HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP202100014 Correspondence 2021-09-29 (13)From: Scott Clark
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 9:49 AM
To: Agricultural Forestal District Committee
Subject: FW: Comments for Agricultural-Forestal Dist. Advisory Committee Review -
9/22
Dear AFD committee members –
Included below is a message regarding an item on tomorrow’s agenda.
--Scott
From: Nora Seilheimer <nora@seilheimer.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 9:04 AM
To: Scott Clark Sclark@albemarle.org
Cc: Ann Mallek <amallek@albemarle.org>; Liz Palmer <lpalmer@albemarle.org>; Karen Firehock
<kfirehock@albemarle.org>
Subject: Comments for Agricultural-Forestal Dist. Advisory Committee Review - 9/22
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on
links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Dear Scott,
Please find as follows comments that I would like you to send to all members of the Agricultural-
Forestal District Advisory Committee in advance of their meeting on September 22.
Thanks,
Nora
Dear Members of the Agricultural-Forestal Districts Advisory Committee,
I write to express my concern for SP202100014 Reclaimed Hope Initiative, as the proposal calls
for a very intensive use for this property that is not consistent with the Hardware Agricultural and
Forestal District.
I strongly believe in the purpose and intent of the Agricultural-Forestal District. These districts
"provide open spaces for clean airsheds, watershed protection, wildlife habitat, and for aesthetic
purposes."
This proposal is problematic for many different reasons. I have outlined a few below:
This is a much more intensive use of the property - it includes a day camp and a boarding
camp. The boarding camp is not seasonal but will operate every day of the year. If approved,
there would be up to 40 daily guests 52 weeks a year, staying 1-7 days, making reservations for
their stay. This does not seem to be different than a hotel or AirBNB.
This use will also include an event venue. Not only will they hold events for their own
organization, but will rent out the event space for other organizations to generate supplemental
revenue. This will include outdoor amplified music until 10 pm, up to 8 times a year. This would
negatively impact all neighbors, ruining the peace and quiet we greatly value.
The applicants plan to build many structures on the site, a 200% increase to what exists now.
They claim that these new buildings will be reversible, so the "land can easily return to farming,
forestry, conservation or other preferred rural uses." This claim is questionable, as they will have
invested millions into these facilities, and removing them will be highly unlikely in the future.
Furthermore, the applicants do not plan on eliminating the division rights, paving the way for the
possibility of even more intense use in the future.
The primary business is not agricultural and forestal, their primary business is family services
and counseling.
This increased activity will not be good for our natural environment. Water is scarce in this part
of the county, and the increased activity could have a negative effect on the water table.
Additionally, there is a lot of wildlife in this area and this increased activity would have a
negative effect on it.
These two properties are surrounded by other properties that are conserved, either through a
conservation easement, historic easements, or are in the Agricultural-Forestal District.
Therefore, the conservation of this property should be prioritized.
My husband and I moved to this area with full knowledge and understanding of the rural areas,
conservation easements, the agricultural-forestal district, and future land use maps. This
proposal is very worrying to us because it is not consistent with these designations and puts all
we value about our area in danger.
Thank you for considering these points as you make your recommendations.
Sincerley,
Nora Seilheimer
1864 Farm Vista Road
434-466-3876