Louisa County Seal, click for homepage Louisa County Seal, click for homepage
Contact    Sitemap    Search    

Menu
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
SEPTEMBER 5, 2006
5:00 P.M.



Board Present: Fitzgerald A. Barnes, Willie L. Gentry, Jr., Willie L. Harper, Richard A. Havasy, Allen B. Jennings, Eric F. Purcell, and Jack T. Wright
Others Present: C. Lee Lintecum, County Administrator; Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator; Patrick Morgan, County Attorney; and Michele Doty, Deputy Clerk


CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Barnes called the September 5, 2006 regular meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 5:00 p.m.  Mr. Purcell led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD

P.T. Spencer, Louisa District, expressed his concern with the revisions of private shooting range.  Mr. Spencer noted that the Planning Commission had spent a significant amount of time on this definition.  Mr. Spencer stated that the revision was  supposedly a compromise among concerned parties and he felt that the citizens have not been fairly represented in this situation.  Mr. Spencer stated that these changes were not properly listed on the website or advertised and questioned the authority used to therefore legally make these changes.  Mr. Spencer reminded the Board that the citizens hold the Board responsible for the changes that are made and put their trust in their elected official.  

Jack Speer, Cuckoo District, noted that he is concerned about the way the deliberations and decisions of the Planning Commission have been brought to the Board.  The matrix that was developed is a good planning tool and clearly stated that shooting ranges should have a by-right designation in A-1 and A-2.  Mr. Speer stated that he finds it disturbing that further restrictions have arisen and appear to have a life of their own.  Mr. Speer requested that the Board take action to find out how these things happened and correct them, as they are there to represent the people.  

Gary Griffith, Jackson District, indicated that changes have been made to the Equestrian Landing Development which include having larger lots and amenities within the subdivision.   The development will have 5 acre lots with the exception to two 10 acres lots which leaves 18 lots fronting the road and includes a riding trail that can be used for bicycles, walking or horses.  Mr. Griffith noted that the development has been designed to try to protect the beaver pond and a stream that crosses the property.

Lawrence Jackson, Louisa District, indicated that back in March 21, 2005 he came before the Board with two issues.  One issue was the Buffalo Soldiers Motorcycle Club who have done a lot in the community to foster good will and education.  Mr. Jackson thanked Sheriff Fortune for his support.  The second issue was a plan presented to the Board for a fluoride treatment program and $2500 was awarded at the time for the budget of 2005 and followed up the next year with a like amount.  These funds were turned over to the Health Department and the funds disappeared and came back to the Countys accounting system.  Mr. Jackson stressed to the Board the need to move on with this program and that the funds requested will enable them to go to the private sector to raise more funds.  Mr. Jackson indicated that he has gone to the state and formed a 501C3 corporation called “Citizens In Action”.  Mr. Jackson appealed to the Board to ask questions on why the funds were not utilized and to free up these funds so that they can be used properly.  

William Anthony, Jackson District, informed the Board that he has concerns regarding the repairs to Bumpass Park.  He questioned why the repairs cost $20,000 and how many bids were received.  Mr. Anthony indicated that with the money planned for the swimming pool and the difference between what the actual cost of the repairs should have been and what was paid, the taxpayers could have received a better reduction.

Linda Meeks, Green Springs, addressed the Board indicating that she has some property in Louisa County that was resurveyed and when the survey was done it was divided into four parcels of land.  They are currently trying to sell the back parcel of the property and the County is indicating that they will not recognize this plat.  Ms. Meeks questioned whom she needs to see to get this issue resolved.  Mr. Purcell questioned whether this was done before or after the deed and Ms. Meeks indicated that this was filed with the deed of trust.  Mr. Barnes asked that she work with Mr. Darren Coffey from Community Development and Mr. Purcell to get this issue resolved.

In response to Mr. Anthonys concerns Mr. Jennings stated that he visited the Bumpass Park Lot when the problem was first identified and felt that it would be an inexpensive repair that the Countys Facilities Management could possibly fix themselves.  He was surprised at the cost when he checked on the status of the project.  Mr. Jennings noted that he is very concerned with being fiscally responsible and is going to check into this and get some answers.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

Mr. Barnes requested to add a dental discussion with Mr. Jackson and to add time to address Mr. Spencers concerns.  

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the September 5, 2006 agenda was adopted as amended.

PRESENTATIONS

Introduction of Dr. Lillian Peake, TJ Health Director

Mr. Lee Lintecum, County Administrator, introduced Dr. Lillian Peake, the new Thomas Jefferson Health Director to the Board.  Dr. Peake addressed the Board, provided a brief summary of her credentials and stated that she is happy to be joining the county.  Dr. Peake provided a handout to the Board on Pandemic Influenza, the Bird-flu, to provide an update to the Board and indicated her willingness to attend and provide information on any issues the Board would like addressed.  Mr. Purcell thanked Dr. Peake for her help and indicated the Boards appreciation for this information.

Fluoride Treatment Program

Mr. Barnes indicated that last March the Board had allocated the sum of $2500 to go toward fluoride treatment to those who did not have access.  These funds had been dispersed to the Health Department to administer the program.  Mr. Jackson indicated that their organization would really like to get this program implemented so the problems that children face with inadequate fluoride can be reversed by up to 90%.  To cost to get implement this program would be approximately $16,000 and they are only asking for enough funds to help get this program started.  Mr. Purcell and Mr. Wright voiced their concern over the fact that these funds were not utilized as they should have been.  Dr. Peake indicated that she fully supports this program and wants to work with this organization to get this program on line.  Mr. Jackson noted that there should now be $5000 allocated since the 2006 funds as well as the 2005 funds were not utilized.  Following a brief discussion, Mr. Barnes stated that they will give the Health Department until the first meeting in October to get these funds properly dispersed or the funds will be allocated to the private organization to utilize these funds properly.  

Private Shooting Range

Mr. Purcell indicated that he is interested in becoming more educated on this issue and feels that there has been a breakdown on how things work.  Mr. Purcell stated that the process should be that staff work with the Planning Commission appointed by the Board and then the Board reserves the ultimate right and authority to look at the proposal and revise as needed.  Mr. Barnes indicated that he would address Mr. Spencers questions however he is not going to put staff on the defense during a public hearing and if errors have been made then they will be fixed.  Mr. Barnes noted that the points brought up by Mr. Spencer were good but staff was asked to bring forward questions to the Board.  The question of the how much acreage is required for a private range bothered him as well as several other Board members.  Mr. Barnes acknowledged that the advertisement of this change may not have been handled appropriately and this is a concern, however the final decision does rest with the Board.  
Mr. Pat Morgan, County Attorney, indicated that there is a clear path on how an amendment gets to the Board and after Mr. Speers phone call he is unclear how this particular issue got to the Board.  Mr. Barnes acknowledged that the Board had brought these concerns to staff and these changes were made following discussions by the Board with staff. Mr. Barnes indicated that he wants Mr. Morgan to make sure that in the future the proper channels are followed when changes are made.  Mr. Morgan suggested that this specific issue receive additional consideration before the changes are implemented.  Mr. Gentry indicated that the Planning Commission was shocked with the changes made to their proposal and initially when the five acres requirement came up it was immediately shot down and sent to the Board without this change.  Mr. Barnes noted that the Planning Commission is an advisory board and the Board has the right to make changes and has the final say.  However Mr. Barnes agrees that the process of changes needs to be done correctly and wants to make sure we follow the correct legal process.  Mr. Spencer reiterated that he is concerned with the process and doesnt question the authority of the Board.

VDOT Monthly Update

Mr. Lintecum stated that he was directed to get with VDOT to schedule a meeting to explain the changes in the VDOT rules, regulations and laws that occurred with the 566 Program.  Mr. Lintecum indicated that Mr. Glass has asked if this could be done as a joint meeting with Fluvanna.  The Board indicated that they would be happy to do this and asked that Mr. Lintecum work with Mr. Glass to set an acceptable date.  Mr. Glass addressed the Board and gave the following VDOT update.  Mr. Glass indicated that currently they are performing brush cutting, machining dirt roads, minor patching, and second grass cutting on primary roads.  Mr. Glass said that there had not been the need to close any roads with the current heavy rains until this morning when they had to close Rt. 624 (Mt. Pleasant Church Rd.) at Christopher Creek, Rt. 613 (Goldmine Road) at Duckinghole Creek, Rt. 640 (E. Jack Jouett Rd.) at Fosters Creek, Rt. 604, (Roundabout Rd.) at Harris Creek, and Rt. 651 (Cales Drive) at the North Anna River.  Mr. Glass noted that all primary paving has been completed in Louisa and the contractors are now in the process of striping the roads and installing the centerline reflectors.  He further noted that the Surface Treatment Contractor has finished in Louisa and has moved to Fluvanna, the State Force Construction Crew is working on Route 699 Indian Creek Road and the bridge crew is working on Rt. 1002 Cammack Street, putting in sidewalks.  In the past month, 13 plats/plans for proposed new subdivisions and developments were reviewed and forwarded to the Culpeper District Planning Department for their review and comments.  Mr. Glass indicated that a speed study that was requested by Mr. Gentry was submitted to Traffic Engineering for Route 208 between Rt. 640 (E. Jack Jouett Rd.) and Interstate 64, the sign study for Route 613 (Oakland Rd.) between Rt. 692 (Hickory Creek Rd.) and Rt. 669 (Ellisville Dr.) was submitted on Mr. Purcells behalf, traffic engineering will be looking at the possible installation of curve signs with speed advisory plates, Rt. 632 (Waldrop Church Rd.) has been center-lined, they just received Commission approval to install the speed limit signs on Rt. 601 (Paynes Mill Rd.) between Rt. 33 and Rt. 522, a citizen request for a speed study was performed on Rt. 607 (Bybee Rd.), which is partially located in Louisa County but the request was denied, a request from the Town of Louisa Planning Commission to have the words “Yield Ahead” painted in the East bound lane at the intersection of Rt. 22 has been forwarded to Traffic Engineering as well as the request from Louisa County Schools to install School Bus Stop Ahead signs in the area of the entrance to Blue Ridge Shores and Rt. 651 (Cales Drive).

In discussion with the Board, Mr. Barnes asked about the status of his request for Rt. 641 Captain Meade Rd. and Mr. Glass indicated that they have received environmental reports and this is on the schedule to be completed.

OLD BUSINESS

Discussion Application of Biosolids on A-2 Zone Properties

Mr. Morgan investigated whether close-by subdivisions could prevent local farms from using Biosolids.  The State has reserved the right to implement special conditions on the spreading of Biosolids if they feel special needs are there.  A private citizen would have to prove that the process is a nuisance, which states that nuisance involves endangerment of health or the destruction of reasonable and comfortable use of the property.  Mr. Morgan noted that unless a citizen can prove that there is a permanent problem they would not be successful in challenging a farmer.  Mr. Gentry indicated that it was his understanding that if the Biosolids were treated properly there would not be an odor problem and if there is an odor that should key us into a problem during monitoring.  Mr. Harper asked if we have authority to stop this process if we find there is a problem and Mr. Morgan indicated that the person who does the monitoring could stop the process if necessary.

Discussion Revised Charter and Bylaws of The Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Academy

Mr. Morgan indicated that he had reviewed the changes to the charter of the Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Academy and found that this is very similar to the original document but had been updated to state code.  Mr. Morgan noted that he has some areas of concern that the Board may want to address.  First, the manner in which a county can withdraw from the program.  The state code that every five years in October the Board can ask to withdraw from the program and it only takes 2/3 of a majority of the participating jurisdiction to approve such withdrawal.   If you withdraw at any other time in then takes a unanimous decision on the part of the other jurisdictions. The original document included this language but was struck out and made reference to it and talked about a withdrawal date and now is not clear when the withdrawal date is.  Mr. Morgan feels that this is something that should be addressed.  Mr. Morgan went on to state that the other concern deals with the method as to how a jurisdiction can withdraw if it had outstanding debt.  The withdrawal can be approved but it would require that it stay in for at least a year longer as the jurisdictions try to determine how to continue the program without the county that is withdrawing.  The county could also pay a withdrawal penalty if they chose to do so in order to withdraw.  The status says that the Board of Directors can provide for conditions of withdrawal but he does not believe that they can when there is a statutorily applied method and doesnt know if they can hold onto another jurisdiction involuntarily for 12 months.  He does not know that they can hold on to a jurisdiction for 12 months.  Mr. Barnes asked if the Board would agree to have a letter drafted by Mr. Morgan with these concerns and recommended changes and state that support of the charter change cannot be made at this time.  The Board authorized Mr. Morgan to draft and send out this letter.

Subdivision Review

Dickens Creek Farm, LLC

Mr. Coffey indicated that this request had been deferred to allow the Board to do additional research.  Mr. Wright indicated that there are two existing roads that were approved in a previous subdivision prior to requiring them to be paved state standard roads.  Mr. Wright noted that his initial understanding was that these two roads would be paved to state standards and extend them.  Mr. Wright found that there is one part of the Dickey Purcell Road that would not be paved because there is no lot that enters that road.  Mr. Wright does not want to leave this road sitting there as a private road available to the public and this section should be closed off.  Mr. Wright asked Mr. Barlow to address this issue as well as the four-acre tract that will be a common area which one of the subdivision has direct access to.  Mr. Wright indicated that in talking with Mr. Barlow it was suggested getting a 10' easement that would provide a walking trail to this area.  Mr. Tommy Barlow indicated that he had spoken to Mr. Malone regarding the portion of the private lane that is not being utilized and they did not plan to pave this road.  Mr. Barlow stated that Mr. Malone indicated that he would pursue getting this section of the road abandoned but this could not be guaranteed, as the lot owners will have the final say.  Mr. Barlow stated that there is no problem with putting an easement down the lot line for a walk way or trail connecting the two subdivisions.  Mr. Barlow pointed out that this plan gets the development off the road and these are two entirely separate subdivisions on two separate roads and knows that the number of lots is a concern.  Mr. Wright indicated that he has no problem with the South Ridge Subdivisions but will not support the other without the road being changed and recommended giving another 30 days to give Mr. Malone time to negotiate this request with the property owners.  Mr. Harper confirmed with Mr. Coffey that these are two separate applications.

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 4-3, the Board agreed to forward the South Ridge Subdivision application (98-27-C) to Community Development for review with Mr. Barnes, Mr. Jennings and Mr. Purcell voting against.   The Board agreed that the other subdivision will come back to the Board at the first meeting in October.

Discussion/Decision Comprehensive Plan Amendments

The Comprehensive Plan Amendments were advertised and placed on the website for public review.  

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the Plan and Map as submitted.

Discussion/Decision Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance Amendments

Mr. Havasy requested that private shooting range not be included in this approval.  The Board agreed that this one section will be removed and sent back to the Planning Commission for review.  Mr. Gentry emphasized how much effort was spent on this particular item and asked how sending this back to the Planning Commission will change anything.  Mr. Havasy thanked Mr. Coffey and his staff for their great work with the fact that there is only one issue that needs to be addressed.  Mr. Barnes stated that the Board is not trying to take away anyones rights, but trying to support the rights of all citizens.  Mr. Purcell stated that he did not realize that this issue was such a big concern and he appreciates delay by a month on this topic to increase his knowledge even if the same recommendation comes back.

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance Amendments with the exception of the private shooting range definition.

NEW BUSINESS

Discussion Home Buyer Assistance Program for Affordable Housing

Mr. Howard Evergreen, Director of Housing, thanked the Board for hearing the recommendations of the Affordable Housing Committee and setting aside money for down payment assistance.  Mr. Evergreen noted that the committee looked at how best to use the funds dedicated for down payments and recommended allowing the Piedmont Housing Alliance to manage them.  Mr. Evergreen indicated that there are people ready to start utilizing these funds and wanted to check with the Board to see if they had any questions.  Mr. Barnes suggested that the Affordable Housing Committee be disbanded and each Board member would come forward with one person to nominate to a new Committee and with an additional four members at large, which would include Darren Coffey.  This would provide each district with the opportunity to be represented.  Mr. Barnes stated that he fully supports this program and asks the Board to disperse this money.  Mr. Barnes noted that some language changes were made to clarify that this is not a gift and is a secured loan and this money will come back into this pool.  Mr. Wright indicated that this program addresses the issues of providing affordable house for the lower levels of income.  Mr. Barnes stated that he is proud of the steps that have been taken by the Board on affordable house.

On motion of Mr. Barnes, Mr. Gentry, Mr. Harper, Mr. Havasy, Mr. Jennings, Mr. Purcell and Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Barnes, Mr. Gentry, Mr. Harper, Mr. Havasy, Mr. Jennings, Mr. Purcell and Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the approved to disperse the funds allocated for affordable housing.  

Mr. Barnes indicated that the current Affordable Housing Committee will be disbanded and asked the Board members to forward their recommendations for their area representative to him prior to the next meeting.

Resolution FY07 CIP & O&M Carryovers

Mr. McLeod indicated that the capital account analysis is broken down by future projects, ongoing projects, and potential projects that obviously are not considered for carry-over.  Mr. McLeod noted that there was $4,743,709.77 that was not expended during the FY06 for capital improvements.  Mr. McLeod further noted that there is a request for $4,916,980.67, which is an additional $182,270.09.  He stated that the additional money is for three overruns which are landfill closure, Sacred Heart Avenue paving and the Administration Building generator.  The second resolution is for the operational encumbrances.  Most of these were for purchase orders and there are some grants such as Homeland Security.  Parks and Recreation also has money to carry over for the Betty Queen Center to replace fixtures broken during the year.  There is some money from reserve and contingencies for the water study, the Piedmont Crossroads Visitor Center and a telecommunication tower project.  Mr. McLeod noted that he included a resolution that the Board has already approved for the vehicle that had been damaged and the request by the Louisa County Public School for their five projects.  

On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adopt a resolution re-appropriating capital projects.

Mr. McLeod noted that there is also a resolution for the re-appropriating operating & maintenance FY06 carryovers.  Mr. Lintecum indicated that the funds for the fluoride treatment program should be added at this time.  

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adopt a resolution to re-appropriate operating and maintenance FY06 carryovers with the addition of funds for the fluoride treatment program.

Subdivision Review

Orchid Farms Subdivision Copperstone, LLC c/o Christopher J. Whitney, Applicant Route 757  Mr. Coffey indicated that the Community Development Department has received a preliminary conceptual sketch for review of Orchid Farms Subdivision proposed to contain a total of 20 lots, which includes two parcels 21.0 acres or larger.  The new subdivision street will be an extension of an existing state road (Route 756, Yancey Drive) that dead-ends at the entrance to the 3.86-acre parcel.  Mr. Coffey indicated that they had received a fax today from Mr. Barlow offering conditions, one is that the road would be built to VDOT standards which is required, second is the entrance sign will be constructed of stone and brick masonry, third is regarding removal of a modular home and the last is in regard to the planting of screenings.  Mr. Wright noted that there is a power pole at the entrance that he has been told is extremely strong and he wants to be sure that there is not going to be a problem.  Mr. Barlow responded that the existing pole is on the edge of the right of way and if this pole becomes a problem it will be moved at the applicants expense before the subdivision gets final approval.   Mr. Barnes questioned the issue of this being more than 18 lots.  Mr. Coffey stated that the current A-1 ordinance allows for 18 lots by-right and as many 21 acre lots after that as you want and then if a state road is servicing the second parcel it is no longer by-right it is a Board review however the proposal is still for eighteen 1.5 acre lots and two 21 acre lots.  Mr. Harper voiced concern that the 21-acre lots could be rezoned and divided again.  Mr. Coffey indicated that land usage is subject to change and there could be a deed restrict on the plat that no further divisions could occur and therefore future rezoning could not change that.

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 6-1, with Mr. Barnes voting against, the Board voted to send this back to the Community Development for review and add that these lots cannot be re-subdivided at a later date.

Equestrian Landing Sun, LLC c/o Gary Griffith, Applicant Route 601/701  Mr. Coffey indicated that the Community Development Department has received a revised preliminary conceptual sketch for “Equestrian Landing” Subdivision, containing 21 lots in Louisa County.  This subdivision is comprised of two parent parcels to be served by a new internal road constructed to VDOT subdivision street specifications, with one access onto Route 701 (Eastham Road).  Three of the proposed lots will access from Route 601 (Greenes Corner Road), leaving 18 lots to be served by the new internal subdivision street. As revised the one means of ingress/egress will serve 18 lots; versus two separate roads in close proximity serving approximately 10-11 lots each.  Two of the three lots fronting on Route 601 will be served by a single driveway easement.  An “equestrian easement” has also been provided that will serve all 21 proposed lots.  Mr. Coffey indicated that he met with applicants and due to the topography it does not make sense for access to go all the way through the three lots on Rt. 601.  Mr. Purcell questioned whether liability for the equestrian easement had been addressed to protect the property owners.  Mr. Coffey indicated that he had not heard of any discussion regarding legal liability.  Mr. Harper indicated that he likes the proposal due to the larger lot sizes.

On motion of Mr. Jennings, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 4-3, with Mr. Barnes, Mr. Purcell and Mr. Gentry voting against, the Board voted to send this back to the Community Development for review.

CLOSED SESSION

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 6:44 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:

1.        In accordance with §2.23711 (a) (7) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel for discussion of litigation.

2.        In accordance with §2.23711 (a) (1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended, for the purpose of discussing personnel under the County Administrator.

REGULAR SESSION

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 7:00 p.m.

RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION

On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adopt the following resolution:

WHEREAS, the Louisa County Board of Supervisors has convened a Closed Meeting this the 5th day of September 2006, pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and

WHEREAS, § 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with the Virginia Law.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED on this the 5th day of September 2006, that the Louisa County Board of Supervisors does hereby certify that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting was heard, discussed or considered by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

REZ09-06; Stephen Pick and Pamela Pick, Applicants/Owners,
Darren Coffey, Director of Community Development, indicated that this request is for the rezoning of approximately 15.768 acres from Agricultural (A-2) to Light Commercial (C-1).  The property is located on the south side of Route 208 (New Bridge Road), across from Route 850 (Anna Coves Blvd).  The property is further identified as tax map parcel 29-40B, in the Mineral Magisterial District and Mineral Voting District.  The 2001 Comprehensive Plan designates this area of Louisa County as Low Density Residential within the Lake Anna Designated Growth Area and under the recently adopted comprehensive plan in 2006 this is in the regional service portion of the Lake Anna Growth Area.  The surrounding parcels are zoned C-1, C-2 and there are parcels that are A-2 and C-1 on either side of the property.  Three persons were present to discuss this application in the Neighborhood Meeting held on May 10, 2006.  Those present did not want industrial uses or higher impact commercial uses, such as an auto garage.  The Development Review Committee met on May 24, 2006 at which Mr. Speer expressed some reservations on recommending a rezoning without a specific site plan or use.  The Committee voted 5-1 for approval to forward a favorable recommendation to the Planning Commission.  The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 2006 at which there was no one present to speak for or against the application.  On motion by Mr. Spencer, the Planning Commission voted 4-2 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board with the three proffers submitted by the applicant at this time.  Mr. Coffey informed the Board that the applicant has submitted revised proffers tonight and stated that this application does appear to conform with the Comprehensive Plan of designated land use and is also in general conformance with the surrounding land uses and zoning.  Mr. Coffey read the additional proffers made by the applicant and stated they are the results of the applicant working with staff following the discussion by the Planning Commission.  

During discussion by the Board Mr. Gentry questioned if the 100 that is referred to in the new buffer wording is in conjunction with the future alignment of Route 208 where there are already existing plans.  Mr. Barnes opened the public hearing and asked the applicant if he wished to address the Board.  Mr. Pick addressed Mr. Gentrys concern stating that he talked with VDOT and if the road is widened this would take it into account and there would still be a 100 buffer and the first set of three proffers does not substitute for this but would be an addition and would be collective of all proffers submitted.  Mr. Pick indicated that he had initially purchased this property to build a home but in researching this property found that is was mainly C1 and C2 and may be utilized better as commercial instead of residential.  Mr. Pick indicated that he has discussed these changes with neighbors and town members and has worked closely with Community Development.  Mr. Barnes closed the public hearing and brought discussion back to the Board.  Mr. Harper asked that the Board take into account that we have zoned pieces of property commercial and no commercial activity has taken place.  Mr. Harper stated that his concern is that we are rezoning for speculative purposes.  Mr. Gentry commented that the applicant has come back to address the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and he has relieved some of this concern however he is still concerned about the fact that the buffer does not mention on the second set of proffers of a 100 buffer to be in alignment with the future expansion of Route 208 as it had been with the 25 buffer in the initial proffer and before this is accepted he would like to somehow get that into the report.  Mr. Purcell said he thinks the applicant is trying to get the best use from his property and doesnt feel the applicant should be held accountable for the changes the Board had made.  Mr. Havasy indicated that he feels that the list should include the uses that could be done and not limited to those that will not be done.  Mr. Wright suggested that as he reviews the list of things that wont be done as it includes many that wouldnt be done anyway.  Mr. Jennings does not see a problem with the application as presented and does not believe we should hinder this applicants progress.  Mr. Barnes acknowledged the points that have been made and that previous zoning has set the tone for this property.  Mr. Harper indicated that we may have created this situation however proffers should include the purposes that could be done and not speculative and the next application will not pass without a fight for specifics.

        On motion of Mr. Harper, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board approved the rezoning request with the submitted proffers.  

CUP06-06; David Wilson, Applicant; Glenn Swenson, Owner; Graven Craig, Agent, Mr. Coffey indicated that this is a request for issuance of a conditional use permit for the establishment and operation of a public garage, specifically for the retail sale of motorcycles and accessories.  The property is located at the intersection of Route 33 (Jefferson Highway) and Route 648 (Jouett School Road).  This is in Jackson Magisterial and Voting District.  The Neighborhood Meeting was held on June 14, 2006 at which eight people were present for this request.  No one had specific comments; however, they all stated their support of the request.  The Development Review Committee met on June 28, 2006 to review this application for a conditional use permit.  The Committee recommended several changes to the conditions recommended and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission with the amended conditions.  These amended conditions included that only mechanical repairs and installations associated with the sale of custom parts and accessories will be allowed, hours of operations amended to state “Open to the Public” so that work can be done on the bikes when the store is closed and lastly they added no overnight storage of equipment is allowed.  The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 2006 at which two people spoke during the public hearing, one for the request and one against the request.  The person speaking against the request indicated that they did not feel that this type of use should be located in a residential area.  The Planning Commission voted 6-0, to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Supervisors, with the conditions previously outlined.  

During Board discussion Mr. Wright asked Mr. Coffey if they were planning to utilize only one of the building and Mr. Coffey replied that currently there are only plans to use one building but this could change in the future.  Mr. Barnes opened the public hearing and asked the applicant if they wished to address the Board.  Mr. Wilson indicated that he did not have anything further to add beyond what Mr. Coffey had stated.  Mr. Barnes closed the public hearing.  Mr. Wright questioned the person who spoke against this application, indicating that this has been a commercial business for 30-40 years so this is not a new operation coming into a residential area.  

        On motion of Mr. Jennings, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board approved the request for rezoning.

REZ11-06; Lawrence B. Nuckols, Applicant; Charles Edward Shelton, et al., Owners; Grayson S. Johnson, Agent, Mr. Coffey indicated that he had received revised proffers for this request this afternoon and provided this information to the Board for their reference.  Mr. Coffey stated that this request is for the rezoning of approximately 69.8 acres from Agricultural (A-1) to Agricultural (A-2).  The property is located on the south side of Route 522 west of Route 663.  This is in the Jackson Magisterial District and the Mountain Road Voting District.  The comprehensive plan designates this area of the county as agricultural and the nearest growth area is located at Gum Spring.  At the Neighborhood Meeting held on June 14, 2006, there were three people present.  Each of these individuals stated their opposition to the request citing the following reasons: the affect on their taxes, the additional number of vehicles traveling by their house to access the subdivision, the proposed road way would be next to their house, and when the property was originally divided for the family, the 50-foot strip of land out to Route 522 was to provide access to this property only.  The Development Review Committee met on June 28, 2006 to review the requested rezoning application and the Committee had some discussion over the location of utilities to access the proposed subdivision and ended up forwarding a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission.  The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 13, 2006 at which two people present that spoke against the rezoning request.  There were concerns about the location of the proposed road to existing dwellings and future access of other adjoining parcels to this street.  There were also concerns about the number of additional vehicles accessing Route 522.  The Planning Commission discussed the width of the road and utility easements and there was discussion between the Commission and the applicants agent regarding restricting access to the proposed road.  The applicants agent indicated that they would have no problem proffering that the road remain private if that was the desire of the Commission once constructed to VDOT subdivision street specifications and this would give them the ability to restrict access.  The Planning Commission did recommend approval on the requested rezoning with the recommendation that the road would remain private and be handled by a homeowners association.  The motion passed by a vote of 5-0.  The proffers that were included today confirm the proffers that were agreed upon at the Planning Commission meeting.  These proffers included that the subdivision road shall be built to state specifications but be kept as a private road, the properties adjoining the private road should not be allowed access to said road, the tax parcel 96-15-4 which is adjacent to this project will not be further divided and we will place a deed restriction on that parcel to ensure that it cannot be further divided.

In discussion with the Board Mr. Wright questioned the lot that was reserved for family division.  Mr. Coffey indicated he could not provide that answer but the applicant was here to answer any questions.  Mr. Barnes opened public hearing and asked the applicant if they wished to address the Board.   Mr. Grayson Johnson indicated that he is the attorney representing Mr. Nuckols.  Mr. Johnson indicated that the 10 acres referred to by Mr. Wright is not included in the property transfer and that the 10 acres will be deeded directly to Charles Shelton Jr.  Mr. Wright asked if that piece of property would have access to the proposed road and Mr. Johnson confirmed that it would.  Mr. Johnson stated that the initial plan was that this would be a state road until the possibility of whether the adjoining land could be again divided was raised.  The question then was asked if the applicant would be willing to proffer that the road would remain as a private road and limit access.  Mr. Johnson indicated that there is a 60 strip of land that comes out to Route 522 that is owned by the Shelton Family and 50 of that would be for the proposed right-of-way to serve these lots and an additional 10 would be for utilities.  They have met with Mr. Tommy Mullins of VDOT who inspected this entrance and advised that there would be no problem in approving the entrance at that location.  Mr. Purcell asked that if the road is to remain private will it meet with state specifications and be paved and Mr. Johnson indicated yes.  Mr. Havasy asked why parcel 96-15-4 was addressed and Mr. Johnson indicated that has been a separate parcel all along but this had been brought up as a concern from the beginning as to what would happen with that parcel of land.  Mr. Johnson confirmed that this parcel will access the private road.  Mr. Sylvester Cooke, Jackson District, stated his concerns have to do with the private road.  Mr. Cooke indicated that the applicant is allowing the 10-acre parcel to have access from this road but will not allow him access.  Mr. Cooke owns the two parcels on each side of the road and as a private road he would not have access to get from one side to the other.  Additionally Mr. Cooke was told at the Planning Commission meeting that you have to have a side step of 40 ft. and this is approximately only 32-33 ft from his house.  

Mr. Johnson clarified that parcel 96-15-4 is not part of the rezoning application and is just a parcel of land that is being purchased and will stay as it is but would have to access from the proposed road.  Mr. Gentry asked if there is a road currently where the proposed 50 right of way is and Mr. Johnson indicated that there is an old road there but it does not follow where the new proposed 50 right of way is.  Mr. Wright asked where the road goes that is located where the zoning action sign is.  Mr. Johnson referred to a map which shows that this is an old road that cuts in off of Mr. Cookes land.  Mr. Barnes closed public hearing and brought discussion back to the Board.  Mr. Gentry indicated that he is concerned with the proffer that states this will be a private road and thinks that this should be a state maintained road.  Mr. Havasy asked that if this is a state maintained road and is there legally any way to stop him from accessing this road and therefore more lots can access this road.  Mr. Jennings indicated that he has a problem with this being a private road and asked how does the Board take into consideration the 10-acre lot in addition to the 18 questioned lots.  Mr. Coffey indicated that the 10 acre lot is not part of this rezoning and will stay family owned and not part of the application.  Mr. Coffey further stated that similarly parcel 96-15-4 is not part of this application.  In response to the Planning Commissions concerns about the number of total lots accessing this road, the applicant did proffer to not allow subdivision of the one parcel they did have control of and indicated that the other properties on this road are zoned A-1 and in order to subdivide they would have to rezone.  Mr. Jennings stated that with the possibility of the other lots being further developed he feels this should be a private road.  Mr. Purcell pointed out that just because a state road goes down a property line it does not give people on the other side the right to access that road.  Mr. Havasy asked Mr. Coffey in the worse case scenario how many could be on this 10-acre lot and Mr. Coffey indicated 6.5.  Mr. Harper stated that he is confused why there is an issue with the number of lots using the road because if this was all rezoned to residential they would build one road that goes out and covers all the lots.  Mr. Barnes indicated that he does not have an issue with the 18 lots, but his main concern is with the private road and would rather see this as a state road.  Mr. Wright indicated that the applicant wanted a state road to begin with and the Planning Commission recommended against it and he will not support the private road due to the safety issues of buses and mail delivery and the ability to have proper maintenance of the road.  Mr. Gentry noted that any road cannot automatically become a state road and he does not agree with the proffer to kept this as a private road and further stated that once it becomes a state road VDOT cannot deny access to the road.  Mr. Coffey noted that the Board can approve the rezoning and only accept the portion of the proffers they agree with.  Mr. Wright suggested waiting until the first meeting in October to give the applicant and the Board the opportunity to research these issues further.
        On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board to table this review until the first meeting in October.  After further discussion by the Board regarding the private road, Mr. Wright withdrew this motion and Mr. Havasy withdrew the second.

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to approve the rezoning of the 18-lot subdivision requiring a state road and not accept proffer 1 and 2.  After further discussion by the Board in regard to the additional 10-acre lot, Mr. Wright withdrew this motion and Mr. Jennings withdrew the second.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board approved only the rezoning from A-1 to A-2 for 18 lots, only accepted proffer 3 and requires the plans for the development be reviewed by the Board.  After extensive discussion by the Board with the applicant and Mr. Coffey, Mr. Wright withdrew this motion and Mr. Jennings withdrew the second
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to table this review until the first meeting in October to allow the application to work with Community Development to address the issue about the private road and family tract.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Mr. Gentry indicated that the pool committee has received a pool bid and they have a meeting scheduled for September 14th and he will report back with the results at the next meeting.

Mr. Barnes met with the School Committee and indicated that the site work bid is out.  Mr. Barnes indicated that the Board is concerned about the discrepancy in the price that was given and what the current price will be since the price of material is going down.  Mr. Purcell stated that he has not been going to the Design Committee meetings because he did not like the way that they were being run.  Mr. Purcell feels that it would be in the best interest of all parties to get competitive bids from different people and different firms because he is not convinced that this process was handled in the proper way and with price of steel and lumber coming down some of the prices that were given six months ago might not be the prices today.

Mr. Barnes asked to appoint Mr. Wright as the lead person with Mr. Jennings to start discussions with the school budget to break the ice.  As well, Mr. Barnes indicated that we need to meet with the School Board to discuss the audit review that was requested because we need to implement some of the things in it to avoid a monetary caveat.  Mr. Barnes asked Mr. Lintecum to get with Dr. Melton to arrange a date for the Board to discuss the audit review and to get a bottom line number on what it will take to build the school.

Mr. Barnes asked Mr. Coffey to check into how various localities handle buses and mail carriers on private roads in gated communities.

Mr. McLeod informed the Board that he has discussed the internet problems with Wildblue and the Board should be receiving calls for work to be done.  Mr. McLeod asked them to get back with him and keep him informed on the status.  Mr. Barnes stated that if we are not getting service we should not be paying and he would like to turn this issue into the FCC.

COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT

Mr. Lintecum advised the Board that a Board member has a conflict with continuing the meeting to September 11th and after discussion by the Board it was agreed that the workshop meeting would be postponed and held on September 25th.

CONSENT ITEMS

Initiate Review Process Taylors Creek Agricultural Forestal District

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to begin the review process for Taylors Creek Agricultural Forestal District and refer the application to the Planning Commission.

Resolution Appropriation to the Sheriffs Department for Funds Raised as a Result of a Catfish Tournament

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt a resolution for appropriation to the Sheriffs Department for funds raised as a result of a catfish tournament.

Resolution Supplemental Appropriation for State Funding Related to the Victims Witness Assistance Program

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt a resolution for supplemental appropriation for state funding related to the Victim Witness Assistance Program.

Resolution Appropriate the VPSA Bonds to the Louisa County School Capital Projects Fund

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt a resolution to appropriate the VPSA Bonds to the Louisa County School Capital Projects Fund.

Schedule Public Hearing REZ01-06; BBCR, LLC, Applicants/Owners, John Carroll, Agent; requests rezoning of approximately 33 acres from Agricultural (A-2) to Residential General (R-2) and General Commercial (C-2).

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to schedule the public hearing for REZ01-06; BBCR, LLC, Applicants/Owners, John Carroll, Agent for the October 2, 2006 meeting

Schedule Public Hearing REZ13-06; Mill Rogers, Applicant; Carolyn Payne Turpin, Owner; Penny G. Koch, Agent; requests rezoning of approximately 3.181 acres from Agricultural (A-2), Residential General (R-2) and Light Commercial (C-1) to General Commercial (C-2).

On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to schedule the public hearing for REZ13-06; Mill Rogers, Applicant; Carolyn Payne Turpin, Owner; Penny G. Koch, Agent for the October 2, 2006 meeting

Resolution Requesting Governor Tim Kane to Have Louisa County Designated a Drought Disaster Area
        On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt a resolution requesting Governor Tim Kaine to have Louisa County designated a drought disaster area.

CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Lintecum indicated that correspondence had been received in regard to the VDOT changes.  Mr. Gentry asked Darren to check in see if we are currently meeting VDOT requirements with the 566 Program changes.

APPROVAL OF BILLS

Mr. Jennings requested that the Board receive supporting documents for the $20,000 in repair work for Bumpass Park.  Mr. Barnes and Mr. Gentry both indicated that they will be abstaining in regard to items pertaining to them.  On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the bills for the month of August 2006 for the County of Louisa in the amount of $1,112,167.00.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

        On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the August 1, 2006 minutes.

Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that they have been invited to hold the September 18
th meeting at the new Louisa Town Hall.

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to hold the September 18th Board meeting at the Louisa Town Hall.

ADJOURNMENT

On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adjourn the regular meeting at 8:43 p.m.

BY ORDER OF


______________________________
FITZGERALD A. BARNES, CHAIRMAN
LOUISA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LOUISA COUNTY, LOUISA, VIRGINIA