Board of Supervisors Regular Second Meeting   12/16/2020

Thank you, Travis.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I call the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to order for our December 16, 2021 p.m.

meeting.

This meeting is being held pursuant to and in compliance with ordinance number 20-A-16, an ordinance to ensure the continuity of government during the COVID-19 disaster.

The supervisors who are electronically present at this meeting are Supervisor Diantha McKeel, the Jack Jouett District,

Supervisor Ann Mallek of the White Hall District, Supervisor Donna Price of the Scottsville District, Supervisor Bea LaPisto-Kirtley of the Rivanna District, and myself, Supervisor Ned Gallaway of the Rio District.

Supervisor Liz Palmer of the Samuel Miller District will not be attending today due to a personal obligation.

The opportunities for the public to access and participate in the electronic meeting are posted on the Albemarle County website on the Board of Supervisors 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.

Also with us today, we have our County Executive, Mr. Jeff Richardson, our County Attorney, Mr. Greg Campner, our Board Clerk, Ms.

Claudette Borgeson and our Senior Deputy Clerk, Mr. Travis Morris.

Thank you, and if everyone would please now join in a moment of silence.

And Board, we have an agenda before us.

I did not receive any requests to pull anything from consent.

Is there anything that needs to be modified or pulled from consent?

Seeing none, if someone would like to make a motion to adopt?

With a vote, you can call the vote.

Ms.

Price?

Aye.

Mr. Galloway?

Yes.

Ms.

Ms.

Mallek?

Ms.

Good.

That will take us to number five, brief announcements by board members.

Supervisor McKeel, you're up first today.

Any announcements?

I'm fine, thank you very much.

Yes, one piece of really good news that I brought home from the Workforce Board meeting last week.

PVCC has been awarded the best community college for veterans in the nation and this is for the third year in a row so credit to them and all the work they're doing on increasing the certificate programs and all the access assistance that they provide to our veterans here.

The bad news is from the Virginia Employment Commission

While nationwide we're up to 7 million unemployment claims weekly, in Virginia, we are still hundreds of thousands of people, 200,000 participants now.

And normally they would be receiving 2,500 contacts a week in a good year.

And last March, as you may remember, it jumped to 125,000 overnight almost.

So now the numbers are coming down somewhat, but there are still

thousands of people who were involved in these programs and many of whom we've seen benefit from the programs here in Albemarle.

They're very concerned at the state level as we all are here that in 13 days, actually it's 12 days now, there will be 300,000 Virginians who will not have any benefits whatsoever if the folks in Washington don't get their act together.

No, I'm good.

Number six, Proclamations and Recognitions.

We do not have any of those today.

Matters not listed for public hearing on the agenda or on matters previously considered by the board or matters that are pending before the board.

My understanding is we do have a sign up today.

Thank you, Chair Galloway.

During the time set aside

Individuals may address the Board of Supervisors concerning matters previously considered by the Board or matters that are pending before the Board other than items listed on the agenda for a public hearing.

Individuals are allowed three minutes to speak and the sign-up sheet is monitored by our Clerk's Office.

Timekeeping is conducted through a timer.

The timer will commence when you begin speaking and this begins your allotted time.

You will be notified when the three minutes are up and you are requested to bring your comments to a close as your microphone will be muted after about five more seconds.

In order to give all speakers equal treatment and courtesy, the board requests that speakers adhere to the following guidelines.

When called to address the board, please state your name and, if you live in Albemarle County, your magisterial district.

Address your comments directly to the board as a whole.

If you have written statements and other supporting material, you may email them to the clerk to be included in the record.

If you represent a group or organization, you may identify the group to be recognized.

If you exceed your allotted time, you will be asked to end your comments and the microphone will be muted.

And if a speaker does not use all allocated time, the unused time may not be shared with another speaker.

Back and forth debate is not permitted.

You're reminded that all comments are live streamed, recorded, and published on the Albemarle County website.

If participating by phone please press star nine to let us know you want to speak and then star six if you're calling from a landline to unmute.

If by zoom please remain muted until you are called to speak.

All right thank you.

Yes, sir.

My name is Gary Grant.

I live in the Earliesville area of the Rio district.

Here are some questions about your current Albemarle County seal, easily answered with just a yes or no.

Don't you feel it's time to replace the picture of apples on your seal with a picture of grapes?

According to the most recent census of agriculture, there are four times more Albemarle farms growing grapes than apples.

Don't you feel it's time to replace the picture of the UVA rotunda on your county seal with something not built by slaves?

According to Encyclopedia Virginia, 15 enslaved men in 1825

were forced to manufacture nearly a million bricks for the construction of the rotunda.

Instead of the rotunda on your seal, how about a picture of Albemarle's grade separated interchange at Rio in 29?

It was built by free men and women who were paid for their work.

Don't you think it's time to replace the picture of a horse on your seal with a picture of a deer?

According to the most recent U.S.

Department of Agriculture equine census, there are 2100 horses owned on Albemarle Farms.

Meanwhile, according to the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources, there were over 4000 deer harvested by hunters in just one recent hunting season in Albemarle.

Don't you think it's time to replace the picture of the globe

on your county seal with something more contemporary.

This is the internet age.

GPS maps are at our fingertips in our pockets.

How about a picture of a cell phone screen instead of a globe?

Finally, there are those scales of justice in the middle of your seal.

How does that stock image represent anything unique to Albemarle?

How about replacing these generic scales

with one of your most well-known objects.

That's the board's digital timer of green, yellow, and red lights that beeps when its digits reach zero, zero, zero.

Thank you for spending taxpayer money to stream your meetings.

Thanks for my almost three minutes of your time and for the curfew-free zone in Albemarle.

Thank you.

Do we have other speakers signed up today?

We do not.

And move on to our next item, number eight, the consent agenda.

Is there a motion to approve?

Second.

Ms.

Price.

Aye.

Mr. Galloway?

Yes.

Ms.

Ms.

Ms.

All right, thank you.

All right, board that will take us to our first item today, number nine, which is a work session.

This is options to address blight in building maintenance.

And I've got Michael Dellinger and Andy Herrick listed.

Mr. Chair, members of the Board of Supervisors, I'm Andy Herrick with the County Attorney's Office.

I will be presenting or taking the lead in today's presentation.

With me today are also Amelia McCulley, who's the Deputy Director of Community Development, as well as Michael Dellinger, the building official, and several other staff members.

Lisa Green is also available.

So I'll be leading off with the presentation today, but again, there are many county staff members that are also

President who were involved in the drafting of today's presentation.

So as I've indicated, today's presentation is about blight and building maintenance and some of the board's options.

This is a topic that the board has considered on several previous occasions.

Most recently in May of last year, Mr. Campner delivered to you all a presentation about the enabling authority available of both the county's existing tools that the county is already using.

as well as available options for revitalizing aging urban neighborhoods.

Today's presentation will give a little bit of background as to where we are and the importance of this issue and then we're going to take a deeper dive into three specific tools that have been before the board previously.

For your consideration, spotlight abatement, the tax abatement program, and a property maintenance code.

We'll conclude with some recommendation and then kick it off for some board discussion.

I imagine that my presentation will take very little of the allotted time.

We wanted to allow plenty of time for the board to provide feedback.

So why is this issue important?

Well, the comprehensive plan indicates that development areas will be vibrant, active places with attractive neighborhoods.

And the fiscal year 2020 to 2022 strategic plan honed in a little further and identified revitalizing aging urban neighborhoods as one of the board's high priorities.

As our staff report indicates blighted and derelict properties can have negative economic and environmental impacts on the community and can lead to criminal activity and public nuisances.

So the problem really is one that's self-evident and the board has recognized in both its comprehensive plan and in the strategic plan.

Here's an outline of some of the existing county regulations that already deal with some of the issues that the county is facing.

And county staff is already actively enforcing many of these programs.

We have an ordinance for uncontrolled vegetation that was adopted several years ago.

Another one for stagnant water that was adopted more recently.

County also has an ordinance regarding inoperable vehicles.

one prohibiting trash and refuse.

The county also enforces safety and health related regulations regarding the residential rental properties as part of the uniform statewide building code.

The county as part of the county's building regulations also address unsafe buildings and structures.

The zoning ordinance has provisions that prohibit junk yards and the keeping of inoperable vehicles.

These are just some of the tools that the county is already enforcing.

Mr. Campner's memo of February 11, 2019, which is attachment B to the staff memo today, has a very comprehensive listing of all the enabling authority, both the ones that the county is presently using, as well as additional authority that the county has at its disposal.

But before we look at some of these tools, I wanted to share some of the limiting factors that are common to all of these and maybe reset expectations a little bit.

Neither the county's existing authority nor the available tools can address all problems.

There's no silver bullet or magic bullet that will magically

take care of all the issues that are facing the urging aging urban neighborhoods.

Most or all of the available tools do not and cannot address concerns like aesthetics or vacancy and occupancy and we may hear frequently from constituents or citizens about their concerns about aesthetics and vacancy but unfortunately there just aren't tools that really address those.

The available tools that the county has at its disposal are designed primarily to address safety and habitability rather than appearances.

In other words, there's not an ordinance that deals with an eyesore.

What the available ordinances deal with more are safety and habitability issues to ensure that structures are sound both for their inhabitants as well as that they're not creating hazards to neighboring properties.

So with that we're going to take a look again at three specific tools.

Some of these may be familiar to you as ones that we've discussed previously.

And the first is spot blight abatement.

And this may be familiar to you simply because the county has in fact engaged in at least one previous spot blight abatement.

A spot blight abatement is a property specific finding and plan requiring owner action or county remediation at owner expense.

So it doesn't require the adoption of a county-wide ordinance or a broad program.

What it is is if the county has identified a specific property that meets the definition of blight, the county staff would bring to the board a proposed ordinance

for the board to find the property as being blighted and then demand from the owner a plan to address that blight.

If the owner fails to abate the blight on the property then the county can go in and remediate the blight itself at the owner's expense and impose charges on the property to recoup the county's expense in remediating that blight.

In terms of its use elsewhere, it was difficult for me to find where else or how widespread the use of spotlight abatement as a tool was.

As you may know, the county has done it once previously with a property on Smithfield Road.

I do know just anecdotally that the city of Charlottesville has engaged in spotlight abatement, but it was difficult, as I said, because it's such a property specific program for me to have sort of a comprehensive listing of

how many other localities are using this as a tool.

I think its strengths are that it's focused and property specific it's cost efficient the county does have some experience at uh at remediating properties this way and it also requires owner involvement it gives the owner an opportunity it puts the owner on notice and gives the owner an opportunity to remediate their own problem before the county takes action.

The limitation is that it may not address all aesthetic concerns.

Again, if an owner chooses simply to board up his property or to secure his property, that is sufficient to remediate the blight, even though it may not address all the aesthetic concerns that everyone may have regarding that property.

The next tool that we'll take a look at, and we'll have an opportunity to discuss these at the end,

is a tax abatement program.

This came to the board's attention most recently as Mr. Campner was providing a legislative update.

He noted that the General Assembly recently modified some of the provisions regarding this program to allow more enforcement ability for localities.

It's important to note that this is primarily a tax incentive program

rather than a land use program.

What it does is it incentivizes improvements to or demolition of derelict buildings by abating the resulting taxes.

So in other words for an owner that may be interested in redeveloping a property, it allows them to come in

make improvements to the property whether by redeveloping the property or demolishing existing derelict buildings and it doesn't penalize them by raising their taxes.

In other words their assessment won't increase as a result or at least like with this way the cost of improvement won't be added to their assessments and they're able to abate taxes over a period of 15 years.

I was able to find nine other localities in Virginia that are using this program, including as nearby as Amherst County.

The strength is that this may incentivize developers or investors who are interested in tax savings on major investments.

So if there were specific properties that had significant redevelopment approval, and you had an investor who was interested in making a major investment on the property, and the tax incentives were a draw for that investor,

This would be a program that would be well targeted for major redevelopment projects.

But I think its limitation is that it's really not targeted towards the redevelopment of individual lots.

In other words, it's unlikely, I think, that many individual property owners are likely to see the tax incentives from this program as being a major incentive for them to keep up their property.

All the other tools at the county's disposal aren't already motivating them to keep up their property.

And again, as with some of the other programs, this really may not address all the aesthetic concerns.

And finally, the last program that we were going to talk about today is the Property Maintenance Code.

And as you may know, Virginia has a uniform statewide building code, some provisions of which every locality is required to enforce, and others of which are enforceable at an optional level.

Localities can choose to take action to adopt the maintenance provisions of the Uniform Statewide Building Code.

It does require a formal adoption, but once a locality has chosen to adopt those maintenance standards, the locality is required to enforce those uniform statewide standards.

In other words, there's not the ability for the locality to deviate from the uniform statewide standards.

It's kind of an all-or-nothing approach in terms of adhering to what the state uniform standards are.

Again, these standards are intended primarily to improve safety and habitability of structures.

In looking around the Commonwealth, approximately a third of the localities in the Commonwealth have adopted a statewide maintenance code.

Most of those localities are urban.

The strengths of this tool is that it does address a variety of maintenance issues and that it already has been adopted by pure localities, but it also comes with a number of limitations that the board would be well advised to consider, starting with its inflexibility.

It's a one-size-fits-all approach that does not allow localities to really deviate.

The enabling authority for partial adoption is uncertain.

One of the ideas that we've heard suggested is perhaps the ability to say we're going to enforce the maintenance code in some parts of the county but not others.

I'm not aware of anywhere in the Commonwealth that has taken that approach.

There have been other localities who have chosen to adopt who to enforce certain chapters.

of the Uniform Statewide Building Code.

But there's not been a locality that I'm aware of that where they've said we're going to enforce it in one part of our locality and not another.

And unfortunately, the State Department of Housing and Community Development that promulgates the Uniform Statewide Building Code has not been very clear about whether that sort of geographic limitation or implementation can be made.

Another very important drawback is that would require substantial additional staffing.

Our thought is it probably would require between a 50 to 100% increase over the existing building staff.

So it's something that the building staff and that the existing building staff can simply be

It would require a significant investment of county resources with additional staffing to properly enforce the maintenance code.

The version of the maintenance code that was in effect at the time that the structure is constructed is the maintenance code that applies to that building.

And because there was not a uniform statewide building code prior to 1972,

There's no uniform statewide building code that applies to pre-1972 structures.

And that's probably a pretty significant limitation in that many of the structures for which we've heard complaints date from that time.

As with the other tools, the property maintenance code doesn't address all aesthetic concerns.

And the last concern is probably one that may be easily overlooked and that is that there's an equity concern that requiring compliance with the statewide building code may impose financial hardships on those least able to afford property improvements.

It may be the people that aren't keeping up their properties are doing so because of financial hardship.

and imposing the property maintenance code would simply complicate that from an equity perspective.

Here's a slide I think that shows an interesting situation as we point out here that there are certain property owners that will aim for minimal compliance whatever the standard and as you may be able to see from this picture it depicts some pretty tall grass but what the owner has done

has actually put rulers or stakes in his front yard to ensure and remind the county enforcement that in fact he is staying within the county's ordinance for tall grass.

So here's an owner that has gone for minimal compliance but chooses not to really keep up the property to the standards that maybe the neighbors would like to see.

So we've got owners that will strive for minimal compliance, as with this tallish grass, and yet raising the minimum standard increases both the maintenance costs for the owners and the enforcement costs for the county.

So the ideal is to try to find a balance between reasonable standards that maintain the community standards, balancing that versus compliance and enforcement costs.

We've put in here a number of slides of properties that may seem like they're problematic, but in fact would not be a problem or may not be a problem under the existing tools.

As I indicated previously, aesthetic concerns aren't addressed by many of the tools.

And so here's a property, for instance,

That's not very sightly and yet it is secured.

There's nothing that appears to be falling off.

It doesn't create a problem with either vermin or trespassers.

And so therefore, staff's initial review on this is that this picture here probably would not meet the definition of blight and would also not be a maintenance code violation.

Again, because it's secure and it doesn't pose a safety danger to itself for the neighboring properties.

Here's another property.

As you can see, it has some issues with peeling paint, with siding and with shutters.

And those three issues probably do make it a maintenance code violation, even though staff's take on that is that it is probably not blight.

So again, as unsightly as these two properties are, we've included these just to illustrate that there is no single remedy that really that

will solve all unsightliness or eyesore properties.

So again, our thoughts and conclusion is that there's really no single tool to address all concerns and especially aesthetic concerns.

The three tools that we've discussed today, staff recommends that we continue to place most of our focus on spotlight abatement as being the most focused and cost-effective tool.

It really is well suited for individual properties without requiring the county to invest a great deal in additional full-time staffing.

We also are recommending deferring consideration of tax abatements and or the property maintenance code unless and until they prove to be cost effective or uniquely suited solutions.

That is to say, unless there's some property that we find that's upline abatement can't fix, our status recommendation would be to continue to use that as the primary tool and to defer consideration of more expensive, larger programs for loan.

So that's the extent of my presentation.

I have suggested a few discussion questions to get us started.

I'm happy to address questions about what I've just presented.

And again, as I've indicated, there's numerous staff members that are also on the line today.

I'm happy to go back to the slides so that you can take a look at the specific tools.

Thank you, Andy.

Happy to entertain the discussion questions.

Sure, and I really do thank you, Andy, for the presentation, and I thank staff for bringing this back before the board.

Probably been, over the years, one of the supervisors that has talked about this the most actively, and I think that that's because I do represent a very dense

urban ring area that is some of the oldest in the county.

I mean, many of my houses go back past 72, but are certainly around that time as well.

And I think we've documented that the Jouett district and the urban ring has some of the oldest houses, and I'm sort of not looking at.

And I just want to be real clear, I have focused my discussion on

neighborhoods, not rural areas and not properties with large, you know, even properties of two acres or three acres.

I'm talking about neighborhoods where people are right on top of each other.

And I think that makes a big difference.

So I was interested, Andy, in your discussion about tool number three.

So I guess one question I had, if you were saying tool three is all or nothing.

That's correct.

We're one of the very few counties that have a designated rural area and a development area.

So what I'm trying to figure out is rather than

The presentations we have all tell us what we can't do and how limited it is.

I'm trying to figure out how to be positive and look at solutions or at least moving us forward, maybe a carrot or what we can do.

I'm just trying to flip the conversation, right?

And is there a way or is there a case to be made for a county that has a rural area and a development area?

that we're not interested in, we can't use the all or nothing, right?

and I don't know where you go with that.

Do you ask for an opinion from the Attorney General?

Maybe that's way out of his field.

Understood.

And so let me clarify, when I say it's all or nothing, what I probably should say to clarify is that there's not a deviation allowed from the state standard.

So Albemarle couldn't say if the state standard says that buildings have to meet a certain standard, Albemarle couldn't say

We adopt all of the uniform statewide building code, but in this case, we're going to have a different standard.

If the state standards are adopted, the state standards are the ones that would apply.

Now, Mr. Dellinger is on the line and can probably better explain partial adoption of the statewide building code.

It is possible in other localities, as I indicated during the presentation,

have adopted certain chapters within.

So they say we're going to enforce it as to this type of structure or this aspect of the structure.

But again, I'm not aware of a locality that said we're going to enforce it in the eastern half of our locality, but not in the western half of our locality.

And I understand that Albemarle is unique in terms of having a more defined urban area and having a diverse rural area as well.

But again, I'm just not aware of a

And just to clarify, again, my discussions have not been around, I'm trying to get away from the word aesthetics, because to be honest with you, peeling paint, I'm not worried about it.

I'm talking about properties that have literally been abandoned.

No one is living in them.

That house that you showed with the high grass, which I am very familiar with, that house right now has been its own, but the person doesn't live there, hasn't lived there in, I don't know, name it, 12 years, 15 years.

The gutter is now falling off while the grass is high.

It's not a matter of the two aesthetic pictures that you showed.

And it's right beside other houses in a neighborhood

and it's essentially, while it's owned, it's abandoned.

And the same thing goes with some of the other houses and I have neighborhoods.

So I guess I view that a little differently than a house that is lived in, right, and has peeling paint.

I'm not trying to be the peeling paint

I'm talking about houses that have vultures coming out of the roofs.

and chimneys that are about to fall over at one point, birds flying in and out of the windows.

These are different houses I'm describing that we've had an urban rain.

The other issue is that, and I don't, I'm just kind of talking, Andy, because what we get is what we can't do.

I'm trying to figure out if we have a problem, what we can do.

And I know I've been saying that for a long time.

The biggest complaint I have in the urban ring, in my urban ring, is people that live next door to mostly duplexes, but lots of single family homes as well, or some single families, but a lot of duplexes.

And over the years, people have swooped in and bought them, and they're using them for rental.

but they don't require any, they're not maintaining them and they don't of course require even the property, the person that lives in there to maintain the grass or whatever.

But mainly it's about the people who own these and rent them and don't maintain them.

And I don't know how we get at that but that to me is one of the, it's kind of the broken window syndrome that you get into in cities

And I will grant you, and I'm going to have to stop because I want to hear what the other folks have to say, but I will grant you we've done a lot of things.

to help and I appreciate very much the standing water.

People were accusing us of trying to be the water police and we were gonna go around and have people vying for a cup of water in their yard.

Actually, what we've been able to do is to provide a healthier community because now people can't just ignore a swimming pool right behind someone else's house that's breeding mosquitoes, which can be a health hazard, right?

So that's been wonderful.

And I will say the most recent secondary parking ordinance, which my urban ring is taking advantage of right now, we're clearing away tow trucks,

boats, campers, all kinds of vehicles that are congesting neighborhood roads, parking in front of other people's houses.

That has been an excellent tool too, and I want to thank you for that.

I really appreciate it.

But the junkyard ordinance is great, except we still have people, we've been working on a junkyard in the Jouett district now since 2008.

and it's as bad as if not worse right now.

So, and I don't need to keep going on, but so I guess I'm just trying to figure out, maybe there's nothing we can do legislatively, but

I'm just looking at my notes and I'm sorry.

I guess what I'm trying to figure out is you say the tax abatement program, because that's kind of a carrot, right?

Won't work for some of what I'm describing.

And I guess

With that, let me just make one more comment and then I've had two complaints in the last probably month about a particular utility company.

This one is one particular utility company, but it goes to some of our other utility companies where they come in and they do construction work and they just leave behind

They replace a telephone pole, and we have one telephone pole that's been just abandoned on the ground in an urban ring neighborhood for over a year.

I'm just so this is kind of a this is a maintenance problem and maybe it's a little bit out of this area but I'm just talking about some of the challenges that we're seeing and they're not all property owners sometimes they are the companies that we have working with us the tow truck operators the tow truck companies as well as the utility and that may be opening up a whole nother

but I did want to take advantage of mentioning it at this time and I'm going to wait and just see what the other supervisors have to say.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Just procedurally, should I go through all three categories or just should we have everybody do question one first?

I just want to, I have a bunch of questions too and I don't want to... This was, I think we're going to do a round on questions and then, but I mean, Andy, did you want us to go move through your discussion points at a specific time as well in addition to just questions?

Okay, I'll just go through what I have and if it gets too confusing, then we'll probably have to do it again.

So I've been taking notes as well and

would just want to add to what Diantha said.

I think anywhere where there's a neighborhood, no matter where, one of the two pictures shown is actually a rural area neighborhood built in the 1960s.

And behind that house is a swimming pool that is full of water.

The house has been abandoned with the furniture and food inside for eight years.

And yet we cannot pump out the pool because it would then fall in.

And so there is nothing we can do about the mosquitoes in that neighborhood.

It is awful.

And we had tremendous amount of staff help out there trying to figure this out.

The neighbors are completely bent around the axle about this.

So this is just one example where it's not so much geography.

where the, you know, how close the houses are together.

So that's more of, I guess, when I get to property maintenance.

Number two, the tax abatement program.

Are there guardrails in place to prevent a landowner from just letting their property fall down so that we can then give them a tax abatement to destroy it the rest of the way and sell it for a whole lot of money?

So I don't need an answer for that, but I would like to know more about that later, about what the processes are.

and second question that I'll leave with you on that tax abatement program is, is this also available to help, you mentioned describing things as a gap finance for redevelopment to provide some tax rebate.

Is this also available for identified brownfields that are in the process of being redeveloped or is this something where this is only for derelict properties that have not yet begun their redevelopment effort?

So I'll leave those two questions.

On to the property maintenance code.

The staff concern is one that we have been told about for 12 years that I've been at the chair, but I will say that when you think about the number of times that staff has to go out to these properties for whom we have looked away,

and multiple staff, multiple trips, on and on and on, whether it's the restaurant, all the restaurant goodies and dead chickens out in Crozet or whether it's, you know, in a rural neighborhood in Earliesville or what.

This is a tremendous time that staff has to spend already.

So if there are ways that we can do something better with our rules and therefore give the first visit a chance to be more effective because we actually have something to say,

about you will not do this anymore or else.

That may save staff time in the long run.

I don't have any data to back it up.

But my main question that I wrote when I was doing the staff report earlier is how do we get to these other issues we have?

So we know we have problems with abandoned houses all over the place and that are dragging down the neighborhoods and removing or

damaging the resaleability of the neighbor's house because they see this dump next door.

And they really don't think it's right.

Their lives are impacted.

And it's really sad to have to say with a whole bunch of staff there present too saying the same thing, I'm sorry, but we can't help you.

Because they really look for local government to say there are rules and my rights shouldn't impact on my neighbors and my neighbors should not impact on me.

So that's sort of an unsolved issue for me that is important.

I've talked about the staff impact already.

I guess I will stop there.

I really want to do something.

I just I think the property maintenance code is the way to go.

Perhaps if the staff could give some particular responses about are we going to get somewhere with the things we have the most often in our complaint file that Lisa, Amelia and Michael hear about all the time.

So is there any reaction here?

So I'm happy to try to address the questions that Ms.

Mallek just raised in terms of the tax abatement program and whether it incentivizes non-compliance.

In other words, would a property owner intentionally let their property go into the ground in hopes of them getting a tax incentive to clean it in?

Again, the program as currently written is geared towards derelict structures, and there's a definition in the code for derelict structures.

So to answer your second question, it would not apply necessarily to brownfield.

There may be other incentives that allow for the remediation of brownfields, but this particular program would not be one of them.

Again, it's my thought that the amount of tax savings at issue for individual dwellings is unlikely to really be much of an incentive.

I think that the tax abatement program really is intended for, if you were to have, let's just say,

A boarded up shopping center or something like that.

Major property, major redevelopment.

I think that's where the tax abatement program would come into play.

They just don't see the tax savings on individual single family dwelling as being enough to incentivize an owner to keep up their property.

And then your other question was, it sounded as though your main concern and a concern that we hear often is about abandoned houses or vacant houses.

And for better or for worse, there's just not a law against having a property vacant as long as it's secured.

If it's boarded up as long as it doesn't invite trespassers, as long as it's not open to wildlife coming in and out of the roof, for instance, then it's not considered to be blighted.

If it is secured, regardless of how unsightly it may be, if it's secured, then it's considered to be not a safety issue.

And again, Mr. Dellinger can probably go through the combinations and permutations of what is and isn't secure and what is and isn't a safety issue.

But again, it gets back to our earlier point of there's not really a law against having an eyesore.

Right, I'm sorry to interrupt.

So the stagnant water ordinance is intended to prevent the development of mosquitoes.

And so one way of coming into compliance with the stagnant water is to treat the standing water.

And I see Ms.

Green's on the line and she can probably address this better than I, but for instance, one way to abate a stagnant water violation is to have mosquito dunks in.

and I know a number of unused pools that you never want to swim in them, but as long as the owner is putting mosquito dunks or some sort of treatment to abate the the um the mosquito development um that that meets the requirements.

Again it's not it's not so much the appearance again it's very unsightly um but it's not creating a health issue as long as the mosquitoes are being abated.

Thank you, Chair Galloway.

Mr. Herrick, thank you very much for your presentation.

I do appreciate that and also appreciate seeing so many people from community development here.

They are familiar with me as I've called in as I know my colleagues have.

I'm interested in the last comment that you just made.

Attractive nuisance would only be a civil action between neighbors.

Not to my knowledge.

I think where the county's ability to abate structural hazards is if there's a building or a structure that's in danger of collapsing, for example, either into a street or onto a neighboring property.

That really is, I think we're talking about a difference that is a distinction because now we're talking about the safety issue rather than simply being the attractive nuisance.

And I'll accept what you're saying at this point.

I would ask a question, just to clarify for me, we often talk about the rural areas and the urban areas or the rural area or the development area.

In this respect, do the terms urban and development, are they synonymous?

Are they equal?

Are they equivalent?

I'm not sure when the board indicates that it wants to make as a focus aging urban neighborhoods.

I'm not sure whether the intent is to make that synonymous with the county's development area or whether there's some other criteria that the board is using when it says that it wants to make that a focus.

I simply raise the development areas as one potential concept for

or one idea that's been raised in the past is to adopt the property maintenance code for the development areas but not for the rural areas.

Okay, and I would ask that the Office of the County Attorney and Community Development very specifically clarify for me and other supervisors and residents, do the terms urban and development, are they synonymous?

Are they equal?

Are they equivalent or are they simply comparable?

That's one question.

The second thing I would say is, as all of the supervisors, we have both urban

Development and rural areas, I am troubled by having a distinction between the standards that we would apply in, there being a distinction between the standards we would apply in different areas of the county.

I mean, in my district, you cannot go south on 20th past Mill Creek before you run into your first derelict collapsing building.

You know, Rolling Road, Jefferson Mill Road, they're everywhere.

And so I think it would be a significant disadvantage to both the rural and the urban or development areas if we differentiated in terms of the standards that we want to apply.

And candidly, I find it troubling

that the comprehensive plan might focus on these safety issues, which is different than aesthetics.

Aesthetics are very subjective, whereas safety I believe is much more objective.

But I'm concerned if we're looking at having safety standards that apply in one area but don't in the other.

They should apply throughout the entire county.

So that would be one comment that I have.

In the materials we were provided on page three of four, about a third of the way down, the language says enabling authority for partial adoption of the Virginia maintenance code is unclear at best.

I think you addressed that in your presentation.

And then you say, if a partial adoption is enabled, staff would recommend application only to smaller lot urban properties in the development area and not to rural properties, to which I would say no.

If we're going to have standards, the standards should apply countywide.

My understanding of the three terms of

possible approaches, the spotlight abatement, that sounds like a special bill that a legislature would do.

You know, Congress, very often people get, there's a special bill for one particular individual.

My concerns with that is it can come across as a favoritism or as a burden provided to individuals rather than being a more uniform application around the county.

However, I am not unmindful of the comments that you indicated with regard to the necessity to substantially increase the amount of personnel required if we were to go to a property maintenance code.

I don't know enough about the code to be able to address at this point the comment that was made that we could adopt certain chapters of the code but not other chapters and so I suspect that myself and other supervisors probably need to be better educated on what the different chapters include so that we would then be able to more informed

make an analysis of whether that would be an approach.

I also have some questions on the tax abatement program.

In our written materials, three requirements were listed that the building, in addition to

A building that might endanger the public's health, safety, or welfare and for a continuous period in excess of six months has been, one, vacant.

I don't really so much have a question on that.

Two, boarded up in accordance with the building code.

I'm not sure exactly what those requirements are but then there's the inclusive and not lawfully connected to electric services or required water or sewer services and again I think based upon the rest of your discussion the tax abatement program is likely only going to be limited to larger properties where there's going to be significant redevelopment

When I lived in Italy the codes there for buildings were that if the property was being remodeled or renovated then the property owner did not have to pay property taxes so throughout the country there was scaffolding around buildings for years

and no work was being done.

And so I think that addresses one of the concerns that was raised that you might be encouraging people to abuse that sort of a situation.

But again, I think based upon your discussion, that's probably the least likely.

So as I look at the three, I think the property maintenance code would be the fairest, provide the most consistency and uniformity

But I recognize the substantial expense from the county standpoint.

A comment or an area that I have not yet addressed is I think we also have to look at the economic impact on our property owners.

because again I suspect that this is the same throughout the county.

I know in my district I have an inordinate number of individuals who simply cannot afford some of the improvements that we would all like to be able to make to our property and so I think as an equity matter we want to be careful that we are not burdening our property owners particularly in this economic environment

as a result of the pandemic and imposing a financial burden upon them that they are not able to meet.

At the same time, every single day, no matter where I drive in my district, I'm driving by buildings that every time I drive by them, I think that is a safety hazard.

And they're attractive nuisances, which are likely to draw children or other individuals to them and very likely have the buildings clocked upon them.

So I really appreciate county staff bringing this topic up.

It's something that has been on my mind of late in community development and other

agencies of the county are aware because of some of the complaints that I have filed on behalf of constituents.

It's clearly an area that we have to look at and so I think we have to do something and those are my comments and questions right now.

Again, I thank you.

I mean I can respond.

I mean I took notes on Ms.

Price's comments.

Her thought that this should be if the property maintenance code were applied that it should be applied countywide.

In terms of a chapter specific approach I think Mr. Dellinger is probably more familiar with the nuts and bolts of the property maintenance code and to better address what chapters apply and what and what the dynamics might be if the board were interested in pursuing

adopting certain chapters but not others of the code.

Yes thank you very much and thank you Mr. Herrick.

I too am, it's on the chat that Stacy could address some of these issues.

I too am concerned about the fact that

we do have lower income people that will not be able to comply.

And so what do we do about that?

And I understand that there are programs.

I think Supervisor Mallek said something about that there are programs that would provide maybe through the, I can't remember, Ann, the Department of Health and Safety, something like that, but that maybe could provide some assistance there.

I think we need to be cognizant of that.

I have a question regarding abandoned buildings because the ones that we have seen, whether or not animals are coming in and out, they probably certainly have rodents going in and out.

That's not a good thing.

I see that as a health and safety issue.

And I'm wondering whether or not on some of these things we couldn't address that as a health and safety issue to be able to go after some of these

buildings and make sure that maybe they are secure, that they are boarded up.

But I do see a lot of our issues that we're probably going to have to ask the state for some additional assistance and I don't necessarily mean monetary, but assistance in giving us the ability to address some of these concerns.

And I do want to ask Mr. Herrick, if a building is falling down into itself, is that considered blight?

That's probably something that we need to look at the specific case, whether it's a danger.

I mean, certainly if there are any residents there, that would be something that would be a danger.

And that's something that the building official could address.

But we need to look at the specifics, whether it was in danger of falling over on any other property.

To get to your earlier question though about whether having wildlife or rodents coming in and out of a property if a property is not secured and it's sort of a haven for rodents that's then you know affecting other properties that definitely is an issue that counties have been addressed and as a matter of fact the spot blight that the county did previously was largely based on the fact that there was wildlife coming in and out of an unsecured building

Okay I mean I'm seeing in our regulations and that's on attachment A a summary of existing regulations I'm seeing a lot of removing prohibiting this prohibiting that prohibiting prohibiting

but I'm not sure how much we're able to act on it.

That's what kind of surprises me.

Prohibiting abandoned or unattended vehicles and yet, well, I mean, Lisa Green knows this.

I have issues in my favorite.

constituent where there's abandoned vehicles all over the place, prohibiting tall grass, weeds, uncontrolled vegetation, et cetera, on vacant undeveloped parcels.

But we have these laws, but are we not able to do anything about it?

That's my question.

Those are the tools for which we currently have ordinances and are currently enforcing and it looks like Ms.

Thank you, Mr. Herrick.

Amelia McCulley, Deputy Director of Community Development.

I wonder if it would be helpful to give the example that you just had, Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley, of the house that's open and there's all kinds of animals and vermin running in and out of it and ask our building official if the current regulations, unsafe structures, unsafe buildings would apply and how he would look at that.

Thank you.

So we have a situation in this example where there's a house, whether it's in the neighborhood or in the rural areas, and it's open.

Doors are open, and so animals and potentially children are getting in the house.

Yeah so I mean we could go back and look at the county ordinance itself which we could apply to owner structures like this.

that that county ordinance is not part of the state building code ordinance and so we can use that as a tool to take care of those and we can use a spotlight abatement as well in those situations so the fire code calls an unsafe structure any type of structure that's whatever there is a complaint

that has a building that's open with the doors open or the windows, the fire officials office contacts us and says this is what we have.

So we have to look at our tools, our toolbox, to see which ones that we can actually apply and which ones we have right to apply.

I mean, can we have it removed?

Sure, yeah.

Right, we can do that.

What ends up happening, and Mr. Herrick can talk a little bit more about this as well, is we have one that I'm working on right now.

And you get an owner that doesn't have the resources to

to put this house down or remove it.

So what we have to do at that point is the county has to get bids to take it down.

If the owner is cooperative with us, then you know that's one thing.

If not, then we have to go through the legal process of going through the magistrate and getting an inspection warrant and going through that process.

Nothing is a quick fix.

Even with property maintenance, you're looking at a lot of times six months before you can do any type of enforcement.

But what we would end up having to do is if we declare that building unsafe and it has to be raised, the county would raise the property and then we would put a lien on the taxes.

The problem that you get into that and other jurisdictions that I was in that some families may have six, eight children that is still tied into that piece of property.

You know, it was mom's house and we don't want mom's house.

You know, it's a mental health issue.

I want mom's house to be gone and so they will sit and let it continue to deteriorate.

So then you go in and you raise the structure and you lean on the property and now you've got eight different heirs that you're dealing with that sell the property, whatever.

I could just make a follow-up point that I think is really important.

Right.

Right.

That's a whole different scenario than what's even in the property maintenance code.

Now we're getting into another structure.

And again, you know, the issues that we see, especially in, you know, when we talk about a rural and urban county,

We have farms that have, you know, farm buildings and stuff that's falling down.

It's falling on top of itself.

So, you know, again, we have to look at what we can apply and what sections that

It's going to have to be equally across the board.

So when we're dealing with a farm structure, a farm structure is completely exempt from the building code.

Right.

I believe we have the tools in our toolbox to do it.

Some of these properties that you all were talking about, some of them you all have brought to our attention, but some of them we haven't even received complaints on in the past.

So we look at what we have in front of us and we take action based on what we have.

Of course, being if there's something out there where somebody is living in,

and it's a dangerous or an unsafe structure.

Yes ma'am and that's the thing even the building code when we're talking about swimming pools it talks about a safety barrier you know we realize that it's a barrier somebody wants into a swimming pool

I think what was it here last year or so down in the Howardsville area where that person trespassed in that quarry and drowned.

You know people had the trespassing signs up but you know unfortunately that's what we deal with but you know we do the best that we can and we use the tools that what we have and we

It's the same thing with this.

Okay, I should probably pipe in.

Sorry.

The health department will not deal with the stagnant water.

I'm so sorry.

I'm Lisa Green, manager of code compliance.

The health department will not deal with stagnant water.

That's why we have the stagnant water ordinance in place.

And one of the issues that we've had is once that

stagnant pool, and some of the areas that you're speaking about has been treated, then there's not a zoning violation.

And so that's why it still looks that way, but it's been treated, so it is in compliance with the stagnant water ordinance.

So that's number one on that particular.

Supervisor Price, the trailer with beer cans flowing out of it, if we get a complaint and go down there, that is where we'll invoke our ordinance for junkyard or things like that on the exterior of the structure.

So that is something that if we have a complaint on, we can address for sure.

Now, some of the things that, and we talked about this last month, is we go there, the property gets cleaned up,

and then it's not in compliance, we abate the violation, we go away and then six months later they do it again.

So it's that hamster wheel.

So we're just running in circles.

But we do have some mechanisms in place that we do and we don't dismiss the fines and things at that point.

And also to your

Supervisor Price, yes, there's the lien that could last forever.

And if the property is then changed hands without a sale, then the lien is still in place for without.

I think so.

We're just a little bit past the allotted time for this topic, although we are running ahead.

So my questions would more be rhetorical and a little different slant.

I don't mean to be a smart aleck about it, but throughout this we've been talking about aesthetics and eyesores and how that can't be applied.

I just find it interesting that ARB spends so much time

Scrutinizing paint colors when we do a development project and here we are saying we can't consider eyesores.

So that's just a contradiction that never sits well with me that we are applying aesthetics and judgment and subjective qualities and a lot of varies and a lot of time and fees and money go into that.

and then to turn around and say it can't be applied elsewhere.

Built-in contradiction through the state, I suppose.

Well, aesthetics matter, so I guess that's a state issue that has to be taken on.

Lisa, I mean, I hear things

And this, Michael and Amelia, could be all three of you.

I'm hearing examples, then I'm hearing, well, we have this available to us in the county code now.

So then I'm guessing this is a manpower piece or is this an enforcement piece?

I mean, when I hear a supervisor ask, what can we do?

If there are instances that can be used under current ordinances, and I'm not talking about the one where they go out, they clean up, and then six months later there's a problem, but it's past that point.

Do we have a manpower issue in seeing some of these through, or does it just have to play out that there have to be certain cycles?

I mean, what's the thought there?

Here, I believe that is a very good assumption of what we have.

The other issue that we would have in these instances also is the monetary need to go do and take care of these because a lot of, again, a lot of these people don't have the resources, you know, on the example that

Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley said, you know, they've fallen in himself.

If they haven't done anything with it at this point in time, they don't have the resources to do it.

They get a seven or ten thousand dollar bill.

And so, at that point in time,

also promote the funds to also be able to do these projects with.

And as the board, that's going to be your all's decision, you know, finding the funds available for us to use as a tool.

I'll make one, okay, understood.

I'll make one final comment and then

We're running a little ahead of schedule, so I think I'll just go back through each supervisor.

If you had a final comment or question to make, you'll have a chance to do that.

It's not lost on me, though, that in one of these regulations, the weeds and the 12 inch and that happening in the conversation from a few months ago where we allow

property that are then the medians of our roads to basically not apply to this ordinance.

And that's either VDOT owned, it's not private owned, it's not resident owned, and it's not being taken care of.

And in some cases, it's twice, three times the 12 inch mark.

Maybe I'll go put rulers up this summer and see what they look like.

But I mean, is VDOT exempt from us holding them to this piece where we go in and charge them for the cleanup?

So they're exempt from that, and then they're telling us that it's dead.

I'll leave it at that.

If there's anything else I have to say, it's probably just me being a smart answer.

We'll go back through.

Just a couple of comments perhaps, but I really appreciate the discussion and I agree with almost everything that many of you all have said because this is a real conundrum.

I will say just to address some of what Donna said, I don't always, I don't focus very often and say the rural area and the development area because I know we have areas within both, right?

Having said that, we constantly used to say we have a development area and we want people to live in the development area.

If we don't keep up our development area and make the neighborhoods in the development area attractive in places that have a quality of life, it doesn't have to mean expensive.

But if we don't give the folks a quality of life in those neighborhoods, they flee.

And so that's why I've been coming back to the development area because we say we want you to live in the development area, but we're not providing the ordinances or the help for people to want to stay in the development area.

but Donna I get it completely and I understand the rural area concerns and I get that we have neighborhoods everywhere but my focus has sort of been on that we want to keep people living in the development area then how are we going to do that and the affordability piece is exactly right I don't know how to balance I struggle with how to balance

the folks that come in and buy these homes or these duplexes, you name it, and then rent them.

And I understand trying to balance between how can we keep them affordable and still try and provide for the rentees a quality of life and the neighbors beside them.

I will just point out that I don't think in Albemarle County's history, I could be wrong, but I've been here some 40 years, I've never known as to raise a house, any kind of building.

Now, maybe we have, but certainly not in the last 20 to 25 years.

And so I don't think that that really is a viable option to discuss because I don't think we've ever done that.

Now, maybe we could, but I don't think we've ever done it.

and we do have in this community at least a few land hoarders and I don't know how you get at that but we have we have one Scottsville district, Samuel Miller district, Jack Jouett district, we have folks that have the money to buy up or they inherit or they have properties

and their water-turned-land hoarders, and they don't take care of the property they have.

I don't know how you get at that.

That's a whole other issue, perhaps.

But I will say that that is a problem we have.

And just one other comment.

Some of these, in my experience, at least in some of the neighborhoods that I'm struggling with,

It's amazing the difference that just putting a sidewalk in will make.

That's something the county can do is to identify the neighborhoods where we can invest in something that while costs some money, it's not

It's not beyond the pale.

And I keep going back to the hydraulic area and even the barracks road area.

You put in a sidewalk and it's amazing the difference it makes.

All of a sudden the same people are still there.

The same owners may be there or rentors may be there.

but the property improves as a result of that sidewalk.

So sometimes it's not just a matter of trying to force somebody maybe there's a carrot that goes along with that that investment of public funds in a neighborhood.

Thank you.

I want to just clarify one thing from my perspective, the comp plan questions in the rural versus urban.

Certainly, there's always been an understanding that there are more services, water and sewer, everything in the urban area.

And I agree completely that for many different decisions impact the quality of life.

And we will kill off the goose that lay the golden egg if we don't make all those decisions well.

to keep our growth areas attractive so people do come.

But a completely separate issue for me, and I know no one was suggesting this, but is the standard of habitation.

Just because someone is of low income and renting something, they should still have a decent place to live and it should be incumbent upon renters, the owner, to not be allowed to rent something that has fallen down and victimized the people who can only afford to live there.

That is a hideous prospect, and I don't know which of our many, many state agencies is even involved with that.

I guess it's sort of what Stacey was getting at with the inspection program that she was suggesting as far as the affordable housing is concerned.

But I did, I saw through the chat that in response to an earlier question I had asked about DHCD cost sharing programs, Michael Gallagher said that Stacey

did have information about that.

I don't know if she's on the program now or she could answer that and email us all about that afterwards.

And some final comments.

Thank you, Chair Galloway and Supervisor McKeel.

I totally agree with you.

If we do not keep our urban area, our development area attractive, then it will dramatically and adversely impact the county.

And there is a substantial distinction between a house that looks to be in disrepair if you're on 20 acres or 60 acres or somewhere out in the county.

where it's not as visible versus if you are 20 feet away from it in an urban area.

And I think that this really goes to sort of an underlying problem that our system has established that Chair Gallaway and Mr. Dellinger were addressing, and that is that when a development is being proposed and approved, we have the ability to impose a degree of standards that we are not later able to enforce

on existing properties.

And that is really where part of the problem is.

When a developer is building something, they have the resources that we can make sure they do it right.

We don't have the same ability to enforce maintenance later on.

And we recognize that for many of our residents, they don't have the financial resources that a developer has.

to make some of the improvements that really should be made.

And so this is just part of the conundrum that we're going to have to deal with.

I am more concerned with the safety aspect than I am the aesthetic aspect.

I think probably most of us are because once you start getting into aesthetics, you're getting so subjective.

You know, what color can you paint your house, for example?

or something like that and I don't think that's anywhere where any of us have thought about going.

But I really see that we have to be able to eliminate, every day when I drive through the county I see houses that have been abandoned for decades.

which we've all talked about.

And there has to be a way, but based upon everything that I've heard today, it appears to be that the spotlight abatement is the most likely mechanism that we have available for us today.

And even with that, it's not going to solve all of our problems.

Again, I thank you all very much.

I really appreciate the work that you've put into it.

And as I think we can see, we still have more work to do.

Thank you, Chairman.

Yes I just have one concern and that was for what Chair Galloway mentioned about the VDOT being able to enforce cutting or you know maintaining the roads properly and such.

Ran into a situation on a private

Road, but not a residential road, a commercial road, not a broken road, and found out that there were bushes, trees that literally, it's a two-lane road, and there were bushes and trees that literally went out about, I'd say at least four feet, maybe five feet into the road branches at a low level and

You were actually forced to go into the other lane to go around this, either that or your car went through this.

And when I called up, when I talked to VDOT about it, they said it's a private road, they can't do anything about it.

And it's on the developer

to whoever owns that home, it's where the giant shopping center is.

And I thought, my God, someone's gonna get injured or go through there at night if they don't see the bushes.

I mean, we're really talking, it was about maybe 20 feet long by about four feet out of bushes and branches.

into the road.

Supervisor LaPisto-Kirtley, I can address that.

Bart and I went out and took a look at that particular section of road.

It was adjacent to a private road and the part you were speaking of was actually on VDOT property so we'll just need to get with them and work out the details on that.

I know.

It goes from private right to the VDOT right-of-way and where that location was we ascertained that that was VDOT right-of-way so we will get with them and talk to them about those locations.

I appreciate that.

and can I just and I'm sorry to jump in I know it but this is really important one of the things that this board is doing and and I've watched it happen in my opinion is we are approving developments Donna's getting at this and Bea's getting at this we are approving developments right now with private roads

and those roads in 10 years or 15 years, because I can give you examples in two or three neighborhoods, those property owners will not be able to keep up the expense of the maintenance of those roads and those roads as they deteriorate cause exactly some of the problems we're talking about.

and there are neighborhoods right now in Albemarle County, there are neighborhoods in Fluvanna, there are neighborhoods in all of our surrounding counties that are on private roads and you can't even sell the houses in those neighborhoods because the roads haven't been maintained.

We have to discuss whether or not we want to continue to allow private roads instead of

As a force, we've got to make sure that these roads are taken into the VDOT system so that the millions and millions of dollars it takes to keep them maintained is there and it's not put back on the neighbors that live in them or the owners of those houses.

Diantha, isn't that because they go

I heard the developers built it to VDOT standards.

However, because of maybe our rules and regulations, they can't put as many homes in there if it's an actual VDOT road as opposed to a private road that's built to VDOT standards.

Well, VDOT will tell you that if it's up to their standards, they'll take it into the system.

And maybe sometimes we're trying, this is a discussion for another time, but this is one of the things I think we really need to flesh out and talk about.

Mr. Chairman, Richardson County Executive, if it's the pleasure of the board, and I know Mr. Campner, our county attorney, has recently talked about what he believes might be an interest level from board members to talk in the future about public and private roads and what our responsibilities are.

And Greg, I don't want the words in your mouth.

I think you came unmuted, and so I'll turn it over to you in a second.

But I was just going to say that we'll be happy to take that direction and come back

That's a fascinating topic.

And probably 10 or 15 years ago,

and Amelia will recall.

There were some issues and why we have some developments with private roads is that at the time VDOT's design requirements, Amelia, and road width requirements were incompatible with the neighborhood model type of development that we were trying to achieve.

I don't know where they are right now, but that's one of the reasons why we do have

private roads.

I think long term in our development areas that is not the way we should be going.

Yes, I think we're dealing with a lot of older roads, prior codes, and right now the default is absolutely to have it be a new public road.

There's some cases with mixed use where VDOT won't accept roads because of parking and so forth, but anyway, we can certainly bring further information on that.

Well, I'm going to push back a little bit because we have two developments right now that are coming to us that are supposed to be affordable, and the original proposal was for private roads.

So I'm going to push back on this because we and I can tell you I've approved numerous developments since I've been on the Board of Supervisors with private roads.

So that'll be coming.

My final I guess request or comment and I'm not Mr. Richardson it sounds to me like when we hear

a resource question like Michael was talking about when I talked about if you have resources for this, that that's probably something to flag for a budget conversation.

I'm not saying that coming this year that we're going to have a lot of ability to do so, but we at least need to know what's on the list to discuss so that if we're not, I don't know if it's to handle blight properties or reserve or something like that for that.

I mean, board members, if we're hearing that there's some issues that sound like exist, we have ordinance in places that allows us to do something, then we run into the fact that there's not money allocated to do it.

So if there's not money allocated to do it, then that's a budget time.

We have to discuss that during budget.

That just seems appropriate.

I'm not saying we're going to put money in there.

You know, we have to see what else is on the list and how it all plays out.

But if we don't put it on the table and have it on the list, then it never gets discussed.

So is there any objection to doing that during budget season?

It doesn't sound like there would be.

That's good to know.

Just knowing that it's flagged and we're having this conversation now.

So yes, things like that.

We want to re-highlight that during budget time so that we're all aware of it and then see to what extent we think the numbers are and everything like that.

One follow up question when we're still lurking around is do we need this maintenance code?

And the reason why we haven't for the last 12 years is because of the cost.

But we've never been given what the cost is.

So my question would be can we itemize the cost of the maintenance code personnel changes?

If there are three people now and we need to go to five, that's different than if we need an extra 10.

I don't know what 100% increase

really means because I don't know exactly which categories of staff we're talking about.

So I think that's a really important part of the discussion that we need to make a decent decision because it seems like many of these issues we're not gonna make any headway with the structure we have now.

The spotlight sounds nice and it might be working only to get the buzzards out but it doesn't fix the house the buzzards were living in.

So there has to be

If 30% of the counties are doing something different than we are, there must be a reason why.

And I would love to find out more about this, but I really need to know the details of what the costs are because I'm convinced with the

multiple, multiple trips that our many, many staff people have made to all these properties that doing it right the first time might really save us a lot of money.

I was going to say to add to that VML has a document that I saved that talks about how Lynchburg has made and I understand they're a city but that they have done the best work at the time this was created around blighted properties and they had a code enforcement task force.

Now, that might be something to look at, but as Ann and Ned are saying, that may require staff, which is what we'll get to what Ann's saying.

All right, so we've allowed an additional about 30 minutes on this topic, but let's bring it home here.

So Amelia, you were asking to make sure you understood the consensus.

This is not just for us to throw things and lob out there, but you want to clarify?

Yes sir that would be very helpful.

Is the board asking us to come back with some cost estimates on a maintenance code program knowing that it can vary greatly if it's responsive or proactive and if it's a partial adoption versus full adoption.

I mean I'd agree with that.

Any objection to what was just said?

Anything else clarified?

And I know in our packet it was all of this received for discussion consideration.

There have been a few questions thrown out there that could break them back in future conversations, the private public road piece.

And then it was asked for the board direct staff to conduct monitoring and evaluation of public nuisance cases.

Yes.

As a note, Supervisor Price lost power, so she'll be rejoining us by phone here.

We still have a quorum, so we'll continue and she'll be joining back on.

Is there anything else, Amelia?

Are you good with everything at this point?

Michael, Lisa, Andy?

Mr. Richardson, are we good there?

Well, I appreciate it, Mr. Chair.

I know we're over time, but I do kind of feel compelled to make a couple of comments.

This is an extremely complex issue where you have owners who reside on properties who are living with a standard of living that is a below modest level and our staff with the sensitivity that they have, they go on these properties and they know pretty quick that they're working with people who are barely getting by if at all getting by.

and they try to be sensitive and they try to exert influence.

That's one segment of this and we're going to have to look at that in the accompaniment of absentee owners who rent properties and do not take an interest level even at a minimum level of compliance and as one or two board members have indicated

The closer that these property owners live beside each other, the more of an adverse impact it can have on property values.

If people are thinking of selling homes, it can be very concerning as it relates to will it affect their ability to sell their home and get what they feel is a fair price.

and then there are resource issues.

Our staff that are before you today, they are very can-do and very polite and they try really hard to work every day and they have very heavy workloads and they know that they are working in a bigger environment where we have depleted resources and we have a shaky economy right now.

So we've got to figure all that out and we'll do that in the budget process.

And I think I've heard pretty much a consensus from this board today that we would like to look at programs that would be more aggressive, maybe perhaps more uniform.

And it's not a matter of if it will require more resources.

Of course it's going to require more resources.

It's not going to be with the resources that we have.

And we're going to have to do a good job of letting this board know that.

So I appreciate Ms.

McCulley and her team.

I do appreciate the interest and the compassion that this board has because I know you hear complaints from citizens in this community and this is a consistency that we're hearing.

We'll do our best work to come and try to provide additional options with more precise cost estimates.

So thank you Mr. Chair.

Thank you all.

All right, board, we are at a point for recess, and we will be coming back at 3 p.m.

for our work session.

So we'll just stay on top time for that.

All right, Travis, you'll let us know when we're off air and reconvene here at 3 p.m.

Alright, so we're coming back late from recess.

We've had some power outages with participants.

Supervisor Price, we're waiting to see if she's able to come back in.

We do want to state up front that due to the weather events, that if that prevents a quorum from being maintained at any given time, that the

Basically what will happen is we'll continue the meeting to the next regular meeting which will be January 6th and so for some reason one more supervisor loses power or disconnects.

We'll call a recess to see if they can be reconnected but if we don't come back on then that means the meeting's going to be forwarded to the January 6th meeting.

The public hearings that are tonight are not the type that would

I don't believe cause any deadline or issues like that, so having those in January 6 will not prevent any major issues there, I don't believe.

I don't think so.

And it may be there are a couple of closed meeting items that are time sensitive.

So what I think we'll try to do if it's okay with everyone, and obviously you have to make your own judgment call if you're here at the building.

For those that are home, it may be different than just the power usage.

We'll try to get through at least the afternoon stuff, and likely the evening things will likely have to be pushed just so we, after daylight, I think it becomes even more problematic for those here in the building running the meeting.

So with that, we can go ahead and move to our number 10, Rio 29 form-based code.

I know we have Rachel and Kayla with us.

Good afternoon members of the board.

I'm Rachel Falkenstein, a planning manager with community development.

I'm joined today by my colleagues Michaela Carty and Leah Brumfield.

We're excited to present to you today the draft Rio 29 form-based code.

We know we have some more work to do to finalize this document, but this is a big milestone for our team and wanted to recognize all the work that's gone into this document from members of staff as well as community partners, stakeholders, and the board as well.

So if you could advance the slide, Michaela.

Our agenda for this afternoon will be

focused mostly on going through the sections of the draft form-based code that we provided and pausing at key points for some discussion and question and answer with the board.

But we do want to make sure we save time at the end for direction on next steps and future work.

And we also will start us off with some project background and share a little bit of work that we've done in 2020 since we last had a work session with the board on this project.

So to start us off, I will just give a quick refresher on kind of the vision for this project and why we're doing this.

If you'll recall, the board adopted the Rio 29 small area plan in December of 2018 and establishes the vision for this area of a connected network of complete streets, sustainable and usable public spaces that enrich the community and development that's vibrant, diverse and mixed use.

And the vision is supported by a series of recommendations in the plan as to how to implement that vision.

And that brings us to form-based code.

You see in the green box on your screen, this is the screen capture from the RIAA 29 small area plan.

There is a specific recommendation that calls for zoning to be updated.

to allow development that is consistent and in keeping with the vision.

And it recommends form-based code be pursued as a possible zoning update.

And so that's the work we're doing today.

That's kind of the background that brings us to form-based code.

Thank you, Rachel.

This is Michaela Acardi, Senior Planner in Community Development.

And throughout the course of 2019, staff led a rigorous engagement process that was made up of project steering committee meetings, public workshops, focus groups with the development community, and work sessions with the Planning Commission and the board.

And this was in addition to staff technical working groups.

This resulted in the draft framework.

There's a screenshot of the document that the board saw in December of 2019.

And the board supported staff's draft and directed staff to continue work on this document to transition this outline to a ready to adopt zoning ordinance.

So that's the work that staff has been doing over the last year.

CDD staff has been collaborating across county departments and working with external agencies such as Virginia Department of Transportation and Charlottesville Area Transit to develop draft ordinance that you have before you today.

In addition to this collaborative work, the Form-Based Code Institute was hired to provide peer review and scenario modeling services.

The Form-Based Code Institute assembled a team of nine reviewers and form-based code experts from a variety of backgrounds.

The group included architects, developers, elected officials, and municipal staff, and their comments and feedback will be shared throughout the presentation today as we move through each section.

In addition, we will share hypothetical development scenarios that were designed to test out and demonstrate the draft ordinance at three different sites throughout RIVA 2019.

These were designed in collaboration with Dover Cole Partners, a firm that is part of the Form-Based Code Institute's network of reviewers.

And it might be interesting to the board to know that Joe Cole, who's a partner at this firm, grew up in the Rhino 29 area, and it was fun to work with him on this project.

Finally, staff has been sharing the draft code with a variety of stakeholders, including the Project Steering Committee that met throughout 2019, property owners, the development community, and this was shared with the Planning Commission at a new work session.

And today, our goal is to share the current draft form based code with the board.

We're seeking the board's support and feedback on moving this draft forward to the public hearing phase.

We'd like to hear the board's feedback on changes that should be made to the draft prior to finalizing.

And then as Rachel mentioned, we have an item at the end of our presentation about the board's feedback on prioritizing future work for this project.

Thanks, Michaela.

So as part of our contracted consultant services, we did have the consultant develop scenarios, not necessarily to show what we should put in various parts of the county, but to show that the code could achieve the goals that we envisioned for the area.

And we also wanted to test out with the mind of a developer, with the mind of someone who had to interpret these codes.

whether these were even feasible, whether these kinds of regulations were possible.

The code did provide these scenarios.

They delivered very well.

And they really gave us a feel for the potential development types and the density we're asking for.

So again, I do want to caveat for the board and the public that these scenarios are not proposals.

They're just an exercise in imagination and they're hopefully shaped by the form-based code that we're looking at.

Next slide.

So this first scenario is the core existing conditions for the corner of Rio and Route 29.

It's currently dominated by single level retail with large parking lots, but as a core site in the core district of the form-based code, it is intended to be the densest most urban character area.

Next slide.

And what we end up with here with the development scenario is an attractive welcoming face of the area.

This development does show a large prominent civic space.

At the rear of the slide, you can see it's right next to the Northside Library.

And it also shows the incorporation of some of the

some of the existing structures that may be more useful to keep while still relegating parking to the rear buildings.

So overall creating a very welcoming walkable facade.

Next slide.

Here is a view of the actual civic space that's proposed here and it shows that this is still a brick dominated area but with more interesting welcoming kind of views.

So going to the flex existing condition slide, we were looking at particularly filling in a lot of the large expanses of parking lots that we have here.

They provide a really good development opportunity for the property owners and for the developers in the area to really maximize on the space that they already have without necessarily demolishing everything that's already on the site.

So if we go to the proposal, the flex development scenario shows an option for adding dense mixed use to this site without actually demolishing everything that's already there, which provides an opportunity for a lot of growth.

This adds residential above retail, it incorporates parking garages, it does incorporate a central civic space, and it also incorporates pedestrian walking streets between buildings, creating that spot where people can at first, even if they're not necessarily living in the area immediately, they can park once and then walk.

with open air, attractive pedestrian streets to get their business done in the area and enjoy actually being here.

I'm sorry to interrupt.

Sure.

Let me go to that.

Mikayla, can you just tell us real quick, I'm pulling up our PDF.

Okay.

So currently on slide 12.

And then yeah, just keep going the next slide.

As you said, that'll indicate those who have the presentation.

Sure.

And I'm sorry, Leah, but could you also state the streets because you had Rio, you had

29, and I'm not sure which year you're on because everything looks different to me.

It's near the library, Northside Library, so maybe you could point out some things that are existing.

So again, these aren't necessarily proposals.

These are just examples of what we could have in the area.

So and if we are going to the street view, we're looking from 29 and this creates a destination when you're looking off of 29 to see that you would want to be invited into this shopping area, into this development.

This is intended to show the wider sidewalks where we have multimodal transportation going on.

It is separated by 529 and it also incorporates a variety of architectural styles that can bring in the life that we're looking for in the redevelopment of the area while still feeling true to the greater Charlottesville architectural areas.

So if we're going to the next slide, that is the EDGE existing conditions.

This is actually a parcel on Berkmar Drive and it's currently owned by the county.

It's right next to the fire station.

Currently, this is completely vacant.

It is wooded.

And if we go to the next slide that shows the development scenario, this demonstrates the ability to put in mixed use or affordable housing developments that slot very easily into this development that creates places where people could live in order to walk to our walkable areas.

This is on the left side.

There is a medical office building and again on the right is the fire station.

Sorry, Donna?

Supervisor Price?

Yes?

Did you say something?

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

This is slide 14 for reference.

So this shows the walking trail at the rear and incorporates

a larger sidewalk at the front of the property and also continues to demonstrate the depth of buffer that we have in the rear of the property between this property and the single-family development behind it.

And if we're going to the next slide, 15, this is the street view of that development.

And hopefully these development scenarios have sparked everyone's imagination.

We're looking at not just what could be, but kind of an inspiration

to make Rio 29 a really great place to live.

Thank you, Leah.

So now we're on slide 16 and we're getting into our portion of the presentation that will allow opportunity for discussion with the board.

So our plan for the presentation, the way we'll structure this is we will go through sections of the code in order that they appear in the draft.

and we're gonna do three sections at a time.

And then after we get through three, we'll pause and allow for discussion on those three sections that we just covered.

And we'll do three rounds of that.

So three rounds of three.

So moving forward to the next slide, I will talk a little bit about some of the overarching edits we've done in the document before you today.

So Michaela talked about the framework we brought in 2019

A lot of work to that document to bring it forward to a draft ordinance for you all to review.

A lot of work was done refining and adding detail to the draft framework and making it into a code that can be adopted and implemented.

We've added standards by working with internal county staff and external agencies to fill out some of those details.

We've also incorporated some more provisions for administrative work and modifications, special exceptions, processes that needed to be filled out to allow this to function like an ordinance.

We've added some graphics and diagrams to the document.

And then lastly, we've removed the incentive section and we've incorporated some of these standards throughout.

And we'll talk about that a little bit more once we get to that section of the code.

So next slide.

So just to refresh your memory, the framework we brought to you in 2019 and you all endorsed, the administration section talked about how it would work.

So the administration section is kind of the how-to guide of the code.

And in our framework from 2019, we were recommending that the ordinance be structured as an optional overlay district.

And what that means is kind of a parallel zoning that property owners would have the option to choose to develop under, but if they weren't interested they could continue to operate or develop under the existing zoning on their property.

So some advantages of this are kind of detailed on this slide.

We're hopeful that the way it's structured incentivizes property owners to want to choose to develop under the form-based code.

It adds quite a bit of additional development potential that doesn't exist with the current zoning today.

It enables mixed-use development through a buy-write process, so those interested in developing mixed-use projects would not have to go through rezoning as they currently do.

Another advantage is we can include an affordable housing provision of requirement in the code, since it is optional.

State of Virginia doesn't allow requirements of affordable housing through zoning, but since it's optional, we can do that.

And then lastly, structuring it this way is consistent with the project goal and the recommendations of the small area plan.

to allow the area to kind of change and transform over time.

So something that'll work today, but also into the future.

So the next slide, I'll summarize some of the peer review feedback we received from the Farm Based Code Institute reviewers on an early draft we shared with them.

They recommended that we include some more overarching goals and context in the administration section.

So we've gone ahead and done that.

They also recommended we specify how existing buildings and existing development can be incorporated into redevelopment proposals.

I'll talk about that in a bit.

They did share a concern that it was optional.

We are not changing the recommendation for the code to be optional.

We just felt the feedback we've heard and our reasoning hopefully is strong justification for going this route.

And then lastly, they recommend we incorporate some more graphics and illustrations.

And this is really to help provide clarity and ability to understand some of these concepts a little bit easier through graphics.

So next slide.

And then the administration section you'll find on pages three through nine of the attachment.

As I said, it's still an optional overlay as it's structured.

And then property owners would be eligible to develop by submitting an application.

So it talks about the process.

If an owner does opt into the RIA 29 form-based code, the regulations would be applied in whole, so you can't pick and choose from the code which standards you'd like to apply.

They would all apply, and they would apply to the entire parcel.

However, phased redevelopment can occur if there's a redevelopment point.

and I think this will be important especially for the larger properties such as the shopping centers who might want to phase a development, develop maybe an out parcel in the parking lot similar to the scenario that Lea shared.

They can do so and still move forward with the farm use code.

And one more slide on administration just talks about the development review process.

Again, there'll be an application submittal and it'll be a by right or staff approved process.

This will be similar to our site plan process that we have today.

The requirements will be a little bit different because the code requirements are a little different than our current ordinance.

These projects will not be reviewed by the board, the planning committee, the ARB,

And in the framework, the document included a regulating plan with three character areas, the core that's shown in the pink hue, the flex in white, and the edge in blue.

These are character areas that align with a small area plan that was adopted, and then amenity spaces are shown in green.

These character areas dictate the permitted uses and the general standards applicable to each property throughout the code.

The feedback we heard from the Form-based Code Institute peer reviewers was that we identify street locations on the regulating plan itself to ensure continuity of development and to provide more guidance on civic space types and locations.

So the updated code draft before you has the character areas and this regulating plan is on pages 10 and 11 of attachment B1.

The amenity spaces are now renamed civic spaces.

Instead of green parcels, they are points that identify the general location and specify the type of civic space required.

This approach allows for greater clarity about the underlying character area of each parcel in case buildings or development occur around a civic space.

And this placement of points allows multiple parcels to contribute.

In most cases, we've placed these along parcel boundaries.

And when we talk about civic spaces, we'll get into this in greater detail.

And the Streets Regulating Plan is also noted as a high priority for future work projects as a result of the feedback that we've heard.

Thanks Michaela.

So now we're on the slide that says framework-uses on the top of the slide.

So our framework for uses does include a large shift as we have described throughout the process, changing the way that the county

generally handles the uses.

We currently have specific named individual uses like musical instrument sales and repair, and we are switching that to broad flexible categories like retail so that we can try and cover uses without excluding anything that has similar impacts.

So as the code strongly emphasizes form over function, we do permit most uses throughout the World War 29 area.

We did also propose new categories.

We proposed specifically artisan manufacturing, which would be small scale industrial uses with extremely low or no impacts.

And that was in response to desire for such uses.

We've had a lot of requests for that.

We've had redevelopment of places with special use permits to allow that kind of use.

when those uses really don't have the impacts that would require a special use permit to mitigate.

So that would be something like artisans, craftspeople, small breweries, small manufacturing, things like that.

We've also allowed an additional use that is described as temporary uses.

And this would allow expansion of uses in existing buildings

where a development might not be able to completely redevelop the entire parcel, but they want to expand use in some of the existing buildings.

And this is intended to avoid having a ghost town, having abandoned shopping centers that are waiting for redevelopment.

So if we go to the next slide for feedback.

We did have feedback that our previous recommendations that went to the commission and the board before were too narrow.

We had that feedback from both the commission and also the

stakeholder group that reviewed it for us.

So we are planning on explicitly calling out interim uses in our code guide and naming the kinds of things that we're looking for in addition to expanding the definition to be clear on how many things we're looking at for here.

As we look at the current draft for uses slide, so we have expanded temporary uses.

We are explicitly permitting them in existing structures as we noted to avoid deserted areas and we've also expanded the use categories in response from the prior slide that you saw before in response to the reality that if these things are not listed then they're not permitted and we want to be able to have uses like utilities throughout the county

as we are a Dillon rules state.

If you don't say you can do it, you can't do it.

We also provided additional guidance on uses that we know are fundamentally contrary to some of the goals that we're looking for in the RAV 29 area based on their form.

And those are explicitly gas canopies and drive-throughs.

So those now require special use permits to achieve in this area.

So now to keep things rolling and focused, we're opening up discussion or questions on these sections that we have just discussed.

I don't think I have any questions right now, but I do think this is exciting work and I appreciate all this information.

Likewise, this is really great reading and a wonderful step forward, so thank you all for the midnight oil.

A couple of things to put on your think about list, because I don't have an answer, only a question.

When you, are you, try to avoid requiring residential over retail because it, in some circumstances, creates a building that cannot be financed by a bank.

So we have learned this the hard way in other areas, and we hopefully will not saddle Rio with this same conundrum.

So as an option, that's terrific.

And if they are rental only, that seems to be fine, but apparently banks will not finance anything that is condoized in a multi-layer, multi-use situation.

So I'll just leave that with you.

I love the idea of the overlay.

And my question is, if the overlay were established, then if someone wanted to just do the conventional approach, they could have a waiver process.

It seems almost opposite what is being proposed.

But if we don't have the overlay, I understand we can't get all those other things.

So I hope there's a way we can get to the point of having the overlay as the basis.

And then if somebody has a particularly unique situation and it only works the old way, then

the staff could consider that.

And that is probably all I have.

The 20 person limit, was that in this?

Oh, that's light industrial.

That's later.

I'll hold off.

Okay.

Thank you, Chair Galloway, and thank you all for your presence.

I missed this part because the power had gone out.

I don't have any questions.

I was very impressed with the part that I did see though.

I think it's very exciting.

Right, so if I ask a question it should be for a future section or make a comment.

Just kick me to that section or delay me till then.

Could you put the view of the regulating zone up on the screen, the regulating plan on page 11 in our attachment?

So you've got these, you've got your different areas, which I like how this has progressed, especially, but I want to hone in on the edge pieces.

And it looks like over on the Woodbrooke neighborhood, the edge does a pretty good job of separating, I mean, while there are things in the edge area, the core and the flex seem pretty well separated from Woodbrooke.

Over on the Berkmar Drive, that one area that's kind of up

behind Burke Marsh Circle and goes over to Commonwealth.

So if you look, yeah, right where your arrow's at, there's a couple of plots back there around that roundabout.

And I'm not disagreeing with this, because I know what exists over in there, but those couple of places just along that edge, I'm hoping, is there a reason why that blue didn't extend in there?

That's correct.

It was an acknowledgement of the existing uses and it was really a judgment call.

I think it could go either way.

For those, and I don't disagree with that, I just want to be mindful on those two areas because this edge, you know, it'd be really easy to think that there's an edge around the whole development, there's really not.

But those are residential neighborhoods and we just want to be thoughtful about how things transition from what's there now to a redevelopment and then what could be added in a redevelopment to help with any buffering or

things if there are areas that are not quote unquote in the EDGE area.

The public institutional use, buy right in the EDGE, is that just in line with everything else that we're doing buy right?

Was there any, I look at the other uses that you have buy right in the EDGE areas and if you've got retail sales or restaurants, entertainment, things like that are all permitted.

So I'm guessing public and institutional, the reason I wrote the note down was just thinking of impacts of public and institutional use might have more, might have more use than those others, but that's probably not the case.

I mean, the retail, the restaurants, things like that could just be as well as used.

That's correct.

And just in general, we're looking at traffic, we're looking at noise.

Most public uses would not necessarily be subject to the regulations of this kind regardless in the current existing zoning.

And then the institutional uses are falling under that same category.

There's a fire station on Berkmar now that once they get up and running you're going to hear the residences are going to hear that.

I don't think they necessarily mind that knowing that they have a fire.

Donna, we're on the current draft uses, which is slide, I don't know what the slide number is, just so people know what we're on.

The temporary uses in the EDGE as a buy-write, so storage yards, construction uses, just talk about the reasoning of why that would be allowed buy-write in the EDGE areas specifically, just because they're so close to residential.

I'm thinking along the lines of what can happen just knowing that if there's construction going on in the core or the flex, I get it, there can be some things off to the edge that could maybe house whatever while those things are happening, but then what that could mean for the residences, debris, dust, noise, et cetera.

That is by right across the board.

So the temporary construction is currently by right everywhere right now.

So that means a construction site, basically.

So if you are going to build a building, you have to have a temporary construction use.

That's just that's the way the zoning works right now.

But it's not necessarily that if I'm in the core area I have to stay on my property for it.

I mean I hadn't thought of using edge area if I was developing a core area.

That's where my head's at here.

I think I understand.

You're talking about it being a staging area.

That wouldn't permit that as a clearance.

That you have to use the construction area that you have right now.

And I'm sure that

We can have further information on this.

I don't know all the specifics of that, but this is actually copied directly from the existing ordinance, the temporary construction uses and temporary storage yards.

So I mean, at the end of the day, you just have to stay on your property.

What I have in my mind is probably not realistically what will play out.

I think that's all of my questions for the uses area, so I'll wait until the other sections come forward.

Supervisor Mallek, did you have a question about light industrial?

Supervisor Mallek, I just wanted to follow up on your point about light industrial.

We are on the uses section.

Oh, thank you.

I got back just in time.

Let me get to my notes there real quick.

I guess my point is I'm focusing my point on strictly light industrial of the 21st century and that I want to be sure that we are not returning to what we tried 10 years ago in the first range of this where we had very strict, or this was 10 years ago,

Very strict size limits, 5,000 square feet and smaller for all these little uses, and everybody had to get a special permit.

So I would hope that we will consider being more flexible about the action scientific, the wet labs, what we call light industrial, but it's also medical research, and not have these employee limits or a special permit required for them.

I'm looking at the chart and thinking, well, I wish that were a buy right.

So I'll just pass that along.

If it's something that generates noise, that's totally different.

But just to remind people, down in the old linen building on East Market Street was an artisan welder.

I mean, Gaston and Wyatt made furniture.

There are furniture makers and jewelers and potters all over the place.

And they're using a lot of older warehouse type buildings because that's much more affordable.

and has the space that they need.

So Supervisor Mallek, I can answer that directly and with probably exactly what you want to hear.

All of the uses that you just described would fall under artisan manufacturing which are permitted by right.

Okay, what about somebody who's a medical research person who's making COVID vaccine or something like that?

I mean, would they be in the light, the purple field R&D flex category is one of my favorites.

So R&D, depending on the use, would be either office or light industrial, and that would be determined at the permitting stage.

So if it's an office use, it's truly an office use, then that would be by right.

Okay, we have a ways to go to figure this out.

Well, if there's any kind of assembly or even if it's injecting sterile saline into little bottles, there is no impact with that.

So that's why I'm trying to avoid having that kind of

aspect of manufacturing and light industrial being put into a special permit category because they'll go somewhere else, that's for sure.

And they'll be really, really good jobs.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but the way that you got the LI by right, it's just encouraging it to be in the flex area.

You don't necessarily want it in the tallest or the most dense area of this area in the core.

And I don't think we'd want that in the edge next to the residential.

So you're

basically telling somebody that wants to do that type of thing, hey, do it in the flex area.

That's by right.

Not that it's, you would need, you wouldn't need, you need special permit if you were above the retail on floor four of whatever building versus just going and setting that up outside of there.

Okay.

I must have been looking at a different chart that had an SP.

Okay, our next section talks about streets and our slide number for this is slide 32.

So we're on the framework street standard slide.

The framework we shared with you in 2019 had some street standards established.

We had four street types.

That was based on the small air plan.

And then we had two tables that talked about street components and street amenities.

So we've done some work to move that forward.

Next slide.

The feedback we received on the streets was quite a bit.

It's a big section and makes up a good bit of our code.

The first three bullets are from our consultants, the Farm Based Code Institute reviewers.

They recommended we identify street locations on the regulating plan.

We did not incorporate that and we'll talk about that in a minute.

They recommended we identify how street standards apply to smaller parcels and they recommended we clarify ownership and maintenance of streets, both of which we have done in the draft before you today.

When we talked about this with the Planning Commission last month, they had some feedback as well.

They focused quite a bit of their discussion on on views and vistas and they thought it was important that

when we get to the point where we are identifying street locations that we be thoughtful about the street alignment to incorporate views along the streets.

The Planning Commission also wanted us to bring forward the message that the importance of investment and implementation that's not necessarily related to the draft form-based code but they felt that for the area to be successful that we really needed to ensure safe bicycle and pedestrian

access and travel throughout the area and doing so would require some investment from the county.

Next slide.

So the draft before you of the street standards incorporated some additional elements that weren't in the framework.

And first is that we've identified two new street types.

So we've carried forward the four street types from before and added two new types.

The pedestrian passages and alleys, these are both optional street types.

We're not requiring them anywhere, but we think they could be useful for some of the forms of the development that we're recommending.

So we provided standards for those street types.

We've also refined some of the components and some of the streetscape elements.

So the components are what's on your street, the bike lanes, the sidewalks, etc.

And the elements are those amenities that kind of come to life on the street.

The seating, the street tree is the lighting.

So we've refined those standards.

We've also incorporated street sections and diagrams.

This is a graphic on the slide you see that is incorporated into the draft form-based code that we've added.

I'll call attention to Michaela and Charles Rapp our planning director who worked on these graphics and they did a really great job.

And if you go to the next slide, you'll see another graphic.

This is a section showing what the dimensions are of each of those street components I mentioned.

So the street standards, as far as thinking about how to identify locations of streets, as I mentioned, we don't have a streets regulating plan.

We don't have a plan that shows exactly where each street should be in Rio 29.

Instead, we rely on some standards, mainly block size.

So we're requiring a network of streets be built.

And we have some minimum and maximum block sizes, we have ranges for each of our character areas.

And that's actually mentioned

in the building standards section, but the street standards call attention to that and that's how they should be located.

Also in this section, we talk about how you could get a modification from street standards because we recognize that when you're putting streets in, things can get in the way.

There can be utilities or existing buildings or trees that you want to avoid.

And so we've built that flexibility into this section.

And just a reminder, if you're following along on the code, this section is pages 15 through 27 of the code.

Right, the next section I'm on slide.

I don't have the numbers in front of me as the presenter, but the title says framework dash building standards.

And this slide shows a screenshot of some very initial diagrams from last December.

And this section includes a lot of the core content of a form based code.

They're building standards that are required.

They're based on a properties character area.

Last year, these included height, ground floor ceiling heights, so those are the ceiling heights for the first floor of a building, block length, and build two lines.

The feedback we heard from the consultant team was to reconsider the height minimums and decrease them to allow for redevelopment of existing buildings and incremental new development.

Additionally, they recommended greater flexibility and block size to account for existing site conditions

and features such as topography.

Finally, the team suggested allowing counter flow streets along Route 29 by adjusting the build two line to a range.

So the current drafts building standards, based on this feedback, we changed the minimum height requirement in the core character area to two stories instead of three stories.

We also provided flexibility and block length by allowing for pedestrian passages and alleys to be incorporated to meet this requirement.

Rachel mentioned this previously.

Additionally, these building standards shift from a specific build to line or a location where the front facade of the building must be located to arrange.

We also incorporated a new standard of a maximum average distance between ground floor entrances.

This is to ensure that streets are pedestrian friendly and have multiple points of access for those walking or biking along the street.

Finally, there's a height bonus provision for additional affordable housing provided above the requirement.

Thank you Michaela.

So now we are on the page that says framework parking standards at the top and that would be slide 39.

So in our framework, we proposed minimum parking requirements that were 1,000 gross, one space per 1,000 gross square feet, one space per every two hotel rooms, and a maximum number not to exceed 150% of the minimum parking.

We allowed provisions for shared parking agreements between multiple uses and parcels.

We incorporated street parking towards parking minimums so that if someone only needed one parking spot and they had a parking spot in front of their retail store, that would be an unacceptable use of that parking spot.

We also permitted structured parking in by right regulations.

As we realized that as the Route 29 area evolves, the best case scenario for the first stages of development would be to create a park wants area and transition towards more transit and more pedestrian over time.

And we're trying to be realistic in that development.

So as we go to the feedback summary page to that end from the stakeholders and also the

the consultants, we did receive feedback suggesting we incorporated ride share.

And we were urged to consider additional design guidance on structured parking to make sure we didn't have large unattractive buildings.

At the work session from the board a few months ago, we also received feedback from the board to consider additional, I'm sorry,

We received feedback to consider standards for e-bikes and also electric vehicle charging stations and e-bike charging stations.

So in the current draft, we have incorporated the structured parking requirements that we discussed.

We have incorporated requirements for non-parking uses on facades to create a more walkable, more pleasing building that people would want to use.

It's not just a wall of parking.

We have included screening or building articulation on the on the parking garages and additionally we've added bicycle parking requirements for both long-term and short-term bicycle storage.

We also incorporated something that came up, not necessarily from our feedback, but during some staff discussions that was something that came to light, particularly during the COVID pandemic, it became clear that pick up and drop off would be a more standard part of the urban landscape.

So we included design standards and requirements for this as well.

And they are just called to pick up and drop off locations.

So this would be for food pickup, delivery, ride share, general deliveries, general storefront loading.

So these would be not traditional loading spaces, but actually the pickup and drop off more frequent transportation used for the general driver as well and Lyft and Uber and these as well.

So as we are moving into the discussion, we're looking at, again, the streets, the buildings, and the parking sections right now.

Yes, thank you.

This is great.

And you have

It's really been, I think, forward thinking.

I do have a couple of questions.

Because we had the discussion at the previous agenda item, would you just clarify for all of us, I see that we have public roads, VDOT roads, there's a reference to Commonwealth County, so can you just go over the road?

Who's putting in the roads?

The maintenance?

Sure, I can cover that.

I realize I've lost over that point on the slide that I covered.

The expectation is that roads be dedicated to the public and that VDOT will own and maintain.

And that's all those main street types, so our local streets, our boulevard, avenue, and the like.

Alleys and pedestrian passages, however, might end up being private.

As you recall, we had the work session in November where we asked your feedback on how you would like these spaces to be owned and maintained moving forward because we have heard from VDOT that we're calling for some extra elements that they don't require and don't actually maintain on these streets.

The wide sidewalks, the street furniture, and those types of elements.

And so your feedback was that they should be publicly owned and maintained.

Great, thank you.

I was going to ask you about charging stations, but I think you've already addressed that.

You're looking forward towards that.

Another question I have, though, is that

I do think in the future, by the time this development comes to fruition, we're going to have some autonomous vehicles.

We certainly have them other places.

How would this code adapt to autonomous vehicles, specifically maybe some sort of a trend in autonomous?

Yeah, I think we would just have to continue to keep an eye on it and see how development evolves and come back to it.

Things that come to mind for me is we might want to reduce our parking requirements if that's the case.

We might also want to look at

whether or not it makes sense to do some really intentional transit planning and identify spots where stops should occur.

Should it be like a provider like John or Kat that we're working with that want to have some dedicated space for stops throughout for maybe a circulator shuttle or something like that.

Well, in developments right now in other areas, they certainly are using already autonomous vehicles, right?

So just trying to figure out to make sure that we accommodate them as they come forward, you know, as we need them, because they're already happening.

Certainly, electric vehicles are already happening.

And I do have, I saw you have bike storage, so you're accommodating bike storage, which is great.

So the other, and maybe this is a good time for me to ask, and maybe it's a lot more about the previous discussion, but this was the first time I had the opportunity to ask.

I would love

to just hear from Roger Johnson, our economic development.

I see Roger's, I see his picture and I would just like to hear from him any thoughts or comments he has about what we've seen or what we're here for today.

Yes, I'm here and I apologize in advance for any poor network quality.

If I start buffering or sound like a squirrel I'm facing the same issues many of you are.

I just have a couple general statements and I should preface this by saying I'm looking at this through the lens of the development community as well as investors and those are the comments that I'm about to share, not necessarily those from the community.

So the greater flexibility that you put into this form-based code, and there is some in there, I think Ms.

Brumfield mentioned how they're listing retail and artisans and certain types of microbreweries.

The greater flexibility you put in the code, the more attractive it will be for both investors and developers, right?

It's just a common sense thing.

The more buy right development that you allow, the more likely it is to

to make a difference in how quickly there's turnover or new development in that particular community.

And I think that gets to the point that Supervisor Mallek was making about putting requiring residential over retail or limiting certain types of light industrial use.

Again when you when you make those determinations and I'm not putting value judgments on whether you should or shouldn't I'm just making a statement the more you put in the more by right development is allowed the more attractive it will be

Right.

Thank you very much.

I guess I have to stop and think about that.

So, do you feel comfortable?

I guess my question is, and you've got one, but do you feel like we have enough flexibility, Roger, or would you like to see some more?

Well I know the development community would like as much flexibility as possible and in certain cases the community input may be just the opposite of that.

So I don't know that I have a position statement for you Supervisor McKeel.

I'm just saying that it's really a question of how quickly you would like this to turn over which is more important to you as an elected official.

There is no value judgment.

And I continue to be concerned because Ann can address this maybe a little bit later, but her experience in Crozet about having residential over commercial and being able to get

Bank financing continues to be a concern for me because that was her experience.

I think I can speak to it historically, but I don't know specifically what Supervisor Malek's speaking to, but I know that the financial lending changed after we had the sort of the economic downfall from the housing market way back in the day where they required that

In order to finance certain condos and other types of things, less than 50% of the owners had to be individual owners, and they couldn't be by a private developer.

The banks felt like that was too risky, and that somewhat limited developers' borrowing ability.

If I can jump in real quick I know that this has come out a couple times and I was going to wait until we got to the architectural section to address it but this kind of speaks to the flexibility that Roger was discussing where the street facade has requirements for a particular mix

of residential and retail, but those first four retail that we're looking for can be used for residential as long as they're constructed to retail requirements.

So

We can get further into that in the architectural section.

That's something that we did address because we do have this history in the county with the particular developments that I think you're discussing.

Right, and I didn't mean to take you out of turn, but I saw Roger and I was just trying to grab him while he was here and I was thinking about it.

All right, but just to highlight it, I mean, we have hit an hour, so we are, this is a hard one to get in in an hour.

So if we can move quickly, I mean, I don't, especially just within light of the weather stuff.

Thank you.

I guess my only, I guess just to ask that all of our planners be especially careful about all of these street

of Elevations.

It looked really great that the one that was on screen for a while was 100 feet curb and gutter for one of our smaller streets.

And so by the time you put that in there, is there really enough left to do the buildings?

And I'm just going back to rezoning attempts in Crozet in 2010 when the community was offered a beautiful plan for the JB Barnes

Lumberyard.

It was completely impractical because by the time you took out the park in the center and the street, making the big rectangle, there were half the dimensions of the usable land that were left over.

And so that whole thing had to be thrown out and started delivering that.

So it's going to be challenging with the shapes of the parcels already.

I just want to make sure that we're not digging in our heels on a particular side.

If there's flexibility, then that's okay.

Not every street may have

room enough for bike lanes in both directions, et cetera, et cetera.

So just to keep that in mind.

And the only other thing is to be very careful about the drastic reduction in parking standards over the next 20 years, because we went from one space per whatever it was, the restaurant, to 10 times that amount, and now there is a parking free-for-all in downtown San Jose.

Not right now because of the COVID,

during normal times, it is a complete and total jam.

And so we have to get on with that.

But keep that in mind.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm good.

Yeah, I'm good here as well.

I mean, I think the streets and the parking is the most difficult part of this.

I mean, once things start to get redeveloped, I think that's going to start to dictate where these streets go.

I don't, I mean, I think there's been a lot of input, a lot of discussion about too much parking, too little parking.

I mean, some of this has, it just has to have the flexibility to figure this out as we go.

We're all going to have to understand that.

Was the building stories in this section, was that part of this or was it just the building?

I mean the only thought I had there, I wrote down a note at one point about like the difference, I'm sure this was discussed, but why the difference between six and seven in the core jumping from bi-rate to special exception?

Is there something special about story seven that I missed along the way here?

I just, you know, I don't have a problem with six or seven or I don't necessarily have a problem with it.

I was just like, oh, well, that's interesting.

It's by right up to six.

But when we get to seven, we've got to ask for a special permit.

This is looking back at both the small area plan and the process last year in 2019, the community workshops that we did work with the stakeholder community about appropriate heights for the area.

And we didn't hear as much support for that seventh story.

It was

Inconsistent at times, so our team felt confident about six stories being appropriate for the area and that also incorporates the height bonuses in this area as well.

Yes, yes.

So the bonus factors allow for the six or seven stories.

So that was, it's more intended to be an incentive and also acknowledging that

Got it.

And then I'm presuming similar answer for why only one story on the edge because you're promoting multiple floors.

All right, thank you.

Sure, well Michaela brings up the slides for the next section.

I just wanted to clarify Supervisor Mallek's comments.

That section, that street section that was shown was our boulevard street section which only applies to Rio Road.

That's the only street that we anticipate being that wide within the area.

It's got two lanes of traffic in each direction and a median, and that's just acknowledging the conditions that are there.

And I'm going to kick off our last section with architectural standards.

The framework document or I'm on the slide that says framework dash architectural standards and the framework document had this was the section that was least developed last December.

It included a proposal to administratively review compliance with entrance corridor guidelines and incorporating the standards that are part of those guidelines within it.

So the feedback that we got from the peer review group was slightly different in that rather than feedback they helped work with us by sharing examples of how other localities regulate facades and transparency as well as examples of very detailed architectural design standards that the county could pursue further if desired.

We also have a note on this slide to indicate that earlier this year we worked with the architectural review board via virtual meetings and feedback forms to receive their direction on different sections that are in the draft today.

So the architectural design standards are related to some questions earlier about uses within a building and rather than dictate specific uses within buildings, this code focuses on the form of buildings and their design.

Two aspects of this code are important in preventing blank walls.

The first is transparency, which refers to the amount of windows and doors on a wall.

The second is a maximum facade segment length.

So this is basically a maximum portion of a wall that does not have a physical or visual break.

And we have written this as being a function of the building height.

So the number, the length of that wall changes according to the building height.

And this applies to facades that face streets and civic spaces.

In addition, this section incorporates the entrance corridor guidelines by including minimum planting requirements, lighting requirements, screening for the mechanical service and loading areas, as well as permitted and prohibited building materials.

There's an extensive list shown on the table on the right.

Thanks Michaela.

So we are on the slide that says framework dash amenity standards and it is slide number 47.

So in the draft framework we did require required amenity spaces although at the time we were calling them green spaces or public spaces.

Each parcel which is to be redeveloped under the form-based code would be required to dedicate a portion of their site to public use.

um this requirement is similar in spirit to current county requirements for open space but it's more dynamic it's more active and instead of reserving that space just to be open for environmental use and for recreation for the residents of a development these spaces would be open to the public because this is an urban

development that is supposed to be more activated and more flexible.

So this creates a lively streetscape.

We're hoping to bring pedestrians out of their cars into the streets, onto the sidewalks, into the amenity spaces.

and these kinds of spaces would incorporate plantings, green spaces, but their primary use would be for active use, people who are walking their dogs, taking a walk after dinner, people who are dining, people who are bringing their lunch or their coffee out to sit on a bench and just enjoy the outside.

people also we have more the intention for these spaces to be programmed with more active county involved events as well like outdoor movie nights, festivals, farmers markets, maybe even sporting events, public speeches, things like that.

So during the drafting of the code, we did switch the name to amenities, from amenities to civic spaces to emphasize the really active public nature that these are civic, these are belonging to all of the public.

So as far as the feedback we received, we did hear that developers were worried about the extent of the civic space requirements and that every single space that would be required to devote one of these civic spaces would put a crunch on the very small developments, particularly small individual parcel owners.

And so in response to that and also

in response to the reality that we don't need 50 million 100 foot by 10 foot parks.

We provide a cash in lieu exemption for many sites.

So any site that is not two acres in sight in the core area

for example, would not have to develop that site.

They could provide funds to develop a larger site on a nearby parcel or a county owned parcel.

Additional feedback, we also heard about wanting pedestrian passages to serve towards civic spaces.

So something like the downtown mall in Charlottesville, that would be an active public space.

We did incorporate that into the draft feedback, into the new draft.

and we also provide additional guidance and we clarify that the county would own and maintain civic spaces as the board directed us in the November work session.

So if we're looking at the current existing civic space standards, again calling out Michaela for great illustrations that are throughout the draft ordinance.

We have examples of what kind elements

We have examples of the elements that are required in each different civic space.

So the chart for civic spaces shows the range all the way from indoor civic spaces like a public art gallery or something like city space to linear parks, squares, plazas, small pocket parks to create activated oases.

and we incorporated different sizes and forms of civic space to have requirements intended towards their intended uses.

So a square would require areas to sit, a focal element to gather around like a fountain or our installation, a green would require a large open grass lawn, things like that.

And we do have the element of the smaller cash in lieu, kind of just to explain that a little further.

In small developments, if a development is less than two acres in the core,

one and a half acres in the flex or one acre in the edge and they're within three quarters of a mile of a large county-owned civic space that is identified on the regulating plan or a civic space that is not county identified that is identified on the regulating plan they can contribute that cash to development and maintenance of those large civic spaces so we're thinking something like a very large activated square with multiple features going on that spans a large amount of space multiple acres at a time

Thank you.

I'm going to finish this off on the code sections that will go through this afternoon.

The framework we brought to you in 2019 had a section

dedicated to incentives and we had laid out a point system by which property owners and developers could qualify for certain incentives.

I'll just move forward to the next slide.

The feedback summary, we got quite a bit of feedback on this topic and the consensus from our reviewers was that this section really wasn't necessary.

Given that it's an overlay zoning and intended to be implemented as an incentive itself, this section seems not necessary to our reviewers.

We heard additional feedback from stakeholders as well that really the most meaningful thing incentive we can provide is that additional height.

And so what we decided to do in the draft before you if you go to the next slide

is to remove this section and then incorporate some of the elements of the incentives table throughout the code itself.

So things like amenity spaces and bicycle storage, those are incorporated now as standards within the draft.

and instead we decided that probably most important for us to incentivize would be affordable housing.

So we've incorporated an affordable housing section at the very end of the code page 50.

We are requiring a percentage of affordable housing be provided with all residential development of six units or more within Rio 29.

And the percentages that we've listed here mimic the percentages of our

Current housing draft policy that you all recently reviewed.

And that is what we're expecting with residential development within RIA 29.

And then there is a provision of affordable height, a height bonus, if developers want to go above and beyond the minimums required by the draft.

Now I think I've covered the other two and for this one I like what I've heard so I think this is a really good way to move forward and I thank you.

I agree that the process

that the county staff has been working on so hard and establishing this is enough incentive.

So I'm very grateful that they've taken that out.

Supervisor Price.

Not seeing the phone in the news.

I'm sorry, I think... Yeah, we're having a hard time hearing you, Supervisor Price.

All right, Supervisor Price, if you could hear us, we're having a hard time hearing you.

Breaking up a lot.

Right, I like everything I've seen.

I like the flexibility involved.

I like the affordable housing piece with the different levels and the new civic center space.

So, congratulations.

I think you guys are really onto something really great.

And if Supervisor Price, if you can hear us, if there's a way to mute the phone, we're getting some static and feedback there.

Thank you.

I'm not, I mean the, I mean I agree the civic spaces and things like that should come into play with the county taking responsibility and getting involved with that just like I had said the last time.

The standards, the architecture standards I'm good with.

The point system and that leaving I want to just give more thought to that.

I think it's fine if it stays the way it is.

The affordable housing should be the focus to incentivize that.

I think that's appropriate.

But I think there was some merit to the prior approach as well.

My question that I had out of that was, was there another locale who used a similar type of system successfully just so that I could brainstorm that a little bit more by the time this comes back in the more official

approvals.

And that I'm happy to get that answer offline if not expecting that answer right now.

The only other thing that I want to say that I failed to mention when we were looking at the core flex in the map with the pink and the white in the edge area, knowing that when we look at the fashion square mall property

and how that part of that is core and part of that is flex and just knowing how that, I mean that property is a complicated property anyway because there's multiple owners involved, et cetera.

But it seems to me that as you go down 29 along the whole property as we think of the footprint of the mall, I'm just wondering if we need to be flexible that if that core area needs to expand to include some of that?

because you've got 29 on the face, you don't really have any residential behind at that point on that end.

That if somebody came in and wanted to really do a big redevelopment, I don't want to get stuck in that they're trying to have one foot on the core side and one foot on the flex side and that become an obstacle.

So I'm hoping there'll be some flexibility there to go, well, maybe the core area

by the nature of how that footprint is is a little bit more accepted versus it just being core flex and they're stuck with two different codes if you would underneath this overlay umbrella.

So I'm just throwing that out there as a think about thing and maybe it's already been discussed.

That's just something I'd rather avoid.

Somebody happened to come in and start asking for a lot of extra things because we've got this code

I can respond to the first portion about the incentive section.

That initial draft was based off of a similar point system in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and I wasn't able to learn.

I think I reached out to staff previously to see if how well that was working and then

Leah and I also spoke with a planner in Portland, Maine, I believe, who there wasn't a point system for the form-based code that they have that isn't the whole city, just a portion of it.

And they had an interesting experience where

It seems that everyone was taking advantage of a green roofs provision that they provided and that sort of came as a surprise to staff so we don't have a lot of clarity on how well that has worked it seems to be not as common of an approach but

Not necessarily a wrong one, just not enough information.

Sure.

I think that's a good point and something we should probably think about a little bit more.

The main difference between the character areas is the height of the buildings that we talked about earlier, as well as the LIUs being allowed in flex and not in core.

So I don't know that it would necessarily be problematic for a site to be kind of straddling to.

But I do want to think about if there's a way to be a little bit flexible about where that line is.

We don't want the line crossing through a proposed building that is seven stories and that being problematic.

Trying to get rid of impediments and obstacles so let's not create something that we're not thinking of by chance, if we are, I don't know.

Well I really appreciate all of the work here today.

So we had a list of future work that we had provided in attachment six that we want to talk about.

I know you're short on time, though.

So most important for us to hear tonight is, is this draft ready to move forward to public hearing?

We had our work program has estimated timeline for first quarter 2021 for public hearing.

Any objection for this moving forward?

No, I don't either.

Yeah, I agree.

So I think we have what we need.

So before we finish, I do want to mention that the Places 29 Rio Community Advisory Committee out there December 10th passed a resolution and I'd like to quickly read the first paragraph.

We, the members of the Places 29 Rio CDC, wish to express our appreciation to Rachel Falkenstein, Kayla Acardi, and countless other Albemarle County staff for their impressive work on the RIO 29 small area plan and resulting proposal to offer a form-based code option.

Over the past several years, they have persevered despite the disruption of the pandemic, the developed and balanced and exciting approach to offering the option for property owners in the RIO 29 area to redevelop the property using form-based code.

As this significant zoning change nears completion with the December 16 work session of the Board of Supervisors to discuss the draft FPC regulation, the committee looks forward to the final implementation of the new code by the board.

I'm not a voting member of the CAC, but had I been, I would have given that a resounding yes.

So the appreciation, I was thrilled that they passed that resolution, acknowledging the efforts and the work of staff.

And Rachel and Mikayla, I know that you've had a lot of interaction with the CAC and the Steering Committee.

and Leah with the presentations here to the board.

You all have a good night.

Thank you for your time today.

All right, board, we are running behind.

I think just as a quick check-in, just based on what I'm looking outside at, I think if we can push through to get the health district in, we have to take action on the ordinance, and then we'll do a check-in with Greg on the closed session items, but we'll go ahead and pull the plug on the evening session.

That would allow the folks here in the building to get out of here as close to light going away, et cetera.

So for the public, we would push everything from six o'clock on out to the next meeting.

I think that's a great idea.

So the next item would be the Thomas Jefferson Health District COVID-19 update.

Good evening, Ryan.

Thank you for having me.

As always, it's a nice opportunity for us to share what's going on and I think I can be somewhat brief in my presentation.

So with that I will, if I may, I'll share my screen to provide some updates on where we are with COVID-19.

And just as a reminder, as of January 1st, we will transition from Thomas Jefferson Health District to the Blue Ridge Health District and certainly be converting all of our materials and our media campaign to the new logo that you see on the bottom.

So we are really excited about that.

I'll start with a national overview and sort of give a comparison of where Virginia stands currently with COVID as related to sort of where we're seeing the worst amount of cases across the country in Oklahoma, Tennessee, New Mexico, and Ohio.

We have seen a pretty significant increase over the last two, two and a half weeks, up 23 per 100,000 to 42.9.

That's a pretty significant increase.

although I will say we are in much better shape as a state in comparison to our neighbors such as North Carolina, West Virginia, and certainly Tennessee.

That's not to say this isn't going to be creating impact and problems locally and in the state.

Here we see really record numbers of cases being reported of COVID for the last couple of weeks.

That seven day average of 3600 is pretty significant.

These numbers are current as of yesterday and there were 3100 cases.

So what we know about COVID is that this actually can present sort of a longer term effect as related to hospitalizations, new cases associated with the current ones, particularly as we move into a longer holiday period.

which is of concern for us in public health because there's just far more opportunities for interaction, whether that's social gatherings, children having to go to different daycare and childcare settings, given different breaks, opportunities for travel and obviously celebrations related to the holidays.

Something I haven't really shared in depth before is hospitalizations in Virginia, and I think it's important to understand where we currently are.

The numbers obviously are records on some days as compared to where we were early in the pandemic in April and May.

We see the average number of daily new cases reported at 103.

and there's always sort of a lag time when it comes to the cases that are reported versus when we actually see hospitalizations it could be a week to two and a half weeks and so that's something we just need to keep in mind as we're sort of thinking about transmission but also the burden on any given community.

Looking more locally, as you can see, since November 30th, we've had a pretty significant increase in weekly case counts.

The data on the left is part of what we do for weekly pandemic metrics updates for localities and schools.

And you can see that there are 202 cases between

the 7th and the 14th.

Again, what we've been finding at these cases are tied in large part due to social gatherings, many of them around Thanksgiving, others not necessarily Thanksgiving, but events that had occurred.

and larger gatherings or in private settings over that same time period.

We are seeing significant increases.

We have larger numbers of contacts to trace and I will be upfront about this.

It's presented a significant challenge to our contact tracing and case investigation.

We continue to contact everyone that we can who are able to reach

We have implemented some abbreviated investigation protocols that helps us get through the investigation a little bit quicker.

But we are making all of our attempts to contact individuals and also let individuals know that they may be considered a close contact.

And so some of our tracing investigation goals of meeting 90% are still there.

It's just maybe we're not getting to the high 90s at this point.

So just something to be mindful of as we're going through the holiday season and what this impact is on the public health response.

Looking at hospitalizations locally, we're not seeing the same impact of COVID on hospitalizations within Albemarle County.

And I'll show you numbers for Charlottesville shortly.

So the seven day moving average is one over the last week, which for right now is a good sign and certainly gives us some optimism.

But again, caution as we may see an uptake over the next couple of weeks as cases may increase with severity.

Charlottesville has seen an increase.

Numbers haven't quite doubled, and maybe not to the extent that we've seen in Albemarle County, but again, there's impact given the close nature of the two communities and localities.

Their numbers do not necessarily reflect the same increases that we saw back in September and October with university students.

But again, it's important to note that there is this increase with potential impacts on the broader community.

Hospitalizations in Charlottesville, similar to Albemarle County, remain low in terms of the number being reported and the seven-day average.

Again, this is different than what we're seeing across the state.

So again, cautious optimism as we look at these numbers specifically.

We are looking a little bit more ahead to 2021.

We certainly continue to have priorities in terms of providing access to testing resources.

In the end of November around Thanksgiving, there were some challenges with access and some slower turnaround times given the demand for testing.

More people were asking for testing because of travel requirements or wanting to make sure that if they do travel to see friends and family, they aren't positive and potentially infecting others.

We also saw sort of the residual effect of that which is when they returned there were more people interested in getting testing.

As a health district we will continue to provide access to community testing throughout January into February and honestly we don't really see any change in our interest in providing that access.

Contact tracing and case investigation.

While vaccines are on the horizon for the broader communities in the coming months, that light at the end of the tunnel is still a far ways off in terms of that providing protection to the community.

So we really have to continue with these two priorities and making sure that we're able to contact trace and case investigate.

We continue to have those priorities.

and we'll be bringing people on and training over the coming weeks as we continue to mount that part of the public health response.

And again, the vaccination planning and operations.

This will be a critical component of what we try to do in 2021 for the response.

It's great news that the local hospitals have access to that vaccine now and are able to provide that to their employees.

We are certainly working on our planning process to make sure that we can provide

access to the vaccine through the prioritization process set by the state and CDC, but certainly in a way that's also equitable to our communities and general population.

So it will be a significant challenge, one that we understand will be closely watched and one that's going to need continued support from all of our communities.

So in summary, we again saw gatherings and travel around Thanksgiving create the surge that we're seeing.

I will say that we are not as bad of a position as other health districts in other parts of the state.

So we certainly are starting off the season a little bit better off than others, but recognize that this continued pattern, there's potential there for that to occur.

And we need to be prepared for that coming up in December and January.

Hospital capacity is stable.

I'm looking at some of the numbers that are reported to the Health and Human Services website.

There are hospitals that are near or at capacity in Virginia.

Locally, we're not seeing that based on the recent data that I could find through Health and Human Services, so there's still some optimism there for stabilization in hospitals.

Again, distribution and dispensing will take time.

It will be another aspect of whole community response from our partners with you, the board, the county, and then across all of our communities in the health district to be able to provide access.

That being said, we need to continue the mitigation strategies.

The things that we've been doing to keep us in this position is a little bit better than where we are in other parts of the state is going to be important moving forward.

And we cannot stray away from those if we want to get through this surge with minimal impact as possible.

And I do want to say, even though Denise isn't here and on her behalf and behalf of the Health District, there have been tremendous successes this year in 2020 that we can build off of due in large part to partnerships like this with the Board of Supervisors, the County Executive's Office, and the entire team with Albemarle County and the work that's been done in partnership

It's been really critical to our response and I feel like we're all part of this public health response together.

So I just want to show and say some thanks and gratitude for that effort on the part of the county.

And with that I will turn it back over and answer any questions.

Ryan, thank you for your excellent report.

Yeah, there's that possibility for sure.