Planning Commission Meeting   8/24/2021

It'll tell us.

It is.

Good.

Yep.

Got it.

Yes, I've got it.

Good evening.

Welcome to the Planning Commission on August 24th at 2021.

This is an electronic meeting.

This meeting is being held pursuant to and in compliance with ordinance number 20-A.

16, an ordinance to ensure the continuity of government during the COVID-19 disaster.

Opportunities for the public to access and to participate in the electronic meeting will be posted on the Albemarle.org community county calendar when available.

I think we're

Having some technical difficulties there, so I'll take it.

Commissioner Keller.

Here.

Commissioner Bailey.

Present.

Commissioner Clayborne.

Present.

Commissioner Carrazana.

Commissioner Randolph.

We didn't hear you, Rick.

I believe I just admitted Commissioner Firehock.

She's connecting now.

All members are present.

Are the matters not listed on the agenda from the public?

Not right now.

She's going to have to jump out and jump back in.

Yes, sir, I'm here.

We've done it, we've done, we've established that we have a quorum and I was simply asking whether or not you saw or you had anyone from the public who wanted to comment on matters not on our agenda this evening.

No, sir, we do not.

Okay, thank you.

Then we're going to follow up with the consent agenda.

Does anyone care to pull the items, either an item or the items from the consent agenda this evening?

Okay, seeing none, is there a motion to move forward the consent agenda?

as moved by Tim, seconded by?

Second.

Second by Corey.

Ms.

Moore?

Aye.

Ms.

Firehock?

Yes.

Oh, you're not frozen, are you, Tim?

Oh, we can't.

Oh, he can't get unmuted.

You're muted, Tim.

But I saw him wave affirmatively.

Aye.

Thank you.

Tim, would you like to say it now?

Aye.

Thank you very much.

So we're going to move into SP 2021-00005 discussion of the HALT property.

Good evening, everyone.

Can you all hear me?

Perfect.

Great, thank you.

My name is Andy Riedelbach and I'm a senior planner with the Albemarle County Planning Division.

And tonight we are here for a public hearing for the Haupt Property Day Camp Proposal, which is application number SP 2021-5.

So to give you some context in where this property is located, it is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District off of Batesville Road.

You can see the two parcels that are the subject

highlighted on the left side of the screen.

In the top right of your screen is the community of Batesville.

I've labeled some of the nearby roads to give you some

that are information on where we are, Batesville and Craigstor Road.

And then this area may look familiar because several months ago, another special use permit application came before you.

And that was recently approved by the Board of Supervisors for Central Virginia Electric Cooperative Solar Power Generation Facility.

And that actually is contiguous to the parcels that we are here tonight to discuss.

It's to the Southeast of the subject parcels across the Meacham's River.

And this is a more zoomed in site of the Hopped property.

Margaret and Richard Hopped are the property owners and the applicants.

They own two parcels that are contiguous to each other.

They live on the property and their residence is up there in kind of the north central portion of the larger property.

You can see the entrance.

There's actually two entrances and the entrance I have labeled is the entrance that would be used for the proposed day camp.

that we're here tonight to discuss.

There are several ponds on the property, one on either side of the property.

As I mentioned, the Meacham's River forms the southern property line.

And then as I said earlier, the CVEC solar facility is to the southeast.

So the zoning of this property, both parcels are zoned RA, which is the rural area.

and there is a overlay zoning district as well, the flood hazard overlay.

And that is only on the Southern portion of both parcels along the Meacham's River.

All surrounding parcels are also zoned rural areas.

And then the proposed, the requested use, which is a day camp is permitted by a special use permit in the RA zoning district.

And then regarding the comprehensive plan, similarly these two parcels and all surrounding parcels are designated as rural areas in the county's comprehensive plan and that designates

The uses designated for rural areas are the preservation and protection of agricultural forest and open space lands and natural historic and scenic resources along with low density residential development at one half unit per acre.

So the specifics of the proposal that we have here before us tonight is a request for an amendment to an existing special use permit, which is SP 1989-110, which was approved back in March of 1990.

The applicants, Margaret and Richard Hopp, are asking to expand the existing permitted day camp use.

to increase the number of participants allowed from the 10, the maximum of 10 participants, which is currently allowed under the 1989 special use permit, up to a maximum of 50.

And this would include 42 campers and eight staff members.

They are also asking to increase the number of days of operation of the camp from 30 days per year to 45 days per year.

and then they are asking to add an additional parcel to their special use permit.

Currently the 1989 special use permit only applies to the larger of the two parcels TMP 85.3a and so they are asking that the other parcel 85.3a1 also be added to the special use permit and together these two parcels total approximately 103.56 acres.

The camp would operate for five days per week, Monday through Friday, for nine weeks throughout the summer months, June through August.

So that would be the 45 days they are requesting.

And the camp would operate eight to five for staff members.

And then the campers who attend would be there from 9 a.m.

to 4 p.m.

There is no overnight boarding or camping proposed.

It would just simply be a day camp.

The only new construction that the applicants are proposing with this is a proposed future pavilion for camp activities.

And that would be constructed on the smaller of the two parcels, 85-3-A-1.

And I have a little more information about the pavilion in a later slide.

And then there would be minimal grading and clearing proposed for the maintenance of trails and the driveway entrance on the property.

And then of course, for the construction of the pavilion.

And before I go any farther, I did wanna just provide some clarification because there actually are two special use permits under review by the county now proposed to be operated by the Living Earth School.

And they are both in the Samuel Miller District, one on either side of the community of Batesville.

So the one that we have in review before us tonight is the one on the left side of this map, Hopps Parcels, which is SP 2021-5.

And then there is another application, SB 2021-13, which is on the Israel Mountain Farm property, which you can see on the right.

That application is still under review by county staff, though I do believe there has been a community meeting held for it.

And so that will probably come before you all at some later date.

But for tonight, we're only looking at the two hops parcels on the

to the west of Batesville.

So some more information about the two properties and the application.

Both parcels are located within the Batesville Agricultural Forest District as you can see in the figure to your right.

There are the two highlighted parcels and then there are several other parcels scattered around that are also part of the Batesville AFD.

So because these parcels are within the AFD, they did go before the AFD advisory committee on March the 16th of this year for review by that committee.

And the majority of that committee did vote that this

The Nature Conservancy holds a conservation on the larger of these two parcels, TMP 85-3A.

And then there are some supplemental regulations found in the Zoning Ordinance for day camps that I wanted to bring your attention to.

There's only the two.

One is the appropriate health department approval of any wells, sanitary facilities such as septic fields, outhouses, that sort of thing is required before a day camp can begin operation.

and then any sort of outdoor burning, whether that's outdoor cooking or campfires, does require approval, notification to and approval by the Albemarle County Fire Rescue Department.

So this is the concept plan that has been provided by the applicant showing the two parcels and showing where the various activities and facilities for the camp

would be the staff parking and turnaround drop-off would be kind of in the center of the property behind the Hops residence.

There is a future pavilion that I mentioned located right along the property line and then there are two ponds that could be used for swimming and then the rest of the over 100 acres would be used for various activities and applicants have stated that the 42 campers would be divided into smaller subgroups and dispersed throughout the property throughout the day.

So as I mentioned, there is the proposed pavilion that is the only new construction that is proposed with this application.

And I've identified on this map the rough approximate location of where the applicants are proposing this to be.

It is outside of critical slopes.

It is right along the edge of the Meacham's River floodplain.

So kind of in a flatter area of the property.

And then the closest property line, since this would be kind of a more note of activity for the camp, it is approximately 200 feet from the property line with the Central Virginia Electric Cooperative property, which is, as I mentioned previously, across the Meacham's River to the southeast.

There is just one recommended revision by staff to the application that staff believes should be made prior to going to the Board of Supervisors and that is providing an estimated maximum square footage of the footprint for the proposed wooden pavilion.

Just to help better understand exactly how large that is proposed to be.

So factors for consideration.

There are several factors favorable to this request.

It is consistent with the county's comprehensive plan.

Minimal disturbance of the land does allow for the continued ability of agricultural and forestal production on the property.

Protection of the water supply watershed, the Meacham's River is within the South Fork Rivanna River.

Reservoir Watershed, and the Conservation of Natural Resources.

And then, as I mentioned, it was determined by the AFD Advisory Committee to be in accordance with the purposes of the agricultural and forestry districts.

Factors unfavorable.

are that the use will generate additional vehicular trips on the surrounding street network through the village of Batesville and along Batesville Road, which I should mention is a gravel road.

However, there are several conditions that staff has included in the special use permit that staff believes will reduce trip generation and the applicant has indicated that they would use a bus and carpooling to further reduce

the trips that would travel along Batesville Road as they go to and from their proposed day camp.

So staff does recommend approval of the special use permit SB 2021-5, the Hall of Property with the following conditions and provided that the one recommended revision is made to the application prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing.

So there are nine recommended conditions and the nine are

The first one is kind of the standard condition used for special use permits that development of the use should be in general accord with the concept plan that has been provided and reflecting the essential major elements such as the camp entrance, the parking and drop-off areas, the location of the future pavilion,

and the location of the outhouses and privies.

And then of course, minimum grading and clearing would be allowed to locate sanitary facilities and the pavilion.

And minor modifications that do not conflict with the above elements can be made to ensure compliance with the zoning ordinance, other county laws, and then state and federal laws.

And of course, minor modifications do have to be made with the approval of both the zoning administrator and the director of planning.

Condition number two outlines the hours of operation for the camp, five days per week, Monday through Friday, for a maximum of 45 days per year, June through August, from 8 a.m.

in the morning to 5 p.m.

in the evening, and no overnight boarding or camping.

Condition number three would limit it to 50 people per session.

As I mentioned, it would be about 42 camp attendees and eight camp staff.

And then regarding transportation, bus and carpool trips would be the primary means of transportation to arrive at the camp.

And then VDOT has identified that the entrance would meet low volume commercial entrance requirements.

So the daily trip generation could not exceed VDOT's requirement for that.

And then six is that health department approval is required for all well septic and outhouse facilities.

Number seven is approval by the fire department for all outdoor cooking and campfires.

And then to ensure impacts on neighboring properties are mitigated, any outdoor lighting that is ultimately proposed would have to be a full cutoff fixture and shielded to reflect light away from abutting properties.

And if the applicants do choose to do outdoor lighting, the lighting plan would need to be submitted for approval by the zoning administrator.

and then sound amplification of any type would not be permitted.

So those are the conditions that staff recommends be placed on the special use permit.

These suggested motions are here for when we get to that portion of tonight's meeting.

And then I'm available for any questions either now or later in the meeting.

Thank you very much.

Other questions?

Are there questions for staff at this moment?

And if you'd unshare your screen, it would be a tiny bit more helpful.

And I have one.

So at this moment, we can wait till we come back.

The existing special use permit has about eight conditions and some of them staff is proposing to get rid of because they are no longer relevant.

Yes.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions?

Andy, can I focus in on number four under recommended actions, which is on page seven?

And my question is,

that the statement is bus and carpool trips must be the primary means of transportation for camp staff and attendees.

So for the busing, when a zoning clearance is

They can as part of the application show that they have at least contracted out a bus or something of that nature and

Carpooling is something that of course would fluctuate probably day by day, sometimes not always.

Every student or attendee would be able to carpool every day, so that's why it is somewhat open, but allowing

ensuring that the majority of the attendees do carpool every day.

And I don't know if zoning would have any additional thing to say about that or not.

Thanks, Andy.

Commissioner Randolph, I understand your concern about that particular condition and the applicant may be able to speak to that a little more as far as what they are promoting when it comes to how they are asking, knowing the concerns of the

The area and how they would promote that as that and and it would be difficult, but we would we would follow up with it as as needed if if we got the complaints that were that that was identified somebody made a complaint that they were

felt that there were too many cars or that somebody was watching what was going on.

But some of these were not, unfortunately, were not able to actually be out there and watch every single and make sure every thing.

But this particular one, I think, is one what we do have to take that on their ability to, they're saying that they're going to comply with that.

You could you could attribute that to a couple other ones as well as far as even say if they did some fires out out on site and they didn't get permission from the fire official to do that.

Thank you for the explanation.

I guess that really the word that I was just raising a question about was primary.

Did primary constitute a percentage, a majority percentage?

And that

that section of number four just seemed a little vague and I was trying to get a better handle on the specificity that's behind it.

No, okay.

May we hear from the applicants then?

I think I'm unmuted.

I thought I would use this few minutes that we have to explain why Rick and I want to have the nature camp operating on our land.

And I've written a few words.

We are concerned about our rapidly developing county and the decisions that will be made by the next generation.

How much development will this next generation allow?

How much green space will they demand?

Will the importance of biodiversity be recognized?

What will be done to reduce our community's contributions to global climate change?

These important decisions will be made consciously and unconsciously by future generations.

We believe our county will best be served if these future adults have childhoods grounded in nature, in an appreciation of the quiet of a pine forest, the deep pleasure of swimming in a spring fed pond or a fast flowing river.

As a fellow resident of Batesville Road, I share your concerns about traffic on the road.

I'm an early morning walker and often dodge dump trucks and fast driving commuters, usually between 7 and 8 a.m.

Yes, there will be an increase in traffic at 9 a.m.

and 4 p.m.

for nine weeks in the summer.

The trade-off will be the opportunity for 42 children a week to spend time in the woods, meadows, ponds, and river on our property.

It's a trade-off we think will benefit us all in the long run as we support the development of a generation of environmentalists.

We are grateful to have lived on this beautiful piece of land for 45 years.

We placed our land at a conservation easement with the Nature Conservancy as one step in preserving it.

But in addition, we would love for our legacy to be that we made it available for children.

Thank you.

Actually, I have a list of questions, if you don't mind, and I think they'll be pretty straightforward for that applicant.

I believe that that number was recommended by the county as being a number that would be appropriate.

I don't think we came up with the number.

I think the county suggested that number, but my memory is not my strongest suit.

Oh, I think, you know, the camp, of course, it's not our camp.

It's the Living Earth School's camp or a nature camp in general.

So Rick and I are not planning to run this camp.

And the Living Earth School has been in operation for over 20 years, and they fill up immediately as soon as they open up.

It's a very popular camp.

So I think it will max out the first year.

at 42 kids.

But I also feel that that's a number that is sustainable for this size property.

Honestly, I wouldn't want the number to be any bigger than that.

So that's plenty big.

Thank you, and I have more questions.

So it might be that the person who runs the camp, the school, if they want to jump in and answer them, that's totally fine.

Yep, sorry about that.

I'm Scott Cunningham.

I'm the Director of Operations for the Living Earth School, so I'd be running the day-to-day programs on the land.

In answer to your question, the programs that we were looking to run at this day camp were from age 5 up to 17.

So that's the targeted group.

Thank you, Mr. Cunningham.

What's the role of staff?

Are they the eyes and ears to make sure that the children are within the property lines?

Sure.

So first of all, our camp staff ratio is very low, which it is six participants or campers to one staff, which is extremely low because of the type of instructing we do.

The instruction that is going on is nature-based around silviculture, permaculture, understanding identification of plants, understanding tracking,

tracking, animal tracking, identification of animals, understanding the whole ecosystem and how children as a person belongs to this environment and is part of the living earth.

It's to build their environmental awareness and the understanding of where they fit in what we call earth.

It does.

I just have two more.

Kind of the subsequent question to that follow-up is just trying to address the concerns of the folks that have written in about children perhaps going outside of the boundaries and maybe crossing over into their property.

Well, the property lines are pretty well defined.

We haven't ever had a problem in the 19 years.

Most of the time, in fact, if you look and talk to the neighbors that we've been friends with over those times, they've actually invited the kids into their land, but we're very responsible.

It's, you know, we're teaching kids how to be responsible within nature and we respect other people's boundaries.

It's not a loud, crazy camp.

It's, you know, it's a heck of a lot of fun.

We have mud days, but we've never had a problem with neighbors.

Thank you.

As an environmentally focused, very easily.

We do a really good job.

We'll take it out.

We'll deal with it.

But we even have kids.

We've managed the micro-trash.

There's not going to be a lot.

They bring their lunches in.

They pack their trash out.

We're not going to be cooking.

We're not providing any food service.

So it's all brought in and it'll all go out with them.

So we do a lot of repair, leave no trace and naturalizing of the areas that we've been in, which is why it's also important to keep the numbers low.

You think 100 acres is a lot, but putting kids on it and having them walk through, play games, assess things, it does create an imprint.

So it's a good size.

Thank you.

You're through, Corey?

A couple and I'm not sure exactly if it's the property owners or the day camp director of operations that's best answer the first question.

But with regards to the shelter, I guess one thing that I'm, you know, through the summer, there's often

thunderstorms, sometimes severe thunderstorms that can pop up and be a bit unpredictable as far as their track.

So I guess one thing that I wanted to understand a little better is the shelter.

Can it house 50 people underneath of it?

Does it have grounding to handle?

Is there a lightning strike or a direct strike?

I know I read in the concept plan there was some mention of tents maybe near the drop off area.

temporary tents, but that might help with water.

Sure.

The weather is very unpredictable and we noticed that in the second week of August when we had four straight days of lightning storms come across camp.

So we put them into a shelter.

I'd have to look at the size of that pavilion, but there's also other outbuildings that would be available in this location that the kids could shelter into.

But we have a comprehensive plan to manage for the risk and we're constantly watching the weather to manage that.

So we'll make sure that there's enough appropriate coverage and the right coverage and the kids can have the appropriate pickup and ease of pickup

Do you currently use any type of bullhorn or any type of notification?

Well, we have several things.

First of all, we have the bullhorn.

Secondly, all of our instructors have walkie talkies.

So we're in constant communication.

So we have those communication methods and we have a number of security protocols because it's not just the weather we worry about.

visitors that are not invited onto the campsite and other things we have to worry about.

So but yes, we have multiple communication levels of security to get that message out.

And so just to circle back to the first question, what is the size of this pavilion?

Is it intended to be reasonably sized to host the full group?

Is there going to be smaller

Yeah, well, two things.

One is a standard tent will not protect you from a lightning strike.

A pavilion, as you said, will have to get you up off the ground or be grounded to protect you.

But that's typically one.

But I don't have the size of that pavilion to say how many people would fit in that and what protection would provide.

But we do have other.

There's a barn on site, and there's other buildings there that could be utilized.

Okay, is this barn part of the hops?

I'm sorry if I mispronounced your name, your last name.

My apologies.

I was referring to the property owners.

Is the barn available for use for the living art school?

Is that negation, has that been agreed upon?

I'm just looking at a concept plan.

I don't see the barn listed as a facility and an outbuilding to be used by the

by the schools.

I can speak to that.

Can you hear me?

Yes, ma'am.

The barns actually, according to the Nature Conservancy easement, the barns would not be available, not because we would specify that, but the Nature Conservancy would not allow them to be used.

So I think

You know, it's a really good question, and I think it's important, and I think we just haven't gotten that far yet.

I mean, the pavilion hasn't been built yet, and we don't have the specifications, but that certainly will be addressed.

Thank you, ma'am.

I have one more question, and then I'll relinquish.

It was written in the concept plan that all water will be brought in by a camper.

I do know that we do often have 100 degree heats in the project narrative.

I guess I question that as far as does the camp also or living in our school bring in other coolers in the case, you know, there's only so much water you can typically tote in as a camper for a whole day of consumption.

So I guess it was listed that there was intended to be no water

We always have large five gallon water buckets throughout the locations of where campers have their setups for whatever activities they're doing.

Sometimes we have broadened water, sometimes we just utilize the hose or the well water at the site.

But every camper we have, they come in with two

to water containers for themselves as part of what they bring to camp on a daily basis.

I have one more question if you'll permit me.

With regards to the privies, we really didn't have a concept of that.

Are those going to be permanent structures or are we looking at it was referred to a state of the art privies?

I'm not sure how to interpret what that is.

I can speak to that.

This is Margaret.

There is an outhouse that has two different sections to it.

And I actually have a picture of it that I could send you.

Professionally constructed.

And one other thing, there is a pump

Okay.

And I'm assuming that those privies that exist there are approved by TNC to be existing on that side of the land?

Sorry for the details.

That's all the question I have this time.

I appreciate those questions and the thoughtfulness of them.

Are there others who have questions for the applicant?

Then we'll go to the public hearing.

Yes, I am.

Jane, you have three minutes to speak.

Okay, my name is Jane Billows.

My address is 1915 Thunder Ridge Road in Batesville, technically of some Afton mailing address.

Our property was the property that you saw on all of the vignettes that Andy showed at the beginning where the

Only property that shares a long water border with the house on the Meacham side.

And then the other property owner on the other side of us is the new solar energy farm going in that has already been approved.

So while we

My opposition to this proposal is both personal and also on behalf of the larger Batesville community.

From a personal point of view, having children and staff, 50 people,

Monday through Friday for the entire summer is one quarter of this year and we will be having impacted by having a commercial operation on the neighboring property.

And it feels like a big imposition, a big ask to us.

It feels like an imposition of somebody else's desire.

And I feel like their freedom to do what they want to do on their land should be limited by how it impacts other people.

And so their freedom ends where my freedom begins.

And I feel like this camp will be an imposition on the way we live every day of the summer.

We also spoke to our liability insurance company who said that our liability insurance will definitely increase and that we might become uninsurable if there's a camp next door.

So that is really significant and I think that the county needs to really take that into consideration.

There are other

neighbors who had similar liability concerns and I don't know if they're on these calls and sending letters but they've spoken to me directly.

And the other thing is Margaret was talking about future generations and what's to say that once this special use permit is approved and now expanded

that future development and the next owners of this property don't expand it even further.

So I'm just trying to limit my losses here.

Property values next to schools, camps and playgrounds go down and people do not like to live next to camps.

All the camps in this county, the neighbors have talked about that it is a disruption and they don't like it.

Your time is up.

Oh, darn.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll have your husband.

He'll be after the next speaker.

Thank you.

Next we have Chris Hawk.

Chris, you have three minutes to speak.

Good evening, this is Chris Hawke with the Piedmont Environmental Council, also known as PEC.

We support county staff's recommendations given the properties A, inclusion within the Batesville Ag and Forest District, B, existing conservation easement on the larger parcel, C, 0.86 miles of frontage on the Meacham's River, and D, location on a rural gravel road with permitted access and safety maintenance measures,

PEC recommends that the following be added to the approval.

One, update county staff recommendation one to include additional pavilion siting requirements requiring that it must be constructed outside of the flood plan, water protection, ordinance buffers, and critical slopes.

Two, update county staff recommendation four to require a documented plan for offsite bus and carpooling.

to provide a certainty that the primary means of transportation for on-site users is not via single vehicle trips and B, clarify the definition of primary and that it and to clarify the definition of primary means of transportation.

Three, update county staff recommendation five to include VDOT's definition for low volume commercial entrances

as it would further clarify within the permit that daily trip generation must not exceed 50 vehicular trips per day.

Four, prohibit paving the existing dirt road or additional roads that would lead to the proposed pavilion.

Five, include TNC's letters dated January 31st, 2020 and February 4th, 2021 to ensure that the special use permit is consistent with the terms and conditions of the conservation easement

and lastly require forested buffers be maintained on property boundaries to A, avoid adverse impacts on adjoining landowners in the Meacham's River and B, reduce the impacts of any future septic impacts that could arise from on-site privies.

In addition to these above recommendations, BCS, the Planning Commission and county staff to further consider, explore and discuss the insurance liability implications raised by adjoining landowners.

The two onsite swimming ponds could create additional liability and insurance implications for adjoining landowners, as the tax maps and concept plans both show the swimming ponds as being co-owned by the applicant and adjoining landowners.

The following questions have arisen during previous discussions for similar uses in Albemarle County's agricultural areas.

Is there a landowner agreement that could help sell insurance and liability implications?

Should the applicant's insurance policy include the adjoining landowners as additionally insured parties given the potentially shared ownership of the swimming ponds?

And lastly, as the requested use requires a special use permit and is not a buy-write use, could the adjoining landowners have predicted, could have predicted the proposed day use camp and swimming ponds within, when acquiring their property?

Thank you for taking the time to listen to PEC's concerns on this matter.

Please feel free to reach out to me with any additional questions.

Thank you, Chris.

Next, we have Bill Fellows.

I'm sorry.

Bill Fellows, 1915 Thunder Ridge Road.

It's still wrapped in Virginia.

I guess my main concern are all the question marks that are involved in this, and they say they'll do this, they'll do that, they'll do this, but there's nothing to police who they're going to, who's going to do this.

You know, it's the responsibility of the house, I don't think so, responsibility of the neighbors, the county, it's a

There's an open fire burn law and I guess they could get around that if they want to, but with the dry conditions now I'd be hesitant to allow that.

50 people on the land, that's a huge footprint.

If we're talking about being stewards of the land, you're certainly not being a steward.

If you're

violating what your neighbor's rights.

And if you read the definition of where the steward of the land is, it's the river that runs through your land that continues on downstream.

It's the property that borders all the other properties.

So that's a huge concern for me.

If you look at the possibility of maybe 30 cars, it's 30 cars going in, 30 cars coming out, going back in, coming back out by those houses on that road.

It's not just a one trip deal.

The return trips twice.

the impact that they're gonna have and the questions that are unanswered are difficult to wrap my head around.

I've known these folks for a long, long time and know they love that land.

And I'm not trying to discourage the use of their land, but it's impossible to do what they're gonna do and still respect that land.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And I will close the public hearing and then bring it back to the applicants for a short response or a short three minutes to sort of speak, add any information if they feel inclined to, only if you feel inclined to.

Yes, yes.

I don't have anything prepared.

So just bear with me as I fumble along.

There is a really long frontage on the Meacham's River.

that our property includes and a very small part of it adjoins the fellows property.

We have tried to assure them that no camp activities will take place across from their property.

There's, you know, it's more than 100 acres and there are lots and lots of opportunities for these kids to explore without there ever needing to be

visible within hearing or sight of the fellows and it's very important that we respect our neighbors and we will certainly do everything we can to make sure that that happens.

I would contest that both ponds are on neighbor's property.

The property that adjoins the Gathwrights, it is near that border, but our property line

Our property includes that whole pond.

It may look that way, but we've seen the sight lines and everything, and it absolutely is not on the Gathwright property.

The other pond, I guess I can't speak clearly to that.

There may be a piece of it that is on an adjoining neighbor's.

I'm not positive.

I was a little astounded by the strength of the complaints of the neighbors.

It sounds like we're going to run a military camp or something and be shooting

doing military type activities.

And this is so, so different than anything like that.

I guess I just concerned about what the public might think after those statements.

As Margaret focused on earlier, it's for kids to come out here and enjoy nature and that's our primary focus.

Thank you, Mr. Missel.

OK.

So this summer, we tracked our carpooling.

Even through COVID, we averaged 2.6 kids per car.

So given that the county averages three person in carpooling, during COVID, we were at 2.6, which puts it about 16 or 17 cars.

We're very focused on creating carpools with all the people that sign up.

That's a part of our environmental focus.

So we understand traffic.

We're working towards it.

Are there commissioners?

Where are your thoughts?

I'm positively inclined towards the applicants.

Yes, I did not ask a lot of questions because I've actually thoroughly studied this proposal and I have also been out to the site, walked the boundaries, walked the paths.

This is a heavily wooded site with already established paths.

I can testify the privies were quite lovely.

And I would say that I do think that this is a very light footprint on the land.

I think the separation from the neighbors is adequate.

And the House assured me that while it might be the case that the children would need to walk from point A to point B and might pass near the property boundary, they're not going to be engaged in activities there.

There's also a high ratio of counselors to children.

So I don't think there's the concern that we read in some of the comments that children will be running off property, swimming the river over to the neighbors and other concerns that were raised.

I also do not believe it is in the purview of the Planning Commission to get engaged in people's liability concerns.

The Planning Commission does not review people's liability policies.

We do not get engaged in assessments of liability risk.

And so I just think that that is not an appropriate avenue for us to be exploring.

In terms of carpooling, again, I've also talked with the folks who proposed to run the camp.

And they seem to have great experience already running summer camps.

It's not their first camp.

And they've engaged in extensive carpool planning.

So I am not concerned that this site would actually be a nuisance to the neighbors.

I absolutely appreciate the need and importance for quiet enjoyment of one's own property.

But I don't believe that

50 campers on a large site greater than 100 acres is actually going to be a disturbance.

And I hope that it isn't.

So I'm very favorably inclined towards this particular proposal.

And just to say, I'm not in favor of a camp on every rural property in Albemarle County.

There are many places where it would not be appropriate.

But having looked at this site, I think that this site is very well buffered and it's a camp with

that it will be managed by people who are truly environmental stewards.

I think that if you were to put 50 cows on this land, it would have a lot more impact than the 50 children propose.

Rick?

The only thing I would add to Karen's peroration, and I echo her sentiment, if not a camp here where in Albemarle County you really would have a difficult time finding a more ideal site than this location.

But I think Daniel's line of questioning does lead to a need here for us to make a recommendation that the pavilion have adequate

Square footage to accommodate 50 people in case of inclement weather.

I just think that's absolutely essential in a wooded location.

Otherwise, we're setting ourselves and campers up and parents up for not a very pleasant outcome.

So I think that's something that is absolutely an essential here, and that pavilion needs to be built sooner rather than later.

for the protection and welfare of the campers and the staff at this location.

So that's something that I think we should add as one of the conditions when we get to that.

But otherwise, I'm enthusiastic behind that.

And I know if there are any problems, since Mr. Haupt was trained by Woody Hayes, he would be able to tackle anyone untoward on the property

Are there other comments?

Karen.

I just wanted to follow on Rick, because it's relevant to what he said.

Just quickly, I guess it is kind of a question for staff at this point.

Mr. Hauk noted that he, or Mr. Hauk, sorry, I'm messing up his name, with PEC was mentioning a concern that the pavilion not be sited in the floodplain or on steep slopes.

And I wouldn't imagine that the county would permit that structure to be within the 100-year floodplain or on a steep slope.

I mean, it's not a structure with four sides to it.

But nevertheless, I wouldn't think the county would allow that.

So I don't see that we would need to make that a condition.

Francis?

Yes, so that was a concern initially when we wanted to know what that location was.

Talking with the zoning administrator and the county engineer, both being the floodplain and the stream buffer there, we did not have any issues.

And the flood, the ordinance would allow that as the open structure, the four posts with a roof basically.

And it's kind of at that edge.

the outer edge of the floodplain in the woods just beyond that opening, that field opening.

So that was a concern.

And we believe that that was still as far as initially what that was there.

Just circling back to Commissioner Randolph's recommendation, I think if we add that, it'll be important to manage expectations.

And so if you're going to do that, perhaps put in accordance with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code, which would give you a square foot per occupant for that, that kind of that gathering there.

So you wouldn't, you wouldn't want us to definitely to come back with square footage, actually, like there's no way to outfit 50 people, prove it to me.

And if it is, as was mentioned by the African, if it doesn't have a floor, it needs to be grounded to be actually, I don't know if that would be covered in the building code or whatever, but that, that would be very important.

The last thing I don't, I don't want to move on.

I can come back to be, I'll let other people talk if there's more discussion on the pavilion.

I do have one question around both the ponds and swimming activities.

Just, just I can,

I can come back to that later if necessary.

Sure.

I am also positively inclined to support this.

I do have some questions or concerns because when you pull up the Almaro GIS, it does appear that the pond does sit on the border between other neighbors property.

And it seems, I don't know what the, what the, you know, zoning or, or

Agreements are necessary for making sure that swimming would be permitted in a jointly owned pond with your neighbors would be.

Mr. Bailey, just a caveat, and I think that the applicants alluded to this.

For starters, the boundaries that are shown on the GIS are approximate.

They're not legally definitive.

To the extent that the boundary line actually does split the water body, it would be the same as if

Property owners would be obligated to keep their uses within their property boundaries, even if that boundary goes through the middle of a body of water.

So technically any uses that the hops might have of the property or their guests or entities or campers would technically need to stay within the boundaries, even if the boundary line went through the body of water.

Perfect.

Thank you, counsel.

Jenny, did I see you raise your hand to adjust your glasses like me?

I agree with what others have said and I'm positively inclined.

I think I do have a few questions in my mind, but I think others have brought those up or shared that that's not necessarily our purview to answer all that.

I did notice that, and I like Rick's suggestion about having a condition that talks about the pavilion and the capacity

I noticed when Mr. Cunningham was talking about, you know, what would happen in the case of an emergency and talking about using the barn that the property owner was aware that, you know, it seems like they're saying that the easement wouldn't allow for that, for those structures to be used.

And so, sorry.

So I guess I would just encourage you all to make sure you're on the same page with

with that part, what the easement does and doesn't allow.

No, so I will say that I suggest that I support the request also and have a sense that from

From my view, I think it's helpful to have a diversity of agricultural businesses that take place in our rural area, or activities that take place in our rural area.

And so, while I'm sensitive and aware of some of the concerns that have been raised to us through letters and through our communications, I also have a sense that

the present owners of the of the property the house would have a commitment to making this work in a way that is not onerous to people around it and that I would believe that the school has one of those easy things that the school ticks people off it'll be very clear next year

What happens in our community, people tend to not be shy about expressing their concerns when things don't go the way that they anticipated going.

So I think there's some market forces that will help to ensure that people do what they sign up to do and what they declare that they'll do, particularly in a public setting and particularly when this goes forward to the

to the supervisors, the very public forum, and so expectations will be there.

And I think people, the two parties will have to manage their expectations and manage the public personas on this idea.

So I would support it.

I support this also.

And I also support the idea that we would be a bit more prescriptive, Andy, a bit more prescriptive in how we look towards the pavilion.

So if you've got additional language for that that you can insert there, I think that would be helpful for this process.

Would you bring that up please?

I think it's going to pop up on our screen shortly.

We can have a commissioned cat.

Well, that's okay.

Yeah, you know, Karen has hers and we haven't seen Rick's pup in a while.

I don't know if he's been put outside or something like that, but.

He's outside with Susan.

He's outside with Susan.

Okay, so we have pets.

All right, so I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of SB2021-0005 Haupt property with conditions one through nine as outlined in the staff report with the following modification to condition number one, location of the pavilion.

Now I need to hold on, I'm going to squeeze some people in so I can see more of you.

Okay.

So Commissioner Firehock, is there an intended capacity that you would like to add to that condition, first of all?

OK, so let me let me do one at a time.

You had indicated that you thought that the capacity of the building ought to be specified.

Yes.

No, it's not specifying a limit on the capacity.

And then my second question regarding your motion was, did you intend for your motion to also include Mr. Reidelbach's suggested revision?

I'm sorry, I have his staff report with condition number one.

And what is the additional revision?

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

So then, Mr. Adlak, if you could go back to your original suggested motion.

Okay.

Sure, okay.

I'll just make it.

Should I just make it again?

Please.

I move that the Planning Commission recommend approval of SB 2021-0005, how property with conditions and revision is recommended in the staff report.

Is there a second for that?

Seconded by Tim.

Is there any discussion?

Ms.

Yes.

Mr. Bailey?

I'll see.

Mr. Bailey?

Mr. Keller?

Mr. Keller?

Ms.

Ms.

Moore.

Aye.

Thank you, everyone.

So where are the, to Mrs. Hopp.

As you've heard from this evening, the commission will be moving this forward to the Board of Supervisors.

with a recommendation for approval.

And you also heard, I think, from our colleagues, a number of items that you might want to, that we would suggest working with Andy that you become, that you're more specific before you bring this, add a bit of specificity to the project when you go before the board of supervisors.

Okay.

So on that note, thank you both for bringing this to us.

And we hope, and as you know, you'll work with staff for the next day and for revisions that may need to be, you may need to consider before moving forward.

But thank you very much and enjoy the rest of your evening.

Thank you, Francis.

So we have a presentation this evening.

Oh, is a presentation different from a work session?

Charles.

Thank you very much.

And I will apologize ahead of time, madam.

And I think we have with us this evening, Kim Biasioli.

That's all right.

Okay, so if you would introduce yourself with that proper pronunciation and tell us about who you are and then let's go into our presentation.

Ask us if there's anything that you'd like from us.

All right.

Well, I will share a presentation.

I'm Kim Biasioli.

I'm the Natural Resources Manager for the county.

And I'm going to talk tonight about the Stream Health Initiative project.

And this is a board initiative.

So like Charles said, it's an informational session.

But of course, I welcome any feedback.

And I'm happy to answer any questions you might have as we go forward.

And so I'm going to talk about the whole project tonight but mainly focusing on phase two of the project, which is focused on improving stream health in the rural area.

And so some of you might be familiar with this project, but I'll just provide a little background to give you the big picture of where this started.

This project began with the creation of Albemarle County's Natural Resources Program in 2015.

And one of the primary objectives of that program when it was established was to conduct a review of the stream buffer requirements in our water protection ordinance.

And so through that work grew essentially this bigger project.

And in 2017, staff were directed by the board to

Develop strategies for improving stream health throughout the county.

And so staff at that time, you know, this was a really broad objective, so they divided it into two phases.

The first phase being focused on development.

and working with the development community to come up with different strategies and solutions for improving stream health.

And then phase two being more focused on rural area land uses.

And some of that, of course, focus on the rural area also includes development because of course development is occurring throughout the county.

So you can see from this graphic that phase one is still ongoing and some of that work is moving forward in parallel with the phase two work

that I'm going to talk about tonight.

So before I get to that phase two work, I'll just give a quick update on some of those key outcomes from phase one.

So some of the proposals that were adopted or completed thus far were, first of all, let's see.

The first one was related to increasing requirements on steep slopes for erosion and sediment control.

Secondly, to allow erosion and sediment control measures only in the outward 50 feet of stream buffers and with mitigation.

There was a general fees update and that also included increasing fees for repeat violations of the ordinance.

Some general updates to the water protection ordinance, primarily clarifications and specifically one clarification related to the requirements for forest management.

So requiring stream buffers or stream side management zones as they're referred to in the best management practices manual for forestry for Virginia.

So requiring those streamside management zones to maintain the exemption for forestry and also bonding for maintenance of stormwater management facilities.

Also two of the phase one, original phase one proposals were related to education and outreach and we've been working really hard to address those through a lot of the work we've been doing in phase two.

So there's another subset of the phase one proposals that have not yet been adopted or completed, but they are supported by the board.

And those are not adopted yet mainly because they're pending allocation of resources.

So the first is an update to address incremental development.

So essentially where there's repeated applications coming in just below that 10,000.

Oh, sorry.

So incremental development is essentially when there are repeated applications coming in just under that 10,000 square foot threshold on the same property, you know, year after year or fairly close together.

So that is meant to address that issue.

And then the second one is to have some additional standards that dictate when two layer erosion and sediment would be required.

And lastly, implementing this 25% improvement factor and these two layer erosion sediment control measures, specifically within sediment TMDL watersheds.

So moving into phase two, again, that's focused on the rural area.

What you're looking at here is the timeline that we set out for this year for the project.

And even before this timeline last fall, we were working on planning and material development.

We formed our student health team.

That's an interdisciplinary team.

with folks from different departments in the organization and also developing a lot of educational material and opportunities for the public to engage with the project both through the website and the public input site.

So in this first stage, so we divided the year into these four quarterly stages.

And the first stage really focusing on education and outreach, listening to the public and hearing what was important to them, and also providing some education through a seven part webinar series with technical experts talking about different aspects of stream health.

and then in the second quarter of the year, we worked with a stakeholder work group and of course those folks volunteered their time and they're all members of the community with different levels of interest and expertise in the subject matter.

And so with the work group, we had a number of conversations through Zoom and worked on defining really the vision and goals for Stream Health in our community and then

brainstorming different strategies we might employ in order to address those goals.

And now you can see we're in the third quarter in this developed stage where we brought those strategies back out to the board and back out to the public.

We're receiving feedback from the board and from members of the public and really starting to work on developing some of these strategies into more fully fleshed out proposals where we can really evaluate and analyze the costs and benefits of each one.

And then moving into the fall, we will, into the decide stage, we'll be bringing those final proposals back to the board for some decision-making.

And then of course, implementation of any of these proposals is going to extend well beyond 2021.

So we started out with over 40 strategies that were proposed to us by the public and mainly by the work group.

And we worked with technical experts to kind of whittle that down into the ones that we determined would have the most impact.

So they either had a medium or high impact on stream health.

We're generally supported by the stakeholders we talked with and at least the ones that participated in the project.

and or we felt would have a high likelihood of success, of course, with appropriate staffing and resources.

So in addition to those specific criteria, there's a lot of other constraints and considerations, of course, that we have been evaluating and will continue to as we move forward, you know, on through the project.

So I'm going to move into sharing with all of you the strategies that we recommended to the board in July.

And this is one of the attachments that I provided as the table.

It doesn't exactly match because there were a few that we've removed from the presentation that were not supported by the board.

And one additional one that was not recommended by staff, but was encouraged by the board for us to add it back in and continue exploring.

and developing into a proposal.

So to organize the discussion, generally, we group those strategies into these three main categories.

And those are newer revised regulations, incentives and voluntary opportunities, and monitoring education and partnerships.

So I'm going to go ahead and share the strategies in each of these categories.

I'm not going to provide a lot of background information.

It's late, but there is some analysis in the table and I'm happy to elaborate, clarify, or answer questions at the end.

So the first category is new or revised regulations.

And you'll notice as we go through these slides, there's two additional pieces of information at the bottom of each one.

And that's the next step either to initiate proposal development, if our Stream Health team felt we had enough information to do that at this time.

or we'll say assess opportunities if we weren't really sure and we needed to do a lot more research to figure that out.

And the second thing is alignment and that's where this proposed stream health strategy aligns with a strategy that is included in either the climate action plan, that's the CAP, or the biodiversity action plan, those are listed as the BAT.

So as we go through you'll see a lot of that, there's a lot of overlap in those strategies and they're cross-referenced here.

So in newer revised regulations, the first strategy is to reestablish county-wide requirements for perpetual retention and management of 100-foot stream buffers with exemptions for agriculture, forestry, and other limited land uses.

The second one is to strengthen restoration requirements and guidelines for when agricultural or forested land is converted to residential use.

and also for mitigation when violations of the water protection ordinance occur.

The third one is to amend the zoning ordinance to clarify that environmental restoration projects and specifically stream mitigation and nutrient banks are permitted by right throughout the county, subject to consistent regulations for their review and approval.

Next is to review existing policies and regulations to identify opportunities for better alignment with the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act.

And lastly, to adopt the full Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act voluntarily in our county.

And this is the one that was not recommended by staff, but recommended by the board for staff to include in our proposal development.

The second category is incentives and voluntary opportunities.

And the first one is to establish a riparian buffer easement program focused on protecting water quality, specifically through new riparian buffer easements in high priority areas, and by strengthening existing whole property easements with additional provisions to protect stream health.

Next is to establish a conservation easement assistance program

to help landowners with the transactional costs of placing land under conservation easement.

The next one is to create a stream health improvement fund that offers assistance to landowners engaged in conservation or cost share programs and to support specific restoration projects that benefit stream health.

The next one is to support existing cost share programs that promote best management practices to improve stream health.

And finally, explore options to encourage onsite treatment of stormwater and minimization of impervious surfaces by providing an incentive for low impact development practices.

And then the last category of strategies is monitoring education and partnerships.

And the first strategy here is to develop a countywide water quality testing program for landowners that could also serve as a screening tool to help identify waterways that would benefit from long term monitoring or stream health improvement projects.

The next one is to expand and formalize a new landowner education project.

Next strategy is to support expansion of education programs for students and a coordinated watershed wide approach, especially at the middle school and high school level.

And explore grant opportunities to support stream health restoration conservation and education projects and programs.

So that's all the strategies.

And I'm happy to hear any feedback or make any clarifications or answer any questions if you have them at this time.

So I will thank you very much.

That was actually very helpful.

So I've got questions, but I'm going to let our colleagues go.

I see Rick's taking himself off mute.

Hey, this is very encouraging in terms of the amount of work that you've done.

And I want to compliment you

and the volunteers in this process.

Just a couple of observations, and I say this as somebody that worked with three watershed organizations and states to the north.

The first is when we look at analysis and discussion under section two, Kim, incentives and voluntary opportunities A.

I would go down to your sub point one, encouraging donation of riparian buffer easements to the county.

One thing that needs to be thought through is how the staffing will need to occur and how managing these easements will occur.

I wanted to put a thought out there

and that is if the county is going to start encouraging accepting donations or repairing buffer easements, should we include an easement dedication fee for the county taking over these easements?

The reason I ask this is when you get down to section C, you talk about creating a stream health improvement fund.

The one thing I've learned in four years working at a different level in the county is that unless you have dedicated money, budget cycles can end up restricting the flow.

You can crimp the hose.

And so the resources don't get to where they need to be.

And recession, mix-fession, every single year water quality

is going to need to be addressed.

In fact, you can make the argument that when the economy goes in recession, that's when mischief takes place in the riparian environment, more tires, refrigerators, etc.

getting a way of funding this that is going to be ongoing, that it's not episodic, periodic, you're not depending upon the political will of the Board of Supervisors whose members can change every two years, three can change.

So I think that I would urge you to look at that.

Under number, Roman number four in A,

You put down conducting a review of stream buffer provisions and existing conservation easements held by ACA and Albemarle County.

Great intern project for a summer.

Just ideal intern project, very specific focus.

Student would just lap up the opportunity to work on that.

Under B, establishing ranking criteria to prioritize

geographic areas, absolutely important to prioritize, but I'm going to come back to this subsequently.

I think there has to be a choice of essentially a beta.

Which of the magisterial districts do you want to start with?

And you could do that completely randomly.

They can draw straws.

You pick out of a hat.

But I do think you need to start with one and tweak it and refine it and then take lessons learned in working in that magisterial district.

One can make the argument with Daniel and Corey here that you may want to pick a magisterial district that has the least amount of rural area rather than the most amount because that produces some challenges that I'm going to come back to.

So on those, let me switch now to under section three.

A lot of discussion always at the board level.

Can we have volunteers take care of this?

Or number two, can we have a nonprofit organization that we already fund take care of this versus adding additional staff to the county?

And I would really urge looking into working with the RCA, and I divulge that my wife and I are contributors to the RCA, but since I worked with three watershed organizations and I had been part earlier of this whole effort to actually get the RCA to merge

into becoming the organization it is today.

But perhaps a P3 relationship with RCA is a model that should be explored rather than just adding staff, building, bureaucracy, et cetera, would be a good way to go.

They do an outstanding job in water quality monitoring, I might add.

And I would say that whether I supported them or not.

And I think under the next point, under B, Albemarle County could do a better job highlighting what RCA finds.

I mean, we try, I know when I was on the board, we tried to incorporate what RCA annual or semiannual water quality studies were finding, but it really wasn't part of the discourse as much as it could be.

Just a thought.

Under D, the last sentence said, exploring creative ways to educate the public and increase awareness of opportunities for landowners was identified as a high priority.

We have a public engagement department.

We've added a number of people over the last five, six years to that department.

There has to be somebody there that can be helpful to you in this whole effort to try to educate the public.

about this process.

And again, this is something that could be done with the RCA together.

And I flip over to E, and you talk about the RCA.

I think it's really important to integrate this with the Albemarle County School Division and the RCA and Albemarle County Community Development.

And I'm sure Diana brought that up at a board level.

So I'm just going to reiterate that, that I think the more we look at integration, especially because of our conversation on the last application on environmental education, there are young people and their young families that are eager to have their children learn this.

So the more we can

develop a partnership, a P4 type of approach than the better off we'll all be.

And finally in G, you would explore ways to work with VDOT to reduce the impacts from public roads.

I think especially that would be the case in terms of gravel where slopes are at play.

And here you could start with one magisterial district

and just do the study and look at how gravel roads and slopes are having an impact on water quality.

And that's where integrating with RCA, they could potentially come and actually do water quality testing at that location.

My final point is not about anything in your phase two.

My final point is on page two of your summary where you said,

There was broad support within the work group for utilizing a variety of these different approaches.

However, representatives from the agricultural community expressed strong opposition to employing a regulatory approach for rural land uses.

If we continue

an approach that's based on voluntary compliance in the rural area.

We are kicking the proverbial can down the road.

And so what I would say is the proper way to approach that is to ask the question, what strategies, individual or in a mix,

assure the best chances or probability of success in natural resource protection because doing it the same old way and just going along with the Farm Bureau statement that we're taking care of that, our animals are not in the watershed,

And I'm not picking on the Farm Bureau, but I've heard that raised in a Farm Bureau meeting before.

It just isn't proven to be accurate when you do the testing in those locations and we're looking at the high levels.

of animal proteins in the water.

So I just think you have to ask the right question.

And with the right question, we get out of this hole.

You're going to regulate it.

You're shoving it down our throats.

That isn't the question here.

The question is, what strategy is going to assure the best chances of natural resource protection for the long term?

Because we've got a watershed and drinking water supply that depends on those outcomes.

So good luck to you.

I'm delighted that you're here and you're working on all of these issues and you've made real headway.

Thank you for all those comments.

Karen Duke, did I see your hand up?

Yeah.

Liz Palmer asked me to give her comments originally on the presentation to the board.

And I was told planning commissioners couldn't be on the stream committee because we would get a chance to comment in this venue.

But I feel like it's a little bit after the fact, frankly, because it's coming to us after the board has already told you what they want.

Nevertheless,

In terms of the riparian buffer easements, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission had a riparian buffer easement for many years, and as far as I know, it still goes.

Were you proposing the county replicate that, or are you, I mean, I didn't understand, it seemed duplicative.

Sure, yeah.

And that's one of the things we looked into.

So we talked with the district and also with other easement organizations in the county, like PEC,

to really kind of work through this and what would be the best approach before we settled on it being a county program.

And there's a few reasons for that.

So the Soil and Water Conservation District does have a program.

They're focused now at least more on mitigation and it's also been more opportunistic so it's really just anyone who will come to them.

So we wanted to have more of a strategic prioritized effort where we're really focusing on maximizing water quality benefits in the county.

Also, their last riparian buffer easement in Albemarle County was recorded in 2003.

So while the program still exists, it hasn't really been active.

And talking with the district, they don't really have the capacity to expand it at this time.

So I think we are in some sense replicating it, but hopefully in a different and more effective and efficient way.

Okay.

It does.

That was very helpful.

Also, just keeping in mind, of course, that there are other organizations like Friends of the Rivers of Virginia that hold riparian easements and have done so for many decades.

So anytime we can partner with a group that already does this for a living and does it well, rather than reinventing the wheel or trying to duplicate something to Rick's earlier point about fickle budgets and fickle elections.

Just another couple quick points.

In terms of TMDLs, Total Maximum Daily Load designated watersheds that are already impaired and have cleanup plans, when

Proposals come to the Planning Commission to review.

One of my little pet peeves is it never states this property is on a TMDL stream.

In other words, no additional consideration is made for the fact that that stream is already impaired.

nor is there any recommendation from staff as to additional things that might be needed to be considered for a property that's coming to us.

So I have sent emails about what is a TMDL till I'm blue in the face.

And I just wish that that was part of the regular procedure for the county and that that could be given some consideration because we already know the water is impaired and we're adding more land disturbance to it.

And you did make an excellent point, too, about

earlier about trying to have stormwater management, especially for water quality, be taken care of on site.

instead of an offsite purchasing of water quality credits, which was enabled by the legislature several years ago.

And it's really hampered our ability to get developers to actually do low impact development BMPs onsite.

They keep buying credits and we're worse for it.

I mean, I'm not blaming them.

It's a cheap thing to do, but it's not good for our streams.

But I just want to end really quickly on

I would say the number one thing that we need to spend our time on is landowner education.

If I was to go and do sort of a man on the creek interview in my watershed, I would bet that the majority of landowners have no idea that there is a stream buffer regulation.

And the other part of that is they would not know why.

There's low awareness of the, you know, my neighbors dutifully mow to the stream, to the actual stream, not just they mow the floodplain, they mow, they want a lawn right to the edge of the creek and they don't know that that's bad.

I have gotten some neighbors to fence cattle out of the stream through cajoling.

But I'm not going to be the one woman educator of the Sam Miller district.

So I just think that a big push to get landowners to do the right thing by letting them know what the right thing is and why it's so important is really where we need to put our energy.

Also, we have so many people moving in and out of the area.

You know, we have people who've been here their whole lives.

We have people who've been here one year.

And so, you know, just that it needs to be a constant re-education campaign as to why the county is doing this.

And then in terms of adopting the entire Chesapeake Bay, Chesapeake Bay Act regulations for this area, I think that's a pretty tall order and will probably not get very far, but that's just my opinion.

Are there others?

Well, thank you for this.

It's great to have you leading this effort and to see such an organized approach thus far.

Building on my two colleagues' comments, I think that they have hit them very well.

But after spending a number of years in the Midwest, where agriculture is king and

We know about the runoffs down in Mississippi and the bloom in the Gulf of Mexico.

There are a number of farmers that I am amazed, given many aspects of their life, politics included, are big, big supporters of buffers and supporting buffers.

I imagine you're keyed into it, but I really encourage you to reach out to the National Association of Conservation Districts, which is actually headquartered in Johnston, Iowa.

They're really into the public education side and bringing farmers who have amazingly successful operations, who believe in the importance of buffers, to speak with other farmers.

I think Rick and

Karen have both hit on this, to my mind, you know, just seeing, you know, the very, on table 1A, and then there's the exemptions for agriculture, forestry, and other limited land uses.

We know why it's there, but I don't know that this is really as hard a nut to crack as it is

It's been set up as a we-they instead of an us.

And I think that there are ways to get at this that are actually quite beneficial to the farm community.

So that would be my message to you.

And if you want to follow up with me on that, I have some more ideas.

I spent a lot of time with farmers in the field in Iowa over the last 30 years.

Other comments?

Well, while I'm waiting to see if my colleagues, I will sort of share a couple of things.

I think if I could extend Rick's image of kicking the can down the road, my concern is that we kick the can to the development area.

Because I was going to ask, when you put up

your phase one where you have those six different issues that you were talking about there, whether or not we'd see any overlap or any commonality between the phase one approach with the developers and the phase two approach with

the agribusinesses because my sense is that even though these are two business types, so there's the ag business and those who build homes and commercial and other places, that the people who do their business in the development part of our community

are treated differently than the people who do their business in the rural or the agri part of their business.

My colleagues have pushed me to the right to farm legislation.

That's it there.

And I get that.

So I understand

where I'm actually plowing a field that's got a lot of bedrock in it.

But my concern is that if Albemarle County is talking about creating a space that allows both people to come here and to build new lives, whether or not that's on what we might see as the traditional farming with cows and sheeps or

the new kind of farming that's taking place, which is with distilleries and wineries and breweries, that kind of farming, that there seems to be a disconnection between the regulations that are applied to two businesses.

So I'm getting away from the rural and the pastoral vision of what farming used to be, but get down to the fact that in Albemarle County, as I'm experiencing farming,

that that happens to be sort of downright co-calculated business.

And many of those businesses are finding that the calculation works for them because they do weddings on their property.

and that while one might say that hopefully there'll be a new generation that comes out of that wedding, but that's not necessarily the crop that's gonna be grown or gonna be harvested there.

So my concern is, is that as you move through this whole thing, if there's some commonality or at least there's some parody that takes place in phase one and phase two of how we look at streams and it's not necessarily just sort of aligned with the romantic image of what farming

used to be in our community.

Because I will share, as Karen shared about her stream, I sit on Ivy Creek at the end of my property's Ivy Creek.

And someone who wanted further upstream from me, they wanted to put a crossing across Ivy Creek.

There's nothing but dirt between them, the 100 foot, and the creek now.

So Ivy Creek that used to run clear, even when we give those torrential rains, we have plenty of soot and silt in it now.

and so they get to do that because they sit on a farm.

I could do it too because I sit in the rural area but if we were developing something in the developed area that would never have been allowed.

And so how do we sort of have this balance to preserve the key thing in our opening statement in our comp plan if we really want this to be that beautiful and that place that people move to and come to live in

and to grow prosperous and to grow wise, then we've got to figure out how the streams that are in the agricultural park aren't trumping the rights of the stream, aren't overseeing, as you say it that way, aren't sort of trumping the rights of the streams in the rest of the county.

That imbalance is uncomfortable for me certainly since I've become a member of the commission and had an opportunity to see how we treat two businesses.

These are just businesses now.

This is not me doing this as a hobby, shall I say.

These are people who are doing this as businesses and I'd like to see some parity between those businesses.

Yeah, sure.

I will.

So I have a lot of thoughts.

So let's see where I can begin.

I'll start, I think, with responding to Rick about the need for dedicated funding.

And also you talked a little bit about staffing and including an easement dedication fee.

I think those are all things that we're considering absolutely staffing with respect to all of these proposals and also resource needs and the need for those to be continual.

And so with the Stream Health Improvement Fund, for example, there is a suggestion, and I don't know how feasible this is, but to have at least a portion of that fund be paid into when mitigation is not possible.

So not really in lieu of mitigation for development projects, but in my understanding from talking to previous staff that we had that in the early 2000s, and you talked about the recession and things going away.

that actually existed in Albemarle County previously.

So we do have a model for it and that would and or having some existing dedicated funding would also allow us to apply for grants where matching funds are required.

So there's a lot of moving parts, but I think, you know, working through all those details is sort of what we're doing now in this proposal development stage.

And let's see.

What else?

Also, you talked a little bit about working with other organizations rather than adding staff, for example, with the RCA water quality monitoring proposal, and that is exactly what we are proposing.

They have the program already well established, and they have ideas for how this could be expanded.

And through this project, we've heard from a lot of landowners throughout the county who want someone to come out to their property and test the water on their stream.

And so, you know, they have their RCA and DEQ have testing sites throughout the county, but there's certainly a lot of opportunity for more of that to occur and having it be a response to landowners need.

It would be somewhat of a random sample throughout the county that might identify

areas where there's some issue contributing to string health, but also long term monitoring sites if there is a really pristine site or areas that need to be targeted for restoration.

and further monitoring.

So those are some of the ideas that we have, but certainly building on those programs, not with existing staff and also with the education programs, it's the same.

We are working to coordinate, hopefully, proposing to coordinate RCA and the Soil and Water's existing programs with some of the county schools, the science coordination that's happening there.

and integrating that if the county schools can accommodate it.

So hopefully that addresses some of your questions.

So certainly working with the school division and absolutely with our public engagement department, we've been working with them throughout.

We also have a lot of volunteer efforts already with the Natural Heritage Committee doing education.

So we're trying to merge together some of these pilot programs that we've been testing and expand them and formalize them

and specifically, to your point, Karen, to new landowners in the county.

So we have GIS tools that can help us identify when land is purchased and when it's purchased in a high priority area.

So really targeting new landowners to help educate them about existing conservation and cost share programs and other just best management practices for stewardship as well.

So all of that is definitely part of the program.

And I want to mention also, Karen, that we are developing these proposals now.

So the strategies have been developed, but I welcome your feedback.

Actually, any of you, as we go forward in the next few months, we're going to be really working on fleshing out these proposals.

So we certainly will have more opportunity for receiving that feedback.

Let's see.

and focusing on TMDL watersheds.

So that's actually in the phase one proposal, the development related proposal to at least one element of that, looking at those two layer erosion and sediment control measures.

So that would be one way to do that, but there's probably other ways to integrate that into the processes and community development.

So that's definitely good feedback.

So I think those are all the things that I would like to address.

We thank you and we'll look forward to I guess your next update or your presentation to us.

I'm looking at Charles as he's nodding since he's there.

And I know I'll expect you to hear from Karen and certainly from Rick.

So I, and perhaps there were others who were a bit quiet tonight, but I believe you'll hear from Karen in the not too distant future.

anything else that anyone needs to sort of add in before we say thank you.

Thank you for your good work and have a good evening.

Nope.

So thank you for your good work and have a good evening and we'll see you soon or we'll see you next time.

That's appropriate.

Thank you.

Okay.

Bye-bye now.

Committee reports.

Who has committee reports?

No one has committee reports.

It must be the, are we on, are we on hiatus?

Okay.

I guess we're on hiatus.

I will say yet again, even though people probably knew about it, if you've got this last sort of moment that you're gonna go on holiday before you just have to stay home again, please let us know.

And for some people who are traveling to exotic places, be safe in your travels and we'll hopefully see you when you come back.

on that piece, since we don't have any committee reports.

Sure.

Thank you, Chair Bivins.

We had a couple of special use permits that went to the board on the evening of the 4th or the Monu Park application.

Remember, it came for this board to increase the area for their four fields.

No increase in intensity, but just additional field usage.

That was approved by the board.

Then afterwards, it was the Blue Ridge Swim Club against modifications to their special use permit, and that was also approved by the board.

And then last week, I had the pleasure of trying to explain a little bit about net density and gross density to the board.

which is really just something we need to work on in the comprehensive plan, I think, in our ordinance updates to pick a direction and clearly define which we do because as I'm sure many of y'all know, we have certain things in our ordinance, certain things in our master plans and certain things in our comp plan and none of them really align.

So we've got our work cut out for us in the near future to try and figure out the direction we want to go and clearly articulate that.

Well, that will be one of those evenings where I hope you don't pack the schedule for that, but you just let us wrestle with that term.

Certainly.

I look forward to that discussion.

I wanted to also give an update on several of you all have asked about meetings, and if we head back in person or not.

So I will say a while ago we did start making plans to eventually get back in person, but we have paused that here at the county based on the current statistics with COVID, new Delta variant, and recommendations from the Health Department.

We will continue to monitor that, but for now, in the foreseeable future, we will continue this Zoom meetings, virtual meetings all throughout the county for us and continue to monitor the situation and follow the guidance from our health district.

So as things evolve, we will certainly update you all and encourage everybody to stay safe.

Thank you.

Anything else?

Questions for Charles?

Karen, your fiver was brilliant to see.

It was.

I have to say it was the County of Albemarle that applied for multiple grants to help the people of Southern Albemarle get online.

And it was the third try was a charm.

So it's taken us

It was all because of those Swedes.

Well, we certainly, I can say, and hopefully others can compliment, it was, you did not break up once.

We did miss the kitty though.

We did miss the kitty.

You had the Moore cat, but we missed your kitty too.

All right.

Anything, any other items for old or new business?

Well, do we have any items for follow up?

Nope.

Hope to do.

Well, then we know we're not meeting next Tuesday.

And we're not meeting the Tuesday after that.

So the next time that we'll be together in this form will be September the 14th.

Did I get that right, counselor?

You know I have a problem with.

All right.

So we'll be together on September the 14th.

And not that this matters.

But pay attention to when you can vote, you know, in person or by mail so that you can keep yourselves and those you love protected.

Okay.

Cause you don't, that's opening up soon and I don't have the date in front of me, but it's an easy day to get.

And for those of you who might've had resistors in your family and said, when it becomes, when it becomes legalized by the FDA, it happened.

So you can suggest that those who were waiting and who can have it, they can now go get a vaccination.

On that note, folks, we're three minutes over.

Have a good night.

See you in a couple of weeks.

And be aware of the heat, because I've seen a number of people who have had heat stroke.

So if you don't have to be out there, it's rough.

See you in a couple of weeks, folks.

Oh, there's Karen.

Be safe in your travels, everyone.

Bye-bye.

Bye-bye.

OK, there we go.

We've done it yet again.

Well done.

A successful meeting.

In fact, I actually did go and read that chapter.

And after I read that chapter, Charles, I went, oh,

The Commonwealth still views itself as being a land-grant colony from Great Britain.

That whole chapter on agriculture, I read that and said, oh, this is basically you do whatever the hell you want to do.

We've got some work cut out for us.

Well, I don't know how we ended up with a couple of more empty weeks, but we did.

There must have been a reason to the scheduling, so we'll see.

Yeah, so you give people a bit of a break, then you know.

Yeah, we've gotten into a good rhythm.

All right, buddy.

Talk to you soon.

Thank you.

Yeah, for sure.

Okay.

Bye-bye.

Thank you, Carolyn.