Planning Commission Work Session Meeting   3/26/2024

I got this information.

You're ready.

Okay.

The planning commission for March 26, 2024 to order and I will begin by stating the opportunities for the public to access and participate in the hybrid meeting are posted on the Albemarle County website, on the planning commission homepage, and on the Albemarle County calendar.

Participation will include the opportunity to comment on those matters for which comments from the public will be received.

With that, I will establish a quorum.

Yes.

Ms.

Firehock.

Here.

Great.

Second.

Any discussion?

All right.

Mr. Firehawk.

Mr. Missel, Mr. Clayborne, Mr. Murray, Mr. Bivins, Mr. Lord.

Great, thank you.

All right, I will now open this or public comment on anything not related to the agenda.

Thank you for bearing with us.

I will now move on to the consent agenda.

Any discussion?

Mr. Moore.

Mr. Bivins, Mr. Murray, Mr. Clayborne, Mr. Missel, Mr. Carrazana, Ms.

Firehock.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

You're busy tonight already.

I appreciate that.

And with that, I will move us to the work session and turn it over to staff.

Thank you, Mr. Missel.

Good evening, members of the commission and numerous members of the public.

My name is Leah Brumfield.

I'm in the zoning department of community development.

And I am joined by Rebecca Cobb of the Berkeley Group.

In this work session, we'll be presenting articles three and 10 for your review and feedback.

So as always, these agenda times are wild guesstimates, but our agenda is as follows.

starting with overview of project goals and our work on this phase of the zoning modernization project, then going on depth in the principles on our style guide.

The style guide principles are evolving, but they are guiding our work throughout whenever we're drafting the ordinance.

So I will be delving into the format and layout of the proposed article three on applications and permits.

And we'll illustrate some of the changes we're bringing in this draft

and then we'll look at Article 10, non-conformities.

However, the draft changes on Article 10 are more about formatting an organization.

Leah, can I just interrupt you for one second?

I'm sorry.

Just to the

matter process.

All right, sounds good.

Thank you.

No pressure.

So as a quick refresher, project goals of the zoning modernization project are to provide streamlined and user-friendly regulation, incorporate best planning practices and current state code requirements, address goals and strategies identified in the comprehensive plan, and consider citizen needs and issues identified through public engagement process.

As we talk about different articles, I will be using article numbers for the new proposed ordinance, but to clarify,

These article numbers do not map to our current articles.

So for example, article three of our current ordinance is definitions, but article three of our proposed ordinance is what we're covering today, applications and permits.

So throughout the presentation, whenever we reference an article number, you can assume that we're talking about the proposed ordinance, not a current ordinance regulation.

As a quick recap, initial reset and kickoff work session for Zoning Modernization Project was August 2022.

At this time, we determined to update the ordinance to a broad holistic approach as recommended by our Consultants Berkeley group as a best practice.

December of that year, we shared with the Planning Commission initial findings of the first round of our public engagement and the zoning evaluation report prepared by the Berkeley group.

We did list a lot of best practices, general suggestions for the ordinance, and then as shown on this slide in January 2023, we held an open house to present those same findings to the public.

In March of 2023, we held a work session with the planning commission again, reviewing drafts of Article 1 and 2 of the proposed zoning ordinance.

Article 1 focused on general provisions of the ordinance.

Article 2 established the powers and responsibilities of various officers and bodies enabled by the zoning ordinance.

So today, we are presenting Articles 3 and 10, covering applications and permits.

and Nonconformities.

So Article 1, covering general provisions, we addressed that before.

It did include the establishment of the zoning map, the zoning ordinance itself, and it referred to enabling legislation for both.

It provided guidelines on how to interpret the ordinance if conflicts arose between different sections or even between our ordinance and the Virginia Code.

We don't want to step on any toes.

So Article 2 established the powers and responsibilities of the zoning administrator, board of zoning appeals, architectural review board, and the planning commission per Chapter 2.

of the County Code, and as well as enforcement standards and how to apply a fees to applications.

So the draft ordinance we're looking at today, Article 3, covers procedures and requirements for applications and permits.

The first division of Article 3 includes common standards and procedures that may apply to multiple application types.

The following divisions after that first division

address individual application types and the specific standards and procedures that only apply to that individual application type within that division.

And then finally, we include requirements and legal standards for public hearings and public acquired notice.

So application, I'm sorry, article 10 covering non-conformities includes non-conforming uses, structures and improvements, parcels and signs,

and that is pretty straightforward.

So these phases of our project, I've mentioned phase one multiple times already tonight, we are in phase one

We're trying to wrap that up.

We are relying primarily on established practice, Virginia law, best practices, and just general good principles of code writing.

As we move into our later phases, when we're looking at design standards, district standards, uses, we'll be relying more and more on the goals and the strategies of COMP plan and public engagement with key stakeholders.

So that will be the primary focus of those those phases is getting that public feedback and incorporating it to make the best practices, the best practices for our individual ordinance for our community.

In Phase 2, we'll be looking at the community design standards, making up essentially the fabric of the built world.

Standards for lighting, landscaping, signs, parking, among others.

And I'll be going very briefly into our initial plans for this phase at the end of this presentation.

Phases 3 and 4 will cover standards that affect uses in districts.

including which uses are permitted in which districts and what the primary makeup of each district fabric will be and then later we'll go into performance standards that govern different types of uses.

So these will be incorporating best practices from the needs and values of our community and so we're really looking to the compliant for that

and then finally in phase five, bringing it all together.

We will have multiple reviews of these and then a public hearing with this body and then at the Board of Supervisors for Adoption and at that stage we'll also be working on general information campaigns to make sure that people don't feel blindsided by the adoption of the new ordinance.

So, as we mentioned earlier, going into our style guide principles, which is what's forming the backbone of creating the draft of the ordinance.

These guidelines are aiming at achieving the project goals we outlined at the beginning, primarily creating a user-friendly regulation.

Our style guide principles have been evolving throughout the process.

And I will note that most of the examples I'm pulling today are from code that we have written.

Therefore, they're from Article 3 and 10 and 1 and 2, primarily Article 3.

These principles will apply throughout the drafting process.

So they may be expanded a little bit, but they will be followed throughout the draft.

So our first principle, one that guides a lot of decisions, is to avoid jargon.

And this includes simplifying text, removing legalistic language whenever possible, but still retaining enforceability in the ordinance.

So the example pulled here is from section 332.2 in our current ordinance, site plan applicability.

and we show that we're simplifying when a site plan is required from the current ordinance language to the proposed language.

Instead of referring back to requirements of Section 32, other applicable requirements, other applicable laws, we're just saying it's required for new uses of development or changes or intensification of use.

That is when a site plan is required.

It's a simpler way to say all of those things.

The second style guide is a brief.

It is to be brief.

This example, we have simplified specifications of when the agent may schedule work sessions and how they must determine appropriate times for requiring a work session.

This can be stated in one sentence.

The factors to be considered, which are described in the first example of current ordinance language, are a matter of zoning administrator policy and judgment.

So this is an internal process, not regulation.

It can be excised from the proposed draft.

our third principle using logical and consistent organization.

We see here in the current ordinance, we have the allowance of creating application forms by the agent or the zoning administrator in multiple places for every different kind of application.

All of these are fundamentally the same.

A more logical and consistent organization would be to, instead of repeating the statement,

creating common procedures under the proposed section 3.1.4.

That application standard applies for all applications that may be regulated under the zoning ordinance.

This

creates consistency between the application types as well.

Here I have kind of the table of contents, a snippet of the table of contents of Division 3, I'm sorry, Article 3, Divisions 3.2 to 3.7.

As you can see, we repeat

A predictable pattern within each type of application so that the reader can understand what's coming next.

It shows the applicability for the division followed by the designation of the agent, followed by non-common standards and procedures for that application, and then anything extra at the end.

This is just a lot easier to read and simpler, and it is predictable.

Along those lines, applying to the, again, entire to the ordinance beyond what's here today, we are following the Berkeley group suggested format of articles where we start with article followed by division and then subsections and subsections across the entire ordinance.

Another drafting guideline that shapes the way we've written is the prioritization of numbered lists.

Looking at the example text on the left, we see a wall of text in the current ordinance.

It describes when a non-conforming structure may be expanded despite non-compliance with a front yard setback.

This snippet of text on the right shows those same regulations in a numbered list instead of a paragraph.

None of the regulations have been removed, but the language has been simplified, so it's shorter, easier to read, and in a list format, there's much more white space.

It's much more reader-friendly.

Kind of along those same lines, creating indented lists.

We're trying to avoid more than three levels deep, so we don't have a, b, one, a, small i, two i's, vi,

all the way down.

Here you see first level is action in public hearing, decision-making body can take the following actions, and then we list those actions.

Additionally, we've created non-regulatory subheadings, which make the text easier to scan, easier to read and understand.

The subheadings are not substantive, but they are very helpful for the reader in approaching the text.

as may seem obvious.

We're standardizing acronyms throughout the ordinance.

Whenever a acronym is used, it's spelled out first at the beginning of a section and then referred to by the acronym for the rest of the section.

And then our ninth style guide principle is to use active and inclusive voice wherever possible.

For example, in this current section of ordinance text, a special use permit may be revoked by the Board of Supervisors

Instead, we're rephrasing that to say the Board of Supervisors may revoke.

That is an active voice and just better English.

So we have, of course, removed instances to gender specific language and are using titles instead of gendered terms throughout.

We are stating requirements in the positive instead of in the negative.

Using may instead of may not wherever possible.

and in this example, current regulations for owner initiation of a zoning map amendment or special use permit.

Pre-application meeting is required unless certain circumstances are met.

In this proposed text, a waiver allows specific exceptions and it is a positive waiver under these sections.

And as a brief digression in creating this presentation, we did notice the error in numbering.

I know that's very important.

And the numbering formatting will be corrected before the ordinance is presented again.

So one of the first things that we came to the table with in rewriting the ordinance was to avoid repeating state code.

We've removed language where state code is copied directly to avoid just bulking up the text for no reason and also to avoid potential conflicts between our ordinance and future amendments of the Virginia Code.

In this snippet pulled from Albemarle County Code section 34.3, we describe who has standing to appeal a decision by the zoning administrator.

This section of state code 15.2-2311 is almost verbatim the same words.

So I know that there have been situations in the past where the

Legislature has changed in ordinance, but the grandfather grandfathered in any locality that is already passed language previously.

I'm just wondering if that might cause an issue with us if we are not putting the language of the code in there.

So that's a good question that we still need to be mindful to comply with the state code and just not repeat the provisions in our own local ordinance to the extent of the legislature, grandfathers, or puts into law the existing provisions.

The county can certainly have an ordinance that states that.

Okay, great.

We are nearing the end of our style guide principles.

So we only have two left.

The 12th one is to incorporate general breast practices.

And we have discussed a number of best practices, which are some of them covered in the style guidelines, style guide principles that we have talked about so far.

But in addition, looking forward, we're also looking at best practices, including things like community design standards,

that we're pulling from effective zoning ordinances across the state and across the country.

We'll be applying these best practices by evidence by staff research, communication with other planning professionals, and guidance from our consulting group for later drafts.

These also best practices also include things that we're going to touch briefly on later, like removing application requirements from the ordinance and naming conventions for

So finally, we are incorporating tables and graphics throughout the ordinance wherever possible as a as a style guide principle.

This illustration on your screen right now shows the application process for a site plan application.

This was drafted by some of our staff, and while these illustrations are not regulatory, they are just illustrative and helpful for the reader.

They do provide easier reading through the ordinance, and they allow a general understanding of processes, concepts, and design standards especially.

So in later phases, we'll be engaging with design professionals to provide a more detailed illustrative regulations like setbacks, treat canopy screening, things that are a little bit more design-based than who may sign an application.

So moving on to the actual drafts we have today.

Article 3 covers the processes of applications and permits that are applicable under the zoning ordinance.

Currently, these processes and standards are scattered throughout the ordinance.

Here is the list of places, certainly not exhaustive, but the primary list of places that we're pulling from the current ordinance from 5.2 to section 30, 31, 33, etc.

will be drawing the references for things like HOMUX, Entrance Quarter, Certificate of Appropriateness, all of these types of applications into Article 3 instead of having them scattered throughout.

But I will point out Article 3 only addresses the processes of the applications.

not the standards for the actual uses themselves.

So while we're bringing in the process for applying for a home occupation, which is a type of zoning permit, so it follows a zoning permit process, we're not saying what types of home occupations are available or what the regulations are.

That's not what we're covering right now.

That's going to be in phase four.

So stay tuned.

The general principles that start at Article 3 are essentially common procedures for applications.

The processes are standardized across the types of applications and they allow the different descriptions and standards and procedures to serve as a menu for the application divisions listed underneath them.

You will note that the general principles, Article Division 3.1, refers to actions by an agent.

This is because the agent, enabled by state legislation to enact different types of application processes, is different depending on the type of application.

So in some instances, the agent may be the zoning administrator.

In other instances, it may be the planning director.

We have used the term agent here to avoid saying the zoning administrator, the planning director, or a designee as appropriate in every other line of this division in keeping with our second principle of being brief.

So kind of illustrating that.

On the left here, you have a table of contents of Division 3.1 showing those common procedures in general principles.

And on the right is a snippet pulled from the special use permit standards and procedures under that division.

So the highlighted sections on the left

are called out and do apply to the special use permit processes very explicitly.

So, pre-application meetings, community meetings, all the application form submission standards, application fees, all of those, those all apply and they are described as applying under the special use permit division.

In contrast, the standards and procedures for site plans only calls out common procedures for forms, submission standards, application completeness, and all the way through application review and action, which is actually staff review and action in this case.

So the common procedures addressing pre-apps, community meetings and public hearings by the planning commission, the board do not apply.

And so they're not pulled in, they're not highlighted in the site plan standards and regulations division.

Delving a little bit further into the application of principles that we've described in drafting the ordinance using special use permits as an example.

First, we call out

the zoning administrator as the agent for special use permits, saying that whenever Division 3.1 describes a process and we're using that process for a special use permit, the agent is the zoning administrator.

And additionally, under each type of application, we describe who may initiate each type of application.

And this is different based on the type.

So that is not included in common procedures.

For example, a special use permit is the only type of application for which an eligible easement holder or electric cooperative may apply for a special use permit without the owner's written consent.

So that is called out here.

Additionally, some standards and procedures are unique to the special use permits.

The common procedures do apply as underlined here, sections 311, 312, Division 314.

But the following additions or modifications also apply regarding public notices and hearings and compliance with Virginia Code.

Further on, going further down in the division for special use permits, the sections that are unique to special use permits include the factors to be considered, conditions of approval, the effect of those decisions, revocation and voiding.

They are caught out in this section and they're unique to that.

As we noted before, removing actual application requirements from the ordinance is generally considered a best practice.

It reduces the amount of text in the ordinance, avoids confusion for applications that may not require every single requirement.

If they're a smaller in scale application, an amendment, or if application requirements change through time.

So instead of having this giant list in the ordinance, we have minimum submission standards.

However, the application requirements are not disappearing.

They are simply staying as currently provided in a checklist tailored for each application.

This is part of our pre-application process.

The applicant is provided with this checklist as shown on the left that tells them which things they actually need to provide with their application.

This is, as I noted, generally a best practice because it can reduce confusion, smooth the application process,

and if we need to amend that form, we can do that as a matter of process.

We don't need to do that through a zoning text amendment.

For example, if we decide that civic space design elements for form-based code need to have electric charging stations, we can have that on this checklist instead of putting that in the ordinance and wasting everybody's time on that.

This also, it is fully required by the ordinance because we are including that provision that says in a completed application form is required for this application.

The completed application form includes these items as highlighted by the agent in the special use permit process, the zoning administrator.

So that is the legal requirement.

And again, I'm going to harp on this until everybody is used to this term.

Special exceptions in our current ordinance are going to be changing to legislative modifications as our proposal.

This is just a correction of terminology.

In the state code, a special exception is defined as a use permitted by special use permit.

This causes a lot of confusion and ambiguity in our ordinance, and so we're renaming specializations as legislative modifications, removing that ambiguity and just avoiding the issue entirely.

Additionally, in Article 3, codifying standards for zoning permits, clarifying types of certificates of appropriateness that are available.

Currently, zoning permits in our ordinance refer only to buildings that do not require a building permit but are subject to setbacks.

So that includes farm buildings and sheds, primarily, and other other small structures.

in practice.

And as we have applied them as the powers of enabled by the zoning administrator to administer this ordinance, a zoning permit also should include and does include in practice, clearances, home stays, family day homes, commercial clearances for buildings like a restaurant or a grocery store,

and home occupations.

Again, as in we're only in phase one, we're only focusing on the processes of those applications, not the substance of the uses themselves.

So we are also working with, we've worked with the architectural review board staff clarifying that certificates of appropriateness may be obtained through one of two ways.

Both have the same standards, they have two different review processes.

One is that the Architecture Review Board reviews the actual application.

and the other is that the staff will review the application if it meets certain requirements.

So previously the staff reviewed certificate of appropriatenesses were referred to as county wide certificate of appropriatenesses and that has been very confusing to developers and the public in general.

This hopefully clarifies that process.

and we have also tried to organize that section to be more logical and more streamlined.

So briefly moving on to article 10, we're covering nonconformities, including uses, structures, parcels, and signs.

Largely just following stated guidelines of removing Virginia code where possible, translating nonconforming language into plain English where possible.

But we are retaining language for Albemarle County specific nonconformities.

like critical slopes and country stores since we cannot refer it back to any other ordinances for those.

The hierarchy of Article 10 again follows that structure of a division followed by sections and subsections, including the actual regulations.

This includes, in addition to the previously mentioned ones, repair and maintenance of structures, non-conformities in the flood hazard overlay districts and signs.

So as we're nearing the end of phase one, our remaining steps are continuing to solicit final draft feedback from stakeholders, which includes this work session today soliciting feedback from community development staff on individual application types that they work with

and meeting with Blue Ridge Home Builders Association and the Charlottesville Area Development Roundtable, which I need to reply to those emails to get those set up.

We will discuss the goals that those two groups have previously expressed for us and get feedback for the current drafts as well to make sure that we're covering all of the bases that we had intended to cover.

We anticipate that these feedback sessions and edits will be completed by June or July of this year, at which time we will return to the Planning Commission for a final review of all four articles, the whole family, one, two, three, and ten.

And then in August or September, we will hope to bring all four articles to the Board of Supervisors for their follow-up work session before moving on to Phase Two.

As the commission is aware, the community development staff is also working on AC44 comprehensive plan because why embark on one giant project when you could embark on three, make no small plans.

So the zoning modernization project is attempting to avoid leapfrogging in the comp plan.

and along those lines, we are hoping to use the actual action steps that the COMP plan is drafting right now to get incorporated into our ordinance.

As we're kind of waiting for those action steps, it is aligning with that timeline that I've just outlined before.

But we know that the public and especially interest groups in general do have a lot of interest in the project, and they do have feedback that we don't want to disappear.

So we have also created a feedback form on our Engage website, shown at the bottom of this slide, engage.albemarle.org, backslash, zoning slash modernization, where anybody can provide that feedback, provides suggestions, things that we need to investigate, just ordinances that aren't working, ordinances that are confusing, things like that.

but as we're getting towards that section of phase two, working on community design standards that are listed here, grading, visibility, lighting, et cetera.

We are currently working on the scope and budget requests for this phase, including a request for information for additional graphics work from an outside professional design service.

There's a lot more opportunities for illustrations in standards like lighting and landscaping than there are for who may sign an application and how many days an application has to be turned over.

That generally concludes staff presentation.

Yeah.

Great.

Thank you.

That was really helpful.

And you're right.

You did answer a lot of questions, at least that I had.

So that was, that was great.

Also was very helpful to see the current language next to the proposed language.

And it's almost like.

You know, I don't think this is ridiculous, but if you ever see those F1 comparisons where the cars are racing and their times are matched and the two are right on top of each other and one gets further ahead and then make it, it would be nice to see almost an overlay of all of the changes that occur, you know, and what that actually ended up looking like, but

I know that's a lot of work, so that was very helpful.

Why don't we do this before we give feedback on the specific articles?

Why don't we just open it up for general questions, if I could?

So why don't I start with Ms.

Firehock?

I don't know.

Okay, great.

All right, we'll get to that.

I don't have a particular question.

I do want to just thank the, I mean, the presentation was well formatted and put together and asked for a lot of my questions.

We had had some conversations earlier and think those examples were exactly the kind of things that we were looking for and helped tremendously.

Great job.

Thanks, Mr. Murray.

I want to continue to thank you for creating a document that is easy to move through.

So while your colleagues gave you a hard time while you were presenting to them,

Tell them the benefit of putting a document together that the commissioners can read and it has page of X or page of Y allows us to be good commissioners and listen to you as you as you move us through this.

So I have lots of questions about particular section.

And I can do that because I actually could read it without being annoyed.

Just echoing thanks that it is written in plain language and plain English that sort of halfway-dedicated non-professional urban planning person like me can understand it quite well.

And I did have one very general question actually throughout sort of all the document.

There's a lot of references to state code.

Yes, absolutely.

I had a couple of quick questions in general.

One is you answered really well, I think, the comprehensive plan timing, because I was wondering how this was going to move forward and how you were getting ahead of things if the comp plan weren't ready.

So that was very helpful.

You mentioned, I think it was

and Matt Steps.

You were talking about phase two and you said this also in your presentation while staff is currently working on the scope of phase two and creating funding requests for this phase.

I'm just curious, is that funding?

Okay, to actually do the work essentially.

Yes.

Is there any potential that that wouldn't be funded?

I think it's, we have general support for it.

Got it.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

You mentioned simplifying, which it, you know, clearly in your examples, that was very evident.

As an applicant, if you think what it might be like to read the simplified text, there's this feeling of relief, like, oh, great, now I get it, I understand this.

There's also a risk, I guess, in that it is so simple that you may miss things or that, you know, the applicant may assume it's simple when in fact there's some extra layers below.

that are more complicated.

So I'm just curious, I don't know if you can answer this, but you must have thought through that as you were looking at simplifying text.

And I guess my question is, in a couple of areas in articles 10 and primarily in article three that we'll get to, there were opportunities for subjectivity, where it seemed a little bit vague, like there were decisions like, you know, something doesn't warrant the pre-application meeting.

Well, why and how do you as an applicant know?

My question is making sense.

Yeah, so this particular example that you're talking about is when an application can or should be exempted a pre-application meeting or a community meeting.

Those are essentially currently codifications of what the zoning administrator is allowed to do regardless.

That is just a general

Power of the Zoning Administrator to make those decisions.

And additionally, I will point out that community meetings are actually not required anywhere in state code.

We have put that upon ourselves.

So those requirements of those factors on when those things are to be considered by not putting them in the ordinance, it doesn't have to be exhaustive.

and have conversations with the applicant at the time and say, this is what you should be aware of.

These things might be an issue.

Yes.

Okay.

So they're not blindsided by that.

There was one other example.

I think you had it on slide number nine.

You don't have to go back to it, but it mentioned form and it quoted as part of the sentence in a format acceptable to the county.

But I was like, well, what does that mean?

Sure, so that in particular goes back to our third large project that we're doing, the comp plan zoning modernization and our enterprise permitting and licensing software system that we're adopting right now.

That is the application process, walks the applicant through that.

Great.

Good to know.

Thank you.

I think those are my only questions.

So with that, are we ready to move on to Article 3?

Okay, why don't I start down at this end?

Sure.

Thank you.

And again, thank you for the whole thing.

I especially love the

Euse of active verbs instead of passive verbs.

Really quick.

Do you want us to do round robins or could it be easier just to move through the sections?

And then those individuals have something to say on that section can come in as opposed to trying to encapsulate.

Yeah, and just come through with that.

I think that might be easier.

Yeah.

Everybody good with that?

Sure.

I'm looking over at my colleague's notes.

I think he's got more fine tooth comb edits than I do.

But I do have.

I do have one question since I started about section 3.1 wondering if we could define agents somewhere in there as we do in 3.2, 3.3, 3.4.

Yeah, so I'm saying that.

Yeah, I wonder if we could say that because it just, we just kind of get somewhere in 3.1 point, whatever, where it's like the agent, it's like, who's the agent?

Yeah, and that's a small thing, relatively speaking, but just

Yeah, since we refer to the agent, just wondering who that is would be great, even if it could be one of a few people.

Also in 3.1, and I'm glad this came up.

This was like my main note when I was reading through this, even though it's way better, even though it's way less wall of text, I still would love tables and graphics.

Like this just begs for a flow chart, you know, 3.1.

So I'm glad that that's part of the plan.

And that's my main stuff on 3.1.

Great.

I guess I had one other broad question on 3.1.

You want me to do that first?

OK, thank you.

I've got my last broad question, and then he's going to get the comb out.

I'm curious how the process would change or not change when the applicant is the county itself.

Sure.

So that is more covered in the actual divisions for the individual application types.

So for example, 3.2 zoning text amendments is actually the only applicant is the county.

No one can apply for other zoning text amendments.

And so the only standards that really apply are

the initiation, so that is just who follows it up.

If you look down at zoning map amendments 3.3.3B, we clarify there that the pre-application meeting

is not required if the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission initiates.

So we did try to highlight that otherwise the application is fairly similar.

There is an application, there is staff review, and it is generally publicized, the same process, and that is not a change.

Questions.

These are just questions.

So on page four of 24.

I just love being able to say that.

Section 3.1.9 B. And so my question there is, this is once the application reviews are complete, county staff will schedule the application for review and action by the Planning Commission.

the Board of Zoning Appeals and the ARB.

Or, it seemed like we were throwing the zoning board of appeals into a process where it's either of these.

And so that's what my sense, it might be either of these, not all of them, because I didn't get until I got to the very end and saw all of them.

I'm thinking, well, why would the zoning board of appeals be scheduled upfront?

So it's just a bit of clarity there that I was asking for.

It does the order matter in the next one with 3.1.1.10A, where you say the purpose of a work session is for staff to present information, seek direction on the issues, and allow the Board of Supervisors the Planning Commission.

So is the order necessary because above that you put the Planning Commission for, are you ordering

That certainly wasn't the intention.

I'm reading and saying, okay, is this what you meant with this?

And so you can say, no, that's not what I meant with that.

Um, the council's already told me that we can't, from the planning commission, can't suggest proffers, but maybe someday we will.

But that was, that was my reference at 3.1.11 B, where I was hoping that we would be, you are now giving us the magic wand to be able to issue proffers.

And I was very excited when I read that.

So,

on 3.1.12B2A.

So the decision-making body will take one of the following actions, refer the application to the agent or to the planning commission.

And so I was wondering why, who was the body that was going to send it to the agent or to the planning commission?

So the decision-making body is any body that makes a decision.

That can be the ARB in certain circumstances, which are very rare.

It can be the Planning Commission, it can be the BZA, and of course it could be the Board of Supervisors.

So they can, if for example, the Board of Supervisors

has a public hearing during which they feel that there is more information needed.

They can refer the application back to the Planning Commission and say, you need to have another session on this and discuss this in your body because they haven't discussed the planning implications thoroughly.

So that's the reference back to that.

or they can say this application is missing so many different pieces.

Staff review needs to be conducted again.

I appreciate that.

To an agent, okay.

Okay, that's that that takes care of the parody issue for me because I was like, whoa, wait a minute.

Only people that have the only the only board which is traditionally referred to anything back to us has been the supervisors.

And or the agent.

Okay, great.

Christopher Murray.

Because the only thing that I would say is that there's, you know, in the streamlining this and removing the actual, you know, forms and so forth out of here.

That is something that we can look into.

I think not sure what the best practice would be for linking out of an ordinance into the website.

I mean, even if you just said as can be found on the county website or we're we're appropriate mentioning the actual form name and the code so that people

So one of the philosophical discussions that we've had is how much information to include in the county code.

In other words, what should be codified versus what information for the public should be put elsewhere.

And so one of the guiding principles of this is to take some of the information out of the county code and put it on the county website instead.

So I think what you're suggesting is an excellent idea, but maybe it's best put it as an editor's note or something because, for example, right now in the county code,

We've got state law references under each section.

That's not part of the code, but it's a helpful to the end user.

Sorry.

For three, I'll start with 3.13 community meeting and a preface saying this, but this might be a policy and not codified, but it's something that's wanted to think about.

And that question is around.

For community meetings, do we feel like we're doing everything we can to be equitable and accessible?

within reason, right?

And so if a meeting, let's say if they're historically done six o'clock in the evening, well, you work the night shift or if you work two jobs or you don't have childcare, what is that mechanism where you can still get that community feedback?

And we might be doing it very well right now, but it's just a question, right?

For us to pause and thank, or I call it a pause point for a second, is are we where we think

We feel like there's opportunities to grow in that area, right?

And so I'm not sure if we're going to come to a resolution tonight with something I wanted to kind of pause for a second and just ask ourselves, you know, is there anything else we could be doing?

No, so I think that is definitely something that we are prioritizing as a department and it's hard to change the policy, the procedures that we have, but they are definitely procedures and I don't think that we would want to codify that because then if we decide to change a format make things

Everybody has a phone embedded in their heads and then we all just join online on Zoom.

Cool, thank you.

And then the only other one for 3.1, I went down to 3.110 work sessions.

And let me find my spot.

Okay, purpose.

And that sentence, where was I at?

Okay, under purpose, the last portion, the purpose of a work session is to receive public comments on the application.

And maybe say, are we sure?

I don't think we've historically have done that.

Sure.

We did discuss that.

That was another one of those philosophical questions.

I guess one thing to think about is there are multiple ways of receiving public comments.

It doesn't specifically say in public forum, right?

Well, there are certain public hearings in which public comment is mandated to be accepted, but those are just the public hearings.

Understood, thank you.

But here, it could be taken as not necessarily just in public form, right?

Well, it talks about work sessions and or the, let's see.

That's it.

That's it.

The planning commission under architecture review to receive public comments on the application.

I've received public comments just not here tonight, for example.

But I can see somebody pointing to that and saying it says the purpose is to receive comments talking about the work session.

So it implies the work session purposes.

So I think it should be changed to allow in-depth analysis on an issue or something like that.

I'm laughing that we've had a long conversation about how to integrate public comment into work session businesses this week.

Well, I think it's a little bit different than what we were thinking about earlier.

The work session's purpose is to allow for us to

to perform in-depth analysis on an issue or an applicant.

You know, that's why we have work sessions versus just a public hearing.

We're not having a public hearing, we're having a work session.

Yeah, clarifying that.

Certainly, it's not that I ever think about things that I did when I was chair, but certainly when I was chair, work sessions were work sessions, they were not open to the public.

Public could have, could observe them, but there are very rare opportunities for the mission to come together and discuss things.

without having to wrestle with outside comments.

And while it's appropriate for those comments to take place, and it's necessary to the process, but there are things where we just need to have a time to just talk about stuff in an open arena and to challenge staff and also challenge ourselves on certain issues.

Well, maybe an in-depth analysis because, again, if you just ended with to review public comments, it really does read like the purpose is to review public comments.

Good comment.

What was the public?

I'm 3.1.

I'm good.

Thank you, Mr. Carrazana.

Can we go to what you were there? 3.11.

So the conditions of approval, because this is something that comes up every now and then, obviously, and we're struggling with particular application and there are some conditions that we would like to

I think there are some limitations on that, obviously.

And I was struck by, some of these make a lot of sense impacts to the public or surrounding lands.

We've certainly done that before where there's screening or, and we've added some of that.

But I guess the one that struck me was the performance guarantees or bonds.

Sure, so the example that we discussed for requiring a condition of approval that would have a performance guarantee or bond would be something that would not be bonded in the site plan process, but would be required for the use itself.

So if there was a special use permit that was going to really necessitate screening, but it was reusing a building, it's not necessarily going to be triggering a site plan, which would bring into the bonding process normally, then you could, for example, if the hearing was in January, the Planning Commission reviews it in January,

The board will be reviewing it in February.

You can't plant at that point, so you can't put in screening.

So we're not going to just push off the hearing until it's planting season.

and the performance guarantee is that, so what came to mind to me, so if you're approving on a certain amount of water use, let's say, is it, can you say you cannot exceed X amount and if

We've done that.

And certainly when it's not, when an organization is not tapping into a public order supply, and so what we've done or what we've offered is that they have to have a meter and a hydrant.

So it's a restriction.

I guess the performance guarantees, I get the bond.

What this is more is guaranteeing that certain required improvements are going to be constructed rather than compliance with the zoning ordinance.

There are other ways of enforcing water restrictions.

So, for example, if a user exceeded the amount of water permitted under a special use permit, that would just be a zoning violation that the zoning administrator could enforce.

Again, I think that, first of all, I would say that 3.1.11 is simply or B is simply declarative of existing law.

and again, one of the conditions that planning commissions in general can require is these sorts of bond or performance guarantees.

Thank you.

So the other, I think it's been mentioned, but.

Some clarification on depth, because someone may just go to a particular section if there's an area that they're, this is what I'm interested in.

And because there is some, like an agent, that's come up before, but I think there's some other language in here that having definitions that people can refer to or refer to.

might be helpful because they may not always do so.

What is an agent?

I mean, a lot of people won't know.

And like you said, it could change from one section to the other.

So I think there's some reference to that or some way for the lay person to just

Yeah, we will have a definition section as we currently do right now.

The current plan is to have all the definitions in that definition section separate from the individual articles.

So it would be I think its own article actually.

They just had a couple for Article 3.

So, Article 3, Division 3.1, 3.1.2, Pre-Application Meeting, D, Requirements Prior to a Meeting.

It's a question, which is, doesn't a conceptual plan in Article 3 need defining as to what's included?

I'm asking if we should define what somewhere in here, what is a conceptual plan?

I know what a conceptual plan is, but I've also seen wide interpretations of how conceptual the conceptual plan is.

I think that depending on how we use the term throughout the rest of the ordinance we can either define it or this may be one of those policy things.

Right now we currently have a process where an applicant submits a paper application essentially or a PDF application that lists what the conceptual plan needs to have on it and that's on the application form saying

a sketch plan showing general dimensions of whatever you're trying to do and also conceptual plans can vary wildly from this is a square that I think I want it to be a hundred feet from the property line but I don't know if I can do that can you tell me if I can

It is even more vague than what you just said because we've had quite a few that are just

Block Blobs, Block 10, Block 6, Block 4.

And then a little narrative like Block 10 has got more commercial and Block 4 is more residential.

And we have no idea what these blobs look like.

There's no massing.

There's a lot of wiggle room.

Yeah.

You know, so we've been, and so I understand that the application checklist, you know, of like the details will be

separate, but I just think conceptual plan is one that we either need to define it better or you put a lot of detail in your application checklist as to what you expect to see somewhere.

You decide, but I don't want to see any more block blobs.

If I don't have to, I'd like to know, you know, because we have turned down applications

because, you know, for rezonings and whatnot, because we thought that the architectural excellence was below what we thought was appropriate or the site lacked adequate green space or whatever the reasons.

But it's because we had enough information to make that determination.

And then we've had to make the same type of determination on block blobs.

And yet, you know, do we approve that one?

We don't know.

Maybe their architecture and their layout is inferior, but we have no way of judging.

Can I add?

Yes, please.

I think it's something that's come up multiple times where just the quality of the presentation and whether it's a conceptual plan or even

Yeah, they're asking us for a special exception on whether, you know, stepbacks was a common one.

And but we have

No idea of the topography.

There's no sections.

There's there's nothing to actually decide whether it would be appropriate to grant that.

Is it appropriate on that particular site?

And some others have given us great details and some others like more than we need.

Yeah, I think a lot of that is definitely going to be working through policy and working through their application forms.

Yeah, because we have had this conversation on the dinosaur many times and we were promised

Yeah, we don't want to lose it.

All right.

I have a totally different comment now on section 3.1.3 community meeting.

In there, it talks about the purpose of a community meeting is to present and answer questions from the public.

That is not the only purpose of a community meeting.

It's simply say, here's what we're doing.

Do you have any questions about our plan?

That's no, that's not the purpose.

That is a part of the purpose.

It is also to make the applicant aware of local concerns and site considerations that may inform the applicant's design, land use, site conditions, or other location specific context.

So I know I said a mouthful and I could text that to you, but the point is, it is not simply to just say, you know, yes, I'm planning to do 30 units per acre.

The point is to hear input.

Now, whether the applicant chooses to make any modifications based on public input is certainly up to them, but it is to hear from them and to consider those.

And that's why we require

the public meeting far as we at least recommended far enough away from the hearing here so that the applicant has time to make changes.

You know, that's why staff doesn't say, yeah, you can just have the community meeting the day before, because if it was just to answer some questions and show them what they're already doing, then they don't need any time in between to do any modifications.

And I know that lots of really excellent modifications have occurred because community meetings, including some where the community was completely against the site, and then came around after a couple of meetings with the applicant where they're able to listen and make appropriate changes.

So can we please add something to the effect that

to also inform the applicant's design or to inform them about site-specific context or something.

Because there also are conditions where, not conditions, situations where I've sat there and watched community members say, well, there's a pocket wetland here.

There's this thing.

There's actually a runoff problem where all the runoff is going into my yard from this.

And the designer, the engineer, didn't know.

So thank you for telling me.

Let us look into that and incorporate that.

So it is to inform them about stuff they wouldn't know unless they ask the public.

So I know it was a long chant, but I had a role in actually getting those public meetings to be required in this county.

So I feel pretty strongly about what the purpose is.

Great.

I just have a couple of quick questions, comments on 3.1.

The good news is we only have 13 left, so we've won down 13 to go.

I'm coming back to you after this, too.

Real quickly, we talked about the subjectivity under the required application or pre-application meeting section 3.1.2b, 4, 5, and 6.

So a pre-application meeting would not be required, for example, if a meeting has already appeared before the staff for a pre-application meeting and they're just reactivating a new application.

That would be one of those situations.

Probably not.

Our requirement is that a pre-application meeting is required.

Well, Mr. Chair, I would point out that there's only three that do require pre-application.

Keep in mind that we're consolidating all sorts of other matters in this title.

For example, appeals to the BZA, architectural review board matters, what we're currently calling special exceptions, but will become legislative modifications.

All those other types of applications do not require pre-application, only these three.

Okay.

Got it.

Thank you.

on section 3.1.6, application completeness and then in application or incomplete applications.

One and two, you mentioned 14 days, 90 days.

I didn't see timelines.

I saw a few other timelines, but those sort of stood out to me.

Like for example, under section 3.1.9, application review and action, staff review, review by commission and board.

Staff review would cover so many different things that would honestly be impossible.

I see.

Okay, got it.

Thank you.

It's good to know.

And then we talked about 3.1.11.

I think that was it.

All right.

Let's go down.

Commissioner Firehock.

Oh, wow.

All right.

We have one overachiever in the group.

Okay.

That's because you make it so easy for me to read.

If you don't want me to do this, my friend, just do it like some of your other friends.

All right, I'm on.

I did have a question.

I did have a question.

And this is really just a question.

So on on 3.3.3 B,

That would be referred back to section 3.1.2.

So it is required in accordance with 3.1.2.

And then if we look back at that section, it can be waived under C if the agent determines that it's not necessary.

Action on such applications will not be invalidated solely due to a failure to timely mail this notice.

Just curious, it sort of stood out to me.

I'm curious why that's there.

So that is a copy from our current ordinance.

There's no change there.

And I think it's just if there's a staff who in mailing staff will always attempt to mail things and make sure they are mailed correctly.

Yeah.

Thank you.

All right, 3.4.

Any questions, comments?

I just had one on the time to submit.

So I'm on 3.4.3.

D1.

Last sentence.

For the Planning Commission's public hearing proffers,

whether they were signed by the owners, blah, blah, blah, the Department of Community, at least 14 days before the Commission's public hearing on the zoning amendment.

Must be submitting to the Department of Community about at least 14.

So with the application itself in the application requirement checklist, that would require the proffers.

This is the signed proffers.

Thank you.

So if I might, if I might clarify, Mr. Chair, D1 is actually a requirement of the current county code.

So the current county code requires proffers to be submitted at least 14 days for the planning commission.

They can be signed or unsigned at that point.

D2 actually goes a step further in requiring signed proffers to be submitted at least nine calendar days before the Board of Supervisors hearing.

That's actually a change from the existing code, but it's consistent with the Board of Supervisors rules of procedure.

Got it.

So these, some proffers are an area where I think it might be useful to actually have some of the Virginia code in the ordinance because I know that in the past there have been things like impact fees, for example, that were enabled by the legislature.

And then some localities adopted impact fees.

But then, but then the legislature took that ability away later.

and then those that hadn't already passed an ordinance and haven't in their ordinance, they could no longer adopt or impact these.

So I think what we're currently doing is we're currently trying to maximize the enabling authority of the Virginia Code and what we're doing here is we're referring to the sections where in the Virginia Code it's a shall, the locality shall do this or locality shall do that.

I think Albemarle has been progressive also in taking advantage of the places where the state code says localities may do this or may do that.

Mr. Herrick has been very careful to say, no, no, we want to keep this one because this is a may.

And the only places where we're removing the information is, again, where the state law is already self-executing.

Regardless of what is included in the county code or not, the state law applies even if the county is silent on it.

Your point is well taken.

Thank you.

We provide three H2 where we speak to or where we speak to that unless otherwise specified in this chapter or specified as a condition of approval we're talking about.

where I'm coming from is when we move land from commercial to residential, which we've done particularly north of town on a couple of times, thinking of a holly mead where the food line, remember we moved some commercial land into, and so it says sign requirements and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, will be the same as for other uses in the district.

On page 11 of 24.

I, too.

I, too.

There's no H2.

I, too.

Sorry.

So that would be the zoning district.

So when we move something from commercial to residential, if then all of a sudden has to be.

Yes, but keep in mind, this is in the special use permit section, part of the code.

I think it might be helpful to add a descriptive word.

I think that would help.

Oh, I did have something there.

Sorry.

You know, this is my thing.

So we see this in certain areas where if you don't do something by a specific time, the permitted void.

But here, and this is where I've been pushing this for a number of years now.

If the S.U.P.

does not spring by some X-Day, then it's void.

That is something, so are we... That's K, by the way.

Yes, so that is a provision that we do have in here.

We are allowed to do this.

This was something that we haven't, we don't have currently codified in our ordinance, but it is permitted under state code, which is this is just a specification that if you say within the conditions of approval,

that a use must commence by a certain time and it does not, then that special use permit is void.

However, standard across the board is that a special use permit does not expire.

And it's the fundamental quality of a special use permit is that it runs with the land.

It is a special use permit that creates that use as particular.

Yes, because

So we know we're eventually going to get the field school back before somebody.

Because the field school had a five year and it didn't do it in five years and it came up with a series of reasons why it didn't happen.

And the supervisors, I believe, added on two years to this, being able to do this piece of this project on Garthra, or Barracksville, I guess it's Barracksville.

At some point, what we're doing is saying, here was a good idea that took place, and this I think was, I think this was like 2010.

So 14 years later, we've got a piece of property that's being held under a dream of 2010.

and I think either the owner of the property or the agents of the property, or excuse me, the owner or the contracted individual for the property ought to say to the county, no, we're releasing this.

Let somebody else do something with this piece of property.

I'm also thinking about the piece of property across from the Northside Library where the person came in and cried in total sorrow about his family and the divorce and blah, blah, blah, and the partnership breaking up.

That was now seven years ago.

I think that's actually a very good point.

I brought this up, too, that when you have these things that are approved, but then they sit out there forever, ordinances change, our county procedures change.

Then someone comes back 20, 30 more years later and says, OK, oh, there's this thing that's on the books.

It's approved.

I'm going to do it now.

And on 3.7.8A, we actually do have a time period for site plans.

If a site plan isn't done by X amount of time, then it becomes invalid.

Sure, I think that is really why we've included K so that when these special use permits come before these legislative bodies, then if there is something that is time sensitive on this use, then that can be specified within the conditions of approval.

In general, because of the nature of special use permits and how varied they are, we don't want to apply an indiscriminate time limit just across the board.

And most special use permits, you've highlighted some of the issues that we've had with some that have come back and maybe haven't been active in time.

But the vast majority of them don't necessarily need that time limit.

So that's really why we have this in here.

So when you come across these situations and you say this is a up in development, up in coming kind of area, you need to worry about your traffic.

I have a question.

I'm sorry if I can on that topic, an example.

So there is one down in Howardville next to the Fish and Games boat ramp where the owner asked for basically a canoe livery.

and there was a lot of controversy around it so the Planning Commission at the time, I was not on the Planning Commission, granted a special use permit for the canoe livery but they said that they had three years and that they would then revisit whether the SUP was appropriate.

The canoe livery never actually commenced.

There's no equipment down there, there was nothing built, there was a sign put up but no

No liverying happened.

So I guess that's my question.

Like if I were to go and I don't, I'm not asking you to look this up right now, but like if I was to go on the county's website and look that up, would I probably still find it saying, you know, canoe livery, SUP kind of thing or would it fall off?

Because, you know, nobody reported it, you know, and counties not like down there monitoring canoe trips.

I guess I'm just curious, like,

It just strikes me as something like, you know, you can go back in the records and find that they did condition it to three years, but then nobody checks.

It's not happening there.

That could be something that could be added to the Board's agenda by whoever the concerned party is for that.

I'm going to pipe in a little bit here, Bart Savoda, Deputy Director of Community Development.

The other part of J is if you're in violation, we'll call it a repeat offender, for lack of a better term in any of those conditions, the board can revisit and revoke a special use permit that way.

Right, so some of our, and if we address the timeframe of the example of Commissioner Firehawk that you used, the processes that we're putting in place will help track some of those approval dates and different things that occurred in the past.

One of the things to remember when we have this conversation about what happened over the last about 15 years or more is we had the housing crisis that not only extended all the site plans

and Resonings extended the special permits.

And then COVID also did the same thing.

So some of those things that we're seeing that didn't happen had an extra special grace period of over a decade.

Yeah, okay.

So some of those things, it's hard to measure those.

I just want to put that into a little bit of context that this is the start of trying to implement some of those things that have expiration, but also the uniqueness of what happened between the housing crisis and COVID lengthened some of those plans to 14, 15 years.

Thanks.

You talk about next steps in your staff.

Memo, and it talks about reaching out to Cadre and to the Blue Ridge Home Builders Association.

I could be interested to hear their thoughts on these kinds of items as well, because going through a special use permit process can be value add to the land.

And if you start to change the durations of the timelines or tie it to a site plan or things that are, you know, affected maybe through the market and through the, you know, ebbs and flows of the market, you may find that it's better to keep it

more flexible, but also have it travel with the land.

So I don't know, I just be curious to see what they have to say about that.

3.7?

Yeah, Mr. Weber.

I was curious for a number five around religious assemblies.

The bar luba, which is, what's that acronym for?

It's religious assembly uses.

The law says that we cannot, we cannot treat a religious assembly use any different from any other use, or sorry, more harshly than any other use in that zoning district, since we allow assemblies

Gotcha.

Thank you.

I had a general, really related question.

I'm sorry, were you done?

Oh, no, go ahead.

I'm in a conversation.

Go, go, go.

I was going to have something related to that.

Did any of those six change in this?

No.

Okay.

And then I said one more.

This is just a comment.

I'm not sure if you're going to do anything about it, but 3.7.6b.

This is a practitioner.

That's I got your comment.

Any and all applicable laws and regulations and everything.

That scares me as a practitioner.

Well, we do not add additional federal requirements to the zoning ordinance.

All right, any others on 3.6?

Sorry, 3.7?

3.9?

It's too late.

I have a question.

There's like an auction.

You missed it.

I have a question.

I'm page 15 to 24.

Is it possible to combine B2 and C3?

and just do some language, some language sort of changing there because you're saying above it has to be prepared inside.

Well, it has to be prepared, but then below it says it has to be signed and sealed.

We don't want them to be signed and sealed when they're submitted.

I see.

Yeah, we don't get that kind of permission when you're an attorney.

It just comes out on a piece of paper.

It's got to be right.

All right. 3.8.

3.7.

So it says that maintenance of improvements, they have to be maintained in perpetuity by the owner.

So is it each successive owner?

So by any owner.

So it's not the owner who did it because that person could be, you know, shuffled off their mortal coil.

Sure, it's not when we talk about the owner, it's not the standard of wording that we use where we refer to previous presidents as Mr. President.

Okay.

Thank you.

and on the bonding.

I know we had a couple of conversations on the bond.

Is there, do we have really somebody in-house or a department that really takes, that really looks at bonding?

Oh, yes.

Okay.

No, I know.

I just, I just, we don't, at least some of us here do.

The rest of us never engaged and I was just fascinated by that.

I had a couple of questions, just one general question on 3.8.3B, Administrative Certificate of Repropriateness.

So, there have been some changes as far as consolidation, where some of the uses have been described using one sentence instead of two.

The actual standards that are being requested here, those have not changed.

This is, we copy pasted from the current ordinance, put it in here, and then where there was some tightening that could happen, that happened.

But as far as actual

3.10.

How about any on the rest of the Article 3?

I didn't know that tenants were able to ask for a zoning permit.

So that would include something like a restaurant requesting a zoning clearance.

Thank you.

Great.

I think I've talked enough.

All right.

It's good.

Well, we have water.

I'm good.

Why don't we go to article 10?

And since it's relatively short, maybe just open it up for any comments on the entire article and we'll start down at this end.

Okay.

I know.

Okay.

Let me say this right.

I appreciate all the great writing and the fact that I don't have very many comments is a testament to your excellent work.

But there was one thing that I couldn't understand and I kept reading it, maybe it's only me.

It was article 10, article 10.2 D1A becomes less nonconforming than the original nonconforming use.

I read that over and over and I could not understand.

So this is one of those situations where we tried so hard to make this make sense.

Sure.

So if there is a use that is located

on a parcel that would not otherwise permit that use, but it's a non-conforming use, so it's allowed to continue.

Why can't we just say more conforming than less non-conforming than the non-conforming use?

Less non-conforming.

There's a line.

So there's a line.

Think about a line that's zero, and you're trying to reach that line, and above the line is conforming, and below the line is non-conforming.

You're trying to reach that line, but you're not actually in the conforming section yet.

It's not more conforming.

So the non-conforming use is abandoned and can't resume if it becomes less non-conforming.

I wonder what example it would.

Well, so for example, if the intensity of the nonconforming use is reduced, so for example, and this may not be a good example, but suppose that you had a commercial, a garage in what became a residential area, and you had it was a let's call it a two bay commercial garage in a residential area that was continuing on as a legally nonconforming use.

If the owner of the property gives up use of one of the bays of the garage so that they're only using one of the bays of the garage going forward, they can't go back to two at some later point.

Well, and I think the point that Ms.

Brownfield is making is just from a usage perspective.

It's not it's not yet conforming.

I just suggest to you that if I can't understand it and I'm no sage, but I think other people will also not understand this.

I went to planning school.

I don't understand your example, but just the reading of just that text.

If you don't happen to have an esteemed attorney,

who knows land planning sitting next to you, as I do.

Okay.

That's the point.

That's right.

Yeah.

Okay.

I'll stay in the non-conforming.

So 10.2.1.

Thank you.

This is just a clarification, but let me see where it is.

Yes.

Sorry.

B. The establishment of non-conforming use.

The casual intermittent temporary or

illegal use of land or structures is not sufficient to establish non-conform use.

So the section here is saying that just because you start using something does not mean that you may continue using it as a nonconformity.

So one of the examples that we have there is there are homestays that have been in existence for 10, 15 years.

and they never obtained a permit for a bed and breakfast permit, which is what that permit would have been at that time.

Just because they've been doing it for a long time doesn't mean that they are now non-conforming.

They weren't following the rules to begin with and so then they don't get to be brought in underground non-conforming use and continue that use.

They're still in violation, whereas if they had gotten a permit for a bed and breakfast permit and then we changed the regulations for homestays, they are now non-conforming.

Subsection B is just declarative of existing law.

I mean, subsection B doesn't need to be there.

It's basically just to help the user.

And I think Ms.

Bromfeld's point is well taken in that in order to be a legal nonconforming use, it has to be a legal use.

You can't just establish a nonconformity through a consistent pattern of illegal land use.

I guess I was throwing me up.

But some people may make that argument.

And the reason this is in there is to create people that creatively want to argue, well, I've been doing this for 20 years, 30 years.

I'm a non-conforming use.

You can't be grandfathered in if you're an illegitimate grandfather.

Thank you.

I'm just trying to come up with a metaphor here.

No, no, no.

OK, Sander, 10, 2, 1, C3.

And I realize this is part of existing code, but it says, a non-conforming use on a portion of parcel may continue on that portion, except that a non-conforming quarry or cemetery may be enlarged or extended to either occupy or use an additional area of the parcel.

It strikes me that in our GIS, we actually have a natural resource extraction layer, and that this would be an opportunity to fix this.

Instead of saying parcel, it should say the natural resource extraction layer.

If you go to Augusta County, you can see areas that they've expanded mining operations so they're visible from space.

Sure.

I think that is hopefully covered under the last sentence, the last phrase of that section that says, identify other rebutting parcels under identical ownership as of the effective date of this article.

So when this ordinance is adopted, that's it.

You can't keep on buying additional parcels.

You have up until that time, so theoretically a year or two years, at which point you can have ownership of additional parcels, but you cannot expand it.

Also, the extraction, extraction overlay district

Oh, I see.

That makes sense.

We can definitely look into that.

I still say the wording on this is unclear to me.

So the general rule with legal nonconforming uses is that they can't be enlarged or extended.

However, the code here identifies two special instances just based on the nature of the use that overtime cemeteries are going to expand and overtime quarries are going to expand.

Unlike, for example, the garage example previously, it's just in the nature of these particular uses that over time they're going to take up more space.

Well, and the boundary under the current code is properties under the same ownership as of a certain control day.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, that's where I was going to go.

Why does the action of quarrying or burying what you quarry?

get an exemption.

So that is to me a policy question.

Why are those two things?

And again, I would say that's just inherent in the nature of the uses.

Again, over time, cemeteries and forms, just by the nature of their use, are going to require more real estate than, for example, an auto garage or a restaurant.

When McDonald's sells more hamburgers, they don't need to expand the restaurant.

people to bury or rocks to quarry, it's by nature going to require more land.

And I would argue while Albemarle County is a little different, most cemeteries have distinct boundaries.

And so they aren't, Albemarle County is a bit different because 95% of the county is rural, but in those places where 95% of the county is not rural, there are distinct boundaries around cemeteries.

For instance, and so I don't,

You know, that's why we do this.

That's why you get buried on top of each other now, as opposed to having

So the distinct boundaries under this would be the parcel lines rather than the extent of the current burying area.

I understand.

I understand.

I guess we're just having trouble with the owner being the same owner.

I think that the most direct path to address that.

would be to post-date this back to whenever this was initially adopted for the adoption of this article.

I think that would be probably, there's no more buying of land.

It's what you bought before that particular date.

to come in for some legislative process.

Yes, that's misbehaving, buried people.

It's non-conforming.

It's non-conforming.

So where are we leaving this?

Oh, before we go, I just want to make sure we've covered what we've talked about here.

And we have an action item.

Okay.

Well, she did, she, I think we did have an offering that it would be.

Yeah, one option.

That would, that would be something that we'd need to look at.

I, again, I don't have the current ordinance pulled up because we have this on the screen.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

So on D2,

Is it necessary to have, if the non-conforming use is discontinued for two or more years, the use loses its non-conforming status?

Stop.

Well, then my interpretation would mean who cares about your oil.

You haven't been using it.

I mean, but my question would be, you haven't had a restaurant for more than two years.

It doesn't matter what you... You could have Twinkies in there.

It doesn't matter.

And again, this is another section that's declarative of existing law that we could just as easily delete this section altogether and the law would still apply regarding non-conforming use.

That this is to aid the user and as Ms.

It's one of those do not iron while wearing clothing situations on the tag is that you know that it's on there because someone did it.

Commissioner Moore.

I don't have any additional questions on 10.

All right.

That is it.

On 10.2.2, this is just my, this is a general question.

I remember a long time ago, we were talking about, you know, no, sorry, you should have done this, a minimum of 25 feet from the right away and from the side.

At some point, we were going to wrestle with what can be built on a lot.

because by saying what you can build 25 feet from here and 50 feet from here, we are becoming, we are prescriptive of the size of the house.

And I remember at one point, somebody saying, when we come to this point of our work, we will actually have a conversation about what

the Planning Commission, and of course the supervisors and the public.

How we want to approach side setbacks, or as I'm looking, side setbacks, rear setbacks, are we going to be more generous or are we going to be more restrictive?

I had a bit of a falling out with your colleague Mr. Fritz on this because he wanted to put like 100 feet setbacks on the sides and 200 feet setbacks from the front and the back.

And it's like, oh, so we're really talking about you can only build a house if you have this size lot.

Is that coming up in a future phase?

No, this is only for non-conforming structures and improvements.

This is what, this is not a change.

These particular requirements, I believe that the 25 feet was changed actually from a previous requirement of 75 feet was reduced at some point in the past, looking at prior ordinances.

Thank you, Chair.

Yes, thank you.

Okay, sorry, and this is not about the text.

I think it's it's quite clear and good.

Thank you again.

I was really curious about the non-conforming legal non-conforming uses.

So it is possible to add a non-conforming use every time we make an ordinance change.

So if there is a use that is conforming now, it is legally conforming, and then we say, you know what, we don't want this use in Albemarle County.

Get rid of it.

I see, I see.

Yeah, that makes sense.

And then I was wondering, do we have some kind of database or map of non-conforming uses out there?

We have individual lists of very particular nonconforming uses.

We have lists of all of our country stores.

We have some lists of historic properties.

For instance, the garage that everyone held last week.

I'm not going to say whether that's legal or not.

I'm going to say is that as it turned out, the garage that was everyone's favorite garage

didn't have a business permit, was not supposed to have a garage in that piece of property.

Are you talking about the garage with the store?

Nope, this is not on the applicants property.

We all like to go.

And that piece of probably was supposed to be engaged with hops, but the hop business didn't work.

All right, let's

Let's see if we are we done with the the zoning modernization phase one.

I'm sorry.

It's really small.

Earlier tonight you flashed up an SUP checklist.

So that is what's currently on the Albemarle County Community Development website as an example of the checklist.

So when the staff go through a pre-application meeting with an applicant, they take that checklist and they actually clarify which things have to be in the

I have a question and I was curious like there's nothing there about like significant vegetation, stream buffers, those kind of things.

So that was just an example.

Okay, so you think there is more stuff about environmental conditions?

To show the existing ones?

Yes.

Okay, sorry.

You flashed really quick and I got all excited.

Awesome.

All right.

No, we have a lot of comments to work through.

I've covered a couple of pages on my notes.

This cob has also been taking probably better notes than I have.

Great.

Well, thank you for your work.

It's extraordinary.

And you guys are great.

Thanks.

All right, let's move on to

three and a half minutes.

Let's move on to committee reports.

Oh, I'm sorry.

All right, are we live?

Yes, you are.

Okay, we are moving now on to item number four, committee reports.

Are there any committee reports from the commissioners?

I do.

It was at the MPO Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee earlier, I guess those last week.

Got a presentation on moving toward 2050, the long-range transportation plan, which they're looking to adopt in May, among the higher priority projects on the plan, including these are actually some of these include projects that are already

have applications submitted just in case the funding doesn't come through.

They still want them on the plan.

That includes the Rio Road Peanut, which is the delightful name for the sort of double roundabout.

Another in the county is the Barracks Corridor that kind of between Georgetown and the Kroger there.

another one in the county just general Rio improvements between Huntington Road and Greenbrier also ranked higher and then Fifth Street multimodal improvements was another one higher ranked so the Fifth Street extended.

We also got a presentation on sort of how they selected the smart scale alternatives that were submitted.

Yay.

These are similar to the ones that we've talked about at previous reports, like the I-64 and 5th Street interchange, sidewalks along US 250 on Pantops, and again the Barracks corridor.

Awesome.

Thank you.

I bet we have a lot of reports that are similar to that, just different areas.

Commissioner Bivins?

I have no reports.

All right.

Yeah, so the CCAC met and we had a nice report from the fire chief about the

of Fire Rescue.

And that was very interesting.

Some of the things I learned that I didn't realize what the training requirements were for to be a volunteer firefighter.

And it's a lot of training.

And the other thing too is that they only have, even when they have a whole lot of applicants that want to be firefighters, that they only have a couple of slots that they can offer.

And so it's very competitive even to get those slots for a volunteer position.

So that was very interesting.

There's also a discussion about how it's anticipated that volunteer fire departments like Cris A. will over time transition to being professional.

And I'm sort of the tension around that and sort of like how they would want to do that in a fair way and open way.

No report from me.

and the MPO Tech Met, but it looks like it's from your agenda.

It sounds like it was a recap.

So they must have done the same thing on both needs.

Miraculously, there was a meeting with the Historic Preservation Committee of Albemarle County.

And we were able, therefore, to achieve quorum and elect the same officer slate.

So yeah, they did the business of the new year.

One thing that was curious that we ended up solving, this is probably in the weeds for you all, but

There was an issue where, I don't want to call it an issue, but it was a difficulty.

So one of the roles of the group is that we go out and photograph and document structures that are going to be torn down that are very historically significant.

You know, we try to talk people out of it, and they have actually successfully talked some people out of taking things down.

But it turned out that because any of the two members being together constituted there's subcommittees and if two members were present of the three people, then there was a quorum and then they had to declare a public meeting so that

that when we would go out, only one person could go to document the structure because if they brought another person with them, they had to notice it as a meeting, which you can imagine somebody who's tearing down a structure doesn't want to notice a public meeting where everyone wants to come out and, you know, do whatever they do, protest or whatever.

So we abandoned, we abolished the subcommittee so that they have two members of the committee happen to go out.

They will not be a quorum.

of a committee.

I thought it was very creative.

That's what we came up with.

And then the other thing is that we really desperately need new members to anyone who's listening out there and TV or recording land that we have six members, 12 would be the full committee.

And if we had more members, it would be easier to establish quorum.

So if you have any colleagues

who are upright in breathing and care about historic preservation, would really like to have them apply.

I'm gonna be writing a pithy, maybe even sexy email about being a member of this group and sending it around, because it is really interesting work, notwithstanding my boring rendition of electing officers and committees, but it is really important work and I hope that

Mr. Firehock, you should connect with AIA Central Virginia.

That would be great.

Yeah, I was thinking of like, you know, the historic president, the architecture historian faculty at UVA and the Blue Ridge Home Builders and

You know, but I'll definitely connect with you to get that email, you know, because otherwise I'll be filling out some spam, you know, form on a website.

So connections are much appreciated.

Anyway, I'll be drafting that this week and sending that around.

But please send us please send us people.

Awesome.

Thank you.

I'll report out on two, but I'll actually combine them because they were an identical agenda.

And that is the Pantops Community Advisory Committee in the Fifth and Avon Street.

There were really three areas of focus.

One was we were briefed by our board members.

on the fiscal, well, actually it was by the staff, it was county staff that briefed us on the 2025 budget.

And Traffic and Safety, the assistant police, the chief of police, briefed us on traffic and safety and it was interesting.

Hopefully, I think the slide presentation is probably available online.

It's really fascinating to look at accident data and to understand how they collect accident data, especially from drivers that are impaired and

Deaths.

Their accident data is actually more accurate in accidents that occurred and resulted in deaths, unfortunately, because there's no way to taint the evidence, I guess, in a sense, or

So, I think it gives them new rights.

I'm speaking about things I really don't know anything about, just what I heard.

And then also transportation projects, as I think some of us reported out on and a couple drew some questions, not a lot of questions, but one was the circle that's located at, I think it's old Lynchburg, bear with me one second, it's

Yeah, Old Inchburg Road and the access to the Fifth Street Police Station, Albemarle Police Station, there'll be a circle there.

Some question whether or not there was enough traffic volume to warrant a circle.

The answer was yes, that came out as being one of the top areas that needed it.

and then also the assistant chief of police mentioned that speed cameras will soon come to the area and they're starting in Commissioner Bivins area, which is right next to Albemarle High School.

So those were the, those were the highlights.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

So there's been a numerous budget meetings this past month.

The one meeting that we'll introduce to all was March 20th.

They did discuss, we had a long work session on development area and rural area land use transportation issues.

The community facilities will be going back to the board.

Again, as we're talking about goals and objectives and that will, the last of that tranche of goals and objective stuff will be community facilities on April 3rd.

I'll get a little worn to land use the second year.

Also at that meeting, the something to come before you, what may interest you was that the county adopted guidelines in accordance with the Public Private Transportation Act that allows for

Other entities to, if I'm not going to be able to give you all the details, but essentially for other entities to approach the county and, you know, offer to build a piece of infrastructure that the county has detailed that at once.

And I think you can also, Mr. Herrick, if you'd like to hop in on the other details, you can.

But yeah, another potential method for delivering transportation projects within our community.

The other thing that was on their agenda was the Grey Star property, the Old Ivy Residences was looking to seek an expansion of central services to that facility, and that was another item they took and passed with the Board of Supervisors 20th.

What was the outcome of that discussion?

That particular one, yeah.

It was granted.

Okay, thanks.

Yeah, so we are, I promise you this calendar, it's coming.

There's a giant whiteboard in our conference room with, you know, a calendar goes all the way to the next year with steps for moving through.

The next thing we'll be doing, we'll be coming back to you with the goals and objectives, action steps.

We're also in the background sort of writing what we think might be some of the big moves.

I think it'll help us as we're talking with you all sort of.

Supreme, how this stuff started plays out, helping write some of the action steps.

We're trying to be intentional and big picture.

But when we release the action steps, there'll be action steps for all eight chapters will be released at the same time.

And then we're going to work through those with you all.

And I think the intent right now is to sort of pull forward the stuff for the development area and rural area first, and then sort of deal with the other stuff afterwards.

I think it'll give us better context.

and also talk a little bit about activity centers, which I think is going to be an interesting concept that we can push forward for you all.

So dates wise, I think we're talking

I should know this off the top of my head, but I think we're coming back with some of those action steps in May, to you all.

And then June, July and August will be busy months, so I've forewarned you before.

Just one question.

I think you are also with the scheduling review.

You're looking at opportunities for public input and layering that in so we can see where those are.

Great question, Chair.

That is exactly what we are doing.

There is going to be a whole engage.

And by the way, right now, I think it's probably also important under the line.

We are in the middle of our another work group.

So they've had a couple of meetings.

I think they're holding another meeting, reaching out to members of the community.

That whole idea of

empowering people who are part of this work group to actually push themselves out to their church groups or former associations, et cetera.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you.

Good updates.

How about any new business?

I don't know if this is new business or not, but I'm assuming that everyone's been receiving these postcards with the Crozet insignia on them.

You have not been receiving these?

Okay.

Well, no, I'm not going to share these with you.

These are four porous cards that have come to my residence, which is fine.

People can remember all they want to.

The tone of them is not very helpful in helping to understand what the individuals who are pushing this out would like us to do vis-a-vis Crozet.

Because they're not named, they just bring up issues.

But I will suggest that if any of you know them or come across them, you know, they have these little quotes by Malcolm Gladwell and Miriam Webster and Eleanor Roosevelt.

The one that I found very disturbing was a quote from Henry Ford.

Those of you who may know Henry Ford was a known Nazi sympathizer.

And in fact, it was Hitler who said that he decided how he was going to go about the elimination of Jews in Germany by watching what Henry Ford was suggesting about that here in the United States at that time.

So I would just suggest to the people who want to capture at least my attention, don't send me Nazi sympathizing materials to my house.

There are other people who can inspire you that didn't have a hand in creating a period in the United States where we almost lost our democracy again, like we may be trying to lose it now.

I just wanted to have we heard anything about when the stream was sorry, Wendy, right?

I don't have any information for you on that.

All right, with that, I will adjourn this meeting of the planning commission and our next meeting will be April 12, 2024 at 6 p.m.