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

Menu
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
October 17, 2005
5:00 P.M.



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


CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Barnes called the October 17, 2005 regular meeting of the Louisa County Board of Supervisors to order at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Harper led the invocation, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS

There were no Constitutional Officers that wished to address the Board.

CITIZENS INFORMATION PERIOD

Sandra Quinlan, Mineral District, informed the Board that she was here this evening to speak with them about the home that she purchased two years ago. Ms. Quinlan stated that after she purchased her home there have been thirty-seven building code violations discovered. Ms. Quinlan stated that she has soil erosion and drainage problems everywhere, and an unapproved water supply. Ms. Quinlan said that she has been trying for two and a half years to get the County Government and the State Health Department to correct these problems or have the builder do it. In closing, Ms. Quinlan asked the Board what it is that she is supposed to do.

Nancy Lear, Jackson District, informed the Board that she was here this evening to publicly present 217 signatures of County citizens who are concerned with the derelict vehicles in Louisa County. Ms Lear said that she believes this to be a public health matter and would hope that the Board would take this stance as well. Ms. Lear said that this situation is not going to go away and will just continue to increase the potential problem of ground water seepage. Ms. Lear stated that she would like to have the Board consider an amnesty waiver on the expense a person has to be charged when they take their car to the Landfill and explore a code change that would require those with many cars to comply with the EPA Junkyard Guidelines, as well as with the guidelines of Louisa County for Junkyards. In closing, Ms. Lear proposed that they begin with the many vehicles on Route 700, which she understands that the County helped generate.

William Shiflett, Jr., Green Springs District, informed the Board that he was here this evening to thank the Board for watching the tax deal that is going on with the Trevilian Station Battlefield Foundation (TSBF). Mr. Shiflett stated that TSBF has purchased some land that he owns a part of, which was his old home place, but they snuck in and bought this land. Mr. Shiflett said that he didnt know anything about this until it was printed in the Louisa paper. Mr. Shiflett stated that he knew that his sister was going to sell the land, but he did not know whom it was going to be sold to. In closing, Mr. Shiflett said that he is against TSBF taking our tax dollars and buying all of this land to use for game and horse riding.

Jean Borduin, Jackson District, informed the Board that she was here this evening to encourage them to address the junk vehicles in the County by implementing a solution. Ms. Borduin said that the world we live in is a model of creative order, which we set our time and activities to these consistent cycles. Ms. Borduin said that each season provides the sense of a fresh start. Ms. Borduin said that once we have matured in life, we realize that working together as a community is what will maintain order. Ms. Borduin urged the Board to do what they dont want to do in order to achieve what they really want to achieve.

Chairman Barnes announced that the Vehicle Ordinance was a topic that the Board was going to address during their Retreat on October 29, 2005 at the School Board Administration Office.

Patty Majtyka, Cuckoo District, informed the Board that she was here this evening as part of the Friends of Lake Anna. Ms. Majtyka stated that as a property owner, she is concerned about the third reactor that is being considered for the power plant. Ms. Majtyka said that living on the warm side of the lake, they tend to experience pretty high temperatures at the lake. Ms. Majtyka said that she is concerned that with the third reactor that the water would be so warm that it would cause a health threat. Ms. Majtyka said that she feels that this would have an impact on their property values.

Jay Bolon, Cuckoo District, informed that Board that he was here this evening to speak with them about two issues. Mr. Bolon said that the first issue is the junk cars, which he is not part of the group that has spoke this evening, but he fully supports what they are trying to do. Mr. Bolon said that anything that could be done to reduce the number of junk cars in the County would be a good thing due to health hazards they present, aside from being an eyesore. Mr. Bolon said that the second issue is the third water-cooled reactor that is being proposed. Mr. Bolon said that he does not believe that the third reactor should be water-cooled. Mr. Bolon said that if a substantial number of individuals in the County were going to be negatively affected, then he feels that for this reason alone, it is something they should be interested in. Mr. Bolon said that even thought the Board does not have any direct authority over this situation, he believes that this is something that they should take a position on it and make a recommendation to those who do have such authority, so they would take this into account. Mr. Bolon said that if the third reactor uses lake water-cooling, then he feels that their property values would be affected, which would affect both taxes and the County Government.
Dennis Schaible, Jackson District, stated that it is seldom that a lake community comes before the Board seeking their help. Mr. Schaible said that in doing this tonight; the Board will receive a draft resolution that they hope they will unanimously support. Mr. Schaible said that the property owners in the communities of Louisa County that are on the lake represent a significant percentage in the non-commercial real estate and personal property taxes collected within the County. Mr. Schaible stated that lake residents provide a disproportionate amount of support to the rescue and fire units in the County. Mr. Schaible said that lake residents provide 100% of the support for the Coast Guard Auxiliary and are highly represented in the entire local civilian and civil organizations, community charity organizations, and the faith based organizations around the lake. Mr. Schaible said that they do not demand much in exchange, nor do they place the same amount of burdens on the tax dollars that are spent for the schools and the roads. Mr. Schaible said that the scientific facts that they are going to see this evening have been presented to them by Dominion, Virginia Department of Water Resources, and the Virginia Health Department, which are significant and need to be covered. Mr. Schaible said that they are seeking a solid support from the Board for their assurance that any additional reactors at the North Anna Plant would not do harm to the lake as they know it today.

ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

Chairman Barnes said that Mr. Wright wanted to remove the resolution from the Consent Agenda for the generators and add it to the agenda as a topic for discussion.

Mr. Lintecum said that he would like to add trash compactors as a topic for discussion and consultation with legal counsel to their closed session for litigation in the Green Springs area per the request of Pat Morgan, County Attorney.

Mr. Purcell said that he would like to add a brief discussion for the Recycling Centers as a topic to the agenda.

        On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the October 17, 2005 agenda was adopted as amended.

OLD BUSINESS

Trevilian Station Battlefield Foundation (TSBF)

Gerald Harlow, TSBF Vice-President, stated to the Board that the TSBF has not sold any land and have put negotiations on hold for quite some time now. Mr. Harlow said that he had a couple of points that he would like to further clarify from when he addressed the Board last month. Mr. Harlow said that the Wilderness Battlefield would be what the TSBF would closely resemble. He said that there would only be a few monuments and they would have Virginia Fencing that they would construct once they have found the money to do so. Mr. Harlow said that a historical battlefield would only place cannons where they were fired from during the actual battle. Mr. Harlow informed the Board that signing an agreement with the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF) isnt anything different than if they would have been approved for a state park in 2002. This would not change their plans. Mr. Harlow said that they are still continuing with their goals of saving the battlefield land, which they currently have, 1,500 acres and a state park requires at least 2,000 acres to even be considered. Mr. Harlow provided a map to the Board that reflected the acreage that they currently own and identified the troop movements through the land. Mr. Harlow said that one of the most important areas of the battlefield remains threatened since they do not have any land holdings in that particular area. Mr. Harlow stated that he hopes that this Board will be remembered as the Board that helped them make this a reality. Mr. Harlow said that in order for them to have the integrity of a battlefield, they have to own all of those areas at some point. Mr. Harlow said that only half of the battlefield land is protected, but it is still their goal to save these lands. Mr. Harlow said that if the Board does not want to participate financially, then they could purchase the land and sell it to TSBF at a later date when they are able to afford it. Mr. Harlow said that the Board could make a loan at a favorable interest rate, which would greatly help them finance these purchases. Mr. Harlow said that if they dont want to purchase the land, then they could help them by donating some of the costs for buying the parcels. Mr. Harlow said that the recent article he read from the “Daily Progress” mentioned the Tourism Director being housed in the new hotel and would be bringing tourists to the County. Mr. Harlow said that fourteen months ago, the Board approved the Historical Heritage signs to be placed on I-64, which they still have not made any progress on. Mr. Harlow said that Virginia Logos has a rule that does not allow them to be eligible for the signage. Mr. Harlow said that he doesnt know what this is going to take to get these signs, but they need to have these brown heritage markers on I-64 for the tourists to see. Mr. Harlow said that he is calling on the Boards help to obtain these signs, which is something that they would like to have placed on Route 208 coming from Spotsylvania County as well. Mr. Harlow said that they are excited about the “Auto Tour” and are close to getting the last stop built. Mr. Harlow said that Harry Jackson sent a letter asking the Board to block the construction of their last “Auto Tour” stop, which is something they need to have to allow individuals to get off of the main road without being hit.

The Board briefly discussed this topic with Mr. Wright expressing the importance of having the appropriate signage. Mr. Wright suggested that they have Mr. Lintecum send a letter to the proper authorities to include Delegate Bill Janis and Senator Houck asking them to use their influence to get these signs up.

Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that he was told that there is a $500.00 per sign fee just to apply for the signs to verify if the battlefield is eligible. Mr. Lintecum said that this fee does not include the price of the sign.  

        On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 6-1, with Mr. Purcell voting against, the Board agreed to have Mr. Lintecum send a letter to the Governor addressing the issue of the signs for the TSBF and to copy Delegate Bill Janis and Senator Houck on the correspondence.  

Friends of Lake Anna Concerns of The Proposed Expansion of North Anna Power Plant

Harry Ruth, Friends of Lake Anna Representative, extended his appreciation to the Board for allowing him to speak on this matter. Mr. Ruth stated that as they indicated recently, they are not against nuclear. Mr. Ruth stated that the Friends of Lake Anna is continually drawing strength, which they recently gained the support of several Lake Anna subdivisions. Mr. Ruth said that they represent about 2,400 owners of lake property. This group was formed about two months ago because of the Dominion Resources request for an early site permit to add two additional reactors to their facility. Mr. Ruth said that the third reactor was requested to be water-cooled using Lake Anna water, with the fourth reactor being air-cooled. Mr. Ruth said that the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality with the Coastal Zone Management Act recently extended the public comment period through October 25, 2005, which provides them the opportunity to have the Board address, their concerns. Mr. Ruth said that their concerns are primarily with the third reactor due to the requested cooling option. Mr. Ruth said that their concerns relate to four different areas with the first one being that there is inadequate water in the small watershed to support a third water-cooled reactor. The second is the increase in the water flow rates; the third is the increase in the water temperatures resulting in increased health risks, and the fourth being the decrease to property values in the tax base. Mr. Ruth said that inadequate water is defined in various memos that were created by the Virginia Department of Water Resources (VDWR) that states, “there is inadequate water supply in the small 342 square mile watershed.” Mr. Ruth said that the watershed is in Louisa, Orange, and Spotsylvania Counties. Mr. Ruth said that VDWR feels that there would not be enough water to cool the third reactor; however, they would support a third reactor if it were dry-cooled. Mr. Ruth said that according to VDWR, if implemented, it would increase the drought cycle in this small watershed, which is currently about every 8.6 years and would change to every 2.5 years. Mr. Ruth pointed out that this would also create water conflicts with the other localities downstream over the twenty-year life span of this early site permit if it were granted. Mr. Ruth said that this would use water most likely that would be needed to accommodate future population growth in Louisa County over this same twenty-year life span. Mr. Ruth said that everyone is moving in closer from surrounding areas; therefore, they could anticipate a lot of growth. Mr. Ruth said that the third reactor would also decrease the water on the cold side of the lake an extra 2.6 for an additional twenty-six days per year. Mr. Ruth said that Dominion is projecting that this would increase water flow rates an extra 60%. Mr. Ruth said that one of the biggest factors that occurs with the increase in water temperatures, which is going to result in health risks to humans, fish, and wildlife. He said that Dominion initially planned on having water temperatures of 127 exiting the plant, which they have now downgraded to 113. Mr. Ruth stated that this would be worse than a hot tub since manufacturers say that you shouldnt enter a hot tub when the temperature is over 104. Mr. Ruth pointed out that both of these new reactors are going to be about 68% larger than the current units, which would have a significant increase of the mega watt output for a total of 1,500. Mr. Ruth said that as a result of the temperature concerns that they presented to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, they wrote to the State Department of Health. Mr. Ruth said that just recently on September 15, 2005, Dr. Robert Strobe, Virginia State Health Commissioner, responded to those temperature concerns. He indicated that there were about five major areas of concerns such as biological risks, burn injuries, and heart conditions. Mr. Ruth said that he has personally seen over 1,000 dead fish floating around in the first lagoon when they experienced the higher temperature recently. Mr. Ruth said that all of this creates a lot of concerns for them at the Friends of Lake Anna and this is why they were formed. Mr. Ruth said that they anticipate that if the third reactor using Lake Anna water comes in to being and they experience the above concerns with water level, water flow, and water temperatures, they believe that the property values surrounding the lake would decrease significantly. Mr. Ruth said that if an early site permit is granted, then pre-construction activities could begin almost immediately. Mr. Ruth said that the only thing that would change the design of the third reactor in the future is if there was a major significant change in the environment; otherwise, Dominion would be granted the authority to proceed with the third water-cooled reactor. Mr. Ruth stated that they are requesting the Board to pass some type of a resolution to send to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, the Virginia State Water Control Board, and the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission before October 25, 2005 to meet the deadline. Mr. Ruth said that they think the resolution should support the fourth air-cooled reactor, but they want to also identify the risks that are associated with the third reactor.

The Board discussed this topic in great detail with Mr. Purcell saying that he read the document from Dr. Strobe and does not fully understand what impact, if any, a resolution from the Board would have on the individuals at the state level that have already expressed their concerns. Mr. Jennings said that he is hoping that the Board would agree on the resolution that has been presented or at least provide a gentlemans agreement that they would consider and are concerned about what the citizenry has expressed. Mr. Jennings said that when he looks at this issue, he understands their concerns about the increased water temperatures and water levels. Mr. Jennings said that this could have an impact on the health of individuals. Mr. Jennings said that growth could also be a factor if the third reactor were approved. Mr. Jennings said that he would hope that during the permitting process, North Anna would consider other options to cool the waters. Mr. Jennings said that there are several concerns that they need to take into consideration. Mr. Gentry said that he believes that this is a situation where there has been several concerns expressed to the Board and he feels that it is part of his job to see that these concerns get sent to the appropriate sources. Mr. Wright said that he has been asked several times if individuals know how Lake Anna came about. Mr. Wright said that if it werent for Virginia Dominion Power, there wouldnt be a Lake Anna. Mr. Wright said that Dominion has been here since the sixties when they built the North Anna Lake. Mr. Wright stated that he believes that this is a state and federal issue. Mr. Wright emphasized that there are individuals at these levels that would protect the public for what might occur. Chairman Barnes said that it is always difficult when you are dealing with peoples livelihoods, homes, love, and feelings. Chairman Barnes said that whether the Board agrees to pass this proposed resolution tonight or not, does not mean that they do not care for the citizens of Louisa County.    

In response to the Mr. Purcells concern, Mr. Ruth said that it is his understanding that the Board would simply be identifying the citizens concerns. Mr. Ruth said that they dont know what the state will or will not do, but all of the responses they receive have to be consolidated. Mr. Ruth said that because the Commonwealth of Virginia is in the Coastal Zone, and the North Anna River feeds the coast, there is an office within the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality that is tasked with gathering all of the concerns and final reporting. Mr. Ruth said that their primary concern is whether or not it is consistent with the U. S. Federal Coastal Zone Management Act. Mr. Ruth said that if the Board were to adopt the resolution, it would show that they share the same concerns.

Mr. Jennings pointed out that they have received an amended resolution from the Friends of Lake Anna for the Boards consideration, which he is going to allow Mr. Gentry to speak on. Mr. Gentry said that he has reviewed this resolution, which points out the fact that it does recognize that the Board still does support an additional third and fourth reactor. Mr. Gentry said that the resolution clearly identifies the concerns that have been expressed to him as a Board member. Mr. Gentry said that the third and fifth “whereas” on the proposed resolution should be eliminated. He said that on the sixth “whereas”, lines 4, 5, and 6 should be eliminated. Mr. Gentry said that he would like to modify the eighth “whereas”, where it says that the Board of Supervisors does support the concept of an additional third and fourth reactor, he would like to remove the word concept since the Board has already taken the position that they support both of the additional reactors. Mr. Gentry said that he would like to eliminate the ninth “whereas” and add an additional “whereas” to state, “Whereas, the Board of Supervisors has received the attached list of concerns from the Friends of Lake Anna.” Mr. Gentry said that where it talks about having the third reactor without having any health temperature water flow impact on the small watershed prior to any permits being issues, he would like to eliminate the word “any” and stop this statement after the word watershed. Mr. Gentry made the motion to support the resolution with the changes that he has recommended. Mr. Jennings seconded the motion.

Dr. Morgan said that he believes that all of the issues that have been presented are important. Dr. Morgan said that the health and welfare of the citizens of Louisa County is of paramount importance to the Board. Dr. Morgan said that the planning design envelope that they have described provides broad guidelines for the specifications on these plants, which could end up being changed prior to the final approval. Dr. Morgan said that they were told that there would be another opportunity for them to comment on this.    

Chairman Barnes requested a roll call to verify those individuals that are in favor of the motion and those that are not in favor.

PRESENTVOTE
David B. Morgan, M.D.No
Eric F. PurcellNo
Jack T. WrightNo
Fitzgerald A. BarnesNo
Willie L. Gentry, Jr.Yes
Willie L. HarperNo
Allen B. JenningsYes

With the votes reflecting 2-5, the motion failed for the Board to adopt the proposed resolution.

Resolution To Award the Contract for Backup Generators to Generator Service Company

Pat McWilliams, Director of Public Works, explained to the Board that a little over a year ago, they had come across the opportunity to receive a Hazardous Mitigation Grant. Mr. McWilliams said that they had applied for monies to increase the backup generator power for County buildings, which protects critical systems. Mr. McWilliams said that during the last hurricane, the Communications Department ran on backup power for eight days. Mr. McWilliams said that other departments and offices are just as imperative to keep operational to assist the citizenry. Mr. McWilliams said that if these funds were not used by Louisa County, then it would be awarded to another locality. He said that it is possible in the future that they might have mandates that require them to have the backup power. Mr. McWilliams said that they sent a bid to eight vendors and advertised in the paper. They originally attempted to get previously used generators that became unavailable due to other hurricanes in other areas. Mr. McWilliams said that they intend on having 100% backup for the County Building. He said that the unit that is currently at the County office would be re-located to the sewage plant to provide them 100% backup and their unit would be moved to the Courthouse to provide backup. Mr. McWilliams stated that he believes what they are proposing would utilize the grant to the best benefit of Louisa County.

The Board briefly discussed this topic with Dr. Morgan asking what costs were associated with relocating the units to other facilities. Mr. Wright said that he has asked for this to come off of the Consent Agenda since all of the back-up data was not available at the time when their Board packets were put together.

Mr. McWilliams said that the costs would change from one job to the next, but most of these automatic transfer switches would be on the move with the units and might require rewiring. Mr. McWilliams said that he believes that it would run between $3,000 to the low teens to re-locate the units. Mr. McWilliams said that they could use the funds up to $75,000 for this project.  

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted to award the contract for backup generators to Generator Service Company in an amount not to exceed $75,000 as identified by RFB PW-06-01.

Resolution To Award The Contract for a Trash Compactor and Two 40 Cubic Yard Receiving Containers

Mr. McWilliams said that he has included a request to allow for a modification in the procurement procedure. Mr. McWilliams explained that they recently experienced problems with the Buckner site, which for now, they have temporarily rectified the situation. Mr. McWilliams said that the unit itself is thirteen years old and is in need of extensive rebuilding. Mr. McWilliams said that the Public Works Committee and the Board had recommended the expansion of the Wares Crossroad site to a two-compactor system. Mr. McWilliams said that the money is in the budget to buy a trash compactor and extra boxes to go to Wares Crossroads. He said that this would not be needed until some time in February or March 2006. Mr. McWilliams recommended that the Board authorize the award of this purchase so they can install it at the Buckner site, so they can take the other unit and have it rebuilt to place at the Wares Crossroad site. Mr. McWilliams said that they went out to get quotes, which the bid procedure requires advertising, except in the case of an emergency. Mr. McWilliams said that he believes this qualifies for an emergency situation. He said that they received three bids on this project and the lowest was by Mid Atlantic Systems for $31,157.91.

The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Gentry saying that he doesnt see that they have a lot of options at this time. Mr. Gentry said that the Public Works Committee discussed the needs for the Wares Crossroad site extensively.    

On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted awarding a contract for a trash compactor and two (2) 40 cubic yard receiving containers to Mid Atlantic Waste Systems for $31,157.91.

NEW BUSINESS

Resolution - Proclaiming the Month of October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month

Chairman Barnes recognized Barbara Moorhead from the Shelter for Help in Emergency.

The Board briefly discussed the topic with Mr. Wright pointing out that when this first came before the Board, they had revised the resolution to include men as well. Mr. Gentry asked for further clarification on the resolution to find out where it goes once the Board passes it.

Ms. Moorhead replied that she believes that this goes to their main organization. Ms. Moorhead said that this is part of their procedure for Domestic Violence Month to make individuals aware of the problems that exist.

On the motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted proclaiming the month of October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in recognition of the important work being done by the Shelter for Help in Emergency.

Discussion - Refuse Sites

Mr. Purcell explained to the Board that he added this topic to the agenda to bring up an issue that a County Employee had brought to his attention. Mr. Purcell said that this particular individual told him that when people come to the recycling centers and find that they are full and closed, these individuals sometimes become irate and curse at the employees. Mr. Purcell said that he understands that they are trying to address the problem to avoid these sites from having to close, but he wanted to have Mr. McWilliams elaborate further on the issue.

Mr. McWilliams said that this is a situation of growing pains. He said that the County currently has nine sites. Mr. McWilliams explained that a single box site is designed with a capacity of 2,500 people, which the County is now serving 3,700 people per site on the average. Mr. McWilliams stated that they are going to have consider expanding this system. He said that double boxing does help, but you then begin having physical constraints due to the layout of the facility. Mr. McWilliams expressed the need to continue to grow the system to accommodate the growth in the County.

The Board discussed this topic with Mr. Gentry stating that regardless of the needs of the refuse sites, he does not agree with anyone abusing employees. Mr. Gentry said that if someone were to walk in the Boardroom and start cursing at one of their employees, they would call the Sheriffs Department. Mr. Gentry said that he would like Mr. McWilliams to follow through with the employees to have them get the information from the individual along with their license plate number to have the Sheriff address the situation. Mr. Wright said that prior to Mr. McWilliams coming on board at the County, they had arranged for the pressure at these packers to be reduced from the 1,800 or 1,900 lbs down to 800 lbs, which once they found out, they had an employee modify the system back to the original number to allow for them to accept more trash.

Mr. McWilliams explained to the Board that there has been a time when he has contacted these individuals himself and has always resulted in an apology.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Mr. Gentry reported to the Board on a “use agreement”, which stemmed from an issue through Parks and Recreation. Mr. Gentry said that this is an agreement with a Community Center area in the Rising Sun Community to give Parks and Recreation the authority to actually supply some additional playground type of equipment at that location to provide a mini-park. Mr. Gentry said that he would like to have the Board agree to this process. Mr. Gentry said that Mr. Morgan prepared the agreement that has been signed.

        On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board agreed to approve the agreement between the County and the Rising Sun Community for Parks and Recreation to provide equipment for a mini-park.

Mr. Harper reported to the Board that the Regional Jail recently met with several local officials and advised them that they are going to have to take this into consideration that their budget is going to have take part of this operation.

Mr. Wright reported to the Board that the Commission on Aging recently held an open house, where they had several attendees. Mr. Wright said that each group at this meeting wrote a list of things that they would like to see things being done for seniors. Mr. Wright said that they received great input from these individuals.

BOARD APPOINTMENTS

Chairman Barnes pointed out that Lawrence Jackson, Sr. has expressed an interest in being appointed to the Health Center Commission.

        On motion of Mr. Purcell, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board appointed Lawrence Jackson, Sr. to the Health Center Commission.

COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT

Mr. Lintecum presented his report highlighting the following items:

Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that Dr. Melton, School Superintendent, would be making a presentation to them on the new elementary school during their retreat on October 29, 2005.

Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that he has included a memo reflecting the individuals that are registered to attend the VACo conference this year.

Mr. Lintecum informed the Board that he has enclosed a copy of Mr. Coffeys report to the Board reflecting the activities of the Community Development Department.

CONSENT AGENDA

Resolution - To Adopt the National Incident Command System in Louisa County

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted to adopt the National Incident Command System in Louisa County.

Resolution - To Approve a Supplemental Appropriation for State Funding for the EMD Cards and Training Under the OEMS Consolidated Grants Program

On the motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving a supplemental appropriation for state funding for the EMD Cards and training under the OEMS Consolidated Grants Program in the amount of $1,934.

CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Lintecum referenced the letter that was received from VACo regarding the 2006 Legislative Program draft and asked the Board members to forward their input to Mr. McLeod for him to submit their final input by October 21, 2005.  

LEGAL CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Morgan did not discuss any legal correspondence with the Board.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

        On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board adopted the minutes of October 3, 2005 as amended.

APPROVAL OF BILLS

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Purcell, which carried by a vote of 7-0, with Messrs Gentry, Jennings, and Wright abstaining from reimbursement checks pertaining to them, a resolution was adopted approving the bills for the first half of October 2005, for the County of Louisa in the amount of $559,988.65.

CLOSED SESSION

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to enter Closed Session at 6:32 p.m. for the purpose of discussing the following:

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

REGULAR SESSION

On motion of Dr. Morgan, seconded by Mr. Wright, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to return to Regular Session at 7:04 p.m.

RESOLUTION -  CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION

On motion of Dr. Morgan, seconded by Mr. Wright, 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 17th day of October 2005, 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 17th day of October 2005, that the Louisa County Board of Supervisors does hereby certify that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting was heard, discussed or considered by the Louisa County Board of Supervisors.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Amendment to the Louisa County Code, Section 14.41, Dogs Running at Large in Certain Subdivisions To Add Contrary Creek Subdivision

Mr. Lintecum informed the Board he received a letter from the Contrary Creek Subdivision requesting that they be added to the Louisa County Code, Section 14.41, Dogs Running at large.

Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. With no one wishing to address the Board, Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.

        On the motion of Mr. Harper, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted to amend the Louisa County Code, Section 14.41, Dogs Running at Large in Certain Subdivisions, to add the Contrary Creek Subdivision.

*Jamie Daniels, Sr., Cuckoo District, spoke during the second public hearing to ask the Board to consider making this a permanent law throughout the County rather than just certain subdivisions.

REZ06-05 - Cutalong

Darren Coffey, Community Development Director, summarized the request to be for the rezoning of approximately 983 acres from A-2, R-2, and C-2 to C-2 and RD for the purpose of developing a master plan cluster oriented community with amenities. Mr. Coffey said that they are requesting a special exception to the minimum lot size and the width requirements of a Resort Development District for cluster lots and executive lots. Mr. Coffey said that they also need administrative approval for non-conforming setbacks and a conditional special exception to allow for committed uses of a residential general district to include townhouses in the C-2 area of the project. The property is located on the east and west side of Route 652 (Kentucky Springs Road) and is in the Mineral/ Cuckoo Magisterial Districts and the Mineral Voting District. Mr. Coffey said that the staff analysis goes through the land improvements, the surrounding land uses, and a Comprehensive Plan analysis. Mr. Coffey said that Lake Anna is listed as a community within a designated growth center of Louisa County, which is described in the Comprehensive Plan as small less urban centers that are separate from larger towns. Mr. Coffey said that they have a full range of public services, including a range of residential choices, mixed use of services, regional employment opportunities, well-defined residential areas, internal collective roads along with arterial roads, public water and sewer, and public facilities to serve the communities and the adjacent population. Mr. Coffey said that this proposal is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Coffey said that the analysis talks about initial impacts, traffic and roadways, wetlands, public safety, proffers, and utilities. Mr. Coffey said that the open space component is about 60% of the open space. Mr. Coffey said that during the Neighborhood meeting that that was held on August 15, 2005, there were fifteen persons present, which none of them spoke in direct opposition to the request; however, several individuals indicated that they had similar concerns relating water supply, lighting, and other issues as they did when the Links at Lake Anna were previously proposed. Mr. Coffey said that the citizens that spoke indicated their support for the project even though there were some concerns that they still had, particularly on the effects on the existing water supply and the impacts to Contrary Creek. Mr. Coffey said that the benefits that were pointed out for the proposal was having the oversized sewage treatment plant, the realignment of the intersection of Route 652 and Route 208 (New Bridge Road), and the proffers being offered by the applicant. Mr. Coffey said that the Development Review Committee had also met and voted 4-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission on the proposed conditional rezoning and the special exception requests. Mr. Coffey said that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8, 2005 where they voted 7-0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Coffey said that the 2001 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as low density residential and community service in the Lake Anna designated growth area. Mr. Coffey said that the County Attorney has reviewed the proffers that were submitted on October 12, 2005 and noticed that number eleven, for partial dedication, that they needed to add an additional sentence saying that if Louisa County does not use the dedicated parcel for the purposes of which it was intended within three years, then the parcel would revert back to the applicants ownership. Mr. Coffey said that there were a total of eighteen proffers that have been proposed and are identified in their handout.

Dr. Morgan said that on the issue of the affordable housing, it reflects that there would be up to forty-five units, but there isnt a minimum listed and questioned how that would work. Dr. Morgan said that on proffer number six, it states, “that $80,000 would be coming from other sources” and asked if this would be from VDOT. Mr. Gentry asked if VDOT has acknowledged that this would qualify for a signal.

Mr. Coffey replied that this does not guarantee that there would be any affordable houses constructed.
Mary Johnson, Belle Survey, said that the $80,000 is from the residual cost of the traffic signalization that hasnt already been collected. Mr. Coffey said that this has been partially funded through VDOT and this is the residual cost that has not been accounted for to date. Mr. Coffey said that VDOT has verbally indicated that a signal is needed there.      

Ms. Johnson showed the Board an electronic presentation highlighting the overall plans of this community. Ms. Johnson identified the Planning and Development Team members highlighting their qualifications and expertise. Ms. Johnson said that some of this land used to have an active mining operation one hundred years ago, which they are currently working with DMME to cap all located mines. Ms. Johnson said that Contrary Creek would provide unique landscape features. Due to acid mine runoff upstream, Contrary Creek has low PH levels. Ms. Johnson said that she feels that this area provides a natural habitat for bird watching. Ms. Johnson said that some of the previous activities that have taken place for this land includes an environmental assessment study, wetland delineation and certification soils testing, hydro-geological testing for water capacity, national laboratory testing for water quality, and archaeological resource study. Ms. Johnson identified the areas for their rezoning request and the reasons behind their determination. The public meetings and presentations that have been made so far have been the neighborhood/community meeting, Design Review Committee, LACA Board of Directors, Lake Anna Business Partnership, Louisa Chamber of Commerce, Louisa Business Leadership Luncheon, and the public hearing that was held by the Planning Commission. Ms. Johnson said that their plan for development is a comprehensive approach to a residential/commercial development, which is a cluster development. Ms. Johnson said that there would be around 613 acres of this site that will be left as open space, which equates to 60% and far exceeds what is required for RD Zoning. This project includes an eighteen-hole championship links style golf course with associated amenities such as a clubhouse, restaurant, practice areas, a nine-acre vineyard, and over eight miles of walking trails. Ms. Johnson said that there is limited water shoreline, which will be used to provide access for the residents and would meet the Shoreline Management Guidelines. There will also be a waterfront community center that will include pools, tennis courts, fitness center, play lot, another restaurant, event area, basketball court, boat storage, day slips and dockage area, and a marina with related facilities. There are a total of 891 homes being proposed for this development, which will include at least forty-five town homes that have been dedicated for workforce housing. Ms. Johnson said that there is 26.4 acres of commercial that is being planned with this development, which they are hoping to attract a 125-room hotel and conference center. Ms. Johnson pointed out that they intend on relocating Route 652 to bring it out directly across from Route 670 (Oak Grove Drive) and will have a stoplight. Ms. Johnson stated that one of their proffers dedicates 2.4 acres to Louisa County. Ms. Johnson said that this development would have well water that is connected to a central water treatment system that is regulated by DEQ. Ms. Johnson said that individuals from the Shorewood Subdivision have voiced their concerns regarding their water supply and the potential of their own wells going dry if the system draws from the same aquifer, so they have agreed to build the water treatment plant at a capacity enough to take in the community and provide a tie in to them in the event that this becomes necessary. Ms. Johnson identified the benefits of the community and the proffers as being strict architectural covenants and standards; eighteen hole golf course; workforce housing; 2.4 acres donated to Louisa County; $500 per single family residential lot; $100,000 dedicated to the remediation of Contrary Creek; $75,000 donation to be divided among the LCHS Athletic Department, Parks and Recreation Department, and Emergency Services; realignment of Route 652 with full turn lane improvements for Route 208 and 652; participation in the cost of traffic signalization; dedication of additional 208 right-of-way for future VDOT improvements; potential opportunity for offsite commercial development to tie into the Cutalong water and wastewater treatment plants; commitment to “dark sky” lighting; dedication of existing vegetated buffers; and an increase of annual revenues of $3 million, at full build out. In closing, Ms. Johnson said that the Cutalong is a well thought out and planned community that has been designed to bring value to Louisa County and the Lake Anna Community, which also provides an opportunity for economic development to take place in the designated growth areas by providing a comprehensive infrastructure in the form of road improvements and the potential water and sewage treatment plant.

Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.

Dick Dickens, Jackson District, Lake Anna Economic Development Tourism Partnership Vice- President, stated that he represents around 215 members, most of who are small business owners around the lake. Mr. Dickens said that he has seen about five presentations about this project and every time that he sees it, he gets more excited about it. Mr. Dickens said that they believe that this is a well thought out project that has been well designed. Mr. Dickens said that he likes the architectural controls and guidelines that have been proposed. Mr. Dickens said that the partnership had put together a list of items that they would like to see around the lake this past summer, which this proposed development covers several of the items on their list. Mr. Dickens said that they want to have some conveniences around the lake so citizens do not have to continuously travel so far.

Bernie Pitchke, Mineral District, stated that he has attended as many of the meetings that he was able to, where they addressed the same concerns. Mr. Pitchke said that they know that 98% of the people are in favor of this project, so there isnt any way to stop it. Mr. Pitchke said that the Shorewood residents have a couple of concerns such as the additional traffic and the water supply. Mr. Pitchke said that they would like to see Route 652 taken care of first before the subdivision begins to grow to help accommodate the traffic. Mr. Pitchke said that all of the structures that have been identified in this proposed plan are ones that utilize a lot of water. Mr. Pitchke said that they would not know until after the developer has gone if they are going to experience problems with their water sources, which they would like to have the developer run the lines into their neighborhood should they experience problems. In closing, Mr. Pitchke urged the Board to consider the Shorewood community further down the road to take care of their water supply, traffic, and safety.

Gene Newman, Jackson District, stated that he believes that Mr. Dickens covered everything that he has to say, but he would like to say he believes they have done an excellent job designing this project. Mr. Newman said that the County continues to lose good quality people around the lake due to the lack of amenities.  

Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.

The Board discussed this topic in great detail with Mr. Purcell saying that he has never seen a plan that has been more thoroughly thought out than this one. Mr. Purcell stated that all of the individuals involved with this proposed development all have excellent reputations in their respected fields for doing top quality work, which is something that he doesnt feel they should take lightly. Mr. Wright said that one of the key things that they are talking about is the County taking over the operation of the Water/Sewer System, which he had advised the Board earlier, that this is something they need to consider since there isnt a set criteria for this. Mr. Wright said that he has taken the liberty of talking to
Bar Delk, Louisa County Water Authority Director, and asked him to advise the Board on how they should approach this Cutalong Development.

Mr. Delk stated that anytime a subdivision comes about that they want the County to manage, should be a system that serves more than just that specific development. Mr. Delk said that the developers have addressed this by adding additional capacity to the proposed system. Mr. Delk said that he has spoken with several other individuals, where he obtained plans and agreements from various authorities. Mr. Delk said that the County would need to have some sort of contractual agreement identifying what the developer would do and the water authority would be responsible for. Mr. Delk said that major highlights are that you want to ensure that you are approving the design, construction, and other aspects to standardize what they already have. Mr. Delk said that when the developer turns over the conveyance of the property, they should have a hydrological study done for more details that what was presented this evening. Mr. Delk said that one of the other authorities had suggested that something be included in their covenants for individuals buying the property acknowledge that the water/sewer system is self-supporting with fees to alleviate the County of additional expenses should they have to pull water from Northeast Creek should the system fail to adequately support the proposed development. Mr. Delk recommended to the Board that if they were to approve this development tonight it be upon the condition that they sign an agreement that has been worked out between the developer and the Water Authority.

The Board further discussed this topic with Mr. Wright saying that one of the reasons that he wanted to have Mr. Delk to do this was in fairness to the other citizens in that area, for those coming into the development, for the developer, and to the County so everyone knows what to anticipate. Mr. Gentry stated that Mr. Purcell expressed his same sentiments about this development. Mr. Gentry said that the Planning Commission fully supports this project. Dr. Morgan said that the quality of the proposal reflects the experience and background of the developers. Dr. Morgan said that the scope and detail of the proffers shows the dedication to high quality development. Dr. Morgan said that he finds the following feature to be quite appealing: green space, buffers, including the funds to improve the traffic flow in the area, dark sky lighting, Contrary Creek water quality study, which are important to the citizens. Dr. Morgan said that he does not like the fact that the affordable housing units states, “up to forty-five”, but there isnt a minimum number of lots, which he feels should be re-worded. Dr. Morgan said that he believes that the Board could approve this request tonight and still negotiate the details of the wastewater treatment later since they are not obligated to this, unless they want to utilize the 50% additional capacity.

Paul Larner said that he wanted to clarify that there isnt any hidden intent for the verbiage, “up to forty-five units”. Mr. Larner said that the reason this has been designed this way is merely because of site constraints. He said that if they are able to fit forty-five units on the parcel, then they fully intend on doing so. Mr. Larner stated that if they would like to modify the verbiage to state that, “they would maximize the number of units to be consistent with the overall zoning ordinance for that pod of land”, which would represent their intent.

Upon further discussion by the Board, Mr. Jennings stated that he was on the Development Review Committee and has been in favor of this project all along. Chairman Barnes said that one of the issues that they are dealing with right now is water and coming up with an adequate water source. Chairman Barnes asked what would happen if they run into a snag and are only able to get enough water for 200 homes.

Mr. Larner replied that they have considered this risk carefully and are prepared to accept the risk for most of the proffers involved. Mr. Larner said that there was one proffer related to the road that they felt they had to protect themselves and this is why the proffer for the road has a condition with it saying that they have to find sufficient water capacity for 450 units. Mr. Coffey  

Mr. Harper said that he believes that this is a great project; therefore, he would like to make the motion to approve the request with adding a contingency to item 3 that would require the developer to meet with Mr. Delk to create a working plan that would benefit the citizenry of Louisa County. Mr. Gentry seconded the motion.

Mr. Morgan informed the Board that they couldnt amend a proffer after the public hearing because they are voluntary. Mr. Morgan said that what Mr. Harper has recommended does not change the proffer itself, but outlines the conditions by which the County would accept.

Mr. Larner said that the proffers are self-executing in them saying that they are going to build the water treatment plant to over 50% capacity if Louisa County takes it over. Mr. Larner said that before they begin substantial design of the system they have to know when the agreement has been reached.

Mr. Coffey clarified that the motion is looking for the approval of conditional rezoning with the special exceptions of the minimum lot size and lot width for an RD District, authorize administrative approval for non-conforming setbacks, and a conditional special exception will allow for permanent uses of R-2 District, including town homes in C-2. Mr. Coffey stated that once the proffers have been accepted, they are legally binding.

On motion of Mr. Harper, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted approving the requests as follows with the proffers submitted by the applicant with the recommended change to item three.

a.        Conditional (proffered) rezoning of approximately 983.32 acres from Agricultural (A-2), Residential General (R-2) and General Commercial (C-2) to General Commercial (C-2) and Resort Development (RD) for the purpose of developing a master planned, cluster-oriented community with amenities.

b.        A Special Exception to the minimum lot size and lot width requirements of the Resort Development District for “cluster lots” and “executive lots”, and to authorize administrative approval for non-conforming setbacks given the absence of a PUD Ordinance in Louisa County at this time.
c.        A Conditional (proffered) Special Exception to allow the permitted uses of the Residential General (R-2) District, including townhouses, in the proposed General Commercial (C-2) areas of the project
.

To Amend The Louisa County Code to Assume Power to Consider Petitions for the Creation of Community Development Authorities

Ernie McLeod, Deputy County Administrator, explained to the Board that the purpose of the Community Development Authority is to finance infrastructure made necessary by development within a CDA District, to issue bonds to finance the CDA improvements and to generate monies to pay for improvements through special ad valorem taxes or assessments on property within the CDA District. Mr. McLeod said that in order to create a CDA, the Board has to adopt an ordinance after a public hearing electing to assume the power to create CDAs. Mr. McLeod said that a petition submitted to the Board by owners of at least 51% of the land area or assessed value in proposed CDA District.  Mr. McLeod identified the remainder of the procedures that are required for the Board to create a CDA along with the types of facilities and infrastructure that are authorized by a CDA. In closing, Mr. McLeod identified what benefits a CDA offers and the impacts of having a CDA.

The Board briefly discussed this topic with Mr. Purcell asking who would be held liable if a project were to fall through. Mr. Gentry said that all of the information that has been presented has been positive and questioned if there were anything that the Board were missing. Mr. Wright asked if this would cover both the residential and commercial portions. Dr. Morgan said that during the previous presentation they had pertaining to CDAs, they were told that the additional costs could be born by the CDA and not by the County.

Mr. McLeod replied that if the developer were not paying their assessed value, then the Treasurer would have to take them to court. Mr. McLeod pointed out that the CDA debt counts against the Countys limit for bank-qualified debt. Mr. McLeod said that this would cover both residential and commercial.

Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 8:19 p.m. With no one wishing to address the Board, Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Dr. Morgan, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted to amend the Louisa County Code to include an ordinance electing to assume the power to consider petitions for the creations of Community Development Authorities, which became effective upon adoption.

To Amend Chapter 86 of the Louisa County Zoning Ordinance to Modify Definitions

Mr. Coffey explained to the Board that the purpose of these amendments is to provide relief from the current setback requirements. Mr. Coffey said that all primary highways would now have the same setbacks. Mr. Coffey said that they have re-evaluated setback by zoning districts, which is where most of the relief would occur. Mr. Coffey said that this would have 10 20 minimum setbacks. Mr. Coffey said that they have provided a new method for measuring setbacks, which would assume a 50 right-of-way on any road, regardless of what it actually is. He said that they have also included additional guidance for an Industrial District, which did not have any yard requirements or setback requirements. Mr. Coffey said that if this were to pass, it would eliminate most of the variance requests that have recently been seen by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). This will also help the BZA more stringently interpret the states hardship criteria, allow for more flexibility for the citizens and developers to build on certain lots, and makes the ordinance more consistent and explicit. Mr. Coffey said that they would be removing the exemption of the current ordinance that excludes steps from the setback requirements. Mr. Coffey identified the definitions that they are proposing to delete. Mr. Coffey said that on secondary roads, the setbacks would be 60 from the edge of the right-of-way line, which is not different than what currently exists. Mr. Coffey said that for Agricultural and Residential subdivisions, it would be 40 from the right-of-way line. Mr. Coffey stated that the purpose of a setback is to provide a structure a safe and appropriate distance away from the road. Mr. Coffey identified the proposed changes to Chapter 86 of the Louisa County Code for Sections: 86-2, 86-18, 86-18.1, 86-19, 86-20, 86-21, 86-67, 86-70, 86-71, 86-77, 86-80, 86-80.1, 86-84, 86-87, 86-88, 86-89, 86-105, 86-106, 86-108, 86-109, 86-110, 86-123, 86-124, 86-124.1, 86-86-126, 86-127, 86-143, 86-144, 86-144.1, 86-146, 86-147, 86-164, 86-165, 86-166, 86-181, 86-182, 86-184, 86-185, and 86-186.

The Board discussed the proposed changes in great detail, with Mr. Jennings asking for further clarification on the setbacks for building structures and if this included the foundation, the steps, and the overhang on a home. Mr. Jennings questioned how someone could build a boathouse on Lake Anna that is on someone elses property and get it approved. Mr. Purcell said that when the Board looked at the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances, they were looking at “by right” divisions and what could be done in A-2. Mr. Purcell said that one of the things that they wanted to get done was to make sure future roads were built to state specifications and get the developments off of the main roads. Mr. Purcell asked if having the setbacks lessened would result in any safety concerns. Dr. Morgan said that the reductions in the setbacks are more consistent with the neighborhood model that they are trying to promote over time, which this will help achieve. Dr. Morgan said that the properties that have had conditional zoning in the past that have granted them land, that they wouldnt have to condemn for widening Route 15, and asked if this would supercede any of these proffers or if those proffers would still be in place. Chairman Barnes said that there are some people that own lots on Route 208 that they plan on giving to their son or daughter, which is all they have. Chairman Barnes said that having a 100 setback might put some of these lots out of buildability and asked if there were some type of clause covering this issue. Chairman Barnes said that he doesnt know if 60 would be far enough for secondary roads. Mr. Gentry said that the Long Range Planning Committee looked at this really picked this apart with the assistance of many other individuals. Mr. Gentry said that he made sure that the primary concerns of the Board were looked at during this process. Mr. Jennings asked if this were adopted, would this only pertain to new lots or if it would apply to existing lots.  

In response to the Boards questions, Mr. Coffey said that the setbacks would exclude steps. Mr. Coffey said that the state code allows for a 1 of overhang, but everything else attached to the structure has to meet the setbacks, which is established by the state. Mr. Coffey said that Dominion allows for structures to be built on their property and they sign agreements with the owners of each of the lake properties. Mr. Coffey said that within Louisa Countys ordinance, you establish minimum criteria regarding setbacks and under state code you have to follow these setbacks or obtain a variance. Mr. Coffey said that the only primary road that has setbacks changing is along Route 15, which is protected. Mr. Coffey said that it is his understanding that if there were a conditional proffer that had been accepted as part of a rezoning, it would be legally binding and is unique to that property. Mr. Coffey said that the current setback that exists on Route 208 is currently at 100 and if the building site cannot meet this setback, it would not be a buildable lot unless they had a variance. Mr. Coffey said that a lot of family divisions would have access through a driveway or an easement, so as long as the structure itself is away from the primary road, that access distance is not an issue. Mr. Coffey reiterated that nothing was changing with these roads; they only added Route 250 and Route 15 to the ordinance. Mr. Coffey said that if they were to change the setback to increase it, then they would be putting a lot of structures into a legally non-conforming status that are currently legal. Mr. Coffey said that if the Board were to pass this tonight, it would apply to all lots.

Chairman Barnes opened the public hearing at 8:54 p.m. With no on wishing to address the Board, Chairman Barnes closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. and brought it back to the Board for further discussion.

On motion of Mr. Wright, seconded by Mr. Gentry, which carried by a vote of 7-0, a resolution was adopted to amend Chapter 86 of the Louisa County Code for Sections: 86-2, 86-18, 86-18.1, 86-19, 86-20, 86-21, 86-67, 86-70, 86-71, 86-77, 86-80, 86-80.1, 86-84, 86-87, 86-88, 86-89, 86-105, 86-106, 86-108, 86-109, 86-110, 86-123, 86-124, 86-124.1, 86-86-126, 86-127, 86-143, 86-144, 86-144.1, 86-146, 86-147, 86-164, 86-165, 86-166, 86-181, 86-182, 86-184, 86-185, and 86-186 as identified in Resolution #: RES05.136 located in the County Administrators office.

RECESS

On motion of Mr. Gentry, seconded by Mr. Jennings, which carried by a vote of 7-0, the Board voted to recess the October 17, 2005 regular meeting at 8:57 p.m. until Saturday, October 29, 2005 for their Retreat that will be held at the School Board Administration Office and begin at 8:30 a.m.


BY ORDER OF

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