Contact Sitemap Search
|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|
C. Lee Lintecum, County Administrator; Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator; Patrick Morgan, County Attorney; and Mary Jackson, Deputy Clerk|
*Eric Purcell arrived at 5:12 p.m.
CALL TO ORDERChairman Barnes called the March 6, 2006 regular meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 5:00 p.m. Chairman Barnes led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
There were no Constitutional Officers that wished to address the Board.
CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD
There were no citizens that wished to address the Board.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Lee Lintecum, County Administrator, informed the Board that under their Consent Agenda, they needed to add the resolution proclaiming March 13 17, 2006 as Multiple Sclerosis week.
Mr. Gentry said that he would like to add the meeting with VDOT and the Louisa Town Council as a topic to the agenda to comment on the Louisa Bypass and other matters that were discussed.
Pat Morgan, County Attorney, informed the Board that he would like to add potential litigation in the Mineral District and litigation in the Zion Crossroads area as topics for discussion during their closed session.
Chairman Barnes said that he would like to add trash on the roads in Louisa County as a topic for discussion.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 6-0, the March 6, 2006 agenda was adopted as amended.
VDOT Monthly Update
Milton Thacker, Resident Administrator, informed the Board that as of today, the Virginia Department of Transportation is celebrating 100 years of excellence. Mr. Thacker said that he had looked at the sign on Lands End Road, which he found that they have an “End of State Maintenance” sign posted.
Chairman Barnes said that he was referring to when you come out of the subdivision; this is where they need to have a stop sign before turning on Lands End Road, which he previously misinformed him.
Mr. Thacker said that they would look at this during the construction of this subdivision, which he is positive that his technicians will capture this. Mr. Thacker said that he had spoke with the Residency Administrator out of Charlottesville regarding the light at the intersection of Route 250 and Route 522, which he has not received any new information pertaining to a time line as to when the light would change from flashing to permanent. Mr. Thacker summarized VDOTs current maintenance activities to the Board saying that a cooler February required their crews response for some minor delays and accidents; moving forward to advertise and award a contract for maintaining our segment of I-64, where the contract would cover from Route 288 near Short Pump to Interstate 81 in the Staunton District and affect all maintenance activities on their segment of I-64 through Louisa County and Fluvanna; attempted to contact the farmer utilizing the barn at the intersection of Route 208 and Route 640 to discuss the water issue that was referred to by Chairman Barnes, where they were not successful in speaking with the owner, but some corrections have been made that might alleviate the concern either by the farmer or someone else; and that he personally reviewed the gravel on Route 641 (Captain Meade Road) and verified that the stone that was placed there met all of their specifications for crush and run, which following a period of time for the stone to settle in the road bed, the remaining stone would be recycled and relocated past the last brick house on the road. Mr. Thacker said that recently it has been reported by the news media that VDOT is reducing maintenance due to program over expenditures, which is being contributed to having to do some activities sooner, inflation, and rising petroleum prices. He said that in their residency, their expenditures are over by 3%, which locally they contribute this primarily due to snow removal operations to date. Mr. Thacker identified VDOTs construction activities saying that they have begun construction on Route 775 (Rising Sun Road), continuing construction activities on Route 718 (Proffits Road) that is ahead of schedule, scheduled meeting on March 7, 2006 to meet with Harry Carter to discuss relocation of the intersection of Route 640 and Route 649, and waiting for authorization approving the expenditures on Route 699 (Indian Creek Road) and Route 754 (Bakers Branch Road). Mr. Thacker said that a meeting was held at his office on March 2, 2006 with representatives of Louisa County, Town of Louisa, and their Culpeper District Planning Staff regarding the Louisa Bypass request by the Town of Louisa. Mr. Thacker said that they are taking a fresh approach to this concern to perhaps include and extend this request to include the Mineral Community and the future needs of both communities and the Countys. Mr. Thacker identified VDOTs general issues saying that the request to reduce the speed study for Route 722 (Garretts Mill Road) requested by resolution has been completed and the speed limit has been reduced to 35 mph; the speed study request by the Board for Route 522 and Route 208 at the Wares Crossroads has been completed and they determined that all existing traffic control/engineering devices are properly located, in good repair, and functioning as designed and intended; therefore, no additions or modifications of the traffic devices were warranted at this time; appealed the results of the study to address the 35 mph signing on Route 208 near Harris Creek Road and approaching the Town of Louisa limits, which he met with the technician last Thursday and will be meeting with the technicians supervisor next week to review the area to see if they are able to extend the sign out a bit; and VDOT received approval to remove the sign island located in the middle of the road at the intersection of Route 522 and Route 618 in the Town of Mineral.
Resolution - Requesting a Traffic Speed/Safety Study on State Route 655 (Bethany Church Road)
Mr. Jennings said that he would like to have a traffic speed/safety study on Route 655 (Bethany Church Road) between the church and Route 33. Mr. Jennings said that several of his constituents have approached him about having a speed reduction through this section. Mr. Wright pointed out that this road goes to Route 609, which brings additional traffic heading towards the lake area during the summer months.
On motion of Mr. Jennings, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 6-0, a resolution was adopted requesting a traffic speed/safety study on State Route 655 (Bethany Church Road) from Route 609 (Buckner Road) to Route 33 (Jefferson Highway).
*Mr. Purcell arrived at 5:12 p.m.
Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that he has enclosed a letter in their Board packet saying that the request for revenue sharing has been postponed until after the General Assembly has completed their work; therefore, they do not have to make a decision at this time for the revenue sharing.
Mr. Gentry said that on March 2, 2006, as Mr. Thacker mentioned, he attended a meeting where they discussed the Louisa Bypass. Mr. Gentry said that based on the urgency, he would like to recommend that they get something started as far as a planning and design initiative to support not only the Town Councils resolution, but to create their own resolution supporting not only the design and construction study of the Bypass for Louisa, but for a potential Bypass on Route 22/208 between the two Towns. Mr. Gentry said that the Planning Department in Culpeper felt that if they were to receive this support from the Board then they would be able to pursue the planning; therefore, he would like to ask for their support on such a resolution.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 70, a resolution was adopted supporting a request by the Louisa Town Council for a Bypass in the Town of Louisa and further requesting a plan/design for Route 22/208 between the Town of Louisa and the Town of Mineral and a Bypass/alternate Route for the Town of Mineral asking VDOT to consider and move forward with a plan to design and construct a complete limited access bypass.
Louisa Habitat for Humanity - Affordable Housing
Page Kemp, Louisa Habitat for Humanity Representative, informed the Board that he is a member of the Steering Committee for this organization. Mr. Kemp introduced several members from their organization and said that they are all concerned about the affordable housing issue in Louisa County. Mr. Kemp introduced two partner families that the Habitat for Humanity has worked with to fulfill their dreams of owning a home. Mr. Kemp pointed out that affordable housing does not exist in Louisa County. He said that their organization is continuing to work to find a solution to this problem. Mr. Kemp explained that they do not give handouts to the individuals that reside in these homes, but a helping hand in providing a home that requires them have a down payment of $1,250.00, make a mortgage payment, and work several hundred hours of sweat equity. Mr. Kemp said that the Habitat for Humanity was formed in 1976 in Georgia and is a non-profit ministry, which currently has 2,100 active Habitat for Humanity affiliates in 100 countries around the world. This organization has helped build over 200,000 homes around the world. Mr. Kemp stated that Louisa County began their chapter in 2001 and is an offspring of the Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Kemp said that each family they select must live in the County in a substandard or overcrowded housing, have the ability to repay a loan, and willing to partner with the Habitat for Humanity to perform sweat equity on these houses. These individuals who qualify must have an income level of 25 - 50% of the area median income for a family of four. Mr. Kemp said that they have a lot of organizations donate a lot of the materials that are used to construct these homes. Mr. Kemp said that he is here this evening to share some ideas with the Board on what they could do to help with the Habitat for Humanity. He said that during their budget and tax discussions they could keep these families and their struggle for housing in mind and potentially provide some real estate tax relief. Mr. Kemp said that the Board could sponsor a workday at one of the future houses and donate their personal time to this effort, which would be a way that they could demonstrate their commitment to affordable housing. He suggested that they could allow county employees the opportunity to donate one day per year to building activities while still being paid. Mr. Kemp stated that they are committed to providing affordable housing, which is an extremely important issue in Louisa County. Mr. Kemp said that they could even pass a resolution to declare a Habitat for Humanity month to get some County buy in on this process.
The Board discussed this topic briefly with Mr. Wright suggesting that they add this topic to their agenda for their upcoming Retreat on March 17, 2006 to discuss more on how the Board and County could get involved. Mr. Gentry extended his appreciation to the members of this organization due to the benefit that it brings to these individuals. Mr. Gentry said that when you talk about man-hours, which doesnt seem to be an issue, he wondered how many houses they could build in Louisa County based on the donation of materials. Chairman Barnes asked Mr. Kemp how much of a problem they have obtaining the land to construct these homes. Chairman Barnes said that this information could be helpful for them to know in the off chance that they were to receive a land proffer from an applicant.
Mr. Kemp replied that the materials are typically purchased with the funds that are donated from various companies. Mr. Kemp said that the number of houses would depend on the amounts of the donations or by the money paid in by previous partner families. Mr. Kemp said that with their current level of volunteers and if they had the supplies, he could see them constructing at least three homes per year. Mr. Kemp said that the real estate assessments are hurting them on trying to purchase land. Mr. Kemp said that he had worked on a habitat project for the City of Richmond where someone had made a large land donation, which allowed them to construct twenty-seven habitat homes on one parcel.
Signage - Trevilian Station Battlefield
Mr. Lintecum said that there are two issues pertaining to the Trevilian Station Battlefield with the first one being the signage on I-64 and the second being the easement for the pull off from Buckingham Branch Railroad.
Trevilian Station Battlefield Signage
Gerald Harlow, Trevilian Station Battlefield Foundation Vice-President, explained to the Board that they have been working on the signage issue for the past five years. Mr. Harlow said that they want the signs posted on I-64 to inform individuals which exit to take for the battlefield and where to begin the tour. Mr. Harlow said that a previous VDOT employee had told them that they would have to wait until the program for these signs had been revamped. Now that the program has been revamped, they are dealing with a contracting firm by the name of Virginia Logos. Mr. Harlow said that last August, the Board approved acquiring these signs through whatever means necessary and as a result of this, a letter was sent to Senator Houck. Mr. Harlow said that Senator Houck in turn sent a letter, which prompted some action. He said that he received a call from the Assistant Secretary of the Department of Transportation saying that they would receive the signs. Mr. Harlow explained that shortly after this, he received an email from Virginia Logos saying that they had been approved for the signs. Mr. Harlow said that they had turned this over to the County to approve the signs, but from what he gathers, they need to approve the preliminary phase to have $250.00 application fee for each sign.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Wright asking how many signs they required. Mr. Wright questioned who was going to pay for the signs.
Mr. Harlow replied that they need two signs, which would cost $500.00 total for the application fee per sign. Mr. Harlow said that Virginia Logos would not provide them an estimated cost on these signs until they receive the application fees. Mr. Harlow said that from what he gathered from Senator Houcks letter, he requested the fees to be waived, but the fees have not been waived. Mr. Harlow said that further down the line, they intended on asking the County for the funds to obtain the signs. Mr. Harlow said that he is finding it difficult to work with Virginia Logos. Mr. Harlow said that he was told that they would not be able to have their emblem on the signs since they only allowed that for colleges, but he feels that this is a matter they could straighten out with the Assistant Secretary of Transportation.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Chairman Barnes told Mr. Harlow that he had spoke with Bob Gibson, Economic Development Director, to verify if this was something that they could handle through their tourism department, which he confirmed that they would be able to do this and asked Mr. Harlow to work with Mr. Gibson. Mr. Purcell said that he noticed in the email that the Board received from Mr. Harlow stated that they are over $600,000 in debt due to land purchases and asked if they planned on cutting the timber on the foundation property to restore it to the state it was during the battles.
Mr. Harlow responded by saying that the 939 acres that was previously purchased by Bear Island was timbered ten years ago and is currently three years away from the first harvest of the pines where they do a thinning. Mr. Harlow stated that they really do not have any marketable timber at this time.
Trevilian Station Battlefield Easement
Mr. Harlow explained to the Board that in 2000, they had signed a contract to do the “Auto Tour”, which consisted of seven stops. Mr. Harlow said that one of these stops requires an easement from VDOT and CSX. He said that they were assured that there wouldnt be any problems with the easements from CSX, which they still havent received a response from them after four years. Mr. Harlow said that again, it took a letter coming from the Board to Senator Houck. He said that Senator Houck threatened that he would introduce legislation that would require them to contact the Trevilian Station Battlefield Foundation (TSBF). Mr. Harlow said that the Buckingham Branch Railroad (BBR) line is willing to donate an easement, but they would not donate it to VDOT since they would not accept it. Mr. Harlow said that BBR is willing to donate this easement to the County, which would allow them to have a safe pull off for their auto tour. Mr. Harlow informed the Board that the TSBF has the money from a TEA-21 Grant to develop the site by having the area paved and the signage posted. Mr. Harlow said that there are just a few feet of land that would be on CSXs property, but they will not give it to the TSBF.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Purcell asking who would have liability on this easement. Mr. Purcell questioned if an individual were to be injured on the property if the County would be held responsible. Mr. Wright asked Mr. Morgan if he thought that CSX would be willing to give the County a Hold Harmless Agreement.
Mr. Morgan said that if the County were to accept the easement, there would be some liability there, but the owner of the property being CSX, would have the ultimate responsibility overall. Mr. Morgan said that the County would have some liability, but their insurance would cover that. Mr. Morgan replied that they could certainly request this from CSX.
Mr. Harlow explained to the Board that the TSBF already has seven stops that are in use with the signage there and have been brought up to the specifications that they need. Mr. Harlow stated that the landowners of Louisa County have generously donated all of these easements to this point. Mr. Harlow said that individuals are currently taking the tour and do not have a safe place to pull off; therefore, they have much more of a liability issue right now by not having a deceleration lane with a paved area than what they would ever have in the future once this has been built to VDOT specifications.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Havasy said that he had done some research this morning in regards to other battlefields. Mr. Havasy said that New Market Battlefield entertains 50,000 people per year. Mr. Havasy said that the Battlefield in Fredericksburg entertains between 250,000 to 1,000,000 people per year. Mr. Havasy pointed out that with Louisa being right off of the Interstate, it would seem to him that if they were able to finish this, then this would be inexpensive tourism that would not cost the County anything. Mr. Purcell said that his concern about this issue is due to VDOT not wanting to accept the easement, which he would like to know why. Chairman Barnes said that he would like to have the time to have Mr. Morgan verify why VDOT does not want to accept the easement.
Mr. Harlow read a letter that he received from VDOT explaining why they do not want to accept the easement saying that upon further investigation, it had been brought to their attention that this project would have to be locally administered and VDOT cannot accept the easement; therefore, it cannot be a VDOT project. Mr. Harlow said that VDOT also stated that Louisa County would have to be the project sponsor and accept the easement. Mr. Harlow said that in this letter from Jamie Glass of VDOT also says that it is a possibility that the railroad would be willing to give the easement to the County. Mr. Harlow said that an agreement would have to be drafted for the responsibility of the maintenance for the easement, which they would maintain the trash on the site. Mr. Harlow said that if something were to happen to the signs as far as vandalism, they would be covered under the Virginia Civil War Trails that would replace the signs; therefore, there wouldnt be any cost to Louisa County.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Wright asked if it would require a resolution from the Board to have Mr. Morgan contact CSX to see what he could negotiate and bring it back to the Board for final approval once he has all of the details. Chairman Barnes directed Mr. Morgan to address this issue with CSX and to let Mr. Harlow know.
Trash on Louisa County Roads
Chairman Barnes said that Mr. Harper has been working on this topic for quite some time trying to get the program running for the inmate trash pick up. Chairman Barnes stated that he has received several complaints from citizens in the County concerning the debris on the roads, especially around the entranceways to the County. Chairman Barnes said that this continues to be a serious problem.
Mr. Lintecum stated that the jails were experiencing difficulties with individual qualifying to participate in this program.
Chairman Barnes asked Mr. Lintecum to work with the Litter Control Coordinator and the appropriate contacts at the jail to schedule dates that the inmates would be able to pick up the litter and bring this information back to the Board at their next regular scheduled meeting.
Mr. Purcell informed the Board that he had just finished meeting with the Elementary School Design Committee along with Mr. Lintecum and Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator. Mr. Purcell said that they reiterated the Boards message that they wanted to have a structure to accommodate 720 students and to get as close as they could to the 90,000 sq. ft. for $16,000,000. Mr. Purcell said that to him it seemed that from the presentation that the architects made had two options that met this criteria. Mr. Purcell said that the designs looked favorable, but there were a couple of questions about them. Mr. Purcell said that one of the designs was a pod system that was favored by the teachers that were in attendance because of the potential for adding on to it, but this increased the cost and was not one of the models that were presented. Mr. Purcell said that there were several individuals from the schools that were concerned because the design only had one extra room in either of the two designs as a non-used room. Mr. Purcell said that from what he gathered, there were dual concerns with the first one being that they were going to build a school that would almost be at capacity, which concerned them that there would be trailers outside. Mr. Purcell said that the second concern was that some of the special needs instructors felt that they would need additional rooms that wouldnt necessarily be occupied all day long where they could move children for testing purposes and other reasons, which was not provided in the two designs that met their criteria. Mr. Purcell said that he had inquired how much additional rooms would cost and was informed that it would be $200.00 per sq. ft that would cost an additional $1.4 million, which he reiterated that the Board would be sticking to the $16,000,000. Mr. Purcell assured the committee that he would address their concerns with the Board. Mr. Purcell said that he was pleased that the architect was able to come up with at least two designs that came extremely close to meeting their demands. Mr. Lintecum said that the only issue that he had with the design was having the flat rooftop.
The Board discussed this topic with Chairman Barnes reiterating that the Board had agreed at their last meeting that they did not want a flat roof because of maintenance issues and things of that nature. Chairman Barnes said that although it costs less to build a flat roof, they have to consider the overall maintenance expense. Mr. Gentry asked Mr. Purcell how many rooms they were talking about for the additional $1.4 million.
Mr. Purcell replied that the school was talking about having five additional rooms, which would equate to half of one of the pods. Mr. Purcell said that he had told them that he had to have the numbers for the additional rooms for him to report back to the Board. Mr. Purcell said that they were asking for an additional 70,000 sq. ft.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Chairman Barnes asked if they would like to know the difference in the costs to have a pitched roof versus a flat roof. Mr. Wright pointed out that Dr. Melton himself had said that he did not want a flat roof because they have already had to modify two different roofs due to leakage and maintenance problems. Chairman Barnes said that he would ask for a cost analysis for the price difference between the two roofs and send it to the Board. Mr. Purcell said that he would like to add that they would like to have the pitched roof because they are interested in the water runoff going back into the ground in an expeditious way that could help the groundwater supply. Chairman Barnes pointed out that the committee wanted a pitched roof, but the architect was trying to stay within the proposed budget. Mr. Harper suggested that they look at what the warranty offers between the two types of roofing as well. Mr. Gentry asked if the construction management team that is costing them $1.3 million had done any value engineering at this time and if not, when would this begin. Mr. Gentry said that both he and Mr. Harper had told them that wanted a monthly report on what is happening as far as the work this management team was performing and he has not received anything. Chairman Barnes said that during the construction management meeting that he attended, they were still working on getting the design of the building down before they are able to begin. Mr. Purcell said that it seemed to him that the construction management gentleman that attended the meeting today was the same person that was running the numbers off of the top of his head when he had told him that he had to have a fixed cost to provide to the Board. Mr. Purcell said that he believed that this individual had been working with the architect to find the cost savings method that drew them to these two designs opposed to the pod system.
Mr. Gentry informed the Board that the Volunteers of Louisa have worked 2,666 hours from January through February 2006. Mr. Gentry said that he would also like to point out that applications have been placed throughout the County Building, Recycling Centers, and other various places throughout the County for nominations for the Volunteer of the Year Award. Mr. Gentry said that they have a category for youth as well as adults and would like to receive as many applications as possible. Mr. Gentry said that the applications nominating an individual must be submitted by March 31, 2006.
Mr. Gentry informed the Board that on Saturday March 4, 2006, he had the opportunity to be a judge for the Parks and Recreation Louisa Idol competition, which was a big success. Mr. Gentry said that he really saw a tremendous amount of talent in the County with the twenty-six participants they had. Mr. Gentry stated that the Parks and Recreation Department really did a tremendous job putting this together. Mr. Gentry said that there was one young lady by the name of Lauren Watts that has sung the National Anthem at basketball games that was seventeen years old that won the overall competition. Mr. Gentry said that they broke the competition down to three different groups for the youth, teenagers, and the adults.
Mr. Gentry informed the Board that the Pool Committee had met this afternoon in regards to the bids that were received. Mr. Gentry said that they received bids from four different contractors. He said that the committee feels that they are unable to accept the four bids since they are well beyond what they anticipated for the cost. Mr. Gentry said that he would recommend that the Board reject the bids that were received and move forward with looking at another design to try to lower the costs.
The Board discussed this topic with Chairman Barnes saying that he would like to make it understood that his support for a pool has not wavered and wont, but he certainly would not support a million dollar overrun for this facility. Chairman Barnes said that he would like to make it clear that his support is not going to waver for this facility, but right now, it would not be prudent to spend this kind of money for an aquatic facility. Mr. Gentry said that the committee is going to look as other designs to consider with the possibility to do the work in phases.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to reject all of the bids that were received for the aquatic facility.
Mr. Gentry informed the Board that in their package they have a letter from Witt Freeman of the IDA concerning surplus material that they have onsite from the pool. Mr. Gentry said that he would like to have the Boards permission to negotiate with the IDA with the surplus material for the possibility of obtaining additional property for the Parks and Recreation Department around the Betty J. Queen Center. Mr. Gentry said that he has talked with several individuals from the IDA and has looked at the engineering, which he is hoping that they can work out a mutual agreement with the two bodies to get additional property that is needed.
On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to move forward with allowing the IDA and the Board to discuss future land acquisition.
Mr. Wright informed the Board that the group that he works with that was known as Chief Local Elected Official (CLEO), which has been changed to the Piedmont Workforce Council and involves the Workforce Investment Act that is through the state and federal government. Mr. Wright said that he has asked these individuals to find the individuals that are qualified to meet the needs of the existing industry, but for new industry coming in to the County as well. Mr. Wright said that they are in the process of revamping this to try to get it reactivated on a positive basis to the Thomas Jefferson Planning District.
Mr. Gentry said that he would like to reappoint Jerry Chaney to the Transportation Safety Commission.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board reappointed Jerry Chaney to the Transportation Safety Commission.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT
Mr. Lintecum presented his report highlighting the following items:
Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that he has received a request from the Department of Social Services regarding the use of the Bunting House.
The Board discussed this topic with Chairman Barnes saying that Mr. Wright and Mr. Jennings are working on this topic and will bring their recommendations back to the Board. Mr. Harper questioned if they were going to track this information to verify what this program is costing them opposed to what they have been paying. Mr. McLeod replied that he would speak with Paul Oswell, Director of Social Services, to confirm the exact amounts.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to adopt the Consent Agenda approving the two following resolutions.
Resolution - Supplemental Appropriation and Disbursement of Two for Life and Four for Life Monies
On the motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the supplemental appropriation and disbursement of monies in the amount of $25,963.65 from the state for the Two for Life fund and $15,078.50 for the Four for Life that will be administered by the division of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) under the Virginia State Health Department.
Resolution - Proclaiming March 13 17, 2006 as Multiple Sclerosis Week in Louisa County
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted proclaiming March 13 17, 2006 as Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Week in Louisa County.
Mr. Lintecum pointed out that they had received a letter from the Department of Justice regarding the Regional Jail.
Mr. Morgan did not discuss any legal correspondence with the Board.
APPROVAL OF BILLS
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the bills for the second half of February 2006 for the County of Louisa in the amount of $288,600.63.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the minutes of February 21, 2006 as presented.
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 6:15 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 potential litigation in the Mineral District.
2. 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 in the Zion Crossroads area.
3. 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.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 6:58 p.m.
RESOLUTION - CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION
On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Jennings, 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 6th day of March 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 6th day of March 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.
Annual Report - Dominion Virginia Power North Anna State of the Station
Jack Davis, Dominion Power Site Vice-President, gave an overview of the report given to the Board members prior to the meeting on the 2005 State of the Station. The topics included:
Electricity Competition in Virginia
Keeping the Nuclear Option Open
Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Yucca Mountain Designation for Commercial Used Nuclear Fuel
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
Employee Involvement in the Community
Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
Jerry Rosenthal, Patrick Henry District, Concerned Citizens of Louisa County Representative, and Peoples Alliance Representative, stated that there are a lot of things that happened at North Anna this year that Mr. Davis did not touch on. Mr. Rosenthal said that he would like to talk about proliferation. Mr. Rosenthal pointed out that one of the byproducts from this plant is plutonium, which is a serious problem when it comes to proliferation. Mr. Rosenthal said that just this week, the President undid the entire basis of their non-proliferation treaty that has existed by making a deal with India that makes the rules that was agreed to by the whole international community gone. Mr. Rosenthal said that this brings no separation between civilian and military. Mr. Rosenthal said that Forbes Magazine says that the nuclear industry is the largest industrial failure in the history of the World. Mr. Rosenthal said that the add that was placed in The Central Virginian advertised that Dominion Power would present the annual State of the Station report to the public, which is not what this is. He said that this is a place for the Board of Supervisors to have a public hearing and have the public speak to the Board and not to have Dominion give their report. Mr. Rosenthal said that the other ads that are placed in the paper announce that the public is invited to attend and express their views, which this ad does not encourage. Mr. Rosenthal stated that this Board should represent its citizens, but it is not doing this. Mr. Rosenthal said that the Friends of Lake Anna recognized that the early site permit was going to be seriously detrimental to the citizens who live on the lake and this Board did nothing, but pass resolutions saying that if Dominion wants this, it would be good. Mr. Rosenthal said that they couldnt rely on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission because they have become a lapdog rather than a watchdog. Mr. Rosenthal said that this past November, Bob Richards submitted a letter to the Editor of The Central Virginian expressing that the Friends of Lake Anna was going to make a private presentation, but a private meeting took place between the Chairman of the Board and Dominion, which appears as collusion. He said that it went on to say that the Chairman should be more interested in the welfare of Louisa County constituents, including those of us who live at the lake rather than the welfare of Dominion. Mr. Rosenthal said that neither the head nor the heart of this Board seems interested in serving the public rather than Dominion; therefore, he feels that this is a failure of democracy and common sense. Mr. Rosenthal said that when those sirens go off at the Dominion Plant, it would already be too late for individuals to do anything about it; therefore, they need a better evacuation plan in place. In closing, Mr. Rosenthal said that there are a lot of issues that this Board has to stand up for the citizens of the County, which he does not feel that they have done; therefore, he gives them a D- as an overall grade.
Mr. Davis said that he is positive that both Mr. Rosenthal and Dominion want safe and reliable power generated at North Anna, which is a common goal they both have in mind.
Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 7:23 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.
Mr. Purcell said that he takes exception to anyone making those kind of derogatory comments about how he represents his constituents. Chairman Barnes extended his appreciation to all parties that spoke this evening saying that the one great thing about this Country is that individuals have the right to say what they feel. Chairman Barnes said that they do the best that they can do and move forward.
CUP08-05 - National Communications Towers, LLC
Darren Coffey, Community Development Director, summarized the request to be for the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a 199 telecommunication tower with associated equipment and buildings. Mr. Coffey said that the property is located on the south side of Route 522 (Zachary Taylor Highway), southeast of Route 687 (Daniel Road) and is in the Mineral Magisterial and Voting Districts. He said that this property is zoned A-1 and the proposed leased area would be 125X125 on a 141 acre parcel. Mr. Coffey said that the 80X90 compound area would hold the monopole tower and associated equipment that would be surrounded by a 7 security fence and 4 landscape buffer on three sides with the fourth side facing an existing wooded area. This area would be accessed by a 30 easement to Route 522 with a VDOT approved entrance and would be set back off of Route 522 approximately 330. Mr. Coffey said that the color of the tower has been proposed to be metallic grey. He said that there was no one present at the Neighborhood Meeting that was held on December 14, 2005 to speak for or against. Mr. Coffey said that the Development Review Committee met where they voted 4-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission. Mr. Coffey said that the Planning Commission held their public hearing on January 12, 2006, at which two individuals spoke in favor of the request. Mr. Coffey said that after the Planning Commission reviewed the conditions, they voted 7-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Supervisors with the thirteen conditions listed in the staff report.
Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m.
Gary Barber, National Communication Towers Representative, informed the Board that he is please to bring this site to Louisa County. Mr. Barber said that in the late fall of 2005, they had recognized that a hole existed in the coverage on Route 522. Mr. Barber said that if this site were approved it would fill the coverage hole on Route 522. Mr. Barber said that during the meetings that were held, there was interest expressed in having this tower.
Mike Villa, Cingular Wireless Representative, informed the Board that he was here this evening to show his support for this request. Mr. Villa said that Cingular Wireless is interested in co-locating on the proposed tower that is being constructed by National Communication Towers. Mr. Villa said that this would help build their coverage area in Spotsylvania County, Louisa County, and Orange County.
Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.
The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Wright asking where the closest tower to this proximity was. Mr. Gentry said that the only concern that he has with this proposal is not necessarily directed toward this applicant and their abilities of what they are going to do for the County because there are needs for the County. Mr. Gentry said that in 2004, Louisa County established a goal to create a telecommunications plan for the entire County. Mr. Gentry said that his concern right now is that they are getting this request for the tower and have an upcoming hearing where Rappahannock Electric is proposing a 300 tower and they had two showings this past Saturday for two other towers, which he is extremely concerned about how all of this is going to tie together. Mr. Gentry said that each company presenting their information states how it would benefit the County, but he does not see how it ties together; therefore, he is concerned about what the overall plan and picture is for the County of Louisa. Mr. Wright said that when Hanover County was making their Comprehensive Plan for towers, one of the major contributors to this plan came back sixty days later requesting twenty-six more sites; therefore, he doesnt believe that these plans are well thought out. Mr. Purcell asked Mr. Coffey if the applicant was in compliance with all of the Countys rules regarding their ability to set up and operate.
In response to the Boards questions, Mr. Barber replied that there were two towers that are near by this site. He said that the distance from the Route 522 site is approximately 5.5 miles to the next site that is being constructed in Orange County. Mr. Barber said that there was another site on Route 623 (Chopping Road) that has two towers and two sites near the North Anna Power Station. Mr. Barber said that in the wireless industry, they typically like to have towers located at least five miles apart. Mr. Coffey confirmed that the applicant is in compliance with the rules that have been established.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Harper said that there is a clear-cut piece of land behind his home where he can see seven towers. Mr. Harper said that the reason that he sees these towers is because of the lighting that they have. Mr. Harper said that he does not have a problem with making the motion to approve this request, however on condition number six, b. he would like to have the sentence end after the statement that the tower would not be lighted. Mr. Harper said that if someone were to approach them later asking them to light this tower, then they would have to come before the Board to ask for an amendment to the permit. Chairman Barnes asked if there were any requirements from the FAA for this tower to be lighted.
Mr. Barber replied that the FAA only requires towers that are over 200 to be lighted unless you are within eight miles from an airport.
On motion of Mr. Harper, seconded by Mr. Havasy, which carried by a vote of 6-1, with Mr. Gentry voting against, a resolution was adopted approving the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a 199 telecommunications tower with the associated equipment and buildings that would be located on Tax Map Parcel 16-7 in the Mineral Magisterial and Voting Districts with the inclusion of thirteen conditions as outlined in Resolution number RES06.040 that is on file in the County Administrators office.
Chairman Barnes said that along the lines of what Mr. Gentry was speaking about, they do get a lot of applicants saying what they would do for Emergency Services. Chairman Barnes asked Mr. Lintecum if they had an idea of how much tower space they require for EMS and the Sheriffs Department.
Mr. Lintecum replied that they are aware of where the weak areas and the strong areas are, but they do not have a Comprehensive Plan in place.
Chairman Barnes asked Mr. McLeod to have Mike Schlemmer, Emergency Services Coordinator, to put together a Communications Plan within thirty days and bring it back to the Board by April 3, 2006.
REZ13-05 - Route 22 Rail Site, LLC
Mr. Coffey summarized the request as being for the rezoning of approximately 799 acres from A-2 to Industrial. Mr. Coffey said that the property is located on the north side of Route 22 (Davis Highway), between Route 625 (Chalklevel Road) and Route 623 (Chopping Road) and is in the Mineral Magisterial and Voting Districts. Mr. Coffey said that the surrounding zoning in this area is primarily A-1 and A-2 with some C-2 zoning on the south side and east side of the property. The 2001 Comprehensive Plan designates this area of Louisa County as Agricultural and is located between the Town of Louisa and Town of Mineral designated growth areas. Mr. Coffey said that one of the key areas of concern with rezoning is the mitigation of adverse impacts. Mr. Coffey said that commonly traffic and buffers are primary concerns, as is the case with this project. He said that a vegetative buffer with the minimum of 100 has been proffered around the site and the uses are limited from what is normally allowed in the zoning ordinance for industrial. Mr. Coffey said that with the conditional rezoning, any proffered master plan or conceptual plan becomes part of the rezoning and the development of the property must precede in general accord with the approved plan. Mr. Coffey said that if this rezoning were approved, the submitted site plan might be reviewed administratively by staff if desired by the Board. Mr. Coffey said that the Neighborhood Meeting was held on December 14, 2005 had fourteen citizens in attendance where they addressed a number of issues that pertained to the railroad such as, the condition of the tracks, number of trains, length of trains, the speed of trains, the types of uses that would be allowed in the industrial park, the existing traffic along Route 22 and 208, capacity of the existing water and sewer system, the number of trucks needed to ship products out once processed, the affects on the current storm water drainage in the area, road improvements that would be needed to other roads besides Route 22, and many other numerous items. Mr. Coffey said that the Development Review Committee had met and discussed this application at some length, which they voted 3-2 to forward a favorable recommendation to the Planning Commission with the proffers submitted at that time. Mr. Coffey said that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 12, 2006 at which twelve people spoke. The Planning Commission voted 6-1 to forward a recommendation of approval on the conditional rezoning to the Board with the proffers submitted at that time. Mr. Coffey stated that the application as presented appears to be in general conformance with the concepts embodied in the Louisa County Comprehensive Plan; although it does not lie directly in the Town of Louisa growth area, it is directly adjacent to it. He said that buffers are critical to visually and audibly reducing any adverse impacts. Mr. Coffey said that the primary consideration in making a recommendation on this application is whether the applicant has adequately addressed the adverse impacts that will result from this project and if the project is in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and other applicable policies. Mr. Coffey said that he had submitted to amended proffers that were dated March 3, 2006 to the Board.
Bob Gibson, Economic Development Director, informed the Board that he is very much in support of this project. He said that he believes that this would be an overall long-term benefit to the County. Mr. Gibson said that with economic development, you have to take a long-term view of the needs and the requirements of the County, which he feels that these individuals have the long-term interest in the County. Mr. Gibson stated that rail traffic is coming back and is growing again for numerous reasons. Mr. Gibson said that the rail is a resource that they should utilize and something that will compliment what they are doing at the airport along with the growth that is taking place in the Zion Crossroads area and Gum Spring.
Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
Randy Tingler, Applicant, introduced Jim Bradshaw of Woolpert to address the Board with the particulars of the presentation and Steve Powell of Buckingham Branch Railroad. Mr. Tingler stated that this was a hard decision for him to even bring this to the Board. He explained that this project was a long-term project and to tie up such a large piece of land took an extremely tough decision on their part for them to do this. Mr. Tingler said that the origins of this project go back to May 2005, where the County had held an Economic Development Workshop and discussed the future needs. Mr. Tingler said that from the meeting, there were three primary recommendations to continue the emphasis on the Zion Crossroads area, to explore and utilize the Gum Spring area, and to work on the rail access usage. Mr. Tingler said that the y looked at several parcels throughout the County, which this was the only parcel that had these resources and the size of land to utilize these resources. He said that this site is going to allow the County to compete for businesses that the state of Virginia wasnt even competing for.
Jim Bradshaw, Woolpert, Inc. Representative, informed the Board that he works for an engineering firm that was contracted to do some planning and a preliminary traffic study on this site. Mr. Bradshaw identified the characteristics and advantages of constructing the Cooke Industrial Rail Park on this site. Mr. Bradshaw pointed out that sewer and natural gas are available for this site. He said that they are estimating that out of the 800 acres, 513 acres would be available for sale and of that, 350 acres would be developable. Mr. Bradshaw said that this project would have three phases of development over a period of thirty years. Mr. Bradshaw said that they would have one rail spur leading off of the main line with three anticipated industrial spurs running off from that. Mr. Bradshaw said that they would have retention ponds, landscaping and buffers throughout the park along with established covenants. Mr. Bradshaw stated that the goals of the developer are to create an industrial park that industries and the local community would be proud of, to target rail users that would invest heavily in development, minimize truck traffic and maximize rail traffic, develop over a period of thirty years, provide good buffering, and ensure on site drainage. Mr. Bradshaw said that the rail service to this park would only be once per day and would not block any roads when serving the park. Mr. Bradshaw identified several other benefits of utilizing the rail service for the community. Mr. Bradshaw said that in the state of Virginia, there are typically nine rail announcements per year with the average outlay per industry of $26,208,466. Mr. Bradshaw said that they have held several meetings with VDOT regarding the traffic. He said that the truck and car traffic would enter and exit at the main entrance off of Route 22. In the phases two and three, two secondary entrances would be added off of Route 625 for cars only, which would occur in twenty to thirty years from now. Mr. Bradshaw said that the truck ingress/egress would have several options to travel north, south, east, and west from the site. Mr. Bradshaw pointed out that anticipating truck traffic volume is difficult since they dont know exactly what industries would be locating in the park. Mr. Bradshaw identified the projected traffic count that they determined by working with VDOT. He explained to the Board that the drainage on the site would be in retention ponds that would be designed to integrate into an attractive landscaping design. The existing drainage streams would be protected and maintained. Mr. Bradshaw said that the environmental concerns would be addressed by individual industry within the parks parameters. Mr. Bradshaw stated that Louisa County is currently in the process of studying how best to expand the sewage treatment plant to accommodate future growth. Mr. Bradshaw said that the industrial types targeted by to locate in the Cooke Industrial Rail Park would primarily use domestic sewage just as in the case of industries located in the Louisa Industrial Air Park. He said that it is their understanding that the water capacity is more than adequate to accommodate for this park. Mr. Bradshaw identified the types of industries they are targeting for this industrial park. Mr. Bradshaw said that they forecast at least 672 jobs opportunities to be created over a thirteen-year period during phase one of construction. Mr. Bradshaw identified the proffers saying that one of them guarantees that 15 acres would be donated to the County for a sewage plant. He said that if the County were to build a sewage treatment plant on the premises, the developer would donate an additional 35 acres to the County to market for industrial purposes, but if they choose not to build the plant, then he would offer them 50 acres at a price of $10,000 per acre.
Linda Hubbard, Mineral District, informed the Board that she and her husband are the owners of the largest out parcel that is on Route 22 between Route 625 and Route 623 along with a lot of the property on the side of Route 623. Mrs. Hubbard said that one of their major concerns was the problem with the traffic along Route 22. Mrs. Hubbard said that she is concerned about the types of industry that would be allowed in the park. Mrs. Hubbard said that she is concerned about the safety issues this additional traffic would create with the school buses and the children driving. Mrs. Hubbard urged the Board to take the emergency services into consideration if they approve the request. In closing, Mrs. Hubbard stated that they are also concerned with the trains blocking individuals driveways.
James Hubbard, Mineral District, stated that he was concerned about where all of this money is going to come from for the roads, rail, and the schools. Mr. Hubbard questioned whether the individuals living in the immediate area would be required to connect to the water and sewer if the infrastructure was put in place. Mr. Hubbard said that he doesnt understand how they could say that there would only be one rail car per day stopping when they arent even aware of how many companies would be in the industrial park. Mr. Hubbard said that he does not want to see all of the land becoming industrial and wiping out the agricultural land.
Howard Loudin, Mineral District, informed the Board that as a general contractor, he has built several of these building facilities in different rail parks, which really helps with the tax base in the locality. Mr. Loudin stated that he feels that this would be a positive development for the County that will help bring industry in to help offset the tax base.
Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.
The Board discussed this topic in great detail with Mr. Wright saying that he believes the 672 jobs they spoke about would be generated from the industry that would be coming in. Mr. Wright said that they did not comment on what the economic impact would have during the construction phase of this project. Mr. Wright said that he would assume that some of the construction materials for this project would be purchased in the County, local contractors could be involved with the construction, and hopefully individuals from the County would be involved in working on the project. Mr. Wright asked if they had any estimates on the economic impact from this standpoint. Mr. Wright further commented that when they consider the traffic impact study for this industrial park, they have to keep in mind that this is not going to be the only development along these roads during this thirty-year period. Mr. Purcell said that the Board has always said that they are in favor of business and industry coming into the County due to the extra tax base that it provides. Mr. Purcell said that he understands that it is hard to quantify this information right now since they are unaware of what types of industry would be buying in this park and asked if they had any way to quantify what they project as far as the phase one of the build out. Mr. Gentry said that Mr. Bradshaw had said that he has been working on an industrial park in Southampton County, Virginia for many years and asked what the problem was with this park if this is such a great project.
In response to Mr. Wrights question, Mr. Bradshaw replied that they were not asked to do an economic fiscal impact report for this particular site. Mr. Bradshaw said that it has been his experience that when an industrial park is located in a community, it is convenient for a developer to use local contractors and local site preparation folks. Mr. Tingler said that this information is hard to quantify since they dont know what businesses would be there, but based on the average for rail industry is around $26,000,000 per industry. Mr. Bradshaw said that they are just beginning the Southampton County, Virginia industrial park now, which they are extending water and sewer from Franklin, Virginia. Mr. Bradshaw said that this particular deal is shared revenue for both Hampton and Franklin that were created specifically for this type of development along the rail industrial corridor.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Purcell said that like many people, when he first heard about this being around 800 to 900 acres, his first thought was that this was a lot of land to devote to an enterprise like this, but he didnt have all of the information that he needed at that time. Mr. Purcell said that he was extremely concerned about the size of this project and wanted to know whether it was going to be phased or not. Mr. Purcell said that the positive aspects of this project are immense, particularly if people keep in mind of what their assessments have been like. Mr. Purcell said that he would also like to have the Board consider that Randy Tingler and the Cooke Foundation have been a local business for many years and will continue to do business in the County; therefore, if this project were to fail, these individuals would hear about it. Mr. Purcell said that he feels that this has a bigger impact than for someone who comes in from outside of the County wanting to develop one piece of property to make their money and leave. Mr. Purcell pointed out that if they consider the tax base that would be generated from this project, they should look upon it favorably. Mr. Havasy said that he agrees with Mr. Purcell whole-heartedly. Mr. Havasy said that when you look at this large amount of property, you have to consider what the other options are that are available to the developer. Mr. Havasy said that the when you consider traffic in this area, you have to keep in mind that the traffic could create a worse situation if they were to develop it in some other way. Mr. Havasy stated that he supports this project. Mr. Wright said that he had sent Mr. Coffey a long list of questions that he wanted to have addressed, which he has only received the answer for three or four of them this evening. Mr. Wright said that they talked about the number of vehicles and trains going into the park and asked what the maximum length of time that a crossing could be blocked. Mr. Wright said that his concerns about the trains pertained to the regular trains going through several times a day and not with the short trains that would be going to the park. Mr. Wright said that he would be concerned about this if a train were to come through at a school hour when the buses need to get through or even for a rescue squad being able to respond to a call. Mr. Wright said that he had asked if there would be backup water resources on site that could be used if there were a large fire on the premises, which he was told they would have adequate water supply, but this doesnt tell him what it is adequate for. Mr. Wright questioned whether the turning lanes would be able to accommodate the trucks waiting to turn into the park or if they would create back ups on the road. Mr. Wright questioned if the term adequate that was used for the water supply was strictly determined by normal operations or if it included excess to have a back up water supply in the case of an emergency. Mr. Gentry said that the Board does want industry in the County that brings additional revenue and employment opportunities. Mr. Gentry said that his concerns for this project are whether this is the right location, the size of it, and the highway infrastructure. Mr. Gentry said that he would prefer to see this rezoned in phases. Mr. Jennings said that overall, he believes that this proposal is good. Mr. Jennings said that he appreciates the Economic Development Department providing him more information that when this began. Mr. Jennings said that the Cooke Foundation has always been good to the community, especially where the schools are concerned. Mr. Jennings went on to say that any locality would be fortunate to have an industrial park. Chairman Barnes said that when the citizens come before the Board to express their concerns, it becomes the Boards concerns and are taken seriously. Chairman Barnes said that the concerns that have been mentioned this evening are issues that the County is dealing with even without the rail park. Chairman Barnes said that whether they have this park or not, Route 22 has to be addressed. Chairman Barnes said that the Board has been trying to designate the Countys growth areas, which would be areas that have the infrastructure in place. Chairman Barnes said that if the applicant had wanted to rezone this property to R-1 or R-2, they would be able to get anywhere from 800 to 1,500 houses on this property. Chairman Barnes stated that this project is about the visions of the County and what the long-term benefits would be. Chairman Barnes said that he believes that the park itself is a business plan that the County needs. Chairman Barnes asked Mr. Gibson if there were any funding that they were applying for this project. Chairman Barnes stated that this is a great opportunity for Louisa County because it will allow them to utilize the rail along with attracting smaller businesses.
Mr. Coffey said that he had sent Mr. Wrights questions to the applicant for them to respond to, which they were able to address some of them. Mr. Coffey said that the water system would connect to the water system, fire suppression would not be an issue, and the exact length of the right taper coming westbound on Route 22 has not been determined nor has the left turn lane. Mr. Coffey said that they have only been told that these would be required from VDOT; therefore, from the Countys standpoint, they would just enforce whatever VDOT required on the site plan. Mr. Coffey said that Mr. Wright had asked about the applicant being a Foundation, which he checked with Mr. Morgan and found that this is a Trust and would transfer to the LLC. Mr. Tingler said that the owner of the property is the William A. Cooke and Trust and the applicant is Route 22 Rail Site, LLC, which is owned by those two agencies. Steve Powell, Buckingham Branch Railroad Assistant Vice-President and General Manager, said that as far as blocking the road crossings, there are two types of trains that go through the Piedmont Subdivision, which are the long trains that have CSX on them that range anywhere from sixty cars up to one-hundred fifty and then they have the trains that are run through Buckingham Branch that typically have ten to fourteen cars that go through once a day. Mr. Powell said that the longer trains would not be stopping at the rail park. Mr. Powell said that by having this rail park located here, it would not influence any roads being blocked. Mr. Tingler said that the long rail cars that come through Louisa would not be part of this rail park, only the shorter lines. Mr. Tingler said that the turning lanes would be determined by VDOT; therefore, they are unaware of the impact on the trucks. Mr. Coffey said that the water supply would be dependant upon the types of industry coming in and based on the conversations that the applicant has had with Bar Delk, Water Authority Director, because there is a centralized water system in the area that is fed from a tower. Mr. Coffey said that he believes that this would be contingent exactly upon what the nature of the use is in the future. Mr. Gibson said that they are able to utilize funding from the state for the roads and the rail, which is a great thing from an economic development standpoint. Mr. Gibson pointed out that Mr. Tingler and the Cooke Foundation bear the liability if the industry is not brought in within an appropriate period of time for the roads; therefore alleviating the County from an expense.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Harper said that he doesnt know how many looked at the zoning ordinance which states, “the primary purpose is industrial to establish areas where the principal use of the land is for heavy commercial and industrial operations, which might create some nuisances that are not properly associated with nor particularly compatible with residential, institutional, and neighborhood commercial establishments.” Mr. Harper said that there seems to be a difference of opinion this evening between the director of Community Development and the other folks. Mr. Harper said that Mr. Coffey had said that this was located in an agricultural zoned area, but in the presentation, it says that it would be located in an industrial/commercial corridor that is fairly isolated from residential development. Mr. Harper said that the traffic count that was presented to them did not represent all of the roads that they the counters on. Mr. Harper said that this project has been planned in phases, but the Board would not be approving it in phases pointing out that the projected timeline for this project is for the duration of a thirty-year period, which circumstances could change during this time. Mr. Harper said that it shows that water and sewer is adequate, but since they havent developed their covenants yet, he is not aware whether they would exclude thermal use of water. Mr. Harper said that he would like to have the opportunity to discuss this further and think about it more. Mr. Harper said that some of the information for this project they just received this evening leaving them no opportunity to decipher the information. Mr. Harper said that transportation has to be taken into consideration as part of land planning and the rail is going to be a big player with this park, but it is not the only player. Mr. Harper said that the IDA says that Louisa County is within 500 miles of 50% of the population of the United States, which is not a long truck trip. Mr. Harper said that he understands what they are going after and he likes what they are saying, but he has a lot of questions that he would like to have addressed prior to making a final decision. Mr. Harper said that the items that he sees that are being proffered out are ones that you have to obtain a CUP for anyhow. Mr. Harper said that he would like to make the motion to table this matter for a sufficient period of time for these answers to be obtained. Mr. Gentry seconded the motion.
Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Purcell asked what the time frame was that Mr. Harper wanted since they are under a deadline for the grant monies. Mr. Harper said that this is true, but he would hate to make a mistake based on running for money. Chairman Barnes said that he understands Mr. Harpers concern, but he would not support a period of ninety days, but he would support tabling until their next scheduled regular meeting. Mr. Harper said that he did not include a specific time period in his motion. Mr. Purcell said that without a designated time frame, it would be tabling the topic indefinitely. Mr. Harper said that they could add it to an upcoming agenda if so desired. Chairman Barnes said that he would not support the motion without having a definite time frame for the topic to be brought back to the Board. Mr. Wright suggested that they add it to the agenda for their first meeting in April. Mr. Purcell said that if they were looking at $25,000,000 per one business in the park that would be multiplied by thirty projects businesses equates to a lot of money. Mr. Purcell asked the applicant if tabling this topic until the first meeting of April would present a problem for them.
Mr. Tingler replied that his concern with the time frame is due to a couple of reasons since they want to move forward to get on the table for VDOT so they arent pushed back until 2008; therefore, pushing this back even for two weeks could result in an additional year of waiting for them. Mr. Tingler said that the second reason is due to this being an industrial park that is going to be marketed as such, could bring a vast array of industries to the County. Mr. Tingler said that he doesnt know if they are going to be able to present any better forecasts for the overall numbers than what they have presented tonight.
Mr. Gentry said that he had seconded the motion since recently they had a couple of Board members that had a concern at a public hearing and wanting additional time to make a decision to have their questions answered prior to making a decision. Mr. Gentry said that he feels that there isnt any difference in this situation since there is a Board member that does not feel that all of his questions have been addressed; therefore, they should give this individual the opportunity to address their concerns. Chairman Barnes said that he has been waiting for someone to designate a date to bring it back to the Board, which they have discussed two different dates that no one has agreed on. Chairman Barnes said that there is a motion and a second on the floor to table the topic. Chairman Barnes requested a roll call to verify those that are in favor of the motion and those that are not in favor.
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||No|
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||Yes|
|Willie L. Harper||No|
|Richad A. Havasy||No|
|Allen B. Jennings||Yes|
|Eric F. Purcell||No|
|Jack T. Wright||Yes|
With the votes reflecting 3-4, the motion failed.
Mr. Harper motioned to deny the request. With no one seconding the motion, the motion failed.
Mr. Havasy made the motion to approve the request, which was seconded by Mr. Jennings. Chairman Barnes requested a roll call to verify those that are in favor of the motion and those that are not in favor.
|Willie L. Gentry, Jr.||No|
|Willie L. Harper||No|
|Richad A. Havasy||Yes|
|Allen B. Jennings||Yes|
|Eric F. Purcell||Yes|
|Jack T. Wright||No|
|Fitzgerald A. Barnes||Yes|
On motion of Mr. Havasy, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 4-3, with Messrs Gentry, Harper, and Wright voting against, a resolution was adopted approving the rezoning request of approximately 799.327 acres from Agricultural (A-2) to Industrial (IND) identified as Tax Map Parcels 42-59B, 42(12) 1, 42-60, 42-31, 42-30, 42-21, 42-22, 42-23, 42-24, 42-14, 42-13, 42-3, 41-234A, 42-4C, 42(16) Lots 1-9 and Lots 11-29, 42-68 and a portion of 42-5 in the Mineral Magisterial and Voting Districts along with the acceptance of the proffers dated January 4, 2006 that were submitted by the applicant.
On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to recess the March 6, 2006 regular meeting at 8:58 p.m. until March 17, 2006 at 1:00 p.m. for their Retreat that will be held at the Betty J. Queen Center.
BY ORDER OF
FITZGERALD A. BARNES, CHAIRMAN
LOUISA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LOUISA COUNTY, LOUISA, VIRGINIA