Albemarle Conservation Easement Authority (ACEA) Meeting   11/13/2025

Comments or motion?

It as well was not there.

So our first proposal to look at is Oakfield.

Everyone else in favor, presumably?

Welcome.

Happy to take any questions.

What's the fourth white shaded area to the west?

Yes.

This is an outdoor rioting.

OK. And that must be an ag building right there.

Yes, this structure between the two building envelopes.

We just say not to connect those two envelopes.

How are they established when they actually are on the land?

The landowners send us GPS coordinates and we mark within the exhibit of the deed, we list the GPS coordinates of the corners.

So you don't do the GPS yourself?

Provide by the land?

Yes, that's in this case, in some cases, the landowner will provide us a screenshot of something and I'll try to match up GPS and send it back and we'll confirm.

Where did the 200 foot riparian buffer come from?

Got it.

Thank you.

And thank you, Charlie.

Thank you all very much.

Seven potential dwellings, I should say.

Is it Garth Road or Whitehall Road at this point?

The term sheet lists no subdivisions, one dwelling permitted, which currently exists, or its replacement up to 4,500 square feet to be contained within the white building envelope.

So that's this right here.

So again, we find it meets the acceptance criteria and recommends acceptance.

Just one dwelling.

I mean, it's sort of bad form, you know what I mean?

If the latter is preferred, then I'll put that into effect.

And if they want more ground, come over here.

Thank you.

Thank you, fair.

Maybe five or six describes the area.

I'm just saying that I think what you were trying for is simplicity, which I think is also a good thing.

And it'd be just as well not to do that.

Is he on the two, I can't recall, I think it was a bunch of years ago, the front parcel to the left and

That's where he lives.

And that's right behind the store, sort of?

You can see the parking lot.

Is there a formula that you use for frontage?

And in this case, I think 200 feet, 300 feet was getting into the building envelope they asked for.

Is that roads or

Oh, okay.

Second.

Have you talked with him about the full monthly?

They're being represented by Lee Rasmussen, so I assume that they can take care of themselves.

That's right.

Opposed?

Well, I have a suggested motion for whomever wants to make the motion.

Can you just read about the top?

Can you just read to where the stars are?

I move that the Albemarle Conservation Easement Authority convene a closed meeting pursuant to section 2.2-3711A of the Code of Virginia under subsection 8 to consult with legal counsel regarding specific legal matters related to the interpretation of conservation easement language addressing permitted land uses which requires the provision of legal advice by such counsel.

Can the chairman make that motion or do you want to peg it on one of those guys?

And then there needs to be a roll call vote.

Director Buttrick?

Aye.

Director Merrick?

Aye.

Director Fennell?

Aye.

Director Taylor?

Aye.

You are welcome to stay here, but not participate.

And to clarify, Andy, I'm now going to mute us.

Yes, please.

Oh, yeah, so if we could, I'm sorry, record, make sure that we're recording again.

I'm very sorry, would you mind reading that again?

Oh I'm sorry.

Second.

Director Buttrick?

Aye.

And then did you have a statement to make?

Request that this fact be recorded in the appropriate public record for a period of five years.

We're going to, you're going to give us an overdue attack.

And you also have the applicants here who I believe would like to address you.

The single family dwelling there now has a total of two bedrooms?

No, the applicants can confirm exactly how many, five or six, I believe.

Right now it has five or six bedrooms?

No, it has three bedrooms.

to hear from what they intend.

That's up to you.

Sure, I'd be happy to.

Then Sam, then it's good.

Then it works for you.

I just want to make sure I'm clear on this.

You mentioned two rooms upstairs, or is that in the calculation of three?

I think you actually confused me as opposed to adding thirds.

The parcel is owned by which LLC?

When you say this particular property, it means the dwelling?

Oh, it's all integrated, as it has been before.

and to allow this piece of property to operate in an affiliate capacity.

I hope it is irrelevant.

So the Ragged Branch use is no longer on this property?

Well, yes and no, because this property is still producing spirits.

I misunderstood your Augusta County reference.

but in a separate series, it's managed distinctly.

No, no.

It's not relevant.

So with regard to the LLC, are they the same members, and how many members are there?

And on the other side, there are one, two, three, four, five, six, all six.

She's the only one.

So the bourbon or whatever the whiskey is you're making is made in Augusta County, and of course, back to the tasting market.

Are you still inviting the public?

Yes.

So have you made an application to Admiral County

Yeah, it probably remains to be seen and that answer probably depends on the outcome of this meeting.

So in that vein, is there

Is there?

Since it's owned by an LLC, the applicants have to go to the board of supervisors and that becomes a legislative decision.

We're not even sure whether we have an approval thing here or not, potentially.

I might add an approval of a different issue, which is allowing a resident manager, whether to allow a resident manager to have that homestay.

The self recommendation is only to take action because I don't think we would recommend

Staff brings questions of these sorts of interpretations to you all, but doing nothing is an appropriate response.

Therefore, I would suggest that that would be silent.

I'm looking forward to supervisors, but it sounds like that's going to happen sooner than later.

So, to my mind, we should lay this on the table without prejudice.

And I think mostly helpful is with staff.

Yeah, I mean, there's guidance for staff.

And that's for special permit or what do they call that?

A special exception.

No.

So they have to have an exception from the rule.

I think that's the path forward for this body.

I mean I understand James did a great job bringing it to this body and so we're aware of it you know what you're doing there were no surprises and then it'll go before the board of supervisors

As staff we had no guidance on this issue and this is sufficient.

Clearly irrelevant to the discussion.

Thank you.

Thank you for your time.

We have one piece.

And so the dock and the observation platforms are featuring quite heavily in the listing, as you might expect.

And it's listed for like over $7 million.

The Blacks have not yet removed the structure and Mr. Miller pleaded ignorance of the violation despite multiple emails and letters to that effect.

Did Black indicate that his intention was to remove

Black indicated a willingness.

What was the prospect of further action or inaction?

But it would be highly unlikely for them to be able to propose an amendment that would permit the structures that are currently there.

Would you flip back to the operative language in the DDD?

We're clear on that, right?

But both docks have substantial structures actually on the bank.

Two different easements, both donating?

One easement, two parcels.

Subdivided.

It was two parcels when it was donated.

But under one easement.

under one easement, a separate ownership was permitted.

And how recently did the current owners purchase them?

rules, forestry was not permitted, there were structures that weren't allowed to be there.

It was previously Dr. Hertz's property.

Yes, Dr. Hertz was the donor.

Right.

Summer of 2024 and February of 2025.

This is not, well, highly untimely.

It was sometime during lockdown.

And these came to light only inadvertently.

And so we looked at this.

So Clifton Inn on the other side, did they have any structures on the property?

It's very similar to the southern dock.

Somewhat irrelevant to what the easement says, but more just a curiosity.

Hopefully at that time I'm not sure the system was working but right it's been faulty it is now working if anyone now applies for a building permit it is flagged.

Is it easily found in the county code or?

Ignorance of the law.

Does the contractor know that he's supposed to go get?

They should.

Contractors.

Almost everything needs a voting permit.

We're talking about more than just stocks here.

Sorry, it sounded like there was more, that's it.

I'm sorry, did you say the order seems simplistic right now for sale, the written letter?

It says in there it's got several building sites or something.

It advertises several building sites and they can build one, maybe two dwellings.

No.

Yes.

into the land records, an opinion of this body that the property is a violation.

Hopefully that's something that could be avoided.

So that's the only thing that would give us leverage to have something like that would be active litigation.

In order to create another recordable instrument in addition to the one that's already on the record.

That's what I'm looking for.

And that's what the list of pendences would do.

Now, is that tortious interference of a contract?

And if the, again, if the primary goes to the landowner with the property of the listing agent, then the listing agent is also on notice of the problem.

What's the purpose of this conservation easement and the purposes clause?

And this marks the 200 foot buffer as restricted in the conservation easement, which is not a requirement.

2015?

Tell me where the frame buffer that's referenced is shown on video.

In the easement?

shall we look at it within the buffer area as shown on the map okay so that is referred lesson for you in the future you didn't write this neither did I with that should say what is upper area or stream something to match the map is that yeah so back to your diagram that's the lake on the one on the left that's the lake in the middle

And their property line goes to the center of the lake.

I can show you.

So does their property line stop at the edge and it doesn't include any of the water?

Here, I'll show you, is this line.

So can they say we don't have access to our property without the use of this dock and these steps?

That would be a question for Council.

It has road access.

And they could all simply hop out upon the bank.

But the easement prevents them from accessing the water.

They could walk down to the bank with their canoe and hop in.

Right.

The easement was intended to make the property less desirable.

Right.

I mean, two things here.

So it would suggest to me we should stem the letters as you have proposed with obvious to me.

I'd be happy to make a moment.

Well, with regard to the Black's property, what you want, what's there, and you want it all removed?

Anything in the buffer.

Anything in the buffer.

Well, I guess what I already said is anything that's not permitted for the terms, which would be structures, other than fencing.

Is this lake open to the public?

Don't believe so.

There's no scenic value from the water, as it were.

I'm just... Yeah, I was just reading through it.

A lot of it's the comprehensive plan.

Yeah.

It mentions scenic, but it doesn't...

But you mentioned ecological function and water quality protection.

I think you're welcome to borrow, James, if he'll let you.

They're two significant structures.

Yeah, what are those structures and why are they?

Yeah, it's just a pit.

The storage shed has walls which seemed big enough for a few kayaks or canoes.

Can they keep the concrete steps in the pad?

It's my instinct that the concrete pad and the concrete steps would count as structures but I haven't looked up them.

You can't have a paved road in a buffer, maybe not.

So it feels like they wouldn't be.

I mean, their impervious surface, which is a bad water quality.

I mean, they can even argue that a flat open deck is not a structure.

But there's also a no-clearing provision, including but not limited to the water resources and practically sensitive lands.

Boom.

That's right.

It's not important.

Yeah, if it were 6,000 square feet of impervious and you could have do that.

I'll give them, I'll give them a dock with no houses.

Well, I think you should be consistent, not one over the other.

Who wins if this goes to court?

I mean, he doesn't feel anything.

The only thing I look at is like, I wish the definition of the buffer was a little bit clearer, but I just don't think it's... Or structure.

You would have thought it was a pretty bad structure.

Which the county's recourse of building with no... Well, that's another violation.

We've got a pretty aggressive building official.

It's get a permit and you can have the structures, which is why.

But they may not be issued a permit if it's in violation of a county held conservation easement or if it's in violation of floodplain.

We haven't heard any indication from zoning or building officials that these structures need to go.

Are they aware?

They're aware.

And are they aware that they're a violation, that this body believes that this is a violation of the consequences of being held by anybody?

Yes.

Maybe.

It states in the deed that they sign that they are required pursuant to a recorded deed of easement and it gives the reference to the easement that was recorded.

The conservation easement deed requires that every successive transfer of the property site back to the deed of easement.

When they were crying foul, we told them that you knew what you were signing up for when you bought it, and they didn't challenge that.

I think I have what I need.

There's no motion required.

So.

The owners and the agent.

Have you guys thought that far down the road yet?

And we're not going to forget about it.

Well, you were saying apply to this correspondence should be made in 30 days and remove it within 90.

Because they've got it all in play, right?

That's our argument at this point.

I mean, it would be nice if zoning would come in as- Right.

for the easement, the easement does not interrupt the zoning process.

How do we know that that wasn't built at the same time?

because we have those aerials, historical aerials to see when the house was built and when the structure was built.

We can do that.

I would think internal discussions between your department and their department have come to a conclusion that they mustn't give a permit to something where it's a violation of the easement.

Job to enforce terms of what is practically a private agreement.

I know.

But would you have zoning reject a permit based on a VOF easement?

In fact, I think we're pursuing trying to get that done in some counties or maybe statewide.

I agree that it would be good, but that doesn't happen here at the moment.

Is that Google work?

No, it's a company called EagleView.

I don't know how it works, but it's- There's state data and the county has its own, but it flies.

High resolution.

It's better than Google Earth.

It's better than Google Earth.

Yeah, it's pictometry, so it's a much closer scale.

All right, got a plan?

Yeah.

Again, that's also cited under legal proceedings.

Yeah.

It's like, in the letter, I would reiterate our enforcement rights for the deed and our restoration rights.

The letter will come from staff or from this body?

That's up to you.

It could even come from our office if that were the direction.

Blue stationary letters are always here.

And oftentimes, rightly or wrongly, that's taken more seriously.

Yeah, that gets the attention.

Any other business anywhere?

Old business, an adjournment.

Motion to adjourn.

Andy, it's good to see you.

Good seeing you.

Good interactions.

So I withdrew you.