HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-1-08Tentative
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
T E N T A T I V E
JANUARY 8, 2014
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
9:00 A.M. – AUDITORIUM
1. Call to Order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Moment of Silence.
Annual Organization
4. Election of Chairman.
5. Election of Vice-Chairman.
6. Appointment of Clerk and Senior Deputy Clerk.
7. Board 2014 Calendar:
a. Set Meeting Times, Dates and Places for Calendar Year 2014.
b. Set Dates for Hearing Zoning Text Amendments Requested by Citizens.
8. Adoption of Rules of Procedures/Policies:
a. Rules of Procedure.
b. Boards and Commissions Policy.
9. Adoption of Final Agenda.
10. Brief Announcements by Board Members.
11. Recognitions:
a. Tom LaBelle, Division Chief for Volunteer Services.
b. GFOA Budget Award.
12. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
13. Consent Agenda (on next sheet).
Discussion/Action Items:
14. Regional Public Safety Firearms Training Center.
15. Biannual Update on FY13-17 Strategic Plan.
Presentations:
16. VDoT Report – Joel DeNunzio.
17. Piedmont Council of the Arts Cultural Plan, Sarah Lawson.
18. The Journey Through Hallowed Ground, Cate Magennis Wyatt.
19. Closed Meeting.
20. Certify Closed Meeting.
21. Boards and Commissions:
a. Board Member Committee Appointments.
b. Boards and Commissions Vacancies and Appointments.
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2014Files/0108/0.0_Agenda.htm (1 of 3) [10/5/2020 4:52:55 PM]
Tentative
22. 1:30 p.m. - To receive public comments: Water Protection Ordinance – VSMP Amendment.
Work Session:
23. Water Resources Funding.
24. CPA-2013-00001. Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment.
25. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
a. Proposed Transit Route Changes. (Ann Mallek/Brad Sheffield)
26. From the County Executive: Report on Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Recess
27. 6:00 p.m. - Call to Order.
28. Public Hearing to receive public comments regarding locating a convenience center either on Mill
Creek Drive, near the Monticello Fire Station, or on Esmont Road, near the Keene Post Office.
29. Adjourn to January 30, 2014, 8:30 a.m., Joint meeting with Economic Development Authority.
CONSENT AGENDA
FOR APPROVAL:
13.1 “Watch for Children” Sign Program.
13.2 FY 2014 Budget Amendment and Appropriations.
13.3 Resolution to accept Roads in Ragged Mountain Farm Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways.
13.4 Cancel January 15, 2014 Board meeting.
13.5 Fiscal Year 2014 County of Albemarle & State Health Department Local Government Agreement.
FOR INFORMATION:
13.6 Process for developing a report on the health and welfare of the volunteer fire rescue system.
13.7 Albemarle County Broadband Task Force Initiation.
13.8 Board-to-Board, January, 2014 Monthly Communications Report from School Board, School Board
Chairman.
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2014Files/0108/0.0_Agenda.htm (2 of 3) [10/5/2020 4:52:55 PM]
Tentative
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK AT PUBLIC HEARINGS ONLY
Return to Top of Agenda
Return to Board of Supervisors Home Page
Return to County Home Page
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2014Files/0108/0.0_Agenda.htm (3 of 3) [10/5/2020 4:52:55 PM]
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members of the Board of Supervisors
FROM: Ella W. Jordan, CMC, Clerk
DATE: December 27, 2013
RE: Agenda for Annual (Organizational) Meeting of January 8, 2014
Agenda Item No. 6. The Code of Virginia, in Section 15.2-1538, states that "The governing body of
every locality in this Commonwealth shall appoint a qualified person, who shall not be a member of the
governing body, to record the official actions of such governing body.” Ella W. Jordan expresses a desire
to be reappointed as Clerk, and Travis O. Morris desires to be reappointed as Senior Deputy Clerk .
These positions are reappointed annually.
__________
Agenda Item No. 7. Board 2014 Calendar:
a. Section 15.2-1416 of the Code states that "The days, times and places of regular meetings to be
held during the ensuing months shall be established at the first meeting which meeting may be
referred to as the annual or organizational meeting; however, if the governing body subsequently
prescribes any ... day or time other than that initially established, as a meeting day, place or time,
the governing body shall pass a resolution as to such future meeting day, place or time. The
governing body shall cause a copy of such resolution to be posted on the door of the courthouse
or the initial public meeting place and inserted in a newspaper having general circulation in the
county or municipality at least seven days prior to the first such meeting at such other day, place
or time...."
Should the Board wish to continue with the schedule adopted last year for its regular meetings,
the Board needs to adopt a motion to set the meeting times, dates and places for Calendar Year
2013 as follows: first Wednesday of the month - 9:00 a.m., and the second Wednesday of the
month - 6:00 p.m., with said meetings to be held in the County Office Building on McIntire Road.
It is also recommended that the meeting dates for January 2015 be January 7 – 9:00 a.m., and
January 14 – 6:00 p.m.
____
b. Section 33.10.2 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the Board of Supervisors shall consider
zoning text amendment petitions by property owners at specified intervals of three months. The
dates requested for these hearings for 2014 are September 10 and December 10, 2013 and
March 11, and June 10, 2015. A motion is required to set these dates which are then advertised
in the newspaper.
__________
Agenda Item No. 8. Adoption of Rules of Procedures/Policies:
a. A copy of the Board’s current Rules of Procedure is included with this agenda item for your
review.
____
b. A copy of the Board’s current Boards and Commissions Policy is included with this agenda item
for your review.
Return to agenda
1
RULES OF PROCEDURE
ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS
These rules of procedure are designed and adopted for the benefit and convenience of the Albemarle
County Board of Supervisors. Their purpose is to help the Board conduct its affairs in a timely and
efficient manner. They incorporate the general principles of parliamentary procedure found in Robert’s
Rules of Order’s Procedure in Small Boards and applicable Virginia laws. The rules of procedure do not
create substantive rights for third parties or participants in proceedings before the Board. Further, the
Board reserves the right to suspend or amend the rules of procedure whenever a majority of the Board
decides to do so. The failure of the Board to strictly comply with the rules of procedure shall not
invalidate any action of the Board.
A. Officers
1. Chairman. The Board at its annual meeting shall elect a Chairman who, if present, shall
preside at such meeting and at all other meetings during the year for which elected. In
addition to being presiding officer, the Chairman shall be the head official for all the
Board’s official functions and for ceremonial purposes. He shall have a vote but no veto.
(Virginia Code §§ 15.2-1422 and 15.2-1423)
2. Vice-Chairman. The Board at its annual meeting shall also elect a Vice-Chairman, who, if
present, shall preside at meetings in the absence of the Chairman and shall discharge
the duties of the Chairman during his absence or disability. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1422)
3. Term of Office. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be elected for one-year terms;
but either or both may be re-elected for one or more additional terms. (Virginia Code
§ 15.2-1422)
4. Absence of Chairman and Vice-Chairman. If the Chairman and Vice Chairman are
absent from any meeting, a present member shall be chosen to act as Chairman.
B. Clerk and Deputy Clerks
The Board at its annual meeting shall designate a Clerk and one or more Deputy Clerks who shall
serve at the pleasure of the Board. The duties of the Clerk shall be those set forth in Virginia
Code § 15. 2-1539 and such additional duties set forth in reso lutions of the Board as adopted
from time to time. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1416)
C. Meetings
1. Annual Meeting. The first meeting in January held after the newly elected members of
the Board shall have qualified, and the first meeting held in January of each succeeding
year, shall be known as the annual meeting. At such annual meeting, the Board shall
establish the days, times, and places for regular meetings of the Board for that year.
(Virginia Code § 15.2-1416)
2. Regular Meetings. The Board shall m eet in regular session on such day or days as has
been established at the annual meeting. The Board may subsequently establish different
days, times, or places for such regular meetings by passing a resolution to that effect in
accord with Virginia Code § 15.2-1416. If any day established as a regular meeting day
falls on a legal holiday, the meeting scheduled for that day shall be held on the next
regular business day without action of any kind by the Board. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1416)
If the Chairman (or Vice Chairman, if the Chairman is unable to act) finds and declares
that weather or other conditions are such that it is hazardous for Board members to
attend a regular meeting, such meeting shall be continued to the next regular meeting
date. Such finding shall be communicated to the members of the Board and to the press
as promptly as possible. All hearings and other matters previously advertised shall be
2
conducted at the continued meeting and no further advertisement shall be required.
(Virginia Code § 15.2-1416)
Regular meetings, without further public notice, may be adjourned from day to day or
from time to time or from place to place, not beyond the time fixed for the next regular
meeting, until the business of the Board is complete. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1416)
3. Special Meetings. The Board may hold special meetings as it deems necessary at such
times and places as it deems convenient. A special meeting may be adjourned from time
to time as the Board finds necessary and convenient. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1417)
A special meeting shall be held when called by the Chairman or requested by two or
more members of the Board. The call or request shall be made to the Clerk of the Board
and shall specify the matters to be considered at the meeting. Upon receipt of such call
or request, the Clerk, after consultation with the Chairman, shall immediately notify each
member of the Board, the County Executive, and the County Attorney. The notice shall
be in writing and delivered to the person or to his place of residence or business, or if
requested by a member of the Board, by electronic mail or facsimile. The notice shall
state the time and place of the meeting and shall specify the matters to be considered.
No matter not specified in the notice shall be considered at suc h meeting unless all
members are present. The notice may be waived if all members are present at the
special meeting or if all members sign a waiver for the notice. (Virginia Code
§ 15.2-1418) The Clerk shall notify the general news media of the time and place of such
special meeting and the matters to be considered.
D. Order of Business
1. Agenda. The Clerk of the Board shall establish the agenda for all meetings in
consultation with the Chairman. The first two items on the agenda for each regular
meeting of the Board shall be the Pledge of Allegiance and a m oment for silent
meditation.
a. At regular meetings of the Board, the order of business shall generally be as
follows:
1. Call to Order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Moment of Silence.
4. Adoption of Final Agenda.
5. Brief Announcements by Board Members.
6. Recognitions.
7. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
8. Consent Agenda.
9. General Business (To include Public Hearings, Presentations, Work
Sessions, Appointments, and other Action Items).
10. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the
Agenda.
11. Adjourn.
A Closed Meeting shall be held whenever necessary. Generally, a Closed
Meeting will be scheduled at the midpoint of the agenda at day Board meetings
and at the end of the agenda prior to adjournment at evening Board meetings.
b. The above order of business may be modified by the Clerk of the Board to
facilitate the business of the Board.
2. Adoption of Final Agenda. The first order of business for a regular meeting of the Board
shall be to adopt a final agenda for that meeting. The Board may modify the order of
business as part of the adoption of the final agenda. In addition, any Board member may
propose to add additional items to the agenda presented by the Clerk for action if notice
of that item has been given in writing or by email to all Board members, the Clerk, and
3
the County Executive by 5:00 p.m. two days before the date of the meeting . Any such
item shall be added to the end of the agenda for discussion or action unless a majority of
the members of the Board agree to consider the item earlier on the agenda. The final
agenda shall be adopted by a majority vote of the members of the Board. No matter for
action not included on the final agenda shall be considered at that meeting.
3. Consent Agenda. The “Consent Agenda” shall be used for matters that do not require
discussion or comment and are anticipated to the have the unanimous approval of the
Board. There shall be no discussion or comment on Consent Agenda matters. Any
Board member may remove an item from the Consent Agenda. Any item removed from
the Consent shall be moved to a specific time or to the end of the meeting agenda for
further discussion or action. A matter requiring only brief comment or discussion may be
considered immediately after the approval of the Consent Agenda.
4. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. “From the
Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the Agenda” shall be the last order
of business for a regular meeting of the Board unless a majority of the members of the
Board agree to consider the item earlier on the agenda. It shall be limited to matters that
are not substantial enough to be considered as additional agenda items to be added to
the final agenda. Such matters are not matters to be acted upon by the Board at that
meeting. Routine committee reports and information updates by Board members shall be
presented under this agenda item.
5. Public Comment. The procedures for receiving comment from the public for matters not
on the agenda shall be at the discretion of the Board. Unless otherwise decided,
individuals will be allowed a three-minute time limit in which to speak during the time set
aside on the agenda for “From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the
Agenda”.
6. Zoning Public Hearings. Zoning applications advertised for public hearing shall be on the
agenda for public hearing on the advertised date unless the applicant submits a signed
written deferral request to the Clerk of the Board no later than noon on Wednesday of the
week prior to the scheduled public hearing. The first request for a deferral will be granted
administratively by the Clerk. The Board will be notified of the deferral in the next Board
package and the deferral will be announced at the earliest possible Board meeting to
alert the public of the deferral. Any request received later than the Wednesday deadline
and any subsequent request for a deferral for the same application previously deferred
will be granted only at the discretion of the Board by a majority vote. The deferral shall
not be granted unless the Board determines that the reason for the deferral justifies the
likely inconvenience to the public caused by the deferral. The staff will make every effort
to alert the public when a deferral is granted.
It is the Board’s preference that a public hearing for a zoning matter should not be
advertised until all of the final materials for a zoning application have been received by
the County and are available for public review. To achieve this preference, applicants
should provide final plans, final codes of development, final proffers, and any other
documents deemed necessary by the Director of Community Development, to the County
no later than two business days prior to the County’s deadline for submitting the public
hearing advertisement to the newspaper. Staff will advise applicants of this date by
including it in annual schedules for applications and by providing each applicant a
minimum of two weeks advance notice of the deadline.
If the applicant does not submit the required materials by this date, the public hearing
shall not be advertised unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
Director of Community Development that good cause exists for the public hearing to be
advertised. If not advertised, a new public hearing date will be scheduled. If the public
hearing is held without final materials being available for review throughout the
advertisement period due to a late submittal of documents, or because substantial
revisions or amendments are made to the submitted materials after the public hearing
has been advertised, it will be the policy of the Board to either defer actio n and schedule
a second public hearing that provides this opportunity to the public or to deny the
4
application, unless the Board finds that the deferral would not be in the public interest or
not forward the purposes of this policy.
Final signed proffers shall be submitted to the County no later than nine calendar days
prior to the date of the advertised public hearing. This policy is not intended to prevent
changes from being made to proffers resulting from comments received from the public
or from Board members at the public hearing.
E. Quorum
A majority of the members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for any meeting of the Board. If
during a meeting less than a majority of the Board remains present, no action can be taken
except to adjourn the meeting. If prior to adjournment the quorum is again established, the
meeting shall continue. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1415)
A majority of the members of the Board present at the time and place established for any regular
or special meeting shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of adjourning suc h meeting from day
to day or from time to time, but not beyond the time fixed for the next regular meeting.
F. Voting Procedures
1. Approval by Motion. Unless otherwise provided, decisions of the Board shall be made by
approval of a majority of the members present and voting on a motion properly made by
a member and seconded by another member. Any motion that is not seconded shall not
be further considered. The vote on the motion shall be by a voice vote. The Clerk shall
record the name of each member voting and how he voted on the motion. If any member
abstains from voting on any motion, he shall state his abstention. The abstention will be
announced by the Chairman and recorded by the Clerk. A tie vote shall defeat the
motion voted upon. A tie vote on a motion to approve shall be deemed a denial of the
matter being proposed for approval. (Article VII, § 7, Virginia Constitution)
2. Special Voting Requirements. A recorded affirmative vote of a majority of all elected
members of the Board shall be required to approve an ordinance or resolution
(1) appropriating money exceeding the sum of $500; (2) imposing taxes; or
(3) authorizing the borrowing of money. (Virginia Code § 15.2-1428)
3. Public Hearings. The Board shall not decide any matter before the Board requiring a
public hearing until the public hearing has been held. The Board may, however, at its
discretion, defer or continue the holding of a public hearing or consideration of such
matter. The procedures for receiving comment from the applicant and the public for public
hearings shall be at the discretion of the Board. Unless otherwise decided, the applicant
shall be permitted no more than ten minutes to present its application. Following the
applicant’s presentation, any member of the public shall be permitted no more than three
minutes to present public comment. Speakers are limited to one appearance at any
public hearing. Following the public comments, the applicant shall be permitted no more
than five minutes for a rebuttal presentation.
4. Motion to Amend. A motion to amend a motion before the Board, properly seconded,
shall be discussed and voted by the Board before any vote is taken on the original motion
unless the motion to amend is accepted by both the members making and seconding the
original motion. If the motion to amend is approved, the amended motion is then before
the Board for its consideration. If the motion to amend is not approved, the original
motion is again before the Board for its consideration.
5. Previous Question. Discussion of any motion may be terminated by any member moving
the “previous question”. Upon a proper second, the Chairman shall call for a vote on the
motion of the previous question. If approved by a majority of those voting, the Chairman
shall immediately call for a vote on the original motion under consideration. A motion of
the previous question shall not be subject to debate and shall take precedence over any
other matter.
5
6. Motion to Reconsider. Any decision made by the Board may be reconsidered if a motion
to reconsider is made at the same meeting or an adjourned meeting held on the same
day at which the matter was decided. The motion to reconsider may be made by any
member of the Board. Upon a proper second, the m otion may be discussed and voted.
The effect of the motion to reconsider, if approved, shall be to place the matter for
discussion in the exact position it occupied before it was voted upon.
7. Motion to Rescind. Any decision made by the Board, except f or zoning map
amendments, special use permit decisions, and ordinances, (these exceptions shall only
be subject to reconsideration as provided above) may be rescinded by a majority vote of
all elected members of the Board. The motion to rescind may be mad e by any member
of the Board. Upon a proper second, the motion may be discussed and voted. The
effect of the motion to rescind, if approved, is to nullify the previous decision of the Board.
Zoning map amendments, special use permit decisions and ordina nces may be
rescinded or repealed only upon meeting all the legal requirements necessary for taking
action on such matters as if it were a new matter before the Board for consideration.
G. Amendment of Rules of Procedure
These Rules of Procedure may be amended by a majority vote of the Board at the next regular
meeting following a regular meeting at which notice of the motion to amend is given.
H. Suspension of Rules of Procedure
These Rules of Procedure may be suspended by the majority vote of the Boar d members present
and voting. The motion to suspend a rule may be made by any member of the Board. Upon a
proper second, the motion may be discussed and voted. The effect of the motion to suspend a
rule, if approved, is to make that rule inapplicable to the matter before the Board. Provided,
however, approval of a motion to suspend the rule shall not permit the Board to act in violation of
a requirement mandated by the Code of Virginia, the Constitution of Virginia, or any other
applicable law.
I. Necessary rules of procedure not covered by these Rules of Procedures shall be governed by
Robert's Rules of Order Procedure in Small Boards.
* * * * *
(Adopted 2-15-73; Amended and/or Readopted 9-5-74, 9-18-75; 2-19-76; 1-3-77; 1-4-78; 1-3-79; 1-2-80;
1-7-81; 1-6-82; 1-5-83; 1-3-84; 1-2-85; 1-3-86; 1-7-87; 1-6-88; 1-4-89; 1-2-90; 1-2-91; 1-2-92; 1-6-93;
1-5-94; 1-4-95; 1-3-96; 1-2-97; 1-7-98; 1-6-99; 1-5-2000; 1-3-2001; 1-9-2002; 1-8-2003; 1-7-2004; 1-5-
2005; 1-4-2006; 1-3-2007; 1-9-2008; 1-7-2009; 1-6-2010; 1-5-2011; 1-4-2012; 1-09-2013).
Return to agenda
Draft: December 12, 2013
-1-
ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
POLICY FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
A. CREATION OF NEW BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
1. On an annual basis the list of active boards and commissions will be purged of all
bodies not required by Federal, State, County or other regulations, which have not met at least once
during the prior twelve-month period.
2. Whenever possible and appropriate, the functions and activities of boards and
commissions will be combined, rather than encouraging the creation of new bodies.
3. Any newly created task force or ad hoc committee which is intended to serve for a
limited time period may be comprised of magisterial or at-large members at the discretion of the Board
of Supervisors. The appointment process shall follow that adopted in Section B for other magisterial
and/or at-large positions.
B. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
1. All appointments to boards and commissions based upon magisterial district
boundaries will be made by the members of the Board of Supervisors. At the discretion of the
supervisor of that district, magisterial positions may be advertised and selected applicants may be
interviewed for the position. The Board will consider and/or interview candidates recommended by the
supervisor of that district.
2. Prior to each day Board meeting, the Clerk will provide the Board a list of expired
terms and vacancies that will occur within the next sixty days. The Board will then advise the Clerk
which vacancies to advertise.
3. In an effort to reach as many citizens as possible, notice of boards and commissions
with appointment positions available may be published through available venues, such as, but not
limited to, the County’s website, A-mail, public service announcements and local newspapers.
Interested citizens will be provided a brief description of the duties and functions of each board, length
of term of the appointment, frequency of meetings, and qualifications necessary to fill the position. An
explanation of the appointment process for both magisteri al and at-large appointments will also be
sent to all applicants.
4. All interested applicants will have a minimum of thirty days from the date of the first
notice to complete and return to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors a detailed application, with the
understanding that such application may be released to the public, if requested. No applications will
be accepted if they are postmarked after the advertised deadline, however, the Board, at its discretion,
may extend the deadline.
5. Once the deadline for accepting applications is reached, the Clerk will distribute all
applications received to the members of the Board of Supervisors prior to the day meeting for their
review. For magisterial appointments, the Clerk will forward applications as they are received to the
supervisor of that district who will then recommend his/her appointment.
6. From the pool of qualified candidates, the Board of Supervisors , at their its discretion,
may make an appointment without conducting an interview, or may select applicants to interview for
the vacant positions. The Clerk will then schedule interviews with applicants to be held during the next
day meeting. For magisterial appointments, the decision to interview selected candidates will be
determined by the supervisor of that district.
Draft: December 12, 2013
-2-
7. All efforts will be made to interview selected applicants and make appointments within
ninety days after the application deadline. For designated agency appointments to boards and
commissions, the agency will be asked to recommend a person for appointment by the Board of
Supervisors.
8. All vacancies will be filled as they occur, except that vacancies occurring in
Community Advisory Councils will be filled on an annual basis at the time regular terms expire unless
there are more than three vacancies on any Council at the same time with more than three months
remaining from the annual appointment date.
9. All incumbents will be allowed to serve on a board or commission without his/her
position being readvertised unless, based on attendance and performance, the chairman of the body
or a member of the Board of Supervisors requests the Board of Supervisors to do otherwise.
10. As a condition to of assuming office, all citizen members of boards and commissions
shall file a real estate disclosure form as set forth in the State and Local Government Conflict of
Interests Act and thereafter shall file such form annually on or before January 15.
11. If a member of a board or commission does not participate in at least fifty perc ent of a
board’s or commission’s meetings, the chairman of the body may request the Board of Supervisors
terminate the appointment and refill it during the next scheduled advertising period.
C. ADOPTION
This policy shall be reviewed and readopted by the Board of Supervisors annually in January.
(Amended and/or Readopted 01-07-98; 02-12-2005; 01-04-2006; 01-03-2007; 01-09-2008; 01-07-
2009; 01-06-2010; 01-05-2011, 01-04-2012; 01-09-2013)
Return to agenda
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
“Watch for Children” Sign Program
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Approval of procedures and cost schedule for requesting
a “Watch For Children” sign
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Letteri, Davis, Herrick, Shadm an, and Freitas
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
In 2012, Virginia Code § 33.1-210.2 was amended to make localities responsible for the installation and maintenance of
“Watch for Children” signs, which was previously the responsibility of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT).
On September 4, 2013, the Board adopted a resolution to enter into an agreement with VDOT for the County to assume
the responsibility for the installation and maintenance of those signs.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 5. Ensure the health and safety of the community.
DISCUSSION:
At its September 4, 2013 meeting, the Board directed staff to develop procedures by which residents could request the
installation of “Watch for Children” signs. In order that the County not incur any additional cost in implementing this
program, the Board directed staff to research the costs associated with processing these applications and installing
these signs, which costs would be passed along to the individual or group requesting the sign.
The General Services Department has prepared proposed Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) (Attachment A)
outlining the program effective January 1, 2014. In summary, anyone requesting a sign would be directed to General
Services for information and an application form (Appendix 2). Once the application and required payment were
submitted, staff would conduct a site visit to determine if the proposed location met VDOT siting criteria. If so, staff
would prepare the appropriate forms for the County Executive’s review and signature. If the installation were approved
by VDOT, the applicant would be required to submit payment for the manufacture and installation of the sign. If the
installation were not approved by VDOT, the applicant would be notified and the application closed.
There are two components of cost reimbursement to the County:
1. a non-refundable payment of $50.00 at the time of application, to cover the cost of staff conducting a site visit to
verify its conformance to VDOT criteria and preparing requisite forms for submittal to VDOT.
2. the installation cost of $200.00 per sign to be paid if the application received VDOT approval for the selected site.
The purpose of this payment would be to cover the full cost of making and installing each sign. General Services has
obtained recent quotes from local vendors for this work.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no budget impact. The proposed payments by sign applicants are intended to offset any cost to the
County.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
This report is for the Board’s information. Unless the Board has specific concerns, no action is required at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – “Watch For Children” Sign Program proposed Standard Operating Procedures SOPs
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
County of Albemarle, General Services
Subject: “WATCH FOR CHILDREN”
Sign Program
Document No.:
Issue Date:
Last Revised:
Page:
1 of 2
Prepared By:
M. Freitas
Approved By:
G. Shadman
1.0 PURPOSE
This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) outlines the procedures and practices for administering
the County’s “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” Sign Program.
2.0 BACKGROUND
The Virginia Supplement to the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)
authorizes the installation of “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” signs (see Appendix 1) in residential
areas on Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT)-maintained secondary routes to alert
motorists that children may be in the vicinity. These signs may be located:
Within a subdivision: a single sign may be placed on streets that are major entry points if the
statutory or posted speed limit is 35 mph or less.
Not within a subdivision: a single sign may be placed beyond the speed limit sign at the major
approach to a residential development where there is ⅓ mile or more residential development
(either side of roadway) with direct frontage/access if the speed limit is 35 mph or less.
As amended in 2012, Virginia Code § 33.1-210.2 gave localities the option to assume
responsibility for the installation and maintenance of “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” signs if they
desired to have these signs installed. VDOT will no longer install or maintain additional signs.
At its September 4, 2013 meeting, the Board of Supervisors (BOS) adopted a resolution to accept
responsibility for the installation and maintenance of new “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” signs in
the County. That resolution authorizes the County Executive to execute VDOT’s Agreement for
the Installation and Maintenance of “Watch for Children” Signs and future addenda to that
Agreement after determining that a sign request met the siting criteria.
3.0 RESPONSIBILITY
The Director of General Services administers this procedure. The Director will establish a
procedure to ensure that each request received is thoroughly reviewed, and make recommendation
to the County Executive whether the request should be forwarded to VDOT.
The Chief of Public Works will review all requests to determine whether the proposed sign
locations are within VDOT guidelines and make appropriate recommendation to the Director of
General Services.
The Grounds Superintendent is responsible for ordering and installing all approved signs. The
Grounds Superintendent will maintain a database of all approved sign installations, including
physical location and date installed.
County of Albemarle, General Services
Subject: “WATCH FOR CHILDREN”
Sign Program
Document No.:
Issue Date:
Last Revised:
Page:
2 of 2
Prepared By:
M. Freitas
Approved By:
G. Shadman
4.0 PROCEDURE
Requests for the installation of “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” signs will be made, by application,
to the Department of General Services. The following steps will be followed in processing
requests for “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” signs:
a. Any person requesting the installation of a “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” sign will be directed
to General Services.
b. The Chief of Public Works or his designee will:
1. Meet with the interested individual(s), discuss the program, and give them a
program brochure/application form explaining the approval process and responsibilities (See
Appendix 2). If the individual(s) wish(es) to continue with the process, they must complete and
submit the application, along with the non-refundable payment to process the application, to the
Department of General Services.
2. Once the application and associated payment are received, will conduct a field
investigation, within a reasonable time, to ascertain whether the requested sign meets VDOT
siting criteria.
3. If the requested sign location does not meet VDOT’s siting criteria, inform the
applicant and close the application.
4. If the requested sign meets VDOT’s siting criteria, prepare the VDOT Agreement
or Addendum (see Appendix 3) for the County Executive’s signature and forward it to the
Director of General Services.
5. If VDOT disapproves the request, inform the applicant and close the application.
6. If VDOT approves the request, inform the applicant and collect payment for
materials and labor to install the sign.
7. Once payment is received, issue work order to the Grounds Superintendent to
install the sign.
c. Once the work order is received, the Grounds Superintendent will order the sign and schedule
its installation. Once installed, the Grounds Superintendent will record the location and
installation in the sign database.
Appendix 1: “Watch for Children” Sign
Appendix 2: Program Brochure/Application
Appendix 3: VDOT Agreement/Addendum Form
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
“WATCH FOR CHILDREN” Sign Program
About the Program
This Program provides the means by which Albemarle County residents can request new
“WATCH FOR CHILDREN” signs. Until 2012, the Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) was responsible for installing and maintaining these signs. In 2012, the General
Assembly transferred that responsibility to the local government.
Where “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” Signs Can Be Installed
These signs may be installed at either of two locations:
1. Within a subdivision, a single sign may be placed on streets that are major entry points where
the statutory or posted speed limit is 35 mph or less, beyond but not within 200 feet of the
posted speed limit sign.
2. At the major approach(es) to a residential development not within a or part of a subdivision
where there is ⅓ mile or more residential development (either side of the roadway) with
direct frontage/access and where the speed limit has been reduced to 35 mph or less; a single
sign may be installed beyond but not within 200 feet from, the (reduced) posted speed limit
sign.
Where “WATCH FOR CHILDREN” Cannot Be Installed
These signs may not be installed:
1. On any roadway where the speed limit exceeds 35 mph.
2. In lieu of a standard Playground sign used to warn motorists of a designated playground.
3. At a location where school warning signs are in place.
4. In combination (same pole) with any other regulatory or warning signs.
5. Preceding any existing regulatory or warning signs.
6. Closer than 200 feet to any existing regulatory or warning sign.
Requesting A Sign
A resident may request a sign by completing and submitting the attached application form to the
Department of General Services. The applicant is responsible for making a $50.00 non-
refundable payment upon application. In addition, if the sign installation is approved, the
applicant also would be responsible for paying for the cost of making and installing the sign –
currently estimated to be $200.00 per sign. Since a non-refundable payment is involved, the
applicant should ensure that the location of the proposed sign meets the placement criteria
described above, and is encouraged to speak with a Department of General Services
representative (434-296-5816) prior to submitting the application.
Once the completed application and payment are received, General Services will review the
application and verify that the proposed site is within VDOT guidelines. If the site meets VDOT
criteria, the County will forward the request to VDOT for approval. If the site does not meet
VDOT criteria, the applicant will be informed and the application will be closed.
If VDOT approves the application, the applicant will be informed and required to submit
payment for the sign installation. If VDOT does not approve the application, the applicant will
be informed and the application closed.
Application and Agreement for “Watch For Children” Signs
Applicant Signature
I understand and agree that the application payment of $50.00 is the non-refundable cost of processing this application, and does
not guarantee the application will be approved. I further understand and agree that if the application is approved, I will pay the
County $200.00 per sign as the cost to install each sign.
__________________________________________________ _____________________________________
Signature Date
Applicant’s Name: ___________________________________________________________________________
(First) (MI) (Last)
Address: __________________________ City ______________________ State ___________ Zip ________
Daytime Phone (______)_____________________ e-mail ___________________________________________
Location(s) of Proposed Sign Installation(s) (Please be as specific as possible, including route number, proximity to
intersection or landmark, etc. Attach photo or map if available.)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOR GENERAL SERVICES USE ONLY APPLICATION #_______________________
Application Fee Amount $ ____________ Date Paid __________ Ck# ___________ Applicant Receipt #___________________
**************
DISPOSITION
Approved ____ Date _______________ Date Installed ______________
Sign Fee Amount $ ____________ Date Paid __________ Ck# __________ Applicant Receipt #___________________
Disapproved ____ Date _____________
Reason for Disapproval ______________________________________________________________________________________________
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
FY 2014 Budget Amendment and Appropriations
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Approval of Budget Amendment and Appropriation
#2014064, #2014065, #2014066, #2014067, #2014068,
and #2014070 for various general government and school
division programs.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Letteri, Davis, and Allshouse, L.
PRESENTER (S): N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Virginia Code § 15.2-2507 provides that any locality may amend its budget to adjust the aggregate amount to be
appropriated during the fiscal year as shown in the currently adopted budget; provided, however, any such amendment
which exceeds one percent of the total expenditures shown in the currently adopted budget must be accomplished by first
publishing a notice of a meeting and holding a public hearing before amending the budget. The Code section applies to all
County funds, i.e., General Fund, Capital Funds, E911, School Self-Sustaining, etc.
The total increase to the FY 14 budget due to the appropriation itemized below is $89,695.20. A budget amendment public
hearing is not required because the amount of the cumulative appropriations does not exceed one percent of the currently
adopted budget.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Mission: To enhance the well-being and quality of life for all citizens through the provision of the highest level of public
service consistent with the prudent use of public funds.
DISCUSSION:
This request involves the approval of six (6) appropriations as follows:
One (1) appropriation (#2014064) to allocate $15,825.00 for training and professional development for various
departments. This appropriation will not increase the total budget because the funding will be allocated from
the Training Pool funding;
One (1) appropriation (#2014065) to appropriate $16,765.00 for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program;
One (1) appropriation (#2014066) to appropriate $8,300.00 from the Reserve for Contingencies to the Office
of Housing for an upgrade of the Office of Housings’ Housing Choice Voucher management software. This
appropriation will not increase the total County budget.
One (1) appropriation (#2014067) to appropriate $3,279.00 from the Reserve for Contingencies to the Office
of Housing for an additional month of funding for Virginia Supportive Housing. This appropriation will not
increase the total County budget;
One (1) appropriation (#2014068) to appropriate $34,600.00 for the Offender Aid and Restoration Drug Court
officer;
One (1) appropriation (#2014070) to appropriate $38,330.20 for various Emergency Communication Center
(ECC) projects approved by the ECC Management Board.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of appropriations #2014064, #2014065, #2014066, #2014067, #2014068, and #2014070 for
various school division and general government projects and programs as described in Attachment A.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Appropriation Descriptions
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
Attachment A
Appropriation #2014064 $0.00
This appropriation will not increase the County Budget.
Source: Training Pool $ 15,825.00
This request is to appropriate $15,825.00 from the Training Pool to various departments for approved training
opportunities and professional development. The Board approved a Training Pool of $50,000.00 in the FY 14 budget
to support the County’s strategic objective to expand opportunities for training and professional development. After
this appropriation, $16,296.00 will remain available in the Training Pool.
Appropriation #2014065 $16,765.00
Source: Federal Revenue $ 16,765.00
This request is to appropriate a $16,765.00 reimbursement from the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program
(SCAAP). SCAAP reimburses localities for compensation expenses incurred by correctional officers supervising
aliens in local and regional jail facilities. Program revenues received from the state are appropriated from the
locality’s General Fund to the correctional facility (Albemarle Charlottesville Regional Jail) for qualifying expenses
incurred.
Appropriation #2014066 $8,300.00
This appropriation will not increase the County Budget.
Source: Reserve for Contingencies $ 8,300.00
This request is to appropriate $8,300.00 from the Reserve f or Contingencies for an upgrade of the Office of
Housing’ Housing Choice Voucher management software. This software provides an effective management tool in
providing rental assistance to clients and reporting required data to the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD). The software vendor has notified the County that a software upgrade will need to occur
in the coming years and that upgrading now can be done at a lower cost than in the future.
Appropriation #2014067 $0.00
This appropriation will not increase the County Budget.
Source: Reserve for Contingencies $ 3,279.00
This request is to appropriate $3,279.00 from the Reserve for Contingencies to the Office of Housing to provide an
additional contribution to Virginia Supportive Housing for rental subsidies at The Crossings for six homeless persons
that would otherwise be funded through the federally-funded Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program. Earlier this
fiscal year, the Board approved an appropriation on September 4, 2013 to provide a three-month extension
(September through November) and on December 4, 2013 to provide funding for the month of December 2013. This
funding will provide sufficient funding for the month of January 2014. Once final approvals are received from HUD and
HCV vouchers are issued, local funding will be discontinued.
Appropriation #2014068 $34,600.00
Source: Federal Revenue $ 34,600.00
This request is to appropriate $34,600.00 in federal grant revenues for a part-time auxiliary deputy officer to work
under the direction of the Albemarle County Sheriff’s Office to assist with the administration and monitoring of
Offender Aid and Restoration‘s (OAR) Drug Court cases. Data from other Virginia communities with such an
arrangement indicates that the ongoing presence of an officer for program participants yields positive outcomes.
These expenses include part-time wages and vehicle fuel, maintenance and repair costs, and will be funded through
federal grant revenues received from OAR. The Board first approved an appropriation for this program in FY 11 at its
January 12, 2011 meeting, and the program has been ongoing. The grant is awarded based on the calendar year, so
the new funds will be available on January 1, 2014. This appropriation will allow this p rogram to continue in the
current fiscal year.
Attachment A
Appropriation #2014070 $38,330.20
Source: ECC Fund Balance $ 22,479.20
Federal Revenue $ 15,851.00
The Emergency Communications Center (ECC) requests that the County, acting as fiscal agent for the ECC,
appropriate funding from the ECC’s fund balance for the following requests, which have been approved by the ECC
Management Board:
Requests $6,229.20 for mobile data licensing, which will fund the agreed upon licensing agreement reached
with the ECC’s mobile data vendor.
Requests $6,250.00 for peer support group training to 25 public safety personnel from the joint public safety
agencies within the City, County and University of Virginia, including ECC staff. The goal of this joint training
is to provide personnel the opportunity to receive specialized training in peer support that assists co -workers
in emotional and tangible peer support during times of personal or professional crisis and to anticipate and
address potential difficulties.
Requests $10,000.00 to complete bi-directional antenna (BDA) equipment replacement. The ECC is
responsible for 26 BDA units that are within government buildings throughout the City, County and University.
These units provide in-building radio coverage for the public safety providers when they are within these
buildings. We had recently replaced 8 of the units and this funding will replace 2 additional units found to be
not working properly.
Requests $15,851.00 for a Homeland Security Grant for a Regional Volunteer Network. The objective of this
grant funded project is to establish a regional volunteer network serving the City of Charlottesville and the
Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa and Nelson. The network will support information-sharing,
collaboration, and multi-jurisdictional training and exercising, and will ultimately utilize volunteers to make the
region’s communities safer and better prepared for emergencies. Outcomes the ECC hopes to realize through
this effort include:
o Establishment of a regional volunteer network that maximizes the strength and capacity of Citizen
Corps and other volunteer programs to support communities during emergencies;
o Creation of an online environment to exchange ideas and collaborate;
o Conduct of shared trainings and exercises to build a skilled volunteer cadre; and
o Formalization of a regional strategy for mutual support across volunteer groups.
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin ia, in regular meeting on the
8th day of January 2014, adopted the following resolution:
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, the street(s) in Ragged Mountain Farm Subdivision, as described on the
attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated January 8, 2014, fully incorporated herein by reference, is
shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia;
and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Departm ent of Transportation has
advised the Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors
requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street(s) in Ragged Mountain, as
described on the attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated January 8, 2014, to the secondary
system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's
Subdivision Street Requirements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right -of-
way, as described, exclusive of any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described
on the recorded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident
Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
* * * * *
The road(s) described on Additions Form AM-4.3 is:
1) Ragged Mountain Drive (State Route 1860) from Route 637 (Dick Woods Road)
south to Route 1861 (Ragged View Court), as shown on plat recorded in the office
the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249-282,
with a 40-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.12 miles.
2) Ragged Mountain Drive (State Route 1860) from Route 1862 (Wise Court) south
to Route 1863 (Ragged Mountain Lane), as shown on plat recorded in the office the
Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249-282, with
a 40-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.15 miles.
3) Ragged View Court (State Route 1861) from Route 1860 (Ragged Mountain
Drive) east to cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282, with a 40-foot right-
of-way width, for a length of 0.09 miles.
4) Ragged Mountain Lane (State Route 1863) from Route 1864 (Farriers Court)
south to cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282, with a 40-foot right-
of-way width, for a length of 0.07 miles.
5) Ragged Mountain Drive (State Route 1860) from Route 1861 (Ragged View
Court) south to Route 1862 (Wise Court), as shown on plat recorded in the office
the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249-282,
with a 40-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.29 miles.
6) Ragged View Court (State Route 1861) from Route 1860 (Ragged Mountain
Drive) west to cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282, with a 40-foot right-
of-way width, for a length of 0.10 miles.
7) Ragged Mountain Drive (State Route 1860) from Route 1863 (Ragged Mountain
Lane) west to cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282, with a 40-foot right-
of-way width, for a length of 0.07 miles.
8) Wise Court (State Route 1862) from Route 1860 (Ragged Mountain Drive) east to
cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282, with a 40-foot right-of-way
width, for a length of 0.09 miles.
9) Farriers Court (State Route 1864) from Route 1863 (Ragged Mountain Lane) east
to cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282, with a 40-foot right-of-way
width, for a length of 0.06 miles.
10) Ragged Mountain Lane (State Route 1863) from Route 1860 (Ragged Mountain
Drive) south to Route 1864 (Farriers Court), as shown on plat recorded in the office
the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3278, pages 249 -282,
with a 40-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.27 miles.
Total Mileage – 1.31
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Fiscal Year 2014 County of Albemarle & State
Health Department Local Government Agreement
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Approve FY14 Agreement with the State Board of Health
for the provision of public health services through the
Thomas Jefferson Health District (TJHD)
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker and Davis
PRESENTER (S): N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Virginia Code § 32.1-31 allows local governing bodies to enter into contracts with the State Board of Health for the
operation of local health departments. It also requires that these contracts specify the services to be provided in addition to
those required by law and contain such other provisions as the State Board and the governing body may agree on. The
County’s contract specifies both the scope and costs for the services to be provided locally.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 5: Ensure the health and safety of the community
DISCUSSION:
The Thomas Jefferson Health District (TJHD), in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Health, is the primary
provider of public health services and programs for Albemarle County and surrounding localities. TJHD offers specific
health programs targeted at preventing and controlling infectious diseases as well as initiatives aimed at improving the
health of low income women, children and infants. In addition, the Health District provides an inspection and
monitoring program to ensure the safety of food and private well/septic systems. These services are funded
cooperatively by the State, County and other neighboring jurisdictions. Non-local funding for these TJHD programs is
provided by the Commonwealth of Virginia, grants and income from local fees charged to individual clients. The
localities served by TJHD provide matching local funds for the allocations made by the state and allocate resources for
Local-Only Programs such as food safety. The Virginia Department of Health requires that local governments enter
into agreements stipulating the scope of health services to be provided by the TJHD to citizens in their respective
jurisdictions. The FY14 agreement (Attachment A) has been reviewed and approved as to form by the County
Attorney’s Office. Attachment B is an attachment to the Agreement, and sets forth services to be provided by the
TJHD.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The County’s FY14 appropriation for the Thomas Jefferson Health District totals $561,771 of which $560,933
represents the County’s required match for Cooperative State and Local Matched Programs. The balance of funds
from the County ($838) is allocated to the Local-Only (Unmatched) food inspection program.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the vital nature of the services provided by the TJHD, staff recommends that the Board approve the FY 14
County of Albemarle & State Health Department Local Government Agreement (Attachment A) and that it authorize
the County Executive to execute that Agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – FY 14 Local Government Health Department Agreement
B – Attachment to Local Government Health Department Agreement
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
STATEMENT OF AGREEMENT WITH the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County
Under this agreement, which is created in satisfaction of the requirements of § 32.1-31 of the Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended, the Virginia Department of Health, over the course of one fiscal year, will
pay an amount not to exceed $685,585, from the state general fund to support the cooperative budget in
accordance with appropriations by the General Assembly, and in like time frame, the Board of
Supervisors of Albemarle County will provide by appropriation and in equal quarterly payments a sum of
$560,933 local matching funds and $838 one-hundred percent local funds for a total of $561,771 local
funds. These joint funds will be distributed in timely installments, as services are rendered in the operation
of the Albemarle County Health Department, which shall perform public health services to the
Commonwealth as indicated in Attachment A(1.), and will perform services required by loc al ordinances as
indicated in Attachment A(2.). Payments from the local government are due on the third Monday of each
fiscal quarter.
The term of this agreement begins July 1, 2013. This agreement will be automatically extended
on a state fiscal year to year renewal basis under the terms and conditions of the original agreement unless
written notice of termination is provided by either party. Such written notice shall be given at least 60 days
prior to the beginning of the fiscal year in which the termination is to be effective. Any increase or decrease
in funding allocation shall be made by an amendment to this agreement.
The parties agree that:
1. Under this agreement, as set forth in paragraphs A, B, C, and D below, the
Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Department of Health shall be responsible
for providing liability insurance coverage and will provide legal defense for state
employees of the local health department for acts or occurrences arising from
performance of activities conducted pursuant to state statutes and regulations.
A. The responsibility of the Commonwealth and the Virginia Department of Health
to provide liability insurance coverage shall be limited to and governed by the
Self-Insured General Liability Plan for the Commonwealth of Virginia,
established under § 2.2-1837 of the Code of Virginia. Such insurance coverage
shall extend to the services specified in Attachments A(1.) and A(2.), unless the
locality has opted to provide coverage for the employee under the Public
Officials Liability Self-Insurance Plan, established under § 2.2-1839 of the Code
or under a policy procured by the locality.
B. The Commonwealth and the Virginia Department of Health will be responsible
for providing legal defense for those acts or occurrences arising from the
performance of those services listed in Attachment A(1.), conducted in the
performance of this contract, as provided for under the Code of Virginia and as
provided for under the terms and conditions of the Self-Insured General
Liability Plan for the Commonwealth of Virginia.
LGA-Revised October 2013
C. Services listed in Attachment A(2.), any services performed pursuant to a local
ordinance, and any services authorized solely by Title 15.2 of the Code of
Virginia, when performed by a state employee, are herewith expressly excepted
from any requirements of legal defense or representation by the Attorney
General or the Commonwealth. For purposes of assuring the eligibility of a state
employee performing such services for liability coverage under the Self-Insured
General Liability Plan of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Attorney General
has approved, pursuant to 2.2-507 of the Code of Virginia and the Self-Insured
General Liability Plan of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the legal
representation of said employee by the city or county attorney, and the Board of
Supervisor of Albemarle County hereby expressly agrees to provide the legal
defense or representation at its sole expense in such cases by its local attorney.
D. In no event shall the Commo nwealth or the Virginia Department of Health be
responsible for providing legal defense or insurance coverage for local
government employees.
2. Title to equipment purchased with funds appropriated by the local government and
transferred to the state, either as match for state dollars or as a purchase under
appropriated funds expressly allocated to support the activities of the local health
department, will be retained by the Commonwealth and will be entered into the Virginia
Fixed Asset Accounting and Control System. Local appropriations for equipment to be
locally owned and controlled should not be remitted to the Commonwealth, and the local
government's procurement procedures shall apply in the purchase. The locality assumes
the responsibility to maintain the equipment and all records thereon.
3. Amendments to or modifications of this contract must be agreed to in writing and signed
by both parties.
_____________________________
Cynthia Romero, MD, FAAFP Local authorizing officer signature
State Health Commissioner
Virginia Department of Health
______________________________
Authorizing officer printed name
______________________________
Authorizing officer title
____________________________ ______________________________
Date Date
Approved as to form by the Office of the Attorney General on August 29, 2011.
Attachments: Local Government Agreement, Attachment A(1.)
Local Government Agreement, Attachment A(2.)
LGA-Revised October 2013
Revised 10/2013 1
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES TO BE ASSURED BY LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
INCOME LEVEL A IS DEFINED BY THE BOARD OF HEALTH TO BE MEDICALLY INDIGENT (32.1-11)
For Each Service Provided, Check Block for Highest Income Level Served
COMMUNICABLE DISEASE SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
(specify
income level
if not ALL)
Immunization of patients against certain diseases,
including Childhood Immunizations
As provided for in 32.1-46
Code Link-32.1-46
X
Sexually transmitted disease screening, diagnosis,
treatment, and surveillance
32.1-57, Districts may provide counseling
Code Link-32.1-57
X
Surveillance and investigation of disease
32.1-35 and 32.1-39
Code Links-32.1-35, 32.1-39
X
HIV/AIDS surveillance, investigation, and sero
prevalence survey
32.1-36, 32.1-36.1, 32.1-39
Code Links-32.1-36, 32.1-36.1,32.1-39
X
Tuberculosis control screening,
diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance
32.1-49, 32.1-50.1, and 32.1-54
Code Links-32.1-49, 32.1-50, 32.1-54
X
CHILD HEALTH SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Children Specialty Services; diagnosis,
treatment, follow-up, and parent teaching
32.1-77, 32.1-89 and 32.1-90
Code Links-32.1-77, 32.1-89, 32.1-90
X
Screening for genetic traits and inborn errors
of metabolism, and provision of dietary
supplements
Code Links-32.1-65, 32.1-69
X
Well child care up to age (enter year)
Board of Health
Code Link-32.1-77
X
WIC
Federal grant requirement
Public Law 108-265 as amended, Child Nutrition Act
of 1966; Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act
2009
Code Link-32.1-351.2
X
EPSDT
DMAS MOA
Social Security Act section 1905(r) (5)
Code Link-32.1-11
X
Blood lead level testing
Code Link-32.1-46.1, 32.1-46.2
X
Outreach, Patient and Community Health Education
Code Link-32.1-11, 32.1-11.3, 32.1-39
X
Community Education
Code Link-32.1-11, 32.1-23
X
Pre-school Physicals for school entry
Code Link-22.1-270
X
Revised 10/2013 2
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES TO BE ASSURED BY LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
INCOME LEVEL A IS DEFINED BY THE BOARD OF HEALTH TO BE MEDICALLY INDIGENT (32.1-11)
Disabled disability Waiver Screenings
DMAS MOA
Code Link-32.1-330
X
Services for Children with Special health care needs
Title V, Social Security Act
Code Link-32.1-77
X
Child restraints in motor vehicles
Code Link-46.2-1095, 46.2-1097
X
Babycare
DMAS MOA
X
MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Prenatal and post partum care for low
risk and intermediate risk women
, Title V, Social Security Act
Code Link-32.1-77
X
Babycare Services
DMAS MOA
X
WIC
Federal grant requirement
Public Law 108-265 as amended, Child Nutrition Act
of 1966; Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act
2009
Code Link-32.1-351.2
X
FAMILY PLANING SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Clinic services including drugs and
Contraceptive supplies
Family Planning Population Research Act of 1970,
Title X
Code Link-32.1-77, 32.1-325
X
Pregnancy testing and counseling
Family Planning Population Research Act of 1970,
Title X
Code Link-32.1-77, 32.1-325
X
Revised 10/2013 3
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES TO BE ASSURED BY LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
The following services performed in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Virginia,
the regulation of the Board of Health and/or VDH agreements with other state or federal
agencies.
Ice cream/frozen desserts:
Under the agency’s Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Virginia Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services (VDACS), the local health department is responsible for initiating the
issuance, suspension, reinstatement and revocation of permits for all frozen desserts plants which are
an integral part of any premises, including Grade "A” milk plants, hotels, restaurants, and mobile units
where frozen desserts are frozen or partially frozen or dispensed for retail sale.
X
Investigation of communicable diseases:
Pursuant to §§ 32.1-35 and 32.1-39 of the Code of the Code of Virginia, the local health director and
local staff are responsible for investigating any outbreak or unusual occurrence of a preventable
disease that the Board of Health requires to be reported.
Code Links-32.1-35, 32.1-39
X
Marinas:
Pursuant to §32.1-246 of the Code of Virginia, local health department staff are responsible for
permitting marinas and other places where boats are moored and is responsible for inspecting them
to ensure that their sanitary fixtures and sewage disposal facilities are in compliance with the Marina
Regulations (12VAC5-570-10 et seq.)
Code Link-32.1-246
X
Migrant labor camps:
Pursuant to §§ 32.1-203-32.1-211 of the Code of Virginia, local health departments are responsible
for issuing, denying, suspending and revoking permits to operate migrant labor camps. Local health
departments also must inspect migrant labor camps and ensure that the construction, operation and
maintenance of such camps are in compliance with the Rules and Regulations Governing Migrant
Labor Camps (12VAC5-501-10 et seq.).
Code Links-32.1-203, 32.1-211
X
Milk:
Pursuant to §§ 3.2-5130, 3.2-5206, 3.2-5208 of the Code of Virginia and the agency’s MOA with
VDACS, the local health department is responsible for issuing, denying, suspending and revoking
permits for Grade “A” milk processing plants which offer milk and or milk products for sale in Virginia.
Local health department are also responsible for the inspection of Grade “A” milk plants for
compliance with the Regulations Governing Grade “A” Milk (2VAC5-490-10).
Code Links-3.2-5130, 3.2-5206, 3.2-5208
X
Alternative discharging sewage systems:
Pursuant to § 32.1-164(A) of the Code of Virginia, local health department are responsible for issuing,
denying and revoking construction and operation permits for alternative discharging systems of less
than 1000 gallons per day serving single family dwellings. Local health departments are also required
to conduct regular inspections of alternative discharging systems in order to ensure that their
construction and operation are in compliance with the Alternative Discharging Regulations (12VAC5-
640-10 et seq.).
Code Link-32.1-164
X
Onsite sewage systems:
Pursuant to §32.1-163 et seq. of the Code of Virginia, local health department staff is responsible for
performing site evaluations and designs of onsite sewage systems. Local health department staff is
also responsible for issuing, denying and revoking construction and operation permits for
conventional and alternative onsite sewage systems. Local health department staff are also
responsible for inspecting the construction of onsite sewage systems for compliance with the Sewage
Handling and Disposal Regulations (12VAC5-610-20 et seq.;“SHDR”) and the Alternative Onsite
Sewage System Regulations (12VAC5-613-10 et seq.;”AOSS Regulations). Local health department
is also responsible for ensuring the performance, operation and maintenance of onsite sewage
systems are in compliance with the SHDR and AOSS Regulations.
Code Link-32.1-163
X
Rabies:
Pursuant to §3.2-6500 et seq. of the Code of Virginia, the local health department is
responsible for investigating complaints and reports of suspected rabid animals exposing a
person, companion animal, or livestock to rabies.
Code Link- 3.2-6500
X
Revised 10/2013 4
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES TO BE ASSURED BY LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
Restaurants/eating establishments:
Pursuant to §35.1-14 of the Code of Virginia, local health departments are responsible for issuing,
denying, renewing, revoking and suspending permits to operate food establishments. In addition,
local health departments are required to conduct at least one annual inspection of each food
establishment to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Food Regulations (12VAC5-421-10
et seq.). These regulations include requirements and standards for the safe preparation, handling,
protection, and preservation of food; the sanitary maintenance and use of equipment and physical
facilities; the safe and sanitary supply of water and disposal of waste and employee hygiene
standards.
Code Link- 35.1-14
X
Sanitary surveys:
The local health department is responsible for conducting surveys of properties which include soil
evaluations and identification of potential sources of contamination. The surveys are conducted in
order to determine site suitability for onsite sewage systems, alternative discharging systems and
wells.
Code Link-32.1-11, 32.1-43
X
Single home sewage discharge
Code Link-32.1-164
Hotels/Motels:
In accordance with §35.1.13 of the Code of Virginia, local health department staff is responsible for
issuing, denying, revoking and suspending permits to operate hotels. The local health department is
responsible for conducting inspections of hotels to ensure compliance with the Hotel Regulations
(12VAC5-431-10 et seq.). These regulations include requirements and standards for physical plant
sanitation; safe and sanitary housekeeping and maintenance practices; safe and sanitary water
supply and sewage disposal and vector and pest control.
Code Link-35.1-13
X
Water supply sanitation-Inspection of Water Supplies
Code Link- 15.2-2144
X
Wells:
Pursuant to §32.1-176.2, local health departments are responsible for issuing, denying and revoking
construction permits and inspection statements for private wells. Local health departments are also
responsible for inspecting private wells to ensure that their construction and location are in
compliance with the Private Well Regulations (12VAC5-630-10 et seq.).
Code Link-32.1-176.2
X
Homes for adults:
The local health department, at the request of the Department of Social Services (DSS) will inspect
DSS-permitted homes for adults to evaluate their food safety operations, wastewater disposal and
general environmental health conditions.
X
Juvenile Justice Institutions:
Pursuant to §35.1-23 of the Code of Virginia and the agency’s memorandum of understanding with
the Department of Corrections, local health departments are responsible for conducting at least one
annual unannounced inspection of juvenile justice institutions in order to evaluate their kitchen
facilities, general sanitation and environmental health conditions.
Code Link-35.1-23
X
Jail inspections:
Pursuant to § 53.1-68 of the Code of Virginia and the agency’s memorandum of understanding with
the Department of Corrections, local health departments are responsible for conducting at least one
annual unannounced inspection of correction facilities in order to evaluate their kitchen facilities,
general sanitation and environmental health conditions.
Code Link-53.1-68
X
Daycare centers:
At the request of DSS will inspect DSS-permitted daycare centers to evaluate their food safety
operations, wastewater disposal and general environmental health conditions.
X
Radon
Pursuant to §32.1-229 local health department may assist VDH Central Office with Radon testing and
analysis.
Code Link-32.1-229.
X
Summer camps/ Campgrounds:
Pursuant to 35.1-16 and 35.1-17 of the Code of Virginia, local health departments are responsible for
issuing, denying, revoking and suspending permits to operate summer camps and campgrounds. The
local health department is responsible for conducting inspections of summer camps and
campgrounds not less than annually to ensure that their construction, operation and maintenance are
in compliance with the Regulations for Summer Camps (12VAC5-440-10 et seq.) and the Rules and
Regulations for Campgrounds (12VAC5-450-10 et seq.).
Code Links-35.1-16, 35.1-17
X
Revised 10/2013 5
Revised 10/2013 6
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
OTHER PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
BASIC PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES TO BE ASSURED BY LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
The following services performed in accordance with
the provisions of the Code of Virginia, the regulations
of the Board of Health and/or the policies and
procedures of the State Department of Health
Medicaid Nursing Home Screening
DMAS MOA
Code Link- 32.1-330
X
Comprehensive Services Act
2.2-5201-2.2-5211
Code Link- 2.2-5201, 2.2-5211
X
Vital Records (Death Certificates)
Code Link- 32.1-254, 32.1-255, 32.1-272
X
Early Intervention Services
Community Policy and Management Teams (CPMT)
Interagency Coordinating Council (Infants/Toddlers)
Code Link- 2.2-5305, 2.2-5306
X
Immunizations for maternity and post-partum
patients
Code Link-32.1-11, 32.1-325, 54.1-3408.
AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP)
Code Link-32.1-11,32.1-330
X
Emergency Preparedness and Response
Code Link-32.1-42, 32.1-43, 32.1-229,
X
HIV Counseling, Testing and Referral
Code Link-32.1-37.2
X
Revised 10/2013 7
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
OPTIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
For Each Service Provided, Check Block for Highest Income Level Served
COMMUNICABLE DISEASE SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Foreign Travel Immunizations
Other:
CHILD HEALTH SERVICES
School health services
Sick child care
Other:
MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Funds for deliveries
Funds for special tests and drugs
Diagnosis, treatment, and referral for
gynecological problems
Other: Prenatal Care Clinic X
(Louisa)
FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Nutrition Education
Preventive Health Services
Pre-Conception Health Care
Other:
Revised 10/2013 8
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(1.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
OPTIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
For Each Service Provided, Check Block for Highest Income Level Served
GENERAL MEDICAL SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Activities of Daily Living
Community Education
X
General Clinic Services (100% Locally
Funded)
Outreach
Occupational health services
Personal care
Pharmacy services-Alternate Drug Delivery
Site
Hypertension screening, referral, and
counseling
Respite care services
Other:
SPECIALTY CLINIC SERVICES (List)
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
DENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Preventive Clinic Services - Children
Preventive Clinic Services - Adults
Restorative Clinic Services
Community Education
Other: Bright Smiles Program (Greene,
Louisa, Fluvanna, and Nelson
X
Revised 10/2013 9
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(2.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES PROVIDED
UNDER LOCAL ORDINANCE
Neither the Code of Virginia nor
Regulations of the Board of Health
requires the following services to
be provided by the local health
department
Place an X in
this column if
service is
provided for
locality
Local ordinance code cite Provide a brief description of
local ordinance requirements
Accident Prevention
Air Pollution
Bird Control
Employee Physicals
General Environmental
Housing - BOCA & local building
codes
Insect control
Noise
Plumbing
Radiological Health
Rodent Control
Solid Waste
Swimming facilities
Weeds
Smoking Ordinances X Albemarle Code § 7-308
Charlottesville Code § 24.1-11 Enforcement
Other environmental services
(identify)
Revised 10/2013 10
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT, ATTACHMENT A(2.)
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES PROVIDED UNDER
LOCAL ORDINANCES OR CONTRACT WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
OPTIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
For Each Service Provided, Check Block for Highest Income Level Served
Income
A only
Defined by
Federal
Regulations
All
Employee physicals
Primary care for inmates in local
jails or correctional institutions
Other medical services (List)
Other (please list)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Process for developing a report on the health and
welfare of the volunteer fire rescue system
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Schedule for report on the health and welfare of the
volunteer fire rescue system
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Eggleston
PRESENTER (S): N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
ATTACHMENTS: No
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On April 20, 2011, the Board adopted an ordinance to establish a coordinated fire and rescue system, which included the
establishment of a Fire and Emergency Medical Services (FEMS) Board. Pursuant to Section 6-107, responsibilities of the
FEMS Board include presenting a report at least annually to the Board of Supervisors regarding the health and welfare of the
volunteer system. Fire Rescue staff is working with a FEMS Board-appointed group to develop the report for presentation to the
Board on March 5, 2014.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 5. Ensure the health and safety of the community
DISCUSSION:
During its December 5, 2013 meeting, the FEMS Board appointed a work group consisting of FEMS Chair/Chief
Alibertis (Western Albemarle VRS), Chief Tim Cersley (Scottsville VFD), Dayton Haugh (Charlottesville-Albemarle
VRS), and Chief Dan Tawney (Seminole VFD) to work with Albemarle County Fire Rescue Division Chief Tom LaBelle
to develop a report on the health and welfare of the volunteer fire rescue system. The group plans to present the report
to the Board on March 5, 2014. In addition, the FEMS Board endorsed the following process and schedule to ensure
the report is completed on time with proper input:
Health and Welfare of Volunteer System Dec
2013
Jan
2014
Feb
2014
Mar
2014
FEMS Board-appointed group to work with Chief LaBelle 12/5
FEMS Board Executive Committee to provide feedback on draft outline 1/6
FEMS Board approval of final outline 1/22
Develop final product – communicate out to FEMS Board 2/11
Executive Summary Due to Legal 2/18
Board Presentation 3/5
The schedule and process is being provided to the Board as information only and no action is required.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no budget impact related to this item.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
This summary is provided for information only and no action is required at this time.
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Albemarle County Broadband Task Force Initiation
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
An update regarding Internet Broadband Access for
Underserved Areas of Albemarle County
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Letteri, Davis, Catlin, Culp
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On September 4, 2013, the Board directed staff to research grant funding and other strategies to advance the availability
of High Speed Internet to underserved areas of the County. On October 23, 2013, staff presented its research results to
the Board, and the Board directed staff to proceed with a Round Table with Telecommunications Providers to obtain
information regarding plans, ideas and known funding sources to help facilitate additional service installation in the
underserved areas of the County and to identify barriers to providing services in select rural areas. The Round Table was
held on October 23, 2013. The notes from the Round Table are attached (Attachment A). The purpose of this Executive
Summary is to inform the Board that one of the outcomes of the Round Table is the formation of a short-term Broadband
Task Force. The details of the proposed work for the Broadband Task Force are included in the Discussion section.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 3. Encourage a diverse and vibrant local economy; and
Goal 7. Promote a valued and responsive county workforce.
DISCUSSION:
On October 23, 2013, the Broadband Round Table took place with 29 attendees. The attendees comprised of
Broadband service providers, legal representation of some of the service providers, staff from the Center for
Innovative Technology, and County and School Division staff met for two hours. The Virginia Broadband Map was
discussed and it was clear to all attendees that Albemarle County has many areas of limited to no access to the
internet (underserved.) Attendees then discussed barriers to providing service to those underserved areas and
potential funding mechanisms with many of the providers detailing the complexity of achieving funding for “low
density” locations and physical challenges of deploying the necessary infrastructure (underground cable or above
ground towers). The group then agreed to formulate a task force to focus on three main areas:
Awareness and Broadband Demand Identification, Funding, and Permitting Process.
One of the many ideas gathered at the Round Table was the formation of a short term (6 to 8 months in duration) task
force to examine the issue of underserved broadband internet areas of Albemarle County. An invitation to serve on
the task force (See Attachment B) was sent out to Telecommunications Providers, the Thomas Jefferson Planning
District Commission, the University of Virginia, and various School and Local Government staff on November 19,
2013. The membership was finalized on November 30, 2013 and the first meeting was scheduled on December 13,
2013.
The Broadband Task Force is working on the following objectives:
Awareness and Broadband Demand Identification – This will be a community effort. The Task Force will promote
awareness of the many values of low cost and reliable high speed internet access throughout the County. One of the
ways to do this is through the creation of a "Demand Identification Website" with a three-fold purpose: To provide
awareness of the value, to identify areas of demand through a brief survey, and to collect data from existing
broadband customers through internet speed tests and other customer satisfaction measures. The Task Force will
work to test and then promote the website through all available channels; analyze the data and information collected;
and submit a report to the Board of Supervisors.
AGENDA TITLE: Albemarle County Broadband Task Force Initiation
January 8, 2014
Page 2
Funding Options Recommendation - While the Task Force researched several grant opportunities to fund
Broadband expansion, there were other funding options mentioned during the Round Table. The Task Force will
review and analyze those other funding options and will include its findings in its report to the Board.
Permitting Process Review, Rights of Way, and Recommendations – A subgroup of the task force will review the
permitting process as it pertains to broadband, the process of obtaining rights of way, and other broadband
infrastructure deployment challenges. The findings will be included in the Task Force’s report to the Board. The
group will not independently pursue any changes to the County’s wireless policy or ordinances related to broadband
deployment. Those ordinance changes will be developed under the Community Development Phase II of the Zoning
Ordinance update of personal wireless facilities.
The Task Force has a goal of providing a report to the Board by April 9, 2014. See Attachment C for a timeline of the
proposed Task Force work.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The only direct budget impact of moving forward as proposed would be the utilization of staff time.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board direct staff to proceed with the Broadband Task Force as proposed and to provide a
report to the Board of Supervisors on April 9, 2013
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Broadband Roundtable Notes
B – Broadband Task Force Invitation
C – Broadband Task Force Timeline and Summary of Work
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
Roundtable on Broadband Service Opportunities in Albemarle County Meeting Notes
Oct. 23, 2013
Albemarle County Local Government sponsored an open meeting for wireless and wire line service providers
on Oct. 23, 2013. This document comprises a summary of the meeting notes.
A list of attendees follows in Appendix A.
The meeting was brought to order by Mike Culp, IT Director for Albemarle County. Susan Stimart of the
County Executive’s Office led the introductions; and Bill Letteri, Assistant County Executive provided opening
remarks. Supervisor Duane Snow thanked everyone for their attendance and encouraged unique partnerships
and quick efforts to bridge the broadband gap in Albe marle.
Mike Culp proceeded through a display of the Center for Innovative Technologies’ Broadband Availability
Maps. Next, Susan and Mike opened the floor for discussions around two themes; Awareness/Adoption and
Barriers to Progress/System Status.
Awareness/Adoption: How does the group work together to make the community aware of the benefits of
high speed (3mbps and above) internet access for education, healthcare, and economic development returns?
Many suggestions ensued throughout the meeting:
Create a program so employers educate employees on the benefit of broadband access
Issue a Citizen Survey(s) to include a concise statement of support from government agencies,
University of Virginia, and other major employees.
o Ask for feedback on current connectivity options
o Conduct broadband “speed tests” and report on results
o Solicit ideas on formulating a “kickstarter” or other type of fund raising effort (e.g. employees
band together to convince employer to commit funds to a broadband deployment initia tive)
Continue and escalate efforts to identify other funding mechanisms
o TJPDC plays an important role in this from a regional perspective and requested inclusion in
ongoing efforts.
Barriers to Progress/System Status: What are the service providers doing today and in the future to bridge
the gap? What are the major barriers to progress; what can teamwork between all sides do to escalate
deployment?
We heard from many of the service providers that the primary barrier is the initial investment combin ed with
the physics of deployment challenges leads to deployments in other areas:
Federal Funding for Albemarle is difficult to obtain due to our status of more underserved than
unserved. Most of the federal funds released thus far have been directed at unserved communities.
While several deployment efforts are underway (e.g. CenturyLink, Comcast); these have been difficult
to start due to comparison of residential density. There are other areas “worthy” of investment due to
residential areas unserved or underserved and showing demand for services (hence deployment shows
a more rapid return on investment.)
Broadband for businesses often times produce the necessary service provider revenue to fund
residential deployments. This seems to be a challenge in A lbemarle as designated growth areas
already have broadband service competition so the relative price is low; and the revenues generated
often do not lead to expanded services in the rural areas.
Our area includes the need to involve VDOT, Dominion Power, and Private Property Owners to obtain
necessary easements for new deployments. This continues to be a challenge and requests for local
government to assist were noted. It is difficult to obtain easements quickly due to many of rural area
plats are owned by interests not in Albemarle County and in some cases not in the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
Providing wireless services runs into additional regulations and permitting issues; including restrictions
on tower heights; and the time it requires to proceed through the application process even when in
compliance. These are items currently being worked through - with improvements seen and
anticipated.
Next Steps
This is a high priority item for the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. As such, comments and ideas from
all participants are encouraged. Working together we can submit ideas to the Board of Supervisors for further
direction. The next major outcome is a Board Agenda Action Item specific to this topic.
It was clear that funding is a critical need; ideas about obtaining funds:
more concentrated effort to identify and apply for federal, state, and private funding
issuance of a tax specific to adding more broadband
additional employer taxes (educating them first on the value of high speed broadband for the
community and recruitment of qualified employees to the area)
employee “crowdsourcing” and establishing demand to their employers; among others.
We need to work together to further define these ideas and how to apply additional funding (if available) to
an accelerated effort to deploy high speed internet access throughout Albemarle County.
Sandie Terry later suggested we immediately conduct a citizen survey – to further qualify the need and current
system status. One immediate action step is to work with the Center for Innovative Technology to conduct this
survey.
Our internal group intends to meet during the first week of November and further define next steps. The
outcome of this meeting will be provided to all attendees. All attendees are encouraged to contact Mike Culp
mculp@albemarle.org or 434-296-5891 for individual meetings; clarification of these notes; or further
discussion.
Appendix A: Roundtable on Broadband Service Opportunities in Albemarle County Attendee List
Oct. 23, 2013
Name E-Mail
Chelsea A. Morse, Sprint Chelsea.Morse@sprint.com
Dave Boker, Sprint David.Boker@sprint.com
Jon Scarborough, Project Manager Virginia, US Cellular jon.scarborough@uscellular.com
Kurt Venables, RF Design Virginia, US Cellular kurt.venables@uscellular.com
Dan Meenan, nTelos Wireless meenand@ntelos.com
Debbie Balser, nTelos Wireless balserd@ntelos.com
Kevin Leibl, Advanced Network Systems kleibel@getadvanced.net
Burke Morton, FiberLight burke.morton@fiberlight.com
Randy Hudson, CenturyLink randy.hudson@centurylink.com
Andrew Draper, CenturyLink Andrew.Draper@CenturyLink.com
Glenn Butler, CenturyLink Glenn.butler@CenturyLink.com
Jeff Cornejo, Blue Ridge Internetworks jeff@briworks.com
Pete Hatcher, AT&T pete.hatcher@att.com
Lori Schweller, LeClairRyan Lori.Schweller@leclairryan.com
Jamie Yowell, Major Account Manager at Verizon Wireless Jamie.yowell@verizonwireless.com
Marshall Pearsall, Verizon Wireless Implementation Manager Marshall.Pearsall@verizonwireless.com
Greg Duncan, Comcast gregory_duncan@cable.comcast.com
Valerie Long, Williams Mullen vlong@williamsmullen.com
Duane Snow, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors duanesnow@gmail.com
Bill Letteri, Albemarle County Assistant County Executive bletteri@albemarle.org
Phil Giaramita, Albemarle County Public Schools pgiaramita@k12albemarle.org
Vincent Sheivert, Albemarle County Public Schools vsheivert@k12albemarle.org
Robert Rejonis, Albemarle County Public Schools rrejonis@k12albemarle.org
Susan Stimart, Albemarle County Economic Development and
Business Partnerships
sstimart@albemarle.org
Mike Culp, Albemarle County IT Dept. mculp@albemarle.org
Sarah Baldwin, Albemarle County Community Development Dept. sbaldwin@albemarle.org
Bill Fritz, Albemarle County Community Development Dept. bfritz@albemarle.org
Sandie Terry, Program Manager, Broadband Center for Innovative
Technology
Sandie.Terry@cit.org
Pat Groot, Grants Administrator TJPDC PGroot@tjpdc.org
Liz Palmer liz@lizpalmerforsupervisor.com
1
/O=ALBEMARLE/OU=EXCHANGE ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP (FYDIBOHF23SPDLT)/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MCULP
From:Michael Culp
Sent:Tuesday, November 19, 2013 2:58 PM
To:Michael Culp
Subject:Albemarle County Broadband Task Force Invitation
Let's make 2014 the year of Broadband for Albemarle County!
Over the past month we completed an internal review of the notes from the Broadband Roundtable and with this e-mail
am inviting membership in a Broadband Task Force.
This is intended to be a "quick hit" task force and together we will refine the scope and schedule from ideas presented at
the Roundtable. The task force will refine and complete its work during the next 4 or 6 months and prepare a
presentation of results and recommendations for a Board of Supervisors Meeting in March or April 2014. See the
attached file for more detail.
Task Force Work Summary
Awareness and Broadband Demand Identification - This is a community effort. We will promote awareness of the
many values of low cost and reliable high speed internet access throughout the County. One of the ways to do this is
through the creation of a "Demand Identification Website" with a three-fold purpose: Provide awareness of the value,
identify areas of demand through a brief survey, and collect data from existing broadband customers through internet
speed tests and other customer satisfaction measures. We will work to test, then promote the website through all
available channels; analyze the data and information collected; and submit a report to the Board of Supervisors.
Funding Options Recommendation - How will broadband expansion be funded? While we researched several grant
opportunities; there were other funding options mentioned during the Roundtable. These other funding options need
further review and development to present as part of the Board of Supervisors' report.
Permitting Process Review, Rights of Way, and Recommendations – A subgroup of the task force will review the
permitting process as it pertains to broadband, the process of obtaining rights of way, and other broadband
infrastructure deployment challenges. The results and recommendations will be included in the Board of Supervisors'
report.
The demand identification website development is already underway. Reaching out today to identify the task force
membership by Nov. 30, 2013. Please let me know by return e-mail or phone call if you are interested or have
questions.
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Culp
IT Director
Albemarle County, VA
mculp@albemarle.org
2
434-296-5891
County Staff, ACPS, Service Providers, Businesses,
TJPDC, University of VirginiaWho?
•Mike Culp to coordinate roster and schedule Dec. 2013 and 1st Quarter 2014 Meetings
•Provide Task Force Members via e-mail to Mike Culp by Nov. 30, 2013
Action Items for the Broadband Task ForceWhat?
•Finalize Scope and Schedule for this short term Task force, not a Permanent Group
•Review and Help Promote Broadband Demand Identification Website and Survey
•Analyze Results of Survey
•Review Options for Funding and Provide Recommendations to Board of Supervisors (BOS) in Spring 2014
•Review Permitting Process for Various Broadband Infrastructure (Wireless and Fiber) and Provide
Recommendations to BOS
Jan. 8 BOS Agenda & Spring 2014By When?
•Members of the Task Force Present Informational Item at the Jan. 8, 2014 Board of Supervisors’ Meeting
•During Jan./Feb./Mar. 2014 do the work to analyze and prepare recommendations to be presented to the
Board of Supervisors in the Spring of 2014.
2013
Task Force
Created
1.Demand Website & Survey
Built and Tested
2.Permits Process Reviewed
3.Funding Options Reviewed
4.Demand Website Promoted
5.Results Reviewed and
BOS Agenda Item Prepared
FebJanDecNov JunMayAprMar
2014
Task Force Ends
Staff & Service
Providers
Comment/Act on
BOS
Recommendations
Informational
Item on the
BOS Agenda
Board -to-Board
January, 2014
A monthly report from the Albemarle County School Board to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Environmental Award —The Virginia School Board A ssociation awarded ACPS with its top environmental
award in the ir annual “Green Schools Challenge”. The competition recognizes school divisions that have
implement ed environmental policies and actions that reduce carbon emissions. In the category for school
divisions with a student enrollment of 10,001 or more students, Albemarle placed first in the state. Twenty-three
of the division’s 26 schools also have attained ENERGY STAR certification, which is a federal Environmental
Protection Agency recognition program. A building’s energy efficiency must be within the top 25 percent of all
similar buildings in the nation in order to be designated as an ENERGY STAR building. Over the past four years,
the school division has avoided $400,000 in projected energy costs due to the use of more efficient systems.
Maker Spaces Attract National Attention— College officials from UNC -Greensboro and from Harvard visited
Monticello's me dia center this past week to learn more about our 21st century learning model, especially the
concept known as maker spaces. Part of the goal for the universities is to gain insight into how to prepare
teachers for this new approach. Maker spaces encourage students to use their creativity and critical thinking skills
to work together in teams on projects of their own design. You can see Channel 29's excellent report on the
program at: http://www.nbc29.com/story/24201428/albemarle -schools -maker-spaces-program-gets -national-
attention.
National Board Certification-- Fifteen Albemarle County Public Schools teachers have earned certification from
the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, successfully completing a rigorous, year-long process for
demonstrating classroom excellence. The National Board was established to advance student learning and
achievement through a system for certifying educators. Across the country, only three percent of more than
100,000 teachers are board certified, and in Virginia, approximately 1,200 teachers, or two percent, are certified.
ACPS, with 40 certified teachers, is among the top school divisions in the state, and its percentage of certified
teachers exceeds both the national and state averages.
Lastinger Family Foundation Grant—Woodbrook Elementary received a grant of $40,000 for an outdoor
classroom from the Lastinger Family Foundation. Third grade students will become “Green Adventure
Scientists” through a nine -month pilot partnership with Green Adventure Project educators to research, design and
construct a sustainable environment based le arning center on school grounds. The educational outdoor center will
provide ongoing learning opportunities while supporting environmental sustainability and stewardship.
School Partnership with Smithsonian--Teachers and students from Sutherland Middle Sc hool are working with
UVA, North Carolina State University, the National Science Foundation and Einstein Fellows on a project for the
Smithsonian that would have Sutherland students recreate museum artifacts from their original designs. A pilot
program ha d the students use a 3D printer to recreate the Vail Telegraph, the world's first telegraph, which was
constructed in 1846. Sutherland is home to a field of study, mechatronics, which teaches students how to
combine design, engineering and manufacturing s kills. The Sutherland program is one of the first of its kind in
the nation.
Legislative Priorities—The School Board met with state senators and delegates to share the legislative priorities
before the 2014 General Assembly session. Items discussed included student assessment reform, such as
decreasing the number of SOL tests and provide more opportunities for performance tasks , increases in Standards
of Quality (SOQ) funding, multi-year projections of local contributions to the Virginia Retirement System, and an
adjustment in the local composite index calculation that reflects the impact of the revenue -sharing agreement with
Charlottesville City.
Donations and Grants to A lbemarle County Public Schools-- Albemarle County Public Schools re ceived the
following donations:
• Club Yancey has received grants and donations totaling $36,200 from a number of individual donors and
foundations for operating expenses.
• The Department of Community Engagement received a donation of $5,000 from an anonymous donor to
provide optical exams and eyeglasses for students.
• Red Hill Elementary received a grant of $500from the NEA Foundation to provide professional
development for educators.
• Monticello High School received a grant of $750 from FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of
Science and Technology) to support its robotics teams.
School Board website: www.k12albemarle.org
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Regional Public Safety Firearms Training Center
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Project update and authorization to proceed with design
of an indoor firearms training facility and public
engagement plan
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Henry, and Sellers
PRESENTER (S): Trevor Henry
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On April 11, 2012, the Board approved the proposed FY 13 capital budget which included funding for a Firearms Training
Facility. The facility was to be located at the closed Keene Landfill site and consisted of design and construction of an
outdoor facility (approximately 300 feet long by 150 feet wide), classroom and toilet facilities, and associated parking. On
November 7, 2012, the Police Department and the Office of Facilities Development (OFD) presented to the Board an
extensive history and status update of the project. At the conclusion of the presentation, the Board reaffirmed its supp ort of
the project as proposed. There was much public concern and resistance to the project as proposed and this concern was
voiced to the Board at several public meetings. As a result, on February 6, 2013 the Board cancelled a scheduled
February 13, 2013 public hearing on the Police Firing Range proposal at the Keene Landfill site, directed staff to bring
forward information on funding for an enclosed firing range, directed staff to bring forward information on additional sites
for a firing range, and directed that the Keene Landfill site only be considered further as a site for an enclosed firing range.
Pursuant to the Board’s direction, staff proceeded to obtain estimates for an enclosed range and to review potential sites.
On April 10, 2013, staff provided the Board an update on the site analysis process. At the conclusion of that meeting, the
Board provided consensus to move forward with discussing a potential site specific to a joint facility with the City and the
University of Virginia; to continue to evaluate other existing publicly owned sites; to form and involve a citizen committee to
work with staff on the evaluation of options; and to report back to the Board in July/August with a site recommendation.
Over the course of several months, staff developed an evaluation matrix which was utilized to evaluate several publicly-
owned sites as potential locations for an enclosed ranged. This evaluation process included the active involvement of
three County citizens over the course of several months.
On August 14, 2013 the Board received further analysis on three specific publicly-owned sites as well as a consensus
recommendation to proceed in partnership with the City and UVA on a joint firearms training facility on one of those sites
which is the property owned by UVA on Milton Road. This site was determined to be the most suitable location for such a
facility (See Attachment A for the August 14, 2013 Power Point presentation) given that it maximizes the partnership with
the County, City and UVA and enables UVA to close an existing open range on the site. At the conclusion of discussion,
the Board directed staff to pursue Milton as the preferred site and to move forward with development of necessary joint
operating and funding agreements with the County, the City and UVA.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 2 – Provide community facilities that meet future and existing needs.
Goal 5 – Ensure the health and safety of the community.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Board a brief summary of past project activity, to emphasize the on-
going work to formalize the partnership with the City and UVA, to seek authorization from the Board to proceed with
additional work to advance the project, and to highlight the public engagement plan developed specifically for this project
as a outline for community outreach and communication.
The County, the City and UVA continue to work together closely to finalize a funding model for both the capital
investment and on-going operating costs. Generally, the model assumes that each partner will contribute a
proportionate share of costs for capital and operations based on the number of sworn officers. It is also assumed
AGENDA TITLE: Regional Public Safety Firearms Training Center
January 8, 2014
Page 2
currently that the County will have lead responsibility for the construction and operation of the facility via a long-term
lease or other formal agreement with UVA. Further, the three partners expect to develop an agreement that provides for
long-term, on-going use of the facility and funding for costs associated with the effective and efficient operation of the
facility. Generally, it is reasonably assumed that an agreement would be modeled after the formal arrangement in place
for the regional Emergency Communications Center.
On December 18, 2013, the Office of the Attorney General announced a grant award of approximately $2.9 Million to
fund capital costs associated with the regional public safety firearms training center which assumes the participation of
the County, City and UVA at the Milton location. The grant award stipulates that all funds will be expended within 24
months of the grant award. The current schedule for design and construction of the facility falls within this time
constraint.
Staff is seeking authorization to proceed with selection of and negotiation with an architectural/engineering firm or
individual to perform design services for the project. Staff proposes the engagement of an architectural/engineering firm
with specific background and expertise in planning, designing, and constructing indoor firearm (shooting range) facilities.
Staff estimates the schedule for the project as follows:
Authorization to Proceed to be provided January 8, 2014
A/E selection/contract ~ 3 months
Design ~ 6-8 months
Site approval ~ 6-8 months (Concurrent to design phase)
Construction ~ 6-9 months
Total time needed to complete project is ~ 15-20 months from the date the Board directs staff to proceed.
Staff has also drafted a Public Engagement Plan for the Board’s review and consideration (Attachment B). This Plan is
intended to generally guide the dissemination of information about the project and the engagement of the broader
community in dialogue as the project moves forward. Staff anticipates that formal public engagement will commence
in April, 2014 once a design team has been established.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Funds are currently budgeted to procure the design services. Staff is proceeding with the project based on the recent
grant award in excess of $2.9 Million from the Office of the Attorney General and a joint funding concept developed in
concert with the City and UVA in which capital and operating costs are shared proportionately based on the number of
sworn officers employed. The total cost for an indoor, 24-lane firearms training facility on the Milton site is estimated
currently to be in the range of $4 Million to $5 Million. Again, the total capital costs will be off-set by grant funds already
awarded in excess of $2.9 Million.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board: (1) authorize staff to proceed with the procurement of an architectural firm or
individual to perform the design services; and (2) endorse the Public Engagement Plan as presented and/or modified
by the Board.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – August 14 BOS Meeting PowerPoint Presentation
B – Public Engagement Plan
Return to agenda
August 14, 2013
Evaluation Activity/Process
Site Recommendation
Indoor Range Cost/impacts
Communication/Citizen Involvement
Next Steps
Joint Committee – UVA/City of Charlottesville/Albemarle
County:
Multiple meetings to discuss partnership opportunities, site
specific options, including UVA owned property
Consensus on Site Recommendation
Proposing potential land lease arrangement with UVA
Developing conceptual models regarding governance structure,
operating guidelines and cost sharing arrangement
More work to do…
▪Draft MOU
▪Draft Operating Guidelines
▪Initiate Land Lease Process with UVA
Internal Staff/Citizen Site Evaluation Committee:
3 Meetings, reviewed several potential sites, prioritized
by:
▪County/City/UVA controlled property
▪Joint Training, Multi Disciplinary training opportunity
▪Costs
▪Location/Development Area/Zoning
Recommending decentralizing PSTF to individual components with
prioritization of Firearms Training Facility
Consensus among internal/citizen committee on Firearms Training
Facility site recommendation.
Proposed
Site
Consensus location, property owned by UVA
Replace current outdoor firing range with enclosed range
Convenience to all primary users 24/7 (ACPD, CPD, UPD)
Joint training opportunities within partnership, including
scenario based training
Site limited to Firearms Training Facility
Limited scope of site work required
Traffic: Less than 1% increase of additional traffic.
Added PD traffic will be ~400-560/week (7 days), 24 hour two-
week traffic load: 56,821
Sound Impacts – minimal sound at property line
based on initial study (at or below ambient noise)
Monticello View Shed
Existing Range Remediation – Estimated to be
$50K per UVA
The building concept assumes a concrete building, concrete roof with an interior
range building consisting of either filled CMU or concrete walls for sound and
ballistic mitigation. The Building will contain a small classroom, bathroom and
storage for the range equipment
Cost Estimate: $4M to $5M
The County’s Administrative Guideline for Public
Participation establishes a systematic approach for
meaningful community engagement
A Public Participation Plan that provides a clear
engagement process for stakeholders will be
developed as the site is identified to ensure
transparency and effective communication
Direction by BOS to pursue Milton Site as the preferred location
for the Firearms Training Facility
Finalize draft Operating, Governance and Funding Agreements
Finalize land lease arrangement with UVA
Finalize community engagement plan
Determine Schedule/Process for project design and approval
Report back to the BOS at Oct work session on progress
Option 1 = Metal roof
Option 2A = Concrete
roof (assumed design)
Quiet office ~50 dB
Conversation ~ 60 dB
AC unit ~ 69dB
Lawn Mower ~96 dB
Rock Concert ~110 dB
Firing Line ~160 dB
PUBLIC INFORMATION PLAN
PROJECT/ACTIVITY:
Construction of Regional Public Safety Firearms Training Center at Milton location
PURPOSE AND NEED:
Communication plan to ensure adequate public information and engagement regarding construction of an
indoor regional public safety firearms training center at Milton in partnership with the City of Charlottesville
and the University of Virginia as decided by the Board of Supervisors.
MAJOR MILESTONES:
April 11, 2012 - the Board of Supervisors approved the proposed FY 13 capital budget which included funding
for the Firearms Training Facility.
November 7, 2012 - Update provided to the Board including addressing concerns raised by the public
regarding noise, safety, lead management, and environmental impacts - the Board reaffirmed the prior
decision to move forward with the police training facility and requested staff to continue working with the
community on noise mitigation.
February 6, 2013 –The Board cancelled the February 13, 2013 public hearing on the Police Firing Range
proposal at the Keene Landfill site, directed staff to bring forward information on funding for an enclosed
firing range, directed staff to bring forward information on additional sites for a firing ran ge, and directed that
the Keene Landfill site only be considered further as a site for an enclosed firing range. The Board also
directed staff to prepare a recommendation for a proposed committee to consider options for firearms
training for County police officers.
April 10, 2013 – Board consensus to move forward with meeting to discuss joint site with City and UVA,
continued evaluation of existing sites, community engagement committee formation and staff directed to
report back to the Board in July/August with a site recommendation.
August 14, 2013– Board voted to direct staff to pursue the Milton site as the preferred location for the
firearms training facility.
STAKEHOLDERS/PARTNERSHIPS:
Adjacent property owners to Milton site including the Village of Rivanna and Glenmore
Residents, businesses and other entities with reasonable proximity to Milton site
Board of Supervisors, City Council, University of Virginia
Media
General city and county residents/businesses
KEY MESSAGES:
Decision has been made to locate the facility at Milton following an extensive site selection
assessment.
Decision has been made that the facility will be enclosed.
Project has undergone extensive public engagement to this point, including the establishment of a
committee which included county citizen representation.
Location at the Milton site is critical to maintaining a partnership with the University of Virginia, as is
the recent grant from the Attorney General’s Office.
An agreement between Charlottesville, Albemarle and University of Virginia will fund construction and
operations.
PROPOSED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES/TIMELINE:
Activity Person(s)
Responsible Date Notes
Check in with the Board of Supervisors Doug/Trevor January 8, 2014
Coordinate with City and UVA public
engagement/communications staff
Lee Immediately following
January 8 BOS
discussion
Develop informational materials Lee/team Ongoing
Check in with the Board of Supervisors Doug/Trevor April 2, 2014
Launch microsite on the web page Lee Week of April 7, 2014
Mailing to adjacent owners Mark/Lee Week of April 7, 2014
AMail announcement for website
availability, community meeting
Lee Week of April 7, 2014
Press release Lee Week of April 7, 2014
Community meeting to review initial
project details
Doug/Trevor/
Lee
Mid-April, 2014
Continued update of website Lee Ongoing
Second community meeting to review
project progress
Doug/Trevor/
Lee
May/June, 2014
Report back to the Board of Supervisors
with schematic design concept
Doug/Trevor May/June, 2014
Awarding of construction contract October/November,
2014
Updated: 12/19/13
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Biannual Update on FY13-17 Strategic Plan
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Biannual Update on FY13-17 Strategic Plan
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Letteri, Walker, Davis, Catlin, Allshouse L.,
and Wyatt
PRESENTER (S): Louise Wyatt
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Supervisors has formally engaged in the County’s strategic planning efforts since 2001. The Board provided
direction and guidance for the development of the FY13-17 Strategic Plan during a strategic planning retreat held on June
30, 2011. After additional discussion at subsequent Board meetings, the Board gave final approval of seven goals and
associated objectives at its May 2, 2012 meeting. Staff provides the Board formal biannual updates on the FY13-17
Strategic Plan in January and at the annual strategic planning retreat in the summer.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
This biannual update on the FY13-17 Strategic Plan supports the County’s Vision and Mission.
DISCUSSION:
Implementation of the FY13-17 Strategic Plan began on July 1, 2012. Since that time, staff has focused primarily on
creating and implementing action plans for years one and two and on designating priority items. Over seventy
employees have been involved in this process, working together on seven cross-departmental goal teams. The
attachment highlights the progress that has been made towards the seven Strategic Plan goals. Staff is still in the
process of finalizing appropriate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for each goal and will incorporate KPIs into future
updates.
At the most recent Board retreat in August 2013, the Board reviewed the 2013 Citizen Survey results, as well as
relevant community profile data as part as a brief environmental scan. The Board then reiterated its support broadly for
the articulated goals and objectives, as well as the progress to date. The Board also discussed a general desire to
explore further some specific strategic challenges, including:
Capacity of the capital program
Connectivity issues, including transit and trails
Community aesthetics that maintain and promote Albemarle’s “character”
At the Board’s next strategic planning in the summer of 2014, staff will seek additional direction on those items, as well
as Strategic Plan actions, strategies, and priority items more generally for years three through five.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The FY13-17 Strategic Plan provides direction for the County’s Five-Year Financial Plan and annual budget
processes.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board review the attached biannual update and provide feedback and direction on the
progress of the County’s FY 13-17 Strategic Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Biannual Update on FY13-17 Strategic Plan
Return to agenda
FY13-17 Albemarle County Strategic Plan—January 2014 Biannual Progress Report
Vision Statement: A thriving County, anchored by a strong economy and excellent education system, that honors its rural
heritage, scenic beauty and natural and historic resources while fostering attractive and vibrant communities.
Mission Statement: To enhance the well-being and quality of life for all citizens through the provision of the highest
level of public service consistent with the prudent use of public funds.
Values: Integrity, Innovation, Stewardship and Learning
1. Provide excellent educational opportunities to all Albemarle County residents
Objectives
a) Increase the availability and quality of pre-kindergarten learning opportunities and adult workforce development
opportunities.
The School Board and Board of Supervisors discussed the importance of pre-kindergarten learning opportunities
at their Joint Board Retreat in July 2013.
Leadership of the School Division and County have met and are making plans to conduct a more thorough
assessment (including financial implications) of different scenarios for maintaining and expanding our pre-K
program.
Bright Stars programs continue in eight elementary schools.
Three local government leaders have attended pre-school classrooms to learn more about the programs and to
participate in a learning experience with the children. Twelve more have signed up and arrangements will be
made for their involvement during the upcoming school year.
In September 2013, CATEC began a strategic planning process to enhance curriculum and training to better meet
industry needs.
In October 2013, the County partnered with the Charlottesville Business Innovation Council (CBIC) and the City
of Charlottesville to host the 10th annual Tech Tour, which exposed over 500 local middle and high school
students to local tech companies and possible career possibilities in that industry sector.
Throughout the fall of 2013, County Economic Development staff continued to partner with PVCC, CATEC, the
Workforce Center, the Chamber, and private business owners to identify gaps in workforce training resources, as
well as gaps specific to Target Industry workforce needs. By November, County staff wrapped 15 qualitative,
manufacturing employer interviews to use in completing the Gap study, as well as support to PVCC’s
Manufacturing Business Roundtable. CATEC Director Adam Hastings is completing final edits to the Gap Study
White Paper.
In support of the City’s efforts to shape workforce training policies, County Staff attended the December 10th
Trade Summit, lending support to the community dialogue on workforce training.
According to the 2013 Citizens Survey, 90% of Albemarle residents rate our educational opportunities as
“excellent” or “good.”
b) Improve coordination to support goals shared between the School Division’s Strategic Plan for K-12 Education
and the County’s overall Strategic Plan.
General Government and School Division staff continue their efforts to work together to automate processes for
pay/leave processing, institute a Purchase Card program, and improve purchasing/financial/budgeting processes.
The County’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) staff and the School’s Fiscal Services staff continue to
meet and work to improve processes and communication.
A Broadband Task Force has been established as a concentrated effort to bring broadband choice to underserved
areas of the County.
To enhance its participation with County school students, the Police Department:
Continues to teach a block of instruction in the driver education classes at all four high schools.
Approximately ten students are active in the Police Explorer Program. They meet at least twice monthly.
The school resource officers are expected to spend time at the middle schools/elementary schools in the
feeder pattern of their assigned schools. These officers have been asked to conduct safety talks in the lower
schools and also to observe the lockdown procedures Albemarle High School, Walton Middle School, Cale
Elementary, and Woodbrook Elementary.
The School Resource Officers and Crime Prevention Officers have completed CPTED surveys of ten
schools.
School Resource officers participated in a career day at Monticello High School where officers were
interviewed by the media department for a local television show.
School resource officers partnered with ATF and provided training to the Monticello High School Safety
Awareness Team on suspicious packages.
The police department partnered with the Commonwealth Attorney, the School system, and Safe
Schools/Healthy Students to provide a sexting forum at Monticello High School. This forum was created
to educate parents and students on the dangers of sexting. There will be future education classes in the
middle schools on sexting prevention.
Officers have been involved bike safety and bike rodeos at Stone Robinson, Cale, Scottsville, Greer,
Meriweather Lewis, and Red Hill.
2. Provide community facilities that meet existing and future needs
Objectives
a. Improve the evaluation practices and procedures used to assess the community’s facility needs.
Staff reviewed the Capital Improvement Program Process and received feedback from all participants. The
majority of the process updates identified, including those approved in June by the Board, are being
implemented in the FY15 process. Upon approval of the FY 2015 budget by the Board of Supervisors, staff
will meet to analyze how the implemented changes affected the CIP process. If it is determined additional
adjustments should be considered, staff will forward those recommendations to OMB and OFD for their
review.
b. Increase the capacity of the Capital Program.
Staff considered several options for increasing funding in CIP, including possible adjustments to the County’s
proffer formula and the establishment of a storm water utility.
The Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee (FIAC) met several times throughout the year. Subsequent meetings
of FIAC to consider changes to proffer formula. Broader policy questions related to proffers remain at the
direction of the Board. Staff anticipates future work sessions on proffer policies generally.
An internal staff team has been considering options for how to address future storm water mandates and
infrastructure needs. Over the next few months, another series of work sessions will be held for the Board to
explore service levels and funding options to address mandates and water quality issues.
The Board’s 12/12/13 adoption of the 5-Year Financial Plan will allow the County to address critical
infrastructure needs to a larger extent than in the recent past due to the assumption of an increase in taxes over
the five years of the plan solely dedicated to the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Some of the major projects
included in the Plan are: upgrade and expansion of the County court facilities, replacement and upgrade of
Emergency Communication Center (ECC) communications equipment, enhanced funding for the VDOT
Transportation Revenue sharing program, and funding of the ACE program.
The current year approved operating budget includes funding to support a bond referendum study which will
evaluate the feasibility/advisability of proceeding with this option to address future capital needs. Following
this year’s CIP request process, staff will be prepared to engage the board in a discussion on the merits of a
bond referendum in the context of capital needs.
c. Identify and implement appropriate alternative construction project procurement methods (design/build, CM
Agency, Job Order Contracting, PPEA, etc.) to reduce costs and improve project execution
After significant research, staff recommended changes to the Purchasing Manual to allow Design/Build and
CM Agency procurement. At its September 4 meeting, the Board adopted the staff-recommended procedures
for these two alternate procurement methods. Incorporation of guideline changes associated with PPEA and
Job Order Contracting are not recommended at this time, but are being further considered.
3. Encourage a diverse and vibrant local economy
Objectives
a. Complete all objectives of last two years of the Economic Vitality Action Plan.
All major action items in the Economic Vitality Action Plan have been accomplished except the
Comprehensive Plan update-related items that will be before the Planning Commission in July. A final report
on the end of the three year plan was presented to the Board in September, 2013.
b. Establish fully functioning economic development program for the County.
A recommendation regarding establishment of an economic development program for the County was
presented to the Board in November 2013; the Board endorsed the process for considering creation of an
independent Office of Economic Development that will include a joint work session with the EDA in January
and a work session including a public comment opportunity in February leading to a final decision by the
Board during the upcoming FY15 budget process.
The Board and the Economic Development Authority (EDA) finalized a Memorandum of Understanding to
outline exactly how funds will be managed between the EDA and the County, and approved budgeted items
for FY14 are now being funded by the EDA.
c. Assess and implement appropriate incentive options to support economic development in the County
The Board adopted an ordinance establishing a tourism zone for the Crozet Development Area to provide a
gap financing mechanism for those qualifying tourism development projects identified as critical and which
address specific critical tourism infrastructure deficiencies; the only deficiency identified by the Board at this
time is lodging establishments.
4. Protect the County’s parks and its natural, scenic and historic resources in accordance with the County’s
established growth management polices
a. Work in conjunction with key stakeholders to protect the health of our local waterways and other critical
natural resources.
Over the course of several months this summer and fall, the Board held a series of work sessions to explore
the Virginia Storm water Management Program mandate and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and MS4 water
quality mandate. In addition, the Board considered broader goals and program and service levels needed to
meet those goals.
As part of the 5-Year Financial Plan process, the Board acknowledged the need for new dedicated revenues to
support increased costs associated with water quality initiatives and mandates including the VSMP and the
TMDL/MS4.
The County is required to submit a proposed Water Protection Ordinance and funding plan to the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality by January 14, 2014 to meet VSMP requirements. The draft ordinance
and plan includes a fee structure designed to recover 100% of all new local costs associated with the
implementation of the VSMP mandate.
In December, 2013, the Board formally accepted the donation of approximately 410 acres of property known
as the Arrowhead Farm for the purpose of establishing a natural resources “preserve” in partnership with key
private and non-profit stakeholders including the Rockfish Wildlife Sanctuary. This property contains specific
biodiversity and geological features deemed important for long-term protection and preservation. This
donation and acceptance represents the creation of the County’s first county-owned “preserve” as a distinction
from a county-owned “park.” Final closing on this transaction is expected before June, 2014.
b. Preserve and maintain the quality of the County’s investment in its parks and its recreational trail and
greenway/blue way system.
Volunteers continue to play a significant role in this work. In FY13, volunteers provided a total of 3,432
hours of assistance in new project construction and ongoing maintenance, including help to open a new
section of Old Mill Trail.
Staff has identified mid-range objectives to include 1) Establish a Greenway/Blueway Advisory committee
and create GIS overlay to illustrate project status; and 2) Upgrade existing rectangular athletic fields with
synthetic turf/lighting. Staff has also identified potentially three new athletic fields on the Western Albemarle
High School campus.
Staff has developed a draft comprehensive Maintenance Management Program as a tool to address ongoing
parks maintenance and management practices.
As of 12/12/13, there were 86,419 acres in conservation easements.
The Board has re-established the Inmate Workforce Program as a way of increasing trail maintenance
capacity. Working together with the regional jail and the local courts, Parks and Recreation staff expect to
utilize this program to provide hundreds of hours of labor dedicated to trail maintenance. Specific goals and
procedures for trail maintenance have been established.
c. Maintain and preserve County-owned historic resources and facilities and work in conjunction with key
stakeholders to enhance awareness of the rich historic assets of this region.
An inventory of all County Property, including City co-owned, has been created.
County Parks and Recreation has presented a draft list of known historic, or potentially historic sites, within
the boundaries of County Parks.
A joint effort has been initiated and is on-going with the Historic Society and the Historic Preservation
Committee using local funding for 1) Battle of Rio Hill Commemoration and 2) Community Education
Exhibits.
Staff continues its work with the Burke Brown Stepp Chapter to identify historic African-American
communities.
In July, 2013 a task team was created to evaluate County policies for retention/disposal of records,
documents, maps, notes, etc. with particular emphasis on those that may have historic significance.
5. Ensure the health and safety of the community
Objectives
a. Work in conjunction with key community partners to establish multi-disciplinary teams to address specific
public health and/or safety issues, emerging trends and or vulnerable groups.
To target at-risk areas, the Department of Social Services (DSS) mapped demographic characteristics
associated with neighborhoods/areas within County and has shared the maps with key community partners
including the United Way, Boys & Girls Club, Police Department, Fire Rescue as well as key leaders
interviewed in the target communities. The most immediate objective is to establish a presence and
connection with key individuals in order to develop healthy relationships within these communities.
The regional Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was adopted by the Board at its meeting on November 13,
2013 and was submitted to the Virginia Department of Emergency Management on November 22nd. Key
personnel will be trained on the new EOP by July, 2014. Two training sessions and one exercise are planned
to include EOP Orientation training sessions on December 17th and January 7 and a regional “table top”
exercise on March 12th. A Recovery Plan will be complete and ready for consideration/adoption by
December, 2014. By April 30, 2014, Emergency Management staff will have identified and engaged a multi-
jurisdictional team focused on recovery planning and the team will have created a first draft of the Regional
Recovery Plan.
A work group met in early July, 2013 to initiate a benchmark study for emergency response times for police,
fire/ rescue, child protective services, adult protective services and other public safety service functions. The
staff of the three key departments completed their work and determined that due to wide variations of data
collection across the state it was not reasonable to compare emergency response time for police and
fire/rescue. Further evaluation of this work item is expected.
The cross-departmental, multi-agency Southwood Quality of Life Team adopted its Charter on October 16,
2013.
b. Enhance the safety of the County by improving emergency response times and increasing prevention activities
and services.
County EMS service from Martha Jefferson Hospital on Pantops began October 2012, and continues to
operate on 12-hour shifts Monday through Friday (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.). This service is expected to continue until
a new station is constructed near the hospital.
The Ivy Fire Station opened on time on July 1, 2013 with an Engine Company running 24/7 and EMS crew
running 12 hours/day five days per week. Recruitment of volunteers to provide appropriate engine company
staffing capacity is on-going and the desired goal of 20 active volunteers has not yet been achieved.
Currently, the Ivy Fire Station has approximately 15 volunteers with about 5 that are “cleared” to serve in a
full capacity.
The Seminole Trail Station renovation project is underway and remains on schedule with completion
expected in the Fall/Winter of 2014. The County acquired Rescue 8 building from CARS in partnership with
STVFD and is utilizing that space as temporary quarters for fire personnel during the construction of the
Seminole Trail project. The Rescue 8 building will used to house the County EMS crew in the future.
Currently, 24/7 County EMS services to Route 29 North are stationed in temporary quarters near
STVFD/Rescue 8.
The County and City are finalizing a joint services agreement to provide for fire response across jurisdictional
boundaries. This agreement, already in practice conceptually, will improve the coordination of emergency
response through the ECC, and in the field as required, to better ensure the quickest and most appropriate fire
engine response to emergencies.
ACPD has worked in conjunction with the Charlottesville-Albemarle communities to establish the Gang
Reduction through Active Community Engagement (GRACE) steering committee. The purpose of the
steering committee is to prevent and reduce youth involvement in gangs and to minimize gang influence on
area youth. The primary objectives are gang prevention, intervention and suppression using the National
Comprehensive Gang Model already proven effective in other communities. The ACPD has secured monies
from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services to establish a regional Gang Coordinator and to
hire a professional researcher to conduct a community assessment of the gang problem. Both of these
positions are in place and actively working.
The new Fellowship Program has identified the pursuit of the National Safety Council Safe Community
designation as a high priority project. The assigned Fellow will create a project plan that will include the
involvement of key community partners and stakeholders. The project will require a community-wide risk
assessment and identification of achievable outcomes to better assure safety in response to identified risk
factors. It is expected that the County, in partnership with partners, will make application to the National
Safety Council for the Safe Community designation.
According to the 2013 Citizen Survey, 87% of Albemarle County residents feel “very” or “somewhat” safe
from violent crime.
Fire Rescue Prevention staff worked with ACDSS staff and others on providing and installing smoke alarms
in several residences within the Southwood community. A group of trained community members were
utilized for this installation to allow for a greater reach into the community and to increase the number of
alarms installed when compared to previous similar efforts.
6. Promote individual responsibility and citizen ownership of community challenges
Objectives
a) Increase County’s volunteer management capability
A Volunteer Advisory Team, made up of representatives from all local government departments that make
significant use of interns/volunteers, continues to work on centralizing/institutionalizing the County's
volunteer efforts, including academic interns, paid interns and volunteers. A SharePoint site has been
established and training and orientation programs are underway.
The Board adopted an ordinance to give the County’s Chief of Police the authority to establish an Auxiliary
Police Force to enhance law enforcement services in the County as part of Phase I of the Geo-Policing effort.
The county’s intern team worked together with County staff to manage the County’s Toy Lift and Food Bank
solicitation efforts.
b) Increase opportunities for citizen self reliance and responsibility for addressing community issues
Staff continues ongoing engagement with the Board’s appointed Community Advisory Councils. The Board
recently adoption of a new procedure that will streamline the application and appointment process for council
members. Staff is beginning to plan for the annual Joint Advisory Council meeting tentatively scheduled for
January/February, 2014.
A regional Public Information Officers (PIO) team continues to work together to promote citizen self
sufficiency and coordinate public information response during emergency situations.
County staff has developed and is implementing public engagement/communications plans for a number of
major capital projects including the Northside Library, public safety firing range/training facility, solid waste
convenience centers, Crozet streetscape, etc.
Initial efforts to establish geopolicing have provided more direct and meaningful involvement of citizens in
community issue identification and problem solving.
The County’s Emergency Management Coordinator developed an emergency preparedness and response
training module that was shared at the annual joint Community Advisory Council Meeting in January.
According to the 2013 Citizen Survey, 74% of Albemarle County residents rated “opportunities to participate
in community matters” as “excellent” or “good.”
7. Promote a valued and responsive County workforce that ensures excellent customer service
Objectives
a) Demonstrate improvements to internal and external customer service.
Staff conducted a survey of internal perceptions of customer service in local government departments during
the fall of 2013. A cross-departmental team is analyzing the results to assist in improvements to both internal
and external customer service.
Several staff initiatives to improve customer service to our citizens are underway, including the development
of a “Citizens Engagement Center” and increased online business transactions made possible with recent
software upgrades.
According to the 2013 Citizen Survey, among those Albemarle County residents who had contact with a
County employee, 76% rated their overall impression of the employee as “excellent” or “good.”
b) Reinforce a culture of using cross departmental efforts to improve communications and teamwork for cost
effective solutions.
In the past two years, over 70 employees have participated in a job shadowing program that encourages
interested employees to shadow a colleague in another department to learn more about what they do.
Updated building maps were created and distributed to all employees to improve customer service.
Quarterly employee town hall meetings that include department updates are helping to improve
communication throughout the organization. Most recently in November 2013, almost 200 County employees
participated in the “1st Annual Albemarle Countypalooza,” which encouraged employees to learn more about
other departments in an informal, celebratory atmosphere.
All County department heads attended an intense 2-day retreat together in November 2013, which encouraged
cross-departmental teambuilding and clear communication of our operating vision as being “ONE
Organization—Committed to Excellence.”
c) Expand opportunities for training and professional development
In both FY13 and 14, departments were able to secure additional funds from the non-departmental training
pool to cover unfunded training costs. For the first time in several years, the FY14 budget includes money to
cover core training needs for all departments.
The County’s tuition reimbursement policy was changed to allow employees up to $1,000 annually to take a
college class.
The Human Resources (HR) Department is working on changes that would clarify training leave policies,
making it easier for employees to pursue training opportunities.
d) Assure staff is supported and recognized for excellence in service.
In conjunction with the County Executive, HR created and implemented a new annual employee recognition
program entitled “Living Our Values.” The program recognizes employees who live the County’s core values
of learning, innovation, stewardship, and integrity. Staff is currently working to create a recognition program
to reward and recognize cross-departmental teams of employees.
Page 1 of 4
Culpeper District
Albemarle County Monthly Report
January 2014
Preliminary Engineering
PROJECT LAST MILESTONE NEXT MILESTONE AD DATE
Route 53 Safety Project – Intersection
Improvements at Route 729 Right of Way Advertisement TBD
Route 616, Black Cat Road
Bridge Replacement over RR Design Public Hearing Right of Way –
November 2013 March 2014
Route 677, Broomley Road
Bridge Replacement over RR Design Public Hearing Right of Way –
September 2013 December 2014
Route 637, Dick Woods Road
Bridge Replacement over Ivy Creek Design Public Hearing Right of Way –
September 2013 December 2014
Route 29 Widening, Ashwood to
Hollymeade Town Center Preliminary Design Public Hearing December 2015
Route 250, Bridge replacement over
Little Ivy Creek Preliminary Design Public Hearing January 2018
Route 774, Bear Creek Road, Unpaved
Road -- Project Scoping –
2016 November 2019
Route 703, Pocket Lane, Unpaved
Road -- Project Scoping –
2016 November 2019
Route 643 – Reconstruction -- Project Scoping –
2015 --
Route 606 – Dickerson Rd. over North
Fork of Rivanna River -- Project Scoping January 2020
Route 29—Adaptive Signal System -- TBD TBD
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE:
PROJECT LAST MILESTONE NEXT MILESTONE AD DATE
Best Buy Ramp Design Public Hearing Right of Way November 2014
Page 2 of 4
Construction Activities
Route 29 Bypass (FO)0029-002-844
Scope: Design and construction 6.2 miles of highway between Route 250 to north of South
Fork of the Rivanna River.
Next major milestone: Obtain approval to publish the EA
Contract Completion Date: September 16, 2016
Only activities authorized being perform ed to include IMR/Traffic Studies for northern and
southern termini. Additional NTP 1 activities have been authorized including limited non -
destructive geotechnical services in support of the EA Re-evaluation, surveying activities in
support of the EA Re-evaluation, and stream and wetland delineations. FHWA
communicated on October 7, 2013 that the Department will have to address Section 4(f) with
regards to the Sammons Homestead. Additional NTP 2 activities such as Final design, RW &
CN activities can be initiated after the Section 4(f). Citizen Information Meeting occurred on
May 23, 2013. Public Hearings to be scheduled at a later date. EA was submitted to FHWA
December 2, 2013.
McIntire Interchange 0250-104-103, PE101
Scope: Construct Interchange at McIntire Road and Rte 250
Next Major Milestone: Completion of Phase 1B
Traffic on US 250 has been shifted for Phase 1B construction. Water and sewer utility
installations are nearing completion, as all boring operations have been performed.
Construction for widening McIntire Road along C.A.R.S. facility has been started with
drainage structures, curb, subbase and asphalt placement. The D602 culvert work is
ongoing, as barrel is complete and wingwalls are complete. Work is progressing with D603
Box Culvert installation for Phase 1B on North side of US 250. The Rock Wall along Ramp 1
is complete.
Contract Completion date: July 2, 2015.
Project Construction started on March 4, 2013.
Guardrail Repair GR07-967-096, N501
Scope: Guardrail repairs – on call – District wide.
Next Major Milestone: Contract Renewal – 3nd term
Contract Completion date: July 1, 2014.
Ballards Mill Road 0671-002-6059 Delayed until June 2014
Scope: Superstructure replacement, State Forces.
Next Major Milestone: Road Closure, November 4th.
Proposed Completion: November 29, 2013
Route 708 Dry Bridge Road (NFO)0708-002-283, C501, B659
Scope: Replace bridge; reconstruct approaches, drainage and incidentals
Next Major Milestone: Bridge removal complete. Construct grading, drainage, utilities and new
bridge
Contract Completion: 12-Sep-14
Page 3 of 4
I-64 Box Culvert Repair (NFO)BRDG-967-083, N501
Scope: I-64 at Ivy Creek Box Culvert Repair, Albemarle County
Next Major Milestone: Project Completion
Contract Completion: 20-Dec-13
Traffic Engineering Studies
Completed
Route 20, Stony Point Road @ Route 250, Richmond Road:
Intersection pavement marking review; Study completed; Pavement marking installation pending.
VDOT Study Number - 003-0250-20130301-006
Route 29, Seminole Trail and Route 649, Airport Rd:
Signing review; Study completed; Sign installation complete.
VDOT Study Number - 003-0029-20130403-010
Route 29, Monacan Trail Road @ Britts Mountain Hollow:
Signing review; Study completed; Sign installation complete.
VDOT Study Number - 003-0029-20130410-010
Route 151 Critzers Shop Road @ Route 803 Goodloe Road:
Signing review; Study completed; Sign installation complete.
VDOT Study Number - 003-0151-20130425-010
Route 250, Rockfish Gap Turnpike @ at Seven Oaks Farm (just east of Rt. 690):
Signing review; Study completed; Sign installation complete.
VDOT Study Number -003-0250-20130425-010
Route 611, Jarmans Gap Road:
Safety and signing review; Study completed; Installation completed.
VDOT Study Number - 003-0611-20130819-007
Route 689, Burch’s Creek Road:
Signing review; Study completed; Sign installation pending;
VDOT Study Number – 003-0689-20130910-010
Route 614, Garth Road:
Signing review; Study completed; Sign installation pending;
VDOT Study Number – 003-0614-20130910-010
Route 250 Rockfish Gap Turnpike @ Route 689 Burch’s Creek Road:
Safety study; Study completed; Sign relocation pending;
VDOT Study Number-- 003-0250-20131008-007
Route 664, Markwood Road:
Safety Review; Study completed; Marker installation complete.
VDOT Study Number—003-0664-20130822-007
Route 250, Richmond Road @ Route 22, Louisa Road:
Pavement marking review; Study completed; Pavement marking installation pending.
VDOT Study Number – 003-0250-20130923-006
Route 606, Dickerson Road @ Route 29, Seminole Trail:
Safety review; Study completed; Pavement marking installation and brush removal pending.
VDOT Study Number- 003-0606-20130819-007
Route 810, White Hall Road @ Route 614, Garth Road:
Safety Study; Study complete; Sign installation pending
VDOT Study Number-- 003-0810-20131016-007
Route 810, White Hall Road:
Guardrail study; Study complete
VDOT Study Number-- 003-0810-20131101-003
Page 4 of 4
Under Review
Route 631, Old Lynchburg Road:
Safety Study; pending;
VDOT Study Number -- 003-0631-20131008-007
Route 250 @ Town and Country Lane:
Signal warrant study; pending
VDOT Study Number—003-0250-20131106-009
Route 866, Greenbrier Drive:
Speed study; pending
VDOT Study Number—003-0866-20131204-011
Pratt Road and Alderman Road:
Safety review; pending
VDOT Study Number—003-0302-20131216-007
Route 250 @ Glenmore
Speed study; pending
VDOT Study Number--003-0250-20131217-011
Maintenance Activities
VDOT Area Headquarters crews completed the following activities during the past month.
For specific route activities, please contact the Charlottesville Residency Office.
Mowing Completed on all primary routes and 15 secondary routes
Machining of non-hard surface roads has been completed on 15 secondary routes
Patching was performed on 1 primary routes and 11 secondary routes
Trimmed trees along 17 secondary routes
Debris removed along 3 primary routes and 12 secondary routes
Culverts and ditches were cleaned on 19 secondary routes
Shoulders repaired on 3 primary routes and 3 secondary routes
All areas preparing equipment and responding to emergency winter events
Joel DeNunzio Virginia Department of Transportation
Charlottesville Residency Administrator 701 VDOT Way
Charlottesville, VA 22911
To sustain the thriving presence of the arts in the Charlottesville area, Piedmont Council for
the Arts (PCA) provides support services to artists, arts organizations, and audiences. PCA
encourages community-wide access to and appreciation for the arts. Our goals are:
• To promote and assist artists and arts organizations at all stages of development
• To inform residents and visitors about area cultural events and opportunities
• To stimulate collaboration and resource-sharing across the cultural sector
• To expand arts learning opportunities for a diverse array of community members
• To demonstrate that the arts enhance quality of life and economic prosperity
• To be an advocate for the arts at local, state, and national levels
WHAT WE DO
Established in 1979, PCA now reaches over 150,000 people annually through programs
and services, community partnerships, and collaborative projects, including:
Art Drinks Networking Nights
Arts & Economic Prosperity Study
Arts Education Handbook
Arts Educator Workshops
The Arts In Your Inbox Newsletter
CitySpace Gallery Exhibits
Create Charlottesville/Albemarle:
A Cultural Plan
Creative Conversation Series
Cultural Tourism & Event Promotion
Local and State Arts Advocacy
Professional Development for Artists
Rising Star Award for Student Artists
Storyline Project for Youth
Web Resources
WHERE WE WORK
PCA is the designated arts agency of Charlottesville and Albemarle, with outreach to
Fluvanna, Greene, Nelson, Louisa, Staunton, and Waynesboro. Our office and exhibit space
is in CitySpace, located at 100 5th St. NE, overlooking Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall. Our
extensive arts resources are also online at www.charlottesvillearts.org.
CREATE CHARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE:
A CULTURAL PLAN
In January 2013, PCA launched the creation of the area’s first-ever cultural plan, titled
Create Charlottesville/Albemarle (charlottesvillearts.org/createcville). Dr. Craig Dreeszen,
a national expert on community cultural planning, led the assessment and wrote the plan.
Extensive public feedback was incorporated into the final version of the plan, which was
unanimously approved by the 28-person Steering Committee in September and officially
endorsed by the Charlottesville City Council in November 2013.
The cultural plan commits to six strategic goals that benefit the local arts community as well
area residents and visitors:
Goal 1. Diversity and Inclusion: Achieve diversity and inclusiveness in arts and culture
as core values and strengths in programming, artists, audiences, staff, and boards.
Goal 2. Arts Education: Ensure all Charlottesville-area youth have access to arts in
their education and all the community’s cultural resources.
Goal 3. A Cultural Destination: Build awareness and participation of residents and
visitors to the area as a destination for arts, history, festivals, food, and wine.
Goal 4. Creative Workers: Create an environment where artists may thrive.
Goal 5. Creative Placemaking: Develop richly layered public places that welcome and
connect people and provide opportunities for creative expression and experiences.
Goal 6. Cultural Infrastructure: Build community-wide capacity to represent and
coordinate the cultural sector and implement the cultural plan.
SIX REASONS TO SUPPORT THE CULTURAL PLAN
At PCA, we believe these goals will help realize a shared vision for the future that celebrates
the unique cultural heritage, world-renowned educational resources, and diverse arts
community of Charlottesville and Albemarle. We also know that the arts:
1. Build community: Local arts, humanities, and heritage programs celebrate diverse
cultures and bridge divides across race and class in the Charlottesville/Albemarle.
2. Improve education: Incorporating the arts into education helps bridge the
achievement gap, recruit the best teachers, and attract families to live here.
3. Create a significant economic impact: According the local results from the Arts &
Economic Prosperity IV study (charlottesvillearts.org/aepiv) the arts and culture sector
generates $114.4 million in local economic activity each year and supports 1,921 jobs.
4. Enliven public spaces: The diverse representation of local arts and culture creates a
vitality and sense of place, from small-town Scottsville to downtown Belmont.
5. Attract visitors to the area: The arts help define Charlottesville/Albemarle as a
distinctive cultural destination with a reputation for excellence and innovation.
6. Offer a substantial return on investment: Our thriving arts and culture scene
attracts new residents and businesses to the area, increasing property values and tax
revenues. By increasing the local investment in the arts, the returns will also grow.
ON YOUR LETTERHEAD
DRAFT Resolution
ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
RESOLUTION OF REAFFIRMATION OF SUPPORT for the
JOURNEY THROUGH HALLOWED GROUND PARTNERSHIP
WHEREAS, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership (JTHG) is a non-profit
organization dedicated to raising national and international awareness of the unparalleled history
in the region from Gettysburg, PA to Albemarle, VA.
WHEREAS, the JTHG has built a strong network of 350 local, regional, and national partnering
organizations to develop a common vision to brand and enhance the scenic, historic, recreational,
cultural, and natural resources of the region.
WHEREAS, the JTHG has collaboratively created a National Heritage Area as designated by
the United States Congress and signed into law by President Bush in 2008.
WHEREAS, the JTHG has successfully completed a Corridor Management Plan for the 180
mile long corridor generally following the Old Carolina Road and worked to have it designated
at only the 99th road in the country to be recognized as a National Scenic Byway in 2009.
WHEREAS, the JTHG has created heritage tourism programs that provide economic
development opportunities for each Partnering jurisdiction within The National Heritage Area to
support our businesses and the quality of life for all citizens.
WHEREAS, the JTHG has developed award winning educational programs, including the Of
the Student, By the Student, For the Student service learning project, to connect students and
teachers with our shared heritage.
WHEREAS, the JTHG developed the “Living Legacy” project that commemorates the
individual and combined sacrifices of the Civil War fallen by planting one tree for each of the
620,000 soldiers who died, as it beautifies the communities of Partnering jurisdictions.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supevisors
reaffirms its commitment to of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership and pledges
its continued support for this collaborative Partnership.
__________________________________ __________
Signed Date
Background:
The award-winning Of the Student, By the Student, For the Student® service learning project connects middle school
students to the American Civil War as they use primary source documents,
humanities scholarship, music, dance, dramatic readings, role-playing and
digital technology to create vodcasts or mini-movies for National Parks located
within the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area. These
student-generated vodcasts become part of the official interpretive materials of
the National Park Service and are available to educators, students and visitors
worldwide through the internet and traveling exhibits.
To date, the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership has worked with
over 1,000 middle school students to create vodcasts for Harpers Ferry National
Historical Park, Thomas Jeffersonís Monticello, Manassas National Battlefield
Park, Ballís Bluff Regional Park, Antietam National Battlefield, and the C&O
Canal National Historical Park. These vodcasts, and a ìbehind the scenesî video, can be viewed by visiting the
Education section on our website, www.HallowedGround.org.
During the 2012-2013 school year, the Journey Through Hallowed
Ground Partnership is creating a series of vodcasts for Gettysburg
National Military Park with seventh-grade students from Gettysburg
Area Middle School. Vodcast topics for the 150th Commemoration of
the Battle of Gettysburg include: the Shriver Family; the abolitionist
Black Ducks; Mistaken Identity: the Barlow and Gordon Story; Civil
War to Civil Rights: the Legacy of Gettysburg; Signal Corps; and the
Story of Sculptor John Gutzon Borglum. The students have wrapped
up filming and currently in the editing and final production stage
of the process. The new videos will be premiered at a community
event scheduled for May 22nd at the Majestic Theatre in downtown
Gettysburg.
www.hallowedground.org
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Of the Student, By the Student, For the Student®
National Recognition:
The Of the Student, By the Student, For the Student project has been recognized by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, won the 2010 WOW Award from the American Association for State and Local History, and received the
2009 Freeman Tilden Award, in recognition of ìoutstanding contributions to interpretation or education at a National
Park. The award is designed to recognize interpreters that develop, revitalize or deliver an innovative, pioneering or
otherwise worthy interpretive or educational program. In addition, the program is a finalist for a 2013 Association of
Partners for Public Lands Media and Partnership Award in the Education Program or Project category (winners will be
announced at the conference in March).
Statement of Need:
Building digital literacy is an important aspect of this project. We know that this
generation of young people are products of a high-tech, media saturated world that may
no longer be moved by stationary exhibits requiring thoughtful reading to digest. In
response, this six-month service learning project asks students to produce dynamic mini-
movies that explore the stories and lessons of these pivotal times in our nationís history
with youthful energy and honesty. The immediacy of the technology combined with a
fresh perspective will enrich interpretation and understanding of the American Civil War.
More, the project fills a critical need at these National Parks for inclusive interpretation
that engages youth by incorporating digital technology and sound humanities scholarship
to make the stories of these
remarkable places and events as
relevant today as they were in 1863.
This transformational project
improves history education by:
Making the American Civil War
relevant to a national and diverse audience.
Enhancing the educational opportunities for students by bringing
history alive with lessons of leadership and civic involvement.
Engaging young people through the use of technology.
Enriching interpretation and understanding of the American Civil
War by filling a critical need for inclusive interpretation that
engages youth by incorporating digital technology and sound
humanities scholarship.
Supporters:
We are thankful for the generous support of :
• National Endowment for the Humanities
• History
• National Park Service
• Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
• Learn and Serve America
• Virginia Department of Education
• Prince William County Board of Supervisors
• Sheppard Foundation
• Richard S. Reynolds Foundation
• Rust Family Foundation
• National Parks Foundation
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Of the Student, By the Student, For the Student®
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Partnership
P.O. Box 77, Waterford, VA 20197 | (540) 882-4929
www.HallowedGround.org
www.facebook.com/TheJourneyUSA
@TaketheJourney on Twitter
Welcome to the remarkable natural, historical, and cultural landscape
that is the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area, a
180-mile long, 75-mile wide swath of land stretching from Gettysburg,
Pennsylvania, to Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello in Charlottesville,
Virginia. This is more than a place- it’s a passage into American history.
The Land of Leadership
No fewer than eight presidents have called this region home, including
Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Dwight D.
Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy. Here, presidents and world leaders
have crafted, or been inspired to write, some of the most important
doctrines of our time, including the Declaration of Independence, the
U.S. Constitution, the Emancipation Proclamation, the Gettysburg
Address, the Monroe Doctrine and the Marshall Plan.
The Land of Conflict and Reunification
This is where the cradle of democracy was forged and the Union was
preserved. From Civil War to Civil Rights, there are many stories to tell
from this area. In addition to Colonial Era sites, the greatest battles of the
Civil War—Harpers Ferry, Manassas, Gettysburg, Antietam, Wilderness,
Monocacy, and dozens of others took place on this Hallowed Ground.
Explore places that connect directly to the most defining moment in
American history.
The Land of Outstanding National Beauty
The lush countryside meanwhile is a tapestry of orchards, farms, and
wineries crossed by pristine rivers and sparkling streams. Some 13
national parks—ideal for hiking, horseback riding, canoeing and other
recreational pursuits—are available to enjoy throughout the year.
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
National Heritage Area
You will find vibrant historic downtowns, such as Gettysburg in
Pennsylvania; Frederick, Hagerstown, Westminster, and others in
Maryland; Harpers Ferry in West Virginia; Leesburg, Middleburg,
Warrenton, Washington, Culpeper, Orange, Madison, and Charlottesville
in Virginia. Each historic downtown has its own unique charm and
culture—restaurants, cafés, museums, galleries, shops, inns, and
festivals.
Connecting the presidential homes and battlefield sites is the Journey
through Hallowed Ground National Scenic Byway, a historic road that
weaves together these places throughout a four-state region, including
parts of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Take
the Journey to Where America Happened,™ and see for yourself why
this region has more history than any other, including:
• 9 Presidential Homes
• 30 Historic Main Street Communities
• 13 National Parks
• 2 World Heritage Sites
• Single Largest Collection of Civil War Sites in the Nation
• Sites from the Revolutionary War, French and Indian War, and the
War of 1812
• Hundreds of African American and Native American Heritage Sites
• 16 National Historic Landmarks
• Over 1 Million Acres on the National Register of Historic Places
• Largest Concentration of Rural Historic Districts in the Country
• Hundreds of vineyards, wineries, orchards and local markets
The Journey Through
Hallowed Ground
From Gettysburg to Monticello
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Partnership
P.O. Box 77, Waterford, VA 20197 | (540) 882-4929
www.HallowedGround.org
www.facebook.com/TheJourneyUSA
@TaketheJourney on Twitter
The Journey Through Hallowed
Ground stretches 180 miles
along the Route 15 Corridor
from Gettysburg, PA through
Frederick, MD and ends at
Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello
near Charlottesville, VA.
The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership (JTHG) is commemorating the
Sesquicentennial of the American Civil War with a legacy project of national significance.
During this country’s most defining moment, over 620,000 soldiers died, many on the
battlefields within the JTHG National Heritage Area.
As a living commemoration for their individual and combined sacrifices, the Living Legacy
Project calls for planting or dedicating one tree for each of the 620,000 soldiers who sacrificed
their lives along the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Scenic Byway, a 180-mile
swath of land that runs from Gettysburg, PA to Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello in Charlottesville,
VA. The JTHG National Scenic Byway, which crosses the
Mason Dixon Line, serves as a link to each of the battlefields and
connects over 30 historic communities, each of which was gravely impacted by the Civil
War. The Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area holds the largest
concentration of Civil War battlefield sites in the country, including the beginning of the
War (Harpers Ferry and Manassas), the middle (Antietam and Gettysburg) and the end
(Appomattox).
The Living Legacy Project will create a unified color palette that reminds visitors that
they are, indeed, on hallowed ground. Seasonal trees and plantings, including redbuds,
red oaks, red maple, and red cedar have been selected to represent the courage and valor
of the individuals being honored with this project. A secondary palette, including canopy
and understory trees, evergreens, shrubs, and ground coverings, will also feature red as a
predominant color, with plantings including black gum trees, sassafras, and winterberry.
The native selection is appropriate to the diverse landscapes along this historic corridor,
and remains sensitive to the local ecology, scenic views, and development patterns.
Opportunities for Engagement
The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership is raising the necessary funds to
complete this $65 million initiative. Individuals, businesses, schools, and community
groups from around the world can contribute to this project from $100 per tree
contributions to corporate sponsorships. Donors may select a soldier to honor, as the trees
will be geo-tagged to allow Smart Phone users to learn the story of the soldier, providing
a strong educational component to engage interest in the region’s historical heritage and
literally bringing the tree to life.
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Living Legacy Tree Planting Project
Journey Through Hallowed Ground
Living Legacy Tree Planting Project
The Journey Through
Hallowed Ground stretches
180 miles along the Route 15
Corridor from Gettysburg,
PA through Frederick,
MD and ends at Thomas
Jefferson’s Monticello near
Charlottesville, VA.
The Journey Through
Hallowed Ground
From Gettysburg to Monticello
This project further lends itself to a national service learning program as we invite students
from around the country to research the fallen from their community, learn their stories and
dedicate a tree in their honor.
Project Partners
The Living Legacy Project has garnered wide support and international media attention. A
sampling of the project partners includes:
1. Federal Highway Administration, the Virginia Department of Transportation, the
Virginia Department of Forestry, and several other agencies have lent support to the project.
Resolutions of support were passed by every county and town within the JTHG National
Scenic Byway region;
2. Support from national, regional, and local non profits, including: the National Trust for
Historic Preservation, the Civil War Trust, the Garden Club of Virginia, Oatlands, Inc., and the
Civil War Cache;
3. Support from educational institutions including public schools, the Lutheran Seminary of
Gettysburg, state universities, and the Flow of History in Vermont, among others; and
4. Private landowners and the development community.
In fifty years time, during the bicentennial of the Civil War, this will be considered the finest
example of homage in our country. We believe this is the time to create and implement a living
legacy for those who gave, in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, “the last full measure
of devotion”.
Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership
P.O. Box 77, Waterford, VA 20197 | (540) 882-4929
www.HallowedGround.org
www.facebook.com/TheJourneyUSA
@TaketheJourney on Twitter
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5843 Fax (434) 296-5800
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members, Board of Supervisors
FROM: Travis O. Morris, Senior Deputy Clerk
DATE: December 30, 2013
RE: Board Member Committee Appointments
Listed below are the names of Board member appointed committees that need appointments made at this
time.
Acquisitions of Conservation Easement (ACE) Committee – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Agricultural and Forestal Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Audit Committee: Two appointments
Term expires December 31, 2014
Charlottesville/Albemarle/UVA Planning and Coordination Council (PACC): Two appointments
Term expires December 31, 2014
CIP Oversight Committee: Two appointments
Term expires December 31, 2014
Crozet Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Darden Towe Park Memorial Committee: Two appointments
Term expires December 31, 2014
2
Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Hazardous Materials Local Emergency Planning Committee
Term expires December 31, 2014
Historic Preservation Committee – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
High Growth Coalition: Two appointments
Term expires December 31, 2014
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO): Two appointments
Term runs coincident with elected term of office or such shorter time as determined by Board
Pantops Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Piedmont Workforce Network Council
Designee in absence of Chair – term expires December 31, 2014
Places 29 Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Property Committee: Two appointments
Term expires December 31, 2014
Rivanna River Basin Commission: Two appointments
Term runs coincident with elected term of office or such shorter time as determined by Board
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC): One appointment
Term runs coincident with elected term of office or such shorter time as determined by Board
Village of Rivanna Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
Workforce Investment Board – Board Liaison
Term expires December 31, 2014
1
BOARD MEMBER COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT TERMS
Acquisitions of Conservation Easements (ACE) – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Agricultural and Forestal Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Audit Committee
Annual appointment
Charlottesville/Albemarle/UVA Planning and Coordination Council: Two members
Annual appointment
CIP Oversight Committee: Two members
Annual appointment
Crozet Community Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Darden Towe Park Memorial Committee: Two members
Annual appointment
Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Hazardous Materials Local Emergency Planning Committee
Annual appointment
Historic Preservation Committee – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
High Growth Coalition: Two members
Annual appointment
Jail Authority
Three year term (Boyd filling unexpired term of Dumler which ends December 31, 2014)
*eligible to serve three full three year terms*
2
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO): Two members
Term runs coincident with elected term of office or such shorter time as determined by Board
Pantops Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Piedmont Workforce Network Council
Board Chair
Designee in absence of Chair – Annual appointment
Places 29 Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Police Department Citizens Advisory Committee – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Property Committee: Two members
Annual appointment
Rivanna River Basin Commission: Two members
Term runs coincident with elected term of office or such shorter time as determined by Board
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority
Term runs coincident with elected term of office (Boyd term ends December 31, 2015)
Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
Term runs coincident with elected term of office (Boyd term ends December 31, 2015)
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC): Two members
Term runs coincident with elected term of office or such shorter time as determined by Board
Village of Rivanna Community Advisory Council – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
Workforce Investment Board – Board Liaison
Annual appointment
For information only – The following non-profits are not appointed by the BOS; they are appointed by
the non- profits:
LEAP Governance Board
Lewis & Clark Exploratory Center Board
Memorandum
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Members, Board of Supervisors
FROM: Travis O. Morris, Senior Deputy Clerk
DATE: December 30, 2013
SUBJECT: Boards and Commissions Vacancy and Reappointment List
______________________________________________________________________________
Attached, please find an updated listing of vacancies for boards and commissions through December 30, 2013.
Appointments that need to be made at this time are to the Equalization Board, Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee,
Natural Heritage Committee, Planning Commission and Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Citizens Advisory Committee.
Listed below are the names and term expiration dates of individuals who wish to be appointed and/or reappointed to
the respective committees:
Equalization Board
Steve Janes (Rivanna District), term expires December 31, 2013
Kevin Quick (Scottsville District), term expires December 31, 2013
Tammie Moses (Jack Jouett District), term expires December 31, 2013
Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee
RD “Peppy” Winchel
Natural Heritage Committee
RD “Peppy” Winchel
Planning Commission: One vacancy – At-Large
Julia Monteith (UVA Liaison), term expires December 31, 2013
Karen Firehock – Samuel Miller District
Mac Lafferty – Jack Jouett District
Bruce Dotson – Rio District
John Echols – At-Large
RD “Peppy” Winchel – At-Large
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Citizens Advisory Committee
RD “Peppy” Winchel
MEMBER
TERM
EXPIRES
NEW TERM
EXPIRES
WISH TO BE
RE-APPOINTED?
DISTRICT IF
MAGISTERIAL
APPOINTMENT
Acquisitions of Conservation Easements (ACE)Bill Edgerton 8/1/2012 8/1/2013 No Advertised, No applications recv'd
ACE Appraisal Review Committee Ross Stevens 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 waiting for response
Agricultural & Forestal District Advisory Council Steve Murray 4/17/2012 4/17/2016 No Advertised, No applications recv'd
Agricultural & Forestal District Advisory Council Mark Gorlinsky 5/5/2010 4/17/2014 Resigned
Agricultural & Forestal District Advisory Council David van Roijen 4/17/2013 4/17/2017 Ineligible
Agricultural & Forestal District Advisory Council Nelson Shaw 4/17/2014 Deceased
Agricultural & Forestal District Advisory Council Robin Mellen 4/17/2013 4/17/2017 Ineligible
Albemarle County Service Authority Richard Carter 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Eligible, (Jack Jouett)
Albemarle County Service Authority David Thomas 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Eligible, (Rio)
Albemarle County Service Authority Liz Palmer 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Resigned, (Samuel Miller)
Equalization Board Steve Janes 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 Yes, (Rivanna)
Equalization Board Tammie Moses 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 Yes, (Jack Jouett)
Equalization Board Virginia Gardner 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 waiting for response, (White Hall)
Equalization Board Kevin Quick 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 Yes, (Scottsville)
Equalization Board William Rich 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 Eligible, (Rio)
Equalization Board John Lowry 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 Eligible, (Samuel Miller)
Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee Craig Evans 7/8/2013 7/8/2015 Ineligible Advertised, 1 application recv'd
Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee Following application received:
RD "Peppy" Winchel
Natural Heritage Committee Diana Foster 9/30/2011 9/30/2015 No Advertised, 1 application recv'd
Natural Heritage Committee Phil Stokes 9/30/2011 9/30/2015 No
Natural Heritage Committee DeMellon Forest 9/30/2012 9/30/2016 No
Natural Heritage Committee Jim Byrom 9/30/2012 Resigned
Natural Heritage Committee Christopher Dumler 9/30/2013 Resigned
Natural Heritage Committee Brian Morse 9/30/2013 9/30/2017 waiting for response
Natural Heritage Committee Rochelle Garwood 9/30/2013 9/30/2017 waiting for response
Natural Heritage Committee Following application received:
RD "Peppy" Winchel
Pantops Community Advisory Council Kirk Bowers 6/30/2013 6/30/2016 No Advertised, 2 applications recv'd
Pantops Community Advisory Council Wendy Fisher 6/30/2013 6/30/2016 No
Pantops Community Advisory Council Joe Milby 6/30/2013 6/30/2016 No
Pantops Community Advisory Council Rita Krenz 6/30/2013 6/30/2016 No
Pantops Community Advisory Council Amy Preddy 6/30/2014 Resigned
Pantops Community Advisory Council Following applications received:
Michael Shareck
Diane Berlin
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Whit Faulconer 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Tim Kaczmarek 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council George Larie 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Charles Lebo 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Christopher Lee 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Cynthia Neff 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Jeff Pixton 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Places 29 Community Advisory Council Jane Williamson 1/31/2014 1/31/2016
Planning Commission Julia Monteith 12/31/2013 12/31/2014 Yes, (UVA Liaison)
Planning Commission Edward Smith 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 (Samuel Miller)Karen Firehock (Samuel Miller District)
Planning Commission Don Franco 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 No, (Rio)Bruce Dotson (Rio District)
Planning Commission Mac Lafferty 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Yes, (Jack Jouett)
Planning Commission Bruce Dotson 12/31/2013 12/31/2015 No, (At-Large)Advertised, 2 applications recv'd
Planning Commission Following applications received:
John Echols
RD "Peppy" Winchel
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Cit. Adv. Comm.Jeffery Greer 12/31/2010 12/31/2012 Ineligible, Joint City/County Advertised, 1 application recv'd
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Cit. Adv. Comm.Vincent Day 12/31/2013 Resigned
Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Cit. Adv. Comm.Following application received:
RD "Peppy" Winchel
Social Services Board Janet Morrow 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Eligible, (Samuel Miller)
Social Services Board Laney Kaminer 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Eligible, (Jack Jouett)
Social Services Board Martin Burks 12/31/2013 12/31/2017 Eligible, (Rio)
Revised 12/30/2013
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Water Protection Ordinance Work Session
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Presentation of Proposed revised Water Protection
Ordinance to implement new State stormwater
management program/Opportunity for public input
STAFF CONTACTS:
Foley, Walker, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, Brooks,
Shadman, Harper
PRESENTERS: Greg Kamptner, Mark Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Nature of Stormwater
Precipitation that neither evaporates nor soaks into the ground is considered stormwater runoff, which flows overland
into natural waterways or into constructed conveyance systems, and eventually to the Chesapeake Bay. Forests,
wetlands and other naturally vegetated areas slow stormwater runoff and absorb water and pollutants. However, when
stormwater flows across roads, rooftops, yards, farms, golf courses, parking lots and construction sites, it picks up
nutrients, sediment, phosphorous, nitrogen, pesticides, dirt, trash, motor oil, bacteria from animal waste, deposits from
airborne pollutants, and other pollutants.
Unmanaged stormwater can cause erosion and flooding. It can also carry the pollutants described above into the
County’s streams, which can be harmful to aquatic life and contribute more sediment and other pollution to the
County’s streams, the Chesapeake Bay, and its tributaries. Properly managed stormwater protects land and streams
from erosion, flooding and pollutants.
How Stormwater is Managed
When land is developed, stormwater is managed during the construction process under an erosion and sediment
control program and a stormwater management program. The stormwater management program also provides for the
post-construction management of stormwater.
Erosion and Sediment Control: The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality explains that an erosion and
sediment control program helps prevent destruction of property and natural resources caused by land disturbing
activities that results in soil erosion, water pollution, flooding, stream channel damage, decreased ground water
storage, slope failures, and damage to adjacent or downstream properties. These types of problems can be
successfully minimized by implementing erosion and sediment control measures on construction sites. State
regulations specify the "minimum standards" that must be followed on all regulated activities. These measures
include prompt soil stabilization, establishing permanent vegetative covers, and establishing sediment basins and
traps. These measures help prevent soil movement or loss, enhance project aesthetics and eliminate appreciable
damage to off-site receiving channels, property and natural resources.
Stormwater Management: The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality describes “nonpoint source pollution”
as water pollution caused by stormwater runoff that is not confined to a single source. A single source discharger,
including such things as a wastewater treatment plant or industrial discharge pipe, are separately regulated under
a Clean Water Act permitting program. Stormwater management programs manage the quantity and quality of
stormwater runoff on construction sites as well as on a regional or watershed basis. As pervious surfaces are
converted to impervious surfaces, the amount of stormwater runoff increases, which may cause erosion, localized
flooding and property damage. The quantity of stormwater runoff can be controlled by measures such as detention
basins that control the peak stormwater discharge. Because stormwater runoff from both pervious and impervious
surfaces may carry large amounts of these pollutants when it rains, the quality of stormwater runoff must be
managed by measures such as permeable pavement, grass channels, bioretention, and constructed wetlands.
AGENDA TITLE: Water Protection Ordinance Work Session
January 8, 2014
Page 2
Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management in Albemarle County
The County has regulated land disturbing activity under its erosion and sediment control regulations since 1975 and
under various forms of stormwater regulations beginning in 1977. By 1997, the County had four separate water-related
ordinances adopted at different times, some of which applied only in limited parts of the County. In 1998, the four
ordinances were updated to comply with evolving State law, revised to improve implementation and consistency with
the County’s Comprehensive Plan, and consolidated into what is now Chapter 17 of the County Code, entitled the
“Water Protection Ordinance.”
The Water Protection Ordinance has been amended periodically since 1998 to keep up with State law. The most
significant amendment was the addition of Article V, Illicit Discharges and Connections, in early 2007. That
amendment was the result of the County’s changed status under the Federal Clean Water Act as an operator of a
small “Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System,” commonly referred to as “MS4.” As an MS4 locality, the County
operates under an MS4 permit and has an MS4 program plan which it must successfully implement during each 5-
year MS4 permit program cycle to improve water quality.
The Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (“CBPA”), adopted by the Virginia General Assembly in 1988, is another driving
force in stormwater management. Although the CBPA is mandated to apply only to those localities generally east of
Interstate 95, other localities are enabled to adopt CBPA requirements at their option. The County is one of a very
limited number of localities west of Interstate 95 to implement any elements of the CBPA, and it has done so by
establishing its own stormwater management program (instead of a State-operated program), and by establishing
resource protection areas by adopting its stream buffer regulations in 1991.
Recent Federal and State Actions to Reduce Stormwater-Caused Pollution
The Clean Water Act (CWA) sets an overarching environmental goal that all waters of the United States be “fishable”
and “swimmable.” In particular, the CWA requires that states such as Virginia establish appropriate uses for their
waters and adopt water quality standards that are protective of those uses. The Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries
are among Virginia’s “waters.”
Since 1998, four significant steps have been taken at the Federal and State levels to reduce pollution into the
Chesapeake Bay:
Clean Water Act Phase II regulations: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) promulgated
its Clean Water Act Phase II regulations pertaining to stormwater discharges. (1999)
Chesapeake 2000 Agreement: Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, and the Chesapeake Bay Commission entered into a comprehensive
agreement to reduce pollution into the Chesapeake Bay. (2000)
Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (“TMDL”): The Chesapeake Bay TMDL was established, based in
part on the Phase I Watershed Implementation Plans submitted by Virginia and the other states in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. The EPA describes the TMDL as “a historic and comprehensive ‘pollution diet’ with
rigorous accountability measures to initiate sweeping actions to restore clean water in the Chesapeake Bay and
the region’s streams, creeks and rivers.” The TMDL “identifies the necessary pollution reductions of nitrogen,
phosphorus and sediment across Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and the
District of Columbia and sets pollution limits necessary to meet applicable water quality standards in the Bay and
its tidal rivers and embayments.” The TMDL sets Chesapeake Bay watershed limits of “185.9 million pounds of
nitrogen, 12.5 million pounds of phosphorus and 6.45 billion pounds of sediment per year – a 25 percent reduction
in nitrogen, 24 percent reduction in phosphorus and 20 percent reduction in sediment. These pollution limits are
further divided by jurisdiction and major river basin based on state-of-the-art modeling tools, extensive monitoring
data, peer-reviewed science and close interaction with jurisdiction partners.” (2010)
State Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control Laws: Beginning in 2004 and continuing to the
present, the Virginia General Assembly has amended the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and the Virginia
Erosion and Sediment Control Law numerous times, establishing new comprehensive standards and deadlines for
localities to meet, and requiring all Virginia localities (with very limited exceptions) to oversee their own stormwater
management programs. The State also has delegated other large areas of oversight of stormwater management
related to construction from the State to the localities. (2004-2013).
AGENDA TITLE: Water Protection Ordinance Work Session
January 8, 2014
Page 3
These regulatory steps have culminated in the proposed revised Water Protection Ordinance and the funding and
staffing plan the Board is now considering.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Protect the County’s parks and its natural, scenic and historic resources in accordance with the County’s
established growth management policies
DISCUSSION:
The Process Between Now and July 1, 2014
The Virginia General Assembly and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (“DEQ”) have established
deadlines for Virginia localities to come into compliance with the new State stormwater management program
requirements. For all intents and purposes here, erosion and sediment control is subsumed into stormwater
management.
January 15, 2014: The County must submit its preliminary stormwater management program application package,
including the draft Water Protection Ordinance, to DEQ for review to determine compliance with State law.
Because of significant amendments to State regulations effective October 23, 2013 and December 17, 2013, the
draft ordinance could not be presented to the Board sooner.
May 15, 2014: The County must hold a public hearing and adopt the Water Protection Ordinance and must submit
its final stormwater management program application package, including its adopted ordinance (July 1, 2014
effective date), to DEQ.
June 13, 2014: Final date for approval of the County’s stormwater management program application package by
the State Water Control Board.
July 1, 2014: The County’s approved new stormwater management program becomes effective.
As provided by 9VAC25-870-150, the County’s application package will be composed of the ordinance, a funding and
staffing plan (addressed in a separate agenda item on January 8), and any policies and procedures including, but not
limited to, any agreements with any other public or private entities regarding the implementation of the County’s
program.
The Proposed Ordinance
The proposed Water Protection Ordinance incorporates new State law requirements pertaining to erosion and
sediment control and stormwater management, continues certain pre-existing programs of the County that exceed the
minimum State standards, specifically the County’s stream buffer pr ogram, and reorganizes the County’s current
erosion and sediment control and stormwater management regulations to facilitate their administration.
Following is a brief description of the key elements in the ten articles composing the proposed Water Protection
Ordinance:
Article I, General: Identifies the authority for the ordinance, states its purpose, describes its applicability, including
its applicability to the Town of Scottsville at the Town’s request (and as provided under State law).
Article II, Administration: Designates the County as the program authority and the County engineer as the program
administrator, defines terms, and establishes fees.
Article III, Applicability of the VESCP and the VSMP to a Land Disturbing Activity or a Site Condition: Describes the
types of land disturbing activities subject to and exempt from the County’s erosion and sediment control program
(“VESCP”) and stormwater management programs (“VSMP”).
Article IV, Procedure for Submitting, Reviewing and Acting on Applications; Post-Approval Rights and Obligations:
Establishes the form and content for all required plans, including two new types of plans (pollution prevention
plans and stormwater pollution prevention plans) previously administered by the State; establishes the procedure
for submitting, reviewing and acting on plans; establishes the rights and obligations of an owner after the County
AGENDA TITLE: Water Protection Ordinance Work Session
January 8, 2014
Page 4
has approved an application, including the obligation to maintain permanent stormwater management facilities;
and establishes the procedures for amending plans after approval.
Article V, Technical Criteria: Establishes the technical criteria for controlling erosion and sediment control,
managing stormwater quantity, and managing stormwater quality to satisfy State standards. The technical criteria
for the new State requirements are addressed in sections 17-500 through 17-502 of the draft ordinance.
Additionally, the County’s Design Standards Manual, which provides guidance to the development community on
technical requirements, will reference the Virginia Stormwater Management BMP Clearinghouse, which the State
intends to use as the source for information on acceptable Best Management Practices.
Article VI, Stream Buffers: Continues and updates the County’s stream buffer protection regulations and amending
some of the regulations to simplify their administration.
Article VII, Illicit Discharges, Illicit Connections, and Prohibited Dumping: Continues and updates the County’s
regulations prohibiting illicit discharges and connections, and prohibiting dumping, as part of the County’s MS4
program.
Article VIII, Compliance: Establishes a wide range of duties on owners holding approved permits to engage in land
disturbing activity, including the duty to comply with all applicable requirements, to maintain all structures, systems
and facilities, to maintain certain required permits and plans onsite, to provide information pertaining to certain
discharges, to report certain discharges, and to provide records; establishes the authority of the administrator to
obtain information from owners, to conduct inspections of sites, and to conduct monitoring and sampling; the new
State regulations impose an obligation on the County for ensuring compliance.
Article IX, Enforcement: Continues, clarifies and enhances the County’s enforcement authority, ranging from
issuing notices to comply and stop work orders to seeking civil penalties and other judicial remedies.
Article X, Groundwater Assessments: Continues the County’s program to collect groundwater information in
conjunction with its review of certain developments; this article is not part of the County’s erosion and sediment
control or stormwater management programs.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The County’s costs in overseeing the current stormwater management program is approximately $240,000 per year.
Approximately $140,000 of that total is, and will continue to be, supported by fees, with the balance paid for out of the
General Fund. When the current fees were established, the Board decided, as a matter of policy, that stormwater
initiatives above and beyond the State mandates (e.g., stream buffers, groundwater) should be partially supported by
the County rather than entirely by the applicant. The draft ordinance proposes fees for development activities that will
fund all new stormwater-related plan and permit reviews and related inspections. The proposed fees are estimated to
increase by $274,000 per year the revenue generated by fees, from the current $140,000 per year to $414,000 per
year, for the next five years. The General Fund amount estimated to cover program costs not covered by fees is
estimated to increase from $11,000 in FY 15 to as much as $218,000 in FY 19.
Beyond the impact of implementing the ordinance revisions as outlined above, staff estimates that the County’s new
stormwater management program will cost an average of $1 million per year for the next five years. This amount
includes the cost of continuing the County’s existing MS4 program. This cost does not include any additional measures
the Board may wish to consider for improving local streams and rivers in the future beyond mandates.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board receive public input at the work session and direct staff to submit the attached draft
Water Protection Ordinance, subject to any direction from the Board and further technical revisions deemed necessary
by staff, together with the other elements of its stormwater management program application package, to the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality for review and approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Water Protection Ordinance
Return to agenda
Draft: 12/30/13
1
ORDINANCE NO. 14-17( )
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 17, WATER PROTECTION, OF THE CODE OF THE
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 17,
Water Protection, is hereby amended and reordained as follows:
Chapter 17
Water Protection
Article I. General
Sec. 17-100 Short title.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the “Water Protection Ordinance.”
Sec. 17-101 Authority.
Articles I through IX of this chapter are adopted pursuant to the authority conferred by the Virginia
Stormwater Management Act (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:24 et seq.), as authorized by Virginia Code §
62.1-44.15:27, the Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:51 et seq.), as
authorized by Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:54, the regulations implementing the Virginia Stormwater
Management Act and the Erosion and Sediment Control Law in 9VAC25-830 through 9VAC25-890, as
applicable, including the general Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit for discharges
from the County’s small municipal separate storm sewer system, and Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:73,
which is a part of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:67 et seq.).
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:54, 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-830 through 9VAC25-890.
Sec. 17-102 Purposes.
The purposes of this chapter are to:
A. Protect public health, safety and welfare. Protect the health, safety and general welfare of the
citizens of the County and the Commonwealth of Virginia.
B. Protect quality and quantity of State waters from unmanaged stormwater. Protect the quality and
quantity of State waters from the potential harm of unmanaged stormwater and to effectively
control soil erosion, sediment deposition and nonagricultural runoff by requiring control measures
that will maintain, protect and improve the water quality and quantity of receiving State waters.
C. Protect property and natural resources. Prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties,
stream channels, waters, and other natural resources.
D. Reduce pollution and illicit discharges to protect water quality. Establish a comprehensive
program to manage sources of stormwater. Runoff from lands modified by human activities can
harm surface water resources by, among other things, changing natural hydrologic patterns,
increasing runoff velocity, and by elevating pollutant concentrations and loadings. Runoff may
Draft: 12/30/13
2
contain or mobilize high levels of contaminants, such as sediment, suspended solids, nutrients,
heavy metals, pathogens, toxins, oxygen-demanding substances, and floatables.
E. Sustainability of groundwater resources. Promote the long-term sustainability of groundwater
resources.
F. Implement State laws. Implement the applicable parts of the State Water Control Law (Virginia
Code § 62.1-44.3 et seq.), including the Virginia Stormwater Management Act (Virginia Code §
62.1-44.15:24 et seq.), as required by Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:27, and the Erosion and
Sediment Control Law (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:51 et seq.), as required by Virginia Code §
62.1-44.15:54, and the regulations implementing the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and
the Erosion and Sediment Control Law in 9VAC25-830 through 9VAC25-890, as applicable, and
as required thereby, including the general Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
permit for discharges from the County’s small municipal separate storm sewer system, and to
provide for the proper administration and enforcement of this chapter.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:25, 62.1-44.15:52; 9VAC 25-870-40, 9VAC 25-870-46, 9VAC 25-870-400.
Sec. 17-103 Applicability.
This chapter, or the applicable parts thereof, shall apply to:
A. Land disturbing activity within the County and the Town of Scottsville. Any land disturbing
activity within the County and within the Town of Scottsville, including that portion of the Town
of Scottsville located within the County of Fluvanna, to which the VESCP, the VSMP, or both,
apply under this chapter and under State and Federal law.
B. Erosion impact areas. Any land identified by the administrator as an erosion impact area within
the County and the Town of Scottsville, to which the parts of this chapter pertaining to erosion
and sediment control, including the requirement for the submittal and approval of an erosion and
sediment control plan, shall apply.
C. Stream buffers. Any area within the County and the Town of Scottsville designated as a stream
buffer under this chapter.
D. Permanent stormwater management facilities. Any areas served by a public permanent
stormwater management facility.
E. Discharges, connections and dumping. All activities that cause or allow to be caused direct or
indirect illicit discharges, illicit connections, and the prohibited dumping of refuse and pollutants,
or which negatively impede the flow capacity of the County’s MS4 or State waters.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33, 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:54, 62.1-44.15:55, 62.1-44.15:73;
9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-104 Land disturbing activity prohibited without approved plans; responsibility.
No owner shall engage in land disturbing activity subject to the requirements of this chapter, or allow land
disturbing activity to occur, on his property, until:
A. Erosion and sediment control plan approved under the VESCP. The owner has submitted to the
administrator an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity and the plan
Draft: 12/30/13
3
has been reviewed and approved by the administrator, and all other prerequisites to engaging in
land disturbing activity have been satisfied, as provided in section 17-400 et seq.; and
B. Permit approved under the VSMP. The owner has submitted to the administrator an application
for a VSMP permit to conduct land disturbing activity and the permit has been reviewed and
approved by the administrator, and all other prerequisites to engaging in land disturbing activity
have been satisfied, as provided in section 17-400 et seq.
.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-105 Assumptions.
The administration of the requirements of this chapter is assumed to comply with the County’s
obligations under its MS4 permit, that the control measures and best management practices approved by
the administrator in conjunction with any erosion and sediment control plan or VSMP permit are effective
based upon current control technologies and best management practices. It also is assumed that control
technologies and best management practices are constantly being refined and improved and, as a result,
the requirements of State law, this chapter, and the Design Standards Manual will be responsive to these
refinements and improvements in administering this chapter.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-400.
Sec. 17-106 Integration with other programs.
The requirements of this chapter shall be integrated and implemented in conjunction with any project
requiring compliance prior to any land disturbing activity, including subdivisions, site plans, and any
other plans of development, those projects within the flood hazard overlay district established in the
Zoning Ordinance, and any dam break inundation zone that has been mapped as provided in Virginia
Code § 10.1-606.3.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:54.
Sec. 17-107 Obligation to comply with all State laws.
Neither any provision in this chapter, nor any omission from this chapter of a self-executing requirement
of State law, shall relieve any owner from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established under
applicable State law nor preclude the institution of any legal action by the County, the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality, or any other public entity with enforcement powers under State
law.
State law reference – 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-108 Saving provision.
The adoption of this chapter, which shall be effective July 1, 2014, shall not abate any pending action,
liability, or penalty of any person accruing or about to accrue, nor waive any right of the County under
chapter 17 in effect prior to July 1, 2014, unless expressly provided for in this chapter. Any erosion and
sediment control plan, stormwater management plan, mitigation plan and, to the extent they pertain to
stormwater management, any final site plan or subdivision plat, approved prior to July 1, 2014, shall
remain in full force and effect, and all rights and remedies of the County in enforcing those plans, permits
and plats are hereby preserved.
Draft: 12/30/13
4
Article II. Administration
Sec. 17-200 Designation of program authority.
The County of Albemarle, Virginia, is hereby designated the program authority (the “program authority”)
for the purpose of administering the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program (“VESCP”) and the
Virginia Stormwater Management Program (“VSMP”) within the County and the Town of Scottsville. In
addition, to further administer the VESCP and the VSMP:
A. Agreements. The County may enter into agreements with soil and water conservation districts,
adjacent localities, or other public or private entities to assist with administering and
implementing the VESCP and the VSMP.
B. Cooperation with State and Federal agencies. The County may cooperate and enter into
agreements with any State or Federal agency in connection with the requirements for erosion and
sediment control with respect to land disturbing activities or for land disturbing activities for
stormwater management.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:50, 62.1-44.15:54, 62.1-44.15:58, 62.1-44.15:61.
Sec. 17-201 Designation of program administrator; powers and duties; express designations.
The County engineer is hereby designated the program administrator (the “administrator”) for the purpose
of administering this chapter. The administrator shall have the powers and duties to administer and
enforce the VESCP and the VSMP, and to exercise all powers and perform those duties of the program
authority as provided in this chapter. In addition, the following officers and employees are hereby
designated specific tasks in order to assist the administrator in administering this chapter:
A. Plan reviewers and inspectors. County employees qualified under section 17-202 and under State
law are designated to act as certified plan reviewers and certified inspectors under the VESCP
and the VSMP.
B. Administrator for post-construction stormwater management facilities and best management
practices. The director of the County’s Department of General Services is hereby designated to
administer the VSMP for post-construction stormwater management facilities and best
management practices.
C. Administrator for the County’s MS4 permit and MS4 program plan. The director of the County’s
Department of General Services is hereby designated as the administrator of the County’s MS4
permit in order to ensure compliance therewith, and to develop and administer the County’s MS4
program plan.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:54.
Sec. 17-202 Administrator, plan reviewers and inspectors; certificates of competence.
The administrator, any person reviewing VESCP or VSMP plans, and each person conducting project
inspections under either the VESCP or the VSMP, shall hold a valid certificate of competence for the
classification of the task to be performed, or its equivalent, as provided in 9VAC25-850-10 et seq. The
administrator and any other person may hold certificates for more than one classified task.
Draft: 12/30/13
5
For purposes of program compliance reviews and evaluations by the State Water Control Board, the
enrollment of persons in certification programs shall be deemed to meet the certification requirements as
provided in 9VAC25-850-55.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:30, 62.1-44.15:54; 9VAC25-850-10 et seq.
Sec. 17-203 Rules of construction.
This chapter protects paramount public interests and shall be liberally construed to effectuate its several
purposes. In addition to the rules of construction set forth in Albemarle County Code § 1-101, the
following rules of construction apply to the construction of this chapter, unless the application would be
contrary to the purposes of this chapter or the context clearly indicates otherwise:
A. All references to any statute, regulation, guideline, handbook, manual or standard are to that
statute, regulation, guideline, handbook, manual or standard as it exists on the date of adoption of
this chapter, and includes any amendment thereafter or reissue in a subsequent edition.
B. All references to the “administrator” include, in the appropriate context, a certified plan reviewer,
certified inspector, or any other person designated to act under this chapter.
C. All references to the “owner” include, in the appropriate context, the applicant, the permittee, the
operator.
D. All references to the “County,” when referring to physical territory in articles I through IX of this
chapter, include the physical territory of both the County of Albemarle and the Town of
Scottsville.
E. All references to “this chapter,” when used in articles I through IX, are referring to articles I
through IX.
F. The word “days” means calendar days, unless otherwise expressly provided.
G. All distances and areas shall be measured in a horizontal plane unless otherwise expressly
provided.
H. The word “current” means the point in time at which a matter is under consideration and shall not
mean the date of adoption of the most recent amendment to this chapter.
I. The word “maintain” or “maintenance” also includes, repair, replace and reconstruct.
J. All provisions requiring that improvements be designed or constructed to prescribed standards, or
otherwise comply with delineated standards, refer to the minimum standard and nothing in this
chapter shall prohibit an improvement from exceeding the standard.
K. Any word or phrase used in this chapter that is not defined in section 17-204 shall be defined as it
is in the Virginia Stormwater Management Act (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:24 et seq.), the
Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:51 et seq.), and in the applicable
regulations in 9VAC25-830 through 9VAC25-890. If the word or phrase is not defined therein,
the meaning of the word or phrase shall be defined as it is in other chapters of this Code and if it
is not defined therein, by resort to other sources determined to be appropriate.
Draft: 12/30/13
6
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:54.
Sec. 17-204 Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply in the administration of this chapter:
Administrator. The term “administrator” means the County engineer.
Adequate channel. The term “adequate channel” means a watercourse that will convey the designated
frequency storm event without overtopping its banks or causing erosive damage to the bed, banks and
overbank sections of the same.
Agreement in lieu of a plan. The term “agreement in lieu of a plan” means an agreement between the
County and the owner that specifies conservation measures that must be implemented in the construction
of a single-family residence, in lieu of an erosion and sediment control plan.
Agricultural land. The term “agricultural land” means land used for horticulture, viticulture, silviculture
or other gardening which may involve the tilling of soil for the raising of crops; the keeping of livestock
and/or poultry; and/or agricultural industries or businesses, such as, but not limited to, orchards, fruit
packing plants, dairies, nurseries or wayside stands.
Agricultural road. The term “agricultural road” means a road or portion of a road that is constructed
exclusively for access to agricultural land and is located on or serves a lot which is not the subject of a
pending or approved preliminary or final plat, initial or final site plan, zoning map amendment to a non-
agricultural zoning district, or a special use permit for a use or activity not directly related to agriculture.
Amendment to approved plan. The term “amendment to approved plan” means an owner-requested
change to an approved plan or to approved permit conditions.
Applicant. The term “applicant” means any person submitting an application for a permit or plan approval
under this chapter.
Application. The term “application,” as used in Article IV, means an application for approval of an
erosion and sediment control plan, for land disturbing activity for which a VSMP permit is not required,
or an application for approval of a VSMP permit.
Best management practice (BMP). The term “best management practice” or “BMP” means schedules of
activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent
or reduce the pollution of surface waters and groundwater systems, and includes both structural and
nonstructural practices described as follows:
A. Structural best management practice. Structural best management practices include storage
practices such as wet ponds and extended-detention outlet structures; filtration practices such as
biofilters, grassed swales, sand filters and filter strips; infiltration practices such as infiltration
basins and infiltration trenches; and any post-construction BMP listed in the Virginia Stormwater
BMP Clearinghouse Website (http://vwrrc.vt.edu/swc/PostConstructionBMPs.html).
B. Nonstructural best management practice. Nonstructural best management practices are
preventative actions that involve management and source controls such as: (i) policies and
regulations that provide requirements and standards to direct growth to identified areas, protect
sensitive areas such as wetlands and riparian areas, maintain and/or increase open space
Draft: 12/30/13
7
(including a dedicated funding source for open space acquisition), provide buffers along sensitive
water bodies, minimize impervious surfaces, and minimize disturbance of soils and vegetation;
(ii) policies or regulations that encourage infill development in higher density urban areas, and
areas with existing infrastructure; (iii) education programs for developers and the public about
project designs and maintenance activities that minimize water quality impacts; and (iv) measures
such as minimizing the percentage of impervious area after development and minimizing directly
connected impervious areas.
Bypass. The term “bypass” means the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a
treatment facility.
Certified inspector. The term “certified inspector” means an employee or agent of the County who: (i)
holds a certificate of competence from the State Water Control Board in the area of project inspection; or
(ii) is enrolled in the State Water Control Board’s training program for project inspection and successfully
completes the program within one year after enrollment.
Certified plan reviewer. The term “certified plan reviewer” means an employee or agent of the County
who: (i) holds a certificate of competence from the State Water Control Board in the area of plan review;
(ii) is enrolled in the State Water Control Board’s training program for plan review and successfully
completes the program within one year after enrollment; or (iii) is licensed as a professional engineer,
architect, landscape architect, land surveyor pursuant to Article 1 (Virginia Code § 54.1-400 et seq.) of
Chapter 4 of Title 54.1 of the Virginia Code, or a professional soil scientist as defined in Virginia Code §
54.1-2200.
Certified program administrator. The term “certified program administrator” means an employee or agent
of the County who: (i) holds a certificate of competence from the State Water Control Board in the area of
program administration; or (ii) is enrolled in the State Water Control Board’s training program for
program administration and successfully completes the program within one year after enrollment.
Channel. The term “channel” means a natural stream or manmade waterway.
Clean Water Act (CWA). The term “Clean Water Act” or “CWA” means the federal Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.), formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92-500, as amended by Public Law 95-217,
Public Law 95-576, Public Law 96-483, and Public Law 97-117, or any subsequent revisions thereto.
Common plan of development or sale. The term “common plan of development or sale” means a
contiguous area where separate and distinct construction activities may be taking place at different times
on different schedules.
Construction activity. The term “construction activity” means any clearing, grading or excavation
associated with large construction activity or associated with small construction activity.
Contiguous nontidal wetlands. The term “contiguous nontidal wetlands” means nontidal wetlands that lie
within or adjacent to a stream channel or within the flood plain of that stream channel so that there is a
hydrologic connection between the stream and the wetland, and which include impoundments of water
along a natural stream channel.
Control measure. The term “control measure” means any best management practice or stormwater
facility, or other method used to minimize the discharge of pollutants to State waters, or otherwise restrict
or alter the hydraulics of stormwater flow and discharge.
Draft: 12/30/13
8
Dam. The term “dam” means a barrier to confine or raise water for storage or diversion, to create a
hydraulic head, to prevent gully erosion, or to retain soil, rock or other debris.
Department of community development. The term “department of community development” means the
County department of community development.
Department of general services. The term “department of general services” means the County department
of general services.
Design Standards Manual. The term “Design Standards Manual” means the manual developed and
maintained by the administrator that includes, among other things, the technical criteria required under the
VESCP and the VSMP, and best management practices.
Development. The term “development” means: (i) for the purposes of the VESCP, a parcel of land or a
site developed or to be developed as a single unit under single ownership or unified control which is to be
used for any business or industrial purpose or is to contain three or more residential dwelling units; and
(ii) for purposes of the VSMP, land disturbing activity and the resulting landform associated with the
construction of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreation, transportation, or utility
facilities or structures or the clearing of land for nonagricultural or nonsilvicultural purposes.
Development area. The term “development area” means any portion of the County designated as such in
the Comprehensive Plan.
Dike. The term “dike” means an earthen embankment constructed to confine or control water, especially
one built along the banks of a river to prevent overflow of lowlands; a levee.
Discharge. The term “discharge,” when used without qualification, means the discharge of a pollutant.
Discharge of a pollutant. The term “discharge of a pollutant” means any addition of any pollutant or
combination of pollutants to state waters from any point source, and includes additions of pollutants into
surface waters from surface runoff that is collected or channeled by man; discharges through pipes,
sewers, or other conveyances owned by the State, the County, or other person that do not lead to a
treatment works; and discharges through pipes, sewers, or other conveyances, leading into privately
owned treatment works; provided that this definition does not include an addition of pollutants by any
indirect discharger.
Drainage area. The term “drainage area” means a land area, water area, or both from which runoff flows
to a common point or boundary.
Erosion and sediment control plan. The term “erosion and sediment control plan” means a plan which
meets the requirements of section 17-402 containing material for the conservation of soil and water
resources of a unit or group of units of land, and: (i) shall contain all major conservation decisions to
ensure that the entire unit or units of land will be so treated to achieve the conservation objectives; and (ii)
may include appropriate maps, an appropriate soil and water plan inventory and management information
with needed interpretations, and a record of decisions contributing to conservation treatment. An erosion
and sediment control plan may be a component of a VSMP permit or a stand-alone plan if the land
disturbing activity is not subject to the VSMP.
Erosion impact area. The term “erosion impact area” means an area of land not associated with current
land disturbing activity but subject to persistent soil erosion resulting in the delivery of sediment onto
Draft: 12/30/13
9
neighboring properties or into State waters; provided that the area of land is not a lot or parcel of ten
thousand (10,000) square feet or less used for residential purposes or a shoreline where the erosion results
from wave action or other coastal processes.
Facility or activity. The term “facility or activity” means any point source or treatment works treating
domestic sewage or any other facility or activity, including land or appurtenances thereto, that is subject
to regulation under the VSMP.
Floodplain. The term “floodplain” means the area adjacent to a channel, river, stream, or other water
body that is susceptible to being inundated by water normally associated with the one hundred (100) year
flood or storm event, and includes, but is not limited to, the floodplain designated by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency on a Flood Insurance Rate Map.
Hazardous substance. The term “hazardous substance” means any substance designated under the Code
of Virginia or 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to section 311 of the Clean Water Act.
Illicit discharge. The term “illicit discharge” means any discharge to a municipal separate storm sewer or
State waters that is not composed entirely of stormwater, except discharges pursuant to a separate VPDES
or State permit (other than the State permit for discharges from the municipal separate storm sewer),
discharges exempted under section 17-801(A), and discharges identified by and in compliance with
9VAC25-870-400(D)(2)(c)(3).
Inspection. The term “inspection” means an onsite review of a project’s compliance with an approved
erosion and sediment control plan, an approved VSMP permit, the State permit, the VESCP, the VSMP,
and any applicable design criteria, or an onsite review to obtain information or conduct surveys or
investigations necessary for the implementation or enforcement of this chapter.
Intermittent stream. The term “intermittent stream” means a natural stream or portion of a natural stream
that has a defined bed and defined banks within which water flows in response to precipitation, through
near surface groundwater flow, or from springs, and which is not a perennial stream.
Land disturbance or land disturbing activity. The term “land disturbance” or “land disturbing activity”
means: (i) for purposes of the VESCP, any man-made change to the land surface that may result in soil
erosion from water or wind and the movement of sediments into State waters or onto lands in the State,
including, but not limited to, clearing, grading, excavating, transporting, and filling of land, but does not
include those land disturbing activities exempt under section 17-301; and (2) for purposes of the VSMP, a
man-made change to the land surface that potentially changes its runoff characteristics including clearing,
grading, or excavation, but does not include those land disturbing activities that are exempt under section
17-303.
Large construction activity. The term “large construction activity” means construction activity including
clearing, grading and excavation resulting in the disturbance of five (5) acres or more of total land area;
provided that the disturbance of less than five (5) acres of total land area is a large construction activity if
it is part of a larger common plan of development or sale if the larger common plan will ultimately disturb
five (5) acres or more. Large construction activity does not include routine maintenance that is performed
to maintain the original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of the facility.
Layout. The term “layout” means a conceptual drawing sufficient to provide for the specified stormwater
management facilities required at the time of approval.
Draft: 12/30/13
10
Linear development project. The term “linear development project” means a land-disturbing activity that
is linear in nature such as, but not limited to: (i) the construction of electric and telephone utility lines, and
natural gas pipelines; (ii) construction of tracks, rights-of-way, bridges, communication facilities and
other related structures of a railroad company; (iii) highway construction projects; (iv) construction of
stormwater channels and stream restoration activities; and (v) water and sewer lines; provided that private
subdivision roads or streets are not linear development projects.
Major modification. The term “major modification” means, for the purposes of this chapter, the
modification or amendment of an existing State permit before its expiration that is not a minor
modification.
Man-made. The term “man-made” means constructed by man.
Maximum extent practicable (MEP). The term “maximum extent practicable” or “MEP” means the
technology-based discharge standard for municipal separate storm sewer systems established by CWA §
402(p) and which is achieved, in part, by selecting and implementing effective structural and
nonstructural best management practices (BMPs) and rejecting ineffective BMPs and replacing them with
effective best management practices (BMPs).
Minimize. The term “minimize” means to reduce or eliminate the discharge of pollutants to the extent
achievable using stormwater controls that are technologically available and economically practicable.
Minor modification. The term “minor modification” means a minor modification or amendment of an
existing State permit before its expiration for the reasons listed in 40 CFR 122.63 and as specified in
9VAC25-870-640, and other modifications and amendments not requiring extensive review and
evaluation including, but not limited to, changes in United States Environmental Protection Agency-
promulgated test protocols, increasing monitoring frequency requirements, changes in sampling locations,
and changes to compliance dates within the overall compliance schedules. A minor State permit
modification or amendment does not substantially alter State permit conditions, substantially increase or
decrease the amount of surface water impacts, increase the size of the operation, or reduce the capacity of
the facility to protect human health or the environment.
Mitigation plan. The term “mitigation plan” means a plan which meets the requirements of section 17-406
that describes how encroachments into a stream buffer will be mitigated through runoff treatment,
revegetation, the addition of extra buffer areas, or other appropriate best management practices. A
mitigation plan may be a component of a VSMP permit, or an erosion and sediment control plan if the
land disturbing activity is subject solely to the VESCP.
Municipal separate storm sewer. The term “municipal separate storm sewer” means a conveyance or
system of conveyances otherwise known as a municipal separate storm sewer system, including roads
with drainage systems, streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains:
(i) owned or operated by a federal, state, city, town, county, district, association, or other public body,
created by or pursuant to State law, having jurisdiction or delegated authority for erosion and sediment
control and stormwater management, or a designated and approved management agency under § 208 of
the CWA that discharges to surface waters; (ii) designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater;
(iii) that is not a combined sewer; and (iv) that is not part of a publicly owned treatment works.
Municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4). The term “municipal separate storm sewer system” or
“MS4” means all separate storm sewers that are defined as “large” or “medium” or “small” municipal
separate storm sewer systems or designated under 9VAC25-870-380(A)(1).
Draft: 12/30/13
11
Natural stream. The term “natural stream” means a tidal or nontidal watercourse that is part of the natural
topography, that usually maintains a continuous or seasonal flow during the year, and is characterized as
being irregular in cross-section with a meandering course. Constructed channels such as drainage ditches
or swales shall not be considered natural streams; however, channels designed using natural channel
design concepts may be considered natural streams.
Necessary infrastructure. The term “necessary infrastructure” means components of a site development
necessary for the protection of the public health, safety, or welfare, and environmental features and they
include, but are not limited to. drainage channels, structures and facilities, best management practices,
access roads for emergency vehicles, and access roads in order to maintain stormwater management
facilities or water-dependent facilities, or both.
Nonpoint source pollution. The term “nonpoint source pollution” means pollution such as sediment,
nitrogen, phosphorus, hydrocarbons, heavy metals, and toxics whose sources cannot be pinpointed but
rather are washed from the land surface in a diffuse manner by runoff.
Nontidal wetlands. The term “nontidal wetlands” means wetlands other than tidal wetlands that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions, as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to section 404 of
the Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations.
Nutrient credit. The term “nutrient credit” or “credit” means a nutrient credit certified pursuant to
Virginia Code § 62.1-44.19:12 et seq.
Operator. The term “operator” means the owner or operator of any facility or activity subject to
regulation under this Ordinance.
Other rural land. The term “other rural land” means any portion of the County that is designated Rural
Area in the Comprehensive Plan but which is not within a water supply protection area.
Outfall. The term “outfall” means, when used in reference to municipal separate storm sewers, a point
source at the point where a municipal separate storm sewer discharges to surface waters and does not
include open conveyances connecting two municipal separate storm sewers, or pipes, tunnels or other
conveyances which connect segments of the same stream or other surface waters and are used to convey
surface waters.
Owner. The term “owner” means the owner or owners of the freehold of the premises or lesser estate
therein, mortgagee or vendee in possession, assignee of rents, receiver, executor, trustee, lessee, or other
person, firm, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, trustee or any other person or form of
entity in control of a property, and includes, in the appropriate context, an applicant, a permittee, and an
operator.
Peak flow rate. The term “peak flow rate” means the maximum instantaneous flow from a prescribed
design storm at a particular location.
Perennial stream. The term “perennial stream” means any stream that is depicted as a continuous blue
line on the most recent United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle maps (scale
1:24,000) or which is determined by the program authority to be perennial following a site-specific
Draft: 12/30/13
12
evaluation using the guidance entitled “Determinations of Water Bodies with Perennial Flow,” dated
September 2003, issued by the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Department.
Permittee. The term “permittee” means the person to whom the County has issued a permit.
Person. The term “person” means any individual, corporation, partnership, association, state,
municipality, commission, or political subdivision of a state, governmental body, including a Federal,
State, or local entity as applicable, any interstate body or any other legal entity.
Plan of development. The term “plan of development” means the process for site plan or plat review to
ensure compliance with Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:74 and this chapter which is required as a precedent
to clearing, grading, or other land disturbing activity on a site or the issuance of a building permit.
Plat. The term “plat” means a preliminary or final plat, or a plat for any other class of subdivision as
provided in the Subdivision Ordinance.
Point of discharge. The term “point of discharge” means a location at which concentrated runoff is
released.
Point source. The term “point source” means any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance
including, but not limited to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container,
rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, landfill leachate collection system, vessel, or other
floating craft from which pollutants are or may be discharged; provided that this term does not include
return flows from irrigated agriculture or agricultural runoff.
Pollutant. The term “pollutant” means dredged spoil, solid waste, incinerator residue, filter backwash,
sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, munitions, chemical wastes, biological materials, radioactive materials
(except those regulated under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 USC § 2011 et seq.)), heat,
wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt and industrial, municipal, and agricultural waste
discharged into water; provided that this term does not mean: (i) sewage from vessels; or (ii) water, gas,
or other material that is injected into a well to facilitate production of oil or gas, or water derived in
association with oil and gas production and disposed of in a well if the well used either to facilitate
production or for disposal purposes is approved by the State Water Control Board and if it determines that
the injection or disposal will not result in the degradation of groundwater or surface water resources.
Pollutant discharge. The term “pollutant discharge” means the average amount of a particular pollutant
measured in pounds per year or other standard reportable unit as appropriate, delivered by runoff.
Pollution. The term “pollution” means the alteration of the physical, chemical or biological properties of
any State waters as will or is likely to create a nuisance or render the waters:(i) harmful or detrimental or
injurious to the public health, safety or welfare, or to the health of animals, fish or aquatic life; (ii)
unsuitable with reasonable treatment for use as present or possible future sources of public water supply;
or (iii) unsuitable for recreational, commercial, industrial, agricultural, or other reasonable uses, provided
that (a) an alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological property of State waters, or a discharge or
deposit of sewage, industrial wastes or other wastes to State waters by any owner which by itself is not
sufficient to cause pollution, but which, in combination with such alteration of or discharge or deposit to
State waters by other owners, is sufficient to cause pollution; (b) the discharge of untreated sewage by any
owner into State waters; and (c) contributing to the contravention of standards of water quality duly
established by the State Water Control Board, are “pollution” for the purposes of this chapter.
Draft: 12/30/13
13
Pollution prevention plan. The term “pollution prevention plan” means a plan which meets the
requirements of section 17-404 for implementing pollution prevention measures during construction
activities and which details the design, installation, implementation, and maintenance of effective
pollution prevention measures to minimize the discharge of pollutants. A pollution prevention plan is a
component of a VSMP permit.
Postdevelopment. The term “postdevelopment” means the conditions that reasonably may be expected or
anticipated to exist after completion of the land development activity on a specific site.
Predevelopment. The term “predevelopment” means: (i) the conditions that exist at the time that plans for
the land development of a tract of land are submitted to the County for the purpose of establishing
regulatory values or minimums, for pollutant loadings and discharge characteristics; or (ii) where phased
development or plan approval occurs (preliminary grading, demolition of existing structures, roads and
utilities), the conditions that exist at the time prior to the first item being submitted shall establish
predevelopment conditions; provided that the administrator may determine that the predevelopment
conditions are those that existed at some time other than as provided in (i) or (ii) depending on recent
exempt or non-exempt land disturbing activities on the site which affected runoff, and further provided
that downstream characteristics may necessitate additional protections. Nothing in this definition shall
affect any applicable assumptions or calculations required by this chapter.
Program. The term “program” means the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program or the Virginia
Stormwater Program or, in the appropriate context, both.
Regulations. The term “regulations,” when referring to State regulations, means those regulations
implementing the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and the Erosion and Sediment Control Law in
9VAC25-830 through 9VAC25-890.
Reinspection. The term “reinspection” means any inspection necessary to determine whether any
deficiency or violation in a notice of violation or a stop work order has been corrected.
Runoff. The term “runoff” means that portion of precipitation that is discharged across the land surface or
through conveyances to one or more waterways.
Runoff characteristics. The term “runoff characteristics” includes maximum velocity, peak flow rate,
volume, flow duration, and any other measure of the nature of the discharge.
Runoff volume. The term “runoff volume” means the volume of runoff that runs off the site from a
prescribed design storm.
Sediment basin. The term “sediment basin” means a temporary impoundment built to retain sediment and
debris with a controlled stormwater release structure.
Sewage disposal system. The term “sewage disposal system” means a sewerage system or treatment
works composed of a facility or combination of facilities constructed for the transport or treatment, or
both, of domestic, commercial or industrial sewage, but not including plumbing, fixtures, lateral pipes
from a dwelling unit to a septic tank, lateral pipes from a dwelling unit to a publicly owned sewerage
facility, or publicly owned facilities for the transport or treatment, or both, of sewage.
Site. The term “site” means the land or water area composed of one or more parcels where any facility or
land disturbing activity is physically located or conducted, including adjacent land used or preserved in
connection with the facility or land disturbing activity.
Draft: 12/30/13
14
Small construction activity. The term “small construction activity” means: (i) construction activities
including clearing, grading, and excavating that results in land disturbance of equal to or greater than ten
thousand (10,000) square feet, and less than five (5) acres, or a land disturbance of less than ten thousand
(10,000) square feet that is part of a larger common plan of development or sale if the larger common
plan will ultimately disturb equal to or greater than ten thousand (10,000) square feet and less than five
(5) acres; provided that the term does not include routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the
original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of the facility; or (ii) any other
construction activity designated by either the State Water Control Board or the United States
Environmental Protection Agency’s regional administrator, based on the potential for contribution to a
violation of a water quality standard or for significant contribution of pollutants to surface waters.
Source. The term “source” means any building, structure, facility, or installation from which there is or
may be a discharge of pollutants.
Stabilized. The term “stabilized” means land that has been treated to withstand normal exposure to natural
forces without incurring erosion damage.
State. The term “State” means the Commonwealth of Virginia.
State permit. The term “State permit” means, unless the context indicates otherwise, the State permit titled
“General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater from Construction Activities” found in 9VAC25-880
authorizing a category of discharges under the Clean Water Act and the Virginia Stormwater
Management Act within the geographical area of the State.
State waters. The term “State waters” means all water, on the surface and under the ground, wholly or
partially within or bordering the State or within its jurisdiction, including wetlands.
Stormwater. The term “stormwater” means precipitation that is discharged across the land surface or
through conveyances to one or more waterways and that may include runoff, snow melt runoff, and
surface runoff and drainage.
Stormwater conveyance system. The term “stormwater conveyance system” means a combination of
drainage components that are used to convey stormwater discharge, either within or downstream of the
land disturbing activity, and includes a man-made, natural, or restored stormwater conveyance system
described as follows:
A. Man-made stormwater conveyance system. The term “man-made stormwater conveyance system”
means a pipe, ditch, vegetated swale, or other stormwater conveyance system constructed by man
except for restored stormwater conveyance systems.
B. Natural stormwater conveyance system. The term “natural stormwater conveyance system”
means the main channel of a natural stream and the flood-prone area adjacent to the main
channel.
C. Restored stormwater conveyance system. The term “restored stormwater conveyance system”
means a stormwater conveyance system that has been designed and constructed using natural
channel design concepts, and they include the main channel and the flood-prone area adjacent to
the main channel.
Draft: 12/30/13
15
Stormwater detention. The term “stormwater detention” means the process of temporarily impounding
runoff and discharging it through a hydraulic outlet structure to a downstream stormwater conveyance
system.
Stormwater discharge. The term “stormwater discharge” means a discharge of runoff from sites where
one or more of the following are located: (i) land disturbing activities including, but not limited to,
clearing, grading, or excavation; (ii) construction materials or equipment storage or maintenance
including, but not limited to, fill piles, borrow area, concrete truck washout, fueling; or (iii) other
industrial stormwater directly related to the construction process including, but not limited to, concrete or
asphalt batch plants.
Stormwater management facility. The term “stormwater management facility” means a control measure or
structural best management practive that controls runoff and changes the characteristics of that runoff
including, but not limited to, the quantity and quality, the period of release or the velocity of flow.
Stormwater management plan. The term “stormwater management plan” means a plan which meets the
requirements of section 17-403 containing information for describing methods for complying with the
applicable requirements of this chapter, and which typically contains two major components: (i) measures
addressing stormwater detention for water quality and discharge characteristics impacts; and (ii) measures
addressing nutrient loadings and water quality. A stormwater management plan is a component of a
VSMP permit.
Stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). The term “stormwater pollution prevention plan” or
“SWPPP” means a plan which meets the requirements of section 17-405 that is prepared in accordance
with good engineering practices and that identifies potential sources of pollutants that may reasonably be
expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges. A stormwater pollution prevention plan is a
component of a VSMP permit.
Stream buffer. The term “stream buffer” means an area of land at or near a tributary streambank or
nontidal wetland, or both, that has an intrinsic water quality value due to the ecological and biological
processes it performs or is otherwise sensitive to changes which may result in significant degradation to
the quality of State waters.
Subdivision. The term “subdivision” means the same as defined in the Subdivision Ordinance.
Subdivision Ordinance. The term “Subdivision Ordinance” means the subdivision regulations of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia codified in Chapter 14 of the Albemarle County Code.
Surface waters. The term “surface waters” means: (i) all waters that are currently used, were used in the
past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters that are subject
to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) all interstate waters, including interstate wetlands; (iii) all other waters
such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands,
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds the use, degradation, or destruction
of which would affect or could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters that are or
could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; from which fish or
shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or that are used or could be
used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce; (iv) all impoundments of waters
otherwise defined as surface waters under this definition; (v) tributaries of waters identified in
subdivisions (i) through (iv) of this definition; and (vi) wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that
are themselves wetlands) identified in subdivisions (i) through (v) of this definition; provided that waste
treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of the Clean
Draft: 12/30/13
16
Water Act and the law, are not surface waters, and surface waters do not include prior converted cropland
as determined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
Ten-year storm. The term “ten-year storm” means a storm that is capable of producing rainfall expected
to be equaled or exceeded on the average of once in ten (10) years, and which also may be expressed as
an exceedance probability with a ten percent (10%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given
year.
Total maximum daily load (TMDL). The term “total maximum daily load” or “TMDL” means the sum of
the individual wasteload allocations for point sources, load allocations (LAs) for nonpoint sources, natural
background loading and a margin of safety, and which can be expressed in terms of either mass per time,
toxicity, or other appropriate measure.
Town of Scottsville. The term “Town of Scottsville” means all of that territory within the incorporated
boundaries of the Town of Scottsville, Virginia, located within the County of Albemarle, Virginia and the
County of Fluvanna, Virginia.
Two-year storm. The term “two-year storm” means a storm that is capable of producing rainfall expected
to be equaled or exceeded on the average of once in two (2) years, and which also may be expressed as an
exceedance probability with a fifty percent (50%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.
Twenty-five year storm. The term “twenty-five year storm” means a storm that is capable of producing
rainfall expected to be equaled or exceeded on the average of once in twenty-five (25) years, and which
also may be expressed as an exceedance probability with a four percent (4%) chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year.
Upset. The term “upset” means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary
noncompliance with technology based State permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the
reasonable control of the operator; provided that the term does not include noncompliance to the extent
caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack
of preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation.
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Program (VESCP). The term “Virginia Erosion and Sediment
Control Program” or “VESCP” means the program established by this chapter and approved by the State
Water Control Board for the effective control of soil erosion, sediment deposition, and nonagricultural
runoff associated with a land disturbing activity to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties,
stream channels, waters, and other natural resources and include this chapter and all other applicable
rules, permit requirements, annual standards and specifications, policies and guidelines, technical
materials, and requirements for plan review, inspection, enforcement, and evaluation consistent with the
requirements of the Erosion and Sediment Control Law and related regulations.
Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse Website. The term “Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse
Website” means a website that contains the authorized detailed design standards and specifications for
control measures that may be used in the State to comply with the requirements of the Virginia
Stormwater Management Act and related State regulations, and whose ISP address as of July 1, 2014 is
http://vwrrc.vt.edu/swc/PostConstructionBMPs.html.
Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP). The term “Virginia Stormwater Management
Program” or “VSMP” means the program established by this chapter and approved by the State Water
Quality Control Board to manage the quality and quantity of runoff resulting from land disturbing
activities and includes this chapter and all other applicable rules, permit requirements, annual standards
Draft: 12/30/13
17
and specifications, policies and guidelines, technical materials, and requirements for plan review,
inspection, enforcement, and evaluation consistent with the requirements of the Virginia Stormwater
Management Act and related regulations.
VSMP permit. The term “VSMP permit” means a permit issued by the administrator under the County’s
Virginia Stormwater Management Program to conduct a land disturbing activity in accordance with this
chapter and which is composed of the following, as applicable: (i) a complete and accurate registration
statement; (ii) an approved erosion and sediment control plan; (iii) an approved stormwater management
plan; (iv) an approved mitigation plan; (v) an approved pollution prevention plan; (vi) an approved
stormwater pollution prevention plan; (vii) a mitigation plan, if applicable; (viii) construction record
drawings; and (viii) inspection reports.
Water-dependent facility. The term “water-dependent facility” means a development that cannot exist
outside of the stream buffer and must be located on the shoreline because of the intrinsic nature of its
operation and which include, but are not limited to: (i) the intake and outfall structures of power plants,
sewage treatment plants, water treatment plants, and storm sewers; (ii) public water-oriented recreation
areas; and (iii) boat docks and ramps.
Water supply protection area. The term “water supply protection area” means those areas of land within
the County that are within the watershed of a public water supply reservoir or water supply intake, and
those areas shall consist of all land within the County that drains naturally to the South Fork Rivanna
Reservoir, Beaver Creek Reservoir, Totier Creek Reservoir, Sugar Hollow Reservoir, Ragged Mountain
Reservoir, Chris Greene Lake, the North Fork Rivanna River intake, and to any impoundment or water
supply intake designated in the future by the board of supervisors as a public water supply reservoir.
Watershed. The term “watershed” means a defined land area drained by a river or stream, karst system, or
system of connecting rivers or streams such that all surface water within the area flows through a single
outlet; provided that in karst areas, the karst feature to which water drains may be considered the single
outlet for the watershed.
Wasteload allocation (WLA). The term “wasteload allocation” or “WLA” means the portion of a
receiving surface water’s loading or assimilative capacity allocated to one of its existing or future point
sources of pollution, and is a type of water quality-based effluent limitation.
Wetlands. The term “wetlands” means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, and which
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Written notice. The term “written notice” means a written communication from the administrator that is
delivered either mailed by first class mail, personal delivery, or, if consented to by the owner in writing,
in conjunction with submitting an application or otherwise, by fax or email.
Zoning Ordinance. The term “Zoning Ordinance” means the zoning regulations of the County of
Albemarle, Virginia codified in Chapter 18 of the Albemarle County Code.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:24, 62.1-44.15:51; 9VAC25-840-10, 9VAC25-870-10.
Sec. 17-205 Records; disclosure and exemptions.
Any records required by the administrator to be submitted by the owner or in the possession of the
Draft: 12/30/13
18
administrator are subject to disclosure to the public as follows:
A. Records not exempt from disclosure. The following records are not exempt from disclosure: (i)
personal information, to the extent as may be authorized under the Virginia Freedom of
Information Act (Virginia Code § 2.2-3700 et seq.); (ii) records related to inspection reports,
notices of violation, and documents detailing the nature of any land disturbing activity that may
have occurred, or similar documents; (iii) the name and address of any State permit applicant or
permittee; (iv) State permit applications, State permits, and effluent data; and (v) information
required by State permit application forms provided by the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, including information submitted on the forms themselves and any
attachments used to supply information required by the forms.
B. Records exempt from disclosure. The following records are exempt from disclosure to the public:
(i) any records relating to active Federal environmental enforcement actions that are considered
confidential under Federal law; and any records relating to enforcement strategies, including
proposed sanctions for enforcement actions; provided that, upon request, the records are subject
to disclosure after a proposed sanction resulting from the investigation has been determined by
the State Water Control Board, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, or the
administrator; and (ii) any secret formula, secret processes, or secret methods other than effluent
data submitted to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality pursuant to State law may be
claimed as confidential by the submitter in accordance with 40 CFR 122.7 .
C. Freedom of Information Act. Except as expressly provided in subsection (B), any other public
record of the County pertaining to this chapter and any record submitted by an owner under this
chapter shall be subject to disclosure, or may be exempt from disclosure, as provided under the
Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Virginia Code § 2.2-3700 et seq.).
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:40; 9VAC25-870-340.
Sec. 17-206 Fees for land disturbing activity subject solely to the VESCP.
The following fees are for any land disturbing activity subject solely to the VESCP and shall apply to the
services provided by the County under this chapter. Any required fee shall be paid upon submittal of an
application and prior to each reinspection. Neither the County nor the County school board shall be
required to pay any fee if it is the applicant:
Land disturbing activity pertaining to single family dwelling unit
Agreement in lieu of a plan if single family dwelling unit located in a residential
development $150
Agreement in lieu of a plan if single family dwelling unit not located in a residential
development $150
Plan review for a single family dwelling unit $150
Permit and first year inspection fees for a single family dwelling unit $150
Annual permit renewal and inspection fees for a single family dwelling unit, starting
with second year $150
Each reinspection $150
Land disturbing activity pertaining to non-exempt agricultural land
Draft: 12/30/13
19
Plan review $150 per review
Permit and first year inspection fees $150
Each reinspection $150
Annual permit renewal and inspection fees, starting with second year $150
All other land disturbing activity
Plan review, disturbed area less than one acre $150 per review
Permit and first year inspection fees, disturbed area less than one acre $200
Annual permit renewal and inspection fee, disturbed area less than one acre $200
Plan review, disturbed area one acre or larger $300 per review
Permit and first year inspection fees, disturbed area one acre or larger $100 per disturbed acre
Annual permit renewal and inspection fee, disturbed area one acre or larger, starting
with second year $100 per disturbed acre
Each reinspection $250
Each request for partial or full release of surety $250
Amendment to approved plan $200 per plan review
Other services
Review of mitigation plan pertaining to a land disturbing activity in a stream buffer $150
Variances $150 per request
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:54; 9VAC25-840-30.
Sec. 17-207 Fees for land disturbing activity under VSMP.
Each owner seeking coverage under the State permit, each owner requesting a transfer or modification of
its existing registration statement for coverage under the State permit, each owner requesting a major
modification to a State permit, and each owner covered under the State permit required to maintain permit
coverage shall pay a fee upon submittal of the VSMP permit application or, for the permit maintenance
fee, annually, in the amounts according to the following schedule:
Fee Type
Permit
Issuance
Fee 1
State Portion of
Permit Issuance
Fee 2
Transfer or
Modification
Fee Amount 3
Permit
Maintenance
Fee 4
Small construction activity/land
clearing (less than 1 acre)* $290 $81 $20 $140
Small construction activity/land
clearing (equal to or greater than 1
acre and less than 5 acres)*
$2,700 $756 $200 $1,350
Large construction activity/land
clearing (equal to or greater than 5
acres and less than 10 acres)*
$3,400 $952 $250 $1,700
Large construction activity/land
clearing (equal to or greater than
10 acres and less than 50 acres)*
$4,500 $1,260 $300 $2,250
Large construction activity/land
clearing (equal to or greater than
50 acres and less than 100 acres)*
$6,100 $1,708 $450 $3,050
Large construction activity/land
clearing (equal to or greater than
100 acres)*
$9,600 $2,688 $700 $4,800
Draft: 12/30/13
20
Other services Fee
Each reinspection $250
Each request for partial or full release of surety $250
Amendment to approved plan $200 per plan
review
Review of mitigation plan pertaining to a land disturbing activity in a stream buffer $150
Exceptions $240 per request
Construction record drawing; review
1. The fees imposed by this column are the total fees to be paid by the owner to cover the County’s costs to review a stormwater
management and other required plans, VSMP registration statement review, VSMP permit issuance, State permit coverage
verification, inspections, reporting and compliance associated with a land disturbing activity. Any land disturbing activity
subject to the fees in this section is not subject to the separate fees under section 17-206. Any site that has been purchased for
development within a previously permitted common plan of development or sale, the applicant shall be subject to the
applicable fees required by this column.
2. The amounts in this column are not a separate fee but reflect the portion of the fee required by column 1 that must be paid by
the County to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality pursuant to Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:28(A)(5)(a). These
amounts are twenty-eight percent (28%) of the fee required by column 1.
3. The fees imposed by this column are intended to cover the County’s costs to review a request to modify or transfer registrati on
statements from the State permit and major modifications to the State permit that result in changes to stormwater management
plans that require additional review by the County. The applicable fee shall be based on the total disturbed acreage of the s ite.
In addition to the State permit modification fee, any modification resulting in an increase in total disturbed acreage shall pay
the difference in the fee imposed by column 1 that was initially paid and the permit fee imposed by column 1 that would have
applied for the modified total disturbed acreage. No fee shall be required for a minor modification.
4. The fees imposed by this column are an annual permit maintenance fee, and includ e fees imposed on expired permits that have
been administratively continued. The fee, which shall be prorated in the first year, shall be paid at the time provided in section
17-208(B). With respect to the State permit, these fees shall apply until the State permit coverage is terminated.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:28, 62.1-44.15:31, 62.1-44.15:36; 9VAC25-870-730, 9VAC25-870-820, 9VAC25-870-825,
9VAC25-870-830.
Sec. 17-208 Fees; payment.
Each owner shall pay the fees imposed by sections 17-206 and 17-207 as follows:
A. Form. Each fee shall be in the form of cash or a check payable to the “County of Albemarle.”
B. When payment to be made. Payments shall be made as follows:
1. VESCP. Each owner seeking approval of an erosion and sediment control plan shall pay
all applicable fees upon submittal of the application.
2. VSMP; permit issuance. Each owner required to pay the permit issuance fee shall pay
one-half of the applicable total fee required by column 1 of the table in section 17-207
upon submittal of the application, and the remaining one-half shall be paid prior to
issuance of coverage under the State permit.
3. VSMP; transfer or modification. Each owner required to pay the transfer or modification
fee required by column 3 of the table in section 17-207 shall pay the fee upon submittal
of the application to transfer or modify.
3. VSMP; annual maintenance fee. Each owner required to pay the State permit coverage
maintenance fee required by column 4 of the table in section 17-207 shall pay the fee
Draft: 12/30/13
21
annually to the County until a notice of termination is effective. The maintenance fee
shall be due by April 1 of each year. On the first April 1 after the land disturbing activity
has begun, this fee shall be prorated on a monthly basis, and the full fee shall be paid by
April 1 of each year thereafter. No fee shall be refunded for land disturbing activity that
is completed in months other than April.
C. Required information to be included with certain VSMP permit application payments. Each
owner shall submit the following information with the fee payment, or submit a completed
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality permit application fee form:
1. Applicant name, address and daytime phone number.
2. Applicant Federal Identification Number (FIN), if applicable.
3. The name of the facility or activity and its location.
4. The type of State permit applied for.
5. Whether the application is for a new State permit issuance, State permit reissuance, State
permit maintenance, or State permit modification.
6. The amount of fee submitted.
7. The existing State permit number, if applicable.
8. Other information as required by the administrator.
D. Use of fees. The County’s portion of the fees imposed under sections 17-206 and 17-207 shall be
used solely to carry out the County’s responsibilities under the Virginia Stormwater Management
Act, the Erosion and Sediment Control Law, the applicable regulations in 9VAC25-830 through
9VAC25-890, this chapter and any other applicable standards and specifications.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:36, 62.1-44.15:54; 9VAC25-840-30, 9 VAC25-870-700, 9VAC25-870-750, 9VAC25-
870-760, 9VAC25-870-780, 9VAC25-870-820.
Sec. 17-209 Fees; incomplete and late payments
Incomplete and late payments of fees required by sections 17-206 and 17-207 shall be subject to the
following:
A. Incomplete payments. The failure of an owner to pay the fee due as required by this chapter for
the application or service shall be deemed to be a nonpayment of the fee and: (i) the application
shall not be processed; and (ii) no service shall be provided by the County. The administrator
shall provide written notice to the owner of any incomplete payment within ten (10) days after the
determination that the payment is incomplete.
B. Late payments. Any late payment shall be subject to interest at the underpayment rate provided in
Virginia Code § 58.1-15 and shall be calculated on a monthly basis at the applicable periodic rate.
A ten percent (10%) late payment fee shall be charged to any account more than ninety (90) days
past due.
C. Remedies. The County may pursue any remedies provided by State law to collect any past due
Draft: 12/30/13
22
amount. In addition, the County or the administrator may pursue the remedies provided in section
17-900 et seq., including revocation of any approval.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-770.
Sec. 17-210 Review of administrator’s action by the board of supervisors; judicial review.
Any person aggrieved by an action or inaction of the administrator may demand that the board of
supervisors review the action or inaction and may thereafter request judicial review of the board of
supervisor’s final decision, as provided herein:
A. Actions that may be reviewed. Any of the following actions by the administrator may be
reviewed: (i) the disapproval of an erosion and sediment control plan or VSMP permit; (ii) the
approval of an erosion and sediment control plan or VSMP permit with conditions the owner
objects to; (iii) the disapproval of a variance or exception; (iv) any determination made under
sections 17-300 through 17-306; (v) any State permit decision made by the administrator; (vi) any
enforcement decision made by the administrator; (vii) the failure of the administrator to act within
the time periods required by this chapter; and (viii) the approval of an erosion and sediment
control plan or VSMP permit where the issue is compliance with 9VAC25-840-40(19).
B. Standing. Any owner who is an applicant, permittee, operator or any other person subject to State
permit requirements under the VSMP who is aggrieved by any action or inaction under
subsection (A)(i) through (vii) has standing to seek review under this section. Any downstream
owner who is aggrieved by an action under subsection (A)(viii) has standing to seek review under
this section.
C. Demand for hearing and time in which to make demand before the board. Any person who has
standing under subsection (B) may demand in writing a formal hearing by the board of
supervisors, provided that a petition requesting a hearing is filed with the clerk of the board of
supervisors: (i) within thirty (30) days after the date of notice of the action, when review is sought
under subsection (A)(i) through (A)(vi); (ii) within thirty (30) days after the date by which the
administrator was required to act but failed to do so, when review is sought under subsection
(A)(vii); or (iii) within thirty (30) days after the date of the administrator’s approval of the erosion
and sediment control plan or VSMP permit, when review is sought under subsection (A)(viii).
D. Conduct of hearing before the board. The hearing before the board of supervisors under this
section shall be held at a regular or special meeting of the board, subject to the following:
1. Verbatim record. A verbatim record of the hearing shall be taken and filed with the State
Water Control Board.
2. Depositions. Depositions may be taken and read as in actions at law.
3. Subpoenas. The board has the power to issue subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum, and
at the request of any party shall issue subpoenas. The failure of a witness without legal
excuse to appear or to testify or to produce documents shall be acted upon by the board in
the manner prescribed in Virginia Code § 2.2-4022. Witnesses who are subpoenaed shall
receive the same fees and mileage as in civil actions.
Draft: 12/30/13
23
E. Decision by the board. The board shall make a final decision within forty five (45) days after the
hearing is concluded. The board may affirm, reverse, or modify the action of the administrator, or
it may take any action the administrator failed to take. The decision shall be in writing and state
the date of the decision and the reasons for the decision. Notice of the board’s decision shall be
provided to the owner and to any downstream owner who is aggrieved.
F. Time in which request judicial review. A final decision by the board of supervisors under this
section may be subject to judicial review, provided that an appeal is filed by the person aggrieved
in the circuit court within thirty (30) days after the date of the board’s written decision.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:26, 62.1-44.15:44, 62.1-44.15:45, 62.1-44.15:46, 62.1-44.15:62; 9VAC25-870-118.
Article III. Applicability of the VESCP and the VSMP
to a Land Disturbing Activity or a Site Condition
Sec. 17-300 Land disturbing activities and site conditions subject to the VESCP.
The following land disturbing activities and site conditions are subject to the VESCP, and the owner shall
comply with all applicable requirements of the VESCP in this chapter and under State law:
A. Land disturbance of 10,000 square feet or more. Any land disturbance of ten thousand (10,000)
square feet or more, including the harvesting of forest crops, unless the activity is exempt under
section 17-301.
B. Land disturbance of less than 10,000 square feet; common plan of development or sale. Any land
disturbance of less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet if the disturbance is part of a common
plan of development or sale whose total land disturbance will exceed ten thousand (10,000)
square feet, unless the activity is exempt under section 17-301.
C. Erosion impact area. The administrator determines that a site is an erosion impact area under
section 17-304, regardless of whether the activity resulting in the condition is otherwise exempt
under section 17-301.
D. Agricultural road included within a plan of development. The administrator determines that any
previously constructed agricultural road, exempt at the time of its construction under section 17-
301, is no longer exempt because the owner submitted an initial site plan, preliminary plat, any
other subdivision plat, or special use permit for a use or activity not directly related to agriculture,
for the site on which the agricultural road is located, and: (i) the initial site plan, subdivision plat,
or special use permit application was submitted within twenty-four (24) months after construction
of the agricultural road began; and (ii) the administrator determines that the dimensions and
alignment of the agricultural road substantially correspond to the dimensions and alignment of a
road proposed on the plan, plat, or any document submitted as part of the special use permit
application.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:51; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-301 Land disturbing activities exempt from the VESCP.
The following land disturbing activities are exempt from the VESCP:
A. Minor residential-related activities. Minor residential-related land disturbing activities such as
Draft: 12/30/13
24
home gardens and individual home landscaping, repairs, and maintenance work.
B. Connections. Individual service connections.
C. Public utility lines. Installing, maintaining, or repairing any underground public utility lines when
the activity occurs on an existing hard surfaced road, street, or sidewalk, provided that the land
disturbing activity is confined to the area of the road, street, or sidewalk that is hard surfaced.
D. Conventional onsite sewage systems. Septic tank lines or drainage fields for a conventional onsite
sewage system unless they are included in an overall plan for land disturbing activity related to
constructing the building to be served by the system.
E. Mining, oil and gas operations and projects. Permitted surface or deep mining operations and
projects, and oil and gas operations and projects conducted pursuant to Title 45.1 of the Virginia
Code.
F. Agricultural, horticultural, and forestal activities. Tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural,
horticultural, or forest crops, livestock feedlot operations, the construction of agricultural roads
unless and until a plan of development is submitted and the road is no longer exempt as provided
in section 17-300(D), or as additionally set forth by the State Water Control Board in regulations;
provided that this exemption shall not apply to the harvesting of forest crops unless the area on
which the harvesting occurs is reforested artificially or naturally in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 11 (Virginia Code § 10.1-1100 et seq.) of Title 10.1 of the Virginia Code or
is converted to bona fide agricultural or improved pasture use as described in Virginia Code §
10.1-1163(B).
G. Agricultural engineering operations. Agricultural engineering operations including, but not
limited to, constructing terraces, terrace outlets, check dams, desilting basins, dikes, ponds not
required to comply with the provisions of the Dam Safety Act (Virginia Code § 10.1-604 et seq.),
ditches, strip cropping, lister furrowing, contour cultivating, contour furrowing, land drainage,
and land irrigation.
H. Railroad improvements. Repairing or rebuilding the tracks, rights-of-way, bridges,
communication facilities, and other related structures and facilities of a railroad company.
I. Posts and poles. Installating fence and sign posts or telephone and electric poles and other kinds
of posts or poles.
J. Emergency work. Emergency work to protect life, limb, or property, and emergency repairs;
provided that if the land disturbing activity would have required an approved erosion and
sediment control plan if the activity was not an emergency, then the land area disturbed shall be
shaped and stabilized in accordance with the requirements of the County.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:51.
Sec. 17-302 Land disturbing activities subject to the VSMP.
The following land disturbing activities are subject to the VSMP, and the owner shall comply with all
applicable requirements of the VSMP in this chapter and under State law:
A. Land disturbance of 10,000 square feet or more. Any land disturbance of ten thousand (10,000)
Draft: 12/30/13
25
square feet or more, including the harvesting of forest crops, unless the activity is exempt under
section 17-303.
B. Land disturbance of less than 10,000 square feet; common plan of development or sale. Any land
disturbance of less than ten thousand (10,000) square feet if the disturbance is part of a common
plan of development or sale whose total land disturbance will exceed ten thousand (10,000)
square feet, unless the activity is exempt under section 17-303.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:24, 62.1-44.15:34; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-303 Land disturbing activities exempt from the VSMP.
The following land disturbing activities are exempt from the VSMP requirements of this chapter, unless
otherwise required by federal law:
A. Mining, oil and gas operations and projects. Permitted surface or deep mining operations and
projects, and oil and gas operations and projects conducted pursuant to Title 45.1 of the Virginia
Code.
B. Agricultural, horticultural, and forestal activities. Clearing lands specifically for agricultural
purposes and the management, tilling, planting, or harvesting of agricultural, horticultural, or
forest crops, livestock feedlot operations, or as additionally set forth by the State Water Control
Board in regulations; provided that this exception shall not apply to harvesting of forest crops
unless the area on which harvesting occurs is reforested artificially or naturally in accordance
with the provisions of Chapter 11 (Virginia Code § 10.1-1100 et seq.) of Title 10.1 of the Virginia
Code or is converted to bona fide agricultural or improved pasture use as described in Virginia
Code § 10.1-1163(B).
C. Single-family residences. Single-family residences separately built and disturbing less than one
acre and not part of a larger common plan of development or sale, including additions or
modifications to existing single-family detached residential structures.
D. Discharges. Discharges to a sanitary sewer or a combined sewer system.
E. Reclamation of abandoned property. Activities under a State or Federal reclamation program to
return an abandoned property to an agricultural or open land use.
F. Project maintenance. Routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and
grade, hydraulic capacity, or original construction of the project. Paving an existing road with a
compacted or impervious surface and reestablishing existing associated ditches and shoulders
shall be deemed to be routine maintenance if performed in accordance with this subsection.
G. Emergencies. Conducting land disturbing activities in response to a public emergency where the
related work requires immediate authorization to avoid imminent endangerment to human health
or the environment. In a public emergency, the owner shall advise the administrator of the
disturbance within seven (7) days after commencing the land disturbing activity, and compliance
with the administrative requirements of this chapter to obtain approval of a VSMP permit is
required within thirty (30) days after commencing the land disturbing activity.
H. State and Federal agencies. State and Federal agencies eligible to operate a VSMP consistent
with the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and the Virginia Department of Environmental
Draft: 12/30/13
26
Quality’s approved annual standards and specifications as provided in Virginia Code §§ 62.1-
44.15:27 and 62.1-44.15:56.
I. Linear development projects, utilities and railroads. Linear development projects subject to
annual State standards and specifications, electric, natural gas, and telephone utility companies,
interstate and intrastate natural gas pipeline companies, railroad companies, or authorities created
pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-5102 eligible to operate a VSMP consistent with the Virginia
Stormwater Management Act and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality’s approved
annual standards and specifications as provided in Virginia Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27 and 62.1-
44.15:56.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:24, 62.1-44.15:34.
Sec. 17-304 Determining the status of a land disturbing activity or a site condition.
The administrator shall determine:
A. Whether an activity is subject to this chapter. Whether an activity is a land disturbing activity
and, if it is so, whether it is subject to the VESCP, the VSMP, or both, or whether it is exempt
therefrom.
B. Whether an erosion impact area exists. Whether an erosion impact area exists on a site.
C. Whether an agricultural road is part of a plan of development. Whether a road is an agricultural
road and whether it is part of a plan of development under section 17-300(D).
D. Related offsite land disturbing activity. When a land disturbing activity includes activity at a
separate location, including but not limited to borrow and disposal areas, whether: (i) the offsite
activity should be considered as being part of the proposed land disturbing activity; or (ii) to
require the power to provide proof of an approved erosion and sediment control plan if the owner
asserts that the offsite activity is already covered by an approved erosion and sediment control
plan, and to require that the owner certify that the plan will be implemented in accordance with
applicable VESCP regulations in this chapter.
E. Adjacent offsite land disturbing activity. When a land disturbing activity or plan requires land
disturbing activity on adjacent or abutting property, whether: (i) the owner of the adjacent or
abutting property must be a signatory on the application; or (ii) to require a recorded easement
and agreement for the offsite land disturbing activity before further land disturbing activity
occurs, or in the case of a proposed plan, prior to further review or approval.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-15.44:27, 62.1-15.44:54, 62.1-15.44:55; 9VAC25-840-80.
Sec. 17-305 Notice of determination regarding status of land disturbing activity or site condition.
The administrator shall provide notice to the owner of any determination under section 17-304(A) that a
proposed land disturbing activity is subject to this chapter where an owner asserts that the activity is
exempt, any determination under section 17-304(B) that an erosion impact area exists, any determination
under section 17-304(C) that an agricultural road is now subject to the VESCP, as follows:
A. Notice. Upon making a determination, the administrator shall immediately inform the owner of
the determination. The notice may either be informal, by the administrator speaking to the owner
Draft: 12/30/13
27
by telephone or in person, or a written notice. The written notice shall: (i) state the basis for the
determination; (ii) instruct the owner to submit an erosion and sediment control plan for review
and approval; and (iii) for determinations pertaining to erosion impact areas or agricultural roads,
state the date by which the plan shall be submitted.
B. When written notice required. If informal notice as provided in subsection (A) is first provided to
the owner and the owner either requests written notice or fails to comply with the informal notice,
the administrator shall then provide written notice to the owner as provided in subsection (A).
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-15.44:27, 62.1-15.44:54.
Sec. 17-306 Owner’s obligation upon receipt of notice of determination.
Upon receipt of the notice provided by the administrator under section 17-305, the owner shall be
obligated to act as follows:
A. Determination that land disturbing activity is subject to the VESCP or the VSMP, or both. If the
administrator determines that a land disturbing activity is subject to the VESCP, the VSMP, or
both, under section 17-305(A) or (C), the owner shall immediately comply with the applicable
requirements of this chapter and the applicable requirements of this chapter shall be immediately
enforced.
B. Determination that an erosion impact area exists. If the administrator determines that an erosion
impact area exists under section 17-305(B), the owner shall: (i) not permit any portion of that
land to remain in a condition so that soil erosion and sedimentation causes reasonably avoidable
damage or harm to adjacent or downstream property, roads, streams, lakes, or ponds; and (ii)
immediately comply with the applicable requirements of the notice and this chapter. If good
cause is shown, the administrator may grant to an owner an extension of time to comply with the
requirements of this subsection and this chapter.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-15.44:27, 62.1-15.44:54, 62.1-15.44:55; 9VAC25-840-80.
Article IV. Procedure for Submitting, Reviewing and Acting on Applications;
Post-Approval Rights and Obligations
Division 1. Application Requirements
Sec. 17-400 Responsibility to prepare, submit and obtain approval of applications; multi-
jurisdictional developments.
The procedures in this article, and all related requirements of this chapter, apply to any land disturbing
activity subject to the VESCP and the VSMP, as well as any land disturbing activity subject to the
VESCP but not the VSMP. Any land disturbing activity subject only to the VESCP shall be subject only
to the requirements of this chapter applicable under the VESCP. An application shall be submitted as
follows:
A. Responsibility of the owner. Each owner is responsible for preparing, submitting, and obtaining
approval of an application prior to engaging in land disturbing activity subject to this chapter.
When the land disturbing activity will be required of a contractor performing construction work
pursuant to a construction contract, the preparation, submission, and obtaining approval of the
plan shall be the responsibility of the owner.
Draft: 12/30/13
28
B. Submittal of application to the administrator. Subject to subsection (C), each application shall be
submitted to the administrator as provided in this chapter.
C. Multi-jurisdictional developments. If a proposed land disturbing activity involves lands under the
jurisdiction of the County’s program and another public entity’s program, in lieu of the owner
submitting separate applications to each program, either:
1. Request that State review plan. The administrator or the other program, or both, may
request that the application be submitted to the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality for review and action; or
2. Agreement that single program administer the project. The administrator may enter into
an agreement on behalf of the County with the other program regarding the
administration of the project, whereby the program containing the greater portion of the
project shall be responsible for all or part of ensuring that the applicable program
requirements are satisfied. The greater portion of the project shall include all anticipated
future phases and development of the project, as determined by the administrator.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-401 VSMP permit application; form and content.
Any owner whose proposed land disturbing activity is subject to the VSMP shall submit an application
for a VSMP permit that includes all of the following, in the form required by the administrator:
A. Application form. A completed application on an application form provided by the administrator,
signed by the owner.
B. Fees. All applicable fees required by section 17-207 and the applicable fee form.
C. Registration statement. A complete and accurate registration statement from the operator on the
official form provided by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality in order to apply for
State permit coverage. The registration statement shall be signed by the owner in accordance with
9VAC25-870-370 and 9VAC25-880-70.
D. Erosion and sediment control plan. An erosion and sediment control plan satisfying the
requirements of sections 17-402.
E. Stormwater management plan. A stormwater management plan satisfying the requirements of
sections 17-403.
F. Pollution prevention plan. A pollution prevention plan satisfying the requirements of section 17-
404.
G. Stormwater pollution prevention plan. A stormwater pollution prevention plan satisfying the
requirements of section 17-405.
H. Mitigation plan. A mitigation plan satisfying the requirements of section 17-406 if land disturbing
activity is proposed within a stream buffer under section 17-604.
Draft: 12/30/13
29
I. Requested variations or exceptions. A request for any variation or exception as provided in
sections 17-407 and 17-408.
J. Construction record drawings. Construction record drawings if existing stormwater management
facilities are used, satisfying the requirements of section 17-422
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:34; 9VAC25-870-59, 9VAC25-870-370, 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-402 Erosion and sediment control plans, and agreements in lieu of a plan; form and content.
Any owner whose proposed land disturbing activity is subject to the VSMP, or is subject solely to the
VESCP, shall submit an erosion and sediment control plan for review that includes the following, in the
form required by the administrator:
A. Application form. A completed application on an application form provided by the administrator,
if the land disturbing activity is subject only to the VESCP and a VSMP permit is not required.
B. Fee. The fee required by section 17-206, if the land disturbing activity is subject only to the
VESCP, and a VSMP permit is not required.
C. Elements of plan. Except as provided in subsection (D), an erosion and sediment control plan that
contains all of the following elements:
1. Temporary and permanent controls. The specifications for temporary and permanent
controls of soil erosion and sedimentation in such detail as the administrator deems to be
reasonably adequate, considering the nature and extent of the proposed land disturbing
activity, implementing appropriate erosion and sediment control best management
practices and satisfying the requirements of 9VAC25-880-70, Part II(A)(2). All control
measures required by the plan shall be designed and installed in accordance with good
engineering practices.
2. Maintenance responsibilities. A statement describing the maintenance responsibilities of
the owner to ensure that the land disturbing activity will satisfy the purposes and
requirements of this chapter.
3. Technical criteria. The technical criteria required by section 17-500.
4. Identification of land disturber. Identify the person holding a certificate of competence
required by Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:54, who shall be in charge of and responsible for
carrying out the land disturbing activity.
5. Additional information. Additional information required by the administrator as
determined to be necessary for a complete review of the plan.
6. Certification. A certification on a form provided by the administrator and signed by the
owner stating that all requirements of the approved plan will be complied with.
D. Agreement in lieu of a plan. Notwithstanding subsection (C), if the land disturbing activity is for
the purpose of establishing or modifying a single family dwelling unit, the administrator may
allow an agreement in lieu of a plan for the land disturbing activity required for constructing the
dwelling; provided:
Draft: 12/30/13
30
1. Eligibility. The single family dwelling unit is on an individual lot of one (1) acre or less
which is not subject to an active erosion and sediment control plan or is not part of a
common plan of development or sale.
2. Other factors to be considered by administrator. In determining whether to allow an
agreement in lieu of a plan under this section, the administrator shall consider the
potential threat to water quality and to adjacent land resulting from the land disturbing
activity, and whether the land disturbing activity is within the mountain overlay district
identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Contents and form of the agreement in lieu of a plan. The contents of any agreement in
lieu of a plan shall be established by the administrator, and they shall: (i) be sufficient to
ensure that the purposes and requirements of the VESCP, including the requirements of
9VAC25-880-70, Part II(A)(2) are satisfied; and (ii) identify the person in charge of and
responsible for carrying out the land disturbing activity and holding a valid certificate of
competence for that task. The form of the agreement shall be subject to review and
approval by the County attorney.
4. Effect of agreement in administration of the VESCP. Except as provided in subsection (C)
and section 17-500 pertaining to the content and technical criteria applicable to erosion
and sediment control plans, all other references in this chapter to an erosion and sediment
control plan shall include an agreement in lieu of a plan, and the County and the owner
shall have all of the rights, responsibilities and remedies set forth in this chapter as
though the agreement in lieu of a plan was an erosion and sediment control plan.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-840-60, 9VAC25-870-400, 9VAC25-880-70, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-403 Stormwater management plans; form and content.
Any owner whose proposed land disturbing activity is subject to the VSMP shall submit a stormwater
management plan for review that includes the following, in the form required by the administrator:
A. Elements of plan. A stormwater management plan for the entire common plan of development or
sale, where applicable, which shall be considered to be a single land disturbing activity even
when there are individual parcels in a residential, commercial, or industrial common plan of
development or sale. The plan shall contain all of the following elements:
1. Stormwater discharges and features. The plan shall consider all sources of surface runoff
and all sources of subsurface and groundwater flows converted to surface runoff, and
shall include information on the type of and location of stormwater discharges,
information on the features to which stormwater is being discharged including surface
waters, and predevelopment and postdevelopment drainage areas.
2. Contact information. Contact information including the name, address, telephone
number, and email address of the owner and the tax reference number and parcel number
of the property or properties affected.
3. Details pertaining to, or narrative of, current and final site conditions. Either sufficient
plan information provided and documented during the review process that addresses the
Draft: 12/30/13
31
current and final site conditions, or a narrative that includes a description of current site
conditions and final site conditions or
4. Description of proposed stormwater management facilities. A detailed plan of the
proposed stormwater management facilities, including all best management practices,
that will satisfy the requirements of this chapter and a description of all facilities and best
management practices that will prevent or minimize water quality impacts for any new
development or redevelopment project that will result in land disturbing activity of ten
thousand (10,000) square feet or more.
5. Description of long-term operation and maintenance. A description of the mechanism
through which the facilities, including all best management practices, will be operated
and maintained after construction is complete, provided that this description is satisfied if
the stormwater management facility will be subject to the agreement required by section
17-415.
6. Information about proposed stormwater management facilities. The following
information about the proposed stormwater management facilities, including: (i) the type
of facilities; (ii) the location, including geographic coordinates; (iii) acres treated; (iv) the
surface waters into which the facility will discharge; and (v) any other information
required by the administrator in order to comply with any requirements of the County’s
MS4 permit.
7. Documentation demonstrating compliance. Documentation and calculations, including all
hydrologic and hydraulic computations and runoff characteristics, verifying compliance
with the water quality and quantity requirements of the technical criteria in section 17-
501.
8. Maps. One or more maps of the site depicting the topography of the site and: (i) all
contributing drainage areas; (ii) existing streams, ponds, culverts, ditches, wetlands, other
water bodies, and floodplains; (iii) soil types, geologic formations if karst features are
present in the area, forest cover, and other vegetative areas; (iv) current land use
including existing structures, roads, and locations of known utilities and easements; (v)
sufficient information on adjoining parcels to assess the impacts of stormwater from the
site on these parcels; (vi) the limits of clearing and grading, and the proposed drainage
patterns on the site; (vii) proposed buildings, roads, parking areas, utilities, and
stormwater management facilities; (viii) proposed land uses, with tabulation of the
percentage of surface area to be adapted to various uses, including but not limited to
planned locations of utilities, roads, and easements; and (ix) other site information
deemed necessary by the administrator.
9. Offsite compliance options. If an owner intends to meet the requirements established in
section 17-502, which implements 9VAC25-870-63 and 9VAC25-870-66, through the
use of off-site compliance options, where applicable, a letter of availability from the off-
site provider.
10. Additional information. Additional information deemed necessary by the administrator
for a complete review of the plan.
B. Seals and signatures. Any elements of the stormwater management plan that include activities
regulated under Virginia Code § 54.1-400 et seq. shall be appropriately sealed and signed by a
Draft: 12/30/13
32
professional registered in the State pursuant to Virginia Code § 54.1-400 et seq. Any stormwater
management plan requiring an appropriate seal and signature shall be deemed to be incomplete
under section 17-409 if it is not sealed and signed as required by this section.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-55, 9VAC25-870-108, 9VAC25-870-400, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-404 Pollution prevention plans; form and content.
Any owner whose proposed land disturbing activity is subject to the VSMP shall submit a pollution
prevention plan for review that includes the following, in the form required by the administrator:
A. Elements of plan. A pollution prevention plan containing all of the following elements:
1. Sources of pollutants. Identify potential pollutant generating activities and the pollutant
that is expected to be exposed to stormwater.
2. Location of pollutant generating activities. Describe the location where the potential
pollutant generating activities will occur, or if identified on a site plan, refer to the site
plan.
3. Nonstormwater discharges. Identify all nonstormwater dischargres as provided in
9VAC25-880-70, Part I(E), that are or will be commingled with stormwater discharges
from the construction activity, including any support activity.
4. Person responsible. Identify the person responsible for implementing the pollution
prevention practices for each pollutant generating activity, if different from the person
listed as the qualified personnel in the stormwater pollution prevention plan.
5. Practices and procedures. Describe the pollution prevention practices and procedures
that will be implemented to respond to the categories of leaks, spills and discharges in
9VAC25-880-70, Part II(A)(4)(e).
6. Pollution prevention awareness. Describe the procedures for providing pollution
prevention awareness of all applicable wastes, including any wash water, disposal
practices and applicable disposal locations of these wastes to personnel in order to
comply with the State
B. Details of measures to minimize the discharge of pollutants. The pollution prevention plan shall
detail the design, installation, implementation, and maintenance of effective pollution prevention
measures in accordance with 40 CFR 450.21(d) to minimize the discharge of pollutants. The
following are the minimum requirements for minimizing the discharge of pollutants:
1. Minimum control measures. At a minimum, the control measures shall be designed,
installed, implemented, and maintained to address the following:
a. Wash waters. Minimize the discharge of pollutants from equipment and vehicle
washing, wheel wash water, and other wash waters. Wash waters must be treated
in a sediment basin or alternative control that provides equivalent or better
treatment prior to discharge.
Draft: 12/30/13
33
b. Minimization of exposure to precipitation and stormwater. Minimize the
exposure of building materials, building products, construction wastes, trash,
landscape materials, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, detergents, sanitary waste,
and other materials present on the site to precipitation and to stormwater.
c. Minimize discharges from spills and leaks. Minimize the discharge of pollutants
from spills and leaks and implement chemical spill and leak prevention and
response procedures.
2. Best management practices. The pollution prevention plan shall provide effective best
management practices to prohibit the following discharges in accordance with 40 CFR
450.21(e):
a. Washout of concrete. Wastewater from the washout of concrete.
b. Washout of stucco and other materials. Wastewater from washout and cleanout
of stucco, paint, form release oils, curing compounds, and other construction
materials.
c. Vehicle and equipment maintenance and operation. Fuels, oils, or other
pollutants used in vehicle and equipment operation and maintenance.
d. Vehicle and equipment washing. Soaps, solvents or detergents used in vehicle
and equipment washing.
3. Discharges from dewatering activities prohibited. Discharges from dewatering activities,
including discharges from dewatering trenches and excavations, are prohibited unless
managed by appropriate controls in accordance with 40 CFR 450.21(c).
4. Control of waste. The pollution prevention plan shall include measures for controlling
waste such as discarded building materials, chemicals, litter, and sanitary waste at the
construction site that may cause adverse impacts to water quality.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-870-56, 9VAC25-870-400, 9VAC25-880-70, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-405 Stormwater pollution prevention plan; form and content.
Any owner whose proposed land disturbing activity is subject to the VSMP shall submit a stormwater
pollution prevention plan for review that includes the following, in the form required by the administrator:
A. Elements of plan. A stormwater pollution prevention plan containing all of the following
elements:
1. Registration statement. A signed copy of the registration statement for coverage under
the State permit.
2. Notice of State permit coverage. Upon receipt, a copy of the notice of coverage under the
State permit.
3. State permit. A copy of the State permit.
Draft: 12/30/13
34
4. Nature of activity. A narrative description of the nature of the construction activity,
including the function of the project (e.g., low density residential, shopping mall,
highway).
5. Plan of the site. A plan of the site, satisfying the form and style for such a plan as
provided in the Design Standards Manual, identifying:
a. Direction of stormwater flow. Directions of stormwater flow and approximate
slopes anticipated after major grading activities.
b. Limits of land disturbance. Limits of land disturbance including steep slopes and
natural buffers around surface waters that will not be disturbed.
c. Major structural and nonstructural control measures. Locations of major
structural and nonstructural control measures including sediment basins and
traps, perimeter dikes, sediment barriers, and other measures intended to filter,
settle, or similarly treat sediment that will be installed between disturbed areas
and the undisturbed vegetated areas, in order to increase sediment removal and
maximize stormwater infiltration;
d. Surface waters. Locations of surface waters.
e. Concentrated stormwater. Locations where concentrated stormwater is
discharged.
f. Support activities. Locations of support activities, when applicable and when
required by the administrator, including but not limited to: (i) areas where
equipment and vehicle washing, wheel wash water, and other wash water is to
occur; (ii) storage areas for chemicals such as acids, fuels, fertilizers and other
lawn care chemicals; (iii) concrete wash out areas; (iv) vehicle fueling and
maintenance areas; (v) sanitary waste facilities, including those temporarily
placed on the construction site; and (vi) construction waste storage.
6. Requirements of 40 CFR 450.21. The plan must address the following requirements as
specified in 40 CFR 450.21, to the extent not otherwise addressed in the erosion and
sediment control plan submitted for the site:
a. Runoff volume and velocity. Control runoff volume and velocity within the site to
minimize soil erosion.
b. Stormwater discharges. Control stormwater discharges, including both peak flow
rates and total stormwater volume, to minimize erosion at outlets and to
minimize downstream channel and stream bank erosion.
c. Minimize soil exposure. Minimize the amount of soil exposed during
construction activity.
d. Minimize disturbance of steep slopes. Minimize the disturbance of slopes of
twenty-five percent (25%) or greater.
Draft: 12/30/13
35
e. Minimize sediment discharges. Minimize sediment discharges from the site by
designing, installing and maintaining erosion and sediment controls that address
factors such as the amount, frequency, intensity and duration of precipitation, the
nature of resulting runoff, and soil characteristics, including the range of soil
particle sizes expected to be present on the site.
f. Buffers. Provide and maintain natural buffers around surface waters, direct
stormwater to vegetated areas to increase sediment removal and maximize
stormwater infiltration, unless infeasible.
g. Soil compaction. Minimize soil compaction and, unless infeasible, preserve
topsoil.
h. Stabilize disturbed areas. Stabilization of disturbed areas must, at a minimum, be
initiated immediately whenever any clearing, grading, excavating, or other earth
disturbing activities have permanently ceased on any portion of the site, or
temporarily ceased on any portion of the site and will not resume for a period
exceeding fourteen (14) calendar days. Stabilization must be completed within
the period of time determined by the administrator. In arid, semiarid, and
drought-stricken areas where initiating vegetative stabilization measures
immediately is infeasible, alternative stabilization measures must be employed as
specified by the administrator.
i. Outlet structures. Use outlet structures that withdraw water from the surface,
unless infeasible, when discharging from basins and impoundments.
7. Discharges to impaired waters, surface waters within an applicable TMDL wasteload
allocation, and exceptional waters. Discharges to impaired waters, surface waters within
an applicable TMDL wasteload allocation established and approved prior to July 1, 2014,
and exceptional waters shall include the information required by 9VAC25-880-70, Part
II(A)(5).
B. Qualified personnel. The name, telephone number, and qualifications of the qualified personnel
conducting inspections.
C. Delegation of authority. The persons or positions with authority to sign inspection reports or to
modify the stormwater pollution prevention plan.
D. Additional elements of an approved plan. In addition to the elements in subsection (A), an
approved stormwater pollution prevention plan is composed of, once they are approved, the
approved erosion and sediment control plan, including the elements of that plan addressing the
requirements of 9VAC25-870-54(F), the approved stormwater management plan, and the
pollution prevention plan for the land disturbing activity to which the stormwater pollution
prevention plan applies.
E. Signature. The plan shall be signed by a person authorized under 9VAC25-880-70, Part III(K).
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-890-40.
Draft: 12/30/13
36
Sec. 17-406 Mitigation plan if development allowed in stream buffer; form and content.
Each owner who seeks to develop in a stream buffer pursuant to section 17-604 shall submit a mitigation
plan that includes the following in the form required by the administrator:
A. Elements of plan. Except as provided in subsection (B), each mitigation plan shall contain all of
the following:
1. Identify impacts and specify mitigation measures. Identify the impacts of the proposed
development on water quality and lands within the stream buffer and specify the
mitigation measures that will address water quality and stream buffer impacts.
2. Disturbance to land and vegetation minimized. Ensure that, where development takes
place within a stream buffer: (i) the proposed development, including the alignment and
design of any stream crossing, shall be located on those portions of a site and in a manner
that will be least disruptive to the natural functions of the stream buffer; (ii) no more land
shall be disturbed than is necessary to allow a development that is permitted in the
underlying zoning district under the applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance; and
(iii) native vegetation shall be preserved to the fullest extent possible, consistent with the
proposed development.
3. Multiple stream crossings; demonstrate environmental advantage over single stream
crossing. If an owner seeks to establish more than one stream crossing as provided in
section 17-604(C)(7), demonstrate that the environmental impacts from the entire road,
street or driveway necessitated by a single stream crossing would be greater than the
environmental impacts caused by an additional crossing and its associated road, street or
driveway. For the purposes of this subsection, the environmental impacts considered by
the administrator include, but are not limited to, impacts to soil, soil erosion, stormwater
quantity, water quality, loss of vegetated stream buffer, impacts to stream beds and
stream banks, the creation of impervious surfaces, and the disturbance of slopes of
twenty-five percent (25%) or greater.
4. Additional information. Additional information deemed necessary by the administrator
for a complete review of the plan.
B. Building permit in lieu of satisfying requirements of subsection (A). For any mitigation plan
pertaining to the development of one single-family detached dwelling, the administrator may, in
his discretion, accept the building permit for the dwelling in lieu of satisfying the requirements of
subsection (A).
(§ 19.3-46, 2-11-98; § 19.2-8, 6-19-91, § 8; § 19.1-13, 6-19-91, § 13; Code 1988, §§ 19.1-13, 19.2-8, 19.3-46; Ord.
98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 08-17(2), 5-7-08; Ord. 11-17(1), 10-5-11)
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-407 Variances from requirements of the VESCP.
The administrator may waive or modify any applicable requirements of the VESCP that he deems to be
inappropriate or too restrictive for the site conditions, by granting a variance in conjunction with his
review of the erosion and sediment control plan, subject to the following:
Draft: 12/30/13
37
A. When variance may be requested. An owner may request that a variance be granted at the time
the plan is submitted or while it is under review by the administrator.
B. Reason for variance. The owner shall explain in writing the reasons for requesting any variance.
C. Factors to be considered. The administrator shall consider the reasons given by the owner for
requesting the variance, the purposes of this chapter, and the competing need of the owner to
maximize cost effectiveness and the need to protect offsite properties and resources from damage.
D. Variance incorporated into approved plan. Any approved variance shall become part of, and be
documented in, the approved plan.
State law reference – 9VAC25-840-50.
Sec. 17-408 Exceptions from the requirements of the VSMP.
The administrator may grant exceptions from the requirements of the VSMP as follows:
A. When exception may be requested. At the time the VSMP permit application is submitted and
while it is under review, an owner may request an exception from any technical criteria in
9VAC25-870-62 through 9VAC25-870-92 or in 9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99.
B. Factors to be considered. The administrator may grant an exception if: (i) the exception is the
minimum necessary to afford relief; (ii) reasonable and appropriate conditions are imposed as
necessary to ensure that the intent of the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and this chapter
are preserved; (iii) granting the exception will not confer any special privileges that are denied in
other similar circumstances; and (iv) the exception request is not based upon conditions or
circumstances that are self-imposed or self-created. Economic hardship alone is not a sufficient
reason to grant an exception.
C. Certain exceptions expressly prohibited. The following exceptions are expressly prohibited:
1. Requirement for State permit. Any exception to the requirement that the land-disturbing
activity obtain any required State permits
2. Using unapproved BMP. Any exception to allow using a best management practice that is
not found on the Virginia Stormwater BMP Clearinghouse Website
(http://vwrrc.vt.edu/swc/PostConstructionBMPs.html), except where allowed under
9VAC25-870-93 et seq., or is not found in the Design Standards Manual
3. Phophorous reductions. Any exception to allow phosphorus reductions, unless offsite
options available through 9VAC25-870-69 have been considered and found not available.
4. Postdevelopment nonpoint nutrient runoff compliance. Any exception from
postdevelopment nonpoint nutrient runoff compliance requirements, unless offsite
options have been considered and found not available.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:35; 9VAC25-870-57, 9VAC25-870-122.
Draft: 12/30/13
38
Division 2. Submittal, Review and Action
Sec. 17-409 Submittal of application; determination of completeness.
The administrator shall determine whether a submitted application is complete as follows:
A. Date of official submittal. An application shall be deemed to be officially submitted on the date of
the next application deadline established by the administrator after the application has been
submitted and the administrator has determined that the application is complete.
B. Timing of review to determine completeness. The administrator’s review to determine whether an
application is complete shall be made within ten (10) days after he receives the application.
C. Effect of failure to make timely determination of completeness. If a determination of completeness
is not made and timely communicated to the applicant, the permit application shall be deemed to
be complete on the date the application was submitted.
D. Determination that application is incomplete; notice. An application omitting any information
required by sections 17-401 through 17-408 shall be deemed to be incomplete and shall not be
accepted for official submittal by the administrator. The administrator shall inform the owner in
writing of the reasons the plan is incomplete, with citation to the applicable section of this chapter
or other law, and what corrections or modifications must be made for the application to be
complete. The administrator shall inform the owner or his or her agent of the determination by
written notice.
E. Resubmittal. Within fifteen (15) days after the date the written notice under subsection (D) was
mailed or delivered by the administrator, the owner may resubmit the application. If the owner
fails to resubmit the application within the fifteen (15) day period, the application shall be
deemed to be disapproved and a new application and fee shall be required to resubmit.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-870-108.
Sec. 17-410 Review and action on application.
The administrator shall review and act on an application as follows:
A. Review. The administrator shall ensure that the plan is reviewed by a certified plan reviewer (but
referred to herein as the “administrator”) who shall review the plan for compliance with the
technical requirements for an application in sections 17-400 through 17-408 and other applicable
laws. This review shall be completed within forty-five (45) days after the application was deemed
to be complete under section 17-409.
B. Identification of required changes. Upon completion of review, the administrator shall identify all
applicable requirements of this chapter that must be addressed in order for the application to be
approved.
C. Revisions required. The owner shall revise the application to address all of the required changes
before the application may be approved.
D. Time for action. The administrator shall act on the application within sixty (60) days after the date
the application was deemed to be complete, provided:
Draft: 12/30/13
39
1. Time for action if changes required; notice of required changes. If the administrator
requires or recommends changes to the application, he shall issue within forty-five (45)
days after the application was deemed to be complete a written notice to the owner
identifying the required changes that must be made and the recommended changes that
may, in the owner’s discretion, be made.
2. Suspension of running of time for action. The running of the time by which the
administrator must act on an application shall be suspended: (i) from the date the appeal
of the disapproval of a variance or exception is submitted until the date the board of
supervisors acts on the appeal under section 17-210; (ii) from the date of the written
notice to the owner until the date the revised application addressing the required changes
is submitted; (iii) from the date of the owner’s request for a deferral of review under
section 17-411(A); (iv) during any extension granted under section 17-411(C); and (v) for
any multi-jurisdictional land disturbing activity, from the date either Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality review was requested or a multi-jurisdictional agreement was
identified as necessary until the date the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
informs the administrator in writing that it will accept review or the date of the multi -
jurisdictional agreement.
E. Action to approve and notice of approval. If the administrator determines that the application
complies with all applicable requirements, he shall approve the application and promptly either
indicate by stamp or signature on every plan that it is approved or issue a written notice to the
owner informing him of the approval.
F. Action to disapprove and notice of disapproval. If the administrator determines that the
application does not satisfy all applicable requirements, he shall disapprove the application and
promptly issue a written notice to the owner stating the reasons for disapproval by identifying the
application’s deficiencies and citing the applicable sections of this chapter or other applicable
laws, and what modifications, terms and conditions will permit approval of the application.
G. Failure to timely act. If the administrator fails to act on an application within the time specified in
subsection (D), the application shall be deemed approved, subject to compliance with the
requirements of sections 17-414 through 17-422.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:53, 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-870-108.
Sec. 17-411 Deferral of review of application; when application deemed withdrawn.
The administrator’s review and action on an application may be deferred, and the application may be
deemed withdrawn, as follows:
A. Request to defer by owner. An owner may request that review or action on the application be
deferred for a specified period up to six (6) months. If during the deferral period the owner does
not request the administrator to take action on the application as provided in section 17-408
within six (6) months after the date the deferral was requested, the application shall be deemed to
have been voluntarily withdrawn.
B. Failure to submit revised application. If an owner fails to submit a revised application to address
all of the requirements within six (6) months after the date of the written notice as provided in
Draft: 12/30/13
40
section 17-410(D)(1), the application shall be deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn by the
owner.
C. Extension of deferral period or period to submit revised plan. Before the deferral period in
subsection (A) expires, the owner may request that the administrator extend the period before the
application is deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn. The request must be received by the
administrator before the deferral period expires. The administrator may grant one extension for a
period not to exceed three (3) months, taking into consideration the size or nature of the proposed
development, the complexity of the review, and the laws in effect at the time the extension
request is made.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:54.
Sec. 17-412 Coordination of review of erosion and sediment control plans with the review of
subdivision plats and site plans.
The review and action on any application shall be coordinated with the review of a subdivision plat or site
plan, to the extent authorized by law.
A. Site plans. An application may be approved for early (or mass) grading upon approval of an
initial site plan under section18-32.4.2.8, provided that the developer has satisfied any conditions
of approval identified by the agent in the letter required by section 18-32.4.2.5(c). An application
for land disturbing activity within a planned development district may be approved prior to
approval of an initial site plan as provided in section 18-8.5.5.4(b). However, no grading permit,
building or other permit shall be issued and no land disturbing activity may begin until the
developer satisfies the requirements of sections 17-414 through 17-417; provided that land
disturbing activity may occur prior to approval of a stormwater management plan if the activity
was previously covered under the State permit issued July 1, 2009.
B. Subdivision plats. An application may be approved for early (or mass) grading upon approval of a
preliminary plat for a subdivision within a planned development district under Albemarle County
Code § 14-225, provided that the subdivider has satisfied any conditions of approval identified by
the agent in the letter required by section 14-222(C), and further provided that an application for
land disturbing activity within a planned development district may be approved prior to approval
of a preliminary plat as provided in section 18-8.5.5.4(b). However, no grading, building or other
permit shall be issued and no land disturbing activity may begin until the subdivider satisfies the
requirements of sections 17-414 through 17-417; provided that land disturbing activity may occur
prior to approval of a stormwater management plan if the activity was previously covered under
the State permit issued July 1, 2009.
C. Other circumstances. The administrator may approve an erosion and sediment control plan prior
to approval of an initial site plan or a preliminary plat in the following circumstances:
1. Correct existing condition. To correct erosion or excessive sedimentation which is
occasioned by any violation of this chapter or by accident, act of God or other cause
beyond the control of the owner; provided that the activity proposed shall be strictly
limited to correcting the condition.
2. Install underground utility improvements. To install underground public utility mains,
interceptors, transmission lines and trunk lines for which plans have been previously
approved by the operating utility and approved by the County as being substantially in
Draft: 12/30/13
41
accord with the comprehensive plan, if necessary.
3. Borrow, fill or waste areas. To establish borrow, fill or waste areas in accordance with
sections 18-5.1.28 and 18-10.2.1.18.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-413Appeal of decision of the administrator.
Any decision of the administrator under section 17-411 may be appealed by the owner as provided in
section 17-210.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:26, 62.1-44.15:44, 62.1-44.15:45, 62.1-44.15:46, 62.1-44.15:62; 9VAC25-870-118.
Division 3. Required Agreements as Prerequisites to Approval: Surety and Maintenance
Sec. 17-414 Agreement with surety.
Any agreement with surety required by this chapter shall be provided by the owner as a prerequisite to
approval of the application, as follows:
A. Purpose for agreement. The owner shall enter into an agreement with the County to take all
appropriate measures required by the approved plan or a condition of the VSMP permit
(collectively, the “conservation actions”).
B. Form of the agreement. The agreement accompanying the surety shall be on a form prepared by
the County attorney and any proposed amendment to the agreement shall be subject to review and
approval by the County attorney.
C. Purpose for surety; type of surety permitted amount. The owner shall provide a surety to
guarantee that the conservation actions will be taken and satisfied. The applicant shall furnish to
the administrator a cash escrow, certified check, official check, bond with surety, letter of credit,
or collaterally assign funds in a manner satisfactory to the County attorney (collectively, the
“surety instrument”), in an amount sufficient for and conditioned upon the satisfactory
performance of all conservation actions. Any proposed surety instrument shall be subject to being
acceptable to the administrator, shall be in a form and have the substance approved by the County
attorney, and shall be subject to review and approval by the County attorney.
D. Estimate. The owner shall submit a request for an estimate of the surety amount to the
administrator. The administrator shall prepare an estimate of the total estimated cost to initiate
and maintain appropriate all conservation actions based on the unit price for new public or private
sector construction in the County and a reasonable allowance for estimated administrative costs
and inflation, which shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the estimated cost of the
conservation actions.
E. Use of surety. The County may make use of monies guaranteed by the surety instrument if either:
(i) the owner fails to timely renew the bond with surety, letter of credit, or the collaterally
assigned funds; or (ii) the administrator, in his discretion, determines that the owner, after written
notice, failed within the time specified in the notice to initiate, maintain or complete appropriate
conservation actions required by the approved plan or by a condition of the permit.
Draft: 12/30/13
42
F. Right to collect shortfall. If the County takes a conservation action because the owner failed to do
so, the County may collect from the owner the difference if the amount of the reasonable cost of
the conservation action exceeds the amount of the security held.
G. Release of surety. The surety shall be released as provided in section 17-423.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:57; 9VAC25-870-104.
Sec. 17-415 Stormwater management maintenance agreement.
The long-term maintenance of permanent stormwater facilities and other techniques shall be subject to the
following:
A. Responsibility. The owner shall enter into an agreement with the County providing for the
owner’s obligation to maintain, repair, replace, reconstruct any permanent stormwater facilities
and other techniques required in conjunction with the approval of the stormwater management
plan, including as it may be amended, or modified as provided in this chapter. The agreement
shall be subject to acceptance by the administrator.
B. Form and substance of the agreement. The agreement shall be in a form and have the substance
approved by the county attorney, and shall be subject to review and approval by the County
attorney. At a minimum, the agreement shall: (i) be submitted to the administrator for review and
approval prior to approval of the stormwater management plan; (ii) be stated to run with the land;
(iii) provide for all necessary access by the administrator to the property to inspect the facility or
technique and to maintain the facility in the event the owner fails to do so; (iv) provide for
periodic inspections and maintenance by the owner according to the schedule included in the
agreement, and the owner’s obligation to submit periodic inspection and maintenance reports to
the administrator; provided that nothing herein shall preclude the administrator from conducting
inspections in lieu of any owner-conducted inspection; and (v) be enforceable by the County and
any other public entity having authority to enforcement the requirements of the Virginia
Stormwater Management Act or this chapter.
C. Recordation. The agreement shall be recorded in the records of the clerk of the circuit court of the
County.
D. When agreement not required. In his discretion, the administrator is authorized not to require an
agreement for any stormwater management facility designed to treat runoff primarily from an
individual residential lot on which it is located, provided that the owner demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the administrator that future maintenance of the facility will be addressed through
an agreement or other enforceable mechanism at the discretion of the administrator.
State law reference – 9VAC25-840-60, 9VAC25-870-58, 9VAC25-870-112, 9VAC25-880-70.
Division 4. Post-Approval Rights and Obligations
Sec. 17-416 Effect of approvals.
The effect of an approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for any land disturbing activity subject
solely to the VESCP, or a VSMP permit, is as follows:
A. Erosion and sediment control plan. When an erosion and sediment control plan is approved for
Draft: 12/30/13
43
any land disturbing activity subject solely to the VESCP, the owner may engage in the land
disturbing activity as provided in the erosion and sediment control plan and the mitigation plan, if
applicable, subject to any applicable requirements of this chapter including, but not limited to,
sections 17-417 through 17-424, and the affirmative duties in sections 17-800 and 17-801, and
State and Federal law. Any land disturbing activity shall be conducted only as it was approved
under the erosion and sediment control plan and the erosion and sediment control plan shall be
implemented only as it was approved.
B. VSMP permit. When a VSMP permit is approved, the permit is a consolidated permit authorizing
the owner to engage in land disturbing activity as provided by the approved erosion and sediment
control plan, the approved stormwater management plan, the pollution prevention plan, the
stormwater pollution prevention plan, and the mitigation plan, if applicable, and the State permit,
subject to any applicable requirements of this chapter including, but not limited to, sections 17-
417 through 17-424, and sections 17-800 through 17-807, and State and Federal law. The
consolidated permit shall include a copy of, or a reference to, the State permit coverage to
discharge stormwater. Any land disturbing activity shall be conducted only as it was approved
under the VSMP permit. Any plan approved in conjunction with a VSMP permit shall be
implemented only as it was approved.
State law reference – 9VAC25-840-90, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-417 Prerequisites to land disturbing activity.
Upon the approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for any land disturbing activity subject solely
to the VESCP, or a VSMP permit, no land disturbing activity shown on the approved erosion and
sediment control plan or stormwater management plan shall occur until all of the following are satisfied:
A. Land disturbing activity subject only to the VESCP. If the land disturbing activity is subject solely
to the VESCP, no land disturbing activity shall occur and no County department or office or any
other public entity authorized under any other law to issue grading, building, or other permits for
activities involving land disturbing activities regulated under this chapter shall issue any such
permit unless: (i) the owner submits with his application the approved erosion and sediment
control plan and certification that the plan will be followed; (ii) the person responsible for
carrying out the plan provides to the administrator the name of the person holding a certificate of
competence who will be in charge of and responsible for carrying out the land disturbing activity;
and (iii) an agreement with surety is provided as required by section 17-414.
B. Land disturbing activity subject to the VSMP. If the land disturbing activity requires a VSMP
permit, no land disturbing activity shall occur and no County department or office or any other
public entity authorized under any other law to issue grading, building, or other permits for
activities involving land disturbing activities regulated under this chapter shall issue any such
permit unless: (i) the owner submits with his application the approved VSMP permit, including
the approved erosion and sediment control plan and the approved stormwater management plan,
evidence of State permit coverage to discharge stormwater, and certification that the plans will be
followed; (ii) the person responsible for carrying out the plan provides to the administrator the
name of the person holding a certificate of competence who will be in charge of and responsible
for carrying out the land disturbing activity; and (iii) an agreement with surety is provided as
required by section 17-414; provided that land disturbing activity may occur prior to approval of
stormwater management plan if the activity was previously covered under the State permit issued
July 1, 2009.
Draft: 12/30/13
44
C. Revocation of approval. The administrator is authorized to revoke the approval of the plan if the
person responsible fails to provide the name of a person holding a certificate of competence prior
to engaging in the land disturbing activity and the person responsible for carrying out the plan
shall be subject to the penalties provided by State law.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:34, 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-418 Modifications and variances to approved erosion and sediment control plans.
Any approved erosion and sediment control plan shall or may be changed as follows:
A. Required modifications. An approved plan shall be modified as follows:
1. Plan inadequate to satisfy VESCP requirements. The administrator shall require that an
approved plan be modified if, after an inspection of the site, the administrator determines
that the approved plan: (i) is inadequate to effectively control soil erosion, sediment
deposition, and runoff to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream
channels, waters, and other natural resources; (ii) is unable to be physically implemented
as approved; or (iii) fails to satisfy any other VESCP requirement. If an amendment is
required, the administrator may also require the time by which the amendment to the plan
shall by submitted and approved.
2. Re-evaluation if land disturbing activity not begun within 180 days or ceases for more
than 180 days. If land disturbing activity is not begun within one hundred eighty (180)
days after the plan was approved, or if land disturbing activity ceases for more than one
hundred eighty (180) days, the administrator may evaluate the approved plan to
determine whether it still satisfies the applicable VESCP requirements of this chapter and
other applicable laws and to verify that all design factors are still valid. If the
administrator determines that the approved plan is inadequate, no longer satisfies all
applicable VESCP requirements, or that the design factors are no longer valid, he shall
require the person responsible for carrying out the approved plan to submit and obtain
approval of a modified plan before starting or resuming the land disturbing activity.
B. Modification by agreement. The administrator may agree to allow an approved plan to be
modified if the person responsible for carrying out the approved plan finds that because of
changed circumstances or for other reasons, the approved plan cannot be effectively carried out,
and proposed amendments to the plan, consistent with all VESCP requirements, are agreed to by
the administrator and the person responsible for carrying out the plan. The agreement may be
memorialized in a stand-alone agreement or by a note added to the approved plan and signed by
the administrator.
C. Variances. The administrator may waive or modify any applicable requirement of the VESCP
otherwise applicable to an approved plan that he deems to be inappropriate or too restrictive for
the site conditions, by granting a variance, subject to the following:
1. When variance may be requested. During construction, the person responsible for
implementing the approved plan may request a variance.
2. Reason for variance. The owner shall explain in writing the reasons for requesting any
variance.
Draft: 12/30/13
45
3. Factors to be considered. The administrator shall consider variance requests judiciously,
keeping in mind both the need of the applicant to maximize cost effectiveness and the
need to protect off-site properties and resources from damage.
4. Action on request. The administrator shall respond to the request in writing by either
approving or disapproving the variance. If the administrator does not approve the
variance within ten (10) days after receipt of the request, the variance shall be considered
to be disapproved. After disapproval, the applicant may resubmit a variance request with
additional documentation.
5. Variance incorporated into approved plan. Any approved variance shall become part of,
and be documented in, the approved plan.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:55; 9VAC25-840-50, 9VAC25-840-80, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-419 Amendments and modifications to approved stormwater management plans.
Any approved stormwater management plan shall be amended or may be modified as follows:
A. Stormwater management plan; amendment. The administrator shall require that an approved
stormwater management plan be amended if, after an inspection of the site or submittal and
review of the construction record drawing, the administrator determines that the plan fails to
satisfy any VSMP requirement. If an amendment is required, the administrator also may require
the time by which the amendment to the plan shall be submitted and approved.
B. Stormwater management plan; modification. An owner may request that the administrator allow
its approved stormwater management plan be modified. Any modification is subject to review
and approval by the administrator. The administrator shall act on the request and either approve
or disapprove the proposed modification in writing within sixty (60) days after the administrator
receives the request.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-870-108, 9VAC25-880-70, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-420 Amendments to pollution prevention plans.
An owner shall obtain approval of an amendment to a pollution prevention plan whenever:
A. Change affects discharge of pollutants. There is a change in design, construction, operation, or
maintenance that has a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to State waters which has
not previously been addressed in the plan.
B. Inadequate control measures, best management practices, or waste control. As construction
proceeds, any control measure, best management practice or waste control measure in the plan
fails to achieve the purposes of the plan.
C. Pollutants not identified in the plan. As construction proceeds, new potential sources of pollutants
not identified in the plan may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater
discharges from the construction site.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-56.
Draft: 12/30/13
46
Sec. 17-421 Amendments to stormwater pollution prevention plans.
An owner shall obtain approval of an amendment to a stormwater pollution prevention plan in the
circumstances delineated in subsections (A) through (D). Any amendment to the plan shall be updated
within seven (7) days after amendment to its implementation and include the information required by
9VAC25-880-70, Part II(B)(4) and be signed in accordance with 9VAC25-880-70, Part III(K).
A. Change affects discharge of pollutants. There is a change in design, construction, operation, or
maintenance that has a significant effect on the discharge of pollutants to surface waters and that
has not been previously addressed in the plan.
B. Correction of ineffective control measures. During inspections or investigations by the owner’s
qualified personal, the administrator, or any State or Federal official, it is determined that the
existing control measures are ineffective in minimizing pollutants in discharges from construction
activity. Any required amendment to the plan shall include additional or modified control
measures designed and implemented to correct the problems identified. If approval of the control
measure by the administrator is required, the plan revisions shall be completed within seven (7)
days after the control measure is approved.
C. Discharge, release, or spill from high priority facility. Whenever deemed necessary by the
administrator to accurately reflect any discharge, release, or spill from any high priority facility
reported in accordance with 9VAC25-890-40(III)(G). For each such discharge, release, or spill,
the amended plan must include the following information: (i) the date of the incident; (ii) the
material discharged, released, or spilled; and (iii) the quantity discharged, released or spilled.
D. Change in contractor. Any change in the name and required contact information in the contractor
that will implement and maintain any control measure.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-870-108, 9VAC25-880-70, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-422 Construction record drawing; submittal.
When construction of any permanent stormwater management facility is completed, a construction record
drawing for the permanent stormwater management facility shall be submitted for review and action as
follows:
A. Submittal of drawing to the administrator. Each construction record drawing shall be submitted
by the owner to the administrator.
B. Fee. The applicable fee for review and action on the construction record drawing required by
section 17-207 shall be paid when the drawing is submitted.
C. Form and style. The construction record drawing shall satisfy the minimum requirements of the
form and style of a construction record drawing as provided in the Design Standards Manual.
D. Signature and certification. The construction record drawing shall be appropriately sealed and
signed by a professional registered in the State, certifying that the stormwater management
facility has been constructed in accordance with the approved plan.
E. Required measurements and calculations. If the construction record drawing shows any changes
from the approved plan, including changes to any features of the facility including, but not
Draft: 12/30/13
47
limited to, outlet structures, elevations, available volumes, plantings, spillways, and materials, the
owner shall also submit all as-built measurements and calculations necessary to demonstrate
compliance with all applicable regulations. Any other technical requirements of the construction
record drawing shall be as provided in the Design Standards Manual.
E. Determination of completeness, review and action. The procedure for the review and action on a
construction record drawing shall be as provided in sections 17-409 and 17-410, as applicable,
provided that the failure of the administrator to act within any time provided in those sections
shall not be deemed to be approval of the construction record drawing.
F. Required amendments. If the as-built stormwater management facility does not comply with all
applicable regulations, the owner shall make all required changes to the facility in order to
comply with the regulations and the administrator may require that the approved stormwater
management plan be amended as provided in section 17-417(A).
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-55.
Sec. 17-423 Release of surety.
Any surety required by this chapter shall be released as follows:
A. Partial release. In order for any surety to be partially released:
1. Request by owner. The owner shall submit a statement to the administrator on a form
provided by the administrator that adequate stabilization of the land disturbing activity
has been achieved, and pay the fee for a partial release required by sections 17-206 or 17-
207, or both.
2. Response by administrator. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the statement required
by subsection (A)(1), the administrator shall provide written notice to the owner that
responds to the request in one of the following ways: (i) grant the partial release, if an
inspection of the project by a certified inspector confirms that the requirements for partial
release are satisfied; or (ii) inform the owner that an inspection of the project by a
certified inspector confirms that the requirements for partial release are not satisfied and
identify any specified defects, deficiencies or further conservation action required.
3. Release. If the administrator grants the partial release as provided in subsection (A)(2),
the surety shall be partially release within sixty (60) days after receipt of the request
required by subsection (A)(1). The amount of the release shall be based upon the
percentage of stabilization accomplished determined by the inspection.
B. Full release. In order for any surety to be fully released:
1. Request by owner. The owner shall submit a statement to the administrator on a form
provided by the administrator and pay the fee for a full release required by sections 17-
206 or 17-207, or both. For any surety required in conjunction with an erosion and
sediment control plan, the owner shall state that adequate permanent stabilization of the
land disturbing activity has been achieved. For any surety required in conjunction with a
VSMP permit, the owner shall state that the requirements of the permit have been
satisfied.
Draft: 12/30/13
48
2. Response by administrator. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the statement required
by subsection (B)(1), the administrator shall provide written notice to the owner that
responds to the request in one of the following ways: (i) grant the full release, if an
inspection of the project by a certified inspector confirms that the requirements for full
release are satisfied; or (ii) inform the owner that an inspection of the project by a
certified inspector confirms that the requirements for full release are not satisfied and
identify any specified defects, deficiencies or further conservation action required.
3. Release. If the administrator grants the full release as provided in subsection (B)(2), the
surety shall be fully released within sixty (60) days after receipt of the request required
by subsection (B)(1).
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:34; 62.1-44.15:57.
Sec. 17-424 Effect of failure to obtain grading, building or other permit; void for inactivity.
An approved erosion and sediment control plan, if the land disturbing activity is subject solely to the
VESCP, or the VSMP permit, shall be void if the owner fails to obtain a grading, building or other permit
for activities involving land disturbing activities to implement the plan within one year (1) year after the
date of its approval; provided that any plan or permit associated with a subdivision plat or site plan whose
period of validity is extended by Virginia Code § 15.2-2209.1(A) shall likewise be extended for the same
time period.
State law reference –Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Article V. Technical Criteria
Sec. 17-500 Erosion and sediment control plans; applicable technical criteria.
Each erosion and sediment control plan shall satisfy the following, as applicable:
A. Erosion and sediment control minimum standards. The criteria, techniques and methods provided
in 9VAC25-840-40.
B. Annual standards and specifications. Any applicable annual standards and specifications
approved by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
C. Stormwater pollution prevention. If the land disturbing activity also requires a VSMP permit, the
requirements in 9VAC25-870-54(F) and as specified in 40 CFR 450.21.
D. Stream buffers. The procedures and requirements for land disturbing activity and development in
stream buffers, as provided in section 17-600 et seq.
E. County design standards. The technical criteria, including County notes and details, as provided
in the Design Standards Manual.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:52, 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-840-40, 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-501 VSMP permit application; applicable technical criteria.
Each VSMP permit application shall satisfy the criteria, techniques and methods provided as follows:
Draft: 12/30/13
49
A. Land disturbing activity that obtained State permit coverage prior to July 1, 2014. Subject to
subsection (B), any land disturbing activity that obtained State permit coverage or commenced
land disturbance prior to July 1, 2014 shall be subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-93
through 9VAC25-870-99. These projects shall remain subject to the technical criteria in
9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99 for an additional two State permit cycles. After that
time, the portions of the project not under construction shall become subject to any new technical
criteria adopted by the State Water Control Board. Any land disturbing activity under this
subsection also shall comply with the requirements for stream buffers in section 17-600 et seq.
B. Land disturbing activity related to certain development approvals prior to July 1, 2012. Any land
disturbing activity for which a valid preliminary or final subdivision plat, or an initial or final site
plan (collectively, the “plat or plan”), was approved by the County prior to July 1, 2012 shall be
subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99, provided all of the
following apply:
1. Plat or plan not modified. The plat or plan has not been modified in a manner resulting in
an increase in the amount of phosphorus leaving each point of discharge or the volume or
rate of runoff.
2. No coverage under the State permit. The plat or plan did not obtain coverage under the
State permit prior to July 1, 2014.
3. Compliance with technical criteria. The administrator finds that the plat or plan: (i)
provides a layout as defined in 9VAC25-870-10; and (ii) the resulting land disturbing
activity complies with the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99.
4. Stream buffers. Any land disturbing activity under this subsection also shall comply with
the requirements for stream buffers in section 17-600 et seq.
5. Construction deadline. Construction related to any land disturbing activity shall be
completed by June 30, 2019. Any portions of the project not yet under construction by
that date shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted by the State Water
Control Board.
C. Land disturbing activity that receives State permit coverage on or after July 1, 2014. Any land
disturbing activity that obtains State permit coverage on or after July 1, 2014 shall be subject to
the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-62 through 9VAC25-870-92. These projects shall remain
subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-62 through 9VAC25-870-92 for an additional
two State permit cycles, except as provided in 9VAC25-870-48(D). After that time, the portions
of the project not under construction shall become subject to any new technical criteria adopted
by the State Water Control Board. Any land disturbing activity under this subsection also shall
comply with the requirements for stream buffers in section 17-600 et seq.
D. Land disturbing activity related to County, State or Federal funded projects. For any County,
State or Federal projects for which there has been an obligation of County, State, or Federal
funding, in whole or in part, prior to July 1, 2012, or the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality has approved a stormwater management plan prior to July 1, 2012, the project shall be
subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-93 through 9VAC25-870-99. Construction
related to any land disturbing activity shall be completed by June 30, 2019. Any portions of the
project not yet under construction by that date shall become subject to any new technical criteria
Draft: 12/30/13
50
adopted by the State Water Control Board. Any land disturbing activity related to a County
project shall comply with the requirements for stream buffers in section 17-600 et seq.
E. Land disturbing activity related where government bonds or other instruments of public debt
financing issued. For any project for which government bonds or other instruments of public debt
financing have been issued, the project shall be subject to the technical criteria in 9VAC25-870-
93 through 9VAC25-870-99. Any land disturbing activity under this subsection also shall comply
with the requirements for stream buffers in section 17-600 et seq.
F. TMDLs. The Chesapeake Bay TMDL as provided in 9VAC25-890-40 and any other local
TMDLs applicable to a regulated land disturbing activity.
G. Pre-existing County requirements. Any criterion more stringent than the technical criteria set
forth in subsections (A) through (F) existing prior to January 1, 2005 that is set forth in this
chapter or in the Design Standards Manual.
H. Technical criteria applicable to entire common plan of development or sale. Any land disturbing
activity subject to the technical criteria under this section shall apply the applicable stormwater
management technical criteria to the entire common plan of development or sale where
applicable. Individual lots in a residential, commercial, or industrial common plan of
development or sale shall not be considered to be separate land disturbing activities. Instead, the
common plan, as a whole, shall be considered to be a single land disturbing activity. Hydrologic
parameters that reflect the ultimate land disturbance shall be used in all engineering calculations.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:33, 62.1-44.15:49; 9VAC25-870-47, 9VAC25-870-48, 9VAC25-870-95, 9VAC25-
870-104, 9VAC25-870-400, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-502 VSMP permit application; offsite nutrient credits.
An owner shall be allowed to use offsite nutrient credits, subject to the following:
A. Eligibility to use offsite nutrient credits. An owner is eligible to use offsite nutrient credits if one
or more of the following are satisfied:
1. Less than 5 acres disturbed. Less than five acres of land will be disturbed.
2. Pollution control. The postconstruction pollution control (measured in phosphorous)
requirement is less than ten (10) pounds per year.
3. Most phosphorus nutrient reductions are achieved onsite. At least seventy-five percent
(75%) of the required phosphorus nutrient reductions are achieved onsite. If at least
seventy-five percent (75%) of the required phosphorus nutrient reductions cannot be
achieved onsite, and the owner can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the administrator
that: (i) alternative site designs have been considered that may accommodate onsite best
management practices; (ii) onsite best management practices have been considered in
alternative site designs to the maximum extent practicable; (iii) appropriate onsite best
management practices will be implemented; and (iv) full compliance with
postdevelopment nonpoint nutrient runoff compliance requirements cannot practicably be
met onsite, then the required phosphorus nutrient reductions may be achieved, in whole
or in part, through the use of offsite compliance options.
Draft: 12/30/13
51
B. Eligibility to use offsite nutrient credits as a substitute for existing onsite nutrient controls. An
owner satisfying one or more of the criteria in subsection (A) is eligible to use offsite nutrient
credits as full or partial substitutes of perpetual nutrient credits for existing onsite nutrient
controls when: (i) the nutrient credits will compensate for ten (10) or fewer pounds of the annual
phosphorous requirement associated with the original land disturbing activity; or (ii) existing
onsite controls are not functioning as anticipated after reasonable attempts to comply with
applicable maintenance agreements or requirements and the use of nutrient credits will account
for the deficiency. Upon the use of the offsite credits, the party responsible for maintenance shall
be released from maintenance obligations related to the onsite controls for which the nutrient
credits are substituted.
C. Documentation of credits. The owner shall provide documentation of its acquisition of nutrient
credits to the administrator and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. The
documentation shall be composed of a certification from the credit provider documenting the
number of nutrient credits acquired and the associated ratio of nutrient credits at the credit-
generating entity.
D. Minimum performance requirements. The use of offsite nutrient credits shall satisfy the
following:
1. Ratio and perpetual credits. For that portion of a site’s compliance with stormwater
nonpoint nutrient runoff water quality criteria being obtained through nutrient credits, the
owner shall: (i) comply with a 1:1 ratio of the nutrient credits to the site’s remaining
postdevelopment nonpoint nutrient runoff compliance requirement being met by credit
use; and (ii) use credits certified as perpetual credits pursuant to Virginia Code § 62.1-
44.19:12 et seq.
2. Nutrient reductions prior to land disturbing activity. Any offsite nutrient credit used shall
achieve the necessary nutrient reductions prior to the owner starting any land disturbing
activity. If a project is phased, the owner may acquire or achieve the offsite nutrient
reductions prior to starting each phase of the land disturbing activity in an amount
sufficient for each phase.
E. Prohibited use of nutrient credits. Offsite nutrient credits may not be used in the following cases:
1. Water quantity control requirements. Offsite nutrient credits may not be used to address
water quantity control requirements.
2. Water quality based limitations. Offsite nutrient credits may not be used in contravention
of County water quality based limitations at the point of discharge that are: (i) consistent
with the determinations made pursuant to Virginia Code § 62.1-44.19:7(B); (ii) contained
in the County’s MS4 program plan; or (iii) as otherwise may be established or approved
by the State Water Control Board.
F. Crediting nutrient reductions. Nutrient reductions obtained through offsite nutrient credits shall
be credited toward compliance with any nutrient allocation assigned to the County’s MS4 permit
or any applicable TMDL to the location where the activity for which the nutrient credits are used
takes place. If the activity for which the nutrient credits are used does not discharge to a
municipal separate storm sewer system, the nutrient reductions shall be credited toward
compliance with the applicable nutrient allocation.
Draft: 12/30/13
52
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:35; 9VAC25-870-69.
Article VI. Stream Buffers
Sec. 17-600 Extent of stream buffers; retention and establishment.
Except as provided in section 17-602, each erosion and sediment control plan and each VSMP permit
shall provide for stream buffers for the purposes of retarding runoff, preventing erosion, filtering nonpoint
source pollution from runoff, moderating stream temperature, and providing for the ecological integrity of
stream corridors and networks, as provided herein:
A. Development within a development area. If the development is located within a development
area, stream buffers shall be retained if present and established where they do not exist on any
lands subject to this chapter containing perennial streams, contiguous nontidal wetlands, or both.
The stream buffer shall be no less than one hundred (100) feet wide on each side of any perennial
stream and contiguous nontidal wetlands, measured horizontally from the edge of the contiguous
nontidal wetlands, or the top of the stream bank if no wetlands exist.
B. Development within a water supply protection area or other rural land. If the development is
located within a water supply protection area or other rural land, stream buffers shall be retained
if present and established where they do not exist on any lands subject to this chapter containing
perennial or intermittent streams, contiguous nontidal wetlands, and flood plains. The stream
buffer shall extend to whichever of the following is wider: (i) one hundred (100) feet on each side
of any perennial or intermittent stream and contiguous nontidal wetlands, measured horizontally
from the edge of the contiguous nontidal wetlands, or the top of the stream bank if no wetlands
exist; or (ii) the limits of the flood plain. The stream buffer shall be no less than two hundred
(200) horizontal feet wide from the flood plain of any public water supply impoundment.
(§ 19.3-41, 2-11-98; § 19.2-8, 6-19-91; Code 1988, §§ 19.2-8, 19.3-41; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 08-17(1), 2-6-08)
State law reference –Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-601 Management of stream buffer.
Each stream buffer required to be retained or established pursuant to section 17-600 shall be managed as
provided herein:
A. Target vegetative cover. The preferred vegetative cover in a stream buffer shall be a native
riparian forest with ground cover, shrub, and tree canopy layers.
B. Preservation of native vegetation. When evaluating a development design under subsection (C),
when native vegetation may be disturbed or removed under subsection (D) and sections 17-603
and 17-604, and when stream buffers are maintained under subsection (E), native vegetation shall
be preserved to the fullest extent possible.
C. Incorporation into development design. Each stream buffer shall be incorporated into the design
of the development by keeping stream buffers in open or natural spaces, and out of residential lots
or areas of active use, to the fullest extent possible.
D. Retaining native vegetation; disturbance or removal. In order to maintain the runoff, erosion,
nonpoint source pollution control, stream temperature, and ecological values of the stream buffer,
Draft: 12/30/13
53
no native vegetation within the stream buffer shall be disturbed or removed, regardless of the size
of the area affected, except to maintain the stream buffer as provided in subsection (E), provided
that native vegetation may be removed to construct, install, operate or maintain any improvement,
or engage in any activity, authorized by sections 17-603 and 17-604.
E. Maintaining the stream buffer. Each stream buffer shall be maintained in as natural a condition as
possible.
(§ 19.3-42, 2-11-98, § 19.2-8, 6-19-91, § 8; Code 1988, §§ 19.2-8, 19.3-42; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
State law reference –Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-602 Types of development exempt from duties to retain, establish, or manage a stream
buffer.
The following types of development shall not be required to retain, establish, or manage a stream buffer,
provided that the requirements of this section are satisfied:
A. Utility and transportation improvements. The construction, installation, operation and
maintenance of electric, gas and telephone transmission lines, railroads, and activities of the
Virginia Department of Transportation, and their appurtenant structures, which are accomplished
in compliance with the Erosion and Sediment Control Law (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:51 et
seq.) or an erosion and sediment control plan approved by the State Water Control Board.
B. Public water and sewer improvements. The construction, installation, and maintenance by public
agencies of water and sewer lines, including water and sewer lines constructed by private
interests for dedication to public agencies, provided that all of the following are satisfied:
1. Location. To the extent practical, as determined by the Albemarle County Service
Authority or the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, the location of the water or sewer
lines shall be outside of all stream buffer areas.
2. Disturbance minimized. No more land shall be disturbed than is necessary to construct,
install and maintain the water or sewer lines.
3. Compliance with applicable requirements. All such construction, installation, and
maintenance of the water or sewer lines shall comply with all applicable Federal, State
and local requirements and permits and be conducted in a manner that protects water
quality.
C. Silvicultural activities. Silvicultural activities, provided that they are conducted in compliance
with the water quality protection procedures established by the Virginia Department of Forestry
in its “Virginia’s Forestry Best Management Practices for Water Quality.”
D. Public airport improvements. The construction, installation and maintenance of runways,
taxiways, and other similar or appurtenant improvements at public airports, including the
expansion or extension of those improvements, provided that all applicable Federal, State and
local permits are obtained.
Draft: 12/30/13
54
(§ 19.3-43, 2-11-98; § 19.2-12, 6-19-91, § 12; Code 1988, §§ 19.2-12, 19.3-43; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 08-17(4),
9-3-08)
State law reference –Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-603 Types of development authorized in a stream buffer.
If otherwise authorized by the applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, the following types of
development shall be allowed in a stream buffer, provided that the requirements of this section are
satisfied:
A. Pre-existing buildings or structures. Any building or structure which existed on February 11,
1998 may continue in its location on that date. However, nothing in this section authorizes the
continuance, repair, replacement, expansion or enlargement of any such building or structure
except as provided in sections 18-6 and 18-30.3.
B. Temporary erosion and sediment control measures. Temporary erosion and sediment control
measures, provided that to the extent practical, as determined by the administrator, the control
measures shall be located outside of the stream buffer and disturbance impacts are minimized.
C. Water-dependent facilities and miscellaneous uses. Water-dependent facilities; water wells;
passive recreation access, such as pedestrian trails and bicycle paths; historic preservation;
archaeological activities; provided that all applicable Federal, State and local permits are
obtained.
(§ 19.3-44, 2-11-98; § 19.2-7, 6-19-91, § 7; § 19.2-8, 6-19-91, § 8; Code 1988, §§ 19.2-7, 19.2-8, 19.3-
44; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 08-17(2), 5-7-08)
State law reference –Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-604 Types of development which may be allowed in stream buffer by program authority.
Development in a stream buffer may be authorized by the administrator in the circumstances described
below, provided that a mitigation plan satisfying the requirements of section 17-406, is submitted to, and
approved, by the administrator:
A. Within the landward 50 horizontal feet. On a lot within the fifty (50) horizontal feet of a stream
buffer that is the most landward (furthest from the stream), if the development either: (i) would be
for necessary infrastructure to allow reasonable use of the lot; or (ii) would be on a lot that is
within a water supply protection area where the stream buffer protects an intermittent stream and
the lot is within a development area. In all cases under this subsection, any new building site and
sewage disposal system shall be located outside of the stream buffer.
B. Lakes, ponds or restoration projects. On a lot on which the development in the stream buffer will
consist of a lake, pond, or ecological/wetland restoration project.
C. Stream crossings. Stream crossings of perennial and intermittent streams for roads, streets or
driveways, provided they meet the following minimum criteria:
1. Bridges and culverts. Bridges and culverts shall satisfy the following:
Draft: 12/30/13
55
a. Perennial streams. For crossings of perennial streams, bridges, arch culverts, or
box culverts shall be used for the stream crossing and shall be sized to pass the
ten (10) year storm, or the twenty-five (25) year storm if the design standards in
either section 14-410 or 18-32.7.2.1 apply, without backing water onto upstream
properties. Bridges or arch culverts shall either leave the stream section,
consisting of the stream bed and the stream bank, undisturbed or shall allow the
stream to return to a natural stabilized cross-section upon completion of
installation. The lowest interior elevation (invert) of a box culvert installation
shall be a minimum of six (6) inches below the stream bed. Culvert walls and
bridge columns should be located outside the stream banks wherever possible.
b. Intermittent streams. For crossings of intermittent streams, bridges or culverts
shall be used for the stream crossing and sized to pass the ten (10) year storm, or
the twenty-five (25) year storm if the design standards in either section 14-410 or
18-32.7.2.1 apply, without backing water onto upstream properties.
2. Stream stabilization and energy dissipation. Stream stabilization and energy dissipation
measures below each bridge or culvert shall be provided.
3. Disturbance minimized. The stream buffer disturbance shall be the minimum necessary
for the lot(s) to be used and developed as permitted in the underlying zoning district and
under the applicable regulations of the Subdivision Ordinance. Stream crossings shall not
disturb more than thirty (30) linear feet of stream for driveways and sixty (60) linear feet
for roads or streets, provided that the administrator may allow additional length of stream
disturbance where fill slopes or special conditions necessitate additional length.
4. Stream bed and stream bank stabilization. The stream bed and stream banks shall be
stabilized within seven (7) days from the start of backfilling for the bridge or culvert.
5. Establishment of buffer vegetation. For stream crossings where any portion of the pre-
construction stream buffer is not fully vegetated as determined by the administrator, and
for any portion of a vegetated stream buffer that is disturbed during the installation of the
stream crossing, buffer vegetation shall be established and maintained within the stream
buffer but outside of the stream crossing at a ratio of two (2) square feet of stream
buffer restored for every one (1) square foot of stream buffer that was either not fully
vegetated or is disturbed during the installation of the stream crossing. Buffer vegetation
shall be established and maintained at the 2:1 ratio to the extent that the stream buffer is
fully vegetated outside of the stream crossing, provided that the owner shall not be
required to establish vegetation outside of the stream buffer in order to satisfy the 2:1
ratio. The administrator may require that the owner enter into an agreement providing for
the ongoing maintenance of the plantings in the stream buffer, and may require a bond
with surety or other acceptable instrument as provided in section 17-414. Stream buffer
plantings shall be consistent with guidance supplied by the administrator.
6. Evidence of required permits. The owner shall provide the administrator with copies of
approved State and Federal permits associated with the stream crossing, if applicable.
7. Limitation on number of stream crossings; exception. In order to ensure that the
encroachment into or across the stream buffer is minimized, on and after May 7, 2008, it
shall be presumed that one stream crossing is adequate to serve the owner’s lot(s) existing
on that date and all lots created therefrom on and after that date. The administrator shall
Draft: 12/30/13
56
allow only one stream crossing to serve all lots, provided that it may allow additional
crossings under subsection (D).
D. Stream crossings not allowed under subsection (C). On a lot on which the development in the
stream buffer will consist of the construction and maintenance of a road, street or driveway that
would not satisfy the requirements of subsection (C) and the administrator determines that the
stream buffer would prohibit access to the lot necessary for the lot to be used and developed as
permitted in the underlying zoning district and under the applicable regulations of the Subdivision
Ordinance, or to establish more than one stream crossing.
E. Water and sewer facilities or sewage disposal systems on pre-existing lots. On a lot which was of
record prior to February 11, 1998, on which the development in the stream buffer will consist of
the construction, installation and maintenance of water and sewer facilities or sewage disposal
systems, and the administrator determines that the stream buffer would prohibit the practicable
development of those facilities or systems. Any sewage disposal system must comply with all
applicable State laws.
F. Sole building sites on pre-existing lots. On a lot which was of record prior to February 11, 1998,
if the stream buffer would result in the loss of a building site, and there are no other available
building sites outside the stream buffer on the lot, or to allow redevelopment as permitted in the
underlying zoning district.
(§ 19.3-45, 2-11-98; § 19.2-8, 6-19-91, § 8; Code 1988, §§ 19.2-8, 19.3-45; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord.
08-17(1), 2-6-08; Ord. 08-17(2), 5-7-08; Ord. 11-17(1), 10-5-11; Ord. 12-17(1), 5-9-12)
State law reference – Va . Code § 62.1-44.15:73; 9VAC25-890-40.
Article VII. Illicit Discharges, Illicit Connections, and Prohibited Dumping
Sec. 17-700 Applicability.
This article shall apply to all activities that cause or allow to be caused direct or indirect illicit discharges,
illicit connections, and the prohibited dumping of refuse and pollutants, or which negatively impede the
flow capacity of the County’s MS4 or State waters that: (i) are not covered by other articles of this
chapter; and (ii) are not expressly exempt from this article.
(§ 17-500; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-701 Illicit discharges prohibited; exempt and authorized discharges.
No person shall throw, drain, or otherwise discharge, cause or allow others under their control to throw,
drain, or otherwise discharge into the County’s MS4 or State waters any pollutants or waters containing
any pollutants, other than stormwater. Commencing, conducting or continuing any illicit discharge to the
County’s MS4 or State waters is prohibited, subject to the following:
A. Conditionally exempt discharges. The following discharges are not prohibited discharges
provided that the administrator determines that the discharge is not adversely impacting State
waters:
Draft: 12/30/13
57
1. Discharges pursuant to a Virginia Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“VPDES”) or
Virginia Storm Management Program (“VSMP”) permit (other than a VSMP permit for
discharges from the municipal separate storm sewer).
2. Discharges resulting from fire fighting and other public safety activities.
3. Discharges associated with the maintenance or repair of public water, sanitary, and storm
sewer lines, and public drinking water reservoirs and drinking water treatment or
distributions systems conducted in accordance with applicable federal and state
regulations and standards.
4. Discharges associated with any activity by the county, its employees and agents, in the
maintenance of any component of a county-maintained stormwater management facility
conducted in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations and standards.
5. Discharges specified in writing by the administrator as being necessary to protect public
health and safety.
6. Water line flushing.
7. Irrigation water, landscape irrigation, and lawn watering.
8. Diverted stream flows.
9. Rising groundwaters.
10. Uncontaminated groundwater infiltration (as defined in 40 CFR 35.2005(20).
11. Uncontaminated pumped groundwater.
12. Discharges from potable water sources.
13. Foundation drains.
14. Air conditioning condensation.
15. Springs.
16. Water from crawl space pumps.
17. Footing drains.
18. Individual residential car washing.
19. Flows from riparian habitats and wetlands.
20. Dechlorinated swimming pool discharges having less than one (1) part per million
chlorine.
21. Street wash water.
Draft: 12/30/13
58
22. Water from washed parking lots or sidewalks to remove algae or oil buildup;
23. Application of salts or other de-icing substances to streets, sidewalks and parking lots;
24. Discharges associated with dye testing, provided that the program authority is notified in
writing before the test.
If the administrator determines that any of these conditionally exempted activities are causing
adverse impacts to State waters in a specific case, he may revoke the exemption for that specific
case. The revocation shall be effective from the date the administrator provides written notice to
the person responsible for the discharge of the determination that the exemption is revoked.
B. Discharges authorized by VPDES permit, waiver or waste discharge order. The prohibition shall
not apply to any nonstormwater discharge permitted under a VPDES permit, including the State
permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the
authority of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), provided that the
discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other
applicable laws and regulations and further provided that written approval has been granted by
the EPA for any discharge to the County’s MS4.
(§ 17-501; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33; 9VAC25-870-400, 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-702 Illicit connections prohibited.
Constructing, using, maintaining, or allowing the continued existence of an illicit connection to the
County’s MS4 is prohibited, subject to the following:
A. Pre-existing illicit connections. Any illicit connection authorized prior to February 14, 2007 is in
violation of this section unless the administrator expressly extended the date by which to comply
beyond December 31, 2007 upon good cause shown by the person requesting the extension, and
the date by which compliance is required has not passed.
B. Disconnection and redirection. Any illicit connection shall be disconnected and redirected, if
necessary, to an approved onsite wastewater management system or the sanitary sewer system
upon approval of the Albemarle County Service Authority.
C. Locating undocumented connections. Any drain or conveyance that has not been documented in
plans, maps, or their equivalent and which appears to be connected to the County’s MS4 shall be
located by the owner, occupant, lessee, principal, agent, employee or otherwise, of that property
within the time period specified in the written notice of violation from the administrator requiring
that the connection be located. The notice shall require that: (i) the location of the drain or
conveyance be determined; (ii) the drain or conveyance be identified as a storm sewer, sanitary
sewer, or other; and (iii) the outfall location or point of connection to the County’s MS4, sanitary
sewer system, or other discharge point be identified. The results of these investigations shall be
documented and provided to the administrator.
(§ 17-502; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
Draft: 12/30/13
59
State law reference--Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-703 Dumping prohibited.
No person, whether the owner, occupant, lessee, principal, agent, employee or otherwise, may dump or
discharge, or allow any other person to dump or discharge, refuse, as that term is defined in Albemarle
County Code § 13-100, or any other material or pollutant, natural or synthetic, into the County’s MS4,
State waters, or a natural stream, unless the dumping or discharge is expressly authorized by the
Albemarle County Code.
(§ 17-503; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
State law reference –Va . Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33; 9VAC25-890-40.
Article IX. Compliance
Sec. 17-800 Duty to comply.
Each owner has the following duties to comply:
A. Upon a determination that land disturbing activity is subject to this chapter. Upon the
administrator’s determination that a land disturbing activity is subject to the VESCP, the VSMP,
or both, the owner shall immediately comply with the applicable requirements of this chapter and
the applicable requirements of this chapter shall be immediately enforced.
B. Upon approval of a VSMP permit or erosion and sediment control plan. Upon the administrator’s
approval of any VSMP permit or erosion and sediment control plan required by this chapter, the
owner shall comply with all of the terms and conditions of the approved permit or plan at all
times the permit or plan is in effect, including when any activities allowed under the permit or
plan are being performed.
C. All other applicable requirements of this chapter. The owner is obligated to comply with all other
applicable requirements of this chapter not addressed in subsections (A) and (B), including, but
not limited to, the express duties in the following sections.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:58, 62.1-44.15:73.
Sec. 17-801 Duty to maintain structures, systems, facilities, and techniques.
Each owner has the duty to maintain and repair all structures, systems, facilities and techniques required
under the VESCP and the VSMP as follows:
A. Erosion and sediment control structures and systems. Any erosion and sediment control
structures and systems shall be maintained and repaired as needed to ensure continued
performance of their intended function at their intended level. The owner also shall perform all of
the maintenance responsibilities delineated in the approved erosion and sediment control plan. All
control measures required by the plan shall be maintained in accordance with good engineering
practices.
B. Stormwater management facilities and techniques. Any permanent stormwater management
facility or technique specified in the approved stormwater management plan to manage the
Draft: 12/30/13
60
quality and quantity of runoff shall be maintained for so long as the stormwater management
facility or technique exists, in a manner that meets or exceeds the maintenance standards in the
agreement entered into under section 17-415. The owner’s obligation to maintain any such
permanent stormwater management facility or technique shall continue until all such obligations
are the responsibility of the County or another public entity empowered to own and maintain
stormwater management facilities and to implement the techniques described in the stormwater
management plan.
C. Stormwater pollution prevention plan control measures; duty to maintain. Any control measure
in the approved stormwater pollution prevention plan, including any control measure otherwise
subject to subsections (A) or (B), shall be properly maintained in effective operating condition in
accordance with good engineering practices and, where applicable, manufacturer specifications.
State law reference – 9VAC25-840-60, 9VAC25-870-58, 9VAC25-870-112, 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-802 Duty to maintain the functional performance of storm drainage systems and streams.
Each owner of property through which a privately-maintained storm drainage system or natural stream
passes shall maintain the functional performance of the system or stream, regardless of whether they are
subject to a VSMP permit or an erosion and sediment control plan, as follows:
A. Keeping the storm drainage system and natural streams free of refuse and other obstacles. The
owner shall maintain the part of storm drainage system or natural stream on the property free of
refuse, as that term is defined in section 13-100, and other obstacles that would pollute,
contaminate, or adversely impact the system’s or the stream’s functional performance.
B. Maintaining structures within the flood hazard overlay district. The owner shall maintain all
existing privately owned structures on the property that are within the flood hazard overlay
district established under section 18-30.3 so that the structures do not become a hazard to the use,
function, or physical or ecological integrity of the stream.
(Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33; 9VAC25-890-40.
Sec. 17-803 Duty to maintain State permit, stormwater pollution prevention plan, and other
documents onsite.
If the land disturbing activity is subject to a VSMP permit, each owner shall maintain the State permit, the
State permit coverage letter, the registration statement, and the stormwater pollution prevention plan, at a
central location at the construction site. If an onsite location is unavailable to store the documents when
no personnel are present, notice of the documents’ location must be posted near the main entrance at the
construction site.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-54, 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-804 Duty to inspect and take corrective action.
Each owner shall ensure that any inspections required by the State permit are conducted by the qualified
personnel identified in the stormwater pollution prevention plan. Any inspection shall be conducted
Draft: 12/30/13
61
according to the schedule and satisfy the requirements of 9VAC25-880-70, Part II(F). Any corrective
action identified in an inspection shall be completed as follows:
A. Control measure not operating effectively. If an inspection identifies a control measure that is not
operating effectively, corrective action shall be completed as soon as practicable, but no later than
seven (7) days after discovery or a longer period allowed in writing by the administrator.
B. Control measure inadequate. If an inspection identifies an existing control measure that needs to
be modified or if an additional control measure is necessary, implementation shall be completed
prior to the next anticipated measureable storm event. If implementation before the next
anticipated measureable storm event is impractical, then it shall be implemeted no later than
seven (7) days after discovery or a longer period allowed in writing by the administrator.
State law reference – 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-805 Duty to provide information pertaining to discharges and compliance.
Each owner shall provide within a reasonable time the following information pertaining to discharges
upon the request of the administrator:
A. Effect of discharges and wastes. Any application materials, plans, specifications, and other
pertinent information as may be necessary to determine the effect of: (i) the discharge on the
quality of State waters, or such other information as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes
of the Virginia Stormwater Management Act and this chapter; and (ii) the wastes from the
discharge on the quality of State waters, or such other information as may be necessary to
accomplish the purposes of the Clean Water Act and the Virginia Stormwater Management Act.
B. Determine compliance or other cause to change State permit. Any information request to
determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating the State
permit or to determine compliance with the State permit.
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-340, 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-806 Duty to report discharges or noncompliance.
Each owner shall report discharges or noncompliance as follows:
A. Discharge of stormwater not authorized by State permit. Except in compliance with a State
permit, any person who discharges, causes, or allows a discharge of stormwater into or upon State
waters from the County’s MS4 or from a land disturbing activity, or who discharges, causes, or
allows a discharge that may reasonably be expected to enter State waters, shall notify the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality and the administrator of the discharge immediately upon
discovery of the discharge but in no case later than twenty-four (24) hours after discovery of the
discharge. In addition, a written report of the unauthorized discharge shall be submitted by the
owner, to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and to the administrator within five
(5) days after discovery of the discharge. The contents of the written report shall be as provided in
9VAC25-870-310.
B. Discharge of sewage, wastes, noxious, deleterious, or hazardous substances, or oil. Any owner
who discharges or causes or allows a discharge of sewage, industrial waste, other wastes or any
noxious or deleterious substance or a hazardous substance or oil in an amount equal to or in
Draft: 12/30/13
62
excess of a reportable quantity established under either 40 CFR Part 110, 40 CFR Part 117, 40
CFR Part 302, or Virginia Code § 62.1-44.15:19 that occurs during a twenty-four (24) hour
period into or upon State waters or who discharges or causes or allows a discharge that may
reasonably be expected to enter state waters, shall notify the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality of the discharge immediately upon discovery of the discharge, but in no
case later than within twenty-four (24) hours after the discovery. A written report of the
unauthorized discharge shall be submitted to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
and the administrator within five (5) days after discovery of the discharge. The written report
shall satisfy the requirements of 9VAC25-880-70, Part III(G).
C. Unusual or extraordinary discharges. The owner shall promptly notify, in no case later than
within twenty-four (24) hours, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and the
administrator by telephone after the discovery of any unusual or extraordinary discharge,
including a “bypass” or “upset,” from a facility and the discharge enters or could be expected to
enter State waters. The notification shall include the information required by 9VAC25-880-70,
Part III(H).
D. Reports of noncompliance. The owner shall report any noncompliance which may adversely
affect State waters or may endanger public health. An oral report shall be provided to the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality within twenty-four (24) hours after discovery of the
noncompliance. A written report of the noncompliance shall be submitted to the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality and the administrator within five (5) days after discovery
of the noncompliance. The oral and written reports shall include the information required by
9VAC25-880-70, Part III(I).
State law reference – 9VAC25-870-310, 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-807 Duty to provide records and notice pertaining to State permit.
Each owner operating under a State permit shall provide the following records and notice to the
administrator upon request or as required by the State permit:
A. Records required to be kept by State permit. Copies of records required to be kept by the State
permit.
B. Reports pertaining to compliance schedules. Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or
any progress reports on, interim and final requirements contained in any compliance schedule of
the State permit, which shall be submitted no later than fourteen (14) days after each schedule
date.
C. Notice of planned changes. Notice to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and the
administrator as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted
facility or activity, when the alteration or addition requires notice under 9VAC25-880-70(III)(J).
State law reference – 9VAC25-880-70.
Sec. 17-808 Right of administrator to enter to obtain information, conduct surveys, or in
accordance with a performance bond.
In the administration and enforcement of the VESCP and the VSMP, the administrator or any duly
Draft: 12/30/13
63
authorized agent of the County may:
A. To obtain information or conduct surveys. At reasonable times and under reasonable
circumstances, enter any establishment or upon any property, public or private, for the purpose of
obtaining information or conducting surveys. If the purpose to enter the site is to conduct an
inspection to either administer or enforce this chapter, the administrator or any duly authorized
agent of the County shall comply with sections 17-809 or 17-810.
B. In accordance with an agreement with surety. In accordance with an agreement with surety
provided by the owner under section 17-414, enter any establishment or upon any property,
public or private, for the purpose of initiating or maintaining appropriate conservation actions that
are required by the approved plan or any condition of the VSMP permit associated with a land
disturbing activity when the owner, after proper notice, has failed to take acceptable conservation
actions within the time specified.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:39, 62.1-44.15-60.
Sec. 17-809 Inspections by the administrator under the VESCP.
In conjunction with the administration of the VESCP, the administrator shall inspect all land disturbing
activity as follows:
A. Notice of inspection. The administrator shall provide either prior written or verbal notice of the
inspection to the owner or other person responsible for carrying out the erosion and sediment
control plan; provided that notice shall not be required if the owner has consented to the
inspection in writing or granted a written right of entry. The administrator may request that an
owner consent to inspections on the application form or make owner consent a condition of the
erosion and sediment control plan approval.
B. Who may conduct inspection. Any inspection shall be conducted by a person holding a certificate
of competence as an inspector; provided that the administrator may waive the certificate of
competence requirement for an inspection of land disturbing activity authorized by an agreement
in lieu of a plan for the construction of a single family dwelling.
C. Scope of inspection. The inspection shall be conducted for the purpose of determining the land
disturbing activity’s compliance with the approved erosion and sediment control plan.
D. When inspections conducted. Unless an alternative inspection program is approved by the State
Water Control Board, inspections shall be conducted during or immediately following initial
installation of erosion and sediment controls, at least once in every two-week period, within forty-
eight (48) hours after any runoff producing storm event, and at the completion of the project prior
to the release of any surety.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:53, 62.1-44.15:58; 9VAC25-840-60.
Sec. 17-810 Inspections by the administrator under the VSMP.
In conjunction with the administration of the VSMP, the administrator shall inspect all land disturbing
activity as follows:
A. During construction. The administrator shall inspect all land disturbing activity during
construction as follows:
Draft: 12/30/13
64
1. Notice of inspection. The administrator shall provide either prior written or verbal notice
of the inspection to the owner or other person responsible for carrying out the VSMP
permit; provided that notice shall not be required if the owner has consented to the
inspection in writing or granted a written right of entry. The administrator may request
that an owner consent to inspections on the application form or make owner consent a
condition of VSMP permit approval.
2. Who may conduct inspection. Any inspection shall be conducted by a person holding a
certificate of competence as an inspector
3. Scope of inspection. The inspection shall be conducted for the purpose of determining the
land disturbing activity’s compliance with: (i) the approved erosion and sediment control
plan; (ii) compliance with the approved stormwater management plan; (iii) development,
updating, and implementation of a pollution prevention plan; and (iv) development and
implementation of any additional control measures necessary to address a TMDL.
4. When inspections conducted. Unless an alternative inspection program is approved by the
State Water Control Board, inspections shall be conducted at least once per month until
the adequate stabilization of the land disturbing activity has been achieved, and at the
completion of the project prior to the release of any performance bonds.
B. Post-construction. The administrator may inspect all stormwater management facilities, including
facilities for which there is no long-term maintenance agreement or those serving an individual
residential lot, after the land disturbing activity has ended. If the owner and the County have
entered into an agreement as provided in section 17-415, any inspection shall be conducted as
provided in that agreement. If the owner and the County have not entered into an agreement
under section 17-415, any inspection shall be completed as follows:
1. Notice of inspection. The administrator shall provide either prior written or verbal notice
of the inspection to the owner; provided that notice shall not be required if the owner has
consented to the inspection in writing or granted a written right of entry.
2. Who may conduct inspection. Any inspection shall be conducted by a person holding a
certificate of competence as an inspector, other than the owner, provided that the
administrator may, in his sole discretion, use the inspection report of the owner of the
stormwater management facility as part of the facility’s inspection program if the
inspection is conducted by a person who is: (i) licensed as a professional engineer,
architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor pursuant to Virginia Code § 54.1-400 et
seq.; (ii) a person who works under the direction and oversight of the licensed
professional engineer, architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor; or (iii) a person
who holds an appropriate certificate of competence.
3. Scope of inspection. The inspection shall be conducted for the purpose of determining the
condition of the stormwater management facility.
4. When inspections conducted. Inspections shall be conducted for each stormwater
management facility at least once every five (5) years or more frequently as provided in
the County’s MS4 permit. For any other stormwater management facility, the timing of
the inspection shall be in the discretion of the administrator.
Draft: 12/30/13
65
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:37; 9VAC25-870-114.
Sec. 17-811 Inspections by the administrator under the VPDES and of storm drainage channels and
natural streams.
The administrator shall inspect, in the manner authorized by law, storm drainage systems and natural
streams to determine compliance with an applicable State permit and to detect illicit discharges, illicit
connections and dumping. At the written or oral request of the administrator, any owner shall promptly
remove any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the permitted facility to be
inspected, sampled, or both, and the obstructions shall not be replaced. The costs of removing such
obstructions shall be borne by the owner.
(Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:27, 62.1-44.15:33, 62.1-44.15:39, 62.1-44.15:40.
Sec 17-812 Monitoring and sampling equipment by the administrator on VPDES permitted
facilities.
The administrator is authorized, either under a condition of the VSMP permit, with the owner’s consent,
or by court order: (i) to establish on any permitted facility any device deemed to be necessary by the
administrator to conduct monitoring, sampling, or both, of the facility’s stormwater discharge; and (ii) to
require the owner to install monitoring equipment deemed to be necessary by the administrator. The
facility’s sampling and monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper
operating condition by the owner at its own expense. All devices used to measure stormwater flow and
quality shall be calibrated to ensure their accuracy.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:48, 62.1-44.15:49; 9VAC25-870-116, 9VAC25-870-460.
Sec. 17-813 Third party complaints regarding impacts from land disturbing activities.
An aggrieved landowner sustaining pecuniary damage resulting from a violation of an erosion and
sediment control plan or a required permit, or from the conduct of land disturbing activities commenced
without an approved erosion and sediment control plan or a required permit under the VESCP, may
provide written notice of the alleged violation to the administrator and to the director of the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality. If an investigation determines that a violation exists, but the
administrator has not responded to the alleged violation in a manner that causes the violation to cease and
abates the damage to the aggrieved owner’s lands within thirty (30) days following receipt of the notice
from the aggrieved owner, the aggrieved owner may pursue the remedies available under Virginia Code §
62.1-44.15:64.
State law reference – Va. Code § 62.1-44.15:64.
Article IX. Enforcement
Sec. 17-900 Notice to comply.
If, after an inspection, the administrator determines that the owner has failed to comply with any
requirement of this chapter:
A. Notice to owner or other person responsible. The administrator shall provide written notice to the
owner and any other person responsible for carrying out the terms of the permit, plan or any other
Draft: 12/30/13
66
applicable requirement of this chapter.
B. Contents of notice. The notice shall specify the measures needed to comply with the permit, plan
or other applicable requirement of this chapter, and shall specify the time within which such
measures shall be completed.
C. How notice delivered. The notice shall be mailed by certified mail, with confirmation of delivery,
to the address specified in the permit application, the plan certification, or, if the owner and the
County have entered into an agreement as provided in section 17-415, to the address specified
therein, or to another address provided by the owner to administrator in writing, or by personal
delivery at the site of the land disturbing or development activities to the agent or employee.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:37, 62.1-44.15-58.
Sec. 17-901 Failure to comply with notice; revocation, order to stop work, enforcement.
Upon the owner’s or any other responsible person’s failure to comply with the permit, plan or other
applicable requirement within the time specified in the notice provided under section 17-900, one or more
of the following actions may be taken:
A. Revocation. The County or the administrator may revoke any permit issued in conjunction with
the land disturbing activity.
B. Order to stop work. The administrator may issue a stop work order as provided in section 17-902.
C. Enforcement. The administrator may pursue enforcement as provided in sections 17-903 and 17-
904 as applicable.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:37, 62.1-44.15-58.
Sec. 17-902 Stop work orders; procedure.
The administrator is authorized to issue stop work orders as follows:
A. When stop work order may be issued. A stop work order may be issued after a notice to comply
under section 17-901 has been issued when the owner has not timely satisfactorily addressed the
noncompliance identified in the notice to comply; provided that:
1. Emergency stop work order; erosion and sediment control; notice to comply not
prerequisite. A notice to comply is not required before an emergency stop work order
may be issued if: (i) the alleged noncompliance is causing or is in imminent danger of
causing harmful erosion of lands or sediment deposition in waters within the watersheds
of the State; or (ii) the land disturbing activity commenced without an approved erosion
and sediment control plan or any required permits.
2. Emergency stop work order; stormwater management; notice to comply not prerequisite.
A notice to comply is not required before an emergency stop work order may be issued if
the administrator finds that any violation of the VSMP permit is grossly affecting or
presents an imminent and substantial danger of causing harmful erosion of lands or
sediment deposition in waters within the watersheds of the State or otherwise
substantially impacting water quality.
Draft: 12/30/13
67
B. Contents of the stop work order. The stop work order shall order the owner to stop all land
disturbing activity on the site until all of the specified corrective measures have been taken to the
satisfaction of the administrator, until any violation of the permit, plan or other applicable
requirement of this chapter is determined by the administrator to have abated, or that any required
plan or permit be obtained from the administrator, or any combination thereof; provided that any
emergency stop work order to be issued under subsection (A)(1) or (A)(2) also shall direct the
owner to cease immediately all land disturbing activity on the site and inform the owner of the
date, time and location of a hearing before the administrator under subsection (F), at which time
the administrator may affirm, modify, amend, or cancel the emergency stop work order.
C. How stop work order delivered. The stop work order shall be delivered as follows:
1. Noncompliance with VSMP permit or erosion and sediment control plan. If the alleged
violation is the owner’s noncompliance with the VSMP permit or the erosion and
sediment control plan, the stop work order shall be mailed by certified mail, with
confirmation of delivery, to the address specified in the permit application or the plan
certification, or by personal delivery at the site of the land disturbing activity or
development activity to the agent or employee.
2. Land disturbing activity without a VSMP permit or erosion and sediment control plan. If
the alleged violation is the owner engaging in land disturbing activity without either a
VSMP permit or an approved erosion and sediment control plan, the stop work order
shall be mailed by certified mail, with confirmation of delivery, to the address specified
in the land records of the County, and shall be posted on the site where the land
disturbing activity is occurring.
D. Duration of order. A stop work order shall remain in effect for the following periods:
1. Noncompliance with VSMP permit or erosion and sediment control plan. If the alleged
violation is the owner’s noncompliance with the VSMP permit or the approved erosion
and sediment control plan, the stop work order shall remain in effect for seven (7) days
after the date of service pending application by the County or the alleged violator to the
circuit court for appropriate relief.
2. Land disturbing activity without a VSMP permit or erosion and sediment control plan. If
the alleged violation is the owner engaging in land disturbing activity without either a
VSMP permit or an approved erosion and sediment control plan, the stop work order
shall remain in effect until all required permits and plans are obtained from the
administrator, subject to the additional procedures and requirements in subsection (E).
E. Subsequent order and service; land disturbing activity without a VSMP permit or an erosion and
sediment control plan; failure to obtain approval within 7 days. If the alleged violation is the
owner engaging in land disturbing activity without either a VSMP permit or an approved erosion
and sediment control plan, and the owner has submitted a permit application or a plan but has not
obtained approval within seven (7) days after the date of service of the stop work order, the
administrator may issue a subsequent order to the owner requiring that all construction and other
work on the site, other than corrective measures, be stopped until approval of the required permits
or plans is obtained. The subsequent order shall be served upon the owner by certified mail, with
confirmation of delivery, to the address specified in the permit application or the land records of
the County.
Draft: 12/30/13
68
F. Administrative hearing on emergency stop work order. Within a reasonable time after the
issuance of an emergency stop work order under subsection (A)(1) or (A)(2), the administrator
shall conduct a hearing at which time the owner may respond to the order, explain the corrective
measures taken, if any, raise any defenses, if any, and present any other relevant and material
information. Upon conclusion of the hearing, the administrator may affirm, modify, amend, or
cancel the emergency stop work order. A hearing is not required if the owner does not appear and
does not submit any information in writing. Nothing in this subsection compels the owner to
participate in a hearing.
G. Right to appeal. The owner may appeal the issuance of any order under subsection (A) or (E) to
the circuit court; provided that the owner shall have no right to appeal an order issued under
subsection (A)(1) or (A)(2) unless the owner participated in the administrative hearing provided
under subsection (F).
H. Authority to enforce order. The County may enforce any order issued by the administrator under
subsections (A) and (E) in an action seeking injunctive relief, mandamus, or any other appropriate
remedy.
I. Compliance; lifting order. Any order issued by the administrator under subsections (A) and (E)
shall be immediately lifted when the corrective measures have been completed and approved by
the administrator, or when all required permits or plans are obtained from the administrator, or
when the administrator determines that the requirements of this chapter have been satisfied;
provided that nothing in this section prevents the County or the administrator from pursuing any
other action or seeking any other remedy in the enforcement of this chapter.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:37, 62.1-44.15:42, 62.1-44.15:58.
Sec. 17-903 Remedies under the VESCP.
The following shall apply to the enforcement of the VESCP:
A. Violations subject to this section. The County may seek the remedies provided in this section
against any person who commence land disturbing activity without an approved erosion and
sediment control plan or who violates, fails, neglects, or refuses to obey any applicable State
statute or regulation or any County regulation pertaining to the VESCP, the approved erosion and
sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity or any condition thereof, any permit or
condition issued by the County as a result of the approved erosion and sediment control plan, any
stop work order, and any emergency stop work order.
B. Civil penalties. The County may seek civil penalties as follows:
1. Procedure. Proceedings seeking civil penalties for any violation delineated in subsection
(A) shall commence by filing a civil summons in the general district court.
2. Amount of civil penalty. Any violation shall be subject to a civil penalty of five hundred
dollars ($500.00) for the initial summons, and a civil penalty of one thousand hundred
dollars ($1000.00) for each additional summons arising from the same set of operative
facts; provided that if the violation arises from commencing land disturbing activities
without an approved plan, the violation shall be subject to a civil penalty of one thousand
dollars ($1,000.00) for the initial and each subsequent summons.
Draft: 12/30/13
69
3. Maximum aggregate civil penalty. The total civil penalties from a series of violations
arising from the same set of operative facts shall not exceed ten thousand dollars
($10,000.00).
4. Each day a separate offense. Each day during which a violation is found to exist shall be
a separate offense.
5. Option to prepay civil penalty and waive trial. Any person summoned for a violation
under this subsection may elect to pay the civil penalty by making an appearance in
person or in writing by mail to the County’s department of finance prior to the date fixed
for trial in court. A person so appearing may enter a waiver of trial, admit liability, and
pay the civil penalty established for the offense charged. A signature to an admission of
liability shall have the same force and effect as a judgment of court. However, such an
admission shall not be deemed a criminal conviction for any purpose. If a person charged
with a violation does not elect to enter a waiver of trial and admit liability, the violation
shall be tried in the general district court in the same manner and with the same right of
appeal as provided by law. A finding of liability shall not be deemed a criminal
conviction for any purpose.
6. Civil penalties are in lieu of criminal penalties. A violation enforced under this
subsection shall be in lieu of any criminal penalty.
7. Civil penalties; use. Civil penalties shall be paid into the treasury of the County.
C. Civil charges. In lieu of the civil penalties sought under subsection (B) and with the consent of
any person who has committed a violation described in subsection (A), the administrator may
provide, in an order he issues against the person, for the payment of civil charges for violations in
a specific sum, not to exceed the limits specified in subsections (B)(3) and (B)(4). Civil charges
shall be paid into the treasury of the County.
D. Injunctive relief. Any violation, or the threat of any violation, described in subsection (A), may be
enforced in a proceeding brought by the County seeking injunctive relief without the necessity of
showing that an adequate remedy at law does not exist.
E. Other remedy. Without limiting the remedies that may be obtained in this section, any person
violating or failing, neglecting, or refusing to obey any injunction, mandamus, or other remedy
obtained pursuant to this section shall be subject, in the discretion of the court, to a civil penalty
not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000) for each violation.
F. Violation of agreement in lieu of plan; additional information. If a violation occurs during the
land disturbing activity authorized under an agreement in lieu of a plan, then the person
responsible for carrying out the agreement in lieu of a plan shall correct the violation and provide
the name of a person holding a certificate of competence.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:54, 62.1-44.15:55, 62.1-44.15:63.
Sec. 17-904 Remedies under the VSMP.
The following shall apply to the enforcement of the VSMP:
Draft: 12/30/13
70
A. Violations subject to this section. The County may seek the remedies provided in this section
against any person who: (i) violates or fails, neglects or refuses to obey any applicable State
statute or regulation or any County regulation pertaining to the VSMP, including any regulation,
standard or condition adopted pursuant to the conditions of the County’s MS4 permit, including
discharging stormwater into State waters from the County’s MS4, or from land disturbing
activities, except in compliance with a State permit issued by the State Water Control Board
pursuant to the Virginia Stormwater Management Act; (ii) engages in or allows any illicit
discharge, illicit connection, or dumping; (iii) fails, neglects, or refuses to comply with any order
of the administrator, including, but not limited to, any order to maintain a stormwater
management facility; (iv) violates, fails, neglects, or refuses to obey any injunction, mandamus,
or other remedy obtained pursuant to this section.
B. Civil penalties. The County may seek civil penalties as follows:
1. Procedure. Proceedings seeking civil penalties for any violation delineated in subsection
(A) shall commence by filing a civil summons in the appropriate court.
2. Amount of civil penalty. Any violation shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to thirty-
two thousand five hundred dollars ($32,500.00) for each violation, in the discretion of the
court. The amount of the penalty should reflect the degree of harm caused by the
violation and take into account the economic benefit to the violator from noncompliance.
3. Each day a separate offense. Each day during which a violation is found to exist shall be
a separate offense.
4. Civil penalties; use. Civil penalties shall be paid into the treasury of the County and are
to be used for the purpose of minimizing, preventing, managing, or mitigating pollution
of the waters of the County and abating environmental pollution in the County therein in
such a manner as the court may, by order, direct.
C. Civil charges. In lieu of the civil penalties sought under subsection (B) and with the consent of
any person who has committed a violation described in subsection (A), the administrator may
provide, in an order he issues against the person, for the payment of civil charges for violations in
a specific sum, not to exceed the limits specified in subsection (B)(2). Civil charges shall be paid
into the treasury of the County.
D. Criminal penalties. Any person who willfully and knowingly violates any provision of the VSMP
regulations in this chapter is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Criminal penalties shall not be
available as a remedy for a violation of subsection (A)(iii).
E. Injunctive relief. Any violation, or the threat of any violation, described in subsection (A), may be
enforced in a proceeding brought by the County seeking injunctive relief without the necessity of
showing that an adequate remedy at law does not exist.
F. Use of offsite nutrient credits. To the extent available and with the consent of the applicant, the
administrator may include the use of nutrient credits or other offsite measures in resolving
enforcement actions to compensate for: (i) nutrient control deficiencies occurring during the
period of noncompliance; and (ii) permanent nutrient control deficiencies.
State law reference – Va. Code §§ 62.1-44.15:35, 62.1-44.15:42, 62.1-44.15:48, 62.1-44.15:49; 9VAC25-870-116, 9VAC15-870-
310.
Draft: 12/30/13
71
Article X. Groundwater Assessments
Sec. 17-1000 Applicability.
This article shall apply to the establishment of land uses that will rely on privately owned wells serving as
the primary source of potable water and having not more than two (2) connections (hereinafter,
“individual wells”) or central water supplies, as defined in Albemarle County Code § 16-101. The
applicable requirements of this article are determined by the development approval sought by the owner
and the land uses within the development, as follows:
Development Approval and Timing of Submittal for Required Assessment Assessment
Required
Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new structure on a lot of record less
than twenty-one acres in size existing prior to the effective date of this article that will
be served by one or more individual wells
Tier 1
Prior to the issuance of a building permit for a new structure: (1) on a lot of record
created after February 8, 2005 that is subject to a Tier 2 or Tier 3 assessment that will
be served by one or more individual wells; or (2) associated with a use that is subject
to a Tier 3 or Tier 4 assessment that will be served by one or more individual wells
Tier 1
Prior to approval of a preliminary subdivision plat creating lots of less than twenty -one
acres that will be served by individual wells Tier 2
Prior to approval of a preliminary subdivision plat creating four or more lots where at
least three lots are five acres or less Tier 3
Prior to approval of an initial site plan for a new nonresidential or nonagricultural use
using less than 2,000 gallons/day (average) Tier 3
Prior to approval of an initial site plan for a new nonresidential or nonagricultural use
using more than 2,000 gallons/day (average) Tier 4
Prior to approval of any central water supply under chapter 16 of the Albemarle
County Code Tier 4
The administrator may require that development approvals subject to Tier 2 or Tier 3 assessments be
subject to Tier 3 or Tier 4 assessments, respectively, as provided in sections 17-1002 and 17-1003.
If an owner submits a final subdivision plat or site plan without first submitting and obtaining approval of
a preliminary subdivision plat or an initial site plan, the assessment required by section 17-1002 shall
begin upon submittal of the final subdivision plat or site plan, and the assessment required by sections 17-
1003 or 17-1004 shall be submitted by the owner with the final subdivision plat or site plan.
(§ 17-400, Ord. 04-17(1), 12-8-04, effective 2-8-05)
Sec. 17-1001 Tier 1 assessments.
A Tier 1 assessment shall consist of the owner drilling a well on the lot and submitting the following
information to the program authority: (i) a Virginia well drilling completion report (form GW-2) for each
well drilled; and (ii) the latitude and longitude coordinates of each well’s location. The information
submitted must be accepted as complete and accurate by the administrator prior to issuance of the
building permit.
(§ 17-401, Ord. 04-17(1), 12-8-04, effective 2-8-05)
Draft: 12/30/13
72
Sec. 17-1002 Tier 2 assessments.
A Tier 2 assessment shall consist of the program authority reviewing and evaluating the county’s well
database, available hydrogeologic studies, and information from the Virginia Department of Health and
the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, as provided in the Design Standards Manual. Based
on this evaluation, the administrator may require that the owner provide additional groundwater
assessment data prior to subdivision plat or site plan approval, or may require that a Tier 3 assessment be
submitted.
(§ 17-402, Ord. 04-17(1), 12-8-04, effective 2-8-05; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
Sec. 17-1003 Tier 3 assessments.
A Tier 3 assessment shall consist of the following:
A. Draft groundwater management plan. The owner shall submit a draft groundwater management
plan with the preliminary plat or the initial site plan. The groundwater management plan shall
comply with the requirements for such plans in the Design Standards Manual. If the groundwater
management plan identifies special areas of concern, such as an off-site resource of high
groundwater sensitivity or a previously unknown source of contamination, then the administrator
may require additional groundwater assessment data prior to preliminary subdivision plat or site
plan approval.
B. Final groundwater management plan. The owner shall submit a final groundwater management
plan that must be approved by the administrator prior to approval of the final plat or site plan.
C. Surety. Any structural best management practices shall be bonded as a subdivision plat or site
plan improvement.
The administrator may require that a Tier 4 assessment be submitted instead of a Tier 3 assessment if the
special areas of concern identified in subsection (A) have not been adequately addressed by the additional
groundwater assessment data.
(§17-403, Ord. 04-17(1), 12-8-04, effective 2-8-05; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
Sec. 17-1004 Tier 4 assessments.
A Tier 4 assessment shall consist of the following:
A. Draft groundwater management plan; aquifer testing workplan. The owner shall submit a draft
groundwater management plan and an aquifer testing workplan complying with the requirements
for these plans in the Design Standards Manual, with the preliminary plat, initial site plan, or the
application for a central water supply. The groundwater management plan must demonstrate to
the administrator’s satisfaction that the site’s groundwater conditions have been considered with
the subdivision or site plan’s layout and design. The aquifer testing workplan must be approved
by the program authority before the owner may conduct aquifer testing as required by subsection
(B).
B. Aquifer testing workplan. After the program authority approves the aquifer testing workplan, the
owner shall conduct aquifer testing as provided in the workplan.
Draft: 12/30/13
73
C. Final groundwater management plan; groundwater assessment report. The owner shall submit a
final groundwater management plan and a groundwater assessment report complying with the
requirements for the report in the Design Standards Manual, based upon the results of the aquifer
testing. The final groundwater management plan and the groundwater assessment report must be
approved by the administrator prior to final subdivision plat or site plan approval.
D. Surety. Any structural best management practices shall be bonded as a subdivision plat or site
plan improvement.
(§17-404, Ord. 04-17(1), 12-8-04, effective 2-8-05; Ord. 07-17(1), 2-14-07)
Sec. 17-1005 Fees.
Each owner seeking approval of a tier assessment required by this article shall pay a fee as provided by
Albemarle County Code § 18-35.1 and Albemarle County Code § 14-203, as applicable.
(§17-405, Ord. 04-17(1), 12-8-04, effective 2-8-05)
State law reference--Va. Code §§ 15.2-2241(9), 36-98.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Water Resources Funding
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Evaluate alternatives for funding of water resource
programs
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, Shadman,
Harper, Brooks
PRESENTER (S): Mark Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Recent state mandates have significantly increased the scope and costs of County water resource programs. The Board
will receive a separate executive summary at this January 8th meeting regarding a proposed comprehensive revision to the
Water Protection Ordinance that addresses compliance with changes to the Virginia Stormwater Management Program
(VSMP). Additionally, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is imposing new requirements and
standards for the County’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit that are anticipated to significantly
increase funding demands beginning in FY15.
In recent months, the Board has been presented information regarding both the VSMP and MS4 requirements
(Attachments A and B). With this information, the Board considered strategic initiatives within the County’s Five Year
Financial Plan to implement these requirements. In December 2013, the Board determined that the Five Year Financial
Plan should include new funding for both programs. The VSMP costs in the Community Development Department are
proposed to be offset by development applications fees. The MS4 costs in the General Services Department, which
includes both operational and capital costs, requires an additional revenue source for funding. The purpose of today’s
work session is to evaluate the funding needed and possible sources of revenue.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4. Protect the County’s parks and its natural, scenic and historic resources in accordance with the County’s
established growth management policies
DISCUSSION:
For the water resources program, the Five Year Financial Plan identifies the total program cost will escalate from $414
Thousand in FY15 to $1.23 Million in FY19, which equates to approximately $1 Million per year for the Five Year
Financial Plan. This amount is based on assumptions for estimated costs and levels of service and may change during
implementation. In order to create a balanced budget, a new revenue source is needed for this funding. Staff has
identified three potential revenue sources to address this funding need.
1. General Fund – The County has the option to continue to fund the expenses from this Fund as
historically done. At the current real estate tax assessments, the additional $1Million required per year
equates to approximately two-thirds of a cent on the real estate tax rate. Most MS4 counties in Virginia
are currently funding their water resources programs through general fund revenues.
2. Service District – Virginia enables localities to create special tax districts called service districts for
dedicated funding. Taxes are assessed in the same way as property taxes. One county has been
identified as using a Service District and another a sanitary district, which is a form of a service
district.
3. Stormwater Utility – Virginia enables localities to create stormwater utilities. Rather than rely on the
assessed property value, a stormwater utility measures impacts (runoff) and assesses fees based on
that impact. This is typically done in terms of $”X” per 1,000 square feet of impervious cover or some
similar measure. Stormwater utilities have been a preferred revenue source for MS4 cities in Virginia.
To assist the Board in understanding the advantages and disadvantages of the three revenue sources, a table is
provided as Attachment C comparing the three alternatives. In the table, a green color indicates the stronger of the
revenue sources for the specific factor. In one case, an additional light green is provided to indicate that a possibility
exists but must still be confirmed. A short description of each factor in the table is provided:
AGENDA TITLE: Water Resources Funding
January 8, 2014
Page 2
Implementation Costs and Complexity: This factor indicates the relative complexity of establishing this
funding source. Funding water resources programs through the General Fund has no implementation
costs and requires the Board to set the tax rate by resolution, using assessed values of property
already in place. A Service District would have to be established by ordinance, but staff believes that
the process would be fairly simple. The Service District tax rate, also using assessed values of
property already in place, could be either set in the ordinance or established by resolution. Funding
through a Stormwater Utility, once established by ordinance, would come from fees based on each
parcel’s measured impacts from stormwater runoff, rather than assessed property values. The fee
would be based on a dollar amount per a defined square footage of impervious cover, or some similar
measure. Staff believes that a Stormwater Utility would require additional costs and more time to
implement.
Administration Costs and Complexity: This factor indicates the relative complexity of maintaining this
funding source. Once again, the General Fund and Service District are the easiest to administer
because they continue the established process of levying and collecting real property taxes already in
place. The Stormwater Utility requires a separate case-by-case evaluation as property is developed or
changed. In addition, under a Stormwater Utility, the County may reduce fees to any public or private
entity that implements or participates in strategies, techniques or programs that reduce stormwater
flow or pollutant loadings, or decrease the cost of maintaining public stormwater management
systems. Although this incentive program certainly has merit, staff is concerned that it would be
difficult to administer.
Dedicated Funding Source: This factor indicates whether the funding source would be ongoing. The
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and DEQ have strongly encouraged localities to establish
dedicated funding. Both the Service District and Stormwater Utility accomplish this.
Correlation between Impacts and Costs for Property: A stormwater utility establishes fees based on
the measured impact, making it a more equitable charge. Because the General Fund and Service
District tax is based on property values, they have little direct correlation to impacts.
Incentives for Reducing Impacts: The Stormwater Utility has the advantage of allowing the County to
fully or partially waive fees for onsite measures taken to reduce stormwater impacts. These can
include things such as rain barrels or rain gardens.
Complexity of Public Explanation: The concept of property taxes is well understood, which gives an
advantage to the General Fund and Service District. The Stormwater Utility will be considerably more
difficult to explain, as many explanations include qualifiers that confuse the public or make them
suspicious of intentions. For example, it will be difficult to explain that a stormwater utility charge is
based on impervious cover except where the impervious cover is disconnected from channelized
runoff and the runoff is diverted to stormwater management facilities.
60/40 Revenue Split: The County has maintained a policy of a 60/40 split of new real estate tax
revenue between the School Division and the County Local Government unless the Board, in a
particular case, elects to dedicate an increase in revenue for a specific County or School purpose.
The revenues generated by a Service District or Stormwater Utility would fall outside of that policy
because they are required by law to be a dedicated funding source for water resources programs.
Itemized Expense on Income Taxes: Individuals who itemize expenses with their income tax can
deduct general property taxes. This is not possible with Stormwater Utility fees, which are treated the
same as any other utility bill for tax purposes. There remains some question as to whether taxes
imposed by a Service District are entitled to the same tax deduction as general property taxes. Staff
notes that Fairfax County uses a Stormwater Service District and advises its property owners the tax
deduction is allowed based on how its program is designed.
Tax Exempt Properties: Tax exempt properties would not pay property taxes or Service District taxes
if imposed for stormwater programs. All properties would pay a utility fee unless subject to a separate
MS4 permit.
After considering the advantages and disadvantages, staff believes a Service District provides the best balance of
these factors. The General Fund was found to lack the dedicated funding source the regulators are encouraging with
the MS4 permit and, if the Board elected to adhere to the County’s 60/40 funding policy, a substantial tax increase
would be required, which may be difficult to garner public support. The Stormwater Utility is considered to be too
expensive to implement and administer for the amount of funding needed, plus the fee cannot be an itemized
deduction on individual income taxes. Staff also notes that based on other localities, it is anticipated that a Stormwater
Utility would take two years to fully implement, while the revenue source is needed beginning in FY 15. Thus, at least
AGENDA TITLE: Water Resources Funding
January 8, 2014
Page 3
for the next five years, the Service District appears to be the best funding option. If the 2018 reissued MS4 permit
continues to increase the County’s program costs, staff believes a utility should be reconsidered at that time.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The estimated expense of $1 Million per year for the next five years represents the cost of continuing the existing MS4
permit program and addressing the costs with the new mandate. It should be noted this cost does not include any
additional measures the Board may wish to consider for improving local streams and rivers , and could be subject to
change as the program is implemented. Funding for such an expanded program could also be addressed with a
Service District. If a Service District is established effective July 1, 2014, revenue would be collected in December of
2014 and June of 2015, providing full funding for stormwater programs in FY15.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board direct staff to schedule a public hearing for the adoption of an ordinance to establish
a Service District to be effective July 1, 2014 to ensure that the County’s stormwater program can be implemented with
tax revenue to be collected for all of FY15. If the Board concurs, staff will include this as part of the FY15 proposed
budget
ATTACHMENTS:
A – September 4, 2013 Executive Summary – Virginia Stormwater Management Program
B – October 2, 2013 Executive Summary – Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Program and Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
C – Comparison of Funding Sources
Return to agenda
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Virginia Stormwater Management Program
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Review mandated stormwater program in advance of
proposed ordinance amendment and implementation plan
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Letteri, Davis, Kamptner, Graham,
Shadman, Brooks, Harper
PRESENTER (S): Mark Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
September 4, 2013
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Largely in response to Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP), the Virginia Stormwater
Management Act was significantly revised to enhance stormwater regulations and to set clear mandates for local
governments. In response to this new law, the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (VSWCB) promulgated new
regulations. The purpose of this Board work session is to review the elements of the Virginia Stormwater Management
Program (VSMP) that the County is required to submit to the VSWCB by December 15, 2013, and staff’s plan for
responding to this mandate. Over the last several months, staff has provided background information and visions for a
water resource program that responds to both the new State mandates and the County’s goals as stated in current policy
(Attachments A and B). The County’s response to the VSMP mandates will not preclude it from later considering
additional programs that address the County’s goals, and staff plans to resume that effort after the Board provides
direction on this program.
While a hyperlink to the regulations is provided (VSMP Permit Regulations), the reader is advised that the regulations are
over 160 pages in length and can be somewhat difficult to follow without significant background research into Virginia
stormwater law. Staff has attempted to distill the regulations into 2 pages that summarize the County’s mandates and a
recommended response. As with any summary of this type, this report attempts to focus on the key points but cannot fully
address the wide array of details associated with this program.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Protect the County’s parks and its natural, scenic and historic resources in accordance with the County’s
established growth management policies
DISCUSSION:
Required County Response
By December 15, 2013, the County is required to submit the following to the VSWCB:
A draft ordinance supported by the Board that addresses the requirements of the regulations as outlined in the
Virginia Administrative Code (4VAC 50-60-148 and 4VAC 50-60-150).
A funding and staffing plan that supports the full implementation of the ordinance (4VAC 50-60-150).
Policies and procedures to ensure full implementation of the ordinance (4VAC 50-60-150).
Details on each of these elements is provided below.
Required Draft Ordinance
The draft ordinance must address the following nine requirements:
Identification of authority. Identification of the authority accepting complete registration statements (pertaining
to discharges from regulated construction activities) and to complete plan reviews, plan approvals,
inspections, and enforcement. The County’s Water Protection Ordinance (WPO) already contains many of
these provisions and they will be updated to incorporate the VSMP Regulations.
Provisions for reviewing and approving erosion and sediment control plans. The WPO already addresses this
requirement.
Provisions to ensure compliance with the VSMP Regulations pertaining to Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plans, Stormwater Management Plans, and Pollution Prevention Plans. While the County has a stormwater
management requirement in its current WPO, this requirement will be greatly expanded under new State laws,
AGENDA TITLE: Virginia Stormwater Management Program
September 4, 2013
Page 2
and the County is assigned the responsibility for pollution prevention plans that were previously administered
by the State.
Requirements for inspections and monitoring by the developer/property owner. This provision is part of the
transfer of the stormwater and pollution prevention plans to the County. While the program makes the
developer responsible for regularly inspecting the site and ensuring compliance, the County now has a
responsibility for assuring compliance.
Requirements for long-term inspection and maintenance of stormwater management facilities. The County
already requires maintenance agreements as part of its approvals, but this provision includes additional
inspection requirements for future property owners. Staff anticipates this will prove difficult to enforce with
smaller residential developments and may generate future demands for the County to assume responsibility
for these facilities.
Collection and distribution of fees. While the WPO already includes fees and fee collection procedures, the
VSMP Regulations provide for new fees to offset the additional program costs. The VSMP Regulations also
include a requirement that part of collected fees with this program must be transferred to the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for administering state program oversight. Thus, fees included in
the ordinance to offset costs must be determined in anticipation that 28% of most new fees will be transferred
to DEQ.
Provisions for enforcement and civil penalties. The WPO already includes provisions for this, but they will
need to be significantly revised to include the new required provisions.
Provisions for bonding construction activities to ensure the County has a funding source if it proves necessary
for the County to revoke permits and stabilize the site. The County already has this program in place. Staff
notes that many of the current state limitations for a bond program remain in place.
Provisions for record keeping and reporting to DEQ on program compliance. Community Development
already manages this program, but the regulations add additional steps that must be followed.
Required Funding and Staffing Plan
While the VSMP Regulations include proposed fees, the County has flexibility to adopt fees up to complete cost
recovery. Additionally, despite repeated staff requests to the Commonwealth for estimates of typical resource
requirements, no guidance on resource requirements has been provided to local governments. As such, staff is
required to estimate anticipated resource demands for new programs for which it has limited or no experience in
administering.
There are two parts to the County’s program cost estimate. As addressed in the County’s Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (MS4) permit, General Services has provided a budget request that addresses the long-term inspection
and maintenance program. For new program costs associated with construction, Community Development staff has
estimated workload increases based on the current number of applications per year. Assuming the current rate of
applications is maintained, staff estimates that this program will require one additional plan review engineer and one
and one-half additional inspectors starting with implementation of the new ordinance. That would increase engineering
staff from the current 4 FTE to 5 FTE and WPO inspectors from the current 3½ FTEs to 5 FTEs. Staff also anticipates
this program will require one additional inspector in FY16, bringing the number of inspectors to 6 FTEs. The FY16
increase is planned to accommodate program growth as more new projects are subject to the new requirements and
fewer projects are eligible to be grandfathered under the current requirements. This equates to an estimated cost
increase above current levels of approximately $182,000 in FY15 and $251,000 in FY16.
It is possible for the County to offset some or all of the additional costs through development fees established in this
ordinance. When the WPO fees were last updated, the Board established a policy of recovering approximately one-
half of the program costs through fees. By considering the fees allowed in the VSMP Regulations and the number of
current applications each year, staff estimates those fee amounts will generate approximately $180,000 in new
revenue per year. Transferring 28% of that amount to DEQ, as required by the VSMP Regulations, would leave the
County with approximately $130,000 in net revenue. With the estimated program cost increase for FY 15 and 16, the
expected net revenue would maintain compliance with the current policy of recovering one-half of the costs through
fees. Assuming the Board wishes to maintain that current policy, staff recommends this approach. Staff notes the
County may recover additional revenue each year beyond FY16 from permit modifications or renewals, but those
amounts do not appear to be appreciable in FY15 or FY16.
AGENDA TITLE: Virginia Stormwater Management Program
September 4, 2013
Page 3
Required Policies and Procedures
Through the Design Standards Manual, the County already has most policies and procedures in place for
implementation of the new ordinance, though some updates for the stormwater provisions will be required. Staff has
noted two areas where the regulations require new policy.
Towns. The town of Scottsville has the option to be covered by the County’s program or to create its own
program. Scottsville officials have expressed an interest in the County administering the program for the town,
and staff does not believe this would result in a significant change in workload. By State law, this would
include the part of the town within Fluvanna County.
Grandfathering. Staff notes the VSMP Regulations have a very generous grandfathering provision. Under
that provision, any valid plan of development that was approved prior to July 1, 2012 would be grandfathered
from these new regulations until June 30, 2019. For Albemarle County, this would include a number of larger
rezonings in addition to site plans and subdivision plats already extended to June 30, 2017 under separate
action of the General Assembly.
Summary
As outlined above, staff anticipates presenting to the Board for its review in November: 1) a draft ordinance; 2) a plan
for funding and staffing the new program; and 3) recommended policies and procedures for implementing the new
ordinance. The Board will not be required to adopt the ordinance at that time, but an endorsement by the Board of the
three listed documents is required before they are forwarded to the VSWCB prior to December 15, 2013. The
VSWCB will review the documents to verify compliance with its regulations and will advise the County whether the
County’s documents are in compliance or additional changes are required before the Board’s adoption. Following the
VSWCB’s review, staff will ask the Board to schedule the ordinance for public hearing before April 1, 2014, so that the
adopted ordinance may be submitted to the VSWCB by that date.
BUDGET IMPACT:
As noted above, this new program is estimated to increase current program costs by approximately $182,000 in FY15
and by $251,000 in FY16. Some or all of this increased cost can be offset by new revenue associated with
development fees. Staff is proposing to use the fees as provided in the VSMP Regulations and anticipates those fees
will generate approximately $130,000 in net revenue for the County in FY15 and FY16. Additionally, the General
Services Department budget currently includes MS4 permit costs which include overseeing the long-term inspection
program, which also is part of the VSMP permit. Final estimates of the impact on General Services are currently being
finalized and will be reviewed further with the Board on Wednesday. Estimating this amount is challenging because of
the multiples Federal and State mandates being imposed on the County.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has provided this information to assist the Board in understanding the general requirements of the proposed
ordinance, funding and staffing the program, and the policies and procedures associated with the program.
In addition, staff has proposed a fee structure consistent with current policy for WPO fees. When the Board considers
adopting the ordinance, it may adopt lower fees than advertised, but higher fees would require the ordinance
amendment be re-advertised. Therefore, staff requests that the Board advise staff if it would like staff to draft an
ordinance amendment that would more fully offset the increased costs of the program.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – July 3, 2013 Executive Summary, Water Resources Program
B – August 7, 2013 Executive Summary, W ater Resources Program
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Program
and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Review new requirements and resource implications
related to the County’s programs to manage stormwater
and restore impaired waters.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Letteri, Davis, Kamptner, Graham,
Shadman, Brooks, and Harper
PRESENTER (S): Greg Harper
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
October 2, 2013
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
At work sessions on July 3, 2013 and August 7, 2013, the Board was presented with a variety of information in
preparation for decisions it would need to make regarding future program levels and funding. A September 4, 2013 work
session deviated from this discussion series to address a particular, time-critical element of the overall stormwater
management program – modifying the County’s regulatory processes and Water Protection Ordinance to be consistent
with new requirements of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP).
Staff is again deviating from the original discussion to present specific information related to other new State mandates –
those related to the County’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit and Total Maximum Daily Load
(TMDL) requirements. Staff intends to resume discussions related to future program levels and funding in early 2014.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4a: Work in conjunction with key stakeholders to protect the health of our local waterways and other critical
natural resources.
DISCUSSION:
Albemarle County is authorized to discharge stormwater from its urban areas into State waters by way of a permit
issued by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) under Virginia’s implementation of a federal program called
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES program was originally intended to
regulate point sources of pollution but was later broadened to include quasi-point sources, including the outfalls of
storm sewer systems. Although the County does not own and maintain an extensive, connected network of storm
pipes like those found in most cities, the County is nonetheless considered the operator of a municipal separate storm
sewer system, or an MS4.
MS4s are defined as systems operated by public bodies lying within urbanized areas as identified by the latest
census. Albemarle County is one of many MS4s in the Charlottesville urbanized area; others include the City of
Charlottesville, the University of Virginia, Peidmont Virginia Community College, and the Virginia Department of
Transportation. Only the portion of a public body lying within the urbanized area is regulated; for Albemarle this
generally corresponds to the designated development areas.
Albemarle County is one of 90 small MS4 operators in Virginia; small MS4s are all covered under the same “general”
permit. There are 11 large and medium MS4 operators in Virginia covered under “individual” permits. General permits
were first issued in 2003 and have five-year durations. The County’s current permit became effective on July 1, 2013
and expires on June 30, 2018.
MS4 permits convey a responsibility to the operator to reduce the discharge of pollutants from regulated areas into
State waters to the “maximum extent practicable” (MEP); this contrasts with numeric effluent limits often imposed on
traditional end-of-pipe point sources. The MEP standard is presumed to be met if the operator implements an iteritive
program consistent with the permit conditions.
AGENDA TITLE: MS4 Program and TMDLs
October 2, 2013
Page 2
MS4 Permit Requirements
The MS4 permit requires the County to develop, implement, and enforce a variety of specific programs. There is some
overlap between these requirements and other County programs – both those that predate MS4 permitting and those
developed more recently. The responsibility to implement these programs is shared by various departments and staff.
Basic permit requirements consist of six minimum control measures (MCMs) as summarized in the following table:
MCM Permit Requirement General Description Primary
Dept.* Program Overlap
1 public education and
outreach
increasing public knowledge about steps than
can be taken to reduce stormwater pollution GS† -
2 public involvement and
participation
public noticing and receipt of comments;
County participation in local activities GS† -
3
illicit discharge
detection and
elimination
mapping storm sewer system and outfalls;
screening outfalls for non-stormwater
discharges
GS & FR† Fire Rescue; Health
Dept; Zoning
4
construction site
stormwater runoff
control
regulating land disturbing activities – including
new development – through plan review and
inspections
CD VSMP (E&S
regulations)
5
post-construction
stormwater
management
requiring the construction and long-term
maintenance of permanent stormwater
management facilities for development
CD & GS
VSMP (stormwater
management
regulations)
6 pollution prevention /
good housekeeping
proper handling, storage, and disposal of
materials and nutrient management on County
properties
GS & PR Environmental
Management System
* GS = General Services; CD = Community Development; FR = Fire & Rescue; PR = Parks and Recreation
† County receives implementation assistance from Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation Dis trict (TJSWCD)
The County must develop and submit comprehensive 5-year Program Plans describing a combination of specific best
management practices (BMPs) that will be implemented to fulfill the permit requirements. Annually, the County must
report on its progress for each BMP, evaluate the effectiveness of the programs, alter programs as necessary, and
submit various records and data. The latest 5-year Program Plan and past annual reports are available at the
County’s website (www.albemarle.org/water).
In 2012, the County hired a consultant to perform an extensive assessment of the County’s MS4 program. The
assessment was commissioned to satisfy a requirement of the permit and to better prepare the County fo r a possible
future audit by the Environmental Protection Agency, which, in the cases of some other MS4 operators,has led to
financial penalties. The assessment concluded that the program was generally robust but could be improved by
having written inter-departmental and inter-organizational agreements, developing various written standard operating
procedures, and improving information management systems.
Due to the considerable increase in program requirements under the latest permit, operators were not required to
submit a complete 5-year Program Plan at the start of the current cycle. Instead, the permit includes a multi-year
schedule (Attachment 1) by which permittees must update existing program elements or develop new ones.
TMDLs – Chesapeake Bay and Local Waters
By far, the most significant change in the new MS4 permit is the requirement to meet pollutant reductions assigned to
the County through a State or regional TMDL process. Although the rule is not new, this is the first 5-year permit cycle
in which the rule is actually applicable to the County.
As background, the final stage of a TMDL planning process is the development of a Watershed Implementation Plan
(WIP). WIPs generally include an identification of the primary sources of the pollu tants contributing to the impairment
of the waterbody; these may be agricultural practices, wastewater treatment plants, or, an MS4 such as Albemarle
County. For each identified source, the WIP includes an estimation of the existing load, such as pounds per year of
sediment, and an allocation of a load reduction necessary to restore the impaired water.
AGENDA TITLE: MS4 Program and TMDLs
October 2, 2013
Page 3
At this point, only two impaired waters have culminated in allocations of pollutant reductions to Albemarle County’s
MS4; the Rivanna River and the Chesapeake Bay. Both of these TMDLs require that the County take measures to
reduce sediment loads in streams; the Chesapeake Bay TMDL also requires reductions in phosphorus and nitrogen
discharges. As more impaired waters are moved forward through the TMDL proce ss and result in load reduction
allocations to the County, the County will have to incorporate additional measures to address them through its
program.
The County’s initial priority in meeting this TMDL permit requirement is to develop long-term action plans which, when
implemented, will reduce pollutant discharges to the levels allocated by the TMDLs. The Chesapeake Bay TMDL
action plan must be submitted to DEQ by October 2015 and the Rivanna River TMDL action plan by October 2016.
With assistance from staff of the T homas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District, the County is in the early
stages of developing the action plans.
Action plan development will require the precise quantification of existing loads, the allocated reductions, and the
presumed effects of various BMPs, such as projects and activities. BMP effectiveness and cost data will be used to
produce the least-cost and most-practical mix of BMPs which will meet the requirements. The action plans could
possibly include a combination of the following:
increased public education and outreach
an incentive program for private BMPs
enhancements to existing public and private stormwater management facilities
new stormwater management facilities to serve already-developed areas
stream and ecological restoration
non-capital measures, such as nutrient management and street-sweeping
BUDGET IMPACT:
Without yet knowing the specifics of the action plans, staff has estimated that during the next five years the County
will require one additional FTE (FY15) in the role of water resources field inspector and two additional FTEs (FY15
and FY18) in the role of water resources planner, engineer, or scientist. These additional positions equate to an
estimated annual cost increase of $147,000 in FY15 and an additional $82,000 in FY18.
In addition, staff estimates that the cost of implementing an assortment of BMPs to meet the MS4 permit requirements
would be approximately $800,000 to $1,000,000 per year. Unlike the positions proposed by Community Development
to address the VSMP mandate, the staffing and capital needs described above cannot be funded, in whole or in part,
by permit fees. Therefore, the costs would be supported through either the general fund or from a dedicated funding
source, if one is created.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
This information is provided to assist the Board in understanding the general background and resource implications of
the new MS4 permit requirements, including those related to TMDLs.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Schedule of MS4 Program Updates
Attachment C
Water Resources Funding
Comparison of Funding Mechanisms
Factors General Fund Service District Stormwater Utility
Implementation
Costs and
Complexity
Low Low High
Administration
Costs and
Complexity
Low Low High
Dedicated Funding
Source No Yes Yes
Correlation between
Impacts and Costs
for Property
Weak Weak Strong
Incentives for
Reducing Impacts No No Yes
Complexity of Public
Explanation Low Low High
60 /40 Revenue
Split
Yes,
unless specifically
dedicated to
stormwater program
No No
Itemized Expense
on Income Taxes Yes Possible No
Tax Exempt
Properties No No Yes
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
CPA-2013-00001 Comprehensive Plan
Update/Amendment
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Comprehensive Plan Update and Process Discussion
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Graham, Cilimberg, Echols
PRESENTER (S): Elaine Echols
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
January 8, 2014
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Staff began working with the Planning Commission on this comprehensive update to the County’s Comprehensive Plan
(the “Plan”) in the summer of 2011. The last adoption of all elements of the Plan as one document occurred in 1989.
Subsequently, there have been a series of elements/sections of the Plan adopted since, beginning with t he Land Use
Section in 1996. Since 1996, the County has adopted updates to the following sections:
Natural Resources and Cultural Assets (1999)
Land Use Plan (LUP) – Neighborhood Model (2001)
Affordable Housing Policy (2004)
Rural Area Plan (2005)
Transportation Section (2005)
Community Facilities (part) (2007)
Economic Development Policy (2009)
Land Use Plan – Four Master Plans (Crozet 2004 & 2010, Pantops 2008, Village of Rivanna, 2010, and Places
29, 2011)
While these separate updates have kept the Plan relatively current, more recent initiatives and considerations, including
State stormwater regulations, increasing opportunities for agri-business and agri-tourism uses in the Rural Area, the target
industry study, affordable housing issues, and the need for a Master Plan for the Southern and Western Neighborhoods,
necessitate that the Plan be further updated. These updates, in combination with a desire to eliminate the unwieldiness of
the Plan that has resulted from adopting all of these sections independently, led staff and the Planning Commission to
develop a more concise Plan for the County. Because State law requires that localities review their Comprehensive Plans
every five years and because of the length of time that has passed since some sections of the Plan have been updated,
staff believes it prudent that the Board adopt the updated Plan constituting CPA201300001 as soon as i s reasonably
possible.
On July 26, 2011, the Planning Commission began the Plan review and amendment process with a general review of the
County’s Vision, Goals, and Objectives. Between July 26, 2011 and August 27, 2013, the Commission held
approximately 41 meetings devoted in whole or in part to the Plan, with an opportunity for public input at each meeting.
On April 2, 2013, the Commission held a public hearing on the draft Plan. Over the next several months, the Commission
asked staff to provide proposed changes to the final draft. On July 30, 2013, the Commission recommended approval of
the first part of the updated Plan and on August 27, 2013, the Commission recommended approval of the remaining
sections, along with priorities. The fully recommended Plan then went to the Board for consideration and adoption.
The Board began its review of the Commission’s recommended draft of the Plan on August 14, 2013. The Board’s
preferred process at that time was to review the Plan chapter-by-chapter and to hold a public hearing at the end of the
process. At its September 11, 2013 meeting, the Board reviewed the first three chapters and made comments. (See
Attachment A.) In November 2013, the Board decided to suspend the process until the incoming Board was in place. A
draft of the Plan is currently on-line at this location:
http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=14219.
AGENDA TITLE: CPA-2013-01 Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment
January 8, 2014
Page 2
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Mission: To enhance the well-being and quality of life for all citizens through the provision of the highest level of public
service consistent with the prudent use of public funds.
DISCUSSION:
At the Board work session on January 8, staff will provide an overview of the Planning Commission’s recommended
draft Plan and a summary of changes that the Commission has recommended. (See Attachment B.) In the interest of
“re-starting” the Board’s review of the Plan, staff also suggests two possible approaches to reviewing the draft Plan for
the Board’s consideration and direction on January 8.
1. Detailed review of chapters, policy issues, or both, raised by Board members, followed by a public
hearing.
This is the approach the Board initiated this fall before suspending its review. It provides the Board the
opportunity to delve into the Plan details and identify possible changes prior to holding a public hearing.
While such a review is typical of many Comprehensive Plan Amendments, it requires a number of Board work
sessions to complete. For example, the Places 29 Master Plan was recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission on October 27, 2009, first considered by the Board on January 13, 2010 , and adopted
by the Board on February 2, 2011, a period of slightly more than fifteen months. Recognizing that the draft
Plan includes 13 chapters and covers a wide range of subjects, staff believes this type of detailed review
would require six to eight work sessions prior to a public hearing, and the entire process m ay take a year or
more. (See Attachment C for possible schedule.)
2. Public Hearing followed by a review of particular issues identified.
The Planning Commission carefully and systematically developed the draft Plan over a two-year period with
public input at every meeting. The Board can rely on the Commission’s careful review and recommendations
for the Plan and focus its review on specific areas of the Plan in which it has an interest and/or that have been
identified as important by the public. This type of approach was most recently used with the update of the
Crozet Master Plan. Staff estimates that adoption of the Plan may occur within six months if the Board uses
this approach. (See Attachment C for possible schedule.)
BUDGET IMPACT:
Recommendations in the draft Plan include recommendations for future capital improvements and operations. While
there is no additional funding required for either approach that the Board may take to review the Plan, the Board
should be aware that Option 1 is anticipated to require two to three times more staff time than Option 2, resulting in an
ongoing potential that staff will not be available for other policy review priorities.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board choose to conduct its review of the draft Plan as set forth in O ption 2, proceeding to
a public hearing followed by a review of particular issues. While the Board started the review approach as set forth in
Option 1, staff believes with the extensive work completed by the Planning Commission and in the interest of focus
and efficiency, Option 2 is the preferable approach to take. The Board would first set a public hearing, which could be
as soon as February 12, 2014. Staff would provide the complete draft Plan reflecting all Commission
recommendations at least three weeks before the public hearing. After the public hearing, the Board can identify
specific topics and issues for detailed review. Staff can facilitate that detailed review, beginning with a work session
as soon as the following month. The Board may also wish to hold a final public hearing on the proposed Plan at the
conclusion of its work sessions.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Recommended Comprehensive Plan Changes from Board of Supervisors September 11, 2013
Attachment B: Summary of Recommended Changes from Planning Commission to the July 23, 2013 and August 14,
2013 Comprehensive Plan Drafts
Attachment C: Potential Methods for Reviewing Plan – 2014
Return to agenda
ATTACHMENT I BOS
January 8, 2014
Work Session Decisions and Direction from Comprehensive Plan Work Session
September 11, 2013
Chapters 1 - 3
1. Pp. 1.4 and 1.5 Sustainability Accords: Set aside a decision on whether or not to list the accords or
include the statement that the accords continue to be important aspirational principles for the County.
As the Comprehensive Plan draft is reviewed, the Board will see if the recommended strategies in the
Plan are affected by the Accords. If so, the Board will revisit the topic to see if changes to the Plan
are needed.
2. Page 1.7 Livability Project Goals: Change the statement at the top of the page to read, “Through the
Livability Project process, the Planning Commissions of the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle
County recommended consideration of the following goals:”.
3. P. 1.7 Economic Development goals: Consider whether to add a strategy to the Econom ic
Development Chapter for “support jobs” that have been generated by jobs in the target industries.
4. Verify the agency which deals with housing discrimination claims in the County.
5. P. 2.2 Values and Vision: Add the words, “and other governmental agencies,” to the third bullet so
that it reads, “Economic drivers which are business, industry, the University of Virginia, and other
governmental agencies.”
6. P. 3.5: Strategy 1a related to service delivery in the Rural Area: Discuss the relationship of this p olicy
to school bus provision and other school activities when the Board discusses the Community
Facilities Chapter of the Plan.
7. P. 3.5: Consider a strategy for allowing additional living quarters on a single lot for a family member
when the Housing Chapter and/or Rural Area Chapter is discussed.
8. P. 3.6 Cash Proffer Policy: Set aside the Cash Proffer Policy for a separate discussion before
considering recommendations from the Planning Commission for changes. Mr. Foley said that staff
would recommend a process to study this topic.
9. Continue to review the Comprehensive Plan using the process from today. Provide clear direction to
the Board on what should be reviewed in anticipation of the work session. Include the Planning
Commission’s recommended priorities and relevant appendices for each Chapter before the Board
for review.
10. Provide updated information on population change in conjunction with the Board’s annual retreat.
Return to exec summary
ATTACHMENT II BOS
January 8, 2014
The Planning Commission reviewed the Comprehensive plan Draft dated July 23, 2013 and has recommended
the following changes to that draft with their recommendation for approval:
General Information
1. All maps should be large enough to be readable – includes content and legends
2. There is recognition that copy editing is needed and will occur.
3. Information in the Errors and Omissions memo should be included to the list of changes that are needed to
the Plan.
4. At the beginning of all Chapters, add back in the blue boxes that contain the agreed to Livability goals.
Table of Contents
1. The Table of Contents needs to clearly reflect that there will be three separate documents: the Summary
(currently not complete), the Plan, and the Reference materials. This information should match up with the
information on page 1.13.
Summary
1. Start with an introduction.
2. Include information on implementation as well.
Chapter 1: Introduction and Context
1. If net worth information can be obtained easily add it to the graphs. Add a qualifier to the statement about
income on page 1.10 that net worth may be significantly higher in some households and may not be
reflected in information about income.
Chapter 2: Vision and Values
1. Add “rivers” to the list of resources that includes mountains, valleys, and streams (first bullet) on page 2.2.
2. Add information on the source of the information to back up the “values” on page 2.2.
3. Add a statement to include “property rights” in the list of “values” on page 2.2.
Chapter 3: Growth Management
No recommended changes except to make the map on page 3-4 more readable.
Chapter 4: Natural Resources
1. Add information on community surveys which have indicated a high level of support for environmental and
natural resources on page 4.3.
2. Add the word, “quantity” to Objective 1 on page 4.4 so that it reads, “Protect the quality and quantity of
surface water and groundwater resources in the County.
3. Add a statement or phrase about the relationship of the County’s water to the Chesapeake Bay in bullet 1
on page 4.4 to set up the discussion on TMDLs on pages 4.6 and 4.7. (Elaine’s suggestion, “The fact that
many of Albemarle County’s streams and rivers flow to the Chesapeake Bay puts a high level of
responsibility on the County to keep those streams and rivers free from pollutants.”)
4. Under Strategy 1b, on misnumbered page 5.1.9, which talks about the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO),
add the date the original ordinance was adopted by the County.
5. Under Strategy 1e which talks about groundwater on page 4.11, add a bullet that says, “Study ways to
assess the potential impacts of fracking on groundwater.”
6. Verify that the statement on page 4.12, “Air pollution in Albemarle County primarily comes from loc al
vehicle emissions” is accurate by checking with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Staff at the
Planning District Commission (PDC).
7. On page 4.14, Objective 4, delete, “in both the Rural Area and the Development Areas” so that the
objective reads, “Protect biological diversity and ecological integrity.”
8. On page 4.15 in the biodiversity section, add a statement that indicates the focus of biodiversity efforts is in
the Rural Area. Biodiversity efforts are different in the Development Areas.
ATTACHMENT II BOS
January 8, 2014
Chapter 5: Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
1. Add the definition of a historic resource to the introductory section on page 5.3.
2. In Strategy 1b on page 5.4, add the word, “prehistoric” to the list of historic resources preserve.
3. For recommendations related to Monticello, retain the second 4b on page 5.7 and add the sentence (from
the following page), “The Foundation has requested notification of new projects under review, so the
Foundation will be able to contact the owners and developers directly to clarify the extent of visibility and to
discuss the Foundation’s guidelines for reducing visual impacts, as necessary.” Eliminate Strategy 4c on
page 5.8.
4. Regarding the County’s Scenic Streams regulations on page 5.14, clarify that the conflict between t he
Scenic Streams requirements and the Water Protection Ordinance requirements should be rectified.
Chapter 6: Economic Development
1. On page 6.5, under Strategy 1c, move the image that looks like a logo to the bottom of the page.
2. Within Strategy 5c on page 6.9, add the words, “traffic impacts” in the list of items to be considered when
evaluating the fiscal impacts of new business and industrial development.
Chapter 7: Rural Area
1. On page 7.6, within the second paragraph on the page, above Objective 1, add text which speaks to the
need to evaluate the impacts of recent zoning amendments before proposing or approving new zoning
amendments in the Rural Area.
1. Provide a 20-year span in Figure 2: Building Permits for Single-Family detached Residential Units on page
7.7 to provide a larger picture of residential construction in the Rural Area.
2. On page 7.11, in Strategy 1f about conservation easements, the strategy should say, “Continue to promote
conservation easements to provide a financially attractive way for landowners to protect family farms in
Albemarle County and their unique open space resources, an opportunity for landowners to voluntarily sell
a conservation easement to a public agency to be held in trust for perpetuity, and to preserve important
features of the Rural Area for all.”
3. Add “amount of grape production” as an indicator of progress of agricultural activities in the County. (to be
added to the Indicators of Progress section.)
4. For strategy 7e on page 7.26, change the statement from, “Give preference to the Shadwell Interchange for
a greater intensity and concentration of operations which can support agriculture and forestry” to “Study the
Shadwell interchange to determine the potential level and concentration of operations which are
appropriate for agriculture and forestry at that intersection.”
Chapter 8: Development Areas
2. For the village description add term “multimodal” to the sentence that discusses how villages are
connected to the City and urban neighborhoods on page 8.4.
3. Add to the section on creating new villages that more than one route should be accessible to and from a
new village on page 8.4
4. Also on page 8.4., add this sentence, “In particular, the impact of the plan on existing development should
be emphasized. It is expected that consideration will be given to the needs and wishes of those already
living and owning property in the area. Any development near the boundaries of a village should be
sensitive to the existing character of the surrounding Rural Area.”
Chapter 9: Housing
No recommended changes.
Chapter 10: Transportation
1. Add “increasingly” after “…transportation network will…” in the goal on page 10.1 so that it reads,
“Albemarle’s transportation network will be increasingly multimodal, environmentally sound, well
maintained, safe, and reliable.”
ATTACHMENT II BOS
January 8, 2014
2. Add statements about the community’s responsibility to pay for and maintain aging road infrastructure to
address existing needs and accommodate existing zoning. This could be added t o Strategy 1b or be an
additional strategy.
3. Be aware that CHART’s name is changing to Citizen’s Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC)
pending approval by the MPO Policy Board later this year, if timing works out so that that occurs before
the Board considers adopting the Plan, change the name in the Plan.
4. Add a strategy to the draft to reinstate the Transportation Planner position to help with County road
planning, traffic modeling, coordination with the MPO, and with traffic analyses for development proposals.
5. Add wording to state that increased road and interchange capacity will be considered after fully examining
all other multimodal options as well. Additional wording may work in Objective 2 or Objective 6.
6. Amend strategy 11d on page 10.28 to begin with “Participate in the study of a new east-west passenger
train route through the Albemarle-Charlottesville region,” rather than “Initiate a new east-west passenger
train route...”
7. Be sure that the draft reflects that bicycles are classified as vehicles.
Chapter 11: Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
5. Add wording to text under strategy 7a on page 11.16 so that the first sentence reads: “Through the
Livability project, the City and County have decided this is a top priorit y and that a plan should be
developed and implemented that support the river corridor as a destination. . .”
6. A statement needs to be added about the importance of opportunities for the public to participate in
decisions related to park needs.
7. Make sure there is a reference to the trails that are recommended in the Greenway Plan, such as the
Northtown Trail.
Chapter 12: Community Facilities
3. On page 12.3 add a paragraph about strengthening the relationship or link between fiscal planning and the
reduction in federal and state funding. The text should advise the public that local funding will be needed
for community services and facilities. Also, provide text that indicates the need for a link between
community facilities planning and the CIP process.
4. On page 12.12, the reference to public schools should clarify that these are K-12 County public schools.
5. On page 12.27, reference where in the appendix more information on water and sewer capacity can be
found on the Village of Rivanna and the other Development Areas.
Chapter 13: Implementation
1. On page 13.5 add wording under the heading “Work Program for the County” in the third sentence so that it
reads: “The Work Program is developed by staff, reviewed by the Planning Commission, and endorsed by
the Board of Supervisors…”
2. On page 13.5 Add wording on how the Planning Commission’s annual report will be used to give a status
check on the indicators of progress.
3. Look at the indicators of mobility from the TJPDC to add to the indicators of progress.
4. On pages A.5.4 and A.5.5 provide less specificity in area of each room. Identify the minimum square
footage needed for District Stations as 7,000 sq. feet and 13,000 sq. feet for Training Academy. Identify the
activities the building will need to accommodate.
5. Add a note which indicates that Indicators of Progress for Growth Management are found throughout the
document.
6. Natural Resource Priorities – change “1991” in Strategy 1b to “1998.”
7. Natural Resource Priorities -- add Strategy 1d to the list of priorities. “Promote the concept of water
conservation and pollution prevention as a community wide issue.”
8. Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources Implementation Priorities – add a strategy or add to Strategy 1c
wording that emphasizes the need to retain “significant historic records contained in County archives . . .”
9. Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources Implementation Indicators – Add Route 250 East and Route
22/231 to Strategy 7a.
10. Economic Development Implementation Priorities – add all target industries to Strategy 2c.
ATTACHMENT II BOS
January 8, 2014
11. Economic Development Implementation Indicators -- add an indicator related to increase jobs in
agriculture.
12. Economic Development Implementation Indicators – check to see if Susan Stimart has any ideas on how to
track jobs that provide upward mobility. If there are ways, add them to the list of Indicators.
13. Rural Areas Implementation Priorities – add wording to Strategy 1d to clarify its meaning.
14. Rural Areas Implementation Priorities -- change the word “limits” in Strategy 2d to “minimum amount of
produce grown on site.”
15. Rural Areas Implementation Priorities – reference the text in Strategy 6d to clarify the strategy’s intent.
16. Rural Areas Implementation Priorities – clarify Strategy 7a.
17. Rural Areas Implementation Indicators -- delete the “target” language in the first indicator. The indicator
should say, “Decrease in the number and percentage of new single-family homes in the County
constructed in the Rural Area.”
18. Rural Areas Implementation Indicators – change the word “lost” to “converted” in Indicator 2.
19. Rural Areas Implementation Indicators – reword indicator 6 so it does not read as if the County is creating
more land.
20. Rural Areas Implementation Indicators – change the word “grape” to “agricultural” in indicator 10.
21. Rural Areas Implementation Indicators – add an indicator, “No reduction in the number of parcels less than
or equal to 100 acres in size.”
22. Development Areas Implementation Priorities – incorporate “complete streets” into the priorities.
23. Development Areas Implementation Priorities -- clarify in Strategy 9a that the animals listed are not
intended to be pets; also include noise and nuisances as points to consider when studying whether or not
to amend the zoning ordinance for urban agriculture.
24. Development Areas Implementation Indicators – add “public transit” to indicator 5.
25. Housing Implementation Priorities – add “affordable units” to strategy 6e.
26. Housing Implementation Indicators – reorder the indicators so that affordable housing indicators are put
together and that indicators 1 – 3 are put at the bottom of the list.
27. Housing Implementation Indicators—add “for affordable units” to indicator 11.
28. Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems Implementation Indicators – change
indicator 1 to indicate the progress relates to accessibility to City-owned parks in the Rural Area.
29. Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems Implementation Indicators – Add the
James River to indicator 5.
30. Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems Implementation Indicators – Provide
information on where in the Plan to find details on specific trail connections for indicator 8.
31. Community Facilities Implementation Priorities – Include the number of linear feet in bike lanes as an
indicator of progress. See if you can combine this with information on additional sidewalk length.
32. Community Facilities Implementation Priorities – correct strategies 3h and 3j – they are the same.
33. Community Facilities Implementation Priorities – clarify that 2c near the bottom of the page relates to the
Police Department.
Appendices A1 through A7 and A9, A11, A12, and A13
No changes were recommended.
Cash Proffer Policy
There were no proposed changes. [It was noted the Board was going to reexamine the whole policy.]
Affordable Housing Policy
There were no proposed changes.
Neighborhood Model Guidance
There were no proposed changes with the exception of typos.
Community Facilities and Service Expectations
There were no proposed changes.
ATTACHMENT II BOS
January 8, 2014
Land Use Design Guidelines
- Be sure to provide 11 x 17s instead of 8 ½ x 11 size pages.
Crozet Master Plan
- There were no proposed changes.
Appendix A8: Southern and Western Neighborhoods
1. No changes were recommended at this time to the Master Plan other than to clearly state the expectations
for the Parham parcel that were provided at the May 28, 2013 Commission meeting and those identified by
staff in relation to Area B. The Parham site is intended to allow for a residential component, but this same
allowance is not intended for other Office/R&D/Flex/Light Industrial designated properties in the area.
The Commission said it was not opposed to considering a request received last week from three property
owners in the Southern Neighborhood for properties adjacent to Pebble Drive (TMPs 90 -35F, 91-16B, and
91-16A) to be designated as urban density residential through a future comprehensive plan amendment.
The Commission did not feel it was too late in this process to bring up substantive requests because the
larger community had not had an opportunity to see and discuss the implications, nor had the Commiss ion.
Staff noted that the economic development staff were in support of leaving the designations as shown on
the recommended plan because the proposed designation for Office/R&D/Flex/LI increases localized job
opportunities, the location connects closely to I-64, I-95, I-81, and local target industries looking to expand
could benefit from expanded space options and better location.
2. Improve map in Figure 1 in A-8-1 to better distinguish the different neighborhoods by using different colors.
3. Improve Area B map to make blue and red colors the same shade throughout.
4. Page A.8.11; update the community facilities to document the upcoming closing of the Ivy Landfill.
5. Page A.8.12; add trail connections to other master planned areas that appear on the map, such as
Schenk’s Branch trail.
6. On Figure 7, make note that the text of the plan includes additional details which relate to the Land Use
Plan.
7. On page A.8.27, note that the floodplain is included in the area shown in green.
8. On page A.8.35 as well as other places, replace the term “steep slopes” with “critical slopes.”
9. Page A.8.48, Sunset-Fontaine Ave. Connector Road, eliminate the second “not” in the sentence which
begins, “There are four main reasons that staff from Charlottesville, Albemarle County, and UVA are…”
10. For the inset maps, please put the figure number on the right hand side.
11. In A-8-11 under the water and sewer service, make reference to the location for additional information in
the Comprehensive Plan and correct typo that says, “Rugged Mountain Reservoir.”
12. Provide a reference in Land Use Table A-8-20 that there is text in the master plans that further explains the
expectations provided in the land use table at different locations. Also correct the photographic reference of
First National Bank to Virginia National Bank.
13. Under Transportation Improvements, mention the potential widening of Route 29 on the Route 250 Bypass
being studied in conjunction with the Long Range Transportation Plan. Such a widening project hasn’t been
reviewed by the public. The upcoming Long Range Transportation Plan activities will bring this project to
light.
Appendix A10: Places 29
1. No changes were recommended to the area north of Rivanna Station which were requested by the
property owner and reviewed by the Places 29 Advisory Council on June 19, 2013. As with the properties
in the Southern and Western Neighborhoods, the Commission believed more study was needed than the
time allowed. Potential road layout in relation to environmental features, such as two creeks on the
property could be problematic. The Commission did not want to endorse creek and floodplain crossings for
future road connections without more study. They did not want to make a decision without input from other
property owners in the general area. In addition, no other expansions of the Development Areas were
ATTACHMENT II BOS
January 8, 2014
being recommended by the Commission with this update, so it would be unfair to the other applicants to
recommend an expansion for just this case.
The Commission said it was not opposed to considering a request after the Comprehensive Plan is
adopted. The request could be considered prior to or in conjunction with the Places 29 Master Plan
update.
Community Facilities Standards
There were no proposed changes.
Pantops Master Plan –
There were no proposed changes other than the removal of two roads on the Land Use and Transportation
Plans.
Village of Rivanna Land Use Plan
There were no proposed changes except to augment the Master Plan with a Land Use Plan for the Village
using standard colors.
Return to exec summary
ATTACHMENT III BOS
January 8, 2014
Potential Methods for Reviewing Plan – 2014
January 8, 2014
Option 1 Plan A follows the process agreed to by the board of Supervisors on August 14,
2013
January 8 Comprehensive Plan review - process decisions
Meeting 1 Review of prior Board decisions on:
Introduction
Vision and Values
Growth Management
Meeting 2 Natural Resources, including water protection issues
Historic Preservation, including Monticello Viewshed
Economic Development
Meeting 3 Rural Area, including Economic Development and community life in Rural Areas
Capacity Analysis and Expansion Area Requests
Development Areas
Meeting 4 Neighborhood Model, Priority Areas, Urban Agriculture
Southern and Western Neighborhoods Master Plan
Places 29, Pantops/VOR Master Plans, including
Recommendations for City-Co work on Rivanna River in Pantops
Meeting 5 Housing and Affordable Housing Policy
Transportation
Meeting 6 Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems Chapter,
Recommendations and Standards
Community Facilities Chapter, Recommendations and Standards
Meeting 7 Implementation Chapter, Priorities
Performance Measurements, and wrap-up
After work sessions, staff will make all changes to Plan to prepare for public hearing and any further
meetings prior to adoption.
Option 2 Provides for initial public hearing, then follow-up topic-based work sessions,
based on public comment and Board member interests
January 8 Comprehensive Plan review - process decisions
Meeting 1 Public Hearing
Meeting 2 Decision on topics to review
Meeting 3 Topics 1 – 3
Meeting 4 Topics 4 – 6
Additional meetings to be determined based on number of topics to be reviewed
After work sessions, staff will make all changes to Plan to prepare for any further meetings prior to
adoption.
ATTACHMENT III BOS
January 8, 2014
Return to exec summary
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Service – Southern
Albemarle Convenience Center
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Receive public comments regarding locating a
convenience center either on Mill Creek Drive, near the
Monticello Fire Station, or on Esmont Road, near the
Keene Post Office
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Graham, Henry, Shadman
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE: January 8, 2014
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On July 10, 2013, the Board considered a specific proposal received in response to a RFP for solid waste services
along with alternatives for providing solid waste services in the County (See Attachment A). At that meeting, the Board
determined its interest in opening three convenience centers as well as maintaining financial support for the Rivanna
Solid Waste Authority’s operation of the McIntire Recycling Center. The Board also indicated its interest in
discontinuing financial support of the Ivy Materials Utilization Center once at least one of the convenience centers is
operating. Also at that meeting, staff presented the option of a convenience center located on Mill Creek Drive
adjacent to the Monticello Fire Station and the Board expressed interest in seeing an option for a site better situated to
serve the southern Albemarle Rural Area. Staff was directed to proceed towards opening at least one convenience
center by July 1, 2014, and to arrange an opportunity for public input regarding the location of and services to be
provided at the convenience centers.
On October 9, 2013, the Board considered a proposal for a convenience center on Esmont Road near the Keene Post
Office (Attachment B). Staff indicated that if the Board decided on a location at that time, it would be possible to make
the facility operational by July 1, 2014. With this information, the Board directed staff to proceed with the design of a
convenience center on the Esmont Road site and to evaluate the other two convenience center locations using the
presented site selection criteria.
On November 13, 2013, the Board again reviewed solid waste services, including additional site options that were
considered by staff and found by staff to be either unacceptable or marginally acceptable. After consideration, the
Board agreed to:
1. Continue financial support of the RSWA McIntire Recycling Center, subject to the City of
Charlottesville agreeing to continue its support;
2. Approved staff’s list of proposed services to be provided at convenience centers, subject to final
contract negotiations; and
3. Agreed to provide an opportunity to receive public comments regarding preferences for the southern
Albemarle convenience center location at either Mill Creek Drive or Esmont Road.
This meeting is to provide an overview of both sites and an opportunity for the Board to receive public comment in
advance of a final site selection.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 2. Provide community facilities that meet existing and future needs
DISCUSSION:
Public Information
In advance of this meeting, staff has taken the following actions to assure the public is aware of this opportunity for
public comment and has an opportunity to review information regarding convenience centers in general and both sites
in particular:
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Service – Southern Albemarle Convenience Center
January 8, 2014
Page 2
Provided an internet site where citizens may review site layout for both facilities, pictures of typical facilities,
information on typical convenience center operations and specifics on the facility the County is proposing. A
link to this web site is provided as Attachment D.
Mailed a notice of the meeting and information to all adjacent property owners. This included an explanation
of the convenience centers, an FAQ informational sheet, information on how to access the web site, and a
point of contact in the County if they have questions or are interested in other information.
Provided information for community meetings led by Board members, including display boards showing the
convenience center site plans; and attended those meetings to take notes and answer questions.
Contacted the media to assure the public is made aware of the opportunity for public comment at this meeting
and has the opportunity to understand the decision before the Board.
Finally, staff have been available to answer questions from the public as they have been received.
At this point, staff believes the affected public is well informed and prepared to offer comment.
Board Consideration
Staff believes that this meeting will provide the Board the opportunity to review both locations a final time and to
receive public comment before providing direction to staff. From a technical perspective, staff has found both sites to
be acceptable for the proposed services and believes the costs of developing the facility will be similar at both
locations. Thus, the question is which location best serves the customers and has an acceptable level of impact. The
following is provided to assist the Board in evaluating this:
Issues Keene Mill Creek
Convenience to Customers Located near the geographic center of
Southern Albemarle and near Route 20.
Few potential customers live close to the
facility.
Easy access for southern Albemarle
customers travelling to Charlottesville or
other County customers using I-64.
Traffic / Safety Entrance location is acceptable. Nearby
intersection of Esmont Road and Route
20 does not meet modern intersection
standards but the Post Office has shown
that traffic can safely use this location
Entrance location is acceptable, nearby
intersections at Route 20 and Avon are
signalized and judged acceptable.
Possible conflicts with Monticello High
School are judged minimal
Visibility / Aesthetics Densely wooded site provides large
wooded buffers. Two houses within 600
feet of facility will be well screened by
woods. Plan for fence and landscaping to
supplement wooded buffer.
Open site will require extensive
screening, but elevation differences will
eliminate need for full screening from
some adjacent properties. Tandem
School has buildings approximately 600
feet from this location, but no residences
within 1,000 feet.
Noise / Lights Facility will operate during daylight hours,
with possible exception of times between
7 AM and 6 PM in winter months.
Lighting will be limited to security lighting
with full cutoffs to assure no glare on
adjoining properties, but there are no
other existing lights in area.
Facility will operate during daylight hours,
with possible exception of times between
7 AM and 6 PM in winter months.
Lighting will be limited to security lighting
with full cutoffs to assure no glare on
adjoining properties. Adjoining fire
station already well lit.
Comprehensive Plan Goals Community facilities are encouraged to be
located in the Development Areas. This
site is in the Rural Area.
Community facilities are encouraged to
be located in the Development Areas.
This site is in the Development Area.
Timing Considerations
Staff notes that, while it appears possible to have the facility operational by July 2014 with a decision on January 8th,
there is no margin for additional delays if the July 2014 date for commencing operations is to be maintained. If further
delays occur, the following should be anticipated:
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Service – Southern Albemarle Convenience Center
January 8, 2014
Page 3
The County’s current agreement for services at the IVY MUC expires on June 30, 2014. To avoid a period of
time when the County has no solid waste services in place, a contract extension with RSWA would be needed
for the period of time from July 1, 2014 until the convenience center is operational. Staff has raised this
possibility with RSWA staff but the availability of service is not guaranteed, nor has the RSWA Board agreed
to support this extension. RSWA staff was supportive of this extension, provided issues and funding can be
addressed.
RSWA is required to give the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) a minimum of six months
notice when it is closing the transfer station. As RSWA has no agreement for the County to continue funding of
services into FY 15, it will need to notify DEQ of a proposed closing of the Ivy MUC on July 1, 2014. DEQ
could grant an extension on this notification should RSWA and the County later negotiate an extension to keep
the Ivy MUC operational, but this is a complicating factor to an agreement extension.
Based on the FY14 operations agreement, the County provides roughly $1,000 / day to RSWA for operational
support of the Ivy MUC. If it becomes necessary to seek a continuation of services into FY15, it will be
necessary for the Board to identify and approve funding for this previously unanticipated expense.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Staff previously estimated construction costs for three convenience centers at $1 Million. Detailed cost estimates are
not yet available. It is possible costs could be higher, and staff will have a more accurate estimate once a detailed
design is available. The initial review suggests that the cost would be similar for both sites.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
After reviewing staff’s presentation and receiving public comment, staff requests that the Board decide on a site and
direct staff to proceed to design and construction.
If the Board is not prepared to decide on a location, staff recommends that the Board direct staff to initiate negotiations
with RSWA for the continuation of services at the Ivy MUC into FY15. The length of the extension should assure that
there is no period of time when solid waste services are not available to County residents.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – July 10, 2013 Solid Waste Executive Summary, with proposal attached
Attachment B – October 9, 2013 Solid Waste Executive Summary
Attachment C – November 13, 2103 Solid Waste Executive Summary
Attachment D – County Web Site for Convenience Centers
Return to agenda
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Solid Waste Service Options
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Consider response to solid waste RFP and provide
direction on preferred services
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Graham, Shadman
PRESENTER(S): Mark Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
July 10, 2013
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
At the April 10, 2013 work session, the Board directed staff to advertise a Request for Proposals (RFP) for solid waste
services. The purpose of the July 10, 2013 work session is for the Board to consider options for the provision of future
solid waste services and to review of the results of the RFP. The RFP was advertised from May 20, 2013 to June 20,
2013 and one acceptable proposal was received. Four site visits were conducted with potential contractors and staff
responded to phone calls requesting additional information from a number of potential contractors. Based on those
site visits and phone calls, staff anticipated receiving several other proposals. Following up to determine why more
proposals were not submitted, staff found there were two reasons cited:
1) The RFP includes a requirement to operate the facilities, and the companies had limited or no
experience in running convenience centers. The primary business of most companies was hauling
and disposal of waste.
2) The RFP places the financial risk on the contractor for assuring the tonnage received could make the
operation profitable.
The proposal includes an option to operate a convenience center at the Ivy MUC location and an option to operate up
to three convenience centers at other County locations.
Despite having only one proposal, staff found this proposal addresses the requested services and appears to provide
viable options. At this point, staff requests that the Board review the two options provided by this proposal against the
option of continuing with the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority (RSWA) operating the Ivy Materials Utilization Center (Ivy
MUC), then provide direction on which option to pursue.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
2. Provide community facilities that meet existing and future needs
DISCUSSION:
Submitted Proposal
A copy of the Container Rentals, LLC proposal is provided as Attachment A. To summarize, Container Rentals
proposes to operate a convenience center at Ivy MUC or at other locations specified by the County with fees equal to
those charged by RSWA and without any additional County financial support . As has been previously discussed, the
County would still incur cost for (1) the cost of the RSWA ground lease and post-closure expenses if the Ivy MUC site
is utilized and (2) the County’s oversight management expenses regardless of which option is selected. The proposal
includes the requested services except for clean fill, which was an option service. Vegetative waste would be limited
to small loads. Large loads and stumps would be required to use other facilities, which are currently available. Staff
does not believe this limitation is a significant concern with the understanding a convenience center is not inte nded to
serve commercial users. Typically, large loads of clean fill or vegetative waste that include stumps delivered by
commercial users would not be allowed at a convenience center. The option of delivering this material to other
locations still remains and could potentially be continued at Ivy if the RSWA found it profitable to offset other expenses
of the Authority. Additionally, Container Rentals has offered to provide additional recycling services at no cost to the
County provided any permitting issues are addressed by the County. This would include materials such as paint,
fluorescent bulbs and electronics. Staff is still consulting with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality on
how these recycling services could be part of a County convenience center, but initial discussions sugg est this can be
done.
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Service Options
July 10, 2013
Page 2
Comparison of Options
Attachment B provides a staff analysis of the three considered options. The first page of the attachment provides an
analysis of costs and the second page considers other factors that may influence the decision. To summarize:
Option 1 is continuing with the RSWA. This option has the highest operating costs, is the easiest for the
County to implement, and is the only option that continues services for commercial users. Any capital costs
for replacement or upgrading of the facility is assumed to be RSWA’s responsibility, but that cost would
eventually be recovered through fees or County contributions. Depreciation funds set aside by RSWA over
that past number of years may also potentially be used to offset start -up costs. Additionally, a longer term
commitment to this arrangement by the County would likely require a major amendment to the RSWA
Organizational Agreement to align RSWA funding with Board composition, though this process presents its
own challenges. This option appears to be the best choice if the Board wishes to maintain the current level of
service and continues to want to explore other long term options.
Option 2 is the County overseeing a convenience center at the Ivy MUC through a space leased from RSWA
and a contract based on the proposal. This option has no anticipated capital costs , though there will be start-
up and other costs as outlined in attachment B. Based on the RFP response, this option does cut annual
County funding to one-half of Option 1. However, it provides limited services in one location that is marginally
convenient to most County residents, as is the case with Option 1. Additionally, it places the County at
greater risk for possible environmental liabilities associated with any additional issues discovered at the Ivy
MUC. This option appears to be the best choice if the Board believes minimal services are needed, is not
prepared for the capital investment required by Option 3, and the potential environmental liability is judged
acceptable.
Option 3 is the County overseeing the operation of three convenience centers on County properties through a
contract based on this proposal. The analysis of this option includes three convenience centers because the
County’s CIP has included three recycling centers since the early 2000’s. This option would incorporate those
recycling services in addition to other services, replacing a need to continue funding o f the RSWA McIntire
Recycling facility. This option is the more complex to implement and requires more significant upfront funding
to establish the facilities. However, the County’s portion of depreciation funds set aside by the RSWA over
the past number of years should eventually be available to offset some of this c ost, based on a future
settlement with the RSWA. Once past the start up phase, this option was found to have the lowest annual
operating costs while providing the highest level of services to residential users. This option appears to be
the best choice if the Board believes there is a need to improve solid waste services to its residents through
multiple locations without significant ongoing funding for operations, believes commercial users h ave other
viable options, and is prepared to make the capital investment necessary for implementation.
Under this option, the Board would need to agree on convenience center locations and fund their
construction. While very aggressive, staff believes it may be possible to have one facility in place adjacent
the Monticello Fire Station by early 2014. Staff believes this site is a viable option because of its easy access,
the availability of existing infrastructure and the site’s location on the edge of the development area. Sites
located on the edge of development areas are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and serve both rural
residents for solid waste disposal and recycling services and urban areas resident s who may have less need
for solid waste disposal services, but would want easy access to recycling. Proceeding with this site would
allow the County to cease ongoing funding of the RSWA operation at the Ivy MUC. Remaining facilities could
then follow as sites are identified by the Board and constructed. Staff has identified other County properties
that could potentially serve as additional convenience centers, but none that allow quick development.
Additionally, staff realizes the Board may wish to solicit public input before committing to those locations. If
the Board is not comfortable with the Mill Creek site as a location for a convenience center that can more
quickly be placed in service, we would recommend a six month extension of services with the RSWA (until
June 30, 2014) at the current IVY MUC to allow adequate time to go through a site selection and construction
process.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Budget impacts are defined on page 1 of Attachment B.
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Service Options
July 10, 2013
Page 3
RECOMMENDATIONS:
After reviewing the three options, staff believes Option 3 is in the overall best interest of the County. This option
provides the lowest annual operating cost once the facilities are in place and enhances the level of service for
residents, providing three rather than one convenience center location. In addition, this option avoids the potential
liability at the Ivy site and the complications of remaining in a “regional” organization for an exclusively County service.
If Option 3 is selected, staff requests the Board provide direction regarding its desire to (1) begin this new service at
Mill Creek next to the Monticello Fire Station or (2) request an extension of service from the RWSA until June 30,
2014 so that a site selection and construction process can be undertaken. Based on that direction, staff will identify
funding sources for facility construction and finalize a contract that provides for up to three facilities for future review
with the Board.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Copy of Container Rentals Proposal (w/o attachments)
Attachment B_- Comparison of Solid Waste Options (page 1 – costs, page 2 – other factors)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Solid Waste Convenience Centers
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Request Board direction regarding solid waste and
recycling services and locations of convenience centers
after receiving public input.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Graham, Shadman
PRESENTER (S): Mark Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
October 9, 2013
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On July 10, 2013, the Board considered a proposal the County received for providing solid waste and recycling services
(Attachment A). The Board determined that there was interest in opening three convenience centers and in continuing
financial support of the McIntire Recycling Center, and that there was no interest in continuing financial support of the Ivy
Materials Utilization Center after at least one of the convenience centers was operating. Staff was directed to proceed with
opening at least one convenience center by July 1, 2014 and to arrange an opportunity for the public to provide input to the
Board regarding the location and services to be provided at the convenience centers.
This work session is intended to address the following:
1. Provide an opportunity for the public to provide input on services to be provided at the proposed convenience
centers.
2. Establish a site selection process for locating the convenience centers, including criteria for site selection.
3. Determine if there is a site for a convenience center that the Board is prepared to authorize staff to proceed with
design and to initiate the process for construction with the goal of the site becoming operational by July 1, 2014.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 2. Provide community facilities that meet existing and future needs
DISCUSSION:
Public Input
Staff has identified three areas where it believes input would be useful regarding the design and operation of the
convenience centers. Each of those is further discussed below.
Services Provided – The proposal in Attachment A includes the following services:
Bagged Municipal Solid Waste – to include self contained compactor
Cardboard – to include self contained compactor
Recycling – Containers provided for paper, metals, glass, and plastic
Other – White goods, pallets, computer / electronics not required to be treated as hazardous waste would be
accepted
Subsequent discussions with the proposer and the Board have focused on expanding this to include the following services:
Bulky Waste / Other MSW - Container proposed for disposal of old furniture, home materials, etc.
Vegetative Waste – Small load would be allowed with the MSW or Bulky Waste. Large truck loads would be
directed to the contractors facility at Zion Crossroads
At the July 10 Board meeting, the proposer offered that it may be possible to expand the recycling options and to allow
other materials collected to include items such as paints, batteries, and fluorescent bulbs. Staff plans to explore these
options with the proposer, based on Board interest expressed for those services.
Hours of Operation –Staff required in the proposal that the contractor commit to keeping the convenience centers open
to the public a sufficient number of days and hours to satisfy public needs. However, the proposal is flexible regarding the
days and hours of operation. Public input is necessary to determine the days and hours of operation considered
necessary for convenient service.
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Convenience Centers
October 9, 2013
Page 2
Location of Convenience Centers - The Board has indicated an interest in locating the facilities to maximize
convenience to the largest geographic areas rather than locating the facilities at the fringe of the Development Areas.
Staff has attempted to illustrate this with the map provided as Attachment B. There are four circles shown to illustrate
approximate service areas, with the easternmost circle representing the existing private f acility operated at Zion
Crossroads, which is already available to the public.
Site Selection Process – For the purpose of evaluating possible convenience center sites, staff recommends the
following criteria:
Convenience / Location – Includes consideration of the proximity to the center of the circles shown in Attachment
B and distance from a primary highway that provides easy access.
Size / Shape – Determine the parcel has adequate room for a convenience center.
County Owned – A parcel that is already owned by the County eliminates the time and expense to purchase the
property.
Entrance Corridors – While convenience to a primary highway is important, the County’s expressed interest in the
Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines provides a challenge for this type of use.
Number of residences within 1,000 feet of facility – Staff has noted that there have been issues in other
communities for nearby residents related to noise, smell, vermin, and property values.
Utilities – Primarily related to availability of electricity, noting there can be a significant cost in bringing electricity to
a site.
Topography – The closer the property is to a “pad ready” site, the lower the development costs will be and the less
time it will take to prepare the site.
Improvements needed – This includes consideration of entrance improvements required by VDOT, screening and
fencing required, as well as other possible considerations (e.g. utility relocation).
First Facility - Due to the lead time required for the design and construction of a facility and the Board’s direction to have
at least one facility operational by July 2014, a decision is needed as soon as possible for at least one convenience center
location. Staff has considered the above selection criteria and previous Board input, and has determined that the County-
owned property on Esmont Road in Keene appears to satisfy the site selection criteria (Attachment C). This is a seven-
acre site previously planned for a transfer station at the time the Keene Landfill was closed, but never used for that
purpose. This site is near the center of the circle for the southern part of the County (Attachment B), has no residences
within 500 feet of the proposed site and only two within 1,000 feet of the site, and is located close to a primary highway but
not directly on an Entrance Corridor.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Staff estimates that startup costs for a convenience center may be as high as $300,000, noting this estimate may vary
dependent on specific site conditions. The CIP currently contains funds appropriated for the Ivy Landfill Remediation in
excess of those needed in FY14. The option of shifting those funds for the construction of convenience centers was
discussed with the Board in July, and staff is recommending this as a funding source.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends the following:
After receiving public input, provide direction to staff regarding the services, site selection and design of
convenience centers.
Direct staff to proceed with site selection analysis using the map provided as Attachment B and the selection
criteria provided in this report and to work directly with the Supervisor in whose district a site is being considered.
Each site will require Board approval before proceeding to design and construction.
Direct staff to proceed with the design of a convenience center at the Keene property, noting that the initial design
cost should not exceed $50,000 and that staff will provide a cost estimate for construction to the Board prior to
advertising for bids.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – July 10, 2013 Solid Waste Executive Summary, with proposal attached
Attachment B - County Map, Typical Service Areas
Attachment C – Keene Property
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Solid Waste Services – McIntire Recycling and Southern
Albemarle Convenience Center
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Determine whether to request an extension of the current
Rivanna Solid W aste Authority agreement for recycling
services at McIntire through FY 15 and consider alternative
locations for Southern Albemarle Convenience Center
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Graham, Shadman
PRESENTER (S): Mark Graham
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
November 13, 2013
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
At the October 9, 2013 Board meeting, questions were raised as to whether the Board was interested in extending the
County’s agreement with the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority (RSWA) to provide recycling services at its McIntire Road
facility through fiscal year 2015. The current agreement will expire effective June 30, 2014. Staff indicated information
would be brought to this meeting so the Board could make an informed decision.
In addition, at the same October 9th Board meeting, the Board concurred with staff’s recommendation that a Southern
Albemarle Convenience Center be located at the County-owned Property in Keene. The related Executive Summary for
that issue is provided as Attachment A. Since October 9th, several Board members have indicated that there is some
community interest in the Board considering other possible locations. Staff will review alternative locations with the Board
at this meeting and will confirm the services to be provided at the convenience centers.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 2. Provide community facilities that meet existing and future needs
DISCUSSION:
McIntire Recycling
The RSWA currently provides recycling services to the City and County at its McIntire facility. Because recycling
revenues are less than the expense, the RSWA requires an agreement by which the City and County subsidize this
operation at an anticipated cost of $85,821 for FY 14, of which the County’s share is $60,075. The RSWA’s 2011
and 2012 data indicates this facility is processing approximately 2,100 tons of material per year. Assuming the
tonnage remains the same in 2013 as in 2011 and 2012, this subsidy equates to $40.87 per ton for RSWA to break
even on this operation in FY14. Staff also notes the annual tonnage is about 44% of what it was five years ago.
The RSWA has not yet developed a budget estimate of what City and County financial support will be required to
keep the McIntire facility operational in FY15, but initial conversations suggest this cost should be close to the FY14
amount. Recognizing the closing of the Ivy Materials Utilization Center will likely result in some lost economies of
scale, staff recommends a budget estimate of $60,000 for FY15. Additional uncertainty arises from whether there will
be an appreciable drop in use of the McIntire facility as a result of new County convenience centers that provide the
same services in the County. While a drop in tonnage at the McIntire facility would create some reduction in
expenses, it would produce a much larger reduction in revenues associated with product sales. Effectively, the cost
to the County would increase because the processing cost per ton of recycled materials would increase. Staff
believes the following factors support extending the McIntire agreement through FY15:
Only one of three planned convenience centers is programmed to be open at the start of FY 15 and no dates
are yet established for the other two facilities. This will limit recycling opportunites for some residents.
The McIntire facility has been popular with some County residents and has strong support. Without an
acceptable alternative, some residents will believe that the County’s commitment to recycling has weakened.
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Services – McIntire Recycling and Southern Albemarle Convenience Center
November 13, 2013
Page 2
Staff finds the the following factors support ending the agreement on June 30, 2014:
McIntire provides a very small part of the community’s recycling. Most residents can and do use combined
trash and recycling services.
McIntire is a relatively expensive operation. As noted above, the needed subsidy for FY 14 is over $40/ton
and could increase in FY 15.
Convenience Center Services
While discussed with the Board and covered in the Request for Proposals earlier this year, staff needs to confirm the
desired services at the convenience centers. The following list reflects staff’s understanding:
Household garbage, commonly called MSW ;
Recycling, including paper, cardboard, plastic containers, metal, and glass containers. Staff is working with
the understanding these services should not have a fee and should be separate from MSW ;
Bulk waste, including items such as furniture, small loads of brush, and debris from small household
improvement projects;
White goods, including stoves, refrigerators, water heaters and dehumidifiers
Tires and wheels; and
Electronic goods.
In addition, staff will work with the contractor to attempt to provide the following services:
Paint;
Motor oil and antifreeze; and
Batteries and fluorescent bulbs.
The following services would not be provided:
Houshold hazardous waste collection;
Commercial solid waste;
Land clearning / stumps and debris; and
Clean fill disposal
Southern Albemarle Convenience Center Location
In evaluating possible convenience center locations in Southern Albemarle, staff considered Keene to provide the
best balance when applying the selection criteria reviewed by the Board in October. Staff also noted that it is critical to
start design now if the facilty is to be operational by July 2014. Since then, several Board members have identified an
interest by the Town of Scottsville to provide a convenience center at the Scottsville Community Center. If the facility
is to be opened by July 2014, any change to the location must be made now. Staff noted the following when applying
the selection criteria to this Scottsville location.
Adequate size – For planning purposes, staff has assumed a minimum exclusive area of 150 feet by 300
feet, which is slightly more than one acre. The actual facility will likely be somewhat smaller, but this is
needed to assure size issues are avoided during design. This area is not available at the Scottsville
location without either eliminating ball fields or the community center parking lot. Resolution of those
issues was judged to prevent the convenience center being operational by July 2014.
Neighbors – It was noted that several of the possible locations would be within 100 feet of the apartments
adjacent to the Scottsville Community Center. To staff’s knowledge, these residents have not been asked
about support for this convenience center location.
Central location to service area – This site is at one end of the service area. While Scottsville has a higher
population density, a primary concern with the convenience center location was convenience to those more
remote residents who have difficutly finding a commercial hauler that provides service to their area. The
Scottsville location may force those rural residents to drive further out of their way to use this facility.
BUDGET IMPACT:
As noted above, if the decision is to continue support for the McIntire facility, staff recommends a minimum of
$60,000 be budgeted in FY15. Remaining budget considerations for the convenience centers have previously
been addressed.
AGENDA TITLE: Solid Waste Services – McIntire Recycling and Southern Albemarle Convenience Center
November 13, 2013
Page 3
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends:
1. The Board determine if support for the McIntire Recycling facility should continue through FY 15. If the
support is continued, staff will include $60,000 in the proposed FY15 budget for this service and will advise
RSWA of the County’s desire to request an extension of the current agreement through FY15.
2. The Board determine if any changes are needed to the proposed services to be provided at the convenience
centers.
3. The Board confirm that the Keene property remains the best location to provide a convenience center for
Southern Albemarle, and that the planning should continue for this facility to be operational by July 2014.
ATTACHMENTS:
A – October 9, 2013 Executive Summary
Solid Waste Convenience Centers
Representative Examples of Convenience Centers:
Project Background:
The Board of Supervisors has decided to construct three convenience centers around the County that will
provide clean, safe, well managed and convenient locations for county residents to dispose of solid waste and
trash in a way that is more accessible and cost effective than current services.
The Board came to this decision following a very comprehensive analysis of operations and associated costs
at Ivy, including the following major factors:
• Current services at the Ivy Materials Utilization Center (MUC) operated by the Rivanna Solid Waste
Authority are requiring more County tax support each year while quantities of materials are dropping.
The City of Charlottesville has chosen not to continue participating in the Ivy MUC which impacts the
cost effectiveness of the arrangements and eliminates the regional nature of the operation.
• The Ivy MUC will require a significant capital investment to continue operating and revenues will not
justify this cost
• The three convenience centers spread geographically around the County will be much closer to a
significant majority of residents than the single Ivy facility.
• Van der Linde Recycling was selected following a competitive bid process, and while we have not
completely finalized the negotiation process we have every reason to believe that this approach will be
significantly more cost effective for county taxpayers.
Project Overview:
It is important to clarify that convenience centers are not transfer stations (which accept commercial waste) or
landfills. These will be relatively small facilities which only provide services for residential waste. The County is
working hard to limit impacts on residents, and we appreciate your input and feedback throughout the
planning and construction process. There will be three convenience centers located throughout Albemarle
County. Though the specific locations have not been determined, one center will be located in the south, one
in the west, and one in the northeast part of the County. The County will continue to fund the operations at the
McIntire Recycling Facility, but will no longer fund RSWA's Ivy Materials Utilization Center (MUC) on Dick
Woods Road, which will likely close July 2014.
The convenience centers will be open during daylight hours, and closed overnight and on weekends. The
County is committed to keeping the convenience centers clean and safe. Our contract with Van der Linde
Recycling includes a set of housekeeping standards that will be maintained at the center. In terms of security,
the Center will be physically fenced outfitted with security cameras. Furthermore, the center will be staffed
during operating hours. We have an environmental compliance plan for the convenience centers, which will be
monitored by the County's Environmental Compliance Manager. The convenience centers will have minimal
noise impacts. Only residential vehicles will be permitted to enter the facility, and the trash compacter itself
makes very little noise. Furthermore, the center will be open during daylight hours only and will be closed
overnight.
The County is very focused on ensuring that the convenience centers are unobtrusive and not visually
impactful on the surrounding environment. We will have ample vegetative buffers and landscaping to shield
the operations as part of the plan. The landscape plans will be reviewed and approved by the Board of
Supervisors prior to implementation.
General Information on Convenience Centers and Recycling from the Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ)
Project Updates:
1.Convenience Center Project Fact Sheet
2.Convenience Center Frequently Asked Questions
Public Meeting with Board of Supervisor Representative Jane Dittmar for Mill Creek Residents - Thursday,
December 19, 2013, beginning at 7:30 pm in the Forum Room at Monticello High School.
The Board of Supervisors is holding a public hearing on Wednesday, January 8, 2014 at 6:00 pm at the
County Office Building on McIntire Road to allow citizens to share comments regarding the site
selection for a convenience center to serve southern Albemarle County.The Board will be choosing
between a site in the Mill Creek area near the Monticello Fire Rescue Station and a site in Keene and
welcomes public input regarding their final site decision.
Page 1 of 2Solid Waste Convenience Centers
12/26/2013http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=fd&relpage=16337
1.Keene Site: County-owned property located off of Scottsville Rd. and Esmont Rd., just down the road
from the US Post Office.
2.Mill Creek Site: County-owned property located off of Mill Creek Dr. and Avon St. Extended, next to
the Monticello Fire Station.
Comments & Questions:
The Solid Waste Convenience Centers project is being managed by the Office of Facilities Development (434)
872-4501 and the contact is Neale Craft at ncraft@albemarle.org.
Page 2 of 2Solid Waste Convenience Centers
12/26/2013http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=fd&relpage=16337