Board of Supervisors Regular Second Meeting   3/20/2024

Good afternoon.

I'm pleased to call to order this regular meeting at the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on the 20th of March, 1 p.m.

in Lane Auditorium.

I'd like to note that at the dais we have Supervisor Ann Mallek of the White Hall District, Supervisor Ned Gallaway of the Rio District, Supervisor Diantha McKeel of the Jack Jouett District, Supervisor Mike Pruitt of the Scottsville District, myself, Jim Andrews, representing the Samuel Miller District.

Quorum is present.

We've got the absence of Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley up here today.

Also, we are joined today by our county executive, Mr. Jeff Richardson, our county attorney, Mr. Steve Rosenberg, our clerk, Claudette Borgersen, and our senior deputy clerk, Mr. Travis Morris.

Also, please let me welcome Albemarle County police officers assisting today, Lieutenant Angela Jamerson and Master Police Officer Paul Cullen.

If all present, could now stand as you were able to join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Board, I believe now we are at the point where we are going to adopt the final agenda and I have not heard of any suggested amendments, changes to that agenda.

So I'm looking for a motion to adopt the final agenda.

So moved.

Second.

Ms.

Mallek.

Yes.

Ms.

McKeel.

Yes.

Mr. Pruitt.

Aye.

Mr. Andrews.

Yes.

Board will now move to brief announcements by board members.

Our first is Supervisor McKeel.

I have several.

Sadly, I want to recognize the passing of Lorraine Williams.

who was certainly a leader and a dedicated community member in our community.

She was a retired Charlottesville teacher and a civil rights pioneer.

She and her husband Eugene helped desegregate the city schools during the period of time that's referred to as massive resistance.

certainly she will be missed and she is dearly beloved by many members of our community and I just wanted to recognize her passing and say that she was a rock star.

And the other, moving on to a few items that are on a happier note, I'm really pleased to announce that Fran Clark, who is a teacher over at Greer Elementary School, received the Virginia Department of Education's Ambassador of Kindness Award.

It was pretty cool.

And the folks at Greer were just really thrilled that she received that award and so congratulations to Fran.

and the only other item that I want to mention is that Ann and I last night attended a wonderful dinner

Antoine Brinson is the culinary training instructor for Go Cook, which is a Charlottesville and Albemarle organization that teaches people in our community to be cooks in restaurants.

They have 150, he has 150 restaurants he works with.

and supplies, cooks and chefs to those restaurants in this community.

And last night he had a graduation.

and Ann and I went and we had a lovely dinner served to us and I really want to just point out that they are, Antoine with his program is helping many a variety of people in the community learn a skill and a trade.

Some of them are changing careers.

There was a nurse last night

who has taken a brief leave of absence from his nursing job and is training to be a culinary chef.

And there were two gentlemen from the Almall Charlottesville Regional Jail that are currently out on home incarceration

and they are going through the program to learn how to work in restaurants, which is really great.

So it was a wonderful evening and we were able to celebrate with the graduates and have a lovely dinner.

And if you're ever interested, just look up Go Cook, which is a growth opportunity for Cook program.

and they are headquarters, quartered over, sort of in one of the little shopping malls over by Barracks Road Shopping Center.

What I think of is the Metacreek Pharmacy Shopping Center, though Metacreek is not there any longer, but they're in that little strip mall that's over there.

But it's a great program that's doing lots of good things in this community.

Thank you.

I want to thank all the citizens who came out last night to my budget town hall meeting.

I had about 20, 21 folks.

I'm also appreciative of all the staff who were there, who both gave presentations, supported the evening, answered questions, etc.

So it was from 6 o'clock.

but it was, we got good questions.

I hope that citizens will continue to email or come to public hearings and ask additional questions about the budget.

But it was nice to have a good turnout last night, evening for that.

The other is more just a FYI, point me in the right direction type of request.

I noticed, I was grateful to see coming down the parkway today, the big signs talking about the Kudzu removal program going on on the parkway.

The Parkway has certainly been an example of how that weed has earned its moniker.

But if there is that, I'm presuming that's a VDOT program.

I would just be curious to know if that is in fact VDOT and like how they do this.

Are there goats involved?

But they've clearly done something because it looks like it's all like

Rick, what's the word I'm looking for?

Like it's been sprayed and they're going to remove it.

I'm just curious like what this entails and if anybody knows where to point me on that because I don't, obviously I don't think this is a counting thing.

Thank you and it's just for folks they do have the big signs.

They've had caution invasive plant signs up just be

for the Transportation Town Hall and Budget Town Hall for the Crozet Growth Area will be the 10th of April at 7 and then at White Hall Community Building on the 13th.

And the early so one is to be scheduled, so keep your eyes peeled for that third one.

Regarding Antoine Brinson, he began as a graduate of the CIC small business program and the fact that he's already placed 150 workers in jobs is a tremendous effort and a real help for those particular individuals as well as our economic development in general.

This is a red flag day.

Power is already out in many parts of the county due to high winds.

So I hope that people are actually following the law and not trying to burn anything right now because it is incredibly

dangerous.

Regarding the invasive species control, Bradford pairs are also blooming right now, and this is a really good time to mark them.

for dealing with them later because they have to be harvested whatever in a very certain way in order to not make them spread more.

But that's often hard to do when the leaves and flowers are not there.

So marking them now, there was a constant row of them all along the Metta Creek Parkway as I drove down here this afternoon.

So in addition to making huge allergy issues for many, many people, they are very invasive and just taking over.

everywhere.

When I was locally dropping off my tax materials there was a series of brochures for the Tom Deverson Soil and Water District and there are about a dozen different programs for livestock and grazing systems, cropland, tree planting programs, stormwater programs, all sorts of things for urban neighborhoods as well as rural and agriculture and they have funding available for

all sorts of different things so please take this time to plan ahead for an improvement that you would like to do even next year because it takes six months to get all this processing generally done and you can't just walk in on the first of April and say here's what I want to do and expect that they'll have a check ready for you to offset your spring planting.

but very beneficial programs for all residents.

April 1st is the deadline to renew your real estate tax relief program if you were received tax relief last year.

You must file your application or certification renewal by Monday April 1st, which is coming up quickly.

And the folks, Jennifer Matheny and her staff in the finance office will help you if necessary to do all that.

County, and

Iron manganese sulfate, hardness, coliform bacteria, sodium, copper, nitrate, arsenic, E. coli, fluoride, pH.

Total dissolved solids and lead.

So you get your money's worth and a lot of comfort if you get really good results from this test.

If you discover things that need to be fixed, it's really good to know about it ahead of time and figure out things that can be done to either shock your well or other to deal with whatever contamination might be happening.

Let me go down the list here, trying to go in chronological order.

Last Saturday, the Cooper and Wheeler family celebrated the completion of their habitat ownership program journey and receiving the keys to their homes in Old Trail.

They'll move into two end-unit townhouses in the Bishopgate neighborhood.

which is basically right across from Henley School.

Neighbors came out to the celebration to welcome them and these homes were supported in a partnership with Craig Builders, many local businesses and volunteer builders along with hundreds of hours of sweat equity from each of these families.

to achieve their home ownership.

Let's see, April 19th, working down the calendar.

Is the 58th rededication of the Dogwood Vietnam Memorial?

It is the oldest in the United States.

Special parking in the field will be accessed next to the skate park for that day, and Handicap Transport is available from the field to the memorial, and it's sponsored by the Vietnam Memorial Foundation locally.

And the last one is

that April 27th is Saturday, one day only for the White Hall Ruritan annual plant sale.

This is the 14th year that they have done this to raise money for upgrades to the historic building, 821 Rain or Shine at 2904 Browns Gap Turnpike.

And we look forward to seeing everybody there to stock up on native plants that will definitely succeed when you take them home to your garden.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So first, two things about books.

Right now an ongoing throughout the weekend is the Virginia Festival of the Book that takes place throughout

both the city and the county with various book talks that I would encourage folks to look into because there's a lot of diverse different things.

No matter what your interest is, you'll probably find a book talk dedicated to it over the next few days.

I would also like to recognize the incredible work of the Scottsville branch of the Dolly Parton Imagination Library that has been brought to us through collaboration with the Charlottesville Rotary Club and also JMRL.

They had an open house this Saturday to help sign up more children to participate in the Parton Imagination Library Program, which gives them free books over their childhood.

In addition to getting more folks signed up for this, they also successfully had a fundraising drive

that is going to help fund 150 additional children to receive books in the south side of Albemarle.

Donations included those from James River Good Works, Quick Start, Tenants for Central, Charlottesville, Scottsville Chamber of Commerce, Scottsville Lions, Skipper Seniors Club, and the SOMC Methodist Men.

So I would thank them all for their contribution to

and so on.

Booker, a talk that is going to be at the museum at three that day that is going to focus on the history of preserving historically black schools in the region.

Additionally, I would like to recognize and thank the organizers of Impact Seville.

They recently held their Nehemiah Impact event, which was focused on this year housing equity in Albemarle County.

and Transit Equity in the City.

It was a really impressive event, Impact Seville, for those of you who aren't familiar, is over 26 different interfaith congregations and thousands of different parishioners who all come together to rally around important elements of social change that represent through lines throughout their faith beliefs.

And I was really excited to be able to join them.

And also, like everyone else, I would like to just flag upcoming town halls.

I'm going to be doing several collaboratively with other supervisors because I have so many places that people live that are right on the border.

So myself and Supervisor Andrews are going to be at the Fifth Street offices at 7 on, I forgot to write the date, this Thursday, tomorrow.

We are going to also, I'm going to be joined by Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley and PanTops at the Martha Jefferson Outpatient Center, that's 595 Martha Jefferson Drive,

at 6.45 next Monday, the 25th.

And lastly, there's going to be a town hall at Yancey that I will be joining Supervisor Andrews with at 6 on the 28th next Friday, not this Friday, but next Friday.

And that's all I have.

Thank you.

Many of the things I might have announced have been announced.

That's great.

Thank you, Supervisor McKeel, particularly for the remembrance of Lorraine Williams, a leader in our community, certainly missed.

Just to add a couple quick ones, registration for e-waste vouchers for the Saturday, April 20th e-waste drop-off at IBM UC opened online this morning.

and they fill up fairly quickly, so if you're interested in dropping off E-Waste, get it online and sign up.

Also, I want to just remind people that there is now free mulch available at the IVMUC.

That's it.

I signed up for our well test this morning, so appreciate that announcement.

Does anyone have anything else to add?

Our next item is No.

6, Proclamations and Recognitions.

So that will take us on to Item 7 from the public, matters on the agenda but not listed for public hearing or matters previously considered by the Board or matters that are pending before the Board.

Board, I just want to point out that our rules indicate that we will have up to 10 speakers.

We have 11 signed up.

If there is no objection, we'll just go through this with 11, but recognizing that is a deviation from our rules to add the additional speaker.

I see nodding of heads.

Oh, we shorten it and we have more.

You know, that's always been an option as well.

We could have a question whether we need a motion and second to move to 11.

Is it okay?

Thank you.

I think so.

We're good.

There's no one online.

So everybody's in person.

So let me read the directions here.

All right.

During the time set aside for matters on the agenda but not listed for public hearing, individuals may address the Board of Supervisors concerning matters previously considered.

by the board or matters that are pending before the board other than items listed on the agenda for public hearing.

Individuals are allowed one opportunity of up to three minutes to speak at each board meeting during matters from the public and a sign-up sheet is managed by the clerk's office.

Timekeeping is conducted through a timer and a light system at the podium.

The green light will go on when you begin speaking, which begins your allotted time.

The yellow light indicates you have one minute to finish speaking and the red light indicates your time has expired and you will be asked to end your comments.

Give all speakers equal treatment and courtesy.

The board requests that speakers adhere to the following guidelines.

When addressing the board, state your name and if you live in Albemarle County, your Magisterial District.

Address comments directly to the board as a whole.

Any written statements or other supporting materials may be given to the clerk.

If representing a group or organization,

You may ask others present to raise their hands in recognition.

Speakers may not share any unused time with other speakers.

Back and forth debate is not permitted and do not speak out of turn or from your seat.

All comments are live streamed, recorded, and published on the Albemarle County website.

And the first speaker today is Paul Haney.

Oh, it's typed in.

Paul, will you excuse me?

I missed faith.

Faith Schwecker.

Is that correct?

Welcome.

Swiker.

That's right.

It's Kate Schweikert.

I'm representing the Piedmont Environmental Council.

I'd like to thank you all for the board for taking the time to consider the planning of the rural area of Marlborough County with recognition that one cannot protect the rural area without also making the best use of the development areas through an effective and robust growth management strategy that has been prominent in past comprehensive planning.

PEC's analysis of community surveys in Albemarle County from 1994 to 2023 underscored the priority Albemarle County residents have overwhelmingly given to policies tied to the environment, preservation, and smart growth for nearly 30 years.

As the update process continues, PEC created an interactive map that I've sent over to you all earlier this week that visualizes the sensitive and significant characteristics within the rural area.

In it, you can toggle between various water resources, forest blocks, parks, conservation easements, scenic viewsheds, areas rich in agricultural soil, and historic districts and sites.

you can view that at pecfile.org slash Albemarle Rural Area as well.

We created the map to educate during AC44 planning and beyond and we hope it will help to address many of the questions about the perceived lack of agriculture in the county, what defines a scenic view, and what its importance is.

And also to provide contrast to the perception that 95% of the county that represents the rural area is empty space.

Albemarle's rural area that focuses on agricultural working for us and ecosystem services provides a host of economic, health, recreational, and environmental services.

For example, we are the second highest-presucing county in Virginia in the fruits, tree nuts, and berries category, according to the 2017 USDA census data.

Welead, Central Virginia counties and the number of people employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and our current tree canopy alone provides

2076.3 million dollars of annual benefits from the reduction in air pollution, stormwater management, and sequestered and carbon dioxide.

That's just listing a few of the benefits that we get from the rural area.

We hope you consider the factors in our mapping and analysis that's been sent to you earlier this week in your decision making with the understanding that the loss or diminishing of these resources

would be difficult or impossible to repair.

That was quite the segue for me, but before I get to that, in December, Paul Haney, Albemarle County Foreign Bureau, I live in the Rivanna District.

in December of

and the safety feature to it.

So that went really well.

Albemarle County Farm Bureau purchased the saw and we donated that after the safety course to Stony Point Volunteer Fire Department.

Our intention is to make that an annual event and we'll figure out where the saws are going to go each time.

Excitingly, Mr. Kendrick and I met with Amelia Jody and Bart

A couple weeks back, to start the progress on reevaluating and redesigning the clean fill ordinance, we came out of there thrilled.

It went really well.

I think we're all on the same page.

It's just getting all that language that keeps the board happy and that we've got to trudge through.

Concerning for us is recently the Planning Commission.

We've had a lot of rhetoric coming out of there that is very concerning to the forestry and agricultural community.

One thing that we've heard before is that hay is not farming.

That's like saying you don't have to have a basketball played a basketball game.

Hay is the backbone of livestock.

If we don't have hay, we can't carry animals forward.

and, you know, they reference bush hogging.

Well, yeah, that's kind of important.

That's the way we do weed control, and that also helps in keeping Albemarle more beautiful that everybody likes to see, but it is an integral part of agriculture in this county.

The one that really hurt, though, is that there's nothing but boutique farming in Albemarle County.

That's a hard dose, considering with the

I guess the latest, Weldon Cooper says that that boutique farming is generating 713 million dollars annually in this county.

That's quite the boutique.

It's 404,236 jobs.

That's pretty important.

We got 866 farms farming 180, 170,000 acres in this county.

That's more than just a boutique where I come from.

and with all that said, I recently sensual information that the average farm is losing $16,000 a year.

So we're supporting air farming by having wives or spouses that are out earning the money to keep us doing this.

So that's getting pretty quick to what I am concerned about.

We stand and we had spoken with Chair Andrews that we're willing to meet with the Planning Commission so they can understand what forestry and agriculture is.

and at whenever it's appropriate.

Good afternoon.

I'm Tom Olivier from the Samuel Miller District with comments on the comprehensive plan

First, the new comprehensive plan fails to acknowledge the severity of ecological disruptions that lie ahead.

Second, county rural areas are essential contributors to our high quality of life, and they are home to farms and forests and ecosystems that provide materials and services vital to our existence.

Food, timber, clean air, clean water, carbon sequestration.

But rural areas in their ecosystems are under threat for many sources, invasive species, climate change, and development proposals.

In this time of ecological crises and endless calls for additional developed uses in our rural areas, we need a planning framework that integrates thinking about the different rural areas' uses and their interactions.

for this reason I support a rural areas chapter in the new plan and I believe a standalone rural areas plan as proposed would meet our planning needs even better.

Finally, county residents have long contributed both new ideas and constructive criticisms to comprehensive plan deliberations.

For example, the county's biodiversity protection commitments arose from a 1997 proposal from Citizens for Albemarle, a grassroots organization, to the Planning Commission.

In the current update, the AC44 team proposed a new plan unfathomably without a rural areas chapter.

A rural areas chapter was added to the new plan only after sustained criticism from the public.

At the Planning Commission last week, an advertised public comment period before the Rural Areas Work Session was cancelled at the last minute.

Will-be speakers were told that at the previous work session, public comments had taken up too much time.

This cancellation shows a lack of respect for the time of members of the public who prepared and came to speak.

The cancellation also revealed a lack of regard for the role of knowledgeable members of the public in critiquing policy proposals.

I urge that you press the Planning Commission to hold public comment periods before future comprehensive plan work sessions.

Thank you.

I do want to remind speakers that if you're unable to finish, you can turn in your comments to the clerk for us to read.

Good afternoon.

Neil Williamson with the Free Enterprise Forum.

Before I get into the comments I have, I want to make certain that we take a look at that PEC map, which is great.

And the vast majority of it is privately held land.

And that is really important to recognize.

The reason it's great is because of the stewardship of generations of owners.

Disco was king.

You remember that?

The Bee Gees and Donna Summer had a number of number one hits.

That's the same year that Albemarle set up their development, well then they called them growth areas, of greater than 5% of the landmass.

And since that enactment and that race to the courthouse for the rural down zoning, it's been shrinking ever since.

from Repurian buffers, which are great, but it shrinks the development area, the expanding streapscapes to Biscuit Run Park to steep slopes regulations.

All of this makes less and less land available.

Last week, I wrote about the NAR resource that indicated that the Charlottesville MSA is the only MSA in the entire Commonwealth of Virginia that it deemed under permitted.

That means we're not building enough houses, and that's for the whole MSA.

When you look at the car, our fourth quarter report, you can see increasing pricing and decreasing number of listings.

That really indicates a tightening market.

The housing crisis is now.

You have a lot of really exciting things coming down the pike that will include new residents.

Where are they going to live?

As you consider your draconian growth control limits, I ask you to consider them with the lenses that you guys set up for the comp plan.

Equity and climate change.

for if you can't live in Albemarle County and the jobs in Albemarle County, how do you live?

Will you live somewhere else and you have an impact on the environment getting to and from work?

You also lose all the sales tax revenue.

Thank you.

The next person is Norai, and I think this is Saul Heiner.

Saul Heiner.

Yes.

Sure.

Make sure you speak into it.

Yeah.

Hello, my name is Nora Seilheimer and I'm a resident of Albemarle County, the Samuel Miller District.

Thank you for all the hard work that has gone into updating the county's comprehensive plan.

As you consider the goals and objectives that will be reviewed in today's meeting, I ask that you do all in your power to protect the vibrant rural areas that define our Albemarle County.

As PEC has laid out in their summary of community surveys in Albemarle County from 1994 to 2023, nearly 30 years, county residents have steadily prioritized policies tied to environment preservation and smart growth in our county.

2024 is no different.

I ask that you advance an effective and robust growth management strategy that protects the rural areas and makes the best possible use of the development areas.

This balance has been prominent in past comprehensive planning processes and has resulted in the world-class county we live in today.

Please ensure that our county is protected and continues to be protected for future generations.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Tom Loach, resident of Crozet.

In 1991, county executive Rob Tucker published a definitive paper on the subject of land use taxation program in Albemarle County.

in his paper, Mr. Tucker communicated two important points.

One, the reason for the implementation of the land use taxation program, and two, who pays for the program.

Regarding the reason for the Albemarle County joining the state land use program, Mr. Tucker stated the following, the current land use program preserving rural land has been an objective for the county for almost two decades and the benefits derived from this program are significant for the community at large.

No where in Mr. Tucker's publications, as he expressed, any additional reasons for the implementation of the land use taxation program other than rural preservation?

As for who pays for the land use taxation program, Mr. Tucker wrote the following.

The cost of land use is not a hidden fact, and it is implicit

in the concept of land use that the tax burden has shifted to other taxpayers.

The cost for maintaining the land use program has been very expensive for those who are required to pay for it.

In Mr. Tucker's published paper in 1991, a yearly cost for tax land use was $4.2 million.

By 2005, it had risen to $13 million and by 2023, $14 million.

Using these amounts and dates extrapolate to show that the investment

of the County Residents and Rural Protection since 1975 has been over a quarter of a billion dollars.

All that said, and despite the cost of land use and the fact that it does not fully stop rural development, I fully support the status quo when it comes to the present land use taxation program.

Unfortunately, AC44 makes it clear that the future of rural preservation, Albemarle County is now about to become obsolete.

AC44 states that within a new comprehensive plan there will be language outlining the criteria for the expansion of growth areas.

should the Board agree with the State of Position of AC-40 who would expand the growth areas?

I'm sure that besides myself, there will be thousands of other growth area homeowners who will demand that land use program be phased out since it no longer carries its primary purpose of rural protection and certainly not at the cost of tens of millions of dollars per year.

Additionally, it matters little if the growth area expansion is this year, next year or 10 years, nor does it matter how little or how much land is preserved, currently preserved land is converted for development.

developing taxpayer-preserved land as an oxymoron.

If the Board wants to move towards a comprehensive plan that drives Albemarle County to becoming a Northern Virginia, that's your decision.

But one, I doubt, will have much support from either rural or growth area residents.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Good afternoon supervisors.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Maria Deuster and I work for the Community Climate Collaborative based in Charlottesville, also called C3.

I'm here to speak on the topics of housing and transportation and the development and rural areas chapters of AC44.

My colleague, Kaitano de Campos Lopez, will later speak on land use and solar development.

A municipality's zoning code and comprehensive plan have a direct impact on the amount of air and climate pollution produced by the entire community as well as who in the community bears the burden of addressing climate change and its impacts.

C3 supports an increase in multifamily multiplex and missing middle housing in designated growth areas.

Dense housing limits encroachment on green spaces and natural resources.

It is more energy efficient and offers more affordable options for low to middle income residents.

It also more easily allows for equitable, sustainable and affordable transit-oriented development, in which mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods are built in tandem with new or existing public transit.

Density allows for more efficient transit systems, reducing commute times and transportation costs.

As you can see, housing energy and transportation affordability and sustainability are intimately linked.

Our solutions must reflect this.

Rural communities should not be left behind either.

Crossroads communities offer an avenue for support and care and non-development areas, taking advantage of already established points of gathering and community building.

Increased density or development is not necessarily the goal or expectation here.

Providing essential services, especially for the most vulnerable in our communities, is.

The 2022 Map to Health report for Albemarle County and surrounding areas found that access to health care, transportation,

and Human Connection and Socializing were key determinants for healthy communities.

Moreover, in the context of climate change and emergency preparedness, resilience hubs can act as a key way to assemble and disseminate information, access resources and coordinate response.

In our engagement with local experts and organizers, C3 found that many unhoused people in the City of Charlottesville are from rural areas, underscoring that issues of housing and energy affordability are not specific to city residents alone.

positive individual and community health outcomes are determined by a multitude of factors, the majority of which the county can work to improve through the AC44 process.

Good afternoon, supervisors.

My name is Caetano de Campos Lopez.

I'm the Director of Climate Policy of the Community Climate Collaborative, C3.

I'm also a resident of the Rio District.

I'm here to speak on solar development and land use in the development and rural areas.

and so on.

that addresses large-scale projects.

We want to note that this perspective is somewhat limited, where tillage scale is not the only type of solar development that can or should occur in rural areas.

We recommend that it can expand its focus right now, focus only on tillage scale to include smaller scale and distributed solar projects up to 5 megawatts.

These smaller projects are more flexible and feasible in terms of sighting, have less impact on the county's natural and cultural resources and may have quicker approval processes.

at the same time we believe that it's very important that the county actively support on-site rooftop and parking lot solar in entrance corridors, including those in rural areas, by streamlining the permitting processes and allowing them by right.

Finally, while C3 values the stewardship of the natural environment in our rural counties, rural areas,

We also believe that it's important to compare things in a fair way.

For example, not all farming uses are beneficial for an environment and some practices can actually even be detrimental to it.

Industrial farming can cause runoff that contaminates groundwater and drinking water, produce air pollutants, and release significant amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Monocultures can result in excessive fertilizer use, habitat destruction, ecological degradation, and soil fertility loss.

What we are aiming to suggest is that when the county is weighing land use decisions and priorities, they should also engage holistically with the impacts of current practices.

It's a phlog logic to reject solar projects on the grounds that it might negatively impact soil health while unconditionally endorsing monoculture pine plantations, for example.

C3 believes in solutions that adequately address the ongoing climate crisis while maintaining a thriving community.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Kim Bassioli with the Piedmont Environmental Council.

My comments are about the AC44 rural area chapter.

We hope that the impacts of land use goal 4 and objective 4.2 related to legacy zoning and rural area interchanges will be carefully considered.

These proposals perpetuate and expand land use patterns that are inconsistent with the county's growth management policy and its long-standing goals for the rural area.

Last week at the Planning Commission Work Session, the undeveloped areas at Shadwell along 250 East were referred to as empty space that should be filled in.

When I look at the aerial photograph, what I see there is forest, and that forest is just north of the Rivanna River.

This proposed development will not only create sprawl but also chip away at our forest cover and the benefits it provides, like watershed protection and climate resiliency.

This conflicts with the county's own goals for climate action, which aim to not only maintain but increase forest cover.

PEC fully supports land use goals one and two, which speak to protection of the natural and cultural elements of the rural area.

And objectives 1.1 and 1.2 on the importance of reducing land conversion and improving the county's land conservation programs are particularly important.

Land conversion in the rural area creates costs, both for government and residents, things like providing services to outlying areas and mitigating the impacts of climate change.

The conservation programs help the county avoid these costs by keeping rural land intact.

They support working farms and forests and also deliver tremendous public benefit to our entire community by protecting public health, water quality, natural habitat, and the scenic and historic resources that are the foundation of our local tourism economy.

Keeping rural land intact is also in and of itself a nature-based solution to climate change, providing benefits like carbon sequestration and flood resiliency.

We are undervaluing these benefits.

Economic analyses consistently show a return on investment in land conservation in the form of natural goods and services, and by reducing the cost of providing services to rural area residents.

We thank you for including these goals and hope to see specific action steps in support of the conservation programs, which are a critical investment in our community.

I believe it's Holmes, Brown,

just want to make sure that was for homes.

I'm Holmes Brown.

I'm a resident of Batesville.

I packed peaches in Crown Orchard from the summers of 57 through 59.

I've been a property holder and taxpayer in this county since 1979.

I want to start by complimenting the community development staff for coming to a community meeting in Bates Hill on February 24th.

A large number of staff came, we had a big turnout, and it was really an ideal way to really sound out the community.

We were kind of a pilot program, and they went on to Yancey Mill later.

And I think the community and the staff felt those were very valuable.

I want to address the issue of Crossroads communities in AC44.

At a recent planning commission meeting, the issue of what constituted a crossroads community came up, discussion centered on crossroads communities and resilience centers, and what resilience features a crossroads community should have.

Basel was one of the seven locations originally designated as a crossroads community.

At the mention of Batesville, one commissioner commented, it's no more than a store.

Some of us in the audience took umbrage at that.

The comment implied that past definitions of crossroads communities were too narrow and that in the future to qualify under this rubric other elements of resilience is to find an AC44 would have to be added.

I would like to suggest that Batesville has many aspects of community that should be explicitly recognized in county documents.

I'll briefly summarize them.

The Batesville indeed has marked the center of the town's social, commercial, and musical activities over a hundred years.

Crown Orchard founded by the child's family in 1908,

is nationally famous owner and leaser of thousands of nearby acres and owner of five local orchards.

Miller School, established in 1878, has international and local students and an internationally famous bicycle team.

There are three churches, the Methodist and Baptist Church and Mount View Baptist Church.

There's a walking trail, a post office, and two vital community clubs, the Ruritans and the Historic Society.

If you didn't have a chance to complete your comments, please provide them.

My name is Paula Beasley.

I'm in the Samuel Miller District.

I apologize for taking your time as you have much work to do on the rule area section of the COMP plan.

The objective is to plan for the rule areas, but more than half of the goals are obscured language that seems to validate commercial, industrial, or amenities development in the rule areas.

For the more than 30 years I have lived here, the ag forest soil economy has been the economic driver of this county's economy, funding the programs and services provided, especially in the development areas.

While tourism is also provided funding, there can be a tension between the two, as in the case of vineyard, salaries, et cetera, on rural roads.

Mainstream agricultural forestal crop and equine activities, support other county preservation goals, scenic resources, scenic byways,

Rural Character, Entrance Corridors, Natural Resources, Mountain Topps Force, all of which cleanse the air and water to the benefit of the development areas.

Rural activities are not significant contributors of CO2 release, contributing less than 5%, but rather sequester a carbon at a rapid rate.

Goals 1 and 2, the only goals that might protect and promote the rural areas, are written in a static voice.

No requirement or intention to really preserve, protect, and promote the rural areas which do provide these scenic resources, contiguous landscapes, the viewsheds that tourists come to see in addition to our historic resources.

Whereas the active language protecting these resources are mountaintops, scenic resources, scenic byways, viewsheds, conserved lands, unbroken landscapes, natural and historic resources, biodiversity.

None of that language is there.

No language supporting the Mothwalt ACE program and land use to support ag and forestal that provide local food and timber.

The only other two goals appear to enable developing, suburbanizing, commercializing, and industrializing our rural areas.

We do not need development area amenities in the rural areas.

Those involved in ag, forestal, equine activities have little time for that.

We have more than plenty of vineyards and sideways for that.

We do need broadband, 20% don't have it, and it provides an essential link for work and connection.

That's it.

with that board, I believe we're on to the consent agenda.

Just before we jump to that, just make a quick correction.

Yes, so I misspoke.

I said that was going to be next Friday.

Thank you.

So board, is there anything anyone wants to pull from the consent agenda?

So moved.

We have a motion from Supervisor McKeel, a second from Supervisor Mallek.

Ms.

Mallek?

Yes.

Ms.

McKeel?

Yes.

Mr. Pruitt?

Aye.

Mr. Andrews?

Yes.

Our next item.

First Action Item, Number 9, the Public Private Transportation Act Guidelines, and this will be led by Mr. Lance Stewart, Director of Facilities and Environmental Services.

Thank you, Chair Andrews, members of the Board.

Lance Stewart, Albemarle County Director of Facilities and Environmental Services.

I'm happy to be here.

I'll just need one second.

Thank you, technology.

So I'm here today to present an option to the Board of Supervisors for your consideration related to our transportation projects.

Thank you, Supervisor Mow.

So I'll start with a little bit of background on why this is something that we're recommending.

Go into some detail about what it is and what it could potentially do for our community.

Talk about the recommended guidelines and I'll explain to you why they're in place and why we're asking you to consider adopting them.

And then finally walk through

Somersolution Language, in case you do want to make a motion to adopt the guidelines and briefly discuss what our next steps might be after that.

So you are, of course, all keenly aware of the nature of our transportation projects and infrastructure projects in general.

They can be slow to develop, they can be very costly, they can rise in cost over time, the longer time takes.

and we've experienced some pretty sharp increases in the last four years on construction costs generally.

So, you know, our local government and many other local governments across the country are forced to make increasingly difficult decisions about where to put their investments.

and to try to do so as efficiently as possible.

And the methods we've used historically for transportation projects in particular typically involve partnerships with the state through VDOT funds.

That can be a slow process, a competitive process.

Funding may be available only in out years and that out years, although we do get the benefit of those funds.

It makes delivery of projects slower and slower projects are more expensive projects.

So staff have been looking into some options for us to consider, just generally in how we operate the way we've been operating to be more efficient in that, but also to look at other alternative means of project delivery.

and Public-Private Transportation Act is one such alternative strategy to project delivery.

So I'll walk through that.

Generally, it's part of the Code of Virginia.

It's been in place since 1995.

and it allows for partnerships between the private sector and the public sector, hence the name, Public Private Transportation Act.

And typically it's been used in the past for very large projects, either through the Department of Transportation or through larger cities in Northern Virginia or on the coast.

or multiple cities that are adjacent to each other for roadway improvements, tunnels, bridges, often toll roads, park and ride facilities, even sidewalks and shared use paths.

There was a multi-million dollar effort on Interstate 66.

in northern Virginia that was a big slate of roadway improvement projects, shared use paths, sidewalks, parking right facilities, really a remarkable project, much larger than anything we would contemplate given our limited development areas.

So this is similar to like P3s that you're more familiar with that are economic development based.

This just allows either localities to seek partners or potential partners to approach localities to basically partner for investments that are in the best interests of the community and of the private sector.

So deal structures can be very different than what we normally do.

So our typical process is that we get funding, we engage an engineer, we design a project, we bid it out.

If the funds are available, we construct the project.

This allows for some very unique opportunities.

So if we were seeking to build a toll road, for instance, to get more capacity 29 North,

and so on.

Elements of Success for this kind of partnership for localities or for state agencies like VDOT, sometimes it enables projects that just couldn't happen without support and participation from the private sector.

In order for that to happen, it must be, according to the Public Private Transportation Act, must be in the best interest of the local public good.

and elected officials in the case of communities have to make a determination that that's the case, that a specific project that we may seek to accomplish with this method or the private sector may approach us with has to be an advantageous public good, but it also has to make sense for the private sector.

and in some cases it can speed the development of a project, an execution of projects.

So a project that might take four or five years to be funded by VDOT and then the design process starts in the land acquisition and the bidding and the procurement could be eight to ten years out and this model could cut that time significantly.

So there, I briefly mentioned that communities or the Department of Transportation can solicit proposals.

We can have a project that we think may be attractive to others and we could put out a request for proposals.

or just a request for information which is slightly different.

It basically asks the private sector to respond to say is this something that makes sense to you before we go to the greater deal of trouble to craft a full statement of the kind of project we would like to see and the deal structures that would be acceptable to us.

So, typically in order to do that we would, before we issue a solicited proposals, we would come to the Board of Supervisors and explain that we have a project, a specific one that we think may have, that may be benefited by exploring this option.

and assuming we get responses to that, there's a team of folks on staff and I'll walk through those in a little bit more detail later that would review those proposals, make a recommendation to the County Executive, ultimately make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors who might then agree to execute an agreement for our project.

and there is a questions slide coming up in a few slides.

So if I move in fast, hopefully we'll be able to catch back up then.

and I did also mention that we can accept unsolicited proposals so we as a community may be sort of fixed in our mindset about how we want to execute and or fund a project and the private sector may say may think well gosh I could do that less expensively and quicker and get something that I need out of the arrangement as well and so they can without the county initiating taking any action submit a proposal.

and that would have to include enough information for county staff to be able to weigh that effectively.

But if it does seem like something that we should entertain, then our next step at staff would be to likely to issue a request for proposals based on the information that we got from that unsolicited proposal, just so that we're not solely benefiting the first

folks that come along, and also to help ensure that we get a negotiated deal that's the most attractive.

And competition is always helpful there.

So in order to utilize this existing state ordinance, we're required by that ordinance to establish a set of guidelines.

We did research on communities around the state who have these.

They're pretty, you know, very similar to each other.

They tend to, at their essence, restate their requirements of

and the state code.

But they also look at and address the fact that forms of governments change, so it could be as simple as a county executive form of government, then it's the county executive who gets to determine who's on the review team.

And the title of the chief financial officer may vary from organization to organization.

So the guidelines that we've drafted do accomplish that.

They also name specific members of the selection committees and this is based on how generally how other communities have done it.

The county executive or his designate.

The Chief Financial Officer, obviously this is a very important financial decision that's being made.

The Planning Director, whose fingers on the pulse of these transportation projects and the community's needs.

And in our case, the Facilities Environmental Services Director, who often executes projects or at least weighs in on the practicality and practicability of the projects that others may build on our behalf.

and the county executive in these guidelines has the ability to name other people, has the ability to invite VDOT participation if that's deemed helpful and we think that this is, overall the guidelines are very consistent with the state code.

So we do have a few projects, types of projects that we think might work well, or we probably wouldn't be in front of you today.

Of course, adopting the guidelines enables us to move that forward, but we do need to understand what a good project looks like.

And I've already talked about that they need to be beneficial to our community and to the private sector in order to be accomplished.

but also say, I think that for the most part, and I could be very wrong about this, I think the potential is most likely in the development areas.

I could see, for instance, a park and ride might make sense, most sense in a community, like the one that's planned just outside Crozet, the 250-64.

Intersection, that that could be an opportunity that's obviously the type of facility where people might pay to park.

And so, you know, someone might come forward to work with us in a scenario like that.

But I'll be a little bit more specific just on some projects that, at a glance, could potentially benefit from public-private partnerships.

You're all aware of the planned future development of the Rivanna Futures Project that involves

and the construction of an extension of a road, connection to 29 North, extension of utilities throughout there.

That's a development exercise, not involving the development community at this point.

but could potentially benefit from a partnership with the private sector and developers particularly.

Eastern Avenue has been a project that we have struggled to fully fund because of rising costs and at this point we think that this

may also be a viable opportunity for the extension of the, final extension of the road bridge over Licking Hole Creek and sidewalks to complete our pedestrian connectivity.

And then Berkmore, the extension of Berkmore Drive all the way to Airport Road, that's been in the planning stages as it must do for some time.

I understand that there are developers that are interested in

and helping support the cost of that extension so it would seem like another potential opportunity for a public-private partnership.

And my next slide is the questions slide.

Board.

We'll go through our order, but before doing so, I just want to call your attention to the fact that there is a blue sheet at your places that shows a four-word omission in the draft that was posted online at page 12, part 4C number 8, which should read, proposed contingency plans for addressing public needs if the project is not completed on schedule and how the risk and liability for delays add to words is to be apportioned.

Thank you for Supervisor Gallaway for pointing this out.

We will go through our order for questions.

Yes, thank you for this.

I appreciate it.

Just a couple of clarifying questions, I guess.

and so on.

The investment has to advance an economic development initiative.

So an example, Hillsdale Drive, a portion of that next to Kmart was built via a public-private partnership.

That was an economic development partnership.

And the costs of that were borne by, partially, by the developer of the Whole Foods property.

So that was an economic development authority, Charlottesville Economic Development Authority project.

and participation, but that also had a clear economic development benefit.

Thank you.

That's very helpful.

Will you go back to slide eight?

I just noticed and I guess one of my questions would be to obviously this process would be transparent to the community.

Sure, we would, by state code, staff would, as a first step, would come to the Board of Supervisors and present to you basically a determination, recommendation from the county executive that pursuing this would be in the public's best interest, so there would be

a public discussion and a publicly made decision by the Board to issue a solicitation.

And then there would be steps along the way, assuming that proposals were received that were attractive, where we would come back to present what the proposed deal, best deal, may look like, get some direction, come back,

to negotiate a final agreement, come again, most likely.

So there would be, it would be a visible process and certainly the posting of the proposal itself would likely not be on our procurement page because this is outside of the Virginia Public Procurement Act, but it would, so we'll need to, we would need to prominently

and all of

That's correct.

Yeah, I was just curious.

I think that's all I had right now.

Thank you.

Thank you, Lance.

I think you cleared this up because it was a question I had after reading it.

So both the department heads and the county executive can name a designee.

I'm just assuming that the county executive, and maybe Mr. Richardson can respond, but I'm assuming that the county executive, or his designee from the county executive's office is going to be always included in the process as part of the committee, or is the intent to, I don't know, I mean, this is going to sound flip, but I mean, staff this out.

I'm not sure I have an answer to that that would be the same answer as Mr. Richardson would give you.

It's a good question and what I would say Supervisor Gallaway is that I think this would receive a higher level of scrutiny and involvement from the county executive's office simply because it's not that common that something like this would happen and it would probably be a higher profile type of project and so I think it would be normal

for someone like either Ms.

Wall or Mr. Henry and or myself to participate at a more routine level, if you will.

On page 8, it discussed timelines.

I think there was a table, if I'm remembering.

1-5 months, 1-2, I mean there's a slew of time frames there.

I'm just curious, did we come up with those timelines?

Is this the best practices based on other PPTAs that are out there?

I mean overall getting transportation projects done

This is a shortening, even what's there on those tables, but it seems like one of the benefits of pursuing this as an option is the reduced amount of time it takes to get the project up, running, and completed.

But those are pretty vast time frames in some of those areas.

So I guess I would, I'm not suggesting we change any of it, but I'm just glad that the one and the twos are better than the 12 months and the 14 months in some of those sections.

My guess would be this is where I would have supervisor memory of, oh, this PPTA, like, thinking ahead that we approve one.

Why is it taking so damn long?

When it falls within sign these tables and it's like, oh, 12 months later it's not, where are we at?

So you may have to remind us of this table, I suppose, down the road.

to me this is one where you get it up, you get it going, let's get it done and moving.

So I hope that's staff's idea and intent too and this is just buying you the leeway with all the other things that are going on in the county when one of these presents itself.

Page 12, that was addressed on the new sheet.

Page 12, number one, sorry.

I wrote good on page 12 number one.

I can't remember what page 12 number one is.

There's only one number one.

Oh, so yeah, this is a bigger comment.

I'll jump to that.

So page 12, the project benefit and compatibility.

I mean, basically this is asking the applicant to do a fiscal impact analysis, but then also the transportation needs analysis of that.

That's a good question.

Some of this is a little bit opaque to us at this point.

It was difficult to find comparable projects to the scale that we might do locally.

So Eastern Avenue to us is a very important project.

This community has wanted it for a long time.

So as an example, I'd say the design and outcome and what you want to

to work for an Eastern Avenue project, relatively straightforward.

If the comparables we have to compare ourselves to is a 20-mile-long enhancement of Interstate 66 with parking garages and people who may own and operate toll lanes and park and ride facilities, that's pretty sophisticated.

And so we have not yet found

a completed deal that for a community our size for the type of project that we think could work in this community.

Understood.

There's a, on page 20, there's a notation that it has to be certified or a certification is sent to the Governor and or the General Assembly.

You know, I don't recall offhand, and I don't have it in front of me.

I'm sorry.

I mean, this is one where if we go through the whole process, the board endorses it, and then you can set it up the food chain, and oh, they don't like it, and then all that's for naught.

So I'm just curious if this is like us, what exactly that is.

Is it a sign-off?

Is it more of just procedural?

And they, since it's a state code-driven thing that they want the sign-off, but I think, I mean,

I can't imagine the level of projects here would drive, you know, get up the ire of the GA or the GOV, but wow, did I just say that out loud?

But I mean, I could see how there's bigger projects in the state that can be more politicized where this could be interesting, but I mean, that's a concern.

I don't want, this is an Albemarle County project, it's something that we're allowed to do.

That's a great question.

And then page 21, and this, I read through, you know, I saw the days and we had to publicly post and notice and the things that are there rightfully for public transportation, or public notification.

But on page 21, H number two, it says, may set a public hearing.

So it's just the notice being made in a public fashion in similar ways that we hold notice when we'll hold public hearings but we don't necessarily have to hold the public hearing.

I believe that's correct.

Thank you.

Those are all the questions for this.

I think this is great.

Good tool.

I think this could be very helpful to get some things done in the county.

So I'm hoping that whether they're solicited or unsolicited, we can maybe see something over the next 12 months that get one rolling so we can get expert at this.

Because I think this is a good way to get at some projects.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And thank you for the thorough homework and presentation.

I'm reassured thinking that

and

details are written yet and probably wouldn't be until, as the first project comes along, then we will learn things that then have to be made easier for the second.

You know, the guinea pig is going to be a big learning process for everybody.

But I'm also very hopeful that something like this might enable structured parking, which is going to be needed really quickly around many areas in our growth area.

would be something that could be advantaged by this process.

So I look forward to it moving forward.

I don't have any questions.

Thank you.

We have slide 8 up and I just want to clarify something.

The question was asked about after-staff evaluation.

The county must publish notice of proposals being considered in May issue.

A notice inviting others to submit a proposal.

If I look at this, I believe it says that if we are accepting or wanting to go forward with a proposal, then we, in fact, the language I believe is

Looking at here on page five, it says the county will publish a notice inviting others to submit competing proposals.

There's a competing May and a must in the guidelines.

I will need to defer to our attorney.

That's why I'm saying, I don't think it's inconsistent with this, it just is a difference between one that's being considered and one that's to be accepted.

and so on.

Public hearing or public comment setting a public hearing as being that 430 days before entering it that the public hearing could be held during that time.

Thank you.

Okay.

But otherwise, I think this is great.

Obviously, we'll be able to revise the guidelines if it turns out that there's something that needs to be revised.

But at this point, we can get started and I appreciate this.

Chair Andrews, I just want to make sure I understand the issue that you may have identified.

Okay.

I'm looking at page 5, under 5A1, unsolicited proposals permitted.

The last sentence in the first paragraph says, after accepting an unsolicited proposal, the county will publish a notice inviting others to submit competing proposals.

In other words, if a proposal is being considered,

They may solicit other proposals, whereas in this it says if a proposal is being accepted, they will publish a notice.

Yes, so I think, you know, to the extent there is a

A conflict or a difference in what is presented in the slide and what's actually in the guidelines.

You know, certainly what's in the guidelines that are adopted by the board would be controlling.

So, as drafted, it provides that the

that after accepting an unsolicited proposal, the county will publish a notice inviting others to submit competing

Proposals.

And I believe that's also consistent with unsolicited proposal fees on page six, where it says that there's a $5,000 fee for processing review and evaluation of unsolicited proposals.

And if an unsolicited proposal is accepted for publication, the fee will be refunded.

So at that point, presumably you're going forward to allow other competing proposals and the $5,000 is returned.

So we're not keeping it if we accept somebody else's proposal or start to look at other options.

That's only for when no one else is interested.

And we don't know whether it's worth reviewing.

Yes.

So I think that the fee is refunded

So there's sort of a, as I understand it, there is a decision made upon receipt of an unsolicited proposal, whether to further consider it or not.

That's my understanding.

Do we have any other questions or comments?

I'll make the motion, but I want to ask Steve a quick question.

Because in my world, I think the motion is to adopt attachment B, which is the resolution, but the guidelines attachment A as amended, because we did make a change too.

with this blue sheet.

We made a slide adjustment.

Yeah, we added the four words to be a portion.

I think that you can make a motion

Jouett.

So moved.

Second.

We have a motion from Supervisor McKeel and a second from Supervisor Mallek.

Ms.

Mallek.

Yes.

Ms.

McKeel.

Yes.

Mr. Pruitt.

Aye.

Mr. Andrews.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Stewart.

Board will now move to item 10, Brook Hill license agreements for improvements on county property.

And I believe this is being presented by Mr. Frank Pole, our county engineer.

Thank you, Chair Andrews.

Excuse me.

Chair Andrews and the members of board.

My name is Frank Pohl, the county engineer and community development.

And I'll bring this up.

So this proposal is for the board to authorize the county executive to sign

license agreements for improvements on county property.

This county parcel is located, is as shown on the right hand side in the photo there.

It's at the corner of Ashwood Boulevard and US 29.

Parcel ID is 46B51C.

The project is

This road is part of the Brookhill Project, which is down in the right-hand corner of this photo.

Archer Avenue, which is also known as the Ashwood Connector, runs from Polo Grounds Road up to Ashwood Boulevard.

The other approvals that have occurred with this project include ZMA 2015-7, 2018-11 with proffers, special use permit, various site plans, road plans, subdivision flats, WPO applications, and quite a few building permits already.

The proffer itself is written here.

It's dependent or conditioned upon

Excuse me, the completion of this connection is conditioned upon two different thresholds for building permits.

One is 500 single family permits, the wellings we call them right here is multifamily, excuse me, other than multifamily assisted living, rest home or convalescent facilities.

So basically single family detached.

Homes, or 800 permits, the 800th permit for any dwelling type, whichever comes first.

We're at approximately 630 total and 230 single family detached.

So the builder or developers trying to get ahead of, stay ahead of their production of units and start the construction of this connector road.

Some of Archer Avenue down here has already been accepted into the secondary system of state highways.

So this is again just continuing that up to Ashwood Boulevard.

This is a exhibit to provide a little bit more detail of what the licenses are to address.

The county parcel is highlighted in red.

Let me turn on my laser pointer.

So this is the parcel.

There is a VDOT stormwater management facility that was constructed as part of the widening of 29.

To the left over here, things are turning a little bit sideways here, so north is to your right.

The Brookhill development is on the left, Archer Avenue, which is the connector road, is right here.

Now there are some stormwater management facilities proposed with this project to provide onsite treatment.

on each side of the road.

Both of those would be on county property.

There is a landscape buffer here between the Forest Lake subdivision and the roadway.

The roadway will be a two-lane road that includes a median, bike lanes, street trees, five-foot pedestrian sidewalks on each side of the roadway, stormwater management,

The project includes a stream crossing right here, and I already mentioned the landscaping buffer between Forest Lakes and the roadway.

One other thing I wanted to point out here, the license areas

this line right here, I've included in the packet a better kind of another view of that in the plat, there's a plat in the packet but accentuates this line right here in this area to the north on the page here and to the south for grading, landscaping and more more permanent type

License Agreement, this center section and everything within the right-of-way will be, quote, temporary until the road is accepted by VDOT, which brings me to a better description of all the licenses.

There are three, and we had three because of the different timeframes for each license and bonding requirements for each.

The first two require bonds, the third one does not.

I'll just go quickly through them.

The first one is grading and road construction, so that includes everything within the right-of-way.

Establishing, maintaining, repairing the roadway until the improvements are accepted by VEDA, and all of the things included are listed there.

The second license is for the stormwater management facilities.

Facilities will be permanent, so instead of performing our typical or entering into a typical stormwater management agreement with the developer, we've developed this license to kind of take that place.

So there will be ongoing maintenance, but that will be that's being passed on to developer who then will pass it on to the HOA.

And then lastly, the landscaping license, which is that buffered area.

and that will also include rather long-term maintenance.

Thank you.

Board, we'll go through our order.

In general, thank you for the presentation and I'm supportive.

In general, I'm very supportive of connectivity.

That's what we have said we want to do in this county is to move people around different ways.

Help me understand a little bit better.

My red flag always goes up when we talk about turning something over to an HLA.

just because I've had real issues in my district about HLAs letting things fall between the cracks over the years, just being really honest about it and then coming back to the county and saying you have to help us, right?

And then communities being in uproars.

So, Frank, so,

People in the HOA will know about this.

Sure.

So the license agreements will be signed by the developer.

And as part of the turnover process,

from the developer to the HOA for stormwater management facilities we meet with the future HOA board or their representative to explain the responsibilities for maintenance moving forward.

That occurs on every project that's built by developers because the county does not maintain private facilities.

This could be deemed as being a public facility because it's serving a public roadway.

The Board could change their mind later on because these are revocable licenses to take over maintenance in the future.

Yeah, there have been questions about this one for that particular purpose early on about maintenance of stormwater facilities.

This is where we landed.

Thank you.

Yeah, I don't.

Thank you, Frank.

This isn't relative to this item today, but it had recently come up.

It mentions it in the executive summary, the connection of Ashwood eventually to Berkmar.

I don't think there's any movement on that.

That requires the development across the road.

I'm reminded of that because of a constituent question, but that's something I don't even need a response now to.

It's just if there's any

I don't think there's any plans in the work, but it says our comp plan calls for that connection.

So I'm just curious what that means.

And then just to clarify, I did say signalize.

You were talking that Ashwood and Polo Grounds are signalized at 29, right?

Just the way that it worded there.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you.

The question I have, all the others have been answered, but for the maintenance of the stormwater feature, will there be written timetables for what needs to be done on a regular basis?

So that'll be part of the conversation you have with the HOA people eventually.

There are guidelines and the regulations for that, and it'll be on the plans that get approved.

Okay.

It will be on the plans.

Oh, okay.

All right.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Also, I have no additional questions.

Court, I believe there's resolution motions here to be considered.

We have a motion from Supervisor Gallaway, a second from Supervisor McKeel.

Ms.

Mallek, Ms.

This brings us to recess for 15 minutes.

We're a little bit behind, but we'll take the full 15 minutes, but come back promptly and start into our work session on AC 44.

Welcome back, everyone.

We are now moving on to our work session.

AC44, Work Session, Draft Goals and Objectives for the Rural Area Land Use and Transportation and Development Areas Land Use and Transportation, and we are led by Victoria Canalopoulos, our Principal Planner.

Welcome, Ms.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the board.

My name is Tori Kenilopoulos, Principal Planner in the Community Development Department, also joined by a number of my colleagues this afternoon to help answer questions as needed.

And today we have a work session on two of the comprehensive plan chapters for goals and objectives for the rural area and the development areas.

So we will start with a brief overview of where we are in the AC44 process, how we drafted goals and objectives, and the purpose of today's work session.

Then we will move to board discussion for each chapter, and I will share a quick overview of each chapter and a summary of the Planning Commission's feedback, and then pause for board discussion and questions for each topic.

We should have about 50 minutes for discussion for each, and then wrap up with next steps.

There are eight plan chapters, each of which have goals, objectives, and actions.

Goals are where we want to go.

Objectives are outcomes or targets to help us get there.

And the actions are the steps to make the plan happen.

We are wrapping up goals and objectives with phase two, and then we'll kick off phase three later next month, which we'll start with sharing draft action steps and then move into big moves, which are plan priorities, and that will also include sharing metrics to measure success.

So there are three steps during Phase 2.

In the first step, we heard community priorities by plan chapter and that provided a really strong base for drafting plan recommendations.

And then in the second step, we heard input on planning toolkits for coordinated land use and transportation.

So that included activity centers,

and so on.

Developing a process for potential future development areas expansion, rural crossroads communities and rural interstate interchanges.

And I'll talk a little bit more about the direction that we heard from the commission and board on those topics.

And then in the 3rd step, we have been sharing draft goals and objectives by each plan chapter.

So during phase 2, we've had a variety of opportunities for community input, including online questionnaires, pop-ups, open

and then meetings with our other county committees including the Economic Development Authority, Natural Heritage Committee, Architectural Review Board, Historic Preservation Committee and the Solid Waste Alternatives Advisory Committee.

Goals and objectives are drafted through an iterative and collaborative process by an interdisciplinary team of county staff in coordination with partner agencies and departments.

This includes reviewing the current COMP plan, incorporating best practices, and using the AC44 framework.

Refinements and updates are made based on community, county committee, planning commission, and board input.

and as mentioned, the draft goals and objectives build on the community input we've heard throughout Phase 2, including on challenges, opportunities, priorities and the planning toolkits.

The next two slides summarize the direction that we heard previously from the Commission and Board on the four planning toolkit topics.

So we heard that we should update activity centers, locations, and place types throughout the development areas to encourage walkable and mixed use development and support the growth management policy, and also that we should prioritize efficient use of development areas land over potential expansion, including through redevelopment and encouraging mixed use centers.

and also to draft a process for how to evaluate and consider potential future development areas expansion if an expansion is found to be needed in the future.

Efficient use of development areas land is a topic we'll be asking for the board's direction on today.

We also heard that for the rural area, we should explore opportunities for small-scale and community-serving uses and services and opportunities for community resilience hubs.

And this is a topic that we will also be asking for the board's input on today.

We also heard to identify recommended land uses for Shadwell and Yancey Mills Rural Interstate Interchanges in the future through a future small area plan process, prioritizing a plan for the Shadwell interchange,

and the draft objective 4.2 notes that that includes exploring land uses that could support agriculture and silviculture industries.

So the purpose of the work session is based on the community input heard to date and the planning commission's feedback on these topics.

The purpose is for the board to give direction to staff on any changes or additions to the draft plan recommendations so that staff can proceed with drafting action steps.

The draft goals and objectives before the board today are the same draft recommendations that were shared through online questionnaires and with the planning commission.

Revisions will be made after today's meeting to incorporate feedback from the community, county committees, the planning commission and the board.

So we'll start with our first chapter which is rural area land use and transportation.

We wanted to highlight the rural area priorities that the team has heard throughout the COMP plan update process and that we are incorporating into the rural area chapter.

Many of these priorities are consistent with the current comprehensive plan with an overall emphasis on protecting the natural environment and having usable land for agriculture and forestry in the rural area.

We have also been hearing a need to consider appropriate and feasible small scale land uses in some areas.

and WALTIM model transportation for rural area community members as approximately 45% of the county's population lives in the rural area.

So we need the board's feedback on the land use and transportation topics where there is less consensus before moving into action steps.

and the rural area chapter is organized into the following land use and transportation goals and I would like to clarify a few of the land use goals to be more clear about how they would be implemented.

The third goal is focused on increasing community resilience and equitable access to services and resources in the rural area.

So this includes the concept of resilience hubs which can be publicly owned facilities or businesses or community organizations.

An example would be Yancey Community Center which has community programs and resources and could serve as an emergency shelter.

Resilience hubs in the rural area would primarily use existing buildings.

And the goal also includes the concept of crossroads communities which I will cover in more detail on the following slides.

The primary purpose of Goal 4 is to use proactive planning for areas where there is already by right non-rural area development potential or existing development based on existing zoning such as properties that are zoned, light industrial or highway commercial.

An implementation would primarily be done through future small area planning efforts for those areas.

and it could be that no changes are recommended.

I also wanted to specifically mention Objective 1.3 which is to develop and adopt a rural area land use plan that focuses on protecting and supporting working farms and forests, the natural environment, important areas identified in the Biodiversity Action Plan and rural landscape context for historic resources.

So I'm going to skip through the draft goals and objectives language since you all received those in your packets, but I'm happy to return to any of these if it's helpful to have the language on the screen.

The concept of crossroads communities is included in the 2015 comprehensive plan, but does not have significant guidance.

With AC44, the draft definition of crossroads communities

and so on.

We've heard significant community input on the need for healthcare, spaces for community gathering, and programs such as job training in the rural area.

We've also heard some interest in certain small-scale uses in rural communities such as small medical offices.

These communities are not development areas designated for economic development.

The purpose of identifying crossroads communities is to identify places with active businesses, services, and community spaces that provide good services and places to gather for surrounding community members to then set up a process for future engagement and planning for these communities.

No land use changes or by-ride zoning changes would be recommended during AC 44, and it's also possible that no land use changes would be desired through future engagement.

So this is an area that we are asking for the Board's direction on, which is how to proceed with providing more equitable service in the rural area while being consistent with the growth management policy and rural site constraints.

This summary of feedback from the Planning Commission and the specific questions for the Board are intended to highlight areas where we've heard less consensus and where we need specific direction from the Board before we move into Phase 3.

So we would appreciate the Board's feedback on any of the draft goals and objectives for this chapter and especially want to address the following questions.

At their most recent work session, the Planning Commission supported allowing additional small scale and community serving uses such as doctors or dentist's office and professional offices by special use permit in the rural area specifically in locations with existing businesses and services and prioritizing adaptive reuse of existing buildings.

and we would like the Board's direction on this recommendation.

And also, should we continue with the Crossroads Community Concept and identify specific communities with the COMP plan update to set up a process for future engagement?

So with that, I'll turn it over to the Board for discussion and questions and happy to return to any previous slides.

Thank you.

A lot there.

So we'll go through our order.

Supervisor McKeel.

LaPisto-Kirtley,

I am very supportive

The Crossroads Communities concept, there's been talk about a small area plan, and I'm assuming when you talk about further discussion or further involvement, that is what you're referencing as a small area plan.

And I think that's a great idea for going forward with the Crossroads community.

Concept.

I am in favor of them in theory, but the devil's always in the details, right?

And you want some, let's see, transportation,

You want all four bullets, right?

So let's talk about transportation in the rural area.

And I heard some bicycle and pedestrian transit, or I saw.

I'm just not sure exactly how that would play out

Realistically with our limited financial resources, and I'm not saying that there aren't some transportation priorities that we couldn't look at in ways, but realistically we're struggling in the development area for transportation alternatives and walking, biking,

I certainly understand the walking and the biking.

I'm not real sure.

So it could be, it could, you know, include recreational biking or, you know, walking either on rural roads or on trails that are, you know, built in the rural area, which can be private or public.

Some of them are more community built.

And I think some of the improvements could include, you know, looking at wider shoulders where feasible or if there's a project going on.

Because we have limited resources.

I mean, there's no doubt about that.

I will say when it comes to walking and biking I'm interested in people being able to get safely to places that they need to go like a grocery store or a doctor's office or that's where my focus is right now because of our limited resources.

I like the idea of trails

getting to that with public-private partnerships or private land and however we can make that work.

I thought VDOT had already agreed that as they were paving, certainly on Garth Road, as they've been paving those areas, they had agreed to extend the pavement and make the road as wide as possible within reason.

I thought that was already happening.

Exactly.

So I guess, let's talk about, I thought that was happening.

because Grunkarth Road is a great example.

You have a little shoulder on both sides, and then it just goes like this, right?

Thank you for the question, Supervisor McKeel.

I don't have great info for you on Garth Road specifically.

Within the parameters of the funding program that VDOT uses to do the paving, they might make the roadway as wide, the shoulder as wide as possible.

Yeah, because I thought that, and Garthory was just an example, but I thought that we already had that agreement, and I'd like confirmation of that, because in a way it makes sense.

That is an alternative way to get some extra width.

without having to go in and actually create another road on each side.

I appreciate it.

Oh, yeah.

Thank you.

And I missed that, Jim.

We just thought everybody knew you, Jessica.

No, we didn't.

The transit is a little bit harder.

I mean, there is no way that we can afford to put a robust transit system in 726 square miles, right?

We're working on transit right now, and I would suggest that something like a transit in the rural area eventually might be something that the transit authority might be able to look at and to figure out where are our priorities

and how are we, but the issue is how are we gonna pay for it, right?

But I think certainly we do have some transit, John is running some transit into the rural area now and I think it's important if we can do it, but I'm cautious about giving people the expectation that there could be the same robust transit system in the rural area that there is in the development area.

I probably have more to say on that, but I'll stop.

I really like the idea of resilience hubs and to me the utilities, wildfire risk, that goes with our concern around climate change.

there's no doubt about that and so certainly I would be very much in favor of working through those issues.

Addressing failing septic systems is really near and dear to my heart.

We have in the rural area right on the edge of the development area failing septic systems that are polluting our groundwater.

and folks cannot afford to do anything.

We've got to get to this.

If you want to clean up your waterways, one of the best ways we know of now is to make sure that you don't have failing septic systems.

So I'll just let that go for now and let other people have a chance.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I guess I'll go through how to attack this.

Allow, I'll just do the panel first that you have there so I make sure I address it.

I'm fine with allowing number one by special use permit.

I think this is in a way where the special use permit is actually a good process because then we can take the site, the specific nature, the specific impacts, and the specific community input on it and make a decision based on that.

and it then also requires an applicant of some sort bringing it forward.

And if an applicant's bringing it forward, then there's probably some sense of a demand or a need for it in that area, otherwise they would not be proposing it for that area.

So I think this is actually a good process for this type of consideration.

The crossroads communities item

I mean, I have some thoughts on this, which really, basically, to sum it up, leaves it in the hands of the people that live in those areas.

Crossroad communities came to be because of who lives there, what was put there, what was needed, how it was built, how it was used, was all developed through that.

I don't know that I'm ready to say that I'm wanting to go build community centers.

It doesn't seem like that was in here, but that's one option.

Like, does the county take on building a community center in a crossroad community versus partnering somewhere where it needs to be?

I see bullet one as how you get the things into the crossroad communities that are needed.

You know, Yancey, what's going on at Yancey would not be happening if

not for the school division's decision to shut down that school.

So we wouldn't be going out there and putting all the things out there if that school, if the school was still open, there may be some of the services there.

But if that school didn't exist, period, we wouldn't be doing any of that out there, but for the space and the building being there.

So that to me shows like, well, since there is an idea in these other crossroad communities, there could be buildings or something that somebody owns that they want to reach out and partner with us on to provide some public services.

But then it gets stimulated again, just like number one, or bullet one, from the community, from maybe what the local demand is.

I feel like we should somehow provide

Places for folks to go and powers out, especially during either extreme heat or extreme cold times.

Whether or not those have to be in the crossroad communities, I don't know, but they're definitely, this county has a responsibility to provide that.

If we open up our schools, the schools seem to be a way to do that, any fire stations if they have capacity.

So relative to the concept and identify specific communities, I hate to say it, but I'm kind of on the fence here because of I don't want to relinquish the control and the nature of what created the crossword community to begin with, which is the local community deciding what to put in that community and private, the private market determining what goes there, if that makes sense.

Sometimes I almost feel like us trying to

Do something with the concept and identify specific communities.

Is government trying to put a stamp and a definition and put it and get in the way a little bit than what could just be naturally occurring?

So those are my, that's my feedback on that.

I don't know if that was so much direction as commentary.

Transportation funding prioritization consistent with growth management policy while also exploring ways to make walking, biking, and transit safer and more equitable in the rural area.

I guess to the current state of today.

I guess compared to the opportunities that are available today.

So making sure there's more access, but recognizing the difference between the development areas and the rural area.

Well then, consistent with

There's no way.

There are folks at one point at a town hall meeting, I remember, maybe year one, and had me join her in an Earleysville meeting, and somebody wanted us to put bike lanes along Earleysville Road, and I said no.

The cost to put bike lanes out Earleysville Road compared to all the other transportation projects we have to do would have been crazy.

Now I appreciate that bikers want to use Earleysville Road, and I'm not against bikers using Earleysville Road.

But there's a lot of other things on our 100 plus transportation priorities list that are going to be before a project of that magnitude and cost.

not to mention just getting the private people's access from domain.

So if this is more about providing places for them to go to bike and walk or what the public tells us they're already using, meaning keeping gravel roads gravel and not turning them into paved because it keeps them safe for walking and some biking, I'm okay with that as an approach.

But transportation funding prioritization

I think needs to be determined.

And I feel like you've got it laid out in there, how we go about determining where the projects go.

But I don't think the rationale is necessarily different for the development area or the rural area.

If we have a need, and we have safety issues, and we have congestion issues, and it's defined, then it's probably on our transportation priorities list for funding, and then we just have to determine where it ranks relative to everything else.

So I don't know that there needs to be

anything more than what you've maybe already got laid out in the comp plan for that.

Now, transit safer, you know, transit, it seems like part of what is considered for transit in the rural area rightfully and justifiably so, or for the folks that live in the rural area.

and we think of, well, if I live in the rural area and I have to transit into the development area, then how is that possible?

But we often don't talk about the reverse.

So for people that live in the development area that do not have any parks in the development area, that want to go out and enjoy the rural area, the only real way for them to do that is by car, which then creates the impacts the folks that live in the rural area don't want

but if we're going to put everybody living in the development area and keep most of the predominance of our county in rural area for good reason, then we also have to think about how do we allow people that don't live in the rural area the opportunity to enjoy the rural area without it just being a drive-by.

And I don't know how to get at that.

the authority may be able to work on that.

I know rural transit and if we can get going on the authority is going to do a rural transit needs analysis.

But I don't see transit in the rural area is just moving the folks around in the rural area, just like I don't think of the development area and transit is just moving development area folks around the development area.

So there's some crossover here.

If we're going to put the onus of density and the issues that come with great density in the development area, you know,

I've heard in comments and in emails that we've received that we've got to be as efficient as possible with the development area.

Well there's people living there and there's a quality of life that competes against efficiency and that's something that we have to take into account and this has nothing to do with expanding the development area or growth area.

or expanding that.

This is just simply, we all are residents of the county.

Some people choose to live in the development area, some choose to live out in the rural area, but the county is there, the public benefits of the whole county need to be accessible by everybody and then we have to think about how to do that.

If transit, we could figure out how to get the density.

I mean, I went

to wear one of the breweries in Nelson County or distilleries in Nelson County and saw the traffic going out there on a Saturday.

And I mean, good grief.

No wonder there's a roundabout out there and there are big projects.

But if there was an alternative way for folks to go out there, especially since it's a distillery or a brewery and they don't have to drive their butt back, then that would probably be beneficial in a lot of ways, including the impact.

So that's a lot of commentary.

I just, I don't know the solution to that, but that's one that if we're thinking of transit in that way, then we're good to go, because otherwise transit, I think we're getting, starting to get after some stuff, even though people question like parking rides and things like that, those are ways for people to get to the main corridors and then move without necessarily having to drive the whole way.

I think I've already talked on the resilience hubs.

You know, when I think of the folks in Rio District out in Earleysville, when things go, you know, there is a different expectation level, especially for people that have lived here a long time, for what services are available to them.

So I think a lot about them when we're having this conversation, and having a place to go when it heats out, or waters down, or powers out, is an important piece.

and restoration of those items where it's most difficult in the rural area.

So when power lines go down, getting them back online faster, those are the things that tend to come to the surface.

I'm sure Ann will speak more to it.

So I think I've addressed those panels.

My other questions I think full on, and I've already talked to a few people, I think myself included,

and I appreciate that the PEC and others have sent us information on this.

But at the end of the day, just what the authoritative or the final report is of our agricultural activity, how it breaks out and what it is and what it means is something that I don't know who the expert is.

So if there's an expert out there, then if it's the PEC, then they can say we're the expert on this.

but looking at the census data and trying to decipher that, understanding like the comments today about the importance of hay versus if it's a different type of agricultural production.

We have things stated in our goal, like 2.1 is, am I on the right?

That's transportation.

2.1 under rural land use.

or Gold Two is we'll have a strong agricultural and civil culture economy in the rural area and then two, one is focus the county's economic development efforts on supporting local production and value-edited processing of agricultural, civil cultural products and on small scale outdoor recreation uses and private access to nature.

As soon as I read that I said, how are we doing?

What's the program evaluation of that?

And I don't know the answer to that.

in the past session when we went through AC44 stuff, you were asking for are these the right goals or are these the right objectives?

I don't know if this is the right objective because I don't know how we're doing.

And economic development in this county is so young.

I know what projects we've worked on that would be in the rural area versus development area.

But I need a baseline, like a sense of where we're at.

So I have reached out to folks to say, okay, you know, but we have a reputation in this county for it being, you know, that land and land use isn't really farming and it's, you know, the cutting of the hay comment that was made earlier.

I mean, that's a reputation.

And if that's the case and it's not accurate, what's that?

People say that all the time.

We're just giving away tax credits to landowners and there's not really farming there and it's not really agricultural.

I'm not agreeing with it.

I'm just telling you what the perception is.

I hear it all the time, especially from residents that have moved here in the last 10 years, which that in and of itself is probably programmatic.

So if it's not accurate, then it's probably contingent on us to figure it out what the facts are and do a better job of educating the public on it.

of

Well, at the Planning Commission, a commissioner, well, I mean, come on, I know who it is and what's going on and what was said.

So if we all need to learn a little bit more, then we need to.

Then that's okay.

We continue on as to go do it, not just live like in platitudes or false statements.

So the nature of us being working farms,

It's what we're producing, where it's being produced, what the output is.

Is it being realized locally or are the outputs going somewhere else?

Just like we evaluate every other economic development activity in the county, it's something that I think we just need to have a better gras spot.

Under transportation, rural area transportation, 2.4 and 1.4 seem to have some inherent conflict to it.

In one goal or objective, we're talking about the movement of goods.

In another, we're talking about putting through-truck restrictions in because communities don't want the truck traffic.

While the movement of goods is happening on the truck traffic, I'm calling this out not saying I'm in favor of one or the other.

I voted for the through-truck restrictions.

if it's the comp plan and it's rising to that level, objectives, if there is inherent conflict within them, maybe we should address that before we set them up to be some failure.

Is the movement of goods more important or is the through truck restriction more important?

That's not a great, that's not a fair comparison because the movement of the trucks in alternative routes than what they're necessarily taking doesn't necessarily mean that's bad, just like when we put it through Batesville.

The trucks have a more reasonable way to route around that's not really disrupted.

Well, that was my opinion.

So the movement of goods was not disrupted.

But I don't, anytime I see one objective or goal,

that's kind of set up in competition against another one.

I think that's worthy of some further looking at and going, well, wait a minute, let's not set ourselves up for now we're dealing with the movement, we're devaluing one over the other in given situations, because then both can claim the comp plan as evidence as to why we should be on their side.

And that, you know,

when we have land use applications that come before us and the applicants are claiming the comp plan for why we should vote for it and the residents are claiming the comp plan for why we should vote against it?

Well, what?

That's where, in the bigger picture, I'd like a lot of that stuff, hopefully we'll get cleaned up, but that's just an instance of it.

I think I've made

made the other comments that I'm going to make.

But overall, following the lead of the last time, when I go through your chapter here for land use and then rural area transportation, relatively speaking, I did not feel like that there were any goals here that I was dissatisfied with the statement of the goal.

nor did I feel like that there were any objectives missing.

I'm gonna give the overarching caveat that I did the last time, the devil's in the details and the action steps.

So anything in here that, and there's a lot of them, I wasn't gonna go through them again like I did last time, but there are still places where it's like, well, it depends on what we're saying, how are we going to achieve that or what we're going to do versus just being a wish for or a hope for.

Thank you.

Okay, well, I apologize in advance because I've spent way too many hours making lists and now I'm totally confused all over again because of the speed with which we started.

So, I will go back through your presentation and start there just to address the things that you brought up the most.

But, oh, here we go.

Okay.

So,

Do you zoom through the growth management policy?

Okay, so it's coming up again later when maybe I'll be better organized.

Okay, then I'll leave that page for now.

The land use issues,

Get back here where I started.

As has already been said, it depends because a large fuel station and convenience center is different than an artist and furniture maker as far as its impact, its ability.

So I will, somewhere down here, I will use Earleysville as an example.

which we all thought was a crossroads community for 20 years, but it seems to be not on the list anymore, but that's okay, I don't care.

Five churches, post office, doctor's office, which went out of business due to lack of interest.

Two auto repair shops, a thrift store.

A, its grocery store went out of business when the bridge in Advance Mills was closed and all the Green County people had to find another way.

And then Harris-Teter opened at Holyneed and that was the end of the grocery store.

The reason I give that example is because I'm very concerned when I see long lists of wishes and wants that seem to indicate that people really don't have any idea about what life is like in the country and how

People who live in the country do not expect to have everything on their doorstep.

So I think I would hope that our comprehensive plan would not be making promises about all sorts of different things that are very little chance of ever coming true.

And jumping ahead to the transit idea,

Bike Transit and Pedestrian Protecting the gravel roads is the way we solve those issues.

And we can't even provide transit for the growth area.

So there's absolutely no way I'm going to support doing anything organized out in the rural area.

We have had John picking up people who cannot drive for any number of reasons to take them to work and stopping at Chestnut Grove for the park and ride there for 25 years.

and so on.

there's huge criticism when people see a bus of any sort going by with only two or three people on it and the schools are always getting yelled at for that and I'm always explaining the bus starts in Bacon Hollow and comes all the way to school and by the time it gets to school it's full of people but you can't start in the country and have it full right away so anyway these are the kinds of things that set people off

I don't foresee us building trails along any of the roadways in the White Hall District except for the separated that the three-notch has a possibility because it will not be on the roadway.

But I don't see, for safety, it's not safe for people to be riding even in a bicycle lane on 250 when people are going 25 or 55 miles an hour.

So that's something I'm totally disorganized here.

From 2002 on, there has been a plan from the chart plan and the long-range transportation plan about working on shoulders everywhere they can.

So that's nothing new there.

We don't need to start reinvent that wheel.

Grants to repair septic tanks are available all the time through Virginia Department of Health.

They are always trying to get people in to reach out to them to get cost shares, total cost coverage for people of limited means to get these things done.

We can certainly use our county effort to help people become informed of that.

Okay, let's see.

Small scale.

There's no sewer and water.

That needs to be the number one thing governing anything that is considered in the rural area.

For resilience hubs, I love the idea.

And certainly when the derecho happened, there were many

most of the seniors, particularly the highly vulnerable seniors, would not go to Albemarle High School 25 miles away from their house where their animals were for seven days, even though it was 99 degrees for seven days straight and there was no power.

So anything we can do, and we talked at the After Action Report from the derecho about

in limited ways improving some of the facilities at some of our existing structures such as firehouses where there could have places for people to come and get a shower that does not interfere with the operation of the firehouse.

The firehouses did a great job of having their dump tanks out there so people could get water for their animals, take them home, water them that way for people who had already fenced out their streams or never had streams and relied on well water for their

Livestock, which many, many do.

So, working with our existing churches, working with our existing school buildings and firehouses, I would hope that our language and the comp plan would focus on those existing uses, unless inviting new stuff.

Because you may have heard, maybe not.

I hear nothing but so far.

Leave us alone.

get the speeders to slow down and leave us alone.

In 2015, when Elaine Eccles was working on the last revision, we had a big meeting in the White Hall Village and tried to collect ideas from people about things that, that was sort of the first adventure on the, looking at crossroads communities back then.

And people came to the meeting and said, no, you know, we don't want any of this stuff.

just, we don't want it.

Leave us alone.

So nothing has changed that I have heard.

I've heard general misery from many of the little villages in the White Hall district about, they're very, very concerned about what is going to be dropped on them from above.

And so I'm reluctant to, I want to try to calm those things.

2.1, someone mentioned that.

the support for the Ag and Forestal things.

Those are meat processing plants, lumber yards, those kinds of things.

We certainly, there is now one at Teledyne right next to the airport.

It was a highly technical manufacturing contractor for Norfolk Grumman and the Navy and now it has big piles of lumber out there and a sawmill and that kind of thing.

but I don't know what the county is doing or should do to do that unless it's some kind of grant support or whatever for state grants that might come down.

I don't see any other agricultural economic development as being an option.

It's the thing of reducing restrictions perhaps is less fewer process points if there are any might be helpful.

the really a transit that, yes, the total conflict of the movement of goods versus protection of the safety of rural residents.

I have issues with for the safety of rural residents for wineries and breweries already because of the roads are 12 feet wide and there are trees right at the edge.

And even for people who drive them all the time, they're considered very, very dangerous.

And for visitors coming, it is always a risk.

In the old days it was milk trucks and wide tractors and a timber trailer with big logs on it.

And now we are seeing, unfortunately, 18 wheelers without a state driver bringing something from the Walmart distribution center over in the valley to somewhere in Maryland.

And somehow they end up on 810 or on Free Union Road and they don't know how they got there and they don't know how to get out.

And it creates a lot of problems for emergency services as well when these people get stuck on the corners.

that's a little bit outside of your but I guess taking these illusions of transportation things that we can't possibly achieve out of the comp plan would be my preference and now I'm going to go back up my list because I know there are a lot of things I forgot and I

I could do better if I can get this presentation and then go home and annotate it and send stuff back.

I'm having a hard time keeping up with the questions here.

I've talked about that.

Okay, talked about that, talked about that.

Equitable.

Are we talking about vulnerable people or are we talking about growth area versus rural area?

because I do not think there is a need for equitability between the growth area and the rural area.

We've established that.

This is services.

So if there are programs which need to help vulnerable people get to services, that to me is different than the other category.

And I don't know what the answer is on that, but you can help us understand that at some time in the future.

The legacy

Somewhere in here, and I don't know if you've gotten to it or not, there was a referral to increasing sewer and water in places where there was legacy commercial or something and I'm going, oh no, I'm not in favor of that.

We have ways to deal with that and with the managing our water, public water is incredibly important and we have to just not keep having this

Blading Out of Demand, 1.3 rural use, land use.

Did this mean mapping of

Okay, so this is, alright, so segregating out the different uses.

Just to put on your list, many people over the years have bemoaned the fact that Albemarle no longer has agricultural zoning, which it did up until the 80s and then it was all put into RA.

And what that meant was that then it became a residential almost de facto despite tremendous protests from people in the rural area that said the rural, the first use, the primary use should be agriculture and forestry.

not ag and forestry and residential and little commercial uses or whatever.

A more subscribed description avoids a lot of conflict and a lot of demand for extra expense that we cannot supply.

In the area of

Small Scale Services, okay.

The future small area plan for Yancy Mills.

In 2015, there is a big paragraph about agricultural support uses that's already been written, and so I don't think we need to redo that either.

So I'm just trying, I guess the question I asked many months ago is, what has been removed?

And that's because I hope, I know that it's probably not,

and so on.

It's feasible to have a red-lined version, but that's really what I'm looking for, is what in the current comp plan are we just dropping all together?

What has been decided before it gets to us about what's not going to be offered?

So that's a challenge I will leave with you for another day.

Gasset, but I know that they're whole.

Let me just make sure about this.

Updating permitted use categories in the rural area zoning district.

And it says, to better reflect the goals of the chapter.

Can you help me understand what that means?

Good afternoon.

I'm Scott Clark.

I'm the conservation program manager in community development.

The intention of that objective was to have us do a bit of a cleanup of the lists of uses that are permitted either by right or by special use permit in the rural areas zoning district.

So for example, if you want to support

local sales and processing of agricultural goods.

And some of those uses are allowed by special use permit.

You want to make them by right.

I mean, we did something similar several years ago, if I remember correctly, with farm stands or farms.

But they were by special use permit.

We made those by right.

That was that same intention was to clean that up.

Also, there's been a lot of change in the area of event uses over the years.

We originally added the special events category, which is a very general category for events in the rural areas.

Since then, we've added a lot of specific uses for agricultural operations in their events, wineries, breweries, and distilleries in their events.

So those are all directly supporting

Ag Industries that we want to support, whereas that general category of special events maybe doesn't, and we might consider focusing that more on what I think was the original intent back in the early 2000s, which was to have special events be about supporting historic sites, listed historic structures.

Okay.

Yeah, I think that, okay, I would look forward to seeing more, and I don't know if it's possible, but I would really appreciate and benefit from seeing the materials as they evolve because that helps me understand I'm not good at looking at something in three seconds and then being able to respond very well.

So I would love to have it be able to be dribbled out so that we can at least read stuff, knowing that it's all in flux and knowing it's going to change.

That would be helpful.

On page 25 it says, county's legacy of valuing its natural historical cultural resources should support a thriving rural economy.

That to me is a huge problem.

It means that none of those things are any good unless it makes money.

And I disagree 1,000% with that.

So I just wanted to point that out that these are things that have value on their own.

and should not be subserved, I mean, for other values in addition, but also should not be subserved to just an economic development issue.

And did that, did that.

Recap of engagement, okay, page.

So 24, the things I had access by, more services in the rural area.

Explorer land uses that meet our climate action goals such as regenerative agriculture and solar.

What about separating out having some elements more important than others is a problem because it all has to work together in order for the rural area to function at all.

And so as uses fit in with... I just don't know quite how the climate action one is overriding

and so on.

protecting the natural exercise loops that exist now and perhaps enhancing small places to park along the way, which most private landowners have taken care of smoothing a little place for people to park in order to be able to walk or run on Ridge Road, for example.

We have huge problems with people just parking right in the road.

And then people with a trailer full of livestock to go to market can't get out of their own.

Street because of the cars parked on both sides.

So that's something that we need to think about when we have the opportunity to do that.

On page 22, it says some rural roads may qualify for traffic calming programs, and this is supposed to residents should do all these things.

We have a terrible time accomplishing those things.

So that's another situation where I'm not sure that's wise to put in the comp plan because

it raises people's expectations when I haven't been able to achieve traffic coming on Park Ridge where people are running over cats and having real safety problems as it is.

So that was just something else I marked there.

This is, I guess I will stop and do a better job later.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You know the slide I wanted to be back on.

Thank you.

I want to just start by saying I appreciate the presentation.

And also, I generally like the direction that the rural area chapter is going, right?

It's one that kind of the thing I keep bringing up is I think it's important that we think of the rural area as a place with real texture, right?

Is a place with a diversity of actual uses, a diversity of ways of living, and actual diverse economic activity that goes on there.

not just, you know, the blank alternate that I think we sometimes think of it as by default.

And I think this plan really leans into that.

I also want to begin just my comments with like a brief framing thought.

We bandy about the phrase equity a lot both within this document and I would say generally within comprehensive planning without what feels like a very clear understanding of what that framework looks like and how we analyze individual objectives and activities.

and to me like the basics of an equity framework is you think about who is benefiting from a decision, who is being disadvantaged by a decision and also who is being not included in a decision or an action.

That is like the first set of questions you have to ask yourself and a thing that sometimes frustrates me when we talk about the rural area and we specifically talk about preserving

and so on and so forth.

I think it's important to remember that most of those are not truly public.

And that's something that I think we need to think about, right?

If I live in my, and that's even true to people in the rural area, if I live off 20 on my 2 acre parcel with my home that is

Witness, Grand Views.

I cannot explore the rustic rural community because I have a fast-moving and dangerous road that is the only way I can get out of my own home, and it does not connect to anything.

There are not methods of enjoyment.

So I want to begin by just saying I think it's important that we highlight and uplift elements of the draft that focus on placemaking.

And with that, I want to go into kind of what you're talking about here.

I am broadly in favor of the addition of very small-scale and need-driven special uses.

I think I might be in some agreement with some of my peers in that this seems to be fusing a lot of what we're thinking about the possible direction that crossroad communities can be going, things that are also going to be need-driven and community-driven.

and so on.

and us funding possible services that might be needed there if they are clustered.

So I'm wondering if we do want to constrain option one to a geographic footprint.

I'm not saying we should, but I'm wondering if that is maybe something that would be prudent.

I'm leaving that as an open-ended question because I recognize that we also don't want to be over-prescriptive as Supervisor Mallek was mentioning when we become over-prescriptive about necessary uses.

in a area that does not always have the population to support a lot of uses, we can end up really biting our own eye.

So that addresses those first two.

I would agree, right, like generally speaking there are trans, we do not have enough transit in the areas where we have abundant and dense population.

I live off of Fifth and Avon.

That is an incredibly dense community that does not have a reliable bus service.

I get my car repaired two miles away from where I live and I can't get home without calling an Uber, which is insane.

So I do think it's important that we think about how that kind of balancing works.

That being said, if we take out the phrase transportation funding, I think there's also a lot that people have said that they do agree on.

So I recognize that every supervisor has said that we generally don't agree with this and then has listed a variety of different ways that we do want to support walking, biking, and transit.

something that comes to mind, right?

Talking about placemaking.

A place in the rural area, as someone who does not currently live in the rural area that I frequently visit and enjoy is the Dickwoods Road Miller School Parking Lot area is a very popular cross-country track.

That is placemaking, using a rural rustic and a specific parking lot designation that is enjoyed by a tremendously large amount of our community.

Something that also leaps out to me with this very specific example

is that at one point you have to go about a mile up Ortman Road, which is very fast, has no curb or shoulder, and exposes you as you go over hills with blind spots.

I think there are probably strategies and cost-efficient strategies when we think about how we're deploying place-making, how we're making rural areas accessible to the public.

and part of, you know, the public heritage through, again, a public amenity, right, a rural rustic that people are running on, how we can also employ walking and biking strategies to make things that aren't rural rustics maybe more accessible.

I'm not saying that that means we need a crosswalk down Orkman.

I recognize that's extraordinarily expensive, but I do wonder if just as we

and so on.

It's probably not a shock that I support the idea of community resilient tubs.

And again, just drawing point one, two, and four together.

And again, this through line of place making.

I think it's important to think about how we're actually expecting people to live in the rural area.

My partner and I are getting married soon, and we are looking at possibly moving in the near future.

We have talked about living in Keene because that stays in my district, parts of it, and would be a place where we could have a lot more space.

I'm someone who works from home, will work from home, and we are a young family, and I wonder, oh, as a person working from home,

where is my third place in Keene?

And boy howdy if that is not the biggest negative in my decision about where I might want to live.

I think it is important that we think about this in that context.

Do we want to make places that young families feel like they can live?

Do we have places where people can take their young kids on a Saturday afternoon or at lunch?

I don't know that we always have that in all parts of the rural community, and I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that, which is why I do like that when you list in the Crossroad community concept, you do emphasize things I think are sometimes seen as hostile, and that is restaurants.

and other types of uses.

in the rural area.

Again, I think this has to be, of course, community-driven.

I believe that small area plans and community feedback are going to be incredibly important on this, and I don't want to be imposing that, you know, scoops open up and down at the intersection of Keen, right?

That is not what I'm saying.

But I do think it's important that we recognize the value of this for placemaking, value of this for families, the value of this for having a third place for people who only have their two acres and the road immediately adjacent to it to live on.

I also do have a few pieces of comment that's more particular.

First off, with this first thing before we move on from it, I do want to see just how granular that we can get on what we mean by professional offices.

And if there's some things that we're going to prohibit outright, I'm always thinking, what is the sinister economic thing that could happen here?

I don't know that I want a payday lending company to plop a building in porters the moment it gets designated as a special use or that special uses start operating or that it becomes a crossroad community if that's the direction it wants to go.

So I do want to make sure we're being thoughtful about what kind of actual offices that is even including.

If we can go to 3.1 under the land use section, or 3, rather?

This is going to be important, so I want to highlight 3.1 because we talk about how when we're locating community resilience areas, and as I've alluded, I think it's prudent to think of those as co-located potentially with other types of uses because I think that placemaking development is important.

I do worry that

I agree with the idea of using the social vulnerability index.

I am concerned that a census tract is just not granular enough.

I realize that's often one of the most granular things, but like there's a wide range of communities that are going to be occupying a single census tract.

And we can't, like there are two rural census tracts in my own district.

And that does not let me get granular about the different kinds of community to see the levels of distress comparatively.

I recognize that census tracts are also a very small level of granularity.

I'm not sure that we have something better from the census, but I guess I would challenge staff to see if we can figure out a more granular and refined way to actually do social vulnerability identification because I don't think this actually would get to what we're trying to accomplish here because it's going to blend a lot of communities together in a way that's not really readable and legible.

if I can go to 3 under transit.

So here we use my favorite word again, placemaking.

It is also not clear if this concept is supposed to be limited to crossroad communities and here we have crossroad communities in lower case rather than tidal case.

I'm never sure if that's supposed to mean something.

But again, I think the idea of place making should extend beyond crossword communities.

I think it should be something that is in the back of our mind when we're using planning strategies in the rural area.

Like, how is this going to be used?

Who is this going to be used by?

So I guess I'm curious how this is actually going to be articulated and what I should take this to mean because it's not entirely clear.

I also do want to just

Uplift, something maybe controversial that leapt out to me in the community feedback.

And this is also something I heard at several AC44 town halls and just talking with members of my community.

And that is, I'm going to preface this with reminding everyone something that I think we've heard already today, which is currently, if I'm an investor, the highest and best use of any parcel in the rural area

is luxury residential.

That is what I'm going to use it for because that is what's going to make me the most money for my parcel.

And that is also what I think we all agree is least desirable.

We generally don't want to radically increase residential use of the rural area because of all the various climate impacts that can have.

And also we don't want to continue to increase our luxury real estate because frankly we have abundant luxury real estate and we are very much in a dearth of affordable real estate.

it is specifically highlighted to consider ways that there are opportunities to have pocket density based on the kinds of buildings that are allowable.

The comment here says residential village designations could expand or allow some housing infill without too much uncontrolled growth.

Consider multi units and live work units.

I think it is valuable for us to continue to have on the table and think about we already have

Byrite residential uses in the rural area, and they're the kind of residential uses we do not want.

Is there a way to legalize and make Byrite more affordable units and more affordable design types and patterns of living in the residential area?

I think there are, and I think they're challenging.

And again, this also all comes back to the underlying problem of utility service.

But I did not see this reflected in the existing chapter.

and I think it's important and I also recognize it's a hard nut to crack.

But if there are strategies that have been proven successful in other rural communities throughout the country of mitigating sprawl while still allowing patterns of development and patterns of construction that can result in more affordable home types, I would be interested to see that reflected here.

I believe

That is all I have.

Oh, I do have one more thing.

And I believe this has been alluded to previously, but I'll reiterate it.

We've hit on in previous chapters that some goals are measurable and actionable and trackable and some are not.

Here I'm not sure we actually have any objectives that I would describe as measurable and trackable.

That's concerning.

This is the first draft, so I understand why maybe you wouldn't.

I think a lot of these I can think of ways that they can be measured and tracked and they don't have those metrics attached to them.

And that would be something I think might be prudent moving forward.

Back to 22.

Thank you.

And forgive me if I repeat or I seem like I don't fully understand.

So I'm going to take these each and kind of look at them in the context of the draft goals and objectives.

So I'm looking at number one, allow additional small-scale and community-serving uses.

I guess the question that is big by this is that we already have a special use process but there are currently special uses that just you can't even propose in the rural area and so this is trying to open up which ones.

In order to sort of evaluate this it would be helpful to me to look at again and have in front of me

These are the ones that are currently allowed by a special use permit.

And these are the ones that just aren't allowed, period, that we might want to consider.

So if I looked at professional offices, Drs.

Dennis had said they're not allowed currently.

Yeah, I'm kind of for opening up the possibility that someone would propose to have a doctor's office in a rural area where it might not be currently allowed by a special use permit.

So, at the same time, I'm, you know, aware that, well, forgive me, but there was a hickory hill, I think it was, wanted to do a thrift shop, and that was not allowed because it was not a permitted use at that time, it's since moved on to something else, but it

It could have been a country store, but it couldn't be what was proposed.

And so that's the kind of flexibility it would be nice to have, but I wouldn't want to open up too much.

So it'd be nice to see what it is we're talking about in more detail.

Also, I guess in the same context, we've had a recent discussion about artisans and so I'm looking at this and saying is that you know at that point I think you know we were saying that there was a desire to make it so that you didn't even need to come to the special use permit but that you could have certain activities without a special use permit and so I guess that's part of this process of updating

Okay, going on to bullet two, I think we've all heard a lot of real angst about the idea of a crossroads community and what it means and the fact that one size doesn't fit all.

Clearly, it probably would have been less of a concern if we had labeled these right from the beginning as resiliency hubs in the rural area.

or something of that sort, because that is something that I feel like the ANSI does a great service to a local community, but I wouldn't necessarily want to expand services in a crossroad just because it is designated a crossroad.

at the very least this is one of those areas where people said well let's wait do like small area plans and try to figure it out place by place what it is that we would want to put into that area so while I've appreciated a lot of the conversation around Crossroads communities because I think I heard in Batesville for example

A lot of discussion about things that the community might find beneficial, but then they have to decide whether they want it there or whether it fits there.

But if we're talking about using existing structures for resiliency hubs and fall forward, this is something really important.

So, I guess that is, again, roll three in the list.

And to some extent, I'm going to preface all my comments by saying you've received a lot of feedback, not just from the Planning Commission, but from many groups of citizens representing

and many other different interests.

Most recently one of the ones I saw was from Southern Environmental Law Center and I don't think it's one that was as well digested by the Planning Commission because I think it came in very late and I'm not positive.

I really appreciate it with a lot of the points that it had to make and I appreciate a lot of the points that BEC had to make and the Natural Heritage Committee had to make.

and some of the speakers who had previously submitted comments to us.

And I hope none of those are lost in all this because, frankly, honestly, I've started to read through the 50 pages of Planning Commission minutes, but I didn't finish.

and I apologize for that.

So, bullet three, transportation funding prioritization.

I hear what people are saying, but when I looked at this, I thought, well, okay, we have, again, looking at goal one and two and three under transportation, we have rural rustic paving, which I hope we will be able to continue.

HBE74, which a Loudoun County champion which would allow some of those funds to be used to improve a rural road without necessarily paving it because there are places where these are just dangerous roads and there might be something that could be done.

And so seeking out funding for those things, as it's earmarked for those things like rural rustic road programs, I have no problem with it.

I'm not saying that we go into smart scales so that we can get a rural

Road fixed, but I don't want to throw out what we've already doing in terms of transportation funding.

I think also in this particular area there have been suggestions, for example, in improving rural area community members equitable access to walking bicycling opportunities, which was slide 19 I think, but it's okay.

One of the writers to us suggested an Objective 3.3, which has proactively worked with community organizations and others, representing walkers, runners, cyclists to identify safety issues and opportunities for improvement, and I thought, well,

Yeah, I mean, if you're talking, and I'm happy to go back to slide 22, but if you're talking about what we're going to do in the rural areas with respect to transportation, it would be nice to recognize that when we're talking about walking, biking, particularly that there are groups that are using these, and I think Supervisor Pruitt sort of identified that, that

Activity Centers, and so being able to help work with them on prioritizing projects I think would be beneficial.

But again, I agree that transit is not something that we can expand without having first covered the development areas appropriately.

I'm not necessarily taking away from John for services, for pickup.

in specific areas.

I think in the objectives here where it talks about the Social Vulnerability Index and county's overall score in communities that are more than five miles driving distance.

Five to five miles is kind of arbitrary.

There are some places where it could be a lot more than that before you really would expect that there's enough population to warrant something.

But I think

It's a big county and there's a lot of diversity in needs and uses around the county.

I don't know if that helps.

The last one, increasing community resilience.

Again, this, I'm definitely for that and recognize in my mind a lot of what we've been trying to really, what I really see as most beneficial in the crossroads community concept was recognizing community resilience hubs.

and making sure that those kind of resources are identified using existing structures and they're as places that can support people in times of extreme needs especially.

Again, I also have a lot of comments sort of on the different specific goals and objectives, but I'd rather just maybe when we get the slides as suggested by Supervisor Mallek, perhaps annotate them, a lot of my comments would reflect or reflective of comments previously submitted by other organizations, but I just haven't gotten a sense of whether they're

Fully Heard.

There are some that I think are important in their own right for discussion.

So we have objective 1.5, develop a location, citing policy for utility scale solar.

Yes, but we're going to have to have a bigger discussion specifically about solar ordinance and what will allow by right as well as what kind of procedures we need for those that wouldn't be allowed by right.

I will just call out, and I guess this would be around public slide 16 or so, that I agree with a lot of the comments made by people that this goal for feels like just something really odd about talking about, well, we're going to plan for unique locations where they're already non-conforming.

and I'm not sure that we're really wanting to encourage non-conforming uses.

Are we trying to, I'm not sure what this says exactly.

I'm really not sure whether it is it saying, well they're already there so we're going to make the best of it or are we going to try to, you know, I guess that really need help unpacking that.

and so on.

Thank you.

I will, like I said, want to give some more specific comments, but a lot of that is reflected in the comments that we have received and I support.

Just a couple of comments if that's okay, and I'll try and keep them brief.

I do agree, Ned talked about naturally occurring when we were talking about the Crossroads communities.

And in my head, that's where a small area plan allows that the neighbors and the community in a naturally occurring discussion, right, about what they have there and what they want and what they would like more of maybe or not have at all.

just thinking about it from that viewpoint.

The other thing that I would really like to suggest is that somehow or another we update the data.

The data in this document is old.

When we're talking about 2017 census, I mean it's just going to be really important to go back and update the data and I understand that's probably because

for example, the Department of Agriculture puts out every five years.

We can go on to the Department of Agriculture and look at agriculture in Albemarle County and agriculture in Augusta County.

They just updated theirs this year, but certainly a lot of the other data could be updated as well.

It's hard to look at something and say, well, you know, wonder what the current data says.

I will say that

When we talk about agriculture in Albemarle, a certain amount of it is agritourism, which is about grapes and vineyards, I'm just saying.

And it's very concerning that the current data shows that the average income of the farmer in Albemarle County has gone down

while in Augusta County it's gone up in the last four years.

Augusta County Farmers are making twice as much as they were five years ago and the Almar County Farmers are making twice as less.

That's not the right way to say it, but anyway, you know what I'm getting at.

That data is out there and we can look and see on the Department of Agriculture that

Cattle is down in Elmore County, the number of cattle.

I mean, what crops are being grown and how those crops are going down.

So the data is out there, and I think it behooves all of us to really understand that picture.

But we have to use current data to do it.

But it would really be a worthwhile exercise in presenting.

And maybe you all are working on that, Tori.

And you're not in your head, yes.

So I'll stop on that.

and I guess that's all I wanted to add.

Okay, because I had a lot on that and I didn't want to take up that time now.

So if there's nothing further, I think we have another.

One more topic for today and we are happy to have comments over email as well from board members, you know, more specifically kind of redlining or talking through the the draft goals and objectives.

So the second topic, development areas, land use and transportation.

So this chapter is organized into the following land use and transportation goals.

So the vision for the development area and planning for future growth, including the activity centers and multimodal plan, and then investing in existing neighborhoods, and then for transportation, having a multimodal transportation network, safety, quality of life, and then emerging technologies.

So once again, going to skip through the actual draft goals and objectives,

and then talk through a few specific components of this chapter and then share some specific questions for the board.

So there are several tools and maps that are used to guide development areas, land use and transportation along with the goals, objectives and actions.

As shown in the diagram, they are a series of land use and transportation layers.

They include the future land use designations, community design guidelines, activity centers and then also the multimodal plan.

The Future Land Use Designations are applied to each property in the development areas to provide a guiding vision for the future use of each property and they provide guidance during rezoning and special use permit review.

There are 10 draft development area-wide designations that we've shared through AC44 and in Phase 3 these would be applied to an updated Future Land Use Map for the development areas using a one-to-one matching approach.

and then the draft recommendation through AC44 to date is to calculate recommended density on gross density, which we'll also talk more about.

We also wanted to note there may be some changes made during AC44 to reflect existing development for the future land use map, such as redesignating a parcel for residential instead of industrial if there is already an existing apartment building.

or to reflect the intended future use of county-owned properties.

And it should also be noted that some master plans may have unique designations for specific areas that are not more broadly applied across the development areas.

That would include designations such as downtown Crozet and the Crozet master plan and neighborhood density low in the Crozet and Vilge of Rivanna master plans.

And so guidance for those unique areas would be found and remain in the master plans.

So with this updated set of future land use designations, we consolidated the mixed use designations and now have three total.

We also turned the table of designations into individual pages for each to provide more space, including some examples and hopefully allow for easier readability.

So moving on to calculating density, this is a topic that we are asking for the Board's direction on today.

The current recommendation, as mentioned, is to use gross density to calculate recommended density, which the Planning Commission also recommended during their February work session on the development areas.

When applications for rezoning or special use permits that include a residential component are reviewed,

They are evaluated in part based on the recommended density per the applicable master plan.

Density is calculated as residential dwelling units per acre.

One unit is one single family detached home, one single family attached home, one modular home, or one apartment.

Unit.

Recommended density is given as a range based on the future land use designation.

As an example, neighborhood residential is 3 to 6 units per acre.

Special use permits and rezonings are also reviewed based on other relevant recommendations in the COMP plan and master plan such as transportation, parks and trails, and anticipated impacts to public facilities and services.

So the two ways to calculate density are gross and net density.

and so on.

And that is the recommendation in the current comprehensive plan that's out

Density calculations are one factor that affects the type of housing and total number of units that are built with new development For example, using net density calculations for any property with environmental features will result in a lower number of recommended units as compared to using gross density There is not a similar calculation for non-residential uses

for by-right development, gross densities used for the zoning ordinance, and regardless of how density is calculated, ordinance requirements apply for protecting environmental features such as avoiding building in the flood plain.

There are also requirements for providing open and recreational space and necessary infrastructures such as roads, water sewer and storm water management, which also take up space on a site.

So even with gross density, there are a variety of infrastructure and open space needs that still need to fit within a site.

along with other strategies such as encouraging redevelopment and infill and identifying activity centers.

using gross density to calculate recommended density for rezoning and special use permits could be an option for prioritizing development in the existing development areas.

This approach could also make some smaller housing types more feasible, and using gross density would increase the recommended density for some properties in the development areas, that is any property with steep slopes, stream buffers, or floodplain.

It would leave recommendations for properties without those environmental features unchanged.

and it should be noted that land use density ranges are recommendations and the maximum recommended density is not always feasible.

Clustering development to avoid sensitive environmental features is always encouraged regardless of the recommended number of units.

And this is an example of a hypothetical property that has 5 acres in the floodplain and is 15 acres total.

If the property was zoned R6 and the owner wanted to develop the property by right, the gross density calculation would be 15 acres times 6 units, which would be 90 units.

If the property was instead zoned R1 and was designated neighborhood residential with 3 to 6 units per acre recommended density and the property owner wanted to rezone to allow for more units, the recommended density per the current comp plan would net out the 5 acres in the floodplain which would result in a recommended density of 10 acres times 6 units or 60 total units.

So along with the future land use recommendations designations, there are also community design guidelines which are an update to the neighborhood model principles in the current COMP plan.

They are intended to support the growth management policy by encouraging mixed use walkable and dense development throughout the development areas that is also connected with multimodal transportation and that has access to quality parks and open space.

They also provide guidance for rezoning and special use permit review and county facilities.

They are intended to apply to all development in the development areas, with some of the possible exceptions noted depending on the context of the site and the proposed uses.

For example, not every individual development is expected to be mixed use, though each development should contribute to a mix of uses throughout the larger area.

Activity Centers are locations where a higher intensity and density of uses is expected paired with supporting amenities and infrastructure.

This approach is intended to help guide and prioritize future projects and investments.

And these activity centers would replace the 50 centers currently identified in the five master plans.

The Multimodal Systems Plan, which also includes identifying activity centers, is new for Albemarle County and maps multimodal corridors and modal emphases to link activity centers and other key destinations.

It is implemented over time by both the private and public sector as funding and development opportunities become available.

The plan is intended to support improved coordination with VDOT on future projects and review of new development proposals.

We will be sharing updated multi-modal and center maps in Phase 3 along with the future land use map and we'll use community commission and board feedback to help inform updates to those maps.

And in December of last year we wanted to note we went to each of the community advisory committees and they provided their input on the draft centers and modal emphases.

so we are currently making edits to those based on that feedback and feedback from online questionnaires that includes adding park and rides and then collaborating with our parks department on more detailed greenways mapping so we'll be sharing those maps in the next phase.

This table summarizes the three draft types of activity centers.

They are intended to increase in scale from neighborhood up to destination center, but they should all be walkable in mixed use.

And we wanted to note that currently none of the county's long-range plans have a height recommendation that is taller than six stories, though there are multiple buildings that are eight or more stories that are already existing in the county.

So the draft recommendation for destination centers is eight stories to support the growth management policy and support building up instead of building out.

So this is the summary of feedback from the Planning Commission and the specific questions for the Board.

These are focused on using the development areas land effectively and prioritizing dense and mixed use development over potential development areas expansion.

So we would appreciate the Board's feedback on any of the draft goals and objectives for this chapter and especially want to address the following questions.

If the Board directs the project to use gross or net density as the recommendation in the COMP plan,

and also if the board supports recommending up to eight stories in destination centers.

So I'll turn it over to the board for questions and discussion.

Thank you.

We'll go through our order.

Okay.

At first blush, I would support using gross density.

Having said that,

We can support that, but we're still going to have the challenge of the neighbors pushing back against density.

If we're increasing density, we're going to have more pushback from the development area neighbors.

I mean, we recognize that.

That's not a question you can answer, and I understand that.

I'm just saying that.

I see that as

and what we probably need to do in the development area.

I'm happy to do it, but at some point it's going to have to come with an explanation to the citizens in those neighborhoods.

Or we're going to have to agree as a board, we're going to vote for what we want to see happen.

I'm just saying.

Building height, the only thing that saves me on the building height is it says up to.

and that would be clear, right?

Not every place is adopting parking maximums.

I have in my head been a supporter of reducing the current parking requirements.

That's what you're getting at here.

It's a little bit more detailed.

So reducing parking requirements would be allowing projects to have less parking requirements based on the type of business or service they're providing.

Adopting parking maximums is saying you cannot build more than X number of parking spaces.

Yeah, yeah, and with that caveat I could support that.

And considering incentives for structured parking in green infrastructure,

and so on.

I would be in favor of looking towards something like that, but I think people have to recognize at least my understanding is that's not going to, that amount of solar is, while it might be nice for those businesses using that parking lot to support their electric needs.

that's not going to add anything to the grid.

I mean, it's not like you're going to put solar over parking lots and then just say, okay, we've taken care of our problem with supporting the grid, right?

I mean, it's not scalable, I guess is what I'm saying.

We have to recognize that.

But I think, is that something we might be looking at in the future?

No, that's a better word for it.

Thank you.

You describe it better than I. But infrastructure needs to be to keep up with the catch of growth, alignment with capital improvement programs.

Infrastructure needs to keep up with growth.

That's going to be a challenge because VDOT is not going to support infrastructure with roads until a project is approved.

I mean, infrastructure follows growth.

Sure, and this was a comment from the Planning Commission also, something that we've heard from community members.

So that's partly why we're including it, but also recognizing that infrastructure a lot of times goes along with growth and is not necessarily ahead of it.

Yeah, so I have questions about that because you can build highways to know where.

and you can build schools that are half empty because people didn't choose to live there.

So I think it's counterintuitive for the community to understand, but we can't go out and support and build infrastructure ahead of the need and growth.

I mean, that's just a fact.

So I'm not... That last bullet I'm very suspicious of.

And for right now, since I went first, I'll stop.

Thank you.

Yes.

I think it's a draft recommendation.

No, I know it was there.

I'm just saying, did we know we were going to be answering that question?

No, I didn't.

I didn't ponder this question until today.

I'm not answering this question yet.

I don't know.

I appreciate it.

I'm not going to just off the cuff.

Supervisor McKeel did the same thing at first, kind of your first gut reaction, but I'm not ready to answer this question.

I need to go back and do, now that I know that that's a question you need direction on, I need to do a little bit more prep for that.

and you did a fine job going over it all.

I need to think this one through a little bit more based on what I don't feel like I need anything else.

I just feel like I've got what I need, but I didn't really give this a lot of thought walking into today.

So that's why I was asking if it was in there, because I was like, oh, shit, excuse me, I missed it.

Review, building height and form recommendations, building up instead of out.

I'm in support of this.

You know, I did go back and look, because I used to say eight for Rios Smarter Plan.

I was wrong.

It's up to seven stories with the bonus categories.

So even at the core of the Rio Small Area Plan, we're saying the maximum height was five, and then you could get up to seven with bonus categories.

And I was thinking it was six, up to eight.

If we're going to consider the height, the small area plan, which was designed to be a high density redevelopment, needs to already be re-concerned because we're going to put the eight in conflict with our own small area plan where we're saying we want the height.

I just said that last night, I was wrong.

So I'm okay with that.

I think there are areas appropriate in the development areas that can support and actually be fine with the height.