Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12092014actions 1 ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of December 9, 2014 December 10, 2014 AGENDA ITEM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT PODCAST 1. Call to Order.  Meeting was called to order at 3:36 p.m., by the Chair, Ms. Dittmar. All BOS members were present. Also present were Tom Foley, Larry Davis and Travis Morris. Listen 2. Departmental Budget Presentations. a. Parks and Recreation.  Held. b. Community Development.  Held. Recess. The Board recessed at 5:04 p.m., and reconvened at 5:12 p.m. 3. Work Session: CPA-2013-01. Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment, to begin with public comments and possible Board direction.  Chapter Ten, Transportation.  HELD. Wayne Cilimberg/Elaine Echols: Proceed as directed. (Attachment 1) Recess. The Board recessed at 6:22 p.m., and reconvened at 7:01 p.m. 4. Continuation of Work Session to include public comments and possible Board direction.  Chapter Eleven, Parks, Recreation, etc.  Held. Wayne Cilimberg/Elaine Echols: Proceed as directed. (Attachment 1) 5. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Ann Mallek:  Announced that she received an email from an astronomy professor asking if the Board wanted to go on a private tour Fan Mountain.  Congratulated staff on a successful Countypalooza. Jane Dittmar:  Announced that there is an employee luncheon at COB 5 on December 10. 6. From the County Executive: Report on Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.  There were none. 7. Adjourn to December 10, 2014, 4:00 p.m., Room 241.  The meeting was adjourned at 7:46 p.m. ewj/tom Attachment 1 – Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion 2 ATTACHMENT 1 ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DIRECTION AND COMMENTS ON TRANSPORTATION AND PARKS AND RECREATION December 9, 2014 Transportation Direction from the Board  The Transportation Goal was affirmed: Albemarle’s transportation network increasingly will be multimodal, environmentally sound, well maintained, safe, and reliable.  Work with Piedmont Environmental Council to modify the reference d ocument for rural traffic calming to take out all references to Rt. 22/231. Clearly identify the document as providing examples of ways in which rural road modifications for safety can take place that are context sensitive. Ensure that the document does not suggest specific changes for particular roads in the Rural Area.  Update the chapter to reflect changes to the 250 Bypass, rail expectations as part of Places29 Solutions, and House Bill 2 related to prioritization.  Make all references current, such as changing “UnJAM” to the recently adopted LRTP  Include specific references to other plans, such as the Jefferson Area Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Plan.  Clarify and augment text to reflect the importance of removing barriers to interconnecting neighborhoods to commercial and employment areas.  Provide a hyperlink to and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems chapter linking discussion of bike/pedestrian transportation to trails and greenways language.  Include a flowchart or some succinct wa y to show how a transportation improvement requested by a citizen or Board member gets on one of the plans for funding and construction. Other Board Comments  A significant amount of money was spent on Rt. 22/231 corridor study. Citizens are concerned with traffic in this area. Is there a way we can still salvage this information if we take it out of the Plan?  We have so many other transportation projects that need funding we should not call out a specific corridor with a study in the Plan.  The ideas from the report may be great but at the end of the day its VDOT’s road and they will come in with their own design plans for the road.  We do not want to lose all the work done on this report and we should retain the concepts in the Plan.  We don’t have to go outside of the County to see successful roundabouts. We had at least one person dying every year at the airport intersection before the roundabout, but there has not been a single accident since the roundabout was put in.  One thing we need to discuss is if we feel comfortable putting a study from a private group in the Plan and if so, what criteria we should use to determine if this is appropriate. Should we open ourselves up so that anyone who comes out with credible study should be considered for inclusion in the Comp Plan?  Is there anything in the Plan from organizations other than County groups? Staff responded that there is information from the PEC on the Monticello Viewshed in the Historic and Cultural Resources Chapter and recommendations from the Rivanna River Basin Commission provided in the Reference documents for the Natural Resources Chapter.  It is difficult to explain to the public how street or road improvements make it to one of the County’s transportation plans, such as the Long Range Plan or 6-year Plan. Can staff provide information for the plan that we can pull out and give to the public when they ask? Parks, Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems Direction from the Board  Remove the phrase “and is available to all residents” from the end of the Goal so that it reads: Albemarle will have a system of high quality parks and recreational facilities throughout the County that is interconnected by greenways and paths.  Include language and clarity about the distinction between Rural Area parks and Development Areas parks.  Add a strategy to draft a County policy for rural park preserves. Standards for such parks, criteria for acceptance by the County, and funding options for maintenance should be developed and brought back to the Board for consideration and potential adoption. The Natural Heritage Committee should be included in the development of future policy for rural park preserves. This strategy should have a high priority in staff’s work program. However, it is not intended to imply that the County wishes to obtain numerous park 3 preserves in the future. Make minor modifications and updates suggested by staff including updates to parks maps, information on recreational uses of drinking water reservoirs and trail standards info on new greenways maps.  Fore Strategy 7e: Encourage the maintenance and enhancement of existing public access points to the Shenandoah National Park and the Appalachian Trail. Provide for public trail connections to Biscuit Run State Park. o Include language about the need to improve the entrance to Sugar Hollow and the need for measures to protect the headwaters. o Cross reference this to the Natural Resources Chapter.  Provide a strategy to develop more indoor recreational facilities and the need for these to be accessible to all ages and abilities.  Provide a strategy to update the County’s Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment, which was last updated in 2004.  Provide a strategy to further study the parks needs of the County’s Development Areas and determine if the County should own and maintain small neighborhood parks or if these should continue to be maintained by the private sector.  Include more language about the need for recreational facilities, trails, interconnections, etc. in the Development Areas. Other Board Comments  Not all County parks have to be fully developed. Some parks should be primitive and intended for resource protection.  Putting in place a pathway to allow citizens to donate land for parks could set a precedent for citizens to donate property to the County just so that it can be taken off the tax rolls. We should not lock future Boards into having to accept land for parks.  Sugar Hollow is deteriorating from overuse and we should include language about the need to improve this trail access and parking area. This is a complicated issue because it is owned by the City.  Neighborhood parks created with rezoning are not owned by County and are only for use of the neighborhood residents. We should encourage some public parks for people who do not currently have access to parks such as aging neighborhoods.  It may not be a good idea to open up existing private neighborhood parks and recreational facilities for donation to the County. We could see donations of older, deteriorating facilities. The County is not prepared to get into the business of maintaining these facilities. Additional Direction from the Board:  A strategy for developing an emergency response plan for crude oil shipments by rail should be included in the Community Facilities Chapter.  Although the Economic Development Chapter makes reference to the importance of Rivanna Station and NGIC as economic drivers in the County, additional language is needed to identify the importance of the County’s responsibility to help protect the facility for national security. Rivanna Station may wish to expand in the future and these references can help guide land use decisions near Rivanna Station.  Add a section to the Community Facilities Chapter that acts as a place holder for future decisions on expectations for broadband service in the Rural Area.  The Board should bring back ideas on how they would like to see adoption of the plan take place. The Board may wish to adopt each chapter individually or a vote may be desired on the entire document.  It is not too late to bring up changes to the redline draft as chapters are finalized, but the Board should be cautious and bring up only important changes, since adoption would be desired in May 2015. 4 ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC COMMENTS ON TRANSPORTATION AND PARKS AND RECREATION December 9, 2014 5:00PM Public Comment Petie Craddock, resident of Milton in the Scottsville District said that he has family in Cismont who live on the Route 22/231 corridor. He said he would like for the plan to remove any mention of the examples provided as traffic calming. He asked the Board to consider removing PEC’s report from the reference section of the Plan. He said that even if there is no plan to follow the recommendations in this study, items in the References of the Comp Plan often tend to be used as benchmarks for review. He said that he found out last night that the Fire/Rescue Department was not aware of the increased response time caused by roundabouts. He said currently th ere are no impediments along this corridor and adding the roundabouts would cause longer response times for emergency responders. He said that the overwhelming response at Supervisor Boyd’s town hall meeting was opposition to this study’s recommendations. He said these recommendations from a private organization have caused much concern to citizens in the areas. Jeff Werner, Piedmont Environmental Council, said that the PEC is disappointed that staff has recommended removing the report on the Route 231/22 corridor. He said this report presents a series of conceptual solutions to traffic issues in this area. He said the reason they conducted the study was that people historically have expressed concerns of truck traffic in this area. He said that a 2005 VDO T long range plan called for changes to the corridor including expanding the road. He said this caused the PEC to hire a consultant to review traffic data and observe the traffic issues along this corridor. He said that residents asked PEC to help. When PEC presented their ideas to the community, they told the residents that nothing more could be pursued without a public process. He said in their discussion with the community they heard that they preferred simple solutions over complex solutions. He read an excerpt from the report about the preference for simple solutions. He said the report and plan presented for the corridor is conceptual and is flexible to the desires of the community. He said the whole point of the report was to use it as a tool to engage the community and that it should not be thrown out over some hysteria over traffic circles. He said the report could be used as concepts for other rural areas experiencing the same traffic issues. Tony Vanderwalker, resident along Route 231, said citizens of the area personally raised $40,000 to hire traffic engineers to conduct a study. He said this study is $40,000 worth of valid up-to-date measures to improve this road. He said that everyone who lives on this road has had at least one near death exp erience. He said the road has dangerous conditions and a lot of truck traffic. He said the study is meant as an a-la-carte series of changes to slow people down including tight roundabouts designed to be similar to those in Gordonsville. He said the study was funded by the community and approved in meetings by people living in the community. He said he can’t see any reason why the County would turn down free ideas funded and supported by the community. He said the report should be kept in the Comprehensive Plan and it will be able to serve as an established backup if conditions worsen and upgrades are ever needed. Rex Linville, PEC employee and resident of Albemarle, said he was speaking tonight as a trail and recreation advocate. He said that the aspirational language of the Parks and Recreation chapter conflicts with other goals in County, especially in relation to the urban ring. He said there is a disconnect in the Plan. Objective 5 says to provide bicycle and pedestrian connections to City and County parks and schools in the Development Areas from neighborhoods to… public parks and public schools; but he said the Executive Summary says that parks in the Development Areas, if not part of a school complex, are expected to be privately owned. He said the County is putting out great aspirational language but is unwilling to fund these goals. He said he was previously told that funding an acquisition of a greenway corridor was not a priority to be funded by County. He said the City ended up buying this particular greenway. He also said the Plan stops at County line and doesn’t extend along the corridors into the city. He said the region needs a plan for bikes, pedestrians and greenway that links together alternative transportation network between the City and the County. He said this could be an economic engine for the community. He encouraged the Board to work cooperatively with the City, to direct the PDC to put together a plan for both localities and for the County begin funding the implementation of the plan. Pat Napoleon, resident of Charlottesville and landowner in Cismont, said many people are concerned with the PEC initiated traffic study. She said VDOT has explained that there is not enough right-of-way for the roundabouts without taking property. She said the roundabout must be large so that emergency vehicles and large trucks can use them. She said signage and artificial lighting are also a concern. She said she was relieved with the revisions in staff’s proposal. She encouraged the Board to provide detail about the ultimate disposition of traffic calming along the corridor and to assure property owners that there will be no specific properties for roundabouts and or 5 other pullovers. She said the pictures included in the proposal would certainly take private property. She said property is owned by private citizens of Albemarle. She said years ago her father was living on Route 22 and had a heart attack and responders arrived just in time to save his life. She said he may not have survived if there were impediments to slow down the emergency vehicle. Peter Thompson, Samuel Miller District, said he applauds the County for great work in Parks and Recreation and that green spaces in the County that have grown since the last Comp Plan. He said one reality in the County is that many people with disabilities and limited transportation can’t access the County’s Parks. He said the County needs more indoor recreation space. He also said it has been 10 years since a needs assessment has been done for Parks and Recreation in the County. He said many things have changed since then and he encouraged the County to find a way to do an updated needs assessment. He said if an updated needs assessment cannot be completed, the Plan should reference the previous assessment. He recommended the Board add language from the current needs assessment stating that the County has limited indoor facilities. He said this fact places more reliance on private facilities. He said it is also important to have access for all ages to such facilities. Dianne Weber, Cismont resident, said that PEC claims to have had community meetings about the Route 22/231 report. She said neither she nor her neighbors were invited. She asked why one must be a member of PEC to attend those meetings. She said VDOT does not have plans to turn the road into 4 lanes and that the road does not have a higher accident rate. She said adding 6 roundabout s will destroy rural character. She said that roundabouts are hazards to all residents and will slow down traffic 40-60 minutes during rush hour. She cited problems of longer school bus rides, light pollution, higher fuel costs, delivery and labor costs of commercial vehicles. She said a roundabout that appears unexpectedly along a rural road is likely to cause accidents rather than saves lives. She said she appreciated that planners have removed this document from the reference materials. She said this document is a zombie that might come back to life any time. She said she would feel more comfortable to have assurance from the Board that the recommendations of the report are no longer under consideration and would be removed from all County documents. Elizabeth Hubert, resident along Gordonsville Road, adjacent to Lindsay Road intersection, said she had no script tonight. She said that 10 years ago this month she inherited her farm from her father which has been in her family since 1960. She said her house is not like Strawberry Hill where residences are set further off of the road. She said she deals with the sound of traffic. She said her biggest concern is that something more economical to deal with the traffic on this road has not been looked at such as reducing commercial traffic on Route 22. She said there is no reason for logging trucks to be on this road and that there are other routes that can be taken. She said there are other solutions that will not cost millions of dollars. She said she would be directly impacted by a roundabout at this intersection. She said she would see lights from her porch and listen to tractor trailers reduce gears. She said she commutes on this road twice a day, 6 days a week. She said she is an environmentalist not opposed to an environmental solution. Michael Johnson, resident on Route 600, one mile from Cismont, said it is puzzling that this report is purported to be traffic calming. He said he doesn’t think the measures would work or would be needed. He said he asked VDOT for statistics for accidents on this road. He said the average is 143.3 accidents per 100 million vehicle miles traveled; the average on Route 22 is 142. He said this is a typical road; it is not a high traffic, high accident road. He said near the County line the accident rate is 110. He asked why improve something that is better than normal? He said there are other much worse roads with higher accident rates such as Route 53 and other portions of Route 22. He said traffic calming will not work on this route because there is no viable alternative route. He said the only alternative routes add many miles to the dri ve which is not good for the environment. He said nor is slowing down and speeding up several times over the course of the road. Travis Pietila, Southern Environmental Law Center, thanked staff and the Board for their work on the Comp Plan. He said a number of important things have happened relative to transportation since the draft was first written. He said UNJAM 2035 has been updated and references in the Plan should be updated to reference the 2040 LRTP. He said the MPO and the State have removed their support for Route 29 Bypass and have now supported the 29 Solutions Package and this should also be updated in the Plan. He said that paragraph on page 10.11 referencing the western bypass should be removed. He also said there have been developments in passenger rail with Lynchburg passenger rail route and the paragraph on Page 10.27 should be updated. He said that House Bill 2 that sets new priority process for transportation planning that should be reflected in the Transportation Chapter.