Contact Sitemap Search
|Board Members Present:||
Fitzgerald A. Barnes, Dan W. Byers, Willie L. Gentry, Jr., Willie L. Harper, Richard A. Havasy, P.T. Spencer, Jr. and Jack T. Wright|
|Others Present:||Dale Mullen, County Administrator/County Attorney; Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator; Jeremy Camp, Director of Community Development; Kevin Linhares, Director of Facilities Management; Bob Hardy, Director of Information Technology; Robert Dubé, Fire Chief; Jane Shelhorse, Director of Parks and Recreation; Sherry Vena, Director of Human Resources; April Lowe, Acting Office Manager, Administration; Zuwana Morgan, Deputy Clerk, Administration; and Brittany Shupe, Records Clerk, Administration|
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Harper called the March 16, 2009 Budget meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Gentry led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
* Mr. Barnes arrived at 5:03 p.m.
Ms. Gloria Layne, Treasurer, introduced Mr. Jeffrey Scharf of Taxing Authority Consulting Services.
Mr. Jeffrey Scharf with Taxing Authority Consulting Services stated his firm has been helping the county with the collection of delinquent real estate and personal property taxes. Mr. Scharf said the firm began working with Treasurer in January 2008 and since then they have collected $1,081,000, $945,000 of the total was from real estate. Mr. Scharf said from July 2008 until February 2009 the collection had been just under $760,000.
Mr. Scharf said his company was a law firm and they were able to act with the powers of the Treasurer and they had taken steps to add wages to collect taxes. Mr. Scharf said they were working to collect real estate taxes where no one has paid in years or claimed ownership of the property. Mr. Scharf said they were beginning the process through the Circuit Court to begin proceeding to sell those properties which was authorized by the Code of Virginia. Mr. Scharf said as soon as all the steps were taken the proceedings would begin. Mr. Scharf said everyone that was entitled to notice would be given notice if they were able to be located. Mr. Scharf said his firm does not take the selling of property lightly, but they also understand it may be the only way to get a piece of property back to an effective use.
Mr. Gentry asked what the delinquent balance was at this time. Mr. Scharf said real estate was approximately $1.9 million and personal property was about $900,000.
Mr. Byers asked what the notification process was. Mr. Scharf said after it has been advertised in the newspaper, two letters are sent. Mr. Scharf said they use computer databases to locate people and they make telephone calls if they can find the numbers.
Mr. Wright asked do they offer any type of payment plan or does it have to be asked for. Mr. Scharf said their experience was working with governments and they were not a collection agency, they were a law firm so they worked with people. Mr. Scharf said they make formal payment arrangements with people who can make substantial payment arrangements. Mr. Scharf said they work with people under difficult circumstances in these economic times.
Mr. Wright asked what was substantial. Mr. Scharf said it depended on the debt amount. Mr. Scharf said his goal when looking at the debt was to have it paid off before the next tax bill came out.
Mr. Harper said the Board was happy of the effort was being made. Mr. Harper thanked Mr. Scharf and Ms. Layne.
Mr. Scharf said if the Board had any other questions they could contact him.
CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD
Mr. Frank Keffer Louisa District, stated he was on the CCC and they worked hard to get things recycled. Mr. Keffer said he saw Updike put cardboard in the regular trash and then dumped the regular trash on top of the cardboard. Mr. Keffer said he went and asked the Updike employee and was told unless the cardboard box was full they put it with the regular trash. Mr. Keffer asked the Updike employee where he was taking the trash and he was told they go to Gordonsville and pick their trash up and then take it to Greene County and dump it in a field. Mr. Keffer said then they take the truck from Greene County to Amelia County and dump it there and load it on more trucks and haul it to Culpeper. Mr. Keffer said he thought Updike was taking advantage of at least four counties and he thought it should be investigated and he would like to hear back about it.
Mr. Keffer said he read in the paper about how the county was going to spend another $500,000 on the Courthouse. Mr. Keffer said some years back the county spent millions on the Courthouse. Mr. Keffer said it appeared to him the county didnt have any warranty over things that cost millions in taxpayer dollars. Mr. Keffer said where were the inspectors when the building was turned over to the county and why didnt they do a better job. Mr. Keffer said the county needed to go back to the contractors and ask for some type of warranty.
Mr. Keffer said he understood the county had applied for stimulus money and if they did get the stimulus money they needed to realize the money was going to have to be paid back. Mr. Keffer said there was $300 billion that Washington could not answer where it was. Mr. Keffer said if the county did receive some of the stimulus money it needed to be spent properly, like with the Firefighters and Police Officers.
Mr. Harper said Mr. Mullen would get back to him.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Mr. Harper said he would like to add a presentation of the Clean Community Commission. Mr. Harper said he would like to add a resolution declaring April 2009 as clean up Louisa County month. Mr. Harper said he would like to add a resolution to authorize a budget transfer to the CIP from the General Fund. Mr. Harper said he would like to add a resolution of recommendation for Winston Evatt, Jr., for outstanding contribution to EMS. Mr. Mullen said he would like to add information regarding the Long Range Regional Water Supply Citizen Input meetings to the County Administrators report.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the March 16, 2009 agenda was adopted as amended.
Presentation “Buy Local First” Campaign for Louisa County of Louisa
Ms. Tracy Nedza with Virginia Tech Extension Office introduced Ms Deana Meredith with the Chamber of Commerce and Ms. Stacey Richardson with the Economic Development Department. Ms. Nedza said they have been working on developing a “buy local” campaign for Louisa County. Ms. Nedza said with Peebles, a new Dollar Store and Wal-Mart it was a good time to redirect citizens to buy in Louisa County. Ms. Nedza said she hoped the Board would give the resolution their upmost consideration.
Ms. Nedza read over the following slides:
What is a community?
· Sense of connectedness between a social, cultural and economically diverse population living within the same region.
Like a puzzle, each piece is dependant upon the other and unites to create the BIG picture.
Tapping into the “Buy Local First” concept …
Why its important!
What is “Buy Local First”?
· A community-based effort to emphasize the importance of supporting local businesses
· A series of action steps that:
· Unite area businesses of all kinds
· Emphasize the value in buying local
· Generate jobs for local residents
· Increase local revenue
· Cultivate feelings of local ownership
Impacts of buying local?
· Economic Impact
· Social Impact
· Environmental Impact
· Governmental Impact
Economics When is a dollar more than a dollar?
When money is spent locally, research indicates:
· Money re-circulates 3-6 times within the community
· Each dollar spent locally returns 25 cents more to the community than if spent elsewhere.
· Creates a WIN-WIN situation for localities
· Decisions that shape lives
· Local Businesses:
· employs local people your friends and neighbors
· bring rich diversity to the community
· support local events, causes & charities
· enhance the “Quality of Life” of their communities
Environmental Impact Fresher products: from farmer consumer. · Better quality product/longer ripening · Fewer preservatives · Transportation costs reduced fuel
Governmental Impact “Put your Money Where Your House Is” · Increase tax base · Promote community pride Creating a “Buy Local” Initiative · “Task Force” of community-minded business owners · Enlist the support of the local Towns, County Government Officials, media, and other organizations · Raise awareness among the consumers and the business community · Set short, medium and long term program goals and methods of evaluation.
We need your support! No puzzle was ever solved in the box! Mr. Wright said last November he heard Louisa and Greene Counties were going against the trend because they were both up in retail sales. Mr. Wright said this was a good program.
Getting started …
Someone has to start the puzzle by placing the first piece…
Ms. Nedza said small opportunities are often the beginning of great enterprises. Ms. Nedza said Fauquier County and Northhampton County also have “Buy Local First” campaigns and they have been very successful.
Ms. Nedza said the logo was developed by Stacey Richardson.
Mr. Spencer asked where Fayes Office Supplies located was. Ms. Richardson said they were in Orange County. Mr. Spencer said so they werent local and asked where Cheap Signs located was. Ms. Richardson said they were online. Ms. Richardson said they did get quotes from Rainbow Graphics, which is located in Louisa, as much as they could.
Mr. Spencer asked about mylogoimprinted.com. Ms. Richardson said they were in Chesterfield. Ms. Richardson said again, they got quotes for as much as they could buy locally.
Mr. Spencer asked where the $2,228 was coming from. Ms. Richardson said the amount was an estimate on the products they thought would be needed. Ms. Richardson said they had submitted a resolution asking that the funds be pulled out of the Economic Development budget or wherever the Board saw fit.
Mr. Harper said there was a resolution included in the Board Packet and he believed $5,000 was asked for.
Mr. Richardson said that would be seed money to get the program kicked off. Ms. Richardson said they were also introduced to a grant by Matt Benson through Virginia Tech that they were looking into.
Mr. Havasy asked were there any studies or statistics done that showed what kind of return there would be on this small investment. Mr. Gibson said it would be hard to qualify.
Mr. Havasy said he applauded the effort and he would support them.
Mr. Byers asked were the money in the Economic Development budget. Mr. Mullen said yes.
Mr. Byers said if there was going to be a “Buy Local First” campaign all the items should be bought locally. Mr. Byers said if that was done it would send a better message.
Mr. Gentry said he hoped they would be at the April 4th Beautification Festival. Ms. Nedza said they would be there.
Mr. Gentry asked were local business in the program. Ms. Nedza said they had a taskforce of local business but they were just in the beginning stages.
Mr. Gentry said he remembered seeing the logo before. Ms. Nedza said they had the logo during the Christmas holiday season to get people to think about buying locally.
Mr. Barnes asked had the Chamber endorsed this from a financial standpoint. Ms. Meredith said no and the Chamber didnt have a lot of money.
Mr. Spencer said the most expensive things were coming from outside the county and he couldnt support a “Buy Local First” if they were buying the most expensive things outside the county.
Mr. Wright said the Board could not control where people shop, but they could encourage people to buy local.
Mr. Wright made a motion to adopt a resolution to support the “Buy Local First” campaign for Louisa County, Mr. Havasy seconded the motion.
Mr. Byers said he thought the campaign must be more direct and should be locally produced and developed material. Mr. Harper said he didnt have a problem with that, but some items may not be available locally. Mr. Byers said the type of material could be switched.
Mr. Wright said if they have to go back and get justification on everything they bought it would be time consuming.
Mr. Harper said the motion would stand as it was, with the encouragement that everything that could be brought locally would be.
Mr. Barnes said there were certain things that could not be brought locally.
Ms. Nedza said the effort was not have citizens limit their purchases to Louisa, but to have them consider Louisa first.
Mr. Harper requested a roll call vote.
PRESENT VOTE P.T. Spencer, Jr. No Jack T. Wright Yes Fitzgerald A. Barnes Yes Dan W. Byers No Willie L. Gentry, Jr. Yes Willie L. Harper Yes Richad A. Havasy Yes
With the votes reflecting 5-2, the motion passed to adopt a resolution to support the “Buy Local First” campaign for Louisa County.
Fresher products: from farmer consumer.
· Better quality product/longer ripening
· Fewer preservatives
· Transportation costs reduced fuel
“Put your Money Where Your House Is”
· Increase tax base
· Promote community pride
Creating a “Buy Local” Initiative
· “Task Force” of community-minded business owners
· Enlist the support of the local Towns, County Government Officials, media, and other organizations
· Raise awareness among the consumers and the business community
· Set short, medium and long term program goals and methods of evaluation.
We need your support!
No puzzle was ever solved in the box!
Mr. Wright said last November he heard Louisa and Greene Counties were going against the trend because they were both up in retail sales. Mr. Wright said this was a good program.
Presentation Clean Community Commission Annual Report
Mr. Bill Small invited the Board to personally attend the Beautification Festival on April 4, 2009. Mr. Small said they would like the Board to be there to help recruit people for the adopt-a- highway program.
Mr. Small said VDOT has told them that there would be no mowing contracts this spring or summer and no more carcass removal. Mr. Small said the litter pick up would have to rely primarily on volunteers through the adopt-a-highway program. Mr. Small said the CCC recommends that the county be very vocal to VDOT to keep the mowing and litter pick-up. Mr. Small said the CCC would like to encourage the Board to attend the VDOT meeting this month.
Mr. Small said recycling was up. Mr. Small said the inoperable vehicle law has been very effective; however, it was hard to enforce and needed to be revised. Mr. Small said the recycling at the Schools was failing because of a problem with the contractor. Mr. Small said he suggested taking a closer look at recycling within the County Government.
Mr. Gentry said the Commission seems to be in a very confident place. Mr. Gentry said when he talked to VDOT, he would remind them that mowing was one of the cheapest maintenances they could do. Mr. Gentry said it could become a very unsafe situation.
Resolution Declaring April 2009 as clean up Louisa County month.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution declaring April 2009 as clean up Louisa County month.
Update Burn building lease agreement/how to proceed with construction of building
Chief Dube said in the last ten years the volunteers had been working on a training facility. Chief Dube said they have spent a lot of hours trying to find the original lease agreement and no one has found it. Chief Dube said they did find two resolutions from April 1999 that stated there would be a lease agreement, but no actual lease was found. Chief Dube said the Fire Association voted at their last meeting to enter into a new lease agreement with the county.
Chief Dube said the fire training building would cost $477,000 and the Fire Association has $238,000. Chief Dube said they were asking the Board for the funding to build the building to train the volunteers and the career staff.
Mr. Harper asked did Chief Dube want all the funds at once. Chief Dube said the original proposal was to lease and then no new money would be needed for three years.
Mr. Harper said his understanding was if all the money was put upfront there would not be any grant money available. Chief Dube said that was correct.
Mr. Harper asked how much extra would the lease program be. Chief Dube said it depended on the terms of the lease, but the original proposal was seven percent, which was high.
Mr. Havasy asked why a lease would be needed if the county owned the property. Chief Dube said the lease was for the structure.
Mr. Delbert Feaster said he personally didnt think a lease was needed and he thought this was something the county should do. Mr. Feaster said he thought it was too much responsibility for the volunteers.
Mr. Havasy questioned was that how the Fire Association felt. Mr. Feaster said he didnt know how the Fire Association felt, but personally as an instructor for ten years, that was how he felt.
Chief Dube said he would recommend if the building approved it be owned and operated by the county and the county would assume liability.
Chief Dube said there were State regulations that would need to stayed on top of.
Mr. Barnes said he was tired of talking about this building and he would like to get it done. Mr. Barnes said seven percent was pretty high. Mr. Barnes asked could a lease be found at a better price. Mr. Barnes asked what was the best way to approach purchasing this product.
Mr. Mullen said he recommended that if the county had the money, we should pay as we go.
Mr. Spencer asked was there $240,000 in the CIP for the building. Chief Dube said no the $240,000 was what Fire Association had. Mr. Spencer asked what did the county have. Mr. McLeod said at this point we didnt have any funds in the budget for FY 09; however, for FY 10 the county had $240,000. Mr. McLeod said if the Board went into arrangement to procure the facility, the Volunteers could put up their part of the funding until July 09.
Mr. Wright said if the building was going to be deeded to the county and the land was deeded to the county he didnt think a lease was needed unless there was other names on the deeds. Mr. Mullen said it could be contingent on the funding by the Volunteer Fire Association.
Mr. Wright said there had to be a protective clause. Mr. Mullen said this would be looked at and brought back with a plan on April 20, 2009.
Mr. Wright said he wants both sides protected.
Mr. Havasy asked how long was the price good for. Chief Dube said he would have to ask.
Mr. Gentry asked how many proposals were obtained. Chief Dube said this was the sole source. Chief Dube said there were three other manufactures who did this building and their prices were about the same.
Mr. Spencer asked was the motion to tell them to get started and the Board would give them the $240,000 in three months.
Mr. Havasy said the County Administrator/County Attorney was going get deed information in order and then the Volunteers would put up their $240,000 and then in the FY 10 CIP the county would put the remaining in to cover the cost of the building.
Mr. Harper said it was his understanding that the ownership would stay with the county. Mr. Mullen said it was his opinion that would be best.
Mr. Barnes asked was there opportunities to lease the facility to other companies that didnt have the facility. Chief Dube said yes. Mr. Barnes said there needed to be a fee schedule.
Mr. Byers said he supports the motion because it was going to be county property.
On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to proceed with the construction of the Burn Building.
Discussion/Resolution Lawn care and landscaping services
Mr. Mullen said there were two resolutions in the Board packet for adoption he preferred the first resolution be adopted by the Board. Mr. Mullen said Parks and Recreation did contract out grass cutting for 2007-2008 and the performance was substandard and the contractor walked off and left money and Parks and Recreation has been picking up the slack. Mr. Mullen said he believed the county could do a better job themselves. Mr. Mullen asked the Board to adopt the resolution to reject all bids for the current solicitation and to allow the transfer from FY 09 from contract services for labor and lawn maintenance for $25,000 to cover the cost until FY 10. Mr. Mullen said at that time the cost would be reassessed and he would be able to come back with a solid figure for 2010.
Mr. Spencer asked would it cost $25,000 from now until July. Mr. Mullen said he didnt think that it would, but that was how much was available. Mr. Mullen said there would be capital cost to buy equipment and he hoped to bring money back.
Mr. Byers asked were there any repercussions for doing it internally since it had already went out to bid. Mr. Mullen said he needed approval from the Board to reject the bids.
Mr. Gentry said timing and quality was very important he thought this was the best way to handle it.
On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution rejecting all bids associated with Lawn Care Services and Landscaping for the County of Louisa.
Resolution For a supplement appropriation to the CIP for a generator hook-up at Moss-Nuckols Elementary School
Mr. Mullen said the Board had been given a change order request.
Mr. Linhares said the change order amount was $48,659.46, the engineering fees would be $8,916, totaling 57,575.46, which was under the original appropriated amount of $59,000.
Mr. Linhares said they were unwilling to yield on the cost and what they have done was a substitution of materials. Mr. Linhares said instead of copper wire they were providing aluminum wire. Mr. Linhares said they went from a 500 size copper to a 750 size aluminum and a number three copper to a number four aluminum. Mr. Linhares said Mr. Green from the Schools said it was okay with their engineers; however, he would like to get Chief Dubes and the countys inspection departments opinion on the aluminum wire.
Mr. Harper said the discussion would be continued when necessary information was received.
Mr. Byers asked would all the underground wiring to the school be aluminum. Mr. Linhares said yes. Mr. Byers said utility companies usually ran aluminum underground. Mr. Linhares agreed.
Mr. Byers said the aluminum would comparable to what would be lead to that point. Mr. Linhares agreed.
Mr. Spencer asked was $19,000 already approved. Mr. Linhares said up to $59,000 total was approved and $40,560 was the original appropriation and $18,440 was added.
Mr. Spencer said at the last Board meeting it was $70,000. Mr. Linhares said the last Board meeting it was $74,173.8, but since the last Board meeting he found out they made a mathematical error on their spreadsheet.
Mr. Spencer said they had a $20,000 error.
Mr. Wright said he thought the Schools should okay it since it was on their property. Mr. Linhares said according to Mr. Green their engineer was okay with it.
Mr. Harper asked that Mr. Linhares get the answer to the questions and bring it back to the Board.
Mr. Gentry asked if copper prices had gone up or down since this started. Mr. Linhares said they have gone down.
Discussion Approval for Emergency Services in purchase two replacement vehicles
Chief Dube said two of the four vehicles assigned to Emergency Services were in need of replacement. Chief Dube said one vehicle had 140,000 miles and was in the shop about once every two weeks. Chief Dube said there was carry over CIP funds from when the ambulances were purchased, which was more than enough to replace the two mid-sized SUVs. Chief Dube said the vehicles could be purchased for under the $20,000 limit established by the Board.
Mr. Byers asked was equipment carried in the vehicles. Chief Dube said yes, protective clothing, self contained breathing apparatus, firefighter hand tools, gear and command modular in the back.
Mr. Byers asked were the SUVs first response vehicles and were they used in all types of weather that used four wheel drive. Chief Dube said yes.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board approved for Emergency Services to purchase two replacement vehicles.
Mr. Spencer stated he would like to appoint Mr. E.R. Bane to the Commission on Aging. Mr. Harper stated he would like to appoint Mr. Lloyd Runnett to the Agricultural and Forestal Advisory Committee.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board appointed Mr. E.R. Bane to the Commission on Aging and Mr. Lloyd Runnett to the Agricultural and Forestal Advisory Committee.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT
Mr. Mullen said “Louisa Inside and Out” A Program for community awareness was April 23, 2009 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Mr. Wright said “Louisa Inside and Out” was a joint venture with the Chamber of Commerce, the School Board and the Board of Supervisors and the idea was to have different county functions at the High School for an open meeting where the public would be invited to ask questions to different organizations.
Mr. Harper said he thought it was a very worthwhile effort.
Mr. Mullen said Virginia Department of Labor and Industry violations and County response was included in the Board packet.
Mr. Mullen said Mr. Camp did a fine job of putting together a short Proffer Guide which was included in the Board packet.
Mr. Mullen said the Building Inspectors caught a faulty electrical issue at the Countryside subdivision and the County response was included in the Board Packet.
Mr. Byers asked how was the county brought aware of the issue. Mr. Mullen said it was because of the ordinary inspections.
Mr. Mullen gave the Board the following reminders:
· March 25, 2009 Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session
· The Link Ages of Louisa, Inc. Board meeting scheduled for March 11, 2009 has
been rescheduled for April 8, 2009 at 6:30 p.m.
· Long Range Regional Water Supply Citizen Input meetings were March 30, 2009 at the IGC at 7:00 p.m. and March 31, 2009 at Jouett Elementary School at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Byers said in the two letters written to the individuals asked to join the water authority he thought the terms were specified. Mr. Mullen said the terms were specified in the resolution that was adopted by the Board.
Mr. Mullen said staff had adopted a different way of entering journal entries.
Mr. Barnes asked if staff could send the four budget work sessions on Microsoft Outlook.
Mr. Gentry said it was a pleasure picking the County Administrators report with something in it.
Mr. Byers asked if all the Boards meetings could be put on the website.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Resolution To authorize a budget transfer to the CIP from the General Fund
On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution to authorize a budget transfer to the CIP from the General Fund.
Resolution Recommendation of Winston Evatt Jr. for outstanding contribution to EMS
On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted a resolution of recommendation for Winston Evatt, Jr., for outstanding contribution to EMS.
Mr. Mullen said if the Board had anyone they wanted to recognize to please let him know because he didnt want anyone left out.
Mr. Wright said he would like the Board to recognize the indoor Girl and Boy Track Team at the High School.
Mr. Gentry said the Volunteers of Louisa would be having their annual reception on April 26, 2009.
Mr. Spencer asked was the letter where the Judge was asking for two Court rooms suppose to be up for discussion this evening.
Mr. Mullen said his first time hearing about this was last week. Mr. Mullen said the letter was requesting a division of the Louisa Combined District Courts, which would mean we would have General District Court Clerk and a Juvenile Court Clerk with the expense. Mr. Mullen said if the Supreme Court were to act, it could be additional cost.
Mr. Spencer said this would require two Deputies and Clerks and questioned who was going to pay for all of this. Mr. Mullen said he would look into it.
Mr. Harper said he thought it should be made aware that the Board hadnt had any discussion about this and would like some clarification.
Mr. Byers asked what was the purpose of the Auditors Report on the Rappahannock Juvenile Detention Center. Mr. Byers said the audit says “However, we did not audit the information and express no opinion on it” in several places and questioned what they meant by that.
Mr. McLeod said he would get an answer back from the Auditors.
Mr. Spencer asked what amount was the county getting billed for this. Mr. McLeod said this wasnt a bill the county received.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
Mr. Byers said CSA had exceeded their budget by $101,000. Mr. Byers asked once the tire recycling center was in Louisa would the county be compensated for the tires they had to pay to destroy.
Mr. Gibson said he has been in discussion with the company trying to get the county some type of discount.
On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, with Messers Havasy and Gentry abstaining on bills pertaining to themselves, the Board adopted a resolution approving the bills for the first half of March 2009 for the County of Louisa in the amount of $176,018.25.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the minutes of the March 3, 2009 meeting.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the minutes of the March 6, 2009 meeting.
CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD 6:30 P.M.
Ms. Nancy Lear Jackson District stated she represented the Clean Community Commission and she would like personally invite the Board to attend the Beautification Festival.
Mr. Havasy said all the work done last year and this year lead back to Ms. Lear. Mr. Havasy asked Ms. Lear to tell the Board about the success of last years festival. Mr. Havasy said Ms. Lear had done a lot to get the community cleaned up.
Ms. Lear said they collected four times the expected amount of tires. Ms. Lear said they had 73 people who were either vendors or representing some organization. Ms. Lear said Smokey the Bear would be there celebrating his 60th birthday.
On motion of Mr. Barnes, seconded by Mr. Spencer, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 6:34 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:
1. In accordance with §2.23711 (A) (7) VA Code Ann., for the purpose of consultation with legal counsel on actual or probable litigation (specific legal matters requiring the provision of legal advice by counsel).
2. In accordance with §2.23711 (A) (1) VA Code Ann., for the purpose of discussion, consideration, or interviews of prospective candidates for employment; assignment, appointment, promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining, or resignation of specific public officers, appointees, or employees of any public body; and evaluation of performance of departments where such evaluation will necessarily involve discussion of the performance of specific individuals.
On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 7:03 p.m.
RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to adopt the following resolution:
|P.T. Spencer, Jr.||Yes|
|Jack T. Wright||Yes|
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||Yes|
|Dan W. Byers||Yes|
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||Yes|
|Willie L. Harper||Yes|
|Richad A. Havasy||Yes|
WHEREAS, the Louisa County Board of Supervisors has convened a Closed Meeting this 16th day of March 2009, 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 16th day of March 2009, 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 Hearing REZ06-08; Ferncliff, LLC, c/o Ron Carter, Agent; Applicants/Owners; request conditional rezoning of approximately 104.6 acres from Agricultural (A-2) to General Commercial (C-2) and Industrial Limited (I- 1). The property is located on the north side of Route 250 (Three Notch Road), approximately 0.5 miles west of Route 208 (Courthouse Road). The property is further identified as tax map parcel 67-9 in the Patrick Henry Voting District. The 2006 Comprehensive Plan designates this area of Louisa County as Mixed Use within the Ferncliff Designated Growth Area.
Conditional rezoning of approximately 104.6 acres from Agricultural (A-2) to General Commercial (C-2) and Light Industrial (I-1)
Ferncliff, LLC (c/o Ron Carter)
P.O. Box 330
Keswick, Virginia 22947
Bent Tree Design, PLC (Ellie Carter, CLA)
1201 Stoney Ridge Road, Suite1
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Tax Map and Parcel # 67-9, Patrick Henry voting district, existing zoning is A-2 and applicant is requesting C-2 and I-1
The property is located on the north side of Route 250 (Three Notch Road), approximately 0.5 miles west of Route 208 (Courthouse Road).
The land area comprising the proposed Ferncliff Business Park is designated in the 2006 Comprehensive Plan for future mixed-uses and is within the Ferncliff Growth Area (See Illustration 1).
Illustration 1: Location of rezoning as shown on the Louisa County Future Land Use Map
Mixed-use is defined in Chapter V-5 of the Louisa County Comprehensive Plan as: “a type of development that may be a combination of any of the other land uses in a logical, coordinated, well planned project or series of projects.”
Chapter V-18 of the Louisa County Comprehensive Plan identifies the Ferncliff Growth Area as appropriate for residential growth with neighborhood commercial development.
This request is for the rezoning of approximately 104.6-acres from Agricultural (A-2) to General Commercial (C-2) and Light Industrial (I-1). Utilities are intended to be provided through individual well and septic systems. Access would be off of Route 250 with a new road envisioned to be constructed to serve the future lots of the development. This road would be required to meet VDOT road specifications. Buffers are provided along the Route 250 frontage, between the proposed commercial and industrial zoning designated areas and along Interstate 64.
The adjoining parcels as well as the surrounding area is zoned primarily Agricultural (A-2), with General Commercial (C-2) east towards the Route 208 intersection. Development in this area is a mixture of agricultural parcels with smaller single-family residential parcels, commercial property and community service uses.
A traffic impact statement, prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. was submitted with the rezoning application. Although this document is not a full traffic study, it is a professionally prepared analysis of the traffic that could be generated by the proposed development. The traffic impact statement estimates a maximum of 10,460 VPD at build-out. Roads directly impacted by the project would be Route 659, Route 208, Route 250, and Interstate 64.
PROPOSED PROFFERS (Updated March 9, 2009):
Below is a summary of the proffers negotiated with the applicant as part of this rezoning application. The proffer statement is voluntarily offered by the applicant. Each proffer is intended to mitigate specific impacts associated with the rezoning of the subject property.
- A cash contribution of $50,000 is offered to mitigate impacts to the Sheriffs department and Emergency Services. The cash contribution is intended to be used for a new mobile air breathing system and would be paid over the next two years (Staff Note: If this specific offer is accepted, this proffer would need to be added to the Louisa County CIP).
- Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). A development cap restriction is added to the property which limits the number of vehicle trips per day to 2,500, as well as, 250 vehicle trips per hour. Before the development can exceed this cap, a TIA would need to be prepared and the development would need to pay toward its pro rata share of off-site road improvements.
- A conceptual master plan is proffered (see illustration below). The conceptual master plan offers the following key features:
* Route 250 Streetscape Buffer. The installation of a 60-foot wide landscape buffer along Route 250. All plants are to be planted at the same time.
* Commercial / Industrial Buffer. A 25-foot wide landscape buffer shall be planted as a buffer between the commercial and industrial areas.
* Interstate Buffer. A 100-foot wide existing vegetative buffer shall be maintained along I-64.
* Interconnectivity. A general location for a road or travelway has been incorporated into the design to link the site with adjacent parcels should they be rezoned and developed in the future.
- Restricted Uses. Dance Halls, Marinas, Adult Entertainment Establishments, Adult Stores, Halfway Houses, Indoor Shooting Ranges, Outdoor Shooting Ranges and Permanent Sawmills would be restricted on the property.
- Cemetery. The existing cemetery will be identified and protected. Access will be maintained in accordance with law.
The primary consideration when evaluation a rezoning application is whether or not the rezoning itself is legally justified. Chapter 22, § 15.2-2286 (7) of the Virginia Code, authorizes Louisa County with the power to rezone property “whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, or good zoning practice requires”. Information such as input from citizens and the Louisa County Comprehensive Plan help make this determination. When a rezoning decision is made for the sole purpose of serving private interests instead of furthering the welfare of the entire community it can be labeled spot zoning.
Voluntary contributions by the applicant, referred to as proffers, are a secondary consideration when reviewing rezoning applications. Chapter 22, § 15.2-2286 A. of the Virginia Code, authorizes Louisa County with the ability to accept proffers as part of a rezoning application, “provided that (i) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; (ii) the conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning; and (iii) all conditions are in conformity with the comprehensive plan as defined in.” Since proffers help mitigate negative impacts associated with a rezoning, they are important planning tools.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RESULTS:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 12, 2009 at which two people spoke against the request. Those that spoke mentioned a variety of concerns about how the development would impact their rural way of life. The second individual stated an issue regarding an existing cemetery on-site.
There was lengthy discussions between the Commission and the applicants agent regarding the topography, proposes uses, possible excluded uses, groundwater issues, traffic concerns and the proffers submitted by the applicant.
The Planning Commission passed a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning application with the modifications to the proffers discussed during the meeting. These proffer changes included the following: 1) To make changes to proffer #5 to ensure legal compliance with the Va. Code; 2) To add a proffer that would address the family cemetery issue; and 3) To speak with the neighbors again to determine if certain uses should be restricted, and if so, to add a proffer restricting such uses.
The proposed rezoning and conceptual master plan for the Ferncliff Business Park is generally compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is within the Ferncliff Growth Area. This growth area is targeted for neighborhood commercial uses, however, the subject rezoning is located in an area planned for mixed-use. Provided that the development is well designed, the mixed-use designation is compatible with a variety of use types.
It appears that the applicant has given a strong amount of consideration in designing the development in a logical and beneficial way. Utilizing a portion of the property for commercial uses in the front would provide an accessible area along a primary road for neighborhood services. Placing the light industrial uses in the rear of the property will minimize some of the negative impacts to the surrounding area, such as noise. As with the proposed commercial uses, the proposed light-industrial uses would create new tax revenue and jobs for Louisa County.
Mr. Spencer said he didnt see dark sky lighting listed in the proffers. Mr. Camp said that wasnt discussed. Mr. Spencer said that was something that needed to done. Mr. Camp said if that was something the Board wanted it could be discussed with the applicant.
Mr. Spencer said he thought that was listed in the county ordinance. Mr. Camp said he didnt know of any ordinance that covered that.
Mr. Spencer asked what would done about water and sewage. Mr. Camp said it was planning to be done and right now it would have to be on private systems.
Mr. Spencer said they couldnt build unless they had the proper water and sewage. Mr. Camp agreed.
Mr. Wright said the C-2 zoning left it pretty wide open for the applicant and there was a lot allowed in C-2 that wasnt in C-1. Mr. Wright said he would be more comfortable with C-1.
Mr. Byers asked how close was this to the nearest interstate. Mr. Camp said about a half of mile.
Mr. Byers asked were there any uses that had been define or developed. Mr. Camp said no more than industrial in the rear and commercial in the front.
Mr. Barnes said dark sky lighting was something that was normally presented with this type of rezoning and he thought it was in the application.
Mr. Barnes asked how did they arrived at the depth of the buffers on Route 250. Mr. Camp said he tried to be consistent to what had been done in the past. Mr. Barnes said most businesses want to be visible.
Mr. Harper opened the public hearing.
Ms. Mary Johnson of Bell Surveyors stated there was a previous application for a PUD on this piece a property and with the general concerns the application had been withdrawn. Ms. Johnson said they felt this was a much better plan. Ms. Johnson said about 20 acres was going to be zoned C-2 and the rear was 84 acres that would be zoned I-1. Ms. Johnson said there was a central road that would have a 60 foot right-a-way, which would be the main access designed and built to VDOT specifications. Ms. Johnson said there was concerns from VDOT about the right-a-way on Route 250 which had 110 foot of dedicated right-of-way and VDOT was now satisfied. Ms. Johnson said the utility easement would be located right off the 250 right-of-way. Ms. Johnson said they did show interconnectivity between parcels if that was desired.
Ms. Johnson said there would be trees in the back that would be the 100 foot vegetative buffer for interstate 64. Ms. Johnson said they also showed the set back lines Ms. Johnson said there was potential for ground water on the property. Ms. Johnson said the big issue was traffic. Ms. Johnson said the result of discussions between VDOT and Mr. Carter resulted in proffer number six.
Ms. Johnson said the DRC asked that the applicant speak with the neighbors regarding tentative uses and she spoke with a few. Ms. Johnson said spoke with Ms. Richardson who couldnt come to the meeting because of a previous engagement. Ms. Johnson said Ms. Richardson asked about covenants and restrictions. Ms. Johnson said Mr. Carter was working on those, which included hours of operation and further defining some the uses. Ms. Johnson said Mr. Carter would be looking for opinions from Mr. Camp on the covenants and restrictions and he would also be asking on the neighbors to team up on a committee to keep watch over his property.
Ms. Johnson said the cash proffer has been revised from it original state. Ms. Johnson said the cemetery would be protected from development of all construction activity and the applicant would provide access.
Ms. Johnson said the applicant believed this was a reasonable request, its in the growth area and there was expectation that something would happen with this property. Ms. Johnson said they have met all the code requirements, they had spoken with the neighbors and addressed their concerns the best they could. Ms. Johnson said they would provide tax revenue for the county and jobs for the citizens.
Ms. Johnson asked the Board to see in favor of the project.
Mr. Spencer asked could they add the dark sky lighting. Ms. Johnson said yes, she had already spoken with Mr. Carter.
Mr. Spencer said there was not an agreement that said Louisa County would provide water and sewer, even if the county did get the James River pipeline. Ms. Johnson said correct, there was not an agreement.
Mr. Spencer asked why was the 100 foot buffer was on the interstate 64 side. Ms. Johnson said it was recommend by someone through the process and they agreed to do it.
Mr. Spencer asked was the front buffer going to be just trees. Ms. Johnson said there would be trees with flowers and shrubs to provide openings.
Mr. Gentry asked Ms. Johnson to explain more about the VDOT agreement. Ms. Johnson said the proffer, as it was written, allows for the first businesses to get established to help the rest and after that the chapter 527 traffic impact analysis, which is required by VDOT, outlines what would be required.
Mr. Gentry said he didnt know where VDOT came up with that intense requirement, but that could eliminate all the development in that area. Ms. Johnson said it was frightening in the beginning, but the last meeting was very cordial and cooperative and came up this plan, which the applicant was happy with.
Mr. Byers asked how did the covenants work. Ms. Johnson said with the covenants and restrictions they could identify specific concerns.
Mr. Byers asked how many homes were between this project and the Zion interchange. Mr. Gentry said maybe 30.
Mr. Havasy asked how did they come up with 20 percent commercial versus 80 percent industrial. Ms. Johnson the 20 percent was to give it a nice frontage.
Mr. Havasy said the applicant had a by-right allowance to build single family homes on C-2.
Ms. Johnson said they pulled the actual ordinance to go by. Mr. Barnes said that was only if the applicant lived on the property.
Mr. Havasy asked why didnt the plan have buffers on the sides for the neighbors. Ms. Johnson said those properties were in a growth area and they didnt want to offer a proffer when those properties may end up developing in a similar nature.
Ms. Diann Pace Bishop Patrick Henry District, stated she lived directly across from proposed project and she opposed the rezoning requested by Mr. Ron Carter. Ms. Bishop said she lived across from the 104 acre farm and she was born in the county and live in the county her entire life. Ms. Bishop said she planned on living in a quiet county setting with no noise or ugly sights, but it appeared that could change in her sunset years. Ms. Bishop said she opposed Mr. Carters PUD development for some of the same issues. Ms. Bishop said who knew when and if Ferncliff would get water from the James River. Ms. Bishop said it was her understanding that there would not be any central sewage system. Ms. Bishop said she and the local people did not want stinking sewage on top of the ground coming from all the industries and commercial buildings. Ms. Bishop stated she was also concerned with the type of industries that would be built, would they be noisy, stinking or something that would cause a disturbance. Ms. Bishop said she certainly didnt want a 24 hour truck stop, a trash service, a halfway house or an adult entertainment store and she promised if there was a lot of noise she would keep the Sheriffs Office busy with her complaints. Ms. Bishop asked how would the Board like 80 acres of industry across from them. Ms. Bishop said the increased traffic on Route 250 could create problems for residents getting out of their driveways, as well as cause accidents and deaths. Ms. Bishop said she has worked in a local industrial park and knew they were not quiet, attractive or clean and they would take way the beauty of the surrounding properties. Ms. Bishop said she had spoken to Ms. Johnson by phone and told her that if this proposal had to go through she would like a bed and breakfast, small restaurant and small shops. Ms. Bishop said she would not oppose a Williamsburg style development, but she didnt want anything trashy. Ms. Bishop said she felt the concerns of local citizens were forgotten. Ms. Bishop said she had a bad feeling about the whole deal when she saw a Supervisor having lunch with Mr. Carter and the Supervisor said he was going over proposed plans for the development. Ms. Bishop said at Planning Commission meeting on February 12, 2009, the members had concerns about the industry part of the project not having enough water and then approved it to come before the Board. Ms. Bishop thanked the Board for their time and patience and told them they were not for the developer, but for the residents of Louisa.
Mr. Charles Poindexter Patrick Henry District, stated he wanted to echo what the Planning Commission said about water being the real issue. Mr. Poindexter said they were concerned about wells going dry or becoming contaminated. Mr. Poindexter said other concerns were the increase of traffic, danger getting out of driveways, more accidents and bottle necking at Ferncliff. Mr. Poindexter said the parcel had been farmland for about 200 years and once that was changed, the environment would be changed. Mr. Poindexter said there were also concerns with noise pollution, light pollution and odor. Mr. Poindexter said he realized Mr. Carter made a significant investment as agriculture farmland and this was a great parcel of farmland. Mr. Poindexter said Zion Crossroads was a target hot spot for commercial and industrial development and there was quite a bit of land already zoned and approved that was not being utilized. Mr. Poindexter said he didnt think it was time to destroy a rural community so the developer could prosper. Mr. Poindexter said he didnt think it should even be considered to have industrial development in a rural neighborhood. Mr. Poindexter said when you cast your vote think as though this development was in your community or front yard. Mr. Poindexter thanked each Board member for their service to the county and taxpayers. Mr. Poindexter asked them to oppose the zoning change.
Mr. Gerald Harlow Green Springs District, stated the map showed agricultural west of the property. Mr. Harlow said nothing he could say could sway their decision but the vast majority of the people living in the area were opposed to the project, as well the other things being done to Route 250. Mr. Harlow said this was spot zoning at its worst and if was so good for the county, why didnt Route 208 get turned into mix usage like Route 250 did. Mr. Harlow said trucks would avoid Interstate 64 and use Route 250 as their route. Mr. Harlow said the taxpayers would help support this project at some point. Mr. Harlow said the project was pure speculation and it was something the citizens did not want. Mr. Harlow said the project was not close to the interchange, it was a rural and industrial area and the project did not fit. Mr. Harlow said the residents and landowners did not want to see their peaceful community destroyed. Mr. Harlow said he didnt think the county should give a blank check to the developer to bring what he wanted.
With no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Harper closed the public hearing and brought it back to the Board for discussion.
Ms. Johnson said the issues that were heard were brought up before and addressed the best they could. Ms. Johnson said the dark sky lighting could be added if the opportunity was given.
Ms. Johnson passed around a map to the Board and explained the borders and the buffers.
Mr. Havasy asked Mr. Gentry who would be stuck with the future cost of road improvements due to high traffic. Mr. Gentry said they were trying to set up something so the developers would be, but he was confident in the plan. Mr. Gentry said VDOT would be doing less and less and it would be up to the developer to carry the load.
Mr. Spencer asked about the buffers on the left side. Ms. Johnson said she didnt think that the property was occupied.
Mr. Spencer asked was it a county employee that told them to put the 100 foot buffer on interstate 64. Ms. Johnson said no, it was suggested.
Mr. Spencer asked was the applicant going to have the 25-foot set back on the side. Ms. Johnson said yes it was a required set back.
Mr. Harper asked were there any other properties setting out there not being used. Mr. Camp said he did not know.
Mr. Barnes asked Mr. Gibson how valuable was light industrial to economic development.
Mr. Gibson said the price for light industrial at Zion Crossroads was very high and no one would spend that kind of money. Mr. Gibson said there was no available property at Zion Crossroads for light industrial because of the market. Mr. Gibson said he was excited and supportive of the project. Mr. Gibson said with light industrial, everything would be done inside, the noise would be contained and was usually in an upscale building. Mr. Gibson said this was the kind product the county could use and it should not create a problem.
Mr. Wright said he felt more comfortable with C-1. Mr. Wright said he had met with Mr. Carter and he never felt he would do anything detrimental to Louisa County so he could support this.
Mr. Spencer said he didnt want 500 homes on the location and he would rather see it zoned commercial and light industrial.
Mr. Barnes said change was tough and wasnt always welcomed. Mr. Barnes said there were some small businesses that wanted to get started that couldnt afford Zion Crossroads and might be able to afford Ferncliff. Mr. Barnes told Mr. Carter he would trust him at his word.
Mr. Havasy said he always said that he would not stand in the way of industrial or commercial, especially if was good use. Mr. Havasy said the only thing that concerned him was why didnt the applicant provide a buffer for the neighbors.
Mr. Byers said his concerns were also the buffers on the sides. Mr. Byers said he thought this was spread to far from Zion Crossroads. Mr. Byers said he would hope the developer would work with the neighbors for peace and harmony. Mr. Byers said he would prefer to see the development at the hub at Zions.
Mr. Gentry said no one liked speculation, but if your investing in commercial or industrial there would be some type of speculation. Mr. Gentry said he was strong believer that commercial could be done right even in residential areas. Mr. Gentry said he did have a problem with the industrial part, he didnt think industrial didnt fit the neighborhood. Mr. Gentry said industrial had to be in an area were it wouldnt affect residential. Mr. Gentry said he would prefer commercial and light residential. Mr. Gentry said he thought Mr. Carter was a reasonable person, but he could sell the property tomorrow.
Mr. Spencer said he didnt want 500 houses there and he would support it. Mr. Spencer said he would rather it be zoned commercial and light industrial.
Mr. Barnes said the Board could not ask the applicant for the dark sky lighting.
Mr. Mullen said the Board let the applicant know that was what they would like, but if was going to be in the form of a proffer, it had to be voluntary.
Mr. Wright said the proffer had to be added before the meeting started.
Mr. Barnes made a motion to adopt a resolution to approve the conditional rezoning of approximately 104.6 acres from agricultural (a-2) to general commercial (c-2) 20.36 acres and light industrial (i-1) 84.24 acres, Mr. Wright seconded the motion.
Mr. Harper requested a roll call vote.
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||Yes|
|Dan W. Byers||No|
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||No|
|Willie L. Harper||Yes|
|Richad A. Havasy||Yes|
|P.T. Spencer, Jr.||Yes|
|Jack T. Wright||Yes|
On motion of Mr. Spencer, seconded by Mr. Barnes, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to recess the March 16, 2009 meeting at 8:10 p.m. until March 25, 2009 at 6:00 p.m.
BY ORDER OF
WILLIE L. HARPER, CHAIRMAN
LOUISA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LOUISA COUNTY, LOUISA, VIRGINIA