)
County Elected/Advisory Bodies:
Board of Supervisors
Planning Commission
Housing Committee
Others:
University of Virginia
Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council
Charlottesville Dept. of Community Development
NAACP Alice Hill
Beth Myers
Charles Martin
Bruce Dotson, David Tice
Karen Lilleleht
Pete Anderson
No appointment to date
Satyendra Singh Huja
One request has been received from an individual interested in serving
on the steering committee (see Attachment A). In addition, Kat Imhoff, former
Planning Commissioner and current director of the Preservation Alliance has
been suggested as a possible member. We have contacted Ms. Imhoff and she has
expressed an interest and willingness in participating.
It is anticipated that the steering committee will function in an open
fashion and will welcome input and participation from other individuals and
groups. Therefore, participation by Mr. Wood and Ms. Imhoff is acceptable and
encouraged. However, when specific actions are required only those represent-
ing the original selected organizations may be entitled to a vote.
Staff would recommend Board endorsement of the selected organization's
appointments.
By the above shown vote, the Board appointed the following persons to
the Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee:
Citizen Groups:
Albemarle Neighborhood Association
Citizens for Albemarle
Piedmont Environmental Council
League of Women Voters
Tom Loach
Kathleen Galvin
Babette Thorpe
Katie Hobbs
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
00008'0
Business Groups:
Chamber of Commerce
Blue Ridge Home Builders Association
Board of Realtors
Professional Organizations/Interests:
Design Review Council
A~erican Institute' of Architects (AIA)
American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)
County Elected/Advisory Bodies:
Board of Supervisors
Planning Commission
Housing Committee
Others:
University of Virginia
Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council
Charlottesville Department of Community Development
NAACP
Don Wagner
Bob Watson/Steve Runkle (one vote)
Ivo Romenesko
Marilyn Gale
Brian Broadus
Beth Myers
Charles Martin
Bruce Dotson, David Tice
Karen Lilleleht
Pete Anderson
Sherry Buttrick
Satyendra Singh Huja
Alice Hill
Agenda Item No. 5.10a. Resolution to accept Kendalwood Lane (SUB-92-
087) in Forest Lakes Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways.
By the above shown vote, the Board adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the street in Forest Lakes Subdivision, Kendalwood
(SUB-92-087) described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A)
dated January 15, 1997, 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 meets 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 Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transpor-
tation to add the road in Forest Lakes Subdivision described on
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated January 15, 1997, 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, and any necessary ease-
ments 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.
The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is:
(i)
Kendalwood Lane from Station 0+34, left edge of pave-
ment on Ashwood Blvd, State Route 1670 to Station
17+96.60, back of cul-de-sac, 1762.60 lineal feet, as
shown on plat recorded 7/22/93 in Deed Book 1327,
pages 509-518 in the office of the Clerk of the Cir-
cuit Court of Albemarle County showing a 50 foot
right-of-way, with additional plats recorded 11/23/93
in Deed Book 1362, pages 561-566, recorded 1/19/94 in
Deed Book 1376, pages 338-343, and recorded 12/18/96
in Deed Book 1583, pages 79, 80 and 81, for a total
length of 0.34 mile.
Agenda Item No. 5.10b. Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney Replacement,
salary supplement.
The County currently provides a $7,000 salary supplement to the Assis-
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 10)
00005
tant Commonwealth's Attorney position currently occupied by Cheryl Higgins.
Cheryl has recently resigned and Mr. Camblos is requesting that we continue a
portion of this supplement in the amount of $3,321 for the new Assistant
Attorney that he has selected to replace Ms. Higgins. This reduction in
supplement will basically save the County $3,679 on an annual basis.
Staff supports Mr. Camblos' request to maintain a salary supplement of
$3,321 for this position in order that it may be filled on February 1, 1997.
By the above shown vote, the Board supported staff's request to maintain
a salary supplement of $3,321 for this position in order that it may be filled
on February 1, 1997.
Item 5.11. Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.) Bond and
Program Report for the month of November, 1996, received for information.
Item 5.12. Abstract of Votes cast in the County of Albemarle, Virginia,
at the November 5, 1996 General Election, received as information.
Item 5.13. Signs for Identification of Future Roads, received as
follows for information:
A great deal of time is invested in evaluating the transportation needs
of the community. The Comprehensive Plan and CATS (Charlottesville Area
Transportation Study) are used as a basis for development in the County. As
development occurs, segments of planned roads are either constructed by the
developer or right-of-way is reserved for the future construction of a road.
It has been a concern at the time subdivisions are approved that those
affected were cognizant of the planned road alignment when they decide to buy
a home in proximity to such a project. Often, the property owner is not well
informed and becomes upset that the road connection project should not go
forward due to the effect on their property. Ensuring that Realtors and
developers during their marketing activities are providing this information to
potential buyers is not possible.
Examples of specific occasions where planned roads met opposition at the
time the alignment went to public hearing would be Timberwood Parkway, where
the developer was required to reserve the right-of- way and the road design
provided that no homes fronted on Timberwood Parkway. Subsequently, the
connection to Meadow Creek Parkway was met with public opposition because many
property owners were unaware. In that case, a sign would have precluded this
from happening.
To make the public aware of future projects, other communities have
been installing signs at the location of the proposed project and this
practice has been successful. Seeing such a sign will prompt interested
citizens to call and inquire about the proposed road. At that time, they may
review the information that is available in the Community Development Depart-
ment and decide how this does or does not affect their decision to purchase
property.
The first of these signs has been installed at the point where the
Southern Parkway extension to Fifth Street may some day be constructed.
Attached is a printout of the sign design. There are other locations that are
appropriate for the same format (i.e., Western Ridge at the point where it is
intended to link into the 240/250 connector road, and Cory Farm where a
segment of the 240/250 connector is routed through.).
Mr. Juandiego Wade, Transportation Planner, has fielded many calls since
the first sign was installed. If anything, this will prompt the public to
visit the County Planning Department to review the planned transportation
network in specific neighborhoods.
This information is presented to the Board for information on steps that
are being taken to address this issue.
Item 5.14. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for December 17, 1996,
received for information.
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 11)
O000$Z
Item 5.15. Copies of minutes of the Albemarle-Charlottesville Jail
Authority Board meeting for November 14 and November 18, 1996, received as
information.
Item 5.16. Copy of letter dated January 9, 1997, from Ms. Donna
Shaunesey, Executive Director, to Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive,
re: cost of JAUNT services for Albemarle County from July, 1996 through
November, 1996, received as information.
Agenda Item No. 6. SP-96-40. Angus & Brenda Arrington (Sign #6).
Public Hearing on a request for Home Occupation-Class B on 4.68 ac zoned RA
Located off Rt 842. TMS0,P74C. Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily
Progress on December 30, 1996 and January 6, 1997.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and a permanent part of the record. He noted that the appli-
cants were previously granted a Home Occupation Class A permit for a janito-
rial and lawn care business. He also called attention to the fact that the
adjacent property owner was denied a Home Occupation Class B permit to move a
portion of his VCR/TV repair business to an existing garage. This permit was
denied because of the potential for increased traffic from customers on Route
842, which is an unpaved road. The property is located off Goochs Mill Lane
on Route 842 just east of the Black Cat Road, Route 616. He described the
possible impacts as they were shown in the staff report. He indicated that
the staff is recommending denial of SP-96-40 based on the additional traffic
concerns as well as the potential impact of such a use. He said, though, five
conditions are listed should the Board and Planning Commission choose to
approve the request.
The Planning Commission, at its meeting on December 17, 1996, recom-
mended approval subject to the five conditions suggested by staff. The
Commissioners did not feel the additional traffic would be significant to the
extent as the prior application for VCR/TV repair. He called attention to
Condition #3 which states that no storage of gas, oil, fertilizers, nor
chemicals should be on site. The condition further states that there should
be no outside storage of equipment, nor supplies/materials related to land-
scape business, including trailers noted above. The staff thought it would be
good to qualify the word, "storage," because any business such as this one
will at least have a gas tank for filling lawn equipment. He went on to say
the staff felt a third sentence should be added to Condition #3 indicating
that storage for the purposes of this condition is defined as being long term
and a large quantity. He said this is just a suggestion for the Supervisors
to consider. He noted that Condition #4 allows for routine operational
maintenance.
Mr. Cilimberg then referred to concerns by another property owner in the
area that there have been violations. Ms. McCulley, the Zoning Administrator,
informed him today about a violation a few months that her staff investigated.
The Zoning staff asked for the violation to be remedied, and it was taken care
of at the time. There was apparently another visit yesterday from the Zoning
Administrator and there was again some violation as to the allowances under
the current Home Occupation Class A permit. He suggested that Ms. McCulley
may be able to speak to this matter.
Ms. McCulley reported that her office received the original complaint in
September, and Mr. Arrington was contacted. She said he admitted he was using
the shed for business purposes, and her staff person explained that a special
permit was needed from this Board, and he then applied for the special permit.
He was told by a Zoning staff person that he needed to be in the best posture
and he would need to, from a zoning point of view, be in compliance by removal
of all business related equipment from the shed. He still had at one point in
time, as well as yesterday, some equipment in the shed, but the Supervisors
can address this matter with him directly.
She had a conversation with a neighbor who was not able to come to this
meeting. He asked that she mention a couple of points about his concerns and
have the Board consider whether or not they would like to add conditions to
address them. She said the concerns fall in four areas, and a lot of them are
repetitive of things already mentioned in the staff report. First, there is
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 12)
000083
the concern about long term compliance, and there was a suggestion that the
permit be of a limited amount of time, with a requirement for Zoning inspec-
tors to do periodic inspections. This suggestion is definitely precedent
setting, and would call for some mechanism and manpower considerations which
have not had to be considered in the past. She went on to say it is not
really practical, but if it is the Board's desire to have such a condition,
her office staff will carry it forth. The second concern involved traffic
generation, and she said the neighbor recommended that there be no employees
other than the son who lives on the property. She stated that by definition,
a Class B category can have up to two employees, but by conditions of this
permit, the Planning staff has recommended only one additional employee. Ms.
McCulley commented that the third issue related to environmental or health
concerns involving storage of chemicals and fuel, etc. She referred to Mr.
Cilimberg's comments that any such business will have to have some type of gas
for equipment and some of the two cycle engines. She reported that under the
new Fire Code there can only be a maximum of 25 gallons stored inside, which
seems reasonable, so this condition is a satisfactory limit to her staff. She
next mentioned the fourth concern relating to a limit to the operation because
sometimes some business is occurring on weekends and holidays, etc. She said
this conflicts with the zoning use of this property, so there could be a
condition relating to days and hours. She stated that it may not work well
with how this business operates, but her staff can develop conditions if it is
the Board's will.
Mr. Martin asked about the nature of the violation. Ms. McCulley
responded that the violation involved the use of the building for equipment
and materials related to the business. She went on to say there were some
leaf blowers, a lawn tractor and equipment related to landscaping. Mr. Martin
inquired if there were a lot of equipment and materials involved. Ms.
McCulley answered that there was no large amount of equipment involved, and
she explained that she did not make the first visit. She said the senior
inspector can probably be more specific because he is the one who has handled
the case, and he saw the building both times.
Mr. Martin mentioned that the staff report has a lot of discussion in it
about noise, but the Planning Commission seemed satisfied with the fact that
most of the actual business is being conducted off the site. He added that
repairs of equipment would probably make some noise, and he noticed the
Commissioners were concerned about chippers. He asked if it would be reason-
able to limit the hours as to when the applicant could be starting up the
equipment. He did not want to limit the hours for all of the repairing,
because.equipment can be repaired without starting it. Ms. McCulley and Mr.
Cilimberg indicated that the hours could be limited, and Ms. McCulley said it
is a fair way to address the concern. She added that a condition of this type
can be self enforcing and it will not be something her office will be called
upon to investigate.
There were no further comments from the Board, so Mr. Marshall opened
the public hearing. He asked if the applicant would like to speak to this
matter.
Mr. Angus Arrington stated that his small business relates to landscap-
ing but mostly it deals with cutting grass. His business operates approxi-
mately nine months a year. He does not store gas on the property because he
gets his gas at the gas station each morning. He has to go out for major
repairs of machinery, and he would only be changing spark plugs, belts and
routine maintenance such as a person would do at home. He apologized to the
Supervisors because he went about the situation in the wrong manner. He built
a shed, and then he learned he was in violation of the County's rules and
regulations. He showed the Board members pictures of the shed, etc., and he
stated that he wanted to cooperate in any way he can. He went on to say he
talked to his neighbor who suggested that the shed have a rustic appearance.
He built the shed to have this appearance, turned the building around and put
the door in the back. He explained that from the road, a person cannot see if
anything is back there. He pointed out on a picture where he drives in with
his equipment at night, and where he leaves in the morning. He also pointed
out the side closest to his neighbor and the back of the shed. He has also
put up a fence as a buffer.
Mr. Martin inquired if the fence goes all the way across the property.
Mr. Arrington replied that he left some of the property open. He has done
everything possible to make the building presentable. Mr. Martin asked if the
neighbor suggested that Mr. Arrington stop the fence where he did. Mr.
000084
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 13)
Arrington replied, "no." He built the fence on his own. He mentioned that
the white pines for the screening are still small, and he wanted to make sure
his neighbor did not hear any noise, so he put in a fence. He can take the
fence out after the white pines grow together, but in the meantime the fence
affords both of them some privacy.
Mr. Martin asked if the only thing Mr. Arrington is intending to do is
to pull his trailer out in the morning and go to work and come back in the
afternoon and pull the trailer into the building. He also mentioned that Mr.
Arrington will be doing some maintenance. Mr. Arrington answered affirma-
tively. Mr. Martin wondered if Mr. Arrington would have any problems with
limitations as to starting the machinery engines before a certain time. Mr.
Arrington answered that the County has a Noise Ordinance, and he will abide by
it. He mentioned a complaint addressing the fact that he worked on Memorial
Day. He likes to work on Memorial Day, but his neighbor did not like it
because he had some equipment running. He does not work on Sundays.
Mr. Martin inquired aS to Mr. Arrington's need for running the equipment
other than testing it, etc. Mr. Arrington replied that he has no other need
besides the testing. On occasion he starts weed eaters to make sure they are
running. He has back-ups for all of his equipment and he tries to work on
them on Saturdays during the daytime.
Mr. Martin commented that his concern is mainly about the morning hours
such as Saturday mornings. If he starts to mow his yard at 8:30 a.m. on a
Saturday morning, he will make his neighbor mad. Mr. Arrington said he
probably starts working around 10:00 a.m. on Saturdays. He has worked all
week, and he is also tired on Saturdays. Mr. Martin asked, again, if Mr.
Arrington has any problems with such limitations. Mr. Arrington replied,
"no." He could start working at 10:00 a.m. on Saturdays, but during the week
he goes to work at 8:00 a.m.
Mr. Martin asked Mr. Arrington's need for starting his equipment. He
believes Mr. Arrington has indicated that he brings his equipment home in the
evening and leaves the next morning to go to work off site. He wondered if
Mr. Arrington has any strong need to start his equipment at 7:30 a.m. on a
Tuesday or Wednesday. Mr. Arrington said occasionally he may need to start up
a weed eater, but he can do that in the afternoons, because he gets back home
around 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. He does this the day before, so he can just go to
his work in the mornings. Mr. Martin wondered if a restriction such as the
one he mentioned would hurt Mr. Arrington's business. Mr. Arrington replied
that such a limitation will not cause him too much of a problem.
Mrs. Thomas remarked that usually such repairs to small motors are done
before the person leaves for the day or when he or she returns. She wondered
what time Mr. Arrington would be checking to see if the weed eater is working.
Mr. Arrington answered that 8:00 p.m. could be the limit in the evening,
although he referred again to the County's Noise Ordinance. He would like to
keep within the Noise Ordinance regulations. Ms. McCulley noted that such
regulations in the Noise Ordinance end at 6:00 a.m. Mr. Arrington said he
would not be making noise before 6:00 a.m.
Mrs. Thomas explained that this matter does not exactly relate to the
Noise Ordinance, This would be a condition the Board would put on the special
use permit, and a reasonable time could be worked out. She mentioned that it
sounds to her as though a time could be set whereby Mr. Arrington could start
his equipment either before or after a certain time in the mornings or
evenings, but he could not do it both times. Mr. Arrington responded that a
restriction after hours would be better for his business, such at 8:00 p.m.
He went on to say most of the noise will be inside of his building. Mr.
Tucker suggested that it would help if the machinery could be started inside
the building.
Mr. Martin informed Mr. Arrington that he is asking for a lot when he
requested a Class B permit for this area of the County, and that is the reason
the staff turned down the request. He wants to cooperate with Mr. Arrington,
but he also wants to make sure the neighbors are reasonably protected,
although it may not be as much protection as they desire. Mr. Arrington
responded that whatever the Board decides about the restrictions will be fine
with him.
Mr. Martin stated that he does not want to limit Mr. Arrington so much
that his business will not succeed because there are too many rules and
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 14)
00008
regulations. He would rather not approve the permit than to run him out of
business with rules and regulations. Mr. Arrington said he would be willing
to start the engines of his equipment only in the evening. He asked if 8:00
p.m. would be a reasonable restriction.
Mr. Cilimberg stated that there will have to be a period of time when
the noise will be considered allowable. He said language has already been
developed that might work in this situation, but the hours need to be set.
Mr. Martin suggested the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. for starting
equipment or 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. He said at 10:00 a.m. in the morning on
a weekday, he does not think it would be rude to the neighbors if a lawn mower
is started.
Mr. Arrington mentioned the noise from his pickup truck. Mr. Martin
said he is not talking about Mr. Arrington's truck pulling away from the shed
or entering it. Mr. Arrington stated that he does not pull any big trailers
with his truck. He has a couple of small landscape trailers that he uses.
Mr. Martin recalled that the Fire Code allows 25 gallons of gas to be
stored inside a building. He asked if Mr. Arrington would mind a limitation
of five gallons of gas to be stored inside the shed. Mr. Arrington replied
that this limitation would be fine.
Mr. Martin recalled that he has heard a lot of complaints about the way
the land perks in that area and the limited water supply. He said people are
concerned about contamination of their wells because of the limited water
supply. Mr. Marshall wondered if the storage limitation would be added to the
third condition. Mr. Martin answered that he had not even thought about where
it would be added. Mrs. Thomas suggested that after the public hearing the
staff can figure out where the language could best be placed.
Mr. Tucker asked if the time limit had been placed at 10:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m. Mrs. Thomas said this is still undecided. Mr. Martin agreed. He said
he would like to see if there are any other comments about the time limit
before the restriction is added.
Mr. Angus Arrington, Jr. stated that a 9:00 a.m. restriction would be
preferable. He said they can load up at night, but occasionally they may have
to come back home to change equipment. He noted, though, that this would not
happen every day. Mr. Martin said he is not concerned about the Arringtons
taking their equipment on and off their trailers.
Mrs. Thomas remarked that the Board members are concerned about the
starting up of weed eaters, lawn mowers, etc., to test or tune them. She said
these are the things that make a lot of noise.
There were no further questions for the applicant, so Mr. Marshall
opened the public hearing. He asked if anyone from the public wished to speak
to this subject.
Mr. James Butler spoke in support of Mr. Arrington, and he noted that he
is a little concerned about what he is hearing. He mentioned that on several
occasions, Mr. Arrington has shared with Mr. Butler some of the problems he
has been having, and Mr. Arrington has done some things which Mr. Butler
supports. Mr. Butler said he has believed for many years, as far as the
County's vocational and educational systems are concerned, that the black
people need to provide some of their own jobs. He said black people need to
take the chances necessary to train themselves and then do a job. He added
that Mr. Arrington and his son have done just that, and he believes they need
support.
He stated that 20 years ago Mr. Arrington moved to the Keswick area of
the County, bought himself a piece of land and built a comfortable house. Mr.
Butler said in talking to Mr. Arrington it seems as though he has tried to
satisfy his neighbor and the Planning Commission. Mr. Arrington has tried to
do those things he has been asked to do, but at the same time he wanted to be
able to operate his business. Mr. Butler reiterated that he thinks everyone
should support this type of situation. It bothers him when neighbors feel as
though they cannot live with certain peoPle. He has seen this happen on
several occasions, and he does not think it should be supported. He remarked
that he thinks everybody has the desire to make a living for themselves, and
when they work hard and accomplish something, then they should be supported.
000056
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 15)
He said he lives on a farm and he has farm equipment. He lives in a neighbor-
hood of farms and shops and everybody seems to get along fairly well. He
added that people have to face up to the fact that they have to live with each
other. He went on to say it does not matter what color people are or what
nationality or religion. He feels as though Mr. Arrington has tried to get
along with everybody, and his operation does not create a lot of noise or
anything negative to the community. He pointed out that everybody with an
acre of ground is going to have a lawn mower. He hopes Mr. Arrington will be
able to work this out in some way to satisfy the requirements of the Planning
Commission and the Board of Supervisors but, at the same time, it has to be
recognized that in some cases in life everybody cannot be satisfied. He hopes
this matter will not involve a racial or class issue, etc., and it needs to be
dealt with in a way that is as fair to everybody as possible. He commented
that he has known Mr. Arrington for years, as well as his family in Madison
County, and they are fine people. Mr. Arrington has tried hard to develop a
business for himself and his son. He also noted that Mr. Arrington provides
employment nine months out of the year for himself, his son and three other
people, and to be able to provide employment for five people is commendable.
He hopes this situation can be worked out in such a way that Mr. Arrington can
keep his business because he has quite an investment in the equipment he needs
to do his job. He is doing a wonderful job for a lot of people in this County
and City. He hopes the Supervisors will seriously think about what they are
doing, and he hopes they will be fair to Mr. Arrington and as fair as possible
to the neighbors. He stated that the neighbors, though, have to also put
forth some effort.
Mr. Martin recognized Mr. Butler as a past supervisor of this Board, and
he also recognized him as someone for whom Mr. Martin has a great deal of
admiration. He mentioned that this is also Martin Luther King day, who is
another person for whom Mr. Martin has a great deal of admiration. He said
he puts Mr. Butler, not on the same level, but in the same category as Martin
Luther King. Mr. Butler thanked Mr. Martin for his comments. He has enjoyed
the opportunities he has had in Albemarle County since 1952, and he will never
forget his achievements and great hurdles during the years he has been here.
Mr. Marshall asked if anyone else from the public would like to speak to
this special use permit. No one else wished to speak, so at 7:48 pm., Mr.
Marshall closed the public hearing.
At this time, Mr. Martin made a motion to approve SP-96-40 with an
inclusion in the language of the conditions for a restriction not to allow the
starting of equipment before 10:00 a.m. He reiterated that he is not includ-
ing the loading or unloading of trucks in this condition.
Mr. Cilimberg suggested some wording to be included as a second sentence
in Condition #4 which would state that operation of equipment in association
with routine maintenance is only allowed between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
8:00 p.m. Mr. Davis asked if Mr. Cilimberg is referring to every day of the
week in this condition. Mr. Cilimberg responded that nothing has been said
about limiting the days of the week. He is unsure if the days need to be
stipulated, and it will depend on whether or not the Board is comfortable with
the condition as stated. Mr. Martin said he does not have a problem with the
days of the week.
Mr. Marshall agreed. He said Mr. Arrington is a minister, and he will
not be working on Sundays. He then asked if the condition relating to
gasoline storage should be placed with Condition #3. Mr. Martin noted that
Mr. Cilimberg has already recommended storage for purposes of this condition
where the storage is not to be for a long term or in a large quantity.
Mr. Davis suggested that the word, ~storage", be defined as being the
keeping of more than a five gallon quantity of material for longer than a
certain number of days. He said this gets away from the ambiguity of a long
term. Mr. Cilimberg stated that he would imagine the gasoline will be used
fairly quickly if it is just in a five gallon quantity. Mr. Martin said if
the stipulation of five gallons is used, then enough has been said.
Mr. Marshall remarked that he does not understand the problem of the
storage of gasoline. He has a 550 gallon tank of gasoline and an equal size
tank for diesel material for his tractors on the farm. He cannot operate
without these tanks of material, and he probably makes three times the noise
Mr. Arrington makes. Mrs. Thomas noted that Mr. Marshall has a lot more land
around him. Mr0 Marshall commented that this was his next question. He
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 16)
OOOO8'7
wondered how close is the neighbor. Mr. Cilimberg replied that he believes
the neighbor is within 75 feet of Mr. Arrington.
Mr. Martin commented that a person could easily stand on the edge of the
neighbor's property and see everything that is happening on Mr. Arrington's
property. He has been told everybody has to build close together there
because of the way the land perks, even though there is a fair amount of
property in the area.
Mrs. Thomas remarked that she went to the site because she was uncom-
fortable with the Planning Commission going against the Planning staff's
recommendation. She is now in favor of the request, but she felt the staff
needs to know why. She said although the road is gravel, it is wide and
straight and not the type of road such as she and Mr. Perkins would find in
their own districts where a person would hate to have their teenage driver
meet a truck on the road. She said she interprets the VDoT comments to mean
there is no concern about the wear and tear on the road. She does not feel
the additional truck traffic, in this particular instance on this road, is a
concern. She was very impressed with the location of the shed. She said one
of the things that cannot be seen well in the pictures is the hump in the
middle of the land, so all that is seen from the road is the top of the shed.
She said probably two-thirds of it is visible, but the whole shed cannot be
seen. She went on to say things parked behind the shed will certainly not be
seen, and anything that is not directly behind the shed is directly behind the
house, when a person is looking from the road. She mentioned that she was
impressed by a dumpster being placed back in among the trees, and she thought
this showed an attempt to be considerate of where things were placed on the
property so they would not be ugly to the neighbors or passersby.
She also feels this is sort of an agricultural pursuit which is more
appropriate to this zone than a VCR/TV repair expansion. She emphasized,
though, that she was not on the Board at the time of the expansion request.
She said the VCR/TV repair expansion application was turned down, and it is
next door to this operation, and she can see people wondering why one applica-
tion was approved and not the other. She added that an agricultural type of
activity is more appropriate than bringing people in to have their equipment
repaired. She is happy to be supportive of this request. She liked the
suggestions made for the storage, etc., and she noted that Mr. Arrington does
not have a chipper and does not plan to get one. She emphasized that her last
concern is wondering if there is any limit on the type of noise allowed, since
the permit goes with the land and not the applicant. Mr. Martin pointed out
that the Noise Ordinance would be in force at all times, as well as the time
limits. Mrs. Thomas then indicated that this was acceptable with her.
Mr. Martin then restated his motion to approve SP-96-40 with the five
conditions recommended by the Planning Commission, adding the following words
to Condition #4: "Operation of equipment in association with routine mainte-
nance is only allowed between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m." and
Changing Condition #3 to read: "Storage shall mean the keeping of more than a
five-gallon quantity of material." Mr. Bowerman seconded the motion.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: 'Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
(Note: the conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
3 o
5o
No more than three trucks and three trailers parked on site;
No more than one additional employee not related to family permit-
ted on site;
No storage of gas, oil, fertilizers, or chemicals on site. No
outside storage of equipment, supplies/materials related to
landscape business, including trailers noted above. "Storage"
shall mean the keeping of more than a five-gallon quantity of
material;
No repairs of equipment other than routine operational maintenance
(oil change, blade replacement, and the like) ~ Operation of
equipment in association with routine maintenance is only allowed
between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
Area used to conduct the Home Occupation shall not exceed 1,800
square feet.
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 17)
000088
Agenda Item No. 7. SP-96-43. Nancy Porritt, Piney Mountain Preschool &
Children's Cottage (Signs #61 & #62). Public Hearing on a request to estab-
lish private preschool to serve 6-9 children on 2.7 ac in RA district located
on E sd of Rt 29 N across from GE Fanuc. TM21,P12A. Rivanna Dist.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to defer
SP-96-43 to February 19, 1997, at the applicant's request. Roll was called,
and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
Agenda Item No. 8. SP-96-44. George Hall, Buddy's Mobile Automotive
Repair (Sign #63). Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-94-31 for an
automotive repair garage to allow expansion of number of repair garage bays.
Property on N sd of Rt 250E just W of Fluvanna County line. TM95,P12B1.
Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on December 30, 1996 and
January 6, 1997.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and a permanent part of the record. He noted that the property
is located on Route 250 east, just west of the Fluvanna County Line. He
explained that the proposed amendment would add two bay doors to the garage,
but according to Zoning Ordinance requirements, adequate parking would not be
available to add two bay doors. Therefore, Mr. Cilimberg said staff has made
a recommendation that only one bay door be added which would allow for
sufficient parking. He pointed out the favorable aspects of the request, as
well as the unfavorable aspect which would permit a public garage to enlarge
in a rural area. He said the staff supports the request and is recommending
approval with nine conditions. He called attention to Condition #8 which
states that no more than eight vehicles awaiting repair shall be parked on the
property outdoors at any time. He said the applicant has agreed to a reduc-
tion of six vehicles awaiting repair, which is a recommendation made by the
Planning Commission. He stated that the remaining eight conditions stand as
the staff has recommended.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on December
17, 1996, unanimously recommended approval of SP-96-44 subject to the nine
conditions.
There were no questions from the Board members, so Mr. Marshall opened
the public hearing.
Mr. George Hall passed around pictures to the Board members. He said he
wants to install a ten by fourteen door which will give him sufficient room to
do engine work. With a door this size, he will not have to back cars out from
the front of his garage or push cars around back. His reason for wanting to
put a door in the back of the building was to keep from tying up lanes. He
explained that inspection lanes are supposed to be kept open at all times. He
noted that he is not making any money with inspections. He only gets $10 per
inspection, and each inspection takes an hour and a half to two hours, but he
does them as a service to his customers. He had wanted to put in two bay
doors, but one is sufficient. He services the Tiger Fuel trucks, and he wants
to be able to get all of them inside, so he does not have to work on them
outside in the cold.
Mr. Marshall asked if anyone else wished to speak to SP-96-44, and no
one else came forward. Mr. Marshall then closed the public hearing.
Mrs. Thomas referred to the report given this Board which mentioned work
being done after hours involving plastic pipe to remove exhausts in a closed
area. She wondered if this is allowed. Mr. Bowerman stated that the report
indicates that the pipe carries the exhaust outside when someone is working on
exhaust systems inside in cold weather. He said the sound would not be any
different than a normal exhaust.
Mrs. Thomas mentioned the conversation with the previous iteTM about
neighbors getting along with each other. She added that she pictures this as
a business which will be doing work at odd hours as a favor to the customers,
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 18)
ooo089
and such a situation does not make for a good relationship with the neighbors.
She does not think the Supervisors can make a lot of rules and regulations
because it is too intrusive, but she is also sympathetic to people who have to
put up with extraneous noises. She thinks it would be silly to recommend
hours for Mr. Hall to arrive and leave, but there should not be noisy activi-
ties taking place after certain hours.
Mr. Martin said he considers this application entirely differently from
the previous application, based on where the business is located. He pointed
out that it is located on Route 250, and there are cars going up and down the
road 24 hours a day at a fairly steady pace. The other applicant lived down a
gravel road, and the business was located in more of a residential, private
type of setting. He does not believe enough noise will be made, even at 9:00
p.m., to cause problems because there will always be traffic noise on Route
250. He does not see this as a real concern.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Martin to approve SP-96-44, subject to
the nine conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bowerman. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. BOwerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
None.
Mrs. Humphris.
(Note: the conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
2 o
3 o
4 o
The public garage use shall be limited to the repairing and
equipping of vehicles. No bodywork or spray-painting of vehicles
shall be permitted. No sale of gasoline or sale or rental of
vehicles shall be permitted;
All work shall be conducted within the existing building with
additions shown on the attached plan initialed WDF 11/25/96. A
maximum of three bays shall be permitted;
No outside storage of parts including junk parts or inoperable
vehicles except those awaiting repair. Refuse awaiting disposal
shall be stored in appropriate containers;
Fire and Building Official approval;
Improvement of entrance as recommended by the Virginia Department
of Transportation in a letter dated November 21, 1995;
Hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.ml to 1:00 p.m. on Saturday and
no operation of the garage on Sunday;
Engineering Department approval of waste collection and disposal
methods;
Not more than six vehicles awaiting repair, shall be parked on the
property outdoors at any time; and
No expansion of the existing use without Health Department approv-
al.
Agenda Item No. 9. SP-96-49. The Tandem School (Signs #70 & #71).
Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-96-06 to expand facilities for school
to include a field house of approx 13,000 sf on the site of the present school
accessed off of Rt 20 about 1 Mi S of 1-64. TM91,P2A&2B. Scottsville Dist.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on December 30, 1996 and January 6, 1997.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report which is on file in the
Clerk's office and a permanent part of the record. He noted that the gymna-
sium is planned to be served by public water and sewer since the existing
drainfield serving Tandem's other facilities is already loaded to capacity.
The applicant has indicated a desire to have the gymnasium in service for the
beginning of the Fall 1997 semester, but the water and sewer lines being
extended to the Tandem property in association with the Monticello High School
project, will probably not be available before the end of 1997 or mid-1998.
Mr. Cilimberg said temporary measures, such as a pump and haul system, will
probably have to be approved to allow for site plan approval and receive a
Certificate of Occupancy for the building. He mentioned that no detrimental
effect is expected for the surrounding area, ~but there are issues relating to
the future expansion of the school needing further review. He said the
applicant understands this, and he has indicated that there will be a master
plan submitted before those expansion activities occur, and water and sewer
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 19)
000090
will have to be addressed to the entire facility at that point in time.
Mr. Cilimberg noted that the staff has recommended approval of this
request with four conditions as recommended to the Planning Commission, at its
meeting on January 7, 1997. He stated that the Commissioners, as a part of
Condition #1, noted the date of the preliminary site plan, as well as an
initialing by RAL, who is Ron Lilley, a staff person. He informed Board
members that there was one dissenting vote by a Commissioner which was based
on a concern that it may be premature to establish a gymnasium before water
and sewer are actually available for the school.
At this time, Mr. Marshall asked the applicant for comments.
Mr. Don Powers, representing Tandem School, expressed appreciation for
the approval of the Community Hall which was built this year. He said it made
such an incredible difference. Prior to the opening of the Community Hall,
students at Tandem were extremely crowded, and there were so many people going
through the main building. He said the children also think having men's and
women's bathrooms in the new building is great. There has been a need at the
Tandem School for a gymnasium for some time, and applicants have actually been
lost to other schools because there was no indoor gymnasium facility. He is
sure the septic and water issues can be resolved, and plans are in the making
to connect the entire school to County sewer and water when it becomes
available.
Mr. Marshall inquired if the Tandem School officials are considering a
temporary pump and haul system. Mr. Powers answered that school officials
anticipate that a temporary pump and haul system would be the way to go, if
the Health Department approves it, or unless it is less expensive to do
something else.
There were no further questions from Board members, so Mr. Marshall
opened the public hearing on SP-96-49.
No one came forward to speak, so Mr. Marshall closed the public hearing.
Mr. Marshall announced that this project is located in his district, but
he is unable to make a motion, since he is serving as Chairman at today's
meeting. Mrs. Thomas asked if Mr. Marshall is in favor of the application.
Mr. Marshall answered affirmatively.
Motion was then offered by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Martin, to
approve SP-96-49 subject to the four conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
None.
Mrs. Humphris.
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below:)
The new facility (gymnasium/field house) will be located approxi-
mately as shown on the preliminary site plan dated November 11,
1996, revised December 10, 1996, and initialed RAL (reduced
version provided as Attachment A);
The new facility shall be connected to public water and sewer
prior to occupancy if water and sewer is reasonably available to
the property prior to building completion or within three months
after water and sewer lines become reasonably available to the
property if they are not reasonably available prior to building
completion. For purposes of this condition, the term "reasonably
available" refers to the planned extension of water and sewer
lines to a point south of the new connector road from Avon Street
to Route 20, all of which is intended to be accomplished with the
construction of Monticello High School, upon acceptance of those
lines by the Albemarle County Service Authority. Authority for
temporary sewage disposal is not implied in this condition. Such
authority would need to be granted by the Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors upon advice of the Virginia Department of Health;
Total school enrollment and on-site staffing shall be limited to
200 persons.
Additional buildings or increase in total enrollment/staffing must
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 20)
be authorized by a new special use permit.
00009 .'
Agenda Item No. 10. Adopt Resolution endorsing ISTEA Enhancement Grant
Application for the Rivanna Greenway.
Mr. Cilimberg discussed the ISTEA Enhancement Grant Application for the
Rivanna Greenway. He described the Greenway trails, and noted that the
proposed Rivanna Greenbelt/Greenway extension will connect Northeast Park, Pen
Park and Darden Towe Park with the City's existing Rivanna Greenbelt. He said
the City Council addressed this matter last week and the Councilors asked the
staff to focus more on trails and less on the Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge. He
stated that it is the indication now that more than-likely the bridge concept
is not something that will be pursued. This proposal will allow anyone on the
Greenway to come under the bridge, take steps up to the sidewalks on Route 250
East, come down Route 250 East to the Elks Drive Trail and then walk this
trail into the Darden Towe Park.
He said as far as ADA purposes are concerned, there will be a loop
coming back to River Road at a gradual grade so a person in a wheel chair
could come back to River Road and follow the sidewalk to Darden Towe Park. It
also affords people a way to get to Pen Park using the same trail and facili-
ties, and he pointed out that this is a less expensive project than was being
considered initially. Consideration is still being given as to whether there
might be possibilities to pursue the amount of monies along the lines of the
cost of the bridge. If this happens, instead of using the money for the
bridge, it would be used for extension of the trail system further north,
particularly for the possibility of extending the trail beyond Pen Park on the
west side of the Rivanna River where River Run and Dunlora are located. He
said there is land which has either been committed for dedication or is in the
process of being dedicated to the County to allow for the trail to continue.
He emphasized that the resolution and proposal indicate a maximum commitment
that the County would be making toward this project, and he asked Board
members to look at this proposal favorably. The money is included in the CIP
to make the match and provide for the maximum commitment of up to $50,000.
If the Board members are willing, the staff will continue to work on
design and may still pursue close to the total amount of money He noted that
this is a great opportunity. He explained that the ISTEA grant is an 80
percent enhancement grant for the City and County, and it is a project in
which both jurisdictions are very interested. The opportunity to get this
type of federal money will go a long way toward further completing the
Greenway system.
Mr. Tucker called attention to the sixth paragraph of the proposed
resolution and suggested that the words ~possibility of" be added to indicate
noncommittal from County officials as far as a Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge is
concerned. The bridge will probably not be built, but the same funding can
probably be maintained and used for further trail expansion.
Mrs. Thomas mentioned the last paragraph of the resolution which
indicates that Albemarle County agrees to reimburse VDOT for the total amount
of the costs expended by the Transportation Department through the date that
office is notified of cancellation. She suggested that this sentence is worth
examining. She said, as an example, the County will not have to reimburse
VDOT if the Greenbrier Extended project is canceled. She stated that the
Rivanna Greenway project should not go forward, unless everyone is confident
of it, and she is very confident that it is going to be a very attractive
walkway. Since she is going to make a motion in favor of this project, she
felt she should point out that the County is committing itself to reimbursing
VDOT if there is cancellation. She said, though, it does not indicate that
the County will have to go ahead with the project if the federal funding does
not happen.
Mr. Cilimberg agreed. He said reimbursement to VDOT would only happen
if the County got into a contract agreement, and started work on the project,
and then decided not to proceed. He noted that the same condition exists for
the Thomas Jefferson Parkway.
At this time, motion was offered by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Martin,
to adopt the proposed resolution, adding the words "possibility of" in the
next to last paragraph. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 21)
000092'
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
Project Endorsement Resolution
WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation
Board construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a
request by resolution be received from the local government or
state agency in order that the Virginia Department of Transporta-
tion program an enhancement project in the County of Albemarle.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervi-
sors of Albemarle County, virginia, does hereby request the
Commonwealth Transportation Board to establish a project for the
improvement of Rivanna Greenway Access and Path along the South
Fork Rivanna River Reservoir, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of County Supervisors
hereby agrees to pay 20 percent of the total cost for planning and
design, right-of-way, and construction of this project, and that,
if the County of Albemarle subsequently elects to cancel this
project, it hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of
Transportation for the total amount of the costs expended by the
Department through the date the Department is notified of such
cancellation.
Agenda Item No. 11. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the
BOARD.
Mr. Tucker said the School Board would like to meet with the Board to
discuss their budget for the next fiscal year. It was agreed that the Board
could meeting on February 5, 1996, at 4:00 p.m.
Mrs. Thomas stated that she made a mistake when she was discussing
funding for the Airport Road under the Consent Agenda item. She said she
wanted to ask about the ISTEA Enhancement Grant which is to provide a means to
make the corridor more useable, etc. She noted from the information given in
the Executive Summary that the funds to cover the County's local match are
anticipated to come from the proposed 1997/98-2001/2002 CIP, as well as funds
originally intended to match the Airport Access award. She asked if this
means that the Transient/Occupancy Tax won't be needed for this project.
Mr. Tucker responded that the Transient/Occupancy Tax may still be
needed for the Airport Road improvements. He said the problem is that there
is no firm budget figure for the road because plans are still being developed.
He added that the staff is seeking this additional funding through ISTEA
because local money will have to be found somewhere. He reiterated that
another source of revenue could be the Transient/Occupancy Tax. He added that
the Airport representatives have applied for additional funds from the State
Aviation Board, as well. As many types of grant funding sources have been
gleaned as possible, and until the plans are finished, there won't be a final
figure. He stated that the project will need to come back to the supervisors,
because it may mean whether or not they want to continue with bicycle trails,
sidewalks and landscaping, etc., He said the consultant is designing for such
things, but if revenue is not available, this Board will have the ability to
consider a reduction, if necessary.
Mrs. Thomas commented that when this project came before the MPO, the
members of that organization initially wondered why there were bicycle lanes
and pedestrian walks along this road. However, the MPO had just had a
presentation of what the Four Seasons area is like from the point of view of
someone who might like to do something else besides using a single occupant
automobile every time he or she needs to go everywhere. It really impressed
the MPO members that Four Seasons Drive ought to have been built originally
with walking and bicycle access as it is now. She stated that mothers push
their baby buggies on the asphalt, and there are no good places to move aside.
She added that the traffic is fairly fast moving, and the road has a lot of
cut-through traffic. She said after this presentation, everyone realized that
this is an area which will have a lot of development, employment and residen-
tial opportunities, so there should be the possibility of bicycle and pedes-
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 22)
000093
trian walks.
Mr. Tucker agreed. He stated that County officials have to be consider-
ate and cognizant of the intersection at Route 29, because a majority of the
residential lane users are across Route 29. He said consideration needs to be
given to getting across this intersection.
Mrs. Thomas next informed the supervisors that the MPO has passed a
resolution urging that the ISTEA program be reauthorized very much in the same
way it is now. It is these enhancement funds which have made the Monticello
Parkway possible and the bike paths along Rugby and Ivy Road, as well as the
landscaping. She said these things are coming to Albemarle County because the
Federal Government developed ISTEA with some monies set aside which had to be
used for enhancement funds, and it is up to the local state governments to
determine which of the enhancement requests will be funded. She commented
that this money has to be spent for such things, and it is the most creative
use of the gasoline tax dollars that there has been for many years. She
suggested that if anyone is discussing anything with a local congressman, they
might put in a good word for reauthorization of the ISTEA program in very much
the same way as it is now. She noted that the state governments would like to
change this and have all the money come to them as a block and not have any
enhancement funds set aside. She reiterated, though, that the MPO is urging
that there be some set aside funds.
Mr. Marshall said that since the sign was posted for the proposed
Southern Connector road his phone has been ringing. The people in Mill Creek
don't want the road. They are afraid their road would be used as cut-through
to the University. The developer is also afraid it will hinder his ability to
sell lots. If the County cannot afford to build the road, he thinks it should
be removed from plans. Mr. Tucker said the staff would look at the proposed
road, and make a report at a later date.
Mrs. Thomas stated that the whole study for the southern area roads puts
a lot of emphasis on this road as being a way of having an alternative to an
interchange at Interstate 64. She emphasized that County officials have been
told they cannot have this interchange. She is willing to discuss the
Southern Connector road, but she asked that it not be removed from the plans
by an action tonight. She said this is much too premature.
Mr. Marshall remarked that he is trying to support the neighborhoods
there, and the residents do not want the road. If there is an overwhelming
need for the road, then he will support it, but the need has not been proven
to him yet. He also asked why there is not money to build it, if there is
such a need. He thinks there is as much of a chance of getting an interchange
at Avon Street as getting this road built, as far as secondary road funds are
concerned, unless the County is going to build it.
Mr. Marshall recognized Mr. Miller, who was present for the purpose of
obtaining an Eagle Scout Badge.
At 8:33 p.m., motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, to adjourn into
executive session pursuant to Code Section 2.1-344(A) of the Code of Virginia
under subsection 7 to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding pending
litigation of a tax matter. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Thomas. Roll was
called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
At 8:43 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session. Motion was made
by Mr. Bowerman, to certify by a recorded vote that to the best of each Board
member's knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the
open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and
identified in the motion authorizing the executive session were heard,
discussed or considered in the executive session. Mrs. Thomas seconded the
motion. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
January 15, 1997 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 23)
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
000094
Mr. Davis reported that the County and Farmington have reached an
agreement in the litigation that has been pending regarding their tax assess-
ment. He asked that the Board approve a settlement of the 1994 tax assessment
agreeing to an approximate value of $10,560,000, in the 1995 assessment
agreeing to an approximate $13,242,700, and the 1997 assessment agreeing to an
approximate value of $13,707,000. This settlement is subject to approval by
the court and would be concluded in a settlement agreement and an order of the
court.
Motion was made by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Martin, to direct the
County Attorney to finalize this settlement proposal. Roll was called, and
the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Mrs. Thomas.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Humphris.
Agenda Item No. 12. Adjourn. With no further business to come before
the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Approved_by
Board
Initials